This interview has been edited for clarity.

[Editor’s Note (3/3/25): The previous Editor’s Note said that we did not have access to the email sent from Maka Pilcher requesting Temple Hiatt to rescind her endorsement of Oliver Weilein. We have now gained access to this email through a Freedom of Information Act request. The entire contents of the email are included underneath the previous Editor’s Note in this article]

Will Clair: Alright, this is KRUI, and we are live here with Ross Nusser, City Council candidate.

Ross Nusser: Hello, and thanks for having me.

Will: let’s just get started here. You co-founded Urban Acres Real Estate and take part in your family business, Hans Jewelers. You also have worked with Successful Living and Housing Fellowship. What have you learned from these experiences and how they shaped your ability to serve on city council?

Ross: Yeah, so I love Urban Acres and I was one of the co-founders of Urban Acres Real Estate. It’s, sorry, I’m just distracted there. I love being one of the co-founders of Urban Acres Real Estate. As we founded it, we wanted it to be a cooperative of agents and so that’s really what we’ve done. We now have 60 some or so agents. All of the offices in our building are equal size and we just split expenses. We’re passionate about the community. My family’s business has been in downtown Iowa City for a very long time. I am not a part of that. My brother, luckily, took the horns on that and he’s running it. Then, yes, I have pretty extensive non-profit experience that has really helped shape me.

Will: That’s great. It’s a family business and you were born and raised in Iowa City. Has that helped you with campaigning at all?

Ross: No, it has not. It’s been one of those things that’s been interesting. It’s helped with campaigning in the sense that I know a lot of people from growing up, and it’s been a wonderful experience because I’ve been able to connect with people who I haven’t seen for years, or people who I just hadn’t had a chance to connect with on the level that I’ve been able to. So, I’ve really enjoyed getting out and being able to reconnect to some people from my past and to new people, and just love experiencing our wonderful community.

Amanda Moy: What do you think are the top three emergent issues you plan to address when on City Council?

Ross: Yeah, so the top three issues are my platform. It’s affordable housing, it’s mental health, and it’s behavioral health, which includes substance abuse treatment.

Amanda: Yeah, Oliver Weilein also states on his website that affordable housing is a top priority for him. How do you think the two of you differ in approach?

Ross: Yeah, so I have 15 years of real estate experience. So, that 15 years of real estate experience will help inform my housing approach. Also, during the 15 years of real estate experience, I’ve been involved with affordable housing and the nonprofit sector for 14 of those 15 years. I will use my past experiences and things that I’ve learned along my past to help inform how the city can be responsible and deploy money toward affordable housing initiatives. We have a lot of money that we have the ability to deploy.

In the city, we have around $15 million, which is not insignificant, and we have so many nonprofits. One is just right up the street from where we’re where we’re recording this right now or, or where this is being aired at Old Brick Housing Trust Fund at Johnson County. That’s an organization that gives forgivable loans, zero interest loans, and low interest loans to organizations who will commit to building affordable housing units. It’s empowering programs like these that we have in our community, with real people in our community with real strategies and real solutions that are really working right now.

Amman Hassan: So, to the question of non-enforcement, we’re obviously like a blue bubble in a sea of red and a red federal government. Oliver has made it very clear he doesn’t plan to cooperate with some of the orders given down from above, whether they’d be anti-trans, anti-drag laws, or cooperating with ICE. You have stated you have different intentions, particularly because with the threat of losing funding for other projects we have that might also benefit those minority groups, how do you plan to address cooperation or non-enforcement with the state or federal level?

Ross: Yeah, no, I appreciate that. This is something where I have been cherry-picked and mischaracterized on this. I’ll try and make it succinct and clear to avoid the cherry-picking and mischaracterizing. The Daily Iowan, I had reiterated this to them earlier, but they also decided to not put this in, is that our vulnerable populations are under significant threat right now, as you just stated. We need to fight smart. We have to. We have to fight smart. If we don’t do that, if we don’t fight smart, then we risk a misstep that could backfire, and it could totally further endanger our most vulnerable populations. So, we absolutely have to do something about it, but we can’t be brash about it. We have to fight smart.

Amanda: Do you have any comments on the results of the special election primary, especially given that you have raised a lot more funds for your campaign than Oliver has?

Ross: Yeah, so I’m not sure how many funds Oliver has raised for his campaign. That’s been ambiguous to me, but the results of the special election were not ambiguous to me. It shows, you know, first of all, two moved on, and so I was able to survive that and move on. It shows that I have to work, you know, nothing is going to be given to you. You have to get on the treadmill the next day, go to work, try and work hard, push out your message. At the end of the day, it’s up to the voters to choose. It’s not up to me. I want to run to serve this community. I got stomped in the primary, and that’s totally okay. I’m up to the challenge to work, and to get the community activated and in tune with this election.

Amman: At one of the more recent campaign events, you and your constituency mentioned historical preservation. That was one of your top priorities. I’ve often heard, you know, preserving historic buildings as like a dog whistle for nimbyism, preventing affordable housing from being built, infrastructure, stuff like that. How does Iowa City’s historical preservation commission fit into your vision for Iowa City, and what is that relationship with your plan for affordable housing and urban development?

Ross: Yeah, so the first thing is, I said that I was… Can you repeat the first part of that? Because that statement didn’t ring true to me.

Amman: One of your last campaign events you mentioned historical preservation was one of your campaign’s priorities.

Ross: That’s not been one of my campaign priorities. My campaign priorities have been affordable housing, mental health and behavioral health initiatives. I happen to be passionate about affordable housing too just because I’m in real estate and I love real estate. So, affordable housing and historic preservation, they can go hand in hand. A great example of this, we just talked about it o thanks for bringing it up, Old Brick. Old Brick is an example of a building right up the street from here that kind of started the historic preservation in Iowa City. And Old Brick is what houses the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County. So these historic buildings can absolutely be repurposed and Old Brick has a free breakfast program and has venues. It’s a wonderful repurpose and it allows us to maintain our history while still providing to vulnerable populations as well as the community as a whole.

Amanda: So your competitor, Oliver, has made the decision not to accept campaign donations and is instead encouraging people to donate to local causes and charities. Given that you are accepting donations, do you feel that you will feel an obligation to donors or that you will prioritize your donors causes more quid pro quo?

Ross: You know, it’s very bizarre. So, in campaigning we have to file these ethics reports, right? We just hit a filing period. And I saw prior to coming in here, it turns out that I have not been the only one who’s been raising money. I’ve not been the only one. The reporting period was done February 22nd. There are two people who reported. One was Oliver, and one was myself. Oliver has been accepting contributions since January 7th, so I think that me disclosing all of my interactions to the ethics committee appropriately is a sign of me wanting to follow the rules, me respecting the rules that we have in place, and certainly not hiding the contributions that I’ve gotten.

Amanda: Is it true that you have been critical of Oliver’s social media posts dating back to 2019?

Nusser: Yes, it’s irresponsible for me to see violence being propagated by a leader. As leaders, we influence culture, and it goes back to this argument where I so sincerely believe that Oliver is a nice person who wouldn’t so much as hurt a fly, but I don’t believe that the concept is understood that just because you might not hurt a fly doesn’t mean there isn’t an army of people right behind you eager to destroy that same fly.

Amanda: So to clarify, you do believe that publicly available information is fair to be brought forward so that voters can assess the character of a candidate.

Ross: Yes, I do.

Amanda: All right. Would you agree that one of the roles of City Council is to develop a strategic plan to outline the city’s vision, values and strategies?

Ross: Yeah.

Amanda: Would you also agree another important role is to determine how the city spends its money by adopting a budget?

Ross: Yes.

Amanda: Would you be willing to comment on how you accumulated almost $55,000 in unpaid property taxes?

Ross: Yeah, so not property taxes. This is, again, this is part of the misinformation is that I was contacted by multiple news sources that have received an anonymous tip, and it was a federal tax lien that has since been released. It goes back to 2018. So in 2018, I started my journey into recovery, and so I hit rock bottom and I went to treatment, and I knew that I needed to get my life back together. The thing about it, we need to destigmatize mental illness. It’s the shaming of the alcoholic, the shaming of the person who is depressed. This is just, it does not have a place in our society and we’re Iowa City. We love people, and we need to understand how to support people.

