House Study Bill 649, a bill put forth by Republican Governor Kim Reynolds, was discussed by the Iowa House Schooling Council on Tuesday evening. The bill, as it was drafted, may require specific gender markers for transgender people on birth certificates, measures that were once used by Nazis to detect LGBTQ+ people in the 1940s, and would end constitutional recognition for them wherever “male” and “female” appear in Iowa code. However, the proposed legislation’s changing of the phrase “equal” is perhaps the most ambitious attempt to discriminate against trans people.
The bill asks the question, “What does ‘equal’ even mean when it says that the term ‘equal’ does not mean ‘the same’ or ‘identical’ when applied to transgender people?” The act simply states that “equal” no longer means “equal” or “identical” for trans people within the state of Iowa. It does not define the word. Heather Hora, the sponsor’s representative, responded, “Equal would mean… um, I would assume that equal… I don’t know exactly in this context,” when asked directly what the word “equal” meant in the context of this bill.
How can the bill’s sponsor claim to have created the ideal concept for “man” or “woman” in Iowa law if she is unable to define the term “equal” according to removing the term from its original definition? The state government appears ready to destroy the very idea of equality itself by attempting to write trans people out of all legal privileges in Iowa through definitions. Regardless of Iowans’ political views on transgender issues, that ought to be sufficient to shake them all.
The bill’s sponsor goes on to say that “separate” is “not inherently unequal” in addition to redefining the word “equal.” One of the bill’s opponents cited the “separate but equal” theory and its cruel history, as well as the attempt to revive it with a new Republican-endorsed goal. The norms that form the cornerstone of justice for all are in jeopardy, despite the fact that the fresh definition of the word “equal” and the “separate but equal theory” just apply to trans people. Are Republicans eager to go this far because it is so crucial for them to win a political battle against trans people in the state?
The bill’s method of establishing trans people as “separate” is equally significant. According to the act, transgender individuals must have distinctive birth certificates that identify them as such. After receiving gender-affirming treatment, anyone born in Iowa who wants to alter their birth certificate may be required to do so with both gender markers, making their transgender identity clear whenever they use it. This begs the question, “Why is it so crucial for the state to quickly identify transgender people?”
In the past, forced recognition has been used to hurt LGBTQ+ people. Nazis made transgender people and other LGBTQ+ people wear red triangles to denote their status in the 1940s. To raise awareness of how they would be labeled “individual” and denied equal privileges, many of those who opposed the Iowa act showed up wearing such pink triangles.
Concerns about a unique identity marker and forced recognition for trans people did not appear to be taken seriously by Republican Representative Brooke Boden. She moved the bill to the full commission for a vote instead, saying, “What I hear from the transgender community is that they are happy to be transgender, and I guess that would be OK to recognize it as that and make sure that your birth certificate represents those things.”
The House Schooling Committee passed the bill through on a party-line vote despite fierce opposition from more than 100 people who showed up against it. The bill was announced, heard, and passed with less than 24 hours’ notice, giving the commission and the state little time to properly consider its remarkable implications.
As this bill moves to the full House floor in the days to come, Iowa politicians will question the definition of words. Some will argue that the bill simply focuses on defining what a “man” or “woman” are. They refuse to acknowledge, however, that those definitions are diversion, a magician’s ruse to keep you from understanding that the very foundation of equality is in jeopardy.
Transgender columnist Erin Reed resides in Washington, DC. For her license publication, Erin in the Morning, she monitors LGBTQ+ legislation across the US.
