Iowa House higher education subcommittees have moved ahead legislation targeting diversity, equity and inclusion in general education requirements and at private universities, bringing back proposals that failed to make it through the Statehouse last year.
The subcommittee meeting on House Study Bill 542 got heated after a public commenter opposed to the bill, Abigail Escatel, appeared to hit the table close to subcommittee chair Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, before being removed from the room.
Subcommittee members Rep. Skyler Wheeler, R-Hull, and Ross Wilburn, D-Ames, spoke against the “assault” as they described it during the meeting, though their thoughts on the bill itself differed.
“Name calling, attacking, trying to assault a legislator is not constructive,” Wheeler said. “And if your goal is to try and end these bills, if I was to give you some friendly advice, I wouldn’t act that way, because other legislators are going to see that and go, ‘Maybe I need to vote for this thing if they’re going to act this way.’”
The bill would bar public universities from including “diversity, equity, inclusion, and critical race theory-related courses or course requirements” in general education or core curriculum requirements.
Escatel, a rhetoric doctoral candidate at the University of Iowa, said she came to the subcommittee meeting in opposition to the legislation to “address the white male fragility that sits in this room that feels so threatened by the idea that there are Black and Brown intellectuals that know more about the United States in this world, and its legacies of colonialism.”
She said Iowa lawmakers don’t recognize a “very complex racial history that was built on the backs of Black folks” and taken from indigenous people when they were “unsettled from this land.” Escatel’s remarks exceeded the allotted two minutes for public comment. She sat down after repeated directives from Holt that her time was up, and hit the table after a police officer gestured to escort her from the room.
Laura Blaser, an Iowa State University alum who also spoke against the bill, said during her comment that the incident “did not merit a woman being manhandled out of here.” Blaser said she would have given Escatel her own time to finish her statement if she could have. On the bill, Blaser said she didn’t want to take required courses in ethics, diversity and U.S. history during her time in college, but it was “just a few classes” and she believes she is “better for it.”
“I consider myself and my fellow students better prepared for the world for it, and I think this hamstringing of our educational institutions is wrong, and this is not the way to go,” Blaser said.
Also included in the legislation was a directive for the Iowa Board of Regents to conduct a review of all undergraduate general education requirements and core curricula, with the elimination of any of the would-be-violating course requirements. A bill including these requirements for general education courses was introduced last year but failed to make it through an Iowa Senate subcommittee.
Iowa Board of Regents State Relations Officer Jillian Carlson said the board is registered undecided on the bill, adding that a policy was passed in August stating instructors shouldn’t include “controversial topics” unless relevant to the core subject and must endeavor to not indoctrinate students in one way or another but present a range of views and foster critical thinking.
Other opponents to the bill included the Iowa Conference of the United Methodist Church and LGBTQ+ advocacy organization One Iowa. Keenan Crow, director of policy and advocacy at One Iowa, told the subcommittee courses that “promote understanding among students” are both a moral and economic good as they prepare to enter a global workforce.
He called the board of regent policy “alarming” and is concerned by the “constantly growing list of forbidden topics,” and urged the subcommittee to vote no in order to support academic freedom.
Jeffrey Anderson, lobbyist for the Iowa Conference of the United Methodist Church, said “it is an unfortunate fact” that racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination have existed, and still do, in the U.S. The topics suggested in the bill to be prohibited are regularly discussed in different areas of United Methodist churches, he said, and the challenge some of them present lead to critical thinking and intellectual freedom.
“As United Methodists, we want students to have big brains, not small minds, and we don’t think students are that fragile, Anderson said, “and we believe exposing students to challenging concepts and ideas develops critical thinking that results in real learning, not, as some will contend, indoctrination.”
Wheeler thanked Anderson for his comments, saying his approach was the correct one because Wheeler could take notes from it and think about his points, though they “philosophically disagree.”
Wilburn said Holt should not have been “the subject of an assault,” but he had the “opportunity to let it go” after Escatel sat down. The fact that the legislation states it will be known as the “Stop Woke Act” doesn’t help in a situation like this one, he said, where people have “passionate concern,” with some more civil than others, and feel that “rights are being removed.”
He agreed with points made by Blaser during public comment, adding that it should be understood that classes wouldn’t be banned under the legislation, just barred from being required. Wilburn was the only subcommittee member to not approve the bill.
Holt said some of the comments made by Escatel were “incredibly racist,” and that diversity equity and inclusion programs, in reality, promote the exact opposite of what the name implies — adversity, inequity and exclusion. He and Wheeler approved the legislation to move to the full Iowa House Higher Education Committee.
“These concepts teach young people to judge through the prism of race, creating the opportunity to see a racist behind every tree and sow division in our diverse society,” Holt said.
Bill to tie Iowa Tuition Grant to DEI elimination moves ahead
House Study Bill 537 would bar private universities participating in the Iowa Tuition Grant program from opening, maintaining or staffing diversity, equity and inclusion offices unless required by state or federal law or for accreditation standards. Like legislation filed in the 2025 session, the bill would strip violating universities’ eligibility to participate in the grant program starting the academic year after a violation was found and not remedied.
Holt chaired the House Study Bill 537 subcommittee as well, and was joined by Rep. Timi Brown-Powers, D-Waterloo, and Wheeler. Both Republicans voiced their support for the bill and signed it to move to the full Iowa House Higher Education Committee, but Brown-Powers said it would be an “overstep” to tell private colleges what they can and cannot do, and the reason of religion many students have in going to a private college would fall under “DEI.”
“I’m kind of disappointed that we’re bringing this to the table today,” she said.
Representatives of religious organizations spoke out against the bill, with Anderson calling the bill “especially concerning” among the legislation targeting DEI. Interfaith Alliance of Iowa Action Fund lobbyist Connie Ryan also opposed the legislation.
This bill would set a “very bad precedent” for using the Iowa Tuition Grant to try and control private universities, Anderson said.
“Many of Iowa’s private colleges and universities are affiliated with various denominations, including our three United Methodist-affiliated colleges,” Anderson said. “This bill would withhold the Iowa Tuition Grant from students unless the colleges they attend disavow their strongly held religious and moral beliefs and end DEI programs.”
Wheeler said Dordt University is in his district and he thinks “they’ll be OK.” Holt pointed out that private universities would still be allowed to operate with these offices, just not with the “taxpayer money” from the Iowa Tuition Grant.
Referencing one of the definitions of diversity, equity and inclusion included in the legislation, Holt said the goal should be to get back to “colorblind, sex-neutral admissions, meaning then they will be based on merit.”
“Once upon a time, that was the ultimate goal of the civil rights movement in this country, and it needs to be our goal once again,” Holt said. “This goal will never be attained when we engage in discrimination through admission policies that function on anything other than merit.”
