Connect with us

Iowa

GOP lawmakers abandon Iowa's civil rights legacy

Published

on

GOP lawmakers abandon Iowa's civil rights legacy


Ralph Rosenberg served in the Iowa legislature from 1981 through 1994 and was director of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission from 2003 through 2010.

The Iowa legislature turned its back on our state’s proud civil rights legacy with last week’s passage of Senate File 2385, which neuters the effectiveness of the civil and human rights agencies and eliminates specific commissions dedicated to marginalized populations.

This combination undercuts Iowa values of respect and protecting the dignity of all Iowans. The bill compounds the removal of legal authority to proactively act on civil and human rights violations, by broadcasting a national message about how the Iowa government devalues diversity in religion, race, ethnic background, gender, or national identity. (Other pending Republican legislation reinforces this message, by calling for K-12 schools to teach history from a Western Civilization perspective, or limiting diversity, equity, and inclusion programming on college campuses.)

Advertisement

NEUTERING THE IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION

SF 2385 closely tracks Governor Kim Reynolds’ proposed bill on boards and commissions. Senate Republicans largely copied the governor’s ideas for their bill. Key provisions of the legislation strip the Iowa Civil Rights Commission of independent policy advice and statutory authority to:

  • investigate potential discrimination; 
  • conduct and release findings of independent research without prior approval of the director and governor; and
  • examine civil rights violations based on whistleblower evidence or patterns and practices.

SF 2385 removes responsibility and duties from the commissioners and concentrates power with one person: the governor’s appointed director of a renamed Office of Civil Rights. 

The bill restricts the commission’s ability to follow up on evidence of discriminatory patterns or practices or to proactively investigate discrimination and to engage in preventative efforts, such as testing for discriminatory practices. Those may include allegations of discrimination in housing based on whether an Iowan has children or a family, failure to accommodate a disability, or steering potential housing renters and buyers of a certain race towards certain neighborhoods.

Commissioners will be prohibited, or effectively hamstrung, from lobbying or providing information to policymakers unless they receive approval from the governor’s office.

Here are a few examples illustrating how the commission’s work will be affected if it cannot independently investigate or initiate complaints against alleged violators of civil rights.

In the past, if the commission learned that people with disabilities (such as veterans with PTSD needing companion animals) were being denied accommodations, staff could proactively “test” landlords to determine patterns or existence of discrimination. That practice allowed the commission to support the actions of staff and the director, to follow up on a whistleblower informal complaint. SF 2385 removes existing, clear-cut authority to use time-honored efforts like testing to uncover systemic discrimination practices.

Advertisement

Commissioners understood Iowans in the workplace or renting can be intimidated from filing cases. Even with evidence of patterns or trends, the commission and staff will face legal barriers to initiate testing or other investigations, like people being evicted because they had a service animal or because of their physical disability, or women in a particular industry or workforce being harassed.

The bill erases past efforts to educate the public and prevent discrimination. Past commissioners and staff helped achieve annual educational outreach efforts, often exceeding 200 per year. Today’s agency’s performance plan has a goal of 2 per month. Today’s performance plan for the Iowa Civil Rights Commission has a goal of two per month.

Other provisions of SF 2385 eliminate existing human rights commissions, consolidating all into one Human Rights Board with twelve members and just seven voting members. That will reduce representation and voices for Iowans with disabilities, or who are part of marginalized racial and ethnic groups. (Earlier this year, the House State Government Committee had crafted a different bill, which would have spared dozens of state boards and commissions, including the community-specific ones.)

The restructured Civil Rights Commission and Human Rights Board will be unable to offer rapid and independent insight into bills that positively or negatively impact marginalized groups. Current members of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission voted unanimously in March to oppose these changes to the commission and the community-specific bodies.

HOUSE DEBATE REVEALED BIPARTISAN OPPOSITION, CONCERNS

Advocates of SF 2385 portrayed the bill as a way to reduce bureaucracy. During the Iowa Senate debate on April 10, State Senator Chris Cournoyer asserted, “This bill is about maximizing meaningful public participation in the boards and commissions process, and it increases state government accountability and efficiency by eliminating unnecessary bureaucracy.”

