Iowa lawmakers look to change protected classes in Iowa Civil Rights on Thursday
DES MOINES, Iowa — After a week of protests, large police presence, and public comment periods, both chambers of lawmakers are set to debate a bill removing 'gender identity' from the Iowa Civil Rights code.
The bill, HSB 242, was introduced on February 20 and would completely remove gender identity as a protected class, meaning protections from discrimination in employment, housing, wages, etc. would be removed.
This move could make Iowa the first state to take back civil rights to a protected class after they had been afforded.
Food restrictions for Iowans on SNAP benefits advances in Iowa House
The Iowa Senate Judiciary committee advanced the bill on Wednesday afternoon, clearing the way for debate Thursday.
A public hearing is set for Thursday morning in the Iowa House chamber. This will last for 90 minutes, and then both chambers are expected to debate the bill, which could send the legislation to the Governor's desk just a week after these proposals were introduced.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
35 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Big changes are being proposed for a US food aid program. Here's a breakdown by the numbers
President Donald Trump's plan to cut taxes by trillions of dollars could also trim billions in spending from social safety net programs, including food aid for lower-income people. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Here's a look at the food aid program, by the numbers: Year: 2008 The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law took effect eliminating a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. Number: 42 million A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the county. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled in SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. The money can be spent on most groceries, but Trump's administration recently approved requests by six states — Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah — to exclude certain items, such as soda or candy. Dollars: $295 billion Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion of federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come by shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come by expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. Ages: 7 and 55-64 To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't do so are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. The combined effect of those changes is projected by the CBO to reduce SNAP participation by a monthly average of 3.2 million people. Percentages: 5%-25% The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures are unlikely to serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. Margin: 1 House Resolution 1, containing the SNAP changes and tax cuts, passed the House last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food aid and Medicaid and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Democrat Zach Wahls announces bid for U.S. Senate
Sen. Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, announced plans to run for the U.S. Senator seat in the 2026 election. Pictured here is Wahls, left, and several other Democrats at the Anamosa State Penitentiary on April 23, 2021. (Screenshot of event livestream) State Sen. Zach Wahls, a Coralville Democrat, announced Wednesday his campaign in the 2026 election for the seat held by Republican U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst. Wahls said he is running to support 'hardworking' families and to fix the problems he and other Iowans are facing, like the high cost of groceries, child care and medications. 'Government isn't listening to Iowans,' Wahls said in an interview. 'It's not working for us. Iowans who are working hard are just falling further and further behind.' Wahls is a sixth-generation Iowan who was elected in 2019 as senator for District 43. Prior to that, he was known for his LGBTQ+ activism. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Wahls joins Rep. J.D. Scholten, D-Sioux City, and Democrat Nathan Sage of Indianola, who have announced candidacy runs against Ernst, following comments she made during a recent town hall event. Ernst, while talking at a town hall meeting about federal cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, said 'we all are going to die' in response to an attendee who yelled that the cuts would cause people to die. Following the town hall, Ernst posted a sarcastic apology video and said, during an appearance on WHO Radio, she does not regret how she spoke. Ernst has not officially launched a campaign for reelection, but has hired a campaign manager. Her comments have drawn criticism from both sides of the aisle and led several to announce their plans to run for the seat. Wahls said he and his wife were already considering how they could 'fight for (their) fellow Iowans' in the upcoming election cycle, but Ernst's comments 'show how she has lost touch with Iowans.' 'Her tone deaf, double down the next day was bizarre, and I think underscored for me how important it is that a new generation of leaders step up and try to actually get things done in Washington,' Wahls said. Across the aisle, former state legislator Jim Carlin from Sioux City also launched a run for the seat following Ernst's comments. Wahls was the Senate Democratic leader in 2021, but was removed from the role in 2023 following a disagreement over the termination of two staff members. Wahls said the history shows he is willing to stand 'up to the establishment.' 'I've never been afraid of a tough fight, and I think that's going to serve me well,' Wahls said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
States Could Stop SNAP Benefits If Republican Bill Becomes Reality
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. States could stop offering SNAP benefits if the One Big Beautiful Bill Act becomes reality and they are shouldered with more of the cost of the food stamp program. "Shifting responsibility for funding SNAP onto states would upend state budgets," Darcy Milburn, the director of Social Security and health care policy at the Arc of the United States, told Newsweek. "SNAP is an optional program for states, so state governments may decide to address this fiscal challenge by reducing SNAP benefits, restricting eligibility, or even opting out of SNAP entirely," Why It Matters More than 40 million Americans rely on SNAP, which provides monthly benefits to for low- and no-income households to help pay for groceries. What To Know As it stands, states pay for half of the administrative costs of running the food assistance program, while the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) pays the other half. The USDA also covers the entire cost of benefits. But this could soon change: under the Republican-led budget bill, which is currently being considered in the Senate, states could be made to pay for a portion of SNAP benefits in order to reduce federal spending. The House-approved version of the bill mandates that states will need to pay up to 25 percent of the cost of benefits, dependent on individual state payment error rates, starting in 2028. Those with higher error rates—more than 10 percent—would pay the most. If the funding cannot be found, it could lead to states ending their participation in the food stamp program. "Because SNAP is an optional program for states, these deep federal funding cuts may result in some states opting to end SNAP entirely if they are unable to come up with the state funds required to fill the hole left by deep federal cuts," the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) reported in May. Numerous states have warned that the cost of the program could be catastrophic for state budgets if the plans go ahead. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer has warned the state could face footing a $900-million bill, while Rhode Island could end up paying $85 million to make up the gap. In late May, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services said the state would lose some $314 million in food assistance if President Donald Trump's bill comes to pass. So far, no state has said they plan to drop out of the program if the bill passes. Stock image of a woman shopping for groceries. Stock image of a woman shopping for groceries. GETTY "States are not in a position to absorb these substantial additional costs," the CBPP warned. "In fiscal year 2024, tax revenue fell in 40 states after adjusting for inflation, and many states are projecting budget shortfalls in the short and long term." According to a report by Politico, senators on the Agriculture Committee are seeking to reduce the percentage of benefits being paid for by states with the highest error payment rates to 15 percent, down from 25. What People Are Saying A USDA spokesperson told Newsweek: "As set by Congress in law, SNAP is at the request of the state agency. Regardless of this reconciliation exercise, states have the option whether to participate." Darcy Milburn, speaking to Newsweek: "During times of economic uncertainty, we need SNAP more than ever. Any cuts to SNAP funding would make it even harder for people with disabilities and their families to access the food they need to live healthy lives. We urge Congress to reject proposals for any cuts to SNAP, and to work on a bipartisan basis to strengthen and protect this critical program." Jennifer Greenfield, associate professor at University of Denver who specializes in the intersection of health and wealth disparities, previously told Newsweek: "The proposed federal 'savings' are not savings at all—it's a shift of the costs to our already cash-strapped states and families. The net result will be to increase hunger and financial instability among households with children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans—while also sending tens of thousands of people into unemployment." President Donald Trump has not commented directly on the SNAP provisions included in the bill, but has urged lawmakers to pass it. "It's time for our friends in the United States Senate to get to work, and send this Bill to my desk AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!" he wrote on Truth Social. What's Next The Senate is expected to revise several parts of the legislation before holding a final vote.