So yes, in 2018 I started my long journey in recovery, and I’m still not perfect. What that means though, what the journey in recovery means is that in 2018 I made a decision to stop drinking alcohol. You don’t get better overnight. It’s not something that happens. To think so or to proclaim so would just be false. It has taken years, and I still go into the rooms. It’s very important for me, and I love, I love my recovery journey, but you don’t start off and make the decision all of a sudden you’re better. That’s not how it works. So during 2018, that was a very difficult period of my life, and I’ve had other very difficult periods of my life too. I don’t shy away from it. I don’t want to relive it either. I don’t see any way how that has anything to do with the city budget.

Amanda: I would like to confirm you have agreed that important roles on City Council are to establish a budget and work on a strategic plan. Due to both this unpaid tax lien and-

Ross: Not unpaid.

Amanda: Due to the taxes you were sued by American Express on credit card debt due to these issues. A history of not establishing a plan to address the lack of these payments in a reasonable time frame, you know, if you couldn’t manage your finances on a personal level, why should you be trusted to manage finances on behalf of the city?

Ross: I mean, this is another point where it is unrealistic for someone to think of someone who’s going through substance use disorder that they’re going to have their life together. So, the assertion that I couldn’t manage my personal finances in 2018, I mean, that’s like saying, “How could an alcoholic not manage their life in the time that they were an alcoholic?” It’s not a fair question.

Amanda: So, say a tenant listed this as a reason for nonpayment of rent, would you evict them?

Ross: Oh, so I’d love to answer that because I’ve been in real estate for 15 years. How many evictions do you think I’ve done? I’ll just give you a guess.

Amanda: Maybe two.

Ross: Zero. Zero evictions. So, I don’t know how to evict a tenant.

Julia Wilson: Some tenants from around Iowa City have been receiving texts from their landlords encouraging them to vote for you. If the landlords believe that you best represent their interests, interests probably being profit, why should a tenant vote for you?

Ross: Well, why is the interest profit?

Julia: People are landlords, as their career, it’s to make money. That’s why people are landlords.

Ross: What’s the assertion behind that, can you rephrase that? I’m not understanding the layer.

Amman: Citizens are worried that there may be coercion involved with landlords asking their tenants or encouraging them to vote for you. I guess what we’re asking is were you aware that these landlords were communicating with them to make this encouragement, and can you address these concerns that there may be coercion or other elements involved?

Ross: I’m not aware of this at all. I can tell you that I’ve been in real estate for 15 years, and so I’ve been around a lot of real estate people. It probably doesn’t take a huge leap to think that if someone who is invested in real estate, that they might support the candidate who is also invested in real estate in the form of his career.

Julia: So if you had to choose values wise, who do you think you represent more, the landlords or the tenants?

Ross: If elected, I will represent all citizens of Iowa City.

Will: Looking at the city’s 2023-2028 strategic plan, outdoor spaces in the Iowa River are mentioned. Many people in the city are concerned about environmental pollution and the water quality of the city, especially given the fact that Iowa has the second highest and fastest rising cancer rate in the United States. Do you have any plans to address this?

Ross: Yeah, I can’t wait to be part of the conversation if I’m allowed. Since I’ve been a kid, I’ve grown up in Iowa City. Since I’ve been a kid, we’ve tried to revitalize our waterfront in a number of different ways, a number of different times. One time we tried to put sand and have a beach, but then the beach washed out. Another time, it was thought that maybe we could get some rapids going and have a small whitewater rapid course here. I’d love to see the Iowa River be a more prominent part of the community. I don’t know what that looks like. A lot of this ground around here is university owned, so I’m not sure exactly what the city can do, but I’d love to be part of the conversation.

Will: Would you possibly look into working with the university as a member of City Council?

Ross: Always the University of Iowa and Iowa City are two peas in a pod. You can’t have Iowa City without the university, and arguably you can’t have the university without Iowa City, or at least it’d be very hard.

Will: On your website, I also noticed that you had an endorsement from the director of the Community Inclusion Club. Could you talk about some of your time with them?

Ross: Yeah, Tom Braverman is who you’re referring to. I’ve known Tom my entire life, and he has been a wonderful para-educator and person in the community. I’ve really enjoyed just seeing him and the efforts that he’s made in the community and he’s really done a fantastic job.

Will: Would you also care to comment on your campaign manager provoking Oliver Weilein’s endorsers?

Ross: I don’t know. Who’s my campaign manager that you’re referring to and what provocation are you referring to?

Will: Let me find a name right here.

Ross: My campaign manager is my brother and my wife, so it’s one of those two that you’d be referring to.

Will: All right, well, we had a report that there was an alleged campaign manager reaching out to people who had endorsed Oliver and provoking them, Maka Pilcher.

Ross: Maka who is not my campaign manager. See this again, this is like the fifth piece of information that we’ve discussed in this short period of time that’s obviously false and based off of false pretense. I know Maka well. She has been helpful to me. She has been helpful to our campaign. She’s not my campaign manager and I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to.

Amanda: We just have received a tip that Maka has been emailing multiple people who have endorsed Oliver, asking that they rescind their endorsement and also CC’d the county attorney and the sheriff on those emails.

Ross: That’s interesting. I mean, again, these tips are so fantastical. It’s amazing to me how much and how blown up this is getting and being made. And so, I don’t know what to say because I’ve never heard of that before.

[Editor’s Note: The claim about emails from Maka Pilcher asking Temple Hiatt to rescind an endorsement for Oliver Weilein have not been outrightly confirmed by KRUI. Johnson County Sheriff Brad Kunkel and Attorney Rachel Zimmerman were CC’d on the email. We filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Johnson County Sheriff’s department, but were told that it was, “More difficult to fulfill a request for specific terms.” We are still looking for the exact content of this email.]

Julia: We can move on then. So, people feeling that their voice isn’t heard is a big issue in politics. If elected, how do you plan to make yourself available to constituents?

Ross: Yeah, so as I’ve said, after March 4th, I’d like to make myself available to anyone who wants to meet. As a city council member, you’re the closest link to government that people have, so I will have a lot of time after March 4th to focus on things other than my campaign. The time prior to March 4th is reserved for my campaign, but it’s Iowa City and I have a flexible job. I’d be able to meet with whomever would like to meet with me.

Amman: Thank you for speaking to us. Are there any upcoming events you’d like to make the public aware about? Or any ways they can contact you?

Ross: Hawk the vote on the 28th here at 4:30 PM I believe is when I get started at the Iowa Memorial Union.

John Glab: I just wanted to ask, with not talking to people before March 4th wouldn’t it be important for them to know your policies so they know what decision to make when it comes to the vote on Tuesday?

Ross: So, it’s not that I’m not talking to people, I’m talking to as many people as I can and as many people who are on the fence or who are really wanting to know information about this election. What I’m not doing is I am not engaging with or talking to people who are very obviously a part of my opponent’s campaign. I need to spend my time getting votes from my people in Iowa City and it is totally okay to have your choice of political preference, but it is one of those things that I need to be filling my calendar with my constituents and with events that can help me be put in front of people to get more constituents.

Julia: Who are your people because earlier you said you want to represent every single citizen of Iowa City?

Ross: My people are every single citizen of Iowa City. During this campaign, my people are people who are supportive of my campaign or wanting to learn more about my campaign in a way that is not totally defaming or derogatory toward myself.

Amanda: So when you say you want to fill your calendar with your constituents, are you referring to all of the people of Iowa City or are you selectively excluding people who have publicly endorsed Oliver but may be curious to talk to you as well?

Ross: No, if someone expresses a genuine curiosity and it doesn’t seem like it’s gonna be underhanded or again, in this interview by everyone in this room, the five in this room, I’ve received multiple questions that have just been straight out false to some degree. My people are absolutely all of Iowa City, if anyone wants to meet with me who genuinely has not made up their mind or has a question, they can contact me. For people who are part of the other campaigns who have questions about my policies, it’s a reasonable thing for them to be concerned or wondering about my policies. As I’ve stated repeatedly, they can certainly email me, and we can certainly give an email response.

Will: Well, with those concerns, do you have any plans to address the rumors being spread about you?

Ross: No, rumors are rumors. I don’t need to fall into that category. It’s not a productive conversation. It does not advance the ideals of mental and behavioral health. The whole idea is that social media right now is such a toxic, toxic place, and we don’t need to model that toxicity and propagate it further. So on social media, we have a policy where if you’re throwing a comment out there that is derogatory, defaming, if it’s trying to paint a narrative that is other than true, then there’s no place for it right there. If I’m elected to public office, the rules totally change there. In public office, you want to be able to hear, you want to be able to provide an outlet, but right now, and throughout this campaign, there has been so many rumors, so much false information that I don’t want them to use my platform. Them being people who are not supportive of me, to use my platform to try and tear me down further with lies.