Advertisement

While floor managing the bill in the Iowa House on April 16, State Representative Jane Bloomingdale touted the idea of concentrating accountability with a single director. “We’re not taking away any civil rights,” Bloomingdale said. “We are putting a director in charge of an agency, just like every other department. The director is in charge, and the director is accountable for her department. She’s appointed by the governor, confirmed by the Senate.”

Bloomingdale added, “The commission will stay in place. They are also appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate.” She did not acknowledge how the bill would undermine the 60-year-old values and purpose of the Iowa Civil Rights Act, which remains just as important in 2024.

Democratic State Representative Ross Wilburn offered an amendment that would strike the section relating to the Iowa Civil Rights Commission from SF 2385. He walked through some of the ways the bill would downgrade the commission’s authority. This video shows his opening remarks, comments from Bloomingdale, and Wilburn’s rebuttal.

Advertisement

Bloomingdale claimed, “The commission will continue to hear cases and make decisions as they do right now. The director of the agency will now be in charge of her department and the 27 full-time employees, instead of a volunteer board. But the volunteer board will continue to hear cases and make decisions on cases, just as they do now.”

She was apparently referring to contested case hearings. But only a small number of the 1,700 to 2,000 civil rights complaints filed in Iowa each year reach the hearing stage in front of the commission. The remainder of the cases are settled, mediated, dismissed, or issued the right to sue in court.

Wilburn replied that “Words matter,” before reading several passages in SF 2385 that remove the commission’s authority.

The bill’s proponents did not mention that the new Office of Civil Rights would inevitably face pressure to avoid claims against other state agencies for employment, public accommodation, and other areas. There was no consideration of the need for a law enforcement agency to maintain independence.

Concentrating power in the hands of one individual, closely situated to the governor or governor’s staff, fractures the commission’s nearly 60-year history. The Des Moines Register highlighted that problem in its April 18 editorial: “Don’t hand over the authority of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission to Kim Reynolds.”

Advertisement

House members rejected Wilburn’s amendment by 58 votes to 38, with four Republicans (Mark Cisneros, Megan Jones, Charley Thomson, and Hans Wilz) joining Democrats to support the proposal.

Democratic State Representative Jerome Amos Jr. offered another amendment that would restore the state’s current community-specific commissions on the status of African Americans, Latino affairs, women, Asian and Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and people with disabilities. He warned that if the bill was left unchanged,

What it’s going to do is, it’s going to water down the voices of individuals that live in this state. Originally, you had a commission report that actually was made up of those different ethnic groups and they actually had a voice, a collective voice. But what this is going to do, it is going to take away that voice.

The new Human Rights Board might include one individual from each marginalized group. “It’s just not going to work. It will not work,” Amos Jr. said.

House members rejected this amendment by 54 votes to 42, with eight Republicans (Eddie Andrews, Mark Cisneros, Chad Ingels, Megan Jones, Brad Sherman, Ray Sorensen, Charley Thomson, and Mike Vondran) joining Democrats to support it.

Advertisement

Several Democrats remarked on the rushed process for considering a 243-page amendment reflecting negotiations between House and Senate Republicans. Bloomingdale introduced that amendment hours before the House debated and voted on the measure. The lack of adequate notice left little time to analyze a significant bill. During the floor debate, State Representative Amy Nielsen, the ranking Democrat on the House State Government Committee, reminded Iowans of the majority’s failure to acknowledge opposing viewpoints and refusal to consider concerns from opponents.

Similar to how the bill forced out state government representation of Iowans who are members of marginalized groups, the debate muted citizen input and ignored offers by the minority party to collaborate. State Representative Adam Zabner characterized the bill as “a power grab that took away the rights of Iowans and the voices of Iowans in the process of government.”

State Representative Charley Thomson was the only Republican to speak against SF 2385 during the floor debate.

Thomson explained that he generally disagreed with the approach of the bill: “I think government is better when lots of people are participating in it.” He highlighted how the bill would change the Iowa Civil Rights Commission, noting that civil rights statutes “were very carefully constructed, the result of many years of debate and compromise, and I think it is disappointing, to say the least, that we are dealing with it in a rather hurried manner without the consent of, or the consensus of many of the people involved.”

Advertisement

The House approved final passage of SF 2385 on April 16 by 54 votes to 42, with all Democrats present and Republicans Eddie Andrews, Steven Bradley, Mark Cisneros, Zach Dieken, Tom Jeneary, Megan Jones, Brad Sherman, and Charley Thomson voting no.

