Less than two weeks remain before the election. If you have time to volunteer this weekend, please contact a Democratic office to offer to help. Remember, there are many ways to help that do not involve phone calls to strangers or knocks on strangers’ doors.

If you live in the fourth or fifth Congressional districts, I encourage you to volunteer for Becky Greenwald or Rob Hubler. Or, contact the nearest field office for Barack Obama’s campaign.

One Iowa is also coordinating a “Weekend for Equality” volunteer effort. For more information, click here.

If nothing else, vote early so that other volunteers do not waste their time contacting you.

The other exciting event this weekend is another free concert in Des Moines by Justin Roberts and his Not Ready for Naptime Players. They’ll be playing in the lower court of Merle Hay Mall at 1 pm on Sunday. As I’ve written before, Justin’s music is fantastic, and his live shows are a lot of fun for kids and adults.

Please post a comment or send me an e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com) if you know of another important event I’ve missed.

Thursday, October 23:

Becky Greenwald will visit State Center and Eldora with State Senate candidate Steve Sodders and State House candidate Tim Hoy. They will be in State Center at 2 pm in the home of Rita Figgins, 502 4th St. SE. They will be at the Ahoy Foundation, 1266 Edgington Ave in Eldora, at 4 pm.

Rob Hubler is holding a “Servant versus the King” event at 7 pm on the Morningside Campus – UPS Hall, Sioux City.

Tom Harkin Senator Tom Harkin will attend a phone bank at the AFSCME Hall, District 61, 4320 NW 2nd Ave, Des Moines, from 5:30 to 8:30 pm. RSVP at

http://my.barackobama.com/page…

Questions, Call Joseph O’Hern at 515-447-5888.

From the Department of Natural Resources:

A series of informational meetings to highlight proposed rule changes regarding public lands will be held in October in Des Moines, Dubuque and Spirit Lake. […] The primary intent of changing the rules is to clarify the application procedure, formalize the permit denial process and provide better management of public lands and waters. The proposed rules will also provide for potential penalties associated with the violation of permit conditions or failure to get a permit prior to construction on public lands. The proposed rules also provide for greater enforcement ability by the DNR in cases where private entities have encroached on public land.

Public lands are owned by the citizens of Iowa and include many lakes, 14 rivers, wildlife management areas, state forests and state parks.

The proposed rules do not pertain to docks which are covered under a separate chapter of Iowa law and have recently been revised. […]

“The meetings will be an opportunity for the public to learn about what changes are being proposed, but it is also an opportunity for us to hear from the public. Policy always benefits when the public is able to participate in the discussion and provide valuable input,” said Ford-Shivvers.

   * Thursday, Oct. 23rd; 6-8 pm at EB Lyons Interpretive Center, Mines of Spain State Park, 8991 Bellevue Heights, Dubuque.

For more information, contact Inga Foster at 515-281-8967.

Friday, October 24:

At 8 am, Rob Hubler will appear on the Conversations radio program with Dordt University’s President.

Becky Greenwald will attend a house party at 1027 Angela Drive Indianola at 6 pm.

Iowa Public Television will broadcast a debate between Senator Tom Harkin and Christopher Reed at 7 pm.

From Michael Richards (the full conference schedule is after the jump):

SUSTAINABLE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT presents;

SEED Conference II:    A Wake-Up Call

Cedar Rapids, Iowa       October 24/25        2008

In 2008 we have been hit with two of the most challenging crises in the history of Iowa;

1.      The most extreme flooding in the entire history of our state.

2.      The most serious global financial crisis in history.

S.E.E.D Conference II will explore root causes of these two major crises.

S.E.E.D  provides  an effective, non-partisan, local citizen capacity to activate reality based, sustainable solutions.  

For thousands of years, the native ecology of Iowa was resilient, incredibly diverse with  immense capacity to absorb water and sustain life.  These natural systems have been dramatically disrupted through our uninformed policy and economic actions of the past 100 years.   SEED serves as a community catalyst to apply intelligent biomimicry for land, water and resource management to restore ecological resilience.

Iowa has the base economic resources of fertile land, bountiful water and hard working, honest people. Out of necessity, we are entering a time of real economy; We will conserve, scale down, simplify, save, and spend prudently for the things that we actually need.  We will now create a sustainable economy.    As “The Sustainable State”, Iowa can lead the way to restore sane national economic systems and intelligent political discourse.

The false economy is collapsing, but the real economy remains.  Did we forget how to make things that people need?  Can we no longer grow local food?  Did Iowa factories burn down?  Are our tools lost?  Did we run out of good people to work in farms, factories and offices? No!  The real economy remains as our sustainable foundation.  The  present financial crisis is simply the evaporation of the false and illusory world of derivatives, collateralized debt, index funds, credit default swaps, structured investment vehicles, and the hard-sell marketing of sub-prime mortgages and super-sized homes.  That house of cards has collapsed.  We will now build a sane and sustainable economy.

Six years ago as the Iraq war started, I launched Sustainable Ecological Economic Development (S.E.E.D.) to address root, causal factors of war; the deluded pursuit of the false and destructive economy of Empire rather than productive and sustainable Creative Enterprise.  Economies based on Empire exploit other nations, the natural environment and even our own citizens through usury, labor exploitation, and unfair wealth-transfer through corporate welfare and coercive bailouts. Excessive national debt is irresponsibly relegated to future generations.  Average U.S. Citizens have been reduced to powerless serfs, indentured by fear, complex webs of wealth-transfer taxation and oppressive debt to fuel the totally unsustainable military/industrial-Wall St. Machine. Our founding fathers would not recognize the State of our Nation.  The bright light of the American Dream is now shrouded with dark clouds of fear, greed and deception.  We need a wake-up call and restore our nation to ecological and economic health.      The S.E.E.D. Conference is a call to community action.

                                “Without vision, a people perish”-(Book of Proverbs)

Six years ago, I issued a common sense clarion call to my fellow Iowans to shift out of Empire into Sustainable/Ecological Enterprise.  That was a really good idea six years ago.  Today, this paradigm shift is an urgent and absolute necessity.  We invite you to build a Sustainable State.          

                                                                                           -Michael Richards, SEED Founder

Saturday, October 25:

If you have time, volunteer for a Democratic campaign or a progressive interest group this weekend. Web links are at the top of this post.

Rob Hubler’s campaign has the following public events scheduled:

1 p.m., Sioux City Rally for Real Representation.

Special Guests: Governor Tom Vilsack and Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Scott Brennan

The Sanford Community Center

1700 Geneva St, Sioux City, IA

2:30 p.m., Le Mars Rally for Real Representation.

Special Guests IDP Chairman Scott Brennan and HD 3 candidate TJ Templeton

Plymouth County Democrats office

27 Central Ave Northwest, Le Mars, IA

3:45 p.m., Orange City Rally for Real Representation.

Special Guests IDP Chairman Scott Brennan, HD 3 candidate TJ Templeton,

HD 4 candidate James Van Bruggen

De Koffiehoek & Bistro

819 Lincoln Pl SE, Orange City, IA

5 p.m., Sheldon Rally for Real Representation. Special Guest IDP Chairman Scott Brennan

Family Table Restaurant

710 2nd Ave, Sheldon, IA

7 p.m., Fundraiser and dinner with Special Guest IDP Chairman Scott Brennan

(free will offering graciously accepted)

Minerva’s Restaurant

1405 Highway 71 N, Okoboji, IA

The Motor Mill Foundation will host a benefit concert by Big Blue Sky at the Elkader Opera House at 7:30 p.m. on Saturday, October 25. There will be a guest appearance by singer/songwriter Dave Moore of Iowa City. Doors open for a silent auction at 6:30 p.m. Tickets are $15. All proceeds go to preservation of the Motor Mill Historic Site on the Turkey River near Elkader. For details, go to www.motormill.org, or call Larry Stone at 1-888-807-1828.

