DONNELLSON - The party lines were stark in contrast as the two candidates for House District 100 squared off in the Pilot Grove Community Room Thursday night.
The event, sponsored by Mississippi Valley Publishing and monitored by Lee County Economic Development Group's Emily Benjamin, took Republican incumbent Martin Graber (R-Fort Madison) and Democratic challenger Rebecca Bowker (D-Fort Madison) through the gauntlet of public education, transgender recognition, abortion, and workers' rights.
The evening was set with questions from the audience and none from Benjamin as moderator.
Graber outlined his role in the current 83rd district for the past two years, after the position was held by a Democrat for the the past 30 years.
He said he ran to make sure his children and grandchildren have a shot at the same shot of living the American dream he did.
Graber said he's been a Lee County resident for his whole life minus time in the Iowa National Guard.
Bowker said she's running because she doesn't believe Iowa is on the right path.
"I think there's changes that have happened and legislation that has been made in the last couple of years, restriction of voter rights, not fully funding public education, and of course the threat to take away a women's fundamental rights to health care," Bowker said.
Questions immediately focused on recent efforts of the Iowa GOP to move public funds to private schools.
Bowker said the state has tried to move $55 million in public funds to benefit a relatively small amount of students and doesn't guarantee any rights to students.
"Gov. Reynolds has professed to pursue vouchers again in the future," Bowker said. "There's several issues, not just moving the public funds, but we have accessibility issues. They're not obligated to accept all students to their schools."
She said private schools can decline enrollment to handicapped students, or if you are disabled, the schools can exclude you. She also said there has to be transparency,
"You have to be able to know what that board is discussing and what is going on in our schools."
She also pointed out that 84% of private schools in Iowa have religious affiliations, which crosses the separation of church and state dynamic.
"At the end of the day, public money has to stay in public schools."
Graber said the governor did not propose a voucher system in the last session, and the best place to start with education is parents. He said there is already public money in the private school system.
"It's very, very important that we recognize that, in my opinion, the people that ought to control what happens with students is the parents," he said.
"Here's the key, it has to be a joint effort between the students, the parents, and the teachers. It shouldn't be adversarial, they should work together."
Graber said the last governor to cut funding for education was Chet Culver who took money midstream for the public schools.
But Bowker said the current funding level isn't sufficient because it doesn't keep pace with inflation.
"We need to fund public schools at 4 or 5%. When this governor is touting a $1.9 billion surplus, we can do better than 2.5%," she said.
Graber said throwing more money at the problem isn't the answer.
"I would say to you that I'm not a believer that more dollars automatically makes better education. There's a lot more to it than saying 'here's more money take that'.
"It's important that people look at the local level and the quality of the education."
Bowker called it a money illusion because the amount of growth isn't keeping with the growing costs of goods.
The issue of transgender athletes competing with the gender they identify with instead of their biological gender became an issue.
Bowker said she doesn't believe in discriminating against those who identify as a different gender.
"Minority rights are the cornerstone of what our country was based on. In general, I support minority rights that includes LGBTQ individuals and, we as a country and nation, need to move that agenda," Bowker said.
Graber said he voted for the legislation that precludes transgender men from participating in women's sports.
He said the male body structure gives an undue benefit in competition over women and that's not a fair situation.
"I agreed with that and I voted for it."
Another question focused on whether the candidates were anti or pro abortion.
Bowker said it was interesting that the GOP was pushing for a reduction in sex education in public schools, then to defund planned parenthood, then make some contraceptives illegal.
"And, by the way, they want to eliminate abortion or women's right to decide on their own bodies. In no other environment or arena is a man forced to undergo any type of procedure," she said.
"We need to make sure women have a fundamental right to make their own health care decision, and we can't be involved in that."
Graber said he was pro-life and wouldn't say he was pro-abortion.
"If we're going to do anything, we need to make sure we identify for the health care professionals what is an abortion," he said.
Graber said non-viable pregnancies require medical intervention for the safety of the mothers. But he also said the system takes care of the child and mother after the birth.
Bowker took an opportunity to address the impact of the changes to Chapter 20 and public employees' right to bargain for benefits and would she favor reinstatement.
"Absolutely. You're talking about our friends and neighbors that lost their right. Not only did they lose it, but some got slapped in the face, especially corrections, by being excluded from the public safety category," Bowker said.
Graber said the changes to the law took place before he took office and he didn't know if he could support reinstating public employees' bargaining rights.
"The only time it's been mentioned is when the Democrats bring it up as an amendment. I'm going to say right now, it seems like it's working," he said.
Graber referenced the openings at the ISP and said if those rights were in place, they wouldn't be able to do some creative things to help fill those positions.
1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
BCGRIFF
"At the end of the day, public money has to stay in public schools."
I had to re-read this comment by Bowker to make sure I wasn’t misinterpreting her comments. Where in the world does she think this money comes from. It is anything but “public” money. It comes from private individuals paying taxes on privately owned property. The government collects that private money and then distributes it as it sees fit. The fact that a public entity is in charge of redistributing property tax collections doesn’t change its identity to “public” money. It is not an outlandish idea to propose that parents be allowed to take a portion of their own tax dollars and place their children in a school of their choosing – including public, charter, or private.
And Graber is spot on with his comment that more money doesn't necessarily equate to better education. If that were the case, our public schools would be #1 in the world in basic skills, rather than quite far down that list from the top.
Friday, October 7, 2022 Report this