The Senate approved the final version of the boards and commission bill on a party-line 32 to 14 vote on April 19.

BETRAYING OUR STATE’S HISTORY ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Since its inception, the Iowa Civil Rights Commission has been a stalwart defender against discrimination. From Edna Griffin’s stand in 1948 (actually a sit-in six years before Rosa Parks) to recent efforts to enforce disability accommodation laws and safeguard LGBTQ+ rights, the commission has been pivotal in effecting positive change.

Iowa’s legacy is tarnished by this bill. The Iowa legislature and governor are abandoning this history. The State Historical Society of Iowa has done the homework on our history in the publication Iowa: Leader in Civil Rights and Equality. The subtitle of that work is, “How does Iowa demonstrate, ‘Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain?’”

For generations, our state has been a leader in making progress on civil and human rights–enacting laws and advocating for policies to combat discrimination and champion equality. Every day, Iowa becomes more diverse and more diverse than any other day in its history. The proposed changes effectively muffle the voices and concerns of fast-growing groups in Iowa, including the least represented groups in society. Nearly one in five Iowans have disabilities or are members of marginalized racial or ethnic groups. 

Advertisement

Sixty years ago, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was quoted as saying, “I had the audacity to believe that people everywhere could have three meals a day, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality, and freedom for their spirits.” Dr. King’s vision is stalled by this legislation. When the governor signs this bill, she will leave her legacy on civil and human rights.  

Top photo of Ralph Rosenberg published with permission.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Iowa

Iowa Republicans set up a shell game to mask the costs of tax cuts | Opinion

Published

on

Iowa Republicans set up a shell game to mask the costs of tax cuts | Opinion



It is not “taxpayer relief” to use previously paid taxes to pay help pay for budget shortfalls caused by a “tax cut.”

This month, the state Revenue Estimating Conference reported new estimates showing Iowa revenue will drop by $602 million (6.2%) compared with fiscal year 2024. Further, state revenue is expected to drop by a further $428 million (4.7%) in fiscal year 2026, which begins July 1, 2025. Republicans attribute the fall in estimated revenue to the start of their 3.8% flat income tax rate next year. Republicans have promoted reducing the state income tax — which Sen. Jack Whitver derisively calls a “confiscation” — down to zero.

But Republicans have amassed a $2 billion budget surplus, $961 million in its reserve accounts, and $3.75 billion in the Taxpayer Relief Fund, which was supposed to be used to reduce taxes. All told, about $6.75 billion. One good question is: Why?

Advertisement

Republicans enacted a long-term commitment to reduced revenues due to the flax tax at an extremely volatile time during and after the COVID-19 epidemic. The federal government’s $5.2 trillion infusion into states and their economies was the largest fiscal stimulus package ever. One-time federal financial supports reduced state costs and artificially bolstered revenues. Recently, Pew Charitable Trusts observed: “The combination of temporary funds propping up budgets and the adoption of new recurring expenditures or tax cuts has left many states in a precarious position. Policymakers now must grapple with the possibility that their states’ finances are structurally imbalanced and vulnerable to deficits as one-time funds dry up but new commitments remain.”

Not wanting to “waste a good crisis,” as they say, Republicans rushed to enact a flat tax during an extremely uncertain economic time when the level of likely future tax revenues was cloudy at best.

As the COVID economic booster begins to fade, several states have experienced significant decreases in tax revenue as compared to their 15-year trend. Iowa was among states experiencing a negative difference in the fourth quarter of 2023 — mind you, before the flat income tax kicked in. Iowa experienced a 6% decrease in revenue from its historical trend, the fourth-highest difference among states that went negative, according to Pew.

Advertisement

Researchers explained: “State tax collections have been on a downward trajectory since their mid-2022 peak, reflecting, in large part, a decline from the unexpected highs of the pandemic revenue wave. … One question is whether states will be able to afford the budgetary commitments they made in the past three years — such as tax relief and pay raises for public employees — over the long term.”

Yet, Iowa Republicans want to enshrine their COVID-fueled tax cut into the Iowa Constitution. Last session, Republicans passed a constitutional amendment to require a two-thirds vote of both chambers of the state Legislature to pass a bill that would increase the individual or corporate income tax rate. They are expected to pass the legislation a second time this session, which would likely put it on the ballot for voters in November 2026. What a way to saddle future Iowans with a hasty tax cut enacted during a most abnormal period of artificially high revenue and reduced state expenses.

