by | Nov 27, 2012
((This is second installment of a 2 part piece, to start with Part 1 click here))Â
In the end, where we failed was to reach what is popularly called the Low Information Voter. These are voters who for whatever reason get very little to no political information, and what they do get is confined to a very narrow set of media vehicles. By targeting local news and other prime listening/watching avenues, the Democrats were successful in reaching those voters, supplemented by their usual other logistical operations of doorknocking, calling, and absentees.
We did quite a bit better this time on the logistical side with doorknocking, calling, signs, and candidate events. The Victory centers, though not perfect, were an improvement on the past. I believe we can build on that by better coordination with the county central committees and their individual headquarters operations. I believe this will be possible primarily by getting as early of a start as possible in the 2014 election cycle, and begin coordinating our logistical effort, as well as raising the necessary funds within the same timeline to support those efforts.
A big area that helped us was absentees. Republicans have greatly improved on their game from even ten years ago, when Democrats would be the vast majority of absentee votes. Though they are still ahead, Republicans largely narrowed that lead in 2012. We can build on that success in 2014 to get even more marginal GOP voters to cast a ballot in our GOTV operations.
One factor that hurt us in a big way was that the top ticket in Mitt Romney had short to no coattails. Though it didn’t seem to effect incumbents much, any challenger or newcomer in an open seat, from a preliminary analysis of the numbers, was drug down as voters seemed to vote the downticket to the supervisor level in line with their vote in the presidential. This will not be an issue so much in the mid-terms, at least for the state races, particularly if Governor Branstad would run again.
We also had a difficult time competing with money. We always have structural problems in this area due to the usual suspects of Democrat contributing groups, especially the unions, but part of this was from to the unpopularity in the leadership change of the Republican Party of Iowa. They simply were not in the game, leaving the heavy lifting to be done by the PACs and the Legislative Majority funds as well as the local entities and the campaigns themselves. It is necessary I believe that we have all entities engaging in 2014, and make whatever changes necessary at the leadership level to ensure that we have all the assets we can have helping us to win the mid-terms. I believe better targeting will also use our funds in most efficient and effective way possible.
The best advice I can give to Iowa GOP activists wanting to gain more congressional seats, as well as winning a majority in the state senate, is to not dwell to long on our failures or disillusion ourselves with doom and gloom. Rather, properly analyze what went both right and wrong in 2012 and build on that, then go right back at them for 2014, and most importantly begin as soon as possible. We are not by any means out of the picture, and I believe control of both the legislature and governor is well within our grasp.
by | Nov 23, 2012
Below is a brief overview of a bi-partisan initiative that is set to be brought to the floor of the Iowa Legislature when it gavels in next session. Once it is brought to the floor I will publish a more detailed look at it. As noted on Wednesday, Sen. Brad Zaun, Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad, and Rep. Kevin Koester have already signed on to support the measure and it will be interesting to see the reaction from both sides once the session starts.
———————————————————————————————
The Every Iowan Economic Empowerment Act or The Empowerment Act takes advantage of our state’s strengths in two ways.
I. Rewarding Hard Work & Sacrifice Provision
The first component of The Empowerment Act rewards the hard work and sacrifice of Iowans by eliminating taxation on overtime.
A. If an Iowan works an hourly or hourly jobs, after 40 hours state taxation ends. No hour worked over 40 hours is taxed whether that time is accrued at one job or a second or third job.
B. If an Iowan works a salaried position that consists of at least 40 hours per week as their primary job but works a second job that is either hourly or salaried that secondary employment will not be taxed by the state.
C. In a state with the highest per capita number of two working parent households, this rewards their sacrifice by allowing them as a household to keep more of the money they earn or allows one of the two to work less hours while the household brings home the same size weekly paycheck.
II. Capitalism & Working Class Iowa Empowerment Provision
The second component of The Empowerment Act returns to Iowans the ability to invest in and rebuild their communities while savaging rampant cronyism found in state and local gifting politics.
A. 5% Charitable Provision Each working Iowan gets 5% rebated from their individual state income tax bill and they can designate the non-profit organization or organizations of their choice to receive those funds.
B. 10% Rural Revitalization Provision Each working Iowan gets 10% rebated from their individual state income tax bill and they can designate the rural enterprise or enterprises of their choice to receive those funds.
C. 15% Entrepreneurship & Capitalist Empowerment Provision Each working Iowan gets 15% rebated from their individual state income tax bill and they can invest in any Iowa based business venture.
Implementation
1. Potential recipients for investment sign up as state vendors and provide relevant information such as their EIN, business organization charter, and banking information.
2. At tax refund time the state wires invested funds to the appropriate vendor not the taxpayer.
3. The taxpayer is responsible for vetting the investee and any collaborative efforts.
4. Demonstrable fraud is prosecuted as it would be under our current code.
by | Nov 21, 2012
Especially after the last two years of bitter political fighting in Iowa, when you hear an initiative is being co-championed by Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad, Brad Zaun and Kevin Koester–you take note.
Below is the full press release announcing this effort. Though we are closing down shop tomorrow for Thanksgiving, on Friday we will run a detailed look at the legislation so you can form your own thoughts on its merits.
————————————————————————————————————
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Contact:
Rev. Bobby Young, President
515-491-0905; [email protected]
Jonathan R. Narcisse, Advisor
515-770-1218; [email protected]
 Iowa Urban Initiative To Announce Economic Empowerment Act
On Wednesday, November 21 at 8:15 a.m. at Mt. Hebron Baptist Church, 1338 – 9th Street in Des Moines, the Iowa Urban Initiative will announce the Every Working Iowa Economic Empowerment Act or Empowerment Act campaign.
In addition to Pastor Bobby Young, President of the Initiative, a bi-partisan legislative effort will be headed by Sen. Brad Zaun (Rep.) of Urbandale who signed on to the effort this spring at an informational gathering for community leadership, Ast. Minority Leader Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad (Dem.) of Des Moines, Rep. Deborah Berry (Dem.) from Waterloo and Rep. Kevin Koester (Rep.) from Ankeny.
Other local and state activist are expected to be present also representing the political spectrum from those who were engaged in the Occupy movement to Tea Party leadership.
Statewide Campaign
Representatives Abdul-Samad and Berry will take the lead in promoting the Act statewide. Town Hall Forums will be held in Des Moines, Waterloo, Davenport, Cedar Rapids and Sioux City and a barnstorming media blitz will cover several communities throughout Iowa including Clinton, Dubuque, Burlington, Fairfield, Iowa City, Ottumwa, Marshalltown, Mason City, Ft. Dodge, Spencer, Council Bluffs, Ames, Storm Lake and Lee County.
Senator Zaun To Head G.O.P. Support
“The reason I am here today is to support an idea that is thinking outside the box. What we have been doing the past few decades has not been working. This is a method to empower every working Iowan – to reward people for their hard work and sacrifice; to reward Iowans by creating a way for them to invest back in their communities; to invest in their favorite non-profits; to invest in their churches and favorite organizations; to invest in rebuilding our small towns and rural Iowa; and to invest in small business and economic growth – in all 99 counties. This act will create accountability and take control from politicians and bureaucrats and put it back in the hands of the people where it belongs.”
With those words State Senator Brad Zaun (R) embraced Pastor Bobby Young, Chair of the Iowa Urban Initiative in announcing his support for the Every Working Iowan Economic Empowerment Act this spring.
Zaun stated that this Act represents not only the best of what Republicans stand for but a key to growing Iowa’s economy and population after years of decline. He especially praised the Acts shift from reliance on big government as the solution to returning power, hope and opportunity to every working Iowan.
Sen. Zaun, one of Central Iowa’s most popular and respected Republicans, was the party’s nominee for U.S. House District 3 in 2010 and is the former ranking member on the Iowa Senate’s Ways and Means committee. Zaun currently serves on the Senate’s Commerce, Rules and Administration, Transportation and Ways and Means committees and came to the Senate in 2005 after serving as Mayor of Urbandale, Iowa from 1998 to 2005.
A District In Need
“I feel this is the first step to addressing the economic needs of community – urban and rural. It gives people the opportunities to become self-sufficient and determine their own economic destiny,” stated Rep. Berry.
Berry, a former member of the Waterloo City Council, serves perhaps Iowa’s most urban district when poverty, academic woes, health disparities and rampant violence are factored in.
“Most Iowans, including our legislators and governor, can even comprehend the dire condition of this district and the plight of urban Iowans. This Act is a powerful remedy to the pain and needs we face.”
She currently serves on the Iowa House Local Government, Public Safety, Veterans Affairs committees and the Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee.
We Can End Poverty
“For most of my life schemes have been introduced to revitalize urban Des Moines and urban Iowa. In Des Moines we do not see the impact of a quarter billion in federal funds on a still blighted “Model Cities” community. We do not see the benefit of trickle down economics. What we find instead is that 70% of the families with children in the Des Moines School District, our state’s largest, can not feed them without the government putting food on their table,” stated Rep. Abdul-Samad.
“This Act is vital on a number of levels,” stated Rep. Abdul-Samad whose district is in comparable shape to Rep. Berry’s.
“First it grows the Iowa economy from the ground up. Again, trickle down economics has not worked in our state. It helps small businesses with workers and capital. It helps working families retain and invest their earnings. And, it provides vital resources to those serving communities in all 99 counties; to key rural revitalization initiatives and to business ventures at every level. Finally, this Act has the potential to end poverty in Iowa. Republicans and Democrats must join together in getting this legislation passed and starting the reconstruction of our state.
Addition of Rep. Koester
“We are honored to have Rep. Koester join this effort,” stated President Young. Many Iowans are suffering. Urban Iowans are especially struggling. The addition of Rep. Koester demonstrates that this truly is a bi-partisan initiative that will help Iowans in all 99 counties. We look forward to securing the 51 votes in the House and the 26 votes in the Senate to get this to the governor’s desk,” stated President Young.
by | Nov 12, 2012
The way TCR: Iowa set the table for the Iowa Senate’s 22 contested races was as follows: 9 races we predicted heavily favored one Party or the other, 8 races we predicted as leaning one way or the other, and 5 were deemed toss-ups.
The reason I was personally so bullish on a Senate takeover by Republicans was that if these predictions held Democrats would have had to run the table of the 5 toss-up races to keep control of the chamber. In the end, and impressively I might add, this is pretty much what they did. While most of my prognosticating here was accurate, they won victories in 4 of the 5 I deemed toss-ups and managed to flip one seat I had leaning Republican, the end result was not.
Looking For Answers
The best way to fix the problem the GOP had on Tuesday is to dissect what happened. We will have much more on this next week, when I will post a data chart, but for now let’s take the birds-eye view of the facts in the 4 toss-up contests Republicans lost and the one race where a “lean†Republican incumbent was upset.
The spending numbers below represent the cumulative amounts of money that were spent in each race by each side in the last 3 ½ months of the campaigns (July 19 to November 2nd). This includes the money the candidate raised and spent added to the number the Party spent for each ‘in-kindâ€. Since it is common practice for both sides to have the candidate donate large portions of their funds to their Parties, to spend both on their individual behalf and on other candidates the leadership feels could use it, I have gone through all the reports to subtract out this number. The result gives an accurate view of the actual dollars spent on the race (trust me it wasn’t a barrel of fun). Looking at the dollar amounts and the timing of ad buys for each side is very telling and we will break this down further later this week. For now here is the general overview.
SD 49— Naeve (R) defeated by Hart (D)
This race was an open seat due to no incumbent residing in the newly drawn district. It was a very tough district for Republicans but they had a great candidate who ran strong and should be commended.
Bottom Line= Naeve (R) was outspent by $84,000, faced a (D+3,721) registration deficit, and lost by 2,907 votes. Despite being outspent he cut into the registration advantage by 800—he was the only Republican in this list to beat the numbers.
SD 46— Hamerlinck (R) defeated by Chris Brase (D)
This was an incumbent Republican seat that I wrongly had projected to lean Republican. Republican Hamerlinck’s final report was not filed for some reason, but in the first filing he showed spending $30,000 on his own while the Party spent $30,000 for him. On the other side Brase (D) spent $330,000 on the effort. Very telling here is that of this total $259,000 in assistance came directly from the Democrat Party.
Bottom Line= It’s hard to say much on the Republican side without the last report filed, but on the Democrat side the story is a lot of money poured in to facilitate this upset. Between July 19th and October 19th Democrats spent $167,000 before throwing in an additional $157,000 in the final few weeks. The result in ballots cast ended up being a D+409 advantage turned into a 1,954 Democratic victory. Something tells me this ends up being a story of an incumbent hugely outspent and not being backed up with enough dollars from the Party.
SD 36— Jech (R) defeated by Sodders (D)
This was an uphill fight from the jump for Republicans, which many say started when Jech defeated former Senator Larry McKibben in the primary. The conventional wisdom was the Tea Party candidate Jech, who had already lost two runs at a House seat, was a far less formidable candidate than the Branstad backed McKibben. In the final 3 ½ months Jech impressively raised over a $100,000, but the GOP only threw in $46,000 total, including a miniscule $14,000 for the final push. Conversely, Democrats did not take Jech lightly, giving Sodders $358,000 in the final months.
Bottom Line= In the end Jech was outspent by $206,000 in an R+121 district, and she lost by 2,263 votes. There is a ton of interesting stuff going on here. At first glance you could explain away the GOP only giving Jech $46,000 by assuming she was polling poorly. The only problem with that is if she was there’s no way Democrats pump $224,000 to Sodders in the final two weeks. Clearly one Party had a bad read on this race, and it’s likely it was the Democrats. Since Sodders won by 2,263 votes it’s hard to believe he needed the near quarter-million dollars at the end. I tend to agree with the establishment that this race became too heavy of a lift with Jech as a candidate—even though she was badly outspent, it is still pretty amazing to have a 121 voter registration advantage going in and lose the election by well over 2000 votes.
Part 2 Upcoming
Later this week we will look at the other two painful Senate loses (SD 30 and SD 26), document some trends occurring in these five races, and then, finally, make some judgements on what could have been done differently  The ultimate goal here is not to call any particular person or organization out—the goal here is to identify the shortcomings so they can be corrected. Ironically it appears that two years from now Senate Republicans will be in the exact same spot of needing to flip two seats for control.
If a better effort and strategy are not employed—the brutal result will surely be the same.
((To Go Straight To Part 2 Click Here))
by | Nov 6, 2012
**Secretary Of State website is having technical issues and therefore the results we are waiting on coming in slowly. Senate Control still in the balance….most recent info in blue below**
Sec. of State site still not posting full results (only at 97.57%)…As of 1:30 am here is where we stand. The count is Democrats with 24 seats and Republicans with 22 seats. Still yet to come in is SD 42, SD 4 (likely Republican), and SD 30. These numbers will add up to 49 when they come in pending the SD 22 Pat Ward special election.
As the results come in we will update the chart below untill control of the chamber is determined.
Iowa Senate Tracker
Keeping in mind Republicans hold a 13 to 11 advantage in holdover seats as the evening began, and that there are 4 Republican seats going unnopposed, we are tracking 22 races in total. They are in three categories, 1) heavily favored by one party or the other, 2) seats leaning tp one Party or the other, and 3) the 5 crucial toss-ups.
TCR’s Heavily Favored Projections
Republicans                                                                                     Democrats
SD 40 - Projection holds, Repub. wins                                         SD 50 - Projection holds, Dem. wins.
SD 28  - Projection holds, Repub. wins                                       SD 34 - Projection holds, Dem. wins
SD 6    - Projection holds, Repub. wins                                         SD 32 - Projection holds, Dem. wins
SD 4    - Projection holds, Repub. wins.                                        SD 18 - Projection holds, Dem. wins
——————————————–Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â SD 16 -Projection holds, Dem. wins.
TCR Leaners Projections
Republicans                                                                                 Democrats
SD 46 -  Projection wrong, Dem. Brase Wins                        SD 44 - Projection holds, Courtney wins.
SD 38 - Projection holds, Repub. wins .                                SD 42 - Projection wrong, Rep. Kruse wins.
SD 24  -  Projection holds, Repub. wins.                                SD 8 - Projection holds, Gronstal wins.
SD 22 -Â (Pending Special Election)
SD 14 – Projection holds, Repub. wins.
TCR’s 5 Critical Toss-ups
SD 49 -Â Democrat Hart wins.
SD 48 -Â Republican Dan Zumbach wins.
SD 36 -Â Democrat Sodders wins.
SD 30 -Â Democrat Danielson wins.
SD 26 -Â Democrat Mary Jo Wilhelm wins (120 vote margin-recount likely).
If TCR Iowa’s Projections of likely and leaner seat above are correct, Republicans will need just 2 of the 5 toss-ups.
Page 3 of 19«12345...10...»Last »
((This is second installment of a 2 part piece, to start with Part 1 click here)) 
