Iowa Republicans in the legislature and governor’s mansion have enthusiastically joined the Republican Party’s decades long march toward extremism. One of the most dangerous areas of their party’s extremist ideology is their assault on gun safety and their habit of turning a blind eye (or for the most extreme, giving an enthusiastic thumbs up) toward the gun violence that results.
Like all extremism, they wrap this assault up in noble sounding language, pretending that it’s about protecting the rights of gun owners. The truth? It’s about scoring political points with their blindly loyal, mis(dis)informed, and irrationally fearful base while in reality endangering the rights of all Iowans to safe, gun violence free lives.
On November 8, 2022, Iowans will find a constitutional amendment on the ballot. The supposedly innocent amendment reads:
Iowa Right to Firearms Amendment
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The sovereign state of Iowa affirms and recognizes this right to be a fundamental individual right. Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.”
WHAT ARE IMPORTANT TRUTHS ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT?
Fact: The U.S. Constitution’s 2nd Amendment has been more recently interpreted as protecting the right of individual citizen’s to own firearms. [A discussion of whether this is a more valid interpretation than the previous court’s or at minimum, how this amendment gets used to endanger the people’s unalienable right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is an important topic, but beyond the scope of this diary.]
Supporters’ arguments: The Iowa Constitution doesn’t have a 2nd amendment equivalent, we need one, so all we’re doing is adding one.
Truth: Since the U.S. Constitution’s 2nd amendment covers all Iowans, we don’t in fact need our own and more importantly, Iowa Republicans are not just trying to add one. The addition of the term “strict scrutiny”, not found in the U.S. Constitution, was deliberate and the real goal in their extremist anti-gun-safety agenda.
WHAT IS STRICT SCRUTINY?
Strict scrutiny is the highest level of scrutiny a court can use to decide whether a law is constitutional. If this amendment is passed, it would force Iowa judges to use a type of judicial analysis that could lead to them striking down Iowa’s existing gun safety laws and would make implementation of additional gun safety laws extremely difficult.
State rankings, as outlined by Everytown USA, and other research has shown an association between more gun safety laws and lower levels of gun violence, and conversely, fewer gun safety laws and more gun violence.
Only three states have a similar amendment (Alabama, Louisiana, and Missouri). These three states are among the top five in gun violence. All three have had their ‘felon in possession’ laws challenged multiple times. If this amendment were to pass, imagine how much money advocacy groups and we the taxpayers would have to spend to defend our current laws as well as additional ones, if we elect a legislature that fulfills its constitutional duty to protect us by passing more.
Another profoundly dangerous aspect, if passed, would be amendment’s ability to prohibit Iowa’s law enforcement from enforcing federal gun safety laws that are rejected in Iowa due to strict scrutiny. With this amendment, others would be protected by federal gun violence prevention efforts. Iowans would not.
Truth: State gun safety laws and policies do not prevent responsible gun ownership and use. Rather, they prevent firearms-related deaths and injuries by reducing access to guns under conditions that could lead to gun violence, including:
- Keeping violent felons from having firearms.
- Keeping perpetrators of domestic and intimate partner violence from having firearms.
- Keeping guns out of schools, the workplace, and public spaces.
- Keeping assault rifles and other “offensive weapons” out of civilian hands.
- Preventing unintentional deaths and injuries and reducing the risk of teen suicide though safe gun storage in the home.
Truth: Our society depends upon balancing individual rights, like gun ownership, with society’s right to be free from gun violence, in part achieved using common sense gun safety laws. This amendment would profoundly undermine this balance to the detriment of Iowa’s families.
HOW MIGHT IOWANS BE FOOLED OR CONFUSED?
There are multiple traps to recognize, warn against and avoid. These include:
- If voters have heard nothing about it until they’re standing in the voting booth, if they only read the title, they may think a YES vote is simply a vote for the right to own a gun, not realizing what a YES vote really means.
- Seeing and believing the argument that all that’s happening here is that we’re adding an amendment just like the one in the U.S. Constitution so, no big deal, not knowing that the term “strict scrutiny” is not in our Constitution and what it means to Iowans’ safety.
- Reading the words “strict scrutiny” and thinking it means strict scrutiny of people who want guns (a good and reasonable prevention approach) instead of strict scrutiny of gun safety laws (a dangerous and bad thing).
A good example of serious confusion is a poll finding that two-thirds of Iowans opposed permit-less carry laws (anti-gun safety) but supported the amendment, clearly not realizing that the amendment could be used to obstruct good gun safety laws like permit requirements for concealed carry.
In contrast and illustrating the importance of providing information while polling (see underlined section of third bullet point) were the results of a poll of Iowans by Everytown. Among other findings, were:
- 90% of Iowa gun owners support the permitting requirement for carrying concealed handguns in public, and 92% of Iowa gun owners support the state’s background check requirement for all handgun sales.
- The overwhelming majority of both Democrats and Republicans support Iowa’s concealed handgun permit and background check laws.
- By a nearly 2-to-1 margin, more voters oppose a proposed “strict scrutiny” constitutional amendment than support it. After the potential implications of the amendment were explained, 54% of Iowa voters indicated opposition to the proposal, compared to just 28% indicating support.
WILL THE IOWA PRESS SERVE IOWANS WELL ON THIS ISSUE?
Poor journalism, as well as disinformation, could contribute to confusion or even Iowans voting against what they actually want. In poll ofter poll, Iowans support common sense gun safety laws and oppose efforts to undermine them. For every Iowan who supports these laws, a NO vote is the one that will reflect this support. Hopefully, every media report on this issue will make that clear.
One danger is correct but incomplete information. I found a link to BALLOTPEDIA that is an example of this oversimplification (deliberate or not) that fails to promote true understanding. The BALLOTPEDIA entry reads:
A "yes" vote supports adding a right to own and bear firearms to the Iowa Constitution and require strict scrutiny for any alleged violations of the right brought before a court.
|
A "no" vote opposes adding a right to own and bear firearms to the Iowa Constitution and require strict scrutiny for any alleged violations of the right brought before a court.
|
Now here is the text with critical unstated points in brackets:
A "yes" vote supports adding a right to own and bear firearms to the Iowa Constitution [true but completely unnecessary] and require strict scrutiny for any alleged violations of the right brought before a court [true and really bad].
|
A "no" vote opposes adding a right to own and bear firearms to the Iowa Constitution [true but no need to worry since that’s already covered] and require strict scrutiny for any alleged violations of the right brought before a court [true and good, as opposing this language supports gun violence prevention and promotes public health and safety].
|
I greatly fear that at least some of the Iowa Press will (a) fall into the oversimplification trap, (b) turn this into another “he said, she said” debate, as they have for other critical issues in the state and/or (c) do and report bad polling that doesn’t reflect where Iowans actually stand. Any of these, as well as other forms of poor journalism could greatly undermine efforts to deliver the truth and defeat this potentially dangerous amendment. Dear Iowa Press — Do better.
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
Individuals and groups, including the Iowa Democratic Party, need to step up and provide Iowans with the warnings and the truth. Consider being one of the truth tellers.
For Iowans who want to protect the lives and health of those we love, show up on November 8 and ...
VOTE NO ON INCREASING RISK OF GUN VIOLENCE.
VOTE NO ON EXPENSIVE LEGAL BATTLES THAT WILL BE NEEDED TO PROTECT THE LIVES AND HEALTH OF IOWANS IF THIS AMENDMENTS PASSES.
VOTE NO ON THIS UNNECESSARY AND IDEOLOGICALLY EXTREME AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF IOWA.
With love from a fellow Iowan.