It is a sure thing Republicans will hoard Iowa’s surpluses and use it to cover predicted revenue gaps before the November 2026 vote on the constitutional amendment to mask from the voting public the true and lasting impacts of their opportunistic push for a flat tax.

In fact, Republicans and Gov. Kim Reynolds passed Senate File 2442 this year, which, among other things, changed the law regarding how the Taxpayer Relief Fund could be used. Tucked away in the second-to-last division of a 35-page bill is a section that provides that, if the actual net revenue is less than budgeted expenses “there is transferred from the taxpayer relief fund to the general fund of the state an amount equal to fifty percent of the difference or the remaining balance of the taxpayer relief fund, whichever is lower.” That is a preemptive coverup of the probable result of the Republican flat tax as conceded by Republicans, themselves.

Iowa Republicans are not using the Taxpayer Relief Fund as it was originally intended. It is not “taxpayer relief” to use previously paid taxes to pay help pay for budget shortfalls caused by a “tax cut.” Most would call that a shell game. It is like giving yourself a “raise” by moving a dollar from one pocket to another. Why not just give those “confiscated” funds back to Iowans directly via refunds? Ah, but that would spoil the game, wouldn’t it?

Advertisement

Unmet needs and underfunded state accounts exist now. That will get worse.

Governor Reynolds states Republicans have a “commitment to shrinking the size and scope of government.” However, should not elected officials be committed first to ensuring that our government is the “right size,” before deciding it should be shrunk? That is, the right size to fully accomplish basic functions that individuals cannot meet themselves —no matter how much of their own money they have in their pockets — such as prevention and mitigation of natural disasters, ensuring safe bridges and roads, making sure promised pensions are not underfunded, cleaning up Iowa’s fouled waters, and helping public schools at least meet their costs of operation.

Tom Walton is an Iowa lawyer.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Iowa

Iowa 95, Utah 88: A Balanced Comeback

Published

on

Iowa 95, Utah 88: A Balanced Comeback


Iowa 95, Utah 88: A Balanced Comeback

Nine months ago, Utah ended Iowa’s 2023-24 season in the second round of the NIT. Saturday night, Iowa faced off with Utah again at the Sanford Pentagon in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, and came away with a very solid 95-88 win over the Utes. The Hawkeyes used a dominant second half and a balanced scoring effort from the starting lineup to earn the victory.

Advertisement

Here are three takeaways from the game.

1. The Big Finish

Finishing strong hasn’t always been a strength for this particular Iowa team. The Hawkeyes couldn’t make enough shots (or get enough stops) in their neutral-site loss to Utah State last month and ran out of steam after playing very well against Iowa State for 35 minutes a few weeks ago.

Saturday, Iowa trailed 40-36 at halftime and was down 11 early in the second half after conceding a 9-2 run to the Utes out of the break. The Hawkeyes caught fire after that, rattling off 25 points in the next seven minutes of game action to tie the score at 63-all.

Down the stretch, it was the Hawkeyes who were making shots and getting stops. Iowa outscored Utah 20-13 after the game was tied at 75 with 6:59 to play. Iowa scored 59 points in the second half (to 48 from Utah), led by 16 points from Payton Sandfort, who shot 5-of-8 from the floor and was perfect at the free throw line (6-of-6).

Advertisement

Notably, Iowa scored 59 points in the second half despite shooting just 4-of-6 from 3-point range. After attempting 14 three-pointers in the opening 20 minutes (and making five of them), Iowa adjusted on offense in the second half, attacking the rim more and getting higher-percentage shots — and more trips to the free throw line, where the Hawkeyes went 17-of-24 after the break.

“We were moving the ball and driving the ball [in the second half],” Iowa head coach Fran McCaffery said after the win. “We settled too much in the first half. Payton said it [and] he was right, we hit a couple early and started settling.”

“[Then] they don’t have to play defense, they don’t get tired, they come down and they carve you up, they run good stuff. So we kept the ball moving the ball side to side, driving the ball, intelligent screening, back-cuts, that was the difference in the game.”

The sellout crowd at the Pentagon had a noticeable (and unsurprising) Hawkeye flavor, which helped fuel Iowa’s second half comeback. That, as well as the veteran core of this Iowa roster that’s had plenty of experience in these situations — both good and bad — at this point.

Advertisement

“Veteran guys,” said McCaffery on how Iowa was able to turn the game around in the second half. “We’ve got good players, we’ve got good ball-handlers, guys who’ve been through it, [the] crowd was great. I think [it was] a combination of all those things.”

2. Drew Thelwell’s Spark

One player who provided a notable spark in Iowa’s comeback effort was senior guard Drew Thelwell, making his third consecutive start. Thelwell didn’t make a basket in the second half — didn’t even attempt one, in fact — but he scored seven points on 7-of-8 shooting at the free throw line.

Thelwell drew five fouls (more than anyone else on the Iowa roster in the second half), although a few of those came late when the Utes were attempting to extend the game. Still, Thelwell’s ability to attack the defense and the energy he brought were key factors in Iowa’s comeback win.

“[His energy] is infectious,” McCaffery said after the game. “Everyone else goes with him, Brock [Harding]’s kind of that way as well. The energy in the building was phenomenal. Drew was right in the middle of that. His defense, drawing six fouls, those are stats that are critical to a team’s ability to win. You do that by driving the ball and drawing fouls and that’s what he did.”

Advertisement

McCaffery also expanded on what he was looking for when he was pursuing Thelwell out of the transfer portal earlier this year and what he’s brought to this Iowa team. “I was looking for a veteran point guard, who could run a team, who could play off the ball and score, guard his man,” he explained.

“I noticed immediately that this kid could play defense, and wants to play defense and wants to play at both ends, that he understands how to engineer a victory,” McCaffery said. “Drew Thelwell is a winner, that’s what I was looking for and that’s what we got.”

The man that Thelwell displaced in the starting lineup — Ladji Dembele — also had some key plays to spark Iowa’s comeback bid. After scoring zero points and grabbing just one rebound in the first half, Dembele had five points, three rebounds, and a steal after intermission. His two baskets came during Iowa’s surge after falling behind by 11 and helped cut a 7-point deficit to just two.

More importantly, he helped keep Iowa afloat in the second half, with Owen Freeman bolted to the bench with foul trouble (Freeman picked up three fouls in the second half and played under five minutes total after halftime). Dembele played 14:10 in the second half and he finished with a +13 plus-minus rating in those minutes, the highest of any Iowa player in the second half.

Advertisement

McCaffery praised the effort from Dembele and fellow sub Pryce Sandfort. “They’re just rock solid, both of them. All they care about is winning. Pryce, defensively, was tremendous. Ladji, boy was he great. [He] had his two big hoops. But then defensively, on the glass, [he had a] big time offensive rebound late, [a] couple in-traffic rebounds, just his awareness defensively was great.”

3. Balance Carries The Day

Recent years have seen multiple standout individual players that served as the focal points for their respective Iowa teams — Luka Garza, followed by Keegan Murray, and then Kris Murray. Those players were superstars at the college level, racking up All-Big Ten honors, winning Big Ten Player of the Year awards, and vying (or winning, in Garza’s case) for national honors as well.

There isn’t a player quite like that on this Iowa roster — but at its best, this is a team that has a lot of depth and scoring balance, with multiple players that can score and pass and put pressure on a defense. Saturday night saw them at something pretty close to their best, especially in the furious second half comeback effort.

All five Iowa starters finished in double figures in scoring, led by Payton Sandfort with 24 points and a game-high 8 rebounds. Freeman finished second on the team with 16 points, despite missing 75% of the second half with foul trouble. “Owen was really on his way to a big-time game, I felt bad when he got in foul trouble like that,” McCaffery said after the game. Freeman finished with 16 points and 6 rebounds.

Advertisement

Josh Dix and Drew Thelwell each added 15 points, with 10 of Dix’s points coming in the second half. Dix did his damage inside the arc in this game, going 7-of-9 on two-point shots and attempting just one three.

Finally, Brock Harding finished with 12 points, all in the second half. After going 0-for-5 in the first half, Harding went 4-of-8 in the second half, including 2-of-2 from deep. His first three gave Iowa its first lead of the second half at 68-67 and his second triple pushed Iowa’s lead to 88-80 with three minutes to play.