Amanda: Do you have any message for people who do support your campaign, people who do support and endorse you? Do you have a message for them, specifically to those who are making derogatory and insulting comments towards Oliver, especially on social media?

Ross: Yeah, so I mean, I think that I don’t know what comments you’re referring to. So, I can’t answer that specifically because it’s a very broad statement there. What I can say is that we need to tone it down, you guys. This is Iowa City. We love each other. Come on. Like this is something where, especially this race, it’s crazy how negative it has gotten. So, what I would just say to everyone is empathy goes a long way. Empathy, understanding, and at the end of the day, these are two people, myself included, who are trying to do a service to the community, and I think that that’s lost. Oliver’s work in this community is also very valuable. I mean, the whole fact that either of us is being demonized is not something that I’m about. I’m not about shoving people’s face in the dirt. I’m about building people up.

Amanda: In our interview with Oliver, he made a point purposefully to say that, you know, he used the term, you are not dumb, and he was very kind and supportive of you. Given that you’re saying this is Iowa City, we need to be empathetic towards each other, do you have a comment on the fact that you said there’s no place for Oliver’s kind of extremism in our local politics?

Ross: I don’t remember making that exact quote, but I do remember talking about the extremism of posts that he made. There’s no place for that in our politics. So, Oliver has made the decision based on honesty, wanting to have the perception of honesty by not taking these posts down. Again, to me, these posts are just so negative and so destructive, and I just wish he’d take them down. Unless he still wants to stand behind them and stand behind the violent and just negative vitriol that’s in there. I don’t personally think that’s productive. I don’t personally think that that’s what’s gonna get us into our solution. We have a very tough four years coming, and I don’t think we can fight negativity with anything other than positivity.

Amanda: I understand that your personal opinion may be not agreeing with Oliver’s old social media posts, the most commonly cited ones I’ve seen are his posts from 2019 to 2020. But given that you have also had your own struggles in the past, do you think it’s fair to keep talking about Oliver’s social media posts and political decisions from years ago?

Ross: So, it’s interesting that you are now drawing a comparison between my recovery journey and my sobriety to social media posts and a long pattern of that. In 2018 I started my journey of recovery and sobriety, and I’m still evolving that. It’s still very true to me. I still do things every day to reiterate and to help my recovery. Oliver’s done the same thing with the social media since 2019 or whenever the first post was. Consistently he has posted negative and violent photos as recently as December of this past year. That is just not compatible with what I think, and again if you don’t agree with me that’s okay. I’m not saying that Oliver is a bad guy for doing this. I’m saying that as a leader this is not something that should be in the place of leadership. This is not something that we should promote as a community. Violence is not something that we should tolerate as a community.

Amanda: To be fair, I was not trying to directly compare substance recovery and Oliver’s social media, I was more so pointing to the fact that people can grow and change. People can evolve since 2019.

Ross: Correct, but if you show that consistent pattern where it’s still coming, where those images still kept going through Twitter or whatever the source is, through the end of last year from 2019, that is evolving in a particular way. I mean, it’s evolving to keep that belief alive, to hold that belief true, to not disown that belief, just like I don’t disown my substance use. It’s very much a part of me. It’s very much a core. Regardless of how it was intended to come out, it did come out that way. This is part of destigmatizing mental illness. I really do appreciate the opportunity to talk about this, to talk about the struggles in recovery and in mental illness. I am not the only person out there who’s affected by substance use disorder or mental illness, and it doesn’t discriminate. It goes across all socioeconomic spectrums. This has been a good opportunity to show what this journey looks like in part, where it can lead you, and how it can inform your life and life choices.

Glab: What are your thoughts and feelings on the recent Iowa legislator bills that have been passed through subcommittees that strip civil rights away from trans people?

Ross: Yeah, it’s so disappointing for Iowa. I mean, Iowa, we used to be a leader in civil rights, and now we’re a leader in the backwards movements of civil rights. It’s abhorrent, it’s awful, and we have to, as a community, figure out ways to fight smart.

Glab: Also, do you see trans people as part of your constituents to vote for you, or where do you see them as?

Ross: Absolutely. 100% unequivocally, absolutely.

Glab: What have been some of like the things that they’ve expressed to you as you were campaigning in terms of like their wants and needs.

Ross: I’ve heard a lot of personal stories, and the personal stories, just again, bringing it back to recovery, that’s how we relate our journey. So, I’ve heard many personal stories that have intimately related their journey. I’m not at liberty to share those stories on the air. It wouldn’t be respectful for me, but I can tell you that I have a deep sense of empathy. They are so very much a vital part of our community, and I fully intend on protecting them as much as I can.

Glab: With these bills kind of seem more likely than not to go through, what are you going to do if you were elected to City Council to protect the trans members in our community?

Ross: We’re gonna look at them, we’re gonna analyze them, them being the bills, and we’re gonna fight smart. Like I said, we are going to be resourceful, we are going to be thoughtful, we are gonna look into the future, we are gonna look at possible implications, any sort of action that could happen that would either go against us or for us, and we will make the best possible decision at the time. We will make sure that we are fighting for the needs of our most marginalized communities.

Glab: I know you’re not on City Council yet and probably haven’t fully fleshed out ways to do that, but do you have any ideas of how you would do that, I guess looking from an outside-in perspective at the moment.

Ross: Yeah, I’ve not been on City Council as you put, but I have been on leadership roles, and I have had to be in places where tough decisions are needed to be talked about and consensus is needed to be gained. So, this position is one of seven council members. This is just this is something where I will collaborate with my council members. We will figure out how to best address it at the time. I think that it’s hard to do anything and hard to make commitments to anything. Also, part of it is giving away the playbook, right? Like we want to fight smart. We want to be people who can actually protect, actually make a difference.

Amman: Do you have any ideas of what you would do in the present for when these bills pass and what you would do in the future?

Ross: So these bills have not passed, I’m not on council, and so I’m not sure.

Glab: Do you have ideas of what you would do though?

Ross: Collaborate.

Amman: Could you elaborate.

Ross: Collaborate with my fellow counselors.

Will: In addressing these questions, you’ve used the term fight smart a lot. Could you define that a little bit more?

Ross: Yeah, fighting smart, not taking it as anything other than what it is, seeing what’s coming at us, reacting in a way that’s responsible, evaluating what exactly is coming at us, and then figuring out what exactly our solutions can be. What are our options here? There are some things that we can do, there are some things that we can’t do. There are some things that we can do that draw more attention to us, there are some things that we can’t do that also draw more attention to us. So, fighting smart means fighting smart, it means looking, it means thinking before acting.

Will: Is there anything you would like to say to your constituents? Or possible constituents?

Ross: Thank you for listening. Please vote on March 4th.

Amanda: Is there any question we did not ask that you would have liked to have been asked?

Ross: I’m not sure, I think that we’ve covered a lot of a lot of the rumor mill. We’ve not talked a whole lot about the issues, we’ve not talked a whole lot about affordable housing or behavioral health but that’s okay, it seems like the rumor mill is what’s going to be the focus here and that’s okay with me and again I will be here at the Iowa Memorial Union on Friday.

Glab: All right. so, our old news director, Case Fenner, just sent me a text that he saw from somebody. Of course, this is all alleged, but we want to get your side of this. They said in October of 2023, as they were delivering beer to George’s bar in downtown Iowa City, there was a parking dispute. It looks like they alleged that you yelled at them and like chased them down. What do you have to say about that?

Ross: This is, again, obviously very much part of the rumor mill. What? I mean, if you have more context, but you just got a text, you walked out of the room, said, I need to vet this, come back in the room, and then say that? No, I’m on air. You’re wanting me to read something that you just vetted and react to it. Is that the question that you’re asking me?

Glab: Well yeah, it’s a Reddit post.

Ross: Oh, that makes it so much more credible. Thank gosh, it’s a Reddit post.

Glab: I mean, this is going to be going around, so if you want to just read through it, just to get ahead of it.

Amman: Thank you for tuning in to KRUI 89.7 FM Special Election. Thank you for listening.

Note: We do not speak on behalf of the University of Iowa or the Board of Regents.

The post In Conversation with Ross Nusser appeared first on KRUI Radio.

Last Tuesday House Study Bill 158 was introduced and defines a drag show as a performance where the “Performer exhibits a gender identity that is different from the performer’s gender assigned at birth through the use of clothing, makeup, accessories, or other gender signifiers.” This is open to include the performance of singing, dancing, reading, and almost anything “Before an audience for entertainment.” 

This proposal not only directly attacks the lives of queer individuals, but opens the door for the censoring of arts. Venues and artists worry that entertainment like theater, film, along with religious or traditional dress may make them open to liability and persecution from the state. With the wording of this law, it effectively limits trans people from performing in any public matter.

Any parent who knowingly brings a minor to a drag performance can be charged with a Class D felony and charged up to $50,000 for each violation. The owner or manager of an establishment who knowingly allows minors to attend drag shows could also be charged with a Class D felony, and businesses could be fined $10,000 under the bill.

Lawmakers like Representative Helena Hayes, a Republican from New Sharon, have commented that the bill addresses the concerns of their respective constituencies and that it “Will not be the way it is right now,” as it makes its way through the legislature. They both supported the bill’s existing definition and voted to have it be moved to a general house vote.

Representative Elinor Levin, a Democrat from Iowa City, told the Des Moines Register, “This bill creates a penalty that is so disproportionate as to be almost laughable,” and is “Out of whack,” considering the existing laws in Iowa classify bringing children to events with obscene material is only a misdemeanor.

Protesters gathered at the capitol outside the subcommittee to make themselves heard and demonstrate the violence they felt, and the hypocrisy of the legislature proposals.

This bill is being proposed in tandem with Iowa City’s Free Week, a week long private-public cooperation that provides entertainment and public art for free largely in the city’s downtown district. This included drag shows at local LGBTQ bar and venue Studio 13.

In a public statement, an executive of the venue said, “It’s important to voice your opposition to this bill. Though our venues only allow those over 19 or 21 it would eliminate all ages drag performances, drag at Pride, drag brunches in many locations, drag story time and more, and is a clear violation of free speech. Not to mention the chilling effect this would have on the transgender community. Drag is art and has been a part of society for thousands of years. Stand up to the hate coming from the capital and let your representatives know how you feel. We need to push back against extremism where the main goal is to distract voters from the rich and powerful stealing from us all by keeping us fighting each other.”

Despite the environment of fear and -20 degree windchill, locals came out to Studio 13 on Wednesday of Free Week for a night of karaoke, comedy, and drag to voice their support for the scene in their community.

This is as people have grown concerned over the relationship between the state and cities, who often have conflicting goals. The city officials ignore or work around federal and state orders because they don’t fit the wants or need of the constituents, while others fear possible funding cuts or retribution from a particularly punitive Republican controlled government.

On Monday February 24th, an Iowa house sub committee voted to advance House Study Bill 242. The Senate responded with Senate File 418 that contains similar language and aims to remove mentions of queer people in schools.

The bill would be the first time a state has removed civil rights protections for a population of its citizens, and functionally abolishes any protections for transgender and nonbinary people. This allows for trans Iowans to be denied housing, jobs, services, credit, or education based on their gender identity.

In the Iowa State Capitol Building during the subcommittee hearing, hundreds of protesters from across the state came to voice their opposition to the bill. They filled the rotunda and hallway both in physical presence and in noise, chanting their anger and grief, trying to disrupt the hearing. 

State troopers eventually tried to force protesters out of the hallway. This is despite no restrictions on the protest being set in place beforehand, which is a violation of First Amendment protections. State troopers used violent force, pushing people to the ground, and crushing protesters against each other as they tried to move them. Two protesters were arrested. 

The bill is another in a string of anti-LGBT legislation since 2020, and would be the biggest victory for Iowa’s Christian right and Kim Reynolds’ policy goals which includes the systematic removal of the queer community from public life including restricting their access to medicine, public spaces, and athletics.

Christian lobbyist groups like PELLA PAC, The Family Leader, and Inspired Life were present during the sub committees vote and have been drafting and pushing for the removal of gender identity as a legally recognized class since at least last year’s legislative session when they supported House Bill 2082 which had similar language. PELLA PAC states their goals include cleansing America of “Propaganda promoted by Marxist and atheist bureaucracies.” The civil rights protection they removed has stood in the way of other discriminatory policies the house majority is attempting to pass.

The bill makes specific reference to MAGA talking points and is framed under the guise of “protecting woman.” The bill claims that “equal” accommodations do not mean “same” or “identical” and that, “Separate accommodations are not inherently unequal,” upending legal precedent established in the 1950s by Brown v. Board of Education.

The present bill is moving to the House floor for a vote. It also has passed through the Senate subcommittee. Governor Kim Reynolds could sign it into law as early as Thursday afternoon. 

The post Iowa’s First of Its Kind Anti-Trans Legislation appeared first on KRUI Radio.

Knowles has become a controversial figure for his actions and political views, which includes public opposition of gay marriage, his belief that transgender people’s existence is a delusion that must be eradicated, and arguing colonization and expansion of the American Empire as something justified and noble. Knowles gave a speech in the Iowa Memorial Union entitled, “We are so Back: How the Libs Lost Everything”.  

The IMU functions within the university as being the center of campus life, with them describing it as, “Often the place where the university makes its first impression on potential students, faculty, and staff.” One of the five core values stated of the IMU is inclusion, “Affirming and celebrating all backgrounds and personal identities through inclusive and equitable policies, programs, services, and spaces.”

University of Iowa students, staff, and Iowa City community members gathered outside the IMU to protest Michael Knowles speech taking place within the building. For many of the protesters this was another episode in a long series of right wing influencers hosted and sponsored on university grounds. The election, the war in Gaza, and the general assault on LGBT rights has brought the student body’s divisions to the forefront and forced the university to question what does it mean to be tolerant.

“It seems to be a pretty big event, and it seems a little questionable to me,” said a protester present at the speech, “you know, hosting a homophobic, transphobic person at a university which like has policies ostensibly protecting gay and trans people.”

Another protester stated, “I think that inviting him and giving him this much of a platform 一 I think there is a difference than if he just came into the park and like, put some stuff up. But he’s being hosted in a university building with two policemen in the lobby providing protection. They clearly have this organized as a major event inside the IMU. It’s kind of what the entire building seems to be centered around right now, which is a bit, not just inviting, but explicitly platforming, and I think that’s like a fallacy of equality.” 

Those in attendance made efforts to affirm individual identities and made a point of stressing how the speakers’ and university’s actions have affected the mental health and sense of safety on campus for queer students. “The falling on free speech thing doesn’t really carry water anymore, because the last time they invited Matt Walsh or whatnot, there was conflict. It seems like they’re just spending more and more money on this extra police. So yeah, they’re 100% at fault,” one student commented on the university’s involvement, “I understand free speech but that dude can get that on the Daily Wire so that’s his free speech, but he need not come here. I understand why the YAF brought him here, but take him to some other venue because this is state sponsored. So, how are you going to feel safe in this school? Because it feels like, to our trans community, it feels like they hate me, and at best they’re indifferent to our voice.”

The overall well-being of transgender students was also a major concern of protestors, especially in light of the recent presidential election. As one protestor said, “Our trans sisters and brothers are scared right now, and this is like throwing fuel on the fire. We want to meet the fascists at the gate and let them know that we don’t give a shit about your president. We’re here to take care of our people.”

The two groups were sandwiched in between a 24-hour fundraising event for the University of Iowa’s largest student organization, Dance Marathon, which added to the crowds. Many of the passersby approached by KRUI had no knowledge of the YAF’s event and were simply trying to use the building to attend the Dance Marathon fundraiser or were there for academic purposes. 

However, a few onlookers contributed their opinion of the event. Many of them viewed the protest in a positive light, with one saying, “I think they’ve done a really good job organizing, and I know there’s a lot of different voices on campus, so it’s nice that people on more of the progressive side can have their voice heard and the conservatives can be inside and listen to a speaker. It’s awesome. It should double in size.”

Protestors were especially on edge given the large police presence inside and outside the IMU as on October 7th of 2023, peaceful protestors were arrested after demonstrating against a different anti-trans speaker at the IMU. They were charged with either disorderly conduct or interference with official acts. Those protestors were detained a month later in November of 2023. None of the participants were arrested at the protest and no property was damaged, but according to those present, Johnson County police officers reportedly pushed, grabbed, and behaved aggressively towards them.

Through this process, protestors learned that the UIPD and Johnson County Sherriff’s Office have both been involved in monitoring protests. UIPD has installed cameras that pan, tilt, and zoom around campus. This is along with monitoring social media accounts, searching specific terms leading up to events on platforms, and analyzing search results based on posts’ geolocation. It has been reported that UIPD tracks protestors based on their face, build, clothing, walk, temporary injuries, and their cars as they are leaving protests. That is why during the November 11th protest, a majority of protestors wore nondescript clothing, face masks, said to put their phones into airplane mode, and parked away from the IMU. It was also requested that no photos be taken that could identify protestors based on their faces.

Along with these precautions, many protestors were weary of stepping away from the corner section of the IMU due to the arrests last year that came from people blocking the intersection of Jefferson and Madison. This comes after the Iowa state government passed the “Back the Blue” law in 2021 which strengthened qualified immunity for police officers, banned common protest tactics like obstructing a street, and increased penalties for other protest actions. UIPD officers also came out to the crowd of protestors handing out “Free Speech at Iowa” cards that labeled what things protestors could and could not do.

Inside the IMU, Michael Knowles’ talk focused mainly on the criticism of transgender people and progressivism in western society. His traditional views on gender were on full display stating that women should grow out their hair so that their pronouns and identity are apparent. He also said that, “The transgender issue is not chiefly about women’s sports. We want that too, it’s a matter of justice. But most people don’t actually care that much about women’s sports. The trans issue is not even chiefly about protecting children, it is about the liberal elite trying to castrate little kids.”

After Knowles’ talk was over, KRUI staffers asked individuals what they thought of the event. One pair of event attendees said, “We’re both independent voters so we went and checked out the event inside and it was kind of what you would expect for something like this. All he was saying was kind of recycled talking points.”

Another attendee said, “I thought he was great, I thought he had good opinions. I don’t necessarily attend the University of Iowa but I’m not planning on it either, especially because of the kind of liberal ideologies that are here. I appreciated him coming out and sharing his opinion. I mean, that’s what press is about, it’s about people being able to share their opinions openly and not get demeaned for doing so.”

Debates around DEI, trans rights, and the general paradox of tolerance will likely continue to unfold on campus as the university juggles the safety and interests of its students, while attempting to maneuver and adapt to legislation that’s increasingly antagonistic towards academia’s discretion. “I think that there is a general pattern of ‘if you are tolerant, you have to tolerate me being hateful’,” said one demonstrator attending the protest, “that’s kind of what the university seems to have gone with with hosting these kinds of people, and it’s philosophical nonsense.”

This article was written with aid from Amanda Moy, Julia Wilson, and Claire Peery.

The post Michael Knowles and a Case Study of Tolerating Intolerance appeared first on KRUI Radio.

The federal government has recognized this and has attempted to address the rising shortage for decades. More recently the Biden administration has implemented multiple programs including investing in primary care facilities, and loan forgiveness for doctors who practice in rural and designated crisis counties. The programs have totaled more than a billion dollars yet haven’t had any large or noticeable impact on the shrinking pool of available doctors. This crisis has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic which has caused many providers to burn out or retire early. In a report by the company Definitive Healthcare, more than 60% of doctors nationwide said their workload has increased since the pandemic, and between 2021 and 2022 more then 70,000 or 6% of physicians left the field.

There’s more behind this provider shortage then just burnout. People aged 65 and older are the fastest growing cohort and by 2030 nearly 80 million Americans will be in that category. On the supply side, young doctors and students are finding less incentive to become physicians. The pay and labor gap between physicians and other specializations that require just a few more years of education has caused many doctors to reject family medicine in favor of more specialized fields that come with higher pay and less workload.

A common culprit for the pay discrepancy between physicians and specialized fields falls on the RUC, a body of doctors that advises insurance companies and the federal government on how medical procedures should be priced. The RUC routinely rates general care procedures at a significantly lower cost than more specialized care, meaning doctors in general care get lower compensation from insurance for their work. In response to this market failure, nurses and physician assistants have filled the gap.

Between 2013 and 2019 the portion of healthcare visits handled by nurses and physician assistants nearly doubled, and according to the National Institutes of Health, “The proportion of visits delivered by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the USA is increasing rapidly and now accounts for a quarter of all healthcare visits.” The trend of non-physicians filling the role of primary care has only grown since the pandemic, and continues to be one of the ways healthcare providers are attempting to meet demand with rising overhead costs and a shrinking pool of doctors. This practice has been touted as providing equal care while cutting costs by 25%.

Amy Sheaffer, President of A-1 Medical Staffing in Iowa has been in the field for over 20 years and says this isn’t the first time there’s been a shift in nurse’s responsibilities. “During World War I, the Red Cross created a volunteer nurse aid program as many nurses became overworked and tired. In the late 1960s, the physician assistant position was created as there was a shortage of primary care physicians due to access to healthcare and insurance increasing,” Sheaffer describes. 

She says what she is seeing today with many doctors leaving the medical field is nothing like we’ve seen throughout history. Sheaffer notes though that many nurses are altering their roles and how they approach their job to fill in some of those gaps. “Nurses are reconsidering their priorities for a better work life balance and choosing flexible work opportunities. We are also seeing many trying to further their education to practice advanced nursing. This allows them to be properly compensated and assist in reducing the physician shortage by filling the primary care gap,” she said.

She also notes that as the healthcare landscape evolves, so do the roles within it. The increasing complexity of insurance policies and hospital billing has placed a heavier burden on medical staff, requiring more administrative oversight than ever before. Just as past workforce shortages led to the creation of new roles, today’s challenges in reimbursement and claims processing have given rise to specialized professionals who focus on Denial Management. These experts work to ensure that hospitals and clinics receive proper payment for services rendered, reducing financial strain on both providers and patients.

While this shift in roles has cut costs, it has pushed much of that onto lower paid and overworked nurses and physician assistants. Consumers and lawmakers worry this trend may lead to a weakening in the doctor-patient relationship and worsen health outcomes for patients. Some worry that this will lead to a healthcare gap between people in different economic classes, with the wealthy being able to retain a personal physician, while those with less money will have to deal with an incongruent, rotating cast of doctors for routine checkups. So far though, data suggests that outside of emergency or specialty care situations, nurses and physician assistants have similar patient outcomes to traditional family doctors.

The post How Nurses are Affecting the Doctor Shortage appeared first on KRUI Radio.

Many have identified an alarming trend in the local and state government: authoritarianism in Iowa. What many thought to be relegated to distant, dystopian countries has found its way here. This has been after numerous laws and legislation have been passed that target minority groups, including transgender people, and punish people for their dissent. 

Lawyer, and Iowa City city council member Laura Bergus, along with V Fixmer-Oraiz, a Johnson County supervisor, both wrote on this direction that the Iowa government has been taken in an op-ed published in the Little Village magazine. There, they talked about Iowa’s Back the Blue Laws, and how they gave police officers more immunity, while limiting the power of protesters. The laws made it criminal to engage in common protest activities like blocking the street. 

These laws came into effect when seven protesters were charged at Chloe Cole’s speech in the Iowa Memorial Union in October of 2023. All seven identified as trans. This targeting of trans people both in the legislator and on the streets, along with the laws designed to quell dissent has shown the Iowa government’s more restrictive and authoritarian actions. 

In this interview, Laura Bergus elaborates on the authoritarian practices of the Iowa government. She points out the signs of authoritarianism in other places and correlates them to what is happening in the state. She also details the goals of recent legislation, why trans people are being targeted, and some steps to be taken to push back against this trend. 

The post Interview: Laura Bergus on Authoritarianism in Iowa appeared first on KRUI Radio.

Two of the head senior editors and active contributors for Pitchfork, Puja Patel and Amy Philips, have been laid off from the company. Subsequent to this, just about half of the publication’s staff was laid off. This signaled that changes were about to come Pitchfork’s way, making many wonder what will become of it. It also brings up questions about the entirety of music journalism in general, as Pitchfork begins to meld with an editorial scene that brings lesser value toward creative and artistically spawned features. 

Pitchfork was initially established in Minneapolis in 1996 by Ryan Schreiber, who began the publication out of his parents’ basement. It came from his desire to write authentic, genuine, and sincere reviews of independent and alternative music. Prior to Pitchfork, Schreiber barely had any experience with writing for print, but was inspired by the rise of the internet age in tune with the music community. Some of Schreiber’s earlier reviews include staple underground bands such as Radiohead, Broken Social Scene, and Modest Mouse. Many of these bands gained traction from these hipster-esque reviews geared toward a readership that preferred passionately written accounts on music.

Pitchfork became acknowledged for how it covered music in a way that felt like it derived directly from music lovers and enthusiasts. These were people who simply wanted to write about music that they enjoyed and had fun listening to. Up until the year of 2006, Pitchfork authors weren’t even getting paid. The publication functioned with only 6 employees and a couple of freelance writers here and there, posting several music reviews each day.

Image via Rolling Stone

Eventually, Pitchfork relocated to Chicago, and soon expanded its reach to other forms of media such as Pitchfork.tv on YouTube, the Pitchfork Review podcast, and later the Pitchfork Music Festival, which occurs on a yearly basis. Later on, Pitchfork extended its range to mainstream pop adjacent music. Here, it also began opening its coverage to other movements across popular culture. In 2015, Condé Nast officially took charge of Pitchfork, relocating its headquarters to the One World Trade Center in New York City.

This signified the start of Pitchfork’s descent into more commercialist approaches and methods. This was around the time Pitchfork had established a paywall on their site, which made it much less accessible and attainable to its readers. With Pitchfork’s previous inclination toward raw, unfiltered writing on music, we begin to see this as a threat to the honest, critical journalism we used to receive, courtesy of this beloved publication. 

I can personally express my own disappointment and devastation over this. I’ve looked up to a good amount of publications like Pitchfork growing up, consistently viewing them as inspirations. I think that every music writer admires the original goals of Pitchfork. It was to develop a platform to have spirited discussions and dialogues surrounding music. It can only be hoped that music journalism still has a bright future ahead of it, one that doesn’t fade into the trenches of capitalism. 

The post Condé Nast Merges Pitchfork with GQ and Lays Off Multiple Staffers appeared first on KRUI Radio.

At Kinnick, protesters chained themselves to entrance Gates D and F, which led into the upper decks of the stadium. They did so by using bicycle locks, and large rubber bands around their wrists with plastic tubes for protection. Their reasoning behind doing so in the pro-Palestinian protest was to barricade what they believed was a holiday party that University of Iowa president Barbara Wilson hosted for some of the school’s financial donors and partners.

Some of the university’s partners include Collins Aerospace, a subsidiary of RTX Corporation, and Lockheed Martin, both of whom are massive defense and weapons manufacturers. The companies work with the university’s engineering program to eventually hire graduates in their companies, while advancing their education in the field. The protesters believed that some representatives from these companies would be at the holiday party at Kinnick. 

Protesters barricading Gate F. Image via John Glab

The holiday party at Kinnick Stadium was held in a section of the Mediacom Outdoors Club deck, which occupies the second floor of the stadium, overlooking the field. The protesters’ goal was to disrupt this party, and to keep the donors from entering. However, the holiday party wasn’t for donors or corporate sponsors. It was for university staff members and their families. The party had several tables laid out with areas to decorate cookies, play with stuffed animals, interact with Herky, and a throne to tell Santa what they wanted as gifts. About a third of the attendees at the party were children who were engaging in all these activities with their parents. Instead of being a toast to some of the university’s controversial donors, it was just a relatively inconsequential holiday party. 

Along with this, protesters failed to actually barricade the entrances to keep people from entering. The large, cast-iron gates of the stadium were left open for people to walk through and access stairwells. Members of KRUI covering the protest were able to get behind the doors that the protesters chained themselves to. The party and any area of Kinnick was still easily accessible. The main entrance to the stadium was at the nearby bus terminal and was completely accessible. The demonstrators eventually realized this and marched up there with their banners, but did not make it too far before several squad cars rolled up on the scene.  

Inside of the holiday party. Image via Amman Hassan

When the University of Iowa Campus Police arrived, they initially stood watching the protesters. Eventually they responded swiftly and brutally to the protesters chained at Gate D. They seemed to have no care in harming the protesters chained to the doors, as they twisted their arms and wrists, even as they showed no resistance. One protester was crying out in agony to an officer who was twisting their wrist behind their back, but received no sympathy as the officer continued to use excessive force. Two other protesters were kneeled on as they were pressed into the pavement by officers while being detained. One other was seen being dragged away while in a limp position. This was all while protesters were peaceful, and not actually impeding entrances or safety exits. It appears as an unnecessary overreaction by campus police themselves. 

During the second set of arrests at Gate F, police were a lot more careful in removing those chained to the doors. This shift in behavior came after more phone cameras started recording their actions. Demonstrators were removed with the use of bolt cutters, and then zip-tied in handcuffs. Three other protesters were also there ready to give water and medical aid if need be. All three of the protesters acting as medics were doing the same thing, but the only non-white one of them seemed to be targeted and arrested. 

A protesters arm being twisted by police during arrest. Image via John Glab

Later in the evening after the demonstrators arrested were taken to the Johnson County jail, protesters sat outside in support of their fellow organizers. Charges given to the protesters included trespassing and impeding official proceedings, labeled a serious misdemeanor. Within the jail, some of the protesters were placed into solitary confinement, something typically unprecedented for non-violent crimes. Many were also denied medical care for their injuries sustained from being arrested. Along with this, protesters were also misgendered by being placed in the wrong gendered sections of the prison that didn’t correspond with their own identity. Outside, an observer was arrested without reason before being ordered by higher-ups in the police department to be let go. 

Below are documents of official statements from five of the nine protesters arrested, unedited and published in full. These were sent to KRUI by an organizer of the protest. 

Statement from Clara Reynen

Statement from Jenny Kula

Statement from Bellona Allou

Statement from Nix Slater-Scott

Statement from Kate Doolittle

The excessive actions by police in Iowa City, as seen with the response to the Kinnick protests, have been a noticeable trend. Many protesters who attended the demonstrations against Chloe Cole’s anti-trans lecture at the Iowa Memorial Union were arrested weeks later the event for similar crimes to those arrested at Kinnick, even though they were peaceful, non-violent and exercising their freedom of speech. Police also used tear gas and brutal force for many of the Black Lives Matter protests in the Summer of 2020. The trend seems to be a brutal crackdown on peaceful protests by the police themselves.  

A couple days later, on the night of December 12^th, many showed up to the last city council meeting of the calendar year to speak out against the senseless killings and bombings of Palestinians by the Israeli government. The goal was to get Johnson County to call for a ceasefire in Gaza in hopes that if more counties did so, it would put pressure on the federal government to stop aiding Israel in their war. Over fifty people came to the meeting to express their support for the Palestinian people, and a call for a ceasefire.  

Community members who called for a ceasefire standing outside of City Hall. Image via Amman Hassan

Among the people who spoke were Palestinian Iowa City residents who gave detailed stories of their experiences living in both the West Bank and Gaza. These recollections included how the IDF would harass Palestinians. One story told of how an IDF soldier shot a Palestinian man unprovoked, and showed no remorse, even when the man’s family and neighbors were crying out in grief. Others pointed out the utter humanitarian crisis that has been inflicted on the people in Gaza by the Israeli government. Almost no access to drinkable water, no access to medical supplies, the death toll that rises from the bombings, and the immense suffering caused to civilians with these weapons of war were just a few of the things mentioned in the plea to the city council members.  

The scene at city hall was a strong showing of community. Those who came out were sick of the incessant violence and called for an end to it. They felt complacent in the genocide since they paid taxes which the United States government used to help support the Israeli bombings. With all this intense opposition to the Israeli government’s slaughter of Palestinian civilians, the Iowa City community hopes that city council listens to their constituency and calls for a ceasefire in Gaza.

This article was written with aid from Amman Hassan.

The post Iowa City Community Members Demand a Ceasefire in Palestine appeared first on KRUI Radio.

During the lecture, Walsh espoused plenty of hate speech and misinformation towards transgender and queer people, which included intentionally deadnaming people, denying the existence of trans people, and calling for an end to the “dangerous transgender ideology”, amassing cheers while doing so. This was along with an uptick in expressions of anti-trans sentiments online and from people in the university in the weeks leading up to the event. 

This is what led to everyone gathering in that intersection. The protesters wanted to exhibit their anger and show that they weren’t going to stand for an event like this. Whether the individuals were there to protect themselves or their friends and family, they wanted to be heard. From this position, they could show these sentiments to all those who attended the lecture and now had their path blocked, along with those in power at the university, and the Iowa City community in general. They wanted to make sure that their frustrations were heard, and that an event like this that platformed transphobia would never happen in their community again. 

Students protesting outside the IMU after Matt Walsh’s lecture. Image via John Glab

Recently, on a mid-October evening, a nearly identical scene was reflected in the dusk air. This time, after blocking the entrances to the IMU, the group of protesters formed a blockade at the intersection, with individuals continuously circling the cross walk. The reasoning for this demonstration was nearly identical. The IMU hosted another speaker to espouse transphobic rhetoric and misinformation. Here, Chloe Cole, a teenaged detransitioner, was brought in to speak in what was not as large of an affair. She does not have as big of a name as Walsh’s, and her overall viewpoints aren’t as staunchly transphobic. Often it seems like she is being paraded around by other powerful conservative figureheads, where they are manipulating her to advance their anti-trans objectives. 

Despite this, her speech and presence though were still harmful. Her main talking point that audience members rallied around was her opposition to providing gender affirming care for trans people under the age of 18. Many highlight the importance of having this form of medical care to be available to everyone, citing people’s personal experiences of feeling more comfortable in their bodies, and improving their mental health. This was still another attack on Iowa City’s transgender and queer community. Going through the same things again six months later, their anger here was even more palpable, because after they demanded that something like this would never happen again, it happened again.  

With the content of these lectures, it is undeniable that they cross over into the realm of hate speech. This encourages equally hateful actions towards the group of people it is targeting. That is the whole point behind why someone would say hateful sentiments. They do it to convince others to adopt these ideals, and then carry them out in their daily lives. This of course spells danger for the transgender community that these lectures have targeted, where trans individuals experience more harassment, and potentially exposes them to violent acts. 

So, why did another one of these lectures happen again? If it was just an open platform for people to spout hate speech, and so much of the student body was against it, why would another event like this happen again? To answer that we can look at the student organization hosting both events, the University of Iowa chapter of the Young Americans for Freedom. As a student organization, the YAF has the ability to apply for a space within the IMU to host an event. The process of inviting a guest speaker, even if they are there to discuss political topics and motives, is also permitted. Inviting a guest speaker adds more steps to the planning process with university guidelines requiring that an application for the speaker be sent through for review. The process for Cole’s lecture took about three months’ worth of planning.  

Cole’s lecture. Image via KGAN

Since these events are so problematic, why wouldn’t the university deny them? The main claim that is used is the commitment to free speech principles. As a public institution, the University of Iowa is legally required to allow any student organization, with any political belief to have a platform to speak. Allowing the YAF to host an event that expresses the organization’s thoughts and opinions on certain topics does uphold free speech. There is also a clause in the guidelines that requires an open question and answer section during a hosted lecture if the speaker is deemed controversial. This requirement was strategically worked around. In Walsh’s Q&A section, anyone with a dissenting viewpoint was booed profusely so that they could never get out any of their points. During Cole’s Q&A section, the question that one of our reporters had wanted to ask was turned down by Cole’s team. This outrightly defies the free speech principles that give this event any credibility to exist.  

Recently, about a month after the protest, Iowa City and campus police arrested six protesters who were involved in the protest of Cole’s lecture on serious misdemeanors for the obstruction of official acts. They were identified through video surveillance, and photos taken on the day of the protest. All six protesters were of trans identity. Even though there were many other cisgender protesters there doing the same thing, and the worst offense committed was encouraging others to block people from entering the IMU, these six were specifically arrested. This reads clearly as an attempt by city and campus officials to silence those among the transgender community. Making these arrests strives to strike fear in anyone else who would come out and protest another event like this. It tries to deny those of their right to protest, which goes against their free speech principles.  

With these examples, there seems to be a double standard in how the university handles free speech. Here, protecting free speech principles doesn’t seem to be the main priority of the university for allowing these lectures to be hosted. As with most things, their main priority seems to be money. We at KRUI spoke with a lobbyist, who asked to remain anonymous, that operates within the Iowa government, and University of Iowa. They gave us a rundown of how the YAF is able to host these events, and the money involved with them. 

The YAF, and most right-wing student organizations on campus, all operate in a similar way. The YAF at the University of Iowa itself is just a chapter of the larger national Young Americans for Freedom organization, which acts as an interest group. The organization states its goal is to help promote conservativism. The national organization itself receives money through donations from various wealthy individuals, foundations, and corporations. The YAF does not disclose these donations, but many have been recorded to include several million dollars going to the organization at a time. The national organization then distributes the funds procured from donations to its various member chapters in universities across the county to carry out its goal of promoting conservative goals university campuses.

Police clashing with protesters during Cole’s Lecture. Image via John Glab

The YAF has realized that the best way to make an impact on campus is by being provocative. This is why they invite controversial speakers to come to campus, claiming that it’s in the name of free speech. They do this whether or not they actually fully agree with what those speakers have to say. The YAF fans these flames of outrage to burn as strong as possible. Specifically for the Cole lecture, the YAF brought on Iowa City and campus police from the beginning of organizing the event. They knew that people would protest the event, and if the police were there at the protest, it would raise tensions even further and escalate things.  

Their goal was to create a sensationalist atmosphere, and further polarize the community. Part of it is them wanting to fabricate and push a narrative that conservatives are an oppressed group on university campuses. They take these images of people protesting their event and police clashing to post on social media to further this narrative. Through lobbyists like the one we talked to, the YAF goes to their constituents in Republican, right-wing state representatives. They make the argument to them that the “woke” University of Iowa is not sufficiently protecting the free speech of its right-wing students, hence discriminating against them in favoring more progressive, pro-LGBT views. 

From here, the YAF can rely on these right-wing state representatives to pressure the University of Iowa to allow these events to happen, and to quell the backlash that occurs as a result of the transphobic lectures. The state representatives exert pressure through the state budget, which is voted on every year, and includes how much the University of Iowa receives in state appropriations. Since it is a public university, it is heavily dependent on state spending accrued from taxes to continue to operate year after year.  

Graph via the University of Iowa

Looking at the university’s general education fund, which doesn’t include income sources from non-educational services the university carries out like athletic games and school stores, it brought in $218 million in the 2023-24 fiscal year from state appropriations. This makes up 27% of that budget, an extremely significant amount of that is decided by people in the government. What legislators want is for the university to favor groups like the YAF, so they can push these transphobic and homophobic narratives.  

The University of Iowa is compelled to appease the opinions of these right-wing state legislators, or they would risk losing this major source of funding. This also explains why there were so many Republican state representatives at the Chloe Cole lecture. Specifically at that event, we at KRUI talked with, and got the names of representatives Dean Fisher, Mark Cisneros, and Brad Sherman, all of whom are Republican. Many of these representatives’ stances are staunchly against transgender people, which falls under Governor Reynolds’ administration’s ideals. Fisher, when asked by one of our staff members about his stance on gender affirming care, and if he would propose legislation related to the issue responded, “Your questions reflect the fact that you are very biased, and have little understanding of the issue. Apparently, you didn’t listen to Chloe’s speech.”  

These are some of the representatives who have control over the University of Iowa’s funding. The university would not function without this money, and while state legislators would never outrightly take it all away, they could very easily cut back on it. Yet, the university uses up all of its monetary resources, so it can function to its greatest ability. A reduction in funding would mean a reduction in the quality of education that its students are receiving.

Image via Casper Bakker

State legislators are manipulating the University of Iowa with their own funding. It is in each community in the state’s best interest that this money goes to the university, so it can provide an education for its residents. However, this money comes with strings attached. Strings that can be pulled by those in power. This comes as over the past year, many laws have been put in place that attack the trans and LGBT communities.  

These anti-trans bills include Senate Files 482 and 538, which ban trans youth from using the bathroom that corresponds with their gender, and prohibit gender affirming care for those under the age of 18. There is also Senate File 496, which has banned many books from public school libraries that mention and discuss have LGBT related themes, and forbids teachers from bringing up these topics in teachings. These laws look to silence and undermine these people by erasing any recognition of LGBT people in the Iowa school systems. 

Most recently, the Board of Regents set policies that encouraged rolling back diversity equity and inclusion policies for the universities it oversees. Regent David Barker cited concerns over the rapid growth of DEI programs as a reason to look into them, saying, “any bureaucracy that grows rapidly needs a close look from time to time.” This puts DEI programs, institutions that expand students’ worldview, and provide support for minority and marginalized people, in jeopardy. Many argue that this is a further attempt to continue to restrict diverse viewpoints within education systems in the state of Iowa. 

The motivations of the Board of Regents are perhaps very similar to those of state legislators. The Board of Regents oversees the operation of the public universities within Iowa: The University of Northern Iowa, Iowa State University, and the University of Iowa. They decide things like the cost of tuition, budgets and operational guidelines. The board consists of nine members from varying backgrounds, where one of them is required to be a recent student member. Thes members are all appointed by the governor, and then confirmed by the Iowa Senate. A stipulation of the board is that no more than five members can be of the same political party affiliation.  

Of these members, only one, Nancy Dunkel, is affiliated as a Democrat. Four of them, Sherry Bates, Jim Lindenmayer, JC Risewick, and Abby Crow are registered as independents. The remaining four, Michael Richards, Greta Rouse, David Barker, and Robert Cramer are all affiliated as Republican. However, this doesn’t mean that views are evenly split. Though registered among the Board of Regents with no party affiliation, recently appointed JC Risewick has donated thousands of dollars to Kim Reynolds’ election campaigns. Along with this, regent Rouse worked as Reynolds’ communications director, and Barker was appointed by Reynolds to the Executive Council of the Empower Rural Iowa Initiative.  

Protesters marching after Cole’s lecture. Image via Casper Bakker

This not only gives the Board of Regents a Republican majority, but also gives a position to several members who will make decisions according to Reynolds’ interests. Those interests as of recently have been to violate the lives of, and deny the right to exist for transgender people. What we have seen is an increase of these bigoted policies seeping more and more into the daily lives of people through educational institutions. The Iowa government has been flexing its power over these educational institutions, like the University of Iowa, so they follow suit with their transphobic incentives 

So far, the University of Iowa hasn’t tried to fight back, but they have a very limited range to do so with state representatives controlling their funding. This limits the University of Iowa’s ability to provide a safe and tolerant environment for all its students, and the people in the greater community that it fosters. With this manipulation of governmental power, the University of Iowa will continue to degrade as an open and welcoming space for all. This bigotry that is corrupting university policies and attacking the transgender community within its campus is actively putting these people in danger. 

This article was written with aid from John Glab, and field work from Amman Hassan.

The post The Uses of Money and Power That Goes Into Anti-Trans Lectures On Campus appeared first on KRUI Radio.

A major concern for the guild had been actors’ residuals, which are compensated payments made toward actors if the media they had been previously involved in had been reused. With the streaming service community being more prominent in recent years, these residuals have undergone a significant decrease. Starting rates have lowered for the remittances that they receive.

In conjunction with this issue, the matter of AI had also been raised. With AI’s rapid proliferation, policies haven’t yet caught up with how to protect actors’ rights to compensation whenever their work is utilized in the context of AI. As AI becomes more of a prevalent occurrence across industries such as the one of film and television, the union had demanded for there to be a greater sense of consent for when it comes to its usage of actors’ talents and identities. Those partaking in the strike had called off appearing in publicized platforms, alongside engaging in existing, and ongoing projects.

Image via the Los Angeles Times

The strike lasted a total of 118 days, ending on November 9th, 2023 after the approval of a tentative agreement that had included newly-updated provisions for the actors’ service practices and management. These provisions consisted of increases in minimum wage, streaming bonuses, set restrictions and regulations on the use of AI, as well as better conditions with regards to healthcare and pensions. For reference of a more detailed account of the agreement’s inclusions, you can look at a full, detailed summary of what the new agreement covers here.

As AMPTP had called this their “last, best and final offer,” actor Kevin E. West had stated that the deal is “not perfect” but had also added that “nothing is.” Actor and SAG-AFTRA executive vice president Ben Whitehair called the agreement a “massive win.” AMPTP had said that this agreement “represents a new paradigm,” and that “it gives SAG-AFTRA the biggest contract-on-contract gains in the history of the union.” With this negotiation, one can conclude that the deal signifies the protection and support of actors within the professional field so that the industry can continue to flourish within healthy, good spaces. 

The post An Update on the SAG-AFTRA Strike, and What the Tentative Agreement Offers appeared first on KRUI Radio.

The event featured two groups attempting to make their concerns heard. A sympathetic and pro-Palestinian majority, and a pro-Israeli minority. The protest featured many slogans and speakers, but some of the most prominent and consistent themes revolved around war crimes, American involvement, and Palestinian statehood. Specifically “from the river to the sea”, which insinuates a Palestinian state consisting of pre-1947 borders.

This slogan became a focal point of the pro-Israel protesters who considered it a statement of violence. The stakes of the statements made resulted in a supposed schism involving verbal altercations, including slurs and calls for self harm. I was able to speak to a wide variety of individuals representing both sides of this conflict, these are their voices.

Image via Amman Hassan

One of the most interesting people present at the event was Kolet, the aunt of Rachel Corrie, a 23-year-old American activist, who was murdered by an Israeli Bulldozer in Rafah, Gaza in 2003. Kolet has been working with Iowans for Palestine ever since. I asked her what her response was to the attacks and what an American response should look like. She responded by stating, “I don’t have a right to tell Israelis or Palestinians how to live their lives, but as an American, I believe it’s our responsibility to stand when we see things that are wrong, and that’s why I’m here. I would like them to call for a ceasefire and do what we’ve done in multiple other conflicts, which is to airdrop aid in Gaza. It’s not just (Joe) Biden, it’s (Antony) Blinken, it’s the state department, it’s the whole American government that’s responsible. This war did not start October 7th of 2023.”

Other individuals I spoke to were Mike Josephson, and his associate Newman Abuissa. The former is a Palestinian immigrant, who has lived in Iowa City for almost 50 years, and is the latter is the founder of the St. Raphael Orthodox Church. “The president’s response is disgraceful,” Josephson said. “Most people, when they do research, understand why what’s happening is wrong. The power of the media, the top one percent, and the Israeli lobby have outsized influence on our government. It boils down to respect and dignity of the human beings in Palestine. Before Israel, Palestine accommodated everybody. America must call for a cease fire and abide by international law.” Abuissa also commented on his involvement with the Iowa Democrats, and disappointment with Rita Hart’s condemnation of University of Iowa Democrats on the basis of antisemitism.

Image via Amman Hassan

One notable individual at the protest was Max, a resident of Iowa city who centered himself at the protest with an Israeli flag and megaphone defending the Jewish state and condemning the protesters. “October 7th was an eye opener that jews were being targeted. Israel has a right to defend itself, just like in 9/11.” I pressed Max on the 9/11 comparison and he acknowledged the long and ultimately negative consequences of the American response. However, he didn’t seem to apply similar logic to the Israeli reaction, calling for a strong military response. “I believe Israel should get rid of Hamas. These people were gunned down. Antisemitism has been rampant. People need to understand that they were killed for being Jewish. Without Israel, where would jews go?”

I also spoke to some of the other pro-Israel demonstrators, one of which who said they were a first year student at the University of Iowa, and a former exchange student and EMT in Israel. When speaking with them, it became evident that the focus of their interests and many of their pro-Israeli peers present, were those of antisemitism and violence. “I came here because I was scared. I wanted to make sure I didn’t see an Israeli flag getting burned. My friend’s from my gap year have been beaten up for holding up Israeli signs. I need to see if that’s happening on this campus so I know if I should go home for a while. The chants from the river to the sea really scare me. I’m very worried about it, and I’m very scared.”

Image via Amman Hassan

Despite their worries over anti semitic violence, they shared some sympathies for the Palestinian cause stating “I hope they will oust Hamas, get rid of them, and we could end the fighting. I want the fighting to end, I want to live side by side with them. They are amazing people. They are the same as me and you. Oust BB (Netanyahu). Get rid of the right wing government, they are horrible. Fix the systemic racism in Israel. Keep doing what you’re doing. Make sure Iran and Hezbollah don’t get involved. I promote aid being sent to the Palestinian people, just to make sure it doesn’t get to Hamas.”

After the speakers had all took their turns, the protesters began to march around the business district of downtown until circling back to the capital, where they got signatures, informed those present of how to get involved, and ultimately dissipated peacefully.

The post Protesters Gather at the Old Capital in Response to the Israel Palestine Conflict appeared first on KRUI Radio.