Sunday, October 26:

Rob Hubler will attend a House Party with Senator Mike and Connie Gronstal at noon. Special Guest IDP Chairman Scott Brennan. 220 Bennett Avenue,

Council Bluffs, IA

At 3 p.m., Hubler will hold a rally in Sioux City (details TBA)

Justin Roberts and the Not Ready for Naptime Players will perform at Merle Hay Mall in Des Moines (lower court) at 1 pm. Bring money even though the show is free, because you’ll want to buy some CDs.

Monday, October 27:

The Department of Natural Resources will be holding another public meeting to discuss proposed rule changes for public lands (see above) from 6-8 pm at the Dickinson County Community Building, 1602 15th St., in Spirit Lake. For more information, contact Inga Foster at 515-281-8967.

From the Sierra Club of Iowa’s e-mail loop:

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa — The Dry Run Creek Watershed Management Project will be the topic of a lecture hosted by the University of Northern Iowa Department of Earth Science at 4 p.m., Monday, Oct. 27, in Latham Hall, Room 125.

Rebecca Kauten, UNI alumna and urban coordinator in the Watershed Assessment and Monitoring Section of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will speak on “Water Quality in the Built Environment: Examples from a Local Watershed Project.” Her presentation will focus on Dry Run Creek, an impaired watershed, and efforts to implement best management practices in the drainage basin.

The lecture is free and open to the public. For more information, contact Jim Walters, professor and head, UNI Department of Earth Science, at (319) 273-2707.

Fourth district Democratic candidate Becky Greenwald launched this new web ad yesterday:

This is a solid ad, and I’d like to see it on television screens as well as computer screens. You can donate to the Greenwald campaign through her website.

Incumbent Tom Latham started running this negative ad about the bailout last week:

As I noticed while listening to the two radio debates between Latham and Greenwald, Latham is clinging to his bailout votes like a life raft, and yet:

Here’s Latham’s voting record on corporate subsidies.

Here’s Latham’s voting record that relates to government checks on corporate power.

Here’s Latham’s voting record on corporate tax breaks in general (including sub-categories on tax breaks for the oil and gas industry and for the wealthiest individuals).

Latham must be very grateful to be able to talk about the bailout instead of his long record of standing with corporations rather than middle-class taxpayers.

If you live in the fourth district or have friends and relatives there, please spread the word about Latham’s voting record as a whole.

But more important, please get involved with the Greenwald campaign as a volunteer in the final stretch.

On Wednesday, I hurried out of school at lunch to go see John Kerry at the Iowa Veterans Home. Kerry was in Iowa today campaigning for Barack Obama. He made stops in Waterloo, Marshalltown, Ames, Waukee, and Des Moines.

The event was scheduled to start at 11;30, but I couldn't leave school until 11:40. Knowing there was a good chance that the event would start a few minutes behind schedule, I thought I'd get to see a good portion of it. However, the event must have started on time because I only caught the last few questions.

Kerry was asked by a veteran about the possibility of another economic stimulus check. The person said many residents of the Iowa Veterans Home were not eligible for a stimulus check and if they give out another one if something could be done. Kerry said that the government needs to focus on creating jobs and not on writing more checks.

Kerry was then asked by a man, who is supporting Obama and is Catholic, about the abortion issue.

As I was walking out, there were veterans registering to vote and filling out requests for absentee ballots. I didn't get a head count of how many people were there, but you could feel the excitement for the upcoming election in the room.

Steve King keeps adding to the multitude of reasons to elect Rob Hubler to represent Iowa’s fifth district in Congress. He is running a misleading television ad in the Sioux City market:

Friday, October 17, 2008                  

         COUNCIL BLUFFS – Rob Hubler, Democratic candidate for Congress in Iowa’s 5th district, today called on Rep. Steve King to pull his new television ad in which he falsely claims credit for “working with others” to widen Highway 20 from two lanes to four lanes.

         Following an announcement by the Iowa Department of Transportation on Tuesday that $48 million had been allocated for 11.7 miles of four-laning Highway 20, King began running a television commercial claiming credit for the funding.  All of the funding is from a special fund recently approved by the Iowa legislature and none of the funding is from federal sources.

         “Steve King taking credit for funding Highway 20 improvements would be like me taking credit for the sun coming up this morning,” said Hubler.  “Our state legislators and the Iowa Department of Transportation deserve credit for allocating the funding for Highway 20, which is long overdue,” he said.  “King had nothing to do with approving money for highway improvements but, three weeks before an election, he is desperate to show some accomplishments in Congress, by taking credit where it is not due.”

         State Sen. Steve Warnstadt of Sioux City, who has fought for funding in the Iowa legislature, said today that the legislature, “rather than wait for the promises of federal politicians to be fulfilled, worked in a bipartisan manner to not only create the funding for TIME-21, but ensured that projects like four-laning Highway 20 would be top priority for new funding.”

         “I’m pleased that the Iowa Transportation Commission did not wait for federal funds, and is using the resources provided to them by the legislature for critical projects like Highway 20,” said Sen. Warnstadt.

         In his television ad, that began running this week, King says:  “Six years ago I made a commitment to you that I would pull out all the stops to build four-lane Highway 20.  Today with the commission’s announcement, I can tell you that 46 more miles will be built within five years.  My number one transportation priority was a promise, now it’s a plan, soon it will be a reality.  We work together and we get things done.”

         In a press release issued the same day, King again took credit for the Highway 20 improvement project.  “Steve King had absolutely nothing to do with any of that funding and is shamelessly trying to take credit for it,” said Hubler.  “I suppose this is what you do when you’ve spent six years in Congress and have only a resolution encouraging people to celebrate Christmas to show for it,” he added.

         Hubler pointed out that King is unable to get anything done to help his district because he is not respected by other members of Congress, even those in his own party.  “By contrast, Rep. Leonard Boswell of Iowa has a program for Highway 34 in which he gets 20 miles paved every year,” he said.

         Hubler said that he will work with the rest of the Iowa delegation to make sure Iowa gets help with maintaining our highways and bridges.  “I will sponsor and fight for legislation to fund at least ten miles of Highway 20 widening each year until it is completed,” he said.  “If Steve King had done this, we would have 60 miles completed during his three terms in Congress.”

This press release from the Iowa Department of Transportation confirms the above comments by Hubler and State Senator Steve Warnstadt. This project is funded by the state, not by any federal appropriation.

Iowa Guy calls out the television ad as one of King’s “lies.” Here is a rough transcript that someone in the fifth district sent to me (if anyone has an official script, please send me a copy). Judge for yourself:

King: I’m Steve King. I approve this message. Six years ago I made a commitment to you that I would pull out all of the stops to build 4 lane Highway 20. Today with the commission’s announcement, I can tell you that 46 more miles will be built within five years. My number one transportation priority was a promise, now it’s a plan, soon it will be a reality. We work together and we get things done.

Voice Over: “Steve King for Congress”

King’s ad creates a false impression. Note how he refers to “the commission” without making clear that he’s talking about the Iowa Transportation Commission’s announcement regarding Highway 20. He talks about how his “promise” is now a “plan” that will soon be a “reality,” without specifying what he did to make that plan a reality (because he played no role).