When Iowa is moving the ball well, setting screens, and attacking the rim like the offense was in the second half, this becomes a very difficult team to defend because there’s no one player that defenses can key on and try to slow down. Maintaining that focus and that aggressive mindset on the offensive end was key to Iowa’s win on Saturday — maintaining those same things over the next two-and-a-half months will be key to Iowa’s success in the Big Ten.

NEXT: Iowa finishes off non-conference play with a home game against New Hampshire on December 30 (6 PM CT, BTN).

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Iowa

Utah tries to make it three straight against Iowa: MBB Game Preview

Published

on

Utah tries to make it three straight against Iowa: MBB Game Preview


Utah and Iowa will face off in a compelling rematch just nine months after their battle in the National Invitational Tournament (NIT), where the Utes secured a 91-82 victory. This non-conference clash marks an important point in the season for both programs, as Utah (8-2) hits the road following a six-game homestand, while Iowa (8-3) looks to build on their recent momentum. The game will take place at the Sanford Pentagon in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, a neutral site far from Iowa’s usual home at Carver-Hawkeye Arena.

Both teams enter this matchup in solid form. Utah has won two straight, including a dominant 89-59 win over Florida A&M, where they saw significant contributions from their bench. Mason Madsen and Mike Sharavjamts each posted 15 points in that contest, demonstrating the Utes’ depth. Meanwhile, Iowa comes off their most commanding performance of the season, a 104-57 rout of New Orleans. Five Hawkeyes scored in double figures, with Owen Freeman tying his career high of 22 points. This sets the stage for what promises to be a competitive showdown between two high-scoring teams, both eager to build their résumés before entering conference play.

Battle of the Floor Generals

One of the most intriguing storylines heading into the game is the point guard duel between Utah’s Miro Little and Iowa’s Brock Harding. Both sophomores have been instrumental in orchestrating their respective offenses. Harding, averaging 9.8 points and 6.2 assists per game, ranks 16th nationally in assists. His ability to control the tempo and facilitate scoring opportunities has been vital to Iowa’s success, as they rank third in the nation with 20 assists per game.

On the other side, Utah leads the country in assists, with 21 per contest, thanks in large part to Little’s contributions (5.4 assists per game). His size advantage over Harding—nearly 30 pounds—could be a key factor. Little’s physicality and ability to drive the lane will test Harding’s defensive abilities. For Iowa, limiting Little’s impact will be essential, as Utah’s offense flows through him. Conversely, Utah’s defense will need to focus on containing Harding’s playmaking to disrupt Iowa’s offensive rhythm. With both teams ranking in the top 10 nationally in assist-to-turnover ratio, the game may ultimately hinge on which point guard takes better care of the ball.

Advertisement

Slowing Down Iowa’s Twin Towers

Iowa’s offense is powered by forwards Owen Freeman and Payton Sandfort, who form a formidable frontcourt duo. Freeman, a dominant presence in the paint at 6’10, leads the team with 17.2 points per game and shoots an impressive 66% from the field. Sandfort, standing at 6’8, complements Freeman’s inside game with perimeter shooting, having already knocked down 29 three-pointers this season. Their contrasting styles make them difficult to defend, contributing to Iowa’s status as the 11th-highest scoring team in the country, averaging 87.2 points per game.

Utah’s defense will have to rise to the occasion, with Lawson Lovering tasked with handling Freeman inside. Sharavjamts’ size and versatility should allow him to match up with Sandfort, but Utah will likely need to employ frequent defensive switches to counter Iowa’s efforts to create mismatches. Rotational defense and contesting shots at the perimeter will be crucial for the Utes.

Building Momentum

Utah’s leading scorer, Gabe Madsen, continues to be a focal point for the Utes, averaging 19.8 points per game, good for 19th in the nation. His scoring versatility mirrors Sandfort’s, making him a potential game-changer in this matchup. Utah’s ability to score from both inside and beyond the arc has propelled them to 14th in the nation in scoring at 86.6 points per game.

A victory over Iowa would give Utah their first marquee win of the season, providing a significant confidence boost as they head into Big 12 play. With a tough matchup against Baylor looming on New Year’s Eve, this game represents a pivotal opportunity for the Utes to establish momentum and strengthen their standing in the national landscape.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending