Current Date

The Conservative Reader:
Iowa

Iowa Same-Sex Marriage Decision Update

Iowa Same-Sex Marriage Decision Update

Just to give you an update on what’s been going on with the fallout after Friday’s Iowa Supreme Court decision to strike down the Iowa Defense of Marriage Act.

Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal (D-Council Bluffs) says he will not allow debate on the matter.

Gronstal, who lauded the Supreme Court decision handed down Friday overturning the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, was asked by Senate Minority Leader Paul McKinley, R-Chariton, if he would join with Republicans in crafting a bill to move an amendment forward.

“Eleven years ago, you voted in favor of protecting marriage as between one man and one woman,” McKinley said. “Will you pledge to work with me and craft a leadership bill on this important issue and bring it to the floor a vote by this body?”

In response, Gronstal shared a story about his daughter, Kate, telling a group of conservative men that opponents of same-sex marriage “have already lost” and that the younger generation doesn’t care.

“I learned something from my daughter that day. That’s what I see, Sen. McKinley,” Gronstal said. “I see a bunch of people that merely want to profess their love for each other and want state law to recognize that. Is that so wrong? I don’t think that’s so wrong.”

Senator Gronstal voted in favor of the 1998 Defense of Marriage Act before. No one is saying that it is wrong for homosexuals to want a state law to recognize their relationship. It has nothing to do with their desire, though, it has to do with the will of the people and the democratic process.

Now Governor Chet Culver is getting squishy on the subject after saying he would remain open to a constitutional amendment process should this ruling occur the way it did.

“As I have stated before, I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,” Culver said in the statement. “This is a tenet of my personal faith. The Iowa Supreme Court’s decision has, in fact, reaffirmed that churches across Iowa will continue to have the right to recognize the sanctity of religious marriage in accordance with their own tranditions (sic) and church doctrines.”

Adding that the decision does not require churches recognize or officiate over same-sex marriages, Culver said that he, as governor, must respect the authority of the Iowa Supreme Court and uphold the Iowa Constitution.

What about the judicial branch respecting the legislative branch? Also isn’t the amendment process available to us to address what is deemed a constitutional problem? He’s trying to deflect and doing a poor job of it. It may not matter however due to 1964 constitutional amendment that requires voters to be asked every 10 years if they wish to convene a constitutional convention. It will be on the ballot in 2010.

Also, Ramesh Ponnuru nails what the problem is with this ruling.

In a democratic system such as ours, it can be perfectly appropriate for courts to set aside laws. Constitutions reflect the permanent will of the people, which trumps the temporary will of the people as expressed in ordinary statutes (if a court is forced to choose between these sources of law to decide a case).

But nobody can plausibly claim that Iowans meant to ratify same-sex marriage when they approved a constitution including equal-protection language. Nor can anyone plausibly claim that Iowans meant to authorize judges to decide such matters as marriage policy when they approved that language.

The court’s ruling thus has no democratic or constitutional legitimacy. Whether or not same-sex marriage is a good idea, the decision by Iowa’s court to impose it on the state is an outrage.

Major hat-tip to Jeff Angelo, and he brings up some other good points as well.

I shared some thoughts on Sunday regarding this ruling to encourage my brothers and sisters in Christ to remember God is in control regardless of what happens. Also that we need to do a better job reaching out to the homosexual community and make sure that we are respectful and loving in our speech. I also said that addressing this politically is appropriate, and I don’t want those comments to be interpreted as saying not to be involved.

To that end I’d like to share some timely news. I spent some time after work sending emails to all of the Representatives and Senators. I received an email back from Representative Renee Schulte (R-Cedar Rapids) who encouraged me to email the committee members holding the bill up:

I encourage all Iowans who oppose this ruling to contact these Representatives and soon, please be sure to do so in a respectful manner. There is a great sample letter that you can use as a guide.

Cross-posted from Caffeinated Thoughts.

More Follow Up On House File 807

More Follow Up On House File 807

The political fallout continues for Democrats as they try to fend off criticism for Pat Murphy’s behavior Tuesday evening.  A letter to the editor in this morning’s Des Moines register lays it out pretty succinctly: characterizing the behavior of the public at Tuesday night’s public meeting prior to being expelled as anything more than brief expressions of disapproval or aproval (granting the first speaker deserved to be treated better) is spurious at best.  And Kiernan’s accusations that the public’s actions were orchestrated by Republican leaders is an outright lie; I was there during the preparatory time and there was nothing more than providing people with shirt and buttons… no direction to behave in any way.

If you watched KCCI news on Tuesday night (or the story on the web site), you briefly would have seen my ugly mug.  A number of people have mentioned they noticed and were surprised at what happened.  One friend’s Facebook Wall comment: “Way to stand up to the man!”.

Democrats have backed up the bus and skipped debating HF 807 either today (Thursday) or Friday it seems.  Kent Sorenson twittered us last night that majority leaders were working on an amendment that would ensure enough votes would be garnered to get the bill passed.  They are still working with the Governor to ensure they don’t get surprised by him (like they did on the Voter Irrelvancy Act that lost steam last month).

Iowa Independent had an interesting piece on the use of Twitter during the proceedings.  I was monitoring Kent Sorenson and the Senate Republican Caucus tweets, while I was commenting via Twitter myself.  I was also exchanging messages via email with one of the House members.  If you were following my tweets, you’ll know that my cell battery died shortly after the last speaker finished.

So here’s my two cents worth: One might think that Democrats would wise up and give up on this foolish venture and let it lie for now with the economy the way it is.  Passing this bill, which is just another case of a solution in desperate need of a problem (if you take it at face value), will just make a large portion of the Iowa voters angry… winning for Democrats on this bill may be worse than losing because they will probably lose over this.  A bold move at this point would be to stand up and say “We’ve heard Iowans and we get it: we will work on other methods to help lower income Iowans.”.  Democrats won’t get what they want, but then again they are less likely to lose seats in 2010.  And if they think that getting this in during the 2009 session has a better chance of being forgotten by November 2010 than if they pushed it through in the 2010 session, that’s a gamble for them.  This is something that they would be better to find smaller increments to achieve over a longer period.

If their only goal was this bill, that might work.  The bad news is, this bill IS one of those small increments.  If you think this HF 807 is a big deal, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet!

Lastly, one of the speakers Tuesday night, Mark Grittmann, got in contact with me and we’ve shared emails and a phone call back and forth over the past couple of days.  He was kind enough to share the text of his speech at the hearing, which one needs to understand is very much tongue-in-cheek, and conveys eloquently the point I made above:

Good evening and thank you for listening to the people of Iowa.  I’m Mark Grittmann.  I’m not a lobbyist and I’m not representing any special interest group.  I’m just a hard-working American taxpayer.

I’ve heard the Elimination of Federal Tax deductibility may cause up to a $600 Million tax increase and I’m all for it.  And those of you supporting this, say this would be good for the State of Iowa.  So if a $600 million tax increase is good for Iowa, then I think you should do more, so wouldn’t a $1.2 Billion tax increase be even better?

Some have foolishly argued against it.  Can you believe it?

  • Some say the 20% increase in State spending over the last 2 years should be reversed.
  • Some say this Bill is revenue neutral.  But if that is true, and it doesn’t change anything, then why do it?
  • Some say that Government, like family households, should live within their means and not let spending get out of control.
  • Some say a tax increase during a Global Financial Crisis and Recession is the worst thing for the economy, and that tax increases would hurt employers, causing a loss of jobs and people would leave Iowa to find work in other States.
  • Some say the facts about this Bill as to its true impact on taxes isn’t known or has not been fully disclosed, so how can this Bill even be debated yet?  One news report showed that 40% of the individuals receiving a tax increase make less than $40,000 per year.  And 69% of the individuals receiving a tax increase make less than $70,000 per year.
  • Some say that in November 2010, voters will remember the legislators who raised their taxes by 20%.