I read in one of my parenting books that lying can be a form of wish fulfillment. If I had achieved as little for constituents as King has, I’d probably wish I could take credit for a popular highway project too.

Speaking of King’s record, you may recall this article the Sioux City Journal published over the summer, asking “How effective is Steve King?” (Answer: not very.) In the article, King described a “key moment” for him:

King said the extended 2007 funding debate for reauthorization of the federal State Children’s Health Insurance Program was a key moment. The measure was initially written for an increase of $35 billion, but was scaled back before being signed by President Bush in December.

King took to the House floor last fall with a sign that said the SCHIP acronym should instead stand for “Socialized Clinton-style Hillarycare for Illegals and their Parents.”

“I do believe if you took me out of the equation, there would have been a different (funding) result,” King said.

I have a close friend (self-employed) whose family was getting health coverage through her husband’s job. He was just laid off this month. Fortunately, their kids are eligible to be added to HAWK-I (that’s the Iowa version of SCHIP) as of November 1.

Plenty of children would be going without health insurance if not for HAWK-I, and in this economy, demand for the program will probably rise significantly.

Isn’t it great that King fought to scale back the funding?

Another recent “achievement” for King was his proposal to create a commission to study the current financial crisis. Hubler had some choice words about that idea, and I’ve put his full statement after the jump. Some excerpts:

       “For six years, Steve King has supported an administration that has refused to accept responsibility or to hold anyone accountable for policies that have devastated the middle class, provided tax breaks to big oil companies, mismanaged an unnecessary war, and now caused the worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression,” said Hubler.  “We don’t need to spend millions of dollars on a commission that will take months to find out what we already know; when there are no rules, and no regulators, markets do not regulate themselves.”

       “King opposed common-sense regulations designed to protect investors and consumers as his Republican-led Congress gave the Bush administration the authority to dismantle rules, allowing greedy Wall Street speculators and unscrupulous lenders free rein to engage in subprime lending with no oversight from Congress,” Hubler continued.  “Yet, instead of accepting responsibility for his part in creating this mess, King has tried to blame middle class borrowers for the collapse of the housing market,” said Hubler, referring to comments King made Saturday at a town hall meeting in Onawa.

Hubler is a strong Democrat as well as a strong candidate, which is why Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold’s Progressive Patriots Fund is supporting him.

Hubler can win this race if he is able to get his message to voters. He’s already been up on the radio with at least one ad, featuring former Congressman Berkley Bedell. The Hubler campaign has also produced this voter guide (pdf file) to mail district-wide. To reach more voters through direct mail and broadcast media, the campaign needs your help. Please donate today.

We have a great opportunity to take advantage of the coming Democratic wave. This post at Swing State Project notes that seats once thought safe for Republicans are becoming competitive across the country. The author names IA-05 (as well as IA-04) among the “Republican seats at severe risk of being lost or swept away in the ensuing tide.”

The Republican Party is now spending money on behalf of incumbents in some districts comparable to western Iowa in terms of partisan makeup. This recent story from Politico notes:

GOP Reps. John B. Shadegg of Arizona, Lee Terry of Nebraska, Henry Brown Jr. of South Carolina and Dan Lungren of California are all fighting for their political lives, a reversal of fortunes that has caught even the most astute campaign observers by surprise.

Markos commented on the Politico piece,

Shadegg’s AZ-03 is R+5.9.

Terry’s NE-02 is R+9.0.

Brown’s SC-01 is R+9.6

Lungren’s CA-03 is R+6.7.

Iowa’s fifth district has a partisan voting index of R+8. As I’ve written before, ten House Democrats already represent districts at least as Republican. This election will increase that number. Let’s make IA-05 one of them.

King’s third-quarter FEC filing showed a financial advantage over Hubler, but hardly an intimidating war chest. His cash on hand may not even be sufficient to run television ads across the district for the remainder of the campaign. He certainly won’t have a turnout operation to rival what Barack Obama’s campaign and the Iowa Democratic Party have going in western Iowa.

It only takes a minute to donate to Hubler’s campaign, giving him the resources to spread his message in the final weeks. Please take the time to help send a good man to Congress.

Iowa State Treasurer Mike Fitzgerald unveiled a new tax calculator tool this morning in a conference call with reporters. According to a statement from the Obama campaign in Iowa, the calculator  

allows Iowans to test just how much savings individuals and families can expect under both Barack Obama and John McCain’s proposed tax plans.  The calculator prompts users to enter their households’ specific data, and then calculates the difference under each candidate’s proposals.  See the calculator at: http://taxcut.barackobama.com/

[…]

Treasurer Fitzgerald, who has been Iowa’s state treasurer for 26 years, said, “Iowans deserve to know the facts about each candidates’ tax policies.  As the McCain campaign continues to launch false attacks on Barack Obama’s tax plan, this new tax calculator will help voters across the country see for themselves how the Obama-Biden economic plan will provide real tax relief to 95 percent of working families.  Our country faces challenging economic times, and we need steady leadership that will put money back in the pockets of middle class families, create new jobs, strengthen our small businesses and turn our economy around – that’s what we’ll get with Barack Obama as president.”

Barack Obama will give a tax cut to 95 percent of workers and their families, leading middle class families to face the lowest income tax rates in over 50 years. He will also eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000, and give struggling homeowners a mortgage tax worth 10 percent of the interest they pay on their mortgage.

On the other hand, McCain will put the corporate interests ahead of the middle class by giving $45 billion in tax breaks to the 200 largest corporations in America, including $4 billion in giveaways to oil companies that are already making record profits.  And while he’ll reward corporations that ship jobs overseas, he won’t give any tax relief at all to 101 million households.

I just used the calculator, plugging in my family’s details, and we save five times as much under the Obama tax plan as we do under the McCain tax plan.

There’s also a short web ad on the tax calculator page, which highlights the key facts about the Obama and McCain tax proposals.

It’s nice to see a Democratic candidate going on offense when it comes to tax policy.

Over at the Washington Monthly’s Political Animal blog, Hilzoy had a great comment on news that John McCain may soon propose “economic measures aimed directly at the middle class” such as “tax cuts — perhaps temporary — for capital gains and dividends”:

Because what everyone is really worried about right now is how they’ll manage to pay the taxes on their massive capital gains.

The biggest surprise for me this year is how poor a campaign McCain has run since locking up the Republican nomination.

This is an open thread on the dumbest policy idea or campaign tactic McCain has come up with in recent months.

Although McCain had no great options for VP, in my opinion, I still think picking Sarah Palin was one of his biggest mistakes.

UPDATE: The New York Times reports,

Despite signals that Senator John McCain would have new prescriptions for the economic crisis after a weekend of meetings, his campaign said Sunday that Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, would not have any more proposals this week unless developments call for some.

There’s a winning message!

Everyone who doesn’t think that current developments call for some economic policy proposals, please raise your hands.

The second radio debate between Becky Greenwald and  Tom Latham just ended. Kudos to KGLO-AM in Mason City for running a much better debate than WHO 1040 in Des Moines did on Monday. The questions by both journalists in the studio and callers were clear, substantive and balanced. I listened to the livestream, but I hope the station will make the audio available on their website (http://www.kgloam.com).

My overall impression was that Greenwald did just what she needed to do in the two radio debates. As I see it, her most important tasks were:

1. Demonstrate that she understands the issues and is able to speak comfortably on a range of topics.

2. Hold Latham accountable for his lockstep Republican voting record and failure to get key problems solved during his 14 years in Congress.

3. Remind voters that the country is on the wrong track, and she will be there to support Barack Obama’s efforts to put it on the right track.

Greenwald succeeded on all of those fronts.

As for Latham, I see his most important objectives for the debates this way:

1. Avoid acting like a jerk or making a big gaffe.

2. Distance himself from the Republican Party and George Bush’s failed policies.

3. Remind voters of his accomplishments as a member of Congress.

Only the first point can be considered a complete success for Latham, in my opinion. He was respectful toward his opponent and did not make any howlers. His answers did plenty to accomplish the second and third tasks, but Greenwald was able to rebut many of his claims during her own responses.

All challengers have to prove that they are “ready for prime time,” and there is no question that Greenwald did so. I share Chase Martyn’s perspective on the first debate; Latham and Greenwald debated as equals.

Greenwald answered the questions fluidly and precisely. In particular, she was very strong on health care, Social Security, Iraq, energy, taxes, and deregulation. She called Latham on his past support for Republican efforts to privatize Social Security. He repeatedly denied supporting “privatization,” but Greenwald pointed out that there is creating personal accounts (which could get decimated in bear market) is tantamount to privatizing a system that currently provides guaranteed benefits. After the jump, you can read a statement the Greenwald campaign issued on Social Security shortly after the debate.

Greenwald did not stumble or become flustered when faced with a hostile question. (This was also apparent during the first debate.) When callers brought up immigration, she talked about the need to enforce the laws for employers and asked why Latham hadn’t done anything to solve this problem before it got to the point of raids in Marshalltown and Postville. In both debates she also mentioned that many people are surprised to learn Postville is in the fourth district, because Congressman Bruce Braley has been so much more active in seeking enforcement of safety, labor and immigration laws with respect to Agriprocessors. Despite Latham’s claim that Greenwald supports “amnesty” for illegal immigrants, she made clear that she is talking about a path to some kind of legal status for employment (not necessarily citizenship), which could involve fines or in some cases returning to the home country to wait in line.

Greenwald’s closing statement hit on her campaign’s most important themes: the country has been going in the wrong direction for eight years, she firmly believes Obama will be elected president, and she wants to be there to help him change our direction.

As in Monday’s debate, Latham used every opportunity to bring up the bailout bill he voted against twice. In fact, I feel he should send House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a thank-you note, because he was clinging to his votes against the bailout like a life raft. Again and again, Latham cited the bailout as proof that he doesn’t always vote with Bush and stands with the little guy against Wall Street corruption.

He also used the bailout answers to claim that he supports better regulation of Wall Street. He blamed Democrats Barney Frank and Chris Dodd for Congress’s failure to better regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That is only a small part of the overall picture, though. For the last 15 years, Republicans in Washington have been pushing for less regulation of corporations and more corporate subsidies, and Latham has been right there with them.

Here’s Latham’s voting record on corporate subsidies.

Here’s Latham’s voting record that relates to government checks on corporate power.

Here’s Latham’s voting record on corporate tax breaks in general (including sub-categories on tax breaks for the oil and gas industry and for the wealthiest individuals).

Latham must be very grateful to be able to talk about the bailout instead of his long record of standing with corporations rather than middle-class taxpayers. Greenwald mentioned Latham’s longstanding support for deregulation, but those matters have received less media attention than this week’s stock market declines, which Latham pointed to as evidence that the bailout failed.

Greenwald brought up provisions in the revised bailout bill that benefit Iowans (those were the additions that brought Senator Tom Harkin and Congressman Bruce Braley on board). Latham avoided talking about the details of those “sweeteners” but spoke generally about opposing the Washington-style mentality that if you take a bad bill and add $150 billion in spending to it, it becomes a good bill. That’s probably the best argument he can make for why he voted against a bill containing the wind energy tax credit and tax breaks for flood-damaged businesses.

From where I’m sitting, the bailout was the best card Latham had to play, and he made full use of it. If not for that issue, today’s debate would have been a blowout for Greenwald.

Regarding health care, Latham stated clearly today that he would not support John McCain’s proposal as currently drafted, because it doesn’t address issues such as Medicare reimbursements. Earlier in the week, Greenwald’s campaign, the Iowa Democratic Party, and Americans United for Change had been hammering him on his apparent support for McCain’s plan during Monday’s debate.

In today’s debate, Latham did not mention the problem of insurance companies excluding coverage for pre-existing conditions, which Greenwald mentioned prominently in her answer on health care.

Latham expressed pride in many of the bills he has co-sponsored relating to health care, but Greenwald brought up the big picture, which is that the problems in our health care sector have gotten worse, not better, during Latham’s 14 years in Congress. For 12 of those years, he was in the majority party. Why hasn’t he accomplished more?

As for partisanship, Latham mentioned several times today that the Democratic mayor of Boone is supporting him. Here he tapped into the goodwill that often comes to members who serve on the House Appropriations Committee. I don’t think I heard him embrace any of Obama’s proposals, though.

Latham didn’t return to an argument he made several times in Monday’s debate, which is that Iowa’s Democratic members of Congress have more partisan voting records than he does.

He doesn’t seem to understand that the problem with his lockstep Republican voting record is not that it’s “partisan.” The problem is, the Republican policies he has supported down the line (from the war in Iraq to almost any domestic issue you name) have failed. They have put our country on the wrong track. We need to move in a different direction, and Latham isn’t going to support the change we need.

It’s always hard for me to put myself in the mindset of an undecided voter as I listen to a debate. My impression was that Greenwald helped herself a lot, especially since the voters of the fourth district are very likely to support Obama by a significant margin over McCain.

I don’t think Latham did much today to hurt himself, but I wonder whether his bailout votes will be enough to convince fourth district residents that he has been more than a loyal supporter of the most unpopular president in history.

UPDATE: Greenwald’s statement on Social Security is after the jump.

When Congress debated the bailout package last week, plenty of respected economists argued that the bill would do little to fix the problems in the banking sector. However, others insisted we had to “do something” to avert a market meltdown.

Many people became reluctant supporters of the bailout because of the need to “do something.” Here’s how Tom Harkin explained his “yes” vote:

I reluctantly voted in favor of this bill because I believe our nation’s financial system faces serious challenges, and it is important for us to act.  However, I am under no illusions.  I firmly believe that Congress should not have been rushed into this action, but we needed to do something to calm the markets and restore confidence in our economy. While this package will do that in the short term, we must modify it early next year to strengthen and improve the rescue framework – and I will be leading the charge to do that.

Since George Bush signed the bailout bill into law, global and American stock markets have fallen sharply, with the Dow Jones industrial average now at its lowest point in five years.

The front-page headline on Tuesday’s Des Moines Register was apt:

Global markets plunge in response to rescue

Experts unsure what moves might restore confidence

But a week earlier, many of those “experts” insisted that disaster would strike if Congress didn’t jump on board the runaway train. Day after day, the Register’s coverage was slanted in favor of the bailout proposal.

The bailout was very bad politics, but that wouldn’t bother me so much if it had been good policy. Unfortunately, it is already turning out to be a very expensive non-solution to a big problem.

In the coming years, that non-solution will deprive us of the money needed for real solutions.

The Iowa Democratic Party released the sixth video in its “McCain vs. Iowa” series today, focusing on McCain’s opposition to ethanol subsidies.

It begins with a clip of McCain from last week’s presidential debate, affirming that he would end ethanol subsidies. The video goes on to show how this stand puts McCain at odds with prominent Iowa Republicans and on the side of big oil companies.

After the jump you can read the script of this video as well as an IDP release providing background information on this issue.

You can view previous installments of the “McCain vs. Iowa” videos here:

http://www.mccainvsiowa.com/

The House of Representatives is debating the bailout bill that cleared the Senate on Wednesday.

