by | Feb 17, 2010
Evidently anticipating a challenging public presence (although as of 5:10 PM there are only about 100 people in the Iowa House galleries), Speaker Murphy provided the following list of rules:
- Persons signing up to testify will be permitted on the House floor during a public hearing.
- To testify, members of the public will be required to enter the House chamber through the main entrance off the rotunda and will be required to sign-in.
- Testifiers on the House floor during a public hearing are restricted to the area in the rear of the chamber and may not sit at legislators’ desks or clerks’ desks.
- Testimony will be received at microphones located in the rear of the House chamber.
- Each legislator may bring no more than one guest onto the House floor during a public hearing. While on the House floor, the guest must be accompanied by the host legislator at all times.
- Members of the public who wish to observe the public hearing but not testify must observe from one of the galleries.
- Persons attending a public hearing on the House floor or in the House galleries must respect the rules of the House and must refrain from disruptive behavior.
Further explanation at the start by Representative Geri Huser (D-District 42) made it clear that any disruption may impact the opportunity for future public forms to be held in the House chamber.
I was fortunate to be the one guest of Representative Erik Helland (R-District 69). I’m enjoying a seat between both Chris Hagenow (R-District 59) and Erik.
by Art Smith | Feb 17, 2010
I need to apologize that I have been unable, in recent weeks, to keep this blog current for you. As most of you know, I have discontinued my radio show due to the time commitment, and hope to get more writing done as a result. Your kind patience is appreciated. And now…
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
At 5:00 PM this afternoon a public forum is scheduled to hear comments on Democrats attempt to tear apart Iowa’s long history as a Right To Work state (House File 2420, formally HSB 702). It will be held in the Iowa House Chamber (details provided by Shane Vander Hart last week). I will be there and will provide updates via Twitter and an updated post later tonight.
This is potentially one of the last great attempts by power-gorged Democrats to rake Iowans over the coals. True, this year’s bill only drops 18,000 Executive Branch employees into the lions’ den, but at a whopping $5.3 Million theft of personal income. This is another example of how our left-thinking leaders (*sigh*) believe they are empowered to redistribute wealth.
Consider, my friends, the fact that the unions that state employees are members of (voluntarily today) exist under the guise of protecting those employees from the very government that is now handing them (the unions) the keys to the state treasury.
And this is YOUR MONEY that is being used to BUY THE VOTES of more “fairly” fund the labor unions.
Who needs the unions when the General Assembly is more than happy to throw your money away? Let the poor government employees keep their dues!
If this passes, and if Democrats continue to hold power next year, the law will almost certainly be expanded to include the public sector.
Call your state House Member and Senator and tell them you do NOT want to see this bill (commonly referred to as “Fair Share”) become law. And then you can just say “bye-bye” to any new major business development in Iowa.
I know I don’t have to worry about my Representative in the Iowa House, Peter Cownie (R-House District 60). Here’s his update from today on this very topic:
Iowa has a proud history of being a “Right to Work†state since 1947 when it became law. This means an employee does not have to pay union dues if he or she so chooses. It is that simple: Iowans do not have to pay union dues if they are not a member of that union. I believe very strongly in this law and the economic freedoms it protects.
Being a ‘Right to Work’ state is a selling point that economic development groups use in attracting more businesses and jobs to Iowa. In the current economic climate, there is nothing more important than attracting new business and jobs to Iowa. Furthermore, the Legislature should always keep in mind how to ensure that the businesses and jobs we already have in Iowa remain in Iowa. Forced unionization is not the way to do either.
According to the Association of Business and Industry, a group that represents hundreds of businesses and 300,000 people in Iowa, “being a Right to Work state is a powerful tool that businesses look at when locating to Iowa. Any erosion of this would be a detriment to Iowa’s business climate and that is exactly what we don’t need today.â€So, that brings us to a bill that is being floated around the Capitol today. “Fair Share†is what it is commonly known as in the news and among advocates. The current bill is narrowly written to apply only to Executive Branch public employees of the State of Iowa. This means that Executive Branch employees would be forced to pay dues to a union to which they have chosen not to join. The non-partisan Legislative Services Agency estimates this will generate an additional $5.3 million in revenue annually for the state employees unions. Eighteen thousand Iowans who currently choose not to join the union will be paying that $5.3 million.
I do not believe now is the time to force a $5.3 million burden on 18,000 Iowans. I will not be supporting this bill.
by Art Smith | Feb 4, 2010
From Iowa House Republican Leader Kraig Paulsen’s office:
(DES MOINES)—Today in the House Labor committee, Democrats assigned a bill which would gut Iowa’s right to work law. House Study Bill 702 is an attempt by House Democrats to take away Iowans’ choice to join a union.
Iowa’s right to work law guarantees that no person can be compelled, as a condition of employment, to join, not join or pay any fees to a labor union. Iowa’s right to work law has been in place since 1947. This bill is a direct attack on hard-working Iowans’ liberties.
“It is simply wrong to tell someone they must give their hard-earned dollars to an organization they have chosen not to be a member of,†said House Republican Leader Kraig Paulsen (R-Hiawatha). “A union is not forced to represent non-members. They choose forced monopoly bargaining and now they want to force payment for providing those unwanted services.â€
Under the Democrats’ plan, public employees who are non-union would be forced to pay a fee to the union as a condition of their employment, thus completely gutting Iowa’s right to work law.
We’ve been waiting for this. Here’s link to the bill. Democrats tried to do this last year (it was called “Fair Share” then), and the year before, and, oh wait, they’ve been trying to rip out Right To Work for over fifty years! Representative Ralph Watts (R – District 47) wrote this piece a year ago, and is still just as relevant today:
Nothing Fair about Fair Share
Two years ago, after the Democrats took over the Governor’s office, the State Senate and the State House, we started getting more labor bills than I had seen previously. The labor unions had put a lot of money into their candidates and they were here for the payoff. One of those bills was the principle called Fair Share. It was passed by the Senate in 2007 and ran aground in the House when several members of the majority party refused to support the measure. After the extreme pressure put on their caucus to support the bill, one of the Democrats changed registration and became a Republican member of the House and was re-elected in 2008 as a Republican. Apparently her constituents appreciated the principled stand that she took. Emboldened by the increase in Democrats after the last election, the measure is being considered again.
Fair Share sounds on the surface like a fair bill. It’s anything but fair in a Right to Work state such as Iowa and, in effect, would negate the protections offered by the Right to Work law. What Fair Share would do is to make it mandatory for employees who are part of a work group that is represented by a union to pay union dues, whether that employee desired to be a member or not. In a nutshell, it would be a back door repeal of the Right to Work law. Under that law no person can be compelled to pay dues or belong to a union. It has been on the books since 1947.
In an interesting déjà vu moment, a copy of the February 3, 1959 Mason City Globe Gazette front page was distributed to us Tuesday as a reminder of the tragedy where three rock and roll stars died in a tragic plane crash after performing at the Surf Ballroom in Mason City. On that same front page was a large article that talked about a “fiery debate†in the Iowa House over the Right to Work Law. The Democrats have been trying to repeal, or otherwise get rid of, that particular law for the past fifty years. They have been pushing it hard for a good reason; the membership in unions has been declining over the years.
The reason the unions give for wanting this bill passed is that it will help pay for the costs of supporting those members who do not belong or pay dues to the unions, but they are required to serve. The facts tell a different story. In an article in the Register this week a representative of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) said the forced union dues won’t go to cover their costs associated with representing non-paying members, it will go to increased organizing and recruiting.
This is a critical issue for Iowa Taxpayers and the effort spent by unions to get it passed raises another question whether it is time to revisit the issue of public employee unions in Iowa. Since the mid-70’s when our current law was passed (Chapter 20) there has been a quantum leap in the cost of state and local government in Iowa. Public employee unions have been successful in organizing most state, county, and local employees and the impact has been a principle reason for taxes of all stripes increasing in the state. I will add that I am not anti-union because there are examples of bad management practices throughout our history that caused the unions to be organized, but like many other issues, there needs to be a balance. Allowing the unions to control our government to the extent they have taken control should be a cause for concern for all Iowa taxpayers.
This one is definitely worth contacting your Iowa legislator (click here to find your Iowa General Assembly Representatives) and let them know what you think about giving labor unions free reign to steal money from non-union members. Keep in mind, this bill currently only impacts government worker unions, but it’s still wrong and will certainly lead to moves to provide the same right of theft to other unions.
by Art Smith | Jan 12, 2010
Today Iowa’s Governor Culver walked up to the brink of his career, looked down, and jumped. The lead up to this event were announcements that he would “set the record straight” on the budget, provide “big, bold” ideas for Iowa and a “surprise” for schools. All of these sound like great sound bites to attract viewers, but Chet needed a compelling message and earnest delivery. Instead, he brought the same “rah-rah” cheer that has kept Iowa spending itself into oblivion, with a severe lack of enthusiasm in his voice. And the best word he could use to describe the condition of Iowa: resilient.
Chet’s speech was a big “cheer” for IJOBs, a contentious program at best, and he was heavily defensive of the program bought with our grandchildren’s taxes (if they become gamblers). Rightly so, the Governor promoted the “successes” of the past year, many of which Iowan’s should be proud, such as the late year AFSCME agreement and progress in rebuilding from weather-related disasters. But while proclaiming that the new budget will be balanced, he provided scant information on how that would be accomplished aside from a priority to “reorganize government”.
And for the hundreds of Iowans who showed up today on both side of the Definition of Marriage issue, not a peep.
Of course, he also did not speak to Fair Share, Prevailing Wage, or repealing Federal Deductability. But then, why stir the pot?
It has taken far too long for the Governor to respond to critics regarding his handling of the state’s budget, a problem which started a year ago (or even prior to that, but let’s not digress) when the Governor presented a monstrous budget recommendation which led to the largest spending plan Iowa has ever seen (during a recession no less) and pressed for legislators to borrow $650 Billion (costing Iowans $1.4 Billion). The problems this has created didn’t just get dropped on Culver’s doorstep last week… it’s been worsening since the 2009 Legislative session concluded. His effort to “set the record straight” on his management of the budget this past year amounted to little more than the usual creative accounting and deflection. His answer to critics: “Our budget has been balanced every day”. Eyes were rolling throughout the chamber during that line.
As far as his “big, bold” ideas are concerned, there’s no doubt it’s big. The Governor is clearly anxious to continue spending money he doesn’t have, and wants the legislature, among other things, to take money from the Roads Fund to pay for increases to the State Patrol and Department of Public Safety. This amounts to cost-shifting, and it will quickly catch up with us. If we can’t operate from the state’s operating revenues, we’ll have more of the same mess that was created last year by using Federal Stimulus money to finance operating expenses. The problem: when that money is gone we won’t have anywhere else to go. To fund these great ideas, at the end of the day, we will be raising taxes, whether by repealing Federal Deductability, raising fees, or raising those things actually called “taxes”.
Culver’s number one priority, rightly, is Jobs. His solution, funding training programs, is wrong. What’s needed are changes in government policies to help businesses be more productive and consumers to have more resources to stimulate economic growth. No amount of money poured into training is going to create jobs.
The “surprise” for schools is exactly that… a 2% increase in spending on schools. This was not just a surprise for the school districts… the collective “gulp” from Democratic lawmakers was palpable. It will be interesting to see if that’s an increase over the original spending level or the post-10% reduction. Either way, this increase means even more money will need to be cut elsewhere, and neither the Governor nor the Legislature has shown the gumption to stand up and say what everyone else knows: we have to start completely cutting unnecessary programs. But as long as the Governor is “proud” of such things as the fact that we will have the best 21st century Veterans Home, we will be fighting a losing battle.
If the Governor is serious about funding quality education in the state, this plan still does not get us there. Forcing schools to use up their cash reserves doesn’t help either. Culver and the legislature need to grasp that the state can’t necessarily solve every education problem. Far better to work toward real consolidation as Iowa’s school district populations fall, and hold school districts accountable for how they spend state money.
Clearly, our Governor is trying very hard to get Iowa back on it’s feet. But trying hard and succeeding can be two entirely different things. The Governor, although starting to understand the realities of economics, is still flailing around in hopes of being lucky enough to hit that perfect solution that solves all of our problems at once.
It’s not going to be that easy.
The fact is, we need to cut this budget back to the bones… or perhaps just start over again. What do we really need the government to do for us? Unfortunately, there is an awful lot of money being spent on Iowans “wants”. This should not even be the focus of government, but that’s what it has turned into.
And no one in power in Des Moines has the will to do what’s needed.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
One other point: the Governor mentioned that he and the Lt. Governor (Patty Judge) will be going on an “Iowa Jobs Tour”. You’d think he might want to combine this tour with his upcoming campaign… oh, wait…
by | Jan 12, 2010
(DES MOINES)—House Republican Leader Kraig Paulsen (R-Hiawatha) commented on the governor’s condition of the state address today.
“The governor needs to be straight with Iowans, he has raised taxes to balance his budget and that is unacceptable. Balancing the budget is not good enough if it’s on the backs of the taxpayer.
“Among others, the governor has signed utility tax increases, raised taxes on Iowa employers, and a $250 million tax levied on property tax payers. The governor has repeatedly proposed and signed over a half a billion dollars in tax increases.
“Iowa families have been tightening their belts but, they can no longer be asked to carry the weight of this governor’s mistakes and mismanagement.â€