Current Date

The Conservative Reader:
Iowa

Login
2010 Iowa General Assembly Preview

2010 Iowa General Assembly Preview

by | Jan 10, 2010

gavelMonday is the first day of the 2010 session of the Iowa Legislature.  Over the past month or so I’ve had an opportunity on my internet radio show The Conservative Reader Report to discuss the upcoming session with a few local Republican House Members, including Peter Cownie, Erik Helland, and Chris Hagenow.  All of them had the same message we’ve been hearing via the press: this year’s session will be about the Budget.

These Republicans also stated their support for giving Iowan’s the right to vote for a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage, despite the fact that it appears unlikely such an opportunity will exist in the 2010 session. Mike Grandstall has already stated that he will not allow a bill that will define marriage as one man and one woman.  The liberal media is all about calling it discriminatory and that it is “against same-sex marriage”, but the biggest furor should be over one simple thing: Democrats being “against”  the right of Iowans to vote on this important issue.  It is ironic that the Democratic Party, the supposed party of “Yes”, is now the party of “No”.  And this on something less trivial than the typical money spending that Republicans typically try to stop, but on a most fundamental right of Iowans, and clearly desired by a majority of Iowans, to vote on this issue directly.  Instead, the majority party chooses to abrogate the rights of Iowans.

Also on the table are potential opportunities to bring back some labor union priorities, Fair Share apparently being on top of the Governor’s list (he and other Dems owe the unions a lot, and they have not done much to deliver so far).  Other priorities include Prevailing Wage, and Doctor Shopping.

Getting back to the budget, it was encouraging to see today’s Des Moines Register editorial recommending, along with “preserving healthcare for low-income Iowans”, among other things, that the Legislature take a hard look at Tax Credits and consolidation, but most important:

“…the discussion also should include suggestions about what state government can do without…”

How long can it take to figure this one out?  And the Register even made some good suggestions:

“…the Power Fund? Economic-development programs? Services that could be turned over to private contractors?”

And they said, (gasp!) that schools would have to get by with less!

This is certainly a start.  Perhaps the approach that the Editors are seeking is to “make a list and lets see what we can drop to get the budget balanced”.  The notion that budgeting is a hard process involving a balance between what we can afford and what we want is the unfortunate result of coveting what others have.  Greed and selfish desire drive this kind of thinking.

Unfortunately, our current legislature and administration’s thinking about the role of government is that it exists to make sure everyone gets their share of the pie… that everything that has ever looked like a legitimate government service or department must be viable.  Try to stuff everything into a bag, and then pull out a few odds and ends to make it fit the budget.

The typical conservative view is that government exists to address the real needs of the people that cannot be filled by individuals and business or non-profits.  Life (defense, security, emergency services), liberty (justice, rule of law), and property/pursuit of happiness (infrastructure, free-market capitalism).  Most of what government needs to address can be fit in these categories.  Some would say that anything on top of that is optional.  But why should they be optional?  All that does is promote the idea that there is a government trough available at least in good times, and as we’ve seen, also in bad times.

Our government should stop spending money on things that that the government simply does not need to be doing and can instead be done by business, non-profits and individuals on their own.  Instead, our government will continue to bloat because everyone seeks the opportunity for free money from the government.  What is needed is real discipline.

And don’t believe that your taxes won’t get raised… as long as the Legislature is unable to bring spending down to an appropriate level they will need to find ways to “raise revenue”… that is, raise taxes.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I might take some heat for this.  I agree that the NRA recommendations for changes to Iowa handgun laws would be beneficial to the citizens of the state, and I hope we can get them brought through the legislative process soon.  However, I also agree with the Register that in 2010, this will simply be a distraction.  And in 2010, with a Democratically controlled Assembly, we probably won’t see it pass anyhow.  It would be best to wait until 2011 when the balance of power is likely to shift back to the right a bit.

However, I don’t take the same position on the Marriage Amendment.  It would not hurt to allow this to hit the floor and get discussed and voted on in both houses this year… it will still need to be approved in the 2011 session before it can go to the voters.  Delaying it a year does only that… delays it.  The sooner the people of Iowa have an opportunity to vote on this the sooner we can put it behind us.

I’m also glad to see the Register continue to argue for transparency.   I don’t think that either party historical has a corner on promoting more open government, but Republicans have tried last year to get some good legislation through to ensure the public would have easy access to information about what our government is doing, but was rejected by the Majority.  It really is time to open the doors and make the data available to all.

Iowa Republican Party “Leadership For Iowa”

Iowa Republican Party “Leadership For Iowa”

by | Nov 8, 2009

rpi-logoTonight Republicans from around Iowa met at the Elwell Family Center at the Iowa State Fairgrounds.  Isaiah McGee, Iowa State Central Committee Member, acted as Master of Ceremonies.  He made some brief remarks, including “We Must Unite!”

Video presentations from David Vaudt, who criticized Democrats 30% slash of his budget as an attempt to “muzzle the taxpayers’ watchdog” and Bill Northey who wants to see more republicans in the state capital.

Representatives Tom Latham and Steve King could not attend, but they probably had a good excuse since they are working in Washington tonight.  Both provided videos where they spoke to the health care bill being debated today.  Both are trying to kill it.  King stated that “Iowans need to speak out until the bill is mortally wounded with a stake in its heart!”

Huge applause came for Senator Grassley as he stepped on the stage to speak.

Quotes from Chuck Grassley: “Our common focus is leadship and vision for the future.”, “Iowans of every political stripe were telling me, both by words and by action, that they are scared.” “For the first time in the history of the United States the government wants to tell us we must buy something.”  Grassley also mentioned that Republicans have a 200 page bill as an alternative to Democrats 1,995 page bill.  “They want to redistribute wealth, they want to take property without just compensation, and that is not Constitutional.  That won’t happen on my watch.”

Quotes from Matt Strawn: “It’s a good week to be a Republican, not just because of how we won, but how we were able to show the distinctions between Republicans and Democrats to the voters.”, “Iowans are desperate for competent leadership.”  “Real leaders don’t sign the largest budget in the states history and then try to convince iowans otherwise.” 

Pawlenty: “Chuck Grassley has changed Washington more than Washington has change him.” “(Re: Virginia and New Jersey) We need to launch the same comeback across America.” 

Tim Pawlenty provided a stimulating speech to Republicans in Iowa tonight.  It was clear before too long that he was working on his 2012 campaign, but provided ammunition and motivation to push folks toward 2010 as well.

All of the candidates for Governor provided strong speeches, each providing their own unique angle on pretty much the same message: Culver is making a mess of things, we need to cut spending, fix the definition of Marriage, bring more jobs to Iowa by making the state more business friendly. 

Tonight was the first big night for Republican activists to get a taste of Terry Branstad 2.0 (or perhaps 2.1).   He seemed a little rough tonight, starting out hesitatingly, but he eventually warmed up and did well. 

A major benefit of tonight’s event is the continued opportunity for activists to hear not just stump speeches, but ideas.  Although Republicans will be selecting one person to run against Chet Culver, the combined voices of all of the candidates bring some great perspective, great ideas, great concepts to merge together into a platform that our candidate for governor, whoever that ends up being, can bring.  The crowd tonight was well engaged… the big challenge is to keep them and voters engaged through the coming year and maintaining focus.

You can watch the entire event at CSPAN’s web site shortly.  We will provide a direct link to the video tomorrow.

Iowa Race For Governor: Now Featuring Paul McKinley

Iowa Race For Governor: Now Featuring Paul McKinley

by | Jul 7, 2009

paul-mckinley-2My buddy Tim Albrecht at The Bean Walker sent out this exclusive update today:

In an exclusive Bean Walker interview, Senate Republican leader Paul McKinley says he will file the necessary paperwork to form a gubernatorial exploratory committee.

He says he will remain focused on his job as the Senate GOP leader, and expects to come to a decision “by early fall.”

McKinley will join Bob Vander Plaats, Rep. Chris Rants and Christian Fong, who have all filed the necessary paperwork in their potential runs for governor.

Full story by clicking here: http://www.thebeanwalker.com.

This is turning into a fairly respectable field, and not too awry from what I would have expected, although Christian Fong had only come to my attention a couple of weeks ago.

The candidates are still working through the initial “Who Am I, Really?” phase of their campaigns, from what I think I know about these candidates we can probably expect Vander Plaats to be more heavily focused on social issues than the rest of the field, while McKinley will be very focused on fiscal issues.  I’ve met all of these gentlemen at least once with the exception of Fong (who my friend David Chung tried to introduce to me at the Night of The Rising Stars Iowa GOP event in June, but didn’t work out), and those that I’ve met seem to have a good personality for the job.  Fact is, I still don’t know much about any of them.

Unfortunately, it’s going to be difficult to get a good read on where the candidates stand on the issues that Iowans will care about in 2010 just yet.  Partly because we don’t know what those issues will be (although I strongly suspect it will be all about the state budget, spending and taxation).  So, like most long campaigns (11 months to the June 8, 2010 primary), our perception of how well each of these men would serve will be formed and reformed until we get into the Spring of 2010.

A couple of comments:

  1. I am please to see an ethnically diverse candidate (Fong) in the mix.  It is refreshing to see more and more people from diverse cultures step up and offer their skills as leaders in our communities, and we should do all we can to encourage folks like Christian to step out and lead.
  2. I think it is time to see some women consider running for Governor.  For the past several years, I was represented in both the Iowa House and Senate by women (Libby Jacobs, who stepped down last year, and Pat Ward).  I have know a number of other women legislators from around the state and they all provide strong leadership.  While I am not advocating any specific person, it would be great to start seeing some of these women considering a run for Governor, and not to run because they are women, but because they have been gifted with the skills and vision to lead our state.  I believe some of them have, and that should be reason enough.

Linda Lantor Fandel expressed similar thoughts about the presence of women on the Supreme Court yesterday in the Des Moines Register.  I think, if I grasped her point correctly, that she and I both agree that the key issue in political diversity is not voting for someone or appointing someone because of their gender or ethnicity, but rather the grasping of opportunities by women and ethnically diverse individuals.  No one should feel constrained or limited because they are not male or white.

And just think, before this is all over, we will be starting to look at candidates for President for 2012.  We never get a break, do we?

Iowa Race For Governor: Now Featuring Paul McKinley

Iowa Senate Republican Leader Paul McKinley’s Closing Remarks

by | Apr 26, 2009

paul-mckinley-2The following are Iowa Senate Republican Leader Paul McKinley’s (R-Chariton) final remarks delivered Sunday morning:

Thank you, Mr. President. Friends and Colleagues:

I know we are about to drop the gavel for the final time on this year’s legislative session and I know we are all a little tired but before we go home to the people in our districts, I think it might be necessary to look back at the last 104 days and provide the people of Iowa with some needed perspective. After all, it is the people of Iowa who are our employers and it is the people of Iowa who make our communities unique and our state something we can all be proud of.

These three million people elected us to act as their voice and their vote. They sent us to represent them. They are the hardworking people who truly make this state work. Yet, many Iowans have been left wondering whether their opinion really matters and if legislators are really listening to them.

It would be a mistake for us to forget what our very own Constitution says in Article 1, Section 2. The first sentence simply states: “All political power is inherent in the people.” Government is supposed to be of the people and for the people but sometimes this session I was left wondering at times if this was government versus the people.
We have witnessed the frustrations of so many Iowans who just want their government to live within its means. This Legislature has now spent more money than any Legislature in the 163 year history of the state of Iowa. There has been too much spending and too much borrowing and as a result, Iowans have become discouraged. As a result, we witnessed several thousand Iowans gather not only here at the capitol – but across Iowa and this country on April 15 to protest the spending and taxation policies of their government. They feel like their government is not listening to them.

When hundreds of Iowans packed the gallery of the House of Representatives to show their disappointment with a proposal to eliminate federal deductibility, force Iowans to pay a tax on a tax and raise taxes on Iowa families and employers in literally every single tax bracket, they were removed from the chambers and the doors were locked. The public was removed from a public hearing – 600 employers were kicked out of the people’s house by one employee.

Iowa families and employers are making tough decisions every day and yet they witness state government continue to tax and spend and borrow and spend while all this spending is not the solution needed to grow Iowa and bring about prosperity and opportunity.

There are over 80,000 Iowans out of work and yet there was no major piece of legislation passed that would help get those Iowans back into sustainable and permanent jobs. Iowans asked us for leadership on creating jobs – not creating government work through overwhelmingly unpopular bonding and debt proposals. Did we answer their call?

Earlier this month, seven elites on the Supreme Court struck down Iowa’s Defense of Marriage Act and opened up the definition of marriage to be something other than between one man and one woman. For the past three weeks, Iowans have been clamoring for a voice on this issue just as they have wanted a say in other important issues too. Yet, Senators in this body are obstructing the opportunity for the people of Iowa – the people we are here to represent – to have a say in this important and emotional issue. Before you leave this building today, do you want to go home without beginning the process of giving the people of Iowa a chance to vote on a Marriage Amendment? Ignoring the voices of the Iowans we are here to represent is a troubling trend that certainly needs to end.

Just over three months ago, I stood here on the floor of the Iowa Senate on the first day of session and said that we, as Republicans, would work tirelessly to offer solutions that would grow Iowa – not grow government and give a voice back to the people.

I am proud that we, as Republicans and Democrats, were able to find plenty of opportunities where we were able to find common ground and work together to deliver true bi-partisan results for the people of Iowa – the people we were sent here to represent. Yet, we all know there are major differences between the two parties and I think those differences in priorities were also apparent this session.

As I mentioned on the first day, Senate Republicans’ over-arching goal has been and will continue to be the need to re-establish a concept that I believe has been forgotten in recent years: the notion that it is Iowans who run government and not the other way around. Though I am confident and optimistic that we can eventually be successful in fully returning the government to its rightful owners – the people of Iowa – I do believe we have plenty of room for improvement.

I just want to conclude by reminding you of a wonderful Iowa story. I told this story on the first day of the session and I think it will serve as something to think about every day as we work during this interim to start to developing policy for next year’s session.

Economic opportunity is the great equalizer in a free society and it is economic opportunity that turns a dream into a business. It was a dream that David Vredenburg, a good southern Iowa boy, had in the 1930s. Months after the worst day on Wall Street, Mr. Vredenburg and a friend, Charles Hyde, opened a small general store. They opened a store at a time when the only thing more scare than money was hope. As unemployment began ramping up to one quarter of the population and a different bank closed every day the southern Iowa dreamer kept working. Today, as you know, Mr. Vredenburg’s legacy that began as a depression-era general store has become 220 Hy-Vee stores across the Midwest and boasts 55,000 thankful employees.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am going to leave here today with a sense of optimism because I believe in this state. I believe every community has many future David Vredenburgs and Charles Hydes and I hope that we can, in the future, work to make it easier for those Iowans to fully realize their dreams and aspirations.We must never forget that Iowans have common sense, are hardworking are some of the best educated in the world. This state has boundless potential and opportunity and I look forward to working to unleash the ingenuity, creativity and imagination that exists all throughout our great state.

Until we meet again, lets work to restore the public’s trust by truly having a government that’s responsive to the people’s wishes and needs.  Thank you.

Iowa House Republican Leader Kraig Paulsen’s Closing Remarks

Iowa House Republican Leader Kraig Paulsen’s Closing Remarks

by | Apr 26, 2009

kraig-paulsen-2House Minority Leader Kraig Paulsen provided these remarks at 4:15 Sunday morning:

Thank you Mr. Speaker.  Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentleman of the House,

First I would like to thank my caucus.  It is indeed a great honor to stand for you and represent you.  We are 43 strong and we made a difference – be proud of your efforts and successes. Next year we will stand with 44 members as we welcome our friend Rep. Royd Chambers back from serving our country in the Middle East.  We look forward to serving with him in this chamber again. Thank you to my leadership team: Rod, Jodi, Jeff, and Steve for your input and efforts.  And a special thank you to the Republican Whip, Linda Upmeyer for your inexhaustible energy and focus.

I would also like to thank each of you who take the time away from your families and your lives at home to come to Des Moines and serve the people of the great state of Iowa.  Our task is often difficult and grueling, so I think each one of you deserves thanks for giving so much of your time and energy.

The staff of this building who work hard to keep bills moving, get amendments drafted, and make sure things are up and running each day. Thank you.  Specifically, I would like to thank my staff.  Thank you Jeff, Josie, Noreen, Lew, Lon, Brad, Ann, Kelly, Jason, Matt and Tony.  We like to say, and it continues to be true, that we have the most informed staff in the building.

Mr. Speaker – Mr. Majority Leader, I also want to thank you.  Obviously we have some profound differences on policy, but that did not prevent us from working together when possible for the betterment of Iowans.  You committed to me that House Republicans would have opportunities to engage and affect legislation and you followed through on that commitment.   I thank you for that.

Most notably we began working this session effectively to respond to last year’s disaster through the newly formed Rebuild Iowa Committee – while we can debate whether we did enough in the right areas -  Iowa will be better because we worked together.

Republicans and Democrats worked together to write a disaster relief package after listening to the concerns of Iowans.  Of that, we should all be proud.

Unfortunately, much of the cooperation ended there.

Leading is not coming in and pushing a button based on your party.  Leading is listening to the will of the people and hearing the voices of the Iowans who put their faith in you.

I’m not convinced this House of Representatives listened throughout this session.

71 percent of Iowans opposed the massive and unprecedented borrowing proposal we passed in the last two days.  Maybe that is why Iowans weren’t allowed to see the massive spending plan until it was about to be debated.  Even aside from the secrecy which surrounded the formulation of this scheme, the really frustrating part is that Republicans believe we could have accomplished the same things without – WITHOUT – borrowing a single dime if we simply used the infrastructure fund for infrastructure.

On tax day, thousands gathered right outside this building saying, enough is enough, cut back.  Yet, you voted for the largest amount of spending in the history of our state.  Once again, I’m not sure that this House listened.

A few weeks ago the Iowa Supreme Court handed down their ruling striking down traditional marriage in Iowa.  Iowans again came to this chamber and pleaded with this body to take action.  Iowans want to have a chance to be heard on this issue– to vote on a constitutional amendment defining marriage as 1 man and 1 woman just as many promised we would do.  House Republicans tried to make that happen but were circumvented by procedure.  This is very regrettable.

Only 40 percent of Iowans supported the prevailing wage bill.   They sent a deluge of messages voicing their hesitation, but we debated anyway. Later, an even more unpopular plan to take away Iowans’ largest tax deduction was brought to us. As a sea of red shirts packed the balconies to stand up against the raiding of their wallets.  Instead of listening, they were removed from the chamber.

In January, every leader in this chamber promised Iowans that the Legislature would review each program and line item in the state budget to find waste and inefficiencies.  Well, House Republicans followed through.  We went through hundreds of pages of budget documents from state agencies.  And what did we find?  Projects that could be postponed, cars that didn’t need to be purchased, and money that could not be accounted for.  We found $337 million in waste and inefficiencies and offered them as amendments.  Virtually every one was rejected – in fact less than 1% of these savings were accepted.

The result? Historic levels of spending in the state of Iowa.  This is astounding considering all Iowans have heard about are the painful budget cuts and program eliminations.  It is counter-intuitive to know that state revenues are going down and then, fully armed with that knowledge, pass a budget that not only exceeds available revenue but is the largest budget Iowans have ever seen.  After all of this spending I’m left to wonder – if more and more government spending revs up the economy, then why isn’t ours humming along?

Republicans said over and over that we were using a three part test to weigh each bill.  1. Does it grow Iowa’s economy?  2. Does it create jobs?  3. Does it encourage our employers to reinvest in our workforce?

Countless times this year, Republicans urged the majority party to use these same checks.   To consider the choices everyday Iowans are making as they tighten their belts and reexamine their own household budgets to weather this economic storm.   We asked how we were putting even one of 80,000 Iowans back to work.

I’m not convinced that this House was listening.

Mr. Speaker and ladies and gentlemen of the House, I will close with this thought:  we have spent nearly all of our time this session doing one of two things:  spending or borrowing.

As I think back over the last 100 days I think of several things:  the most money spent in Iowa’s history, a partial response to flooding, saddling our children with years of debt, and a failure to act on the issue of marriage.   While I see this as disappointing, I also see an open door of opportunity to take the time to again listen to Iowans and return next year and do the people’s work.

    Log in