Bruce Braley, who voted against the bailout on Monday, has announced that he will support this version. His statement explaining his decision is after the jump.

Dave Loebsack and Leonard Boswell voted for the bailout on Monday and will surely support this version too.

I don’t expect Tom Latham or Steve King to change their votes against the bailout.

UPDATE: The bill passed 263 to 171. Here is the roll call:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/200…

All three Democrats in the Iowa delegation voted yes, while Latham and King voted no.

SECOND UPDATE: George Bush signed the bill already.

Becky Greenwald issued the following statement:

Greenwald Condemns Latham for Voting Against Cleaning Up the Financial Mess He Helped Create

Waukee, IA – Today, Becky Greenwald condemned Tom Latham for voting against the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 as the economy faces its most serious crisis since the Great Depression.

“I am disappointed that Tom Latham voted against fixing the financial mess he helped create. Latham’s years of support for George Bush’s failed economic policies and deregulation of the financial markets while taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Wall Street put America in the economic crisis it faces today. I’m just glad he didn’t get his way when he supported George Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security and risk America’s retirement safety net on Wall Street. And to add insult to injury, this vote was also a vote against providing tax relief to middle income families and disaster victims in Iowa.

“I am pleased the House passed the Economic Rescue Bill. Today’s bill will help to unfreeze credit, protect taxpayers, provide tax relief for Iowans affected by natural disasters, and fix the Alternative Minimum Tax to exempt middle-income taxpayers. It was clear action needed to be taken to protect Iowans, and these provisions go a long way to support working families in the 4th District, who were forgotten in the original bill.

“Through no fault of their own, Iowans who have planned and saved for retirement and families trying to send their children to college would have been forced to delay their plans. Something needed to be done, and Tom Latham voted to do nothing.

“It’s time we have a representative that values working families and Main Street over Wall Street.”

Last night the Senate passed a bailout bill that was somewhat different from the version the House rejected on Monday. The Senate vote was 74-25 (roll call here), with Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin both voting in favor.

Last week Harkin had spoken out against the original bailout proposal, so obviously he was satisfied with the changes made. (UPDATE: Harkin’s statement explaining his vote is after the jump.)

Both Barack Obama and John McCain voted for the bailout last night. Today, Obama made the economy the centerpiece of a campaign speech in Michigan. Click here to read the speech and watch video clips.

Congressional candidate Becky Greenwald, who said on Monday that she would have opposed the House version of the bailout, issued a statement urging Tom Latham to support the Senate version when it comes back to the House:

“I strongly encourage Tom Latham to support this new version of the financial rescue bill. The Senate version of the bill integrated constructive changes including temporarily raising the FDIC insurance caps, renewable energy tax credits and fixing the Alternative Minimum Tax to exempt middle-income taxpayers. These provisions go a long way to support working families in the 4th District, who were forgotten in the original bill.  

“I still think more needs to be done to address the underlying problem of keeping families in their homes, but it is clear by the impending unavailability of credit, we need to take action now. I am encouraged by the modifications to this bill. I hope the House will embrace the modified bill. I encourage Tom Latham to vote in favor of this bill and take this important step in addressing our financial crisis.”

Congressional candidate Rob Hubler, who said on Monday that he would have voted for the bailout in the House, posted this statement on the front page of his website:

“The failed economic policies of the Bush administration, supported consistently by Steve King, combined with the lack of common-sense regulations and oversight by Congress has led us to this financial train-wreck.

“Six years ago, the Bush administration sought authorization to use military force to invade Iraq.  We acted too quickly and became mired down in war.  Today, it is asking for authorization to use financial force in the market place.  We must not make the mistake of acting too quickly without enough information, and we must address the problems of Main Street as well as Wall Street.  The revised proposal includes subsidies to support the production of ethanol and wind energy, which will be helpful to Iowa’s economy.

“By raising the insurance level from $100,000 to $250,000 for savings accounts, we will help small-town bankers survive the current financial crisis.  If the revised version of the rescue package provides that taxpayers will be paid back every dime of the billions it will take to avert an extended recession and gets money to people on Main Street, I would reluctantly vote in favor of the legislation in order to stabilize the economy so that families and businesses on Main Street are not further affected.  I am encouraged that both Senators Obama and McCain are now working toward a solution, while Steve King is still pushing failed policies, such as eliminating the capital gains taxes which favor wealthy Wall Street speculators.  Main Street doesn’t have any capital gains to pay taxes on right now.

“If I am elected to Congress. I will be a strong voice in favor of regulatory measures and vigilant oversight-unlike Steve King-to see that checks and balances are put back in place so that we never have to experience this kind of calamity again.”

Speaking of Steve King, he made news yesterday during a talk radio show. He argued that McCain was right to say the fundamentals of our economy are strong. I didn’t watch Keith Olbermann’s Countdown show last night, but apparently King earned the title of third-worst person in the world for the day.

I haven’t had a chance to read up on the specific improvements made in the Senate bailout bill. I am skeptical that this will solve the problems in the banking sector, however. Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin issued this statement explaining his opposition:

“I will oppose the Wall Street bailout plan because though well intentioned, and certainly much improved over the administration’s original proposal, it remains deeply flawed. It fails to offset the cost of the plan, leaving taxpayers to bear the burden of serious lapses of judgment by private financial institutions, their regulators, and the enablers in Washington who paved the way for this catastrophe by removing the safeguards that had protected consumers and the economy since the great depression. The bailout legislation also fails to reform the flawed regulatory structure that permitted this crisis to arise in the first place. And it doesn’t do enough to address the root cause of the credit market collapse, namely the housing crisis. Taxpayers deserve a plan that puts their concerns ahead of those who got us into this mess.”

-Senator Russ Feingold, October 1, 2008

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich expects the economy to continue to worsen with or without the bailout.

The economist/blogger Bonndad wrote a piece analyzing the various bailout proposals. He concluded, “As far as I have seen, no one has offered any solution to the credit crunch that makes any sense. ”

This is an open thread for any comments related to the economy or the bailout proposals.

Another strong and presidential-looking commercial from Barack Obama:

Although I worry again about whether people will sit through a two-minute ad, I think he is in good form here. The message is clear and to the point. The Republicans are hitting Obama with tax-and-spend ads all over the place, so I think it’s helpful for him to explain what’s in his economic plan and that he won’t raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year.

Also, the relatively intimate setting of Obama speaking directly to the camera is a good antidote to the Republican spin about him being a hyped-up celebrity. Don’t know where this is running.

I also love this new anti-McCain ad called “Parachute,” which Obama is running on national cable networks:

We almost never watch television. Is anyone still seeing Obama or McCain ads in Iowa (I mean other than on national cable news networks)?  

I was pleasantly surprised to hear that the $700 billion bailout bill failed in Congress today on a truly bipartisan vote: 140 Democrats for, 95 against; 65 Republicans for, 133 against.

In the House, Bruce Braley, Tom Latham and Steve King voted no, while Dave Loebsack and Leonard Boswell voted yes.

The full statement from Braley’s office is after the jump. I will update this post with full statements from Iowa’s other members of Congress as they become available. The Des Moines Register has excerpts from each representative’s statement here:

http://www.desmoinesregister.c…

Senator Tom Harkin spoke out against the bailout several days ago.

UPDATE: I encourage those of you who support this bailout to read these notes from a conference call Treasury had with about 800 Wall Street analysts. If you click the link you can even download a recording of the call and listen yourself. The notes at that site are plenty for me. All of the “concessions” the Democrats got were meaningless:

1. The tranching is a mere formality, and the Treasury boys as much as said so. They could take the $700 billion max as soon as the bill has passed,

2. However, they do not plan any action immediately, will wait a couple of weeks. They want to focus their efforts on stronger companies but also made noise about protecting the financial system. This, by the way, is the Japanese convoy system all over.

[…]

5. The exec comp provisions sound like a joke, They DO NOT affect existing contracts, they affect only contracts entered into during the two years of the authority of this program and then affect only golden parachutes. More detail on that point, but I don’t need more detail to get the drift of the gist.

Regarding that second point about Treasury planning to wait a couple of weeks before doing anything, I totally agree with this analysis:

Waiting a couple of weeks because no one has any idea when or where the next bomb will blow up. In other words, all their doomsday scenarios about Black Monday were B.S. They screamed the check had to be written by Monday, but now they’re saying they actually have a few weeks before they need to cash it. Plus, this will allow them to “seek guidance” from GS, JPM, and other selfless public servants about where the money should be funneled.

Remember, a Treasury official admitted to Forbes last week that they made up the $700 billion number. There was no analysis supporting that number.

I think Jerome Armstrong is right on target:

It’s almost as if, the administration thought this election through already, and decided that if they could bust the budget wide enough, then Democrats, incoming with 60 votes in the Senate, 250 in the House, and a President, would be able to do nothing but cut costs.  Try to spend anything in ’09, and the Republicans would be re-born as fiscal deficit hawks running against the spendster libruls.

I don’t pretend to know the solution here, other than taking the fiscal downer now, which is admittedly trite. I also have to wonder about the tact to ‘own’ this thing as well, making it a Democratic bill that takes on Bush, which has its own set of problems. Its become so poisoned that to let the Republicans off the hook would seem to be handing them a gift. At the end of the day, I am doubtful that this “no” sticks, and won’t be at all surprised to see a dozen votes flip to pass this behemoth budget buster pass as is. We win it all, and are able to do nothing but raise taxes and cut spending.

Folks, this is a trap that will enrich a bunch of people while doing little to help the overall economy.

Final point: I totally disagree with Nate Silver, who said this about retiring members of Congress who voted for the bailout:

The congressmen who are retiring this year — and who therefore can perhaps be described as the most neutral arbiters of the public good — voted overwhelmingly for this measure.

Neutral arbiters of the public good?

A lot of retired members of Congress go work at lobbying firms, “consult” with investment banks or get paid to serve on corporate boards. I reject the premise that their support for the bailout means it was a good idea.

I stand by my contention that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s bailout scheme is among the worst proposals to come out of George Bush’s very bad presidency.

So I am glad to learn that Iowa Treasurer Mike Fitzgerald wants some questions answered before urging Congress to pass the bailout. Click the link to read Marc Hansen’s column about a conference call Fitzgerald and other state treasurers had on Thursday with acting U.S. treasury undersecretary for domestic finance.

I am no economics whiz, but I can help answer Fitzgerald’s first question:

Why $700 billion?

From his office at the Capitol, Fitzgerald listened intently, waiting for the answer that never came. And what did he get instead?

“Nothing,” he says, “other than a lot of babble.”

What’s so magical about $700 billion? Fitzgerald still doesn’t know. It’s about 5 percent of the gross domestic product, if that means anything.

“Magical” is a good word for the number, because as it turns out, they just made it up.

I know this because a few days ago, Open Left diarist fladem posted this link from Forbes magazine:

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.”

David Sirota has written two good pieces quoting Nobel prize-winning economists and others on why there is no crisis requiring a bailout package. Here is part 1, and here is part 2.

In an alternate universe where John Edwards hadn’t disgraced himself, he could have been an effective voice against the rush to shovel taxpayer dollars to Wall Street.

Instead, we have Barack Obama’s campaign letting Roger Altman speak for them in favor of Paulson’s scheme. That’s

the same Roger Altman who was a Clinton Treasury official when the Clinton-backed deregulatory orgy was taking place, the same Roger Altman who is now an investment banker who stands to make bank if this bailout passes, the same Roger Altman who Bloomberg notes “is advising a group of investors who are trying to prevent their shares from being diluted in the U.S. takeover of American International Group Inc.” – that is, who have a direct financial interest in Paulson’s bailout package.

Watching this train barrel down the track is quite discouraging.

Great ad, “Zero,” released by Barack Obama’s campaign less than 12 hours after the presidential debate:

The Democratic political blogs seemed to think Obama’s best moment of the debate was when he pounded John McCain on being wrong about Iraq.

I liked that clip, but I think this ad is very smart, because the economy is a bigger issue for most voters than Iraq.

At fivethirtyeight.com, Nate Silver analyzes last night’s snap polls and explains why the snap polls and focus groups showed an advantage to Obama:

TPM has the internals of the CNN poll of debate-watchers, which had Obama winning overall by a margin of 51-38. The poll suggests that Obama is opening up a gap on connectedness, while closing a gap on readiness.

Specifically, by a 62-32 margin, voters thought that Obama was “more in touch with the needs and problems of people like you”. This is a gap that has no doubt grown because of the financial crisis of recent days. But it also grew because Obama was actually speaking to middle class voters. Per the transcript, McCain never once mentioned the phrase “middle class” (Obama did so three times). And Obama’s eye contact was directly with the camera, i.e. the voters at home. McCain seemed to be speaking literally to the people in the room in Mississippi, but figuratively to the punditry. It is no surprise that a small majority of pundits seemed to have thought that McCain won, even when the polls indicated otherwise; the pundits were his target audience.

[…]

McCain’s essential problem is that his fundamental strength – his experience — is specifically not viewed by voters as carrying over to the economy. And the economy is pretty much all that voters care about these days.

EDIT: The CBS poll of undecideds has more confirmatory detail. Obama went from a +18 on “understanding your needs and problems” before the debate to a +56 (!) afterward. And he went from a -9 on “prepared to be president” to a +21.

Click the link, because Silver’s piece is worth your time.

Speaking of the pundits who were McCain’s target audience, the Des Moines Register’s David Yepsen thought McCain won the debate.  

I haven’t written much about Leonard Boswell since the Democratic primary for the third Congressional district, because there hasn’t been much to say. He hasn’t been campaigning much, nor has he needed to. IA-03 is not a competitive House district according to any of the people who follow Congressional races closely (for instance, Swing State Project, the Cook Report and Open Left).

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) spent money to defend Boswell in 2004 and 2006 but hasn’t seen the need for that this year.

So I was more than a little annoyed to receive a fundraising solicitation from Dody Boswell this week:

Dear Friends,

First, thank you all for your support with Leonard’s campaign.  I know we’ve all been working hard for the last few months and now we only have 50 days to go!  It’s great to know so many of you have already gone online to donate.

It is truly with urgency, that I need to ask you again to help out my husband.  The election is closing in and we need to raise enough money to buy some media for the last few weeks of the campaign.  We also have the reporting deadline in two weeks on September 30 and need to show the press that we have the funds to compete.

Our goal is within reach and I know if everyone donated at least forty-two more dollars we will make that goal!!!  You can donate at www.boswellforcongress.com or click on the link below.

PLEASE CONTRIBUTE $42.00 BEFORE THE SEPTEMBER 30 DEADLINE!!!

I can personally tell you how hard Leonard works for us.  And that he appreciates everything that you do to allow him to continue his efforts on our behalf in Washington.

I thank you so very much,

Dody

PS – Your small contribution of $42 really will make all the difference!

Boswell for Congress

P.O. Box 6220

Des Moines, IA 50309

Excuse me, Boswell needs “to show the press that we have the funds to compete”?

As of June 30, Boswell had $393,852 on hand, while little-known Republican challenger Kim Schmett had $28,768. Boswell has held several fundraisers since then.

He should not be asking constituents for more money. He should be handing over a large chunk of his campaign account to the DCCC so they can use it to play for more Republican-held seats and to defend truly vulnerable incumbents (the way the DCCC helped Boswell in past years).

You can reach Boswell’s Congressional office at (202)225-3806.

You can reach his campaign headquarters at (515)883-2254 or Campaign@BoswellForCongress.com.

Tell his staff that you want him to give at least 10 percent of his campaign’s cash on hand to the DCCC.

For more on this year’s Use It or Lose It campaign, read this post by Lucas O’Connor. If every safe House incumbent handed over 10 percent of his or her campaign account, the DCCC would have an additional $8.3 million to use in competitive races.

On a different subject, I called Boswell’s Congressional office yesterday and was told he did not have any statement yet on the bailout proposal. What do you want to bet he was among the Blue Dogs who urged Nancy Pelosi today to move toward the position of the Bush administration and corporate lobbyists?

I’ll fill in that oval next to Boswell’s name on the ballot, but he won’t get a dime from me.

I’m giving as much as I can afford to Rob Hubler and Becky Greenwald.

I forgot that our lame duck fearless leader was going to address the nation tonight on why we should hand over $700 billion to his buddies on Wall Street.

I saw that Warren Buffett is investing $5 billion in Goldman Sachs and will receive equity in return. Why should taxpayers settle for less?

This is an open thread for anything related to the bailout or Bush’s speech. How did he look and sound?

I missed these when I compiled my calendar of events for this week, but I learned from the Center on Sustainable Communities that Edward Mazria, an “internationally recognized architect, author, educator and visionary,” is in central Iowa today and tomorrow.

Mazria will present “Now, it’s Personal….A three-pronged solution for achieving energy independence and solving climate change via the business sector, the largest energy consumer in the U.S.. ”

He is giving a free lecture in Ames tonight:

Ames Lecture

Wednesday, September 24th

7:00 pm

Iowa State University

College of Design

Kocimski Auditorium

He will speak on the same topic tomorrow at lunchtime:

Des Moines Luncheon

Thursday, September 25th

11:30a.m. – 1:00 p.m.

Arthur Davis Conference Room

Greater Des Moines Partnership

700 Locust St., Suite 100, Des Moines

Cost to attend is $20 for COSC members, $30 for non-members. (Price includes lunch.)

Questions? Contact Meg Fitz at 515-286-4934 or mfitz@desmoinesmetro.com.

You can learn more about Edward Mazria and his 2030 challenge at http://www.mazria.com.

Sounds like an interesting program. If anyone goes to hear Mazria, please post a comment or a diary afterwards.

If we’re talking about policy mistakes with disastrous long-term outcomes, it’s hard to top the Iraq War for loss of life and the 2005 energy bill for threats to the planet.

In fact, we could be here all day if we set out to brainstorm all the horrible things to come out of George Bush’s presidency.

But it does seem like the proposed bailout of failing banks is a contender for worst Bush administration proposal ever.

Here are a bunch of links on the subject.

Paul Krugman of the New York Times is updating his blog frequently.

Senator Bernie Sanders: Billions for Bailouts: Who Pays?

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich: What Wall Street Should Be Required to Do, to Get A Blank Check From Taxpayers

Bonddad: This is one of the worst bills to ever be proposed.

Robert Borosage: Financial Crisis: Time for a Citizens’ Plan?

Devilstower: Three Times is Enemy Action

Ian Welsh: How To Bail Out Ordinary Mortgage Holders And Not Just Banks

8ackgr0und N015e wrote a funny piece on one angle of this story that hasn’t received as much attention.

Two of Josh Marshall’s readers ask really good questions.

This post by Matt Stoller includes an excellent statement from Senator Hillary Clinton.

As far as I know, no members of Congress from Iowa have issued public statements about the bailout, but I will post them as they become available.

In June, I wrote about a bill passed by the House of Representatives providing $1.7 billion in funding for public transportation.

Noneed4thneed alerted me to this post by Matthew Yglesias, who reports that Hillary Clinton has introduced a companion bill in the Senate. However, only the New York and New Jersey delegations have signed on so far. Some members of Congress are trying to secure earmarks to fund public transit projects in their home states. Yglesias correctly points out that

Organizing needed funding through earmarks, however, is not an especially sound way to proceed. Far better to pass a proper, widely applicable bill that uses the federal government’s ability to engage in deficit spending to help provide some transit stimulus. At a time when booming energy prices are the main factor driving an economic downturn, cutting back on alternative transportation services is extremely foolish and will only prolong economic problems.

With cheap oil a thing of the past, there should be a strong bipartisan consensus in favor of better public transit in every state. I hope Iowa’s senators will support Clinton’s bill on this subject.

On a related note, this past Saturday 1000 Friends of Iowa organized a “tour de sprawl” in northern Polk County as part of its annual meeting. The bus tour took us through several areas in the corridor being considered for a four-lane beltway in northeast Polk County.

It is incredible to realize that Congressman Leonard Boswell will be seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for this road project. A very small number of people would benefit (primarily developers who are buying up farmland near the beltway’s path).

Meanwhile, valuable farmland could be lost and irreplaceable natural areas such as the Moeckley Prairie could be threatened.

The opportunity cost of spending hundreds of millions on a new road heading north from Altoona and then east to I-35 would be enormous. Traffic flows do not justify this project through sparsely-populated rural areas, especially when gasoline is expensive and many Americans are seeking alternatives to driving.

Imagine how many people in the Des Moines metro area would benefit from a significant federal investment in public transit and making roads safer and more accessible for pedestrians and bicyclists.

This article from Wednesday’s Des Moines Register is worth your time: Grinnell theater renovation sparks projects downtown

Bill Menner, a Grinnell area economic development leader, points to the $2 million renovation and expansion of the city’s longtime theater as a turning point.

The 2004 redevelopment of the Strand Theater attracted Washington, D.C., developer Dick Knapp. The 1976 Grinnell College graduate is buying his third building in downtown Grinnell.

The theater project attracted a $7 million investment from the city for new sewers, water mains and streetscape in downtown. It attracted small businesses such as Grinnell FiberWorks, a quilting shop that receives busloads of shoppers.

Redeveloping the theater “got people excited and brought people downtown,” said Jim Ramsey, president of Grinnell Private Investment Corp., the group that organized efforts to reopen the theater. “It’s hard to find a place to park, even during the middle of the week.”

[…]

The theater, owned by 20 investors including former owner Fridley Theatres, “is holding its own” financially. It was expanded from one screen to three with a donated building next door.

Ramsey said it also brings business into downtown restaurants, shops and coffeehouses and has generated excitement about downtown.

Businesses like Fareway rebuilt its grocery store near the city’s core. Also, some businesses that located on Iowa Highway 146 are looking to relocate downtown, said Ramsey, president of Ramsey-Weeks, a real estate, insurance and investment company.

Investing in downtown helps revitalize local economies, and renovating existing buildings is more environmentally friendly than new construction at the fringe of town.

The Strand renovation was one of 1000 Friends of Iowa’s Best Development Award winners in 2005:

Originally built in 1916, the single-screen theater closed in 2002 and the operators suggested it might be economically desirable to build a multiplex on the edge of town, allowing for more parking than the downtown had to offer. A group of local investors (Strand LLC) were gifted the theatre by its owners, as well as an adjacent building shell (no roof following a 1998 snowtorm).  They committed to creating a three-plex on the site of the theatre plus the adjacent lot.  A local fundraising campaign generated $100,000 to restore the old 1916 façade. The total project exceeded $1.5 million.

The building is a beautiful testament to Grinnell’s commitment to maintaining its historic downtown and making efficient use of its existing infrastructure. The renovation is a delightful integration of historic elements with modern technology.

1000 Friends of Iowa is accepting nominations for the 2008 Best Development Awards through this Friday, July 25. Click here for more details about the categories and how to nominate a project.

Click here for information about the Main Street program at the Iowa Department of Economic Development. That page has links explaining some of the benefits of renovating the streets and neighborhoods where our historic buildings are located.

Governor Chet Culver says says Iowa may consider moving to a four-day work week for state employees to save energy costs:

In Utah starting next month, most government employees will not go in on Fridays and will work 10-hour shifts the other four days of the week.

Utah’s innovation was a popular topic at the National Governors Association meeting last weekend in Philadelphia, Culver said Friday.

If Utah state workers commute 20 percent less, the idea is that fuel use and pollution will decrease. State officials also hope to improve customer service with state buildings open from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., said Lisa Roskelley, spokeswoman for Utah’s governor. And they want to boost employee morale by giving them a three-day weekend every week, she said.

City employees in Birmingham, Alabama are also working four-day weeks this summer, and that link discusses some of the environmental benefits and cost savings.

Meanwhile, seven Iowa locations are among the 600 stores Starbucks is closing nationwide. I can’t say I’m surprised. When you read about tips for saving money, a common piece of advice is to brew your own coffee instead of paying $4 or $5 at Starbucks.

Daily Kos user Lava20 used to work for two different major credit card companies and has posted helpful advice for reducing your credit card bills. Here are the links:

Simple Credit Card Advice For Everyone, Yes You! (includes tips on how to protest every fee, ask for lower interest rates, request that every fee be waived, and so on)

Simple Credit Card Advice. SERIOUS UPDATE (on lowering interest rates, balance transfer options, and improving your credit score)

A theme running through both diaries is that you have a better chance of getting what you want if you are polite and don’t call the customer service representative names or threaten to close your account.

Use this as an open thread to discuss anything you are doing to save a little money in light of rising costs for gas, food and other necessities.

When it comes to making ends meet, you can’t beat this timeless advice from Saturday Night Live.

The weekly Cityview has published a special supplement about locally-owned businesses in central Iowa.

I am passionate about buying local. At first, I was influenced by the fact that both of my grandfathers were small business owners. The more I learned about the economic and environmental benefits, the more committed I became to shopping and dining out at locally-owned businesses.

In addition, as a volunteer for many non-profit groups I know that local business owners are often more supportive of charitable causes in the area than corporate executives at companies with headquarters out of state.

One of the main reasons I got involved with 1000 Friends of Iowa seven or eight years ago was that the group supports economic development with a focus on locally-owned, Main Street businesses.

Rob Marqusee, the rural economic development director for Woodbury County, recently directed me to this outstanding website. It’s full of resources on the economic benefits of buying locally-grown food. I’ll write more about this in the near future, but meanwhile I encourage you to go explore the website yourself.

Marqusee has done a tremendous job in promoting the growth of organic farming and local food networks in northwest Iowa.

Look, I understand that many Iowans are upset about the smoking ban that will go into effect tomorrow.

I agree with the Des Moines Register editorial board, which argued on Sunday that legislators should have delayed the starting date for the ban so that businesses wouldn’t have to implement it just a few days after the Iowa Department of Public Health completed the rulemaking process.

But critics lose all credibility when they rant about the “fascist state Department of Health” and claim that the “monstrous” smoking ban is “all about cruelty,” “all about viciousness,” and so on.

Not surprisingly, that post I linked to denies that secondhand smoke is a serious health problem, despite mounting research to the contrary.

You can read up on what fascism is here. You may disagree with the smoking ban, but don’t compare it to fascism.

We went to a party last night, and one of our friends told us that their next-door neighbors frequently go out on their porch to smoke. The smoke drifts onto my friends’ deck and into their house if they have the window open. She said there’s nothing she can do about it, because her neighbors are on their own property.

So take heart, angry smokers. Even after you are barred from smoking in most public places, you will still be free to pollute the air at your own home. Maybe your neighbors will get to experience your freedom as well.

With only a few days left before Iowa’s smoking ban goes into effect on July 1, the Des Moines Register reports that some business owners are finding creative ways to vent their anger:

At least one Iowa nightclub owner will raise the Soviet flag while playing the former communist country’s national anthem for his customers June 30.

[…]

Blues on Grand will officially go nonsmoking at 9 p.m. June 30 and “have a flag-raising ceremony that truly represents the direction our government is heading,” [manager Jeff] Wagner said. He has already lined up the Soviet flag and music.

As it happens, I visited the Soviet Union several times and have spent a fair amount of time in post-Soviet Russia. It’s probably the last place on earth where smoking would be banned in public. Russians still allow smoking almost everywhere, including on airplanes.

I also can’t imagine the Soviet regime caring enough about the health of ordinary citizens to pass any law to protect indoor air quality. Neither public health nor environmental protection were high priorities in the USSR.

If Wagner thinks it’s tough operating a business in Iowa’s regulatory environment, he should talk to people who have tried to do business in Russia. Between corrupt government officials demanding bribes for permits and organized crime groups that regularly extort business owners, it’s not easy to make money.

According to the Register, advocates are encouraging consumers to make a point of visiting newly smoke-free establishments next week:

Peggy Huppert of the American Cancer Society said various anti-smoking groups across the state have planned their own celebrations. Members plan to visit businesses like Blues on Grand on July 1 and tell their owners they wouldn’t have come if smoking was allowed.

Well, count this guy out:

I have been champing at the bit to finally be able to go to Blues on Grand without having to breathe the filth and stench of the smoke that filled my lungs and permeated my clothes the one and only time I went there.

However, after reading the June 22 story, “Iowa Smokers Smolder Over Ban,” in which the owner states that he plans on putting up the Soviet flag at his bar, it will be a long time before this nonsmoker walks through the door of Blues on Grand, if ever.

Why would this guy intentionally offend the majority of nonsmokers, a group of people that he is going to want and need to prosper under this new worker-safety law?

By the way, I will agree that the casino exemption must go.

– Chuck Davis, Urbandale

So do I, Mr. Davis. It’s still possible that restaurant and bar owners will file suit to challenge the casino exemption, so we may get our wish.

Just when you thought the economy had hit rock bottom. The Conference Board, a non-profit global business organization has reported that its consumer confidence index has dropped to its lowest point since the last recession in 1992. The New York Times paints the grim picture:

Tuesday’s data suggested a nation struggling with expensive gas and devalued homes, where people are fearful for their jobs and wary about where the economy is headed.

Any positive signs that economists and forecasters may have cited need to be thrown out the window. Even with the consumer confidence index at 50.4%, down a whopping 7.7% from May, the worst may still be yet to come. This report should be a wake up call to legislators across the country on behalf of a nation in desperate need of more help.

As the economy worsens, more and more key players are getting on board with the idea of a second economic recovery package. But not everyone’s where we need them to be to get something done in time to matter. For example Rep. David Obey (D-WI), powerful chairman of the Appropriations Committee free associated to Congress Daily (subscription only) and revealed that he doesn’t quite get how urgent doing something to stