In defense of public libraries

Public libraries have long stood as pillars of education, access to information, and community enrichment. In Iowa, our libraries not only provide resources for lifelong learning but also serve as inclusive spaces where individuals from all walks of life can gather, explore, and grow. However, recent legislative proposals—specifically HF521 and SF235—pose significant threats to the ability of public libraries to continue fulfilling these vital roles.

The essential role of public libraries

Public libraries are more than just buildings full of books; they are vibrant community hubs. They offer free access to a wealth of information, support digital literacy, and provide programs that cater to diverse interests and age groups. From early childhood storytimes that foster a love for reading to workshops that enhance job-seeking skills, libraries adapt to the evolving needs of their communities. In rural areas and underserved populations, libraries often serve as the primary, if not sole, access point to critical information and services.

Potential impact of HF521 and SF235

House File 521 and Senate File 235 aim to modify existing obscenity exemptions for public libraries and educational institutions. While the intent behind these bills may be to protect community standards, the broad language used could lead to unintended consequences. By altering obscenity exemptions, these bills could subject libraries and educational institutions to increased legal scrutiny and potential penalties for materials deemed inappropriate by subjective standards. This shift could result in self-censorship among librarians and educators, limiting the diversity of materials available and hindering the open exchange of ideas that is fundamental to educational growth.

Consequences for community access and education

If enacted, HF521 and SF235 could force libraries to remove or restrict access to a wide array of materials, including classic literature, educational content, and resources that reflect the experiences of marginalized communities. Such actions would not only diminish the richness of our library collections but also impede the ability of individuals to seek information that broadens their perspectives and fosters critical thinking. Moreover, these restrictions could disproportionately affect those who rely on public libraries for access to uncensored information, including students, researchers, and individuals without internet access at home.

Advocating for our libraries

It is imperative that we recognize and preserve the autonomy of public libraries to curate collections that reflect the diverse interests and needs of our communities. Rather than imposing restrictive measures, we should trust the expertise of librarians and educators to make informed decisions about the materials they provide. By doing so, we uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and ensure that libraries remain spaces where curiosity is encouraged, knowledge is accessible, and community bonds are strengthened.

Sincerely,

Sandy Lawrence, President of Solon Public Library Board of Trustees (Solon, IA)

Bob King, President of Solon Public Library Foundation (Solon, IA)

Susan Scott, President of The Friends of Solon Public Library (Solon, IA)

Calling on local representatives

In the last several weeks I have called the offices of Senators Ernst and Grassley and Representative Miller-Meeks numerous times to voice concerns about multiple issues (concerns about nominated cabinet officials--all of whom regrettably have been confirmed; NIH and Veterans funding cuts; firings; proposed Medicaid cuts, etc.).  In all cases, I have received a written communication from the respective offices within two days of my inquiry. (I can't exactly call these "responses" because all letters have been non-responsive exercises in sophistry--generic and vacuous recitations not addressing the concerns raised.)

So I decided to simplify things.  On Sunday, March 9, I called all three offices with one question:  would these elected officials commit to not cutting social security?  Several of my friends have also called these offices with the same simple question.  As of this writing, none of us has received a communication from these offices.

What explains this? Unlike my previous questions raised with these offices, this recent question should permit an immediate and resounding response--a straight forward commitment to not voting to cut social security.  The social security funds are dollars we citizens have paid into this system throughout our working lives, which are ours to reclaim upon retirement.  Any cuts to our funds would be nothing but government-sanctioned theft!

I return to my question:  what explains this?  At this point it seems obvious that by their non-action, our republican elected officials are complicit in a wide range of unconstitutional and illegal actions taking place under the auspices of the Trump/Musk Administration. 

As the daughter of German immigrants who survived Nazi Germany, I am horrified!   Hitler gained his autocratic power using the democratic levers of the German democratic state--but only with/through the consent and collaboration of German elected officials and others--including big business interests.  The parallels here are frightening.  As in Germany, we Iowa constituents—republicans and democrats alike--have been, and continue to be sold out by our Iowa elected officials who swore an oath to abide by the Constitution, and who have a primary obligation to represent constituents. Apparently, fulfilling these obligations conflicts with the allegiances of these elected officials to Trump/Musk.  If we are lucky enough to survive this burgeoning autocracy, history will not look kindly upon these cowards.

(Ms.) Gerhild Krapf

Iowa City

What are Iowa’s Congressional delegation’s priorities?

The Iowa Congressional delegation’s decisions impact every Iowan. Government efficiency and cost savings measures are important. The entire federal workforce only represents 6% of the budget, so why the chaotic firings of thousands of government employees without cause? Why the reckless program funding cuts or cutting entire programs?

What are the Iowa delegation’s thoughts on the following: humanitarian and agricultural impact of shuttering USAID; closing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; Republican budget which will add $3 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years; illegal firings of 17 inspectors general? What are the Impacts on veteran care by cutting 80,000 VA employees or firing top military leaders, citing some as DEI hires? Why is the U.S. voting with Russia, North Korea and China in the U.N. while cutting military aid to Ukraine?

Cuts at the CDC, which protects Americans from outbreaks and other public health threats; NIH cuts in medicine and disease funding, including cuts to the Iowa Cancer Affiliate Network when Iowa has the second highest and fastest rising cancer rate. Medical research should always be supported — Iowa has the fastest growing rate of new cancer diagnoses and the second highest rate of cancers in the nation. However, Senator Grassley and Representative Miller-Meeks support NIH funding cuts.

Why cut National Park funding? Park visits have an economic impact of over $55 billion; the timing of these cuts may require people to change vacation plans. Why fire 6,700 IRS employees during tax season? These employees have increased national revenue. USDA cut the budget by $1 billion to purchase local foods. Why cut funding for SNAP and school meals, safety nets for millions of food-insecure children and adults?  The House budget includes $12 billion in cuts to school nutrition programs, providing high-quality nutrition needed to be successful in school.

Where is the concern about the estimated $10.7 million taxpayer dollars spent by President Trump since January 20 to play golf?

Diane Duncan-Goldsmith

Iowa City

 Now is the time to protect Medicaid

I spent six months navigating a complex process to get Medicaid approved for both my parents. My dad, on the Elderly Waiver, undergoes frequent reassessments—an in-person review every three months, phone check-ins in between, and an annual formal review to confirm his eligibility.

Medicaid is vital for my 86-year-old parents. They live in Newton, Iowa, where my mom is in memory care because of severe dementia, and my dad is in assisted living. Every day, my dad spends several hours at my mom’s bedside. Like so many older couples, they worked hard all their lives, saved what they could, and expected to be able to live their final years with dignity. But the reality of long-term care costs quickly drained their savings in less than a year. Now, Medicaid and Medicare are the payers for their care, ensuring they receive the support they need. Without these programs, I don’t know what we would do.

But right now, Republicans in Congress are pushing to slash Medicaid, putting families like mine and millions of others at risk. Their latest budget blueprint proposes massive cuts to Medicaid, with some Republicans calling for as much as $2 trillion in reductions, all while prioritizing tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and big corporations. It’s clear where their priorities lie: millionaires over Medicaid. If they succeed, the consequences will be devastating, especially for seniors and families struggling to afford care.

Medicaid is the largest health insurance program in the country and a crucial pillar of our health care system. It helps cover high medical costs for those with limited income and is the primary payer for long-term care. It also provides home- and community-based care, which allows loved ones to remain at home instead of being forced into institutional settings. Research has consistently shown that Medicaid lowers costs, improves health outcomes, and keeps hospitals open. It’s a program that saves lives and strengthens our communities.

If Representative Miller-Meeks and Republicans in Congress gut Medicaid, millions of Americans—including seniors in nursing homes and low-income individuals—could lose their care. Families like mine would be forced to shoulder the additional financial burden of caregiving, something that many, like my family, simply cannot afford. Anyone caring for an aging relative knows how exorbitant these costs are, and we should be making it easier for people to age with dignity—not harder.

Medicaid cuts would touch nearly every household in the nation. More than 70 million Americans rely on Medicaid, and the ripple effects of slashing the program would be felt far and wide. Beyond seniors, these cuts would be devastating for children, low-income workers, and the health care providers who serve them.

We cannot allow this to happen. No one voted in November to strip health care away from our nation’s most vulnerable. If Republicans get their way, we will all pay the price. Now is the time to stand up and demand that Medicaid remains protected—for our parents, for our children, and for the future of our communities.

Melinda Magdalene Wings

Iowa City

The bigger question

Should the government let unelected people fire workers without cause, ignore funding created by Congress and ignore science. We need more Congressional control over who has access to our personal information. We need more Congressional oversight over Medicaid and Medicare reductions. We need more IRS workers to catch the big frauds. We need more national weather information to warn about tornadoes. We need more representatives who look out for their districts.  

Judy Pfohl

Iowa City

We are in danger of losing the Macbride Nature Recreation Area

We are in danger of losing forever Macbride Nature Recreation Area, the 485-acre piece of land the University of Iowa has leased for 60 years from the Corps of Engineers. The MNRA is where School of the Wild, UI WILD, the Raptor Center, Iowa Wildlife camps for kids, and countless other educational and scientific programs are held. It is also a most unusual and beautiful place that includes the Mehaffey Road area by Solon, one of the few quiet places close to the Iowa City area where the public can go to watch the waves on the lake and the birds flock to fish, or to bicycle or fish or camp.  It seems likely that this incredible place could quickly be lost to wealthy lakeshore real estate if protections are lifted.

A committee is currently accepting comments from the public, and I implore you to share your thoughts with them at MNRA-feedback@uiowa.edu

Kris Vervaecke

Iowa City