And that’s why I think this $600 million tax increase is good for Iowa.  It will bring new and improved, and more fiscally responsible Legislators to the State of Iowa in November 2010.

Thank you for listening, and good night.

That gives me an idea.  We should call this “The Legislative Replacement Act of 2009/2010”.

The news links herein are to Des Moines Register and Iowa Independent.

The Iowa House: No Place For The Public

The Iowa House: No Place For The Public

Empty Gallery

Pat Murphy will probably say he was well within his rights to clear the gallery at tonight’s Public Hearing on House File 807, the bill to repeal the deduction of Federal Income Tax from Iowa Income Tax.

But he was so wrong.

The galleries were filled with people who opposed the bill.  It is interesting that Democrats could not raise up any more than a handful of speakers to support the bill, none to sit in the gallery who support the bill.  And those who spoke in favor were the expected litany of social services and union leaders who would either benefit directly from the bill or are beholden to Democrats.  One speaker in favor, it was observed, sounded distinctly as if he did not even believe what he was saying.

It’s intriguing to see people mischaracterize the events in the House this evening.  I was there.  The very first speaker was roundly booed, and I’ll admit that was inappropriate.  The public was warned.  After that, no other speaker in favor of the bill received much more than a low murmur of opposition, and that was not worth talking about.

The galleries were full of people who could not contain, however, their enthusiasm and support for the comments of those who actually made sense, spoke for Iowans and opposed the bill.  What Pat Murphy (who by the way was not visible in the chamber except when he threw the public out) was facing was an uprising of Iowans who have finally had it with the continued outrageous spending and tax increases being sugar coated as a tax reduction.

Ed Failor Jr., President of Iowans For Tax Relief, was one of many who hit the target on this issue: it will tell our graduating college seniors that there is no room for them or their dreams.  This bill will impact them coming out of school into the work force (those making under $40,000 will be negatively impacted) and will impact their dreams to be successful.  They will be a target.

Many small business owners got up to speak in opposition to the bill.  We already know that small businesses, who employ the majority of Iowans, are at significant risk in the current economy.  And this bill will most dramatically impact their tax burden.  They will pay more.  Several speakers had taken the time to ask their tax preparers to calculate the impact of the bill on their taxes.  One man explained that he would see a 50% increase in his State tax obligation.

Others spoke very eloquently about the absurdity of the bill.  I think there were perhaps 5 or 6 who spoke in favor, and 40 or so against it.

The straw that broke Murphy’s back was the applause after college student Greg Baker spoke.   Busloads of students from Ames and Iowa City came.  It was encouraging to so many students there who share our conservative values.  I just hope they don’t all decide to move out of state after this session is over.

And once the crowd found out they were being ejected, essentially turning the “public” hearing into a private one, that’s when the shouting and anger showed.  People were escorted out, and still in an orderly fashion, but not without getting a few messages in.  The one that rings the loudest is:

“This is the people’s house, but not any longer!”

A later speaker, Ted Morgan, said:

“I’ve never been in a house where the tenants evicted the landlords.”

Republican Party of Iowa Chairman Matt Strawn put it well:

“Never have I seen such a gross display of arrogance and disdain for Iowa taxpayers.  The Iowa House is supposed to serve as the people’s house, the house where great ideas are debated and discussed.”

Earlier in the day, Rep. Paul Shomshor, D-Council Bluffs and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, was quoted as saying:

“We think eliminating federal deductibility is helpful for families and middle-class taxpayers,” said Rep. Paul Shomshor, D-Council Bluffs and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

I don’t know how an intelligent person can get away with making a statement like that.  Either arrogant or stupid, either way it seems obvious Iowa has made a huge mistake electing Democrats into office.

Iowans are starting to see the truth; Murphy may have single-handedly lit a fire he won’t be able to contain.

    Log in