The Questionable ‘Logic’ of the Iowa Legislature

#NoMoreIowaProud

A recent edition of The Gazette’s “On Iowa Politics” highlighted two news stories.

One headline read, “Iowa lawmakers advance bill to require door locks, video surveillance to protect schools from active shooters.”

The next headline was: “Iowa House OKs bill lowering age to buy handguns to 18.”

These two reports may seem unrelated. But taken together, they send up a whole lot of red flags.

About the first story. The Iowa Legislature continues to drastically underfund public schools year after year. This year, it approved a paltry 2 percent public school funding increase. The national inflation rate as of March 31 was 2.4 percent. This creates a funding shortfall. State funding won’t cover costs.

At the same time, Iowa lawmakers want to require schools to upgrade door locks and install expensive security cameras. The proposed bill establishes a grant program. Schools could apply for grant money to pay for new locks. But not for security cameras! And the bill doesn’t even require the Legislature to fund the grant program.

Schools may qualify for a grant. They might not. Money may be available. It might not. We call this an unfunded mandate.

Now the second story. Iowa lawmakers want to lower the age of owning a handgun from 21 to 18. But who is most likely to commit a school shooting? The average age is 20. The third most common age is 18. Putting more guns in the hands of those most likely to commit school shootings only worsens the problem.

So, Iowa lawmakers want underfunded schools “hardened,” but they won’t pay for the upgrades. Lawmakers want to prevent school shootings, but they also want to give more gun access to the most likely group of school shooters.

Does this make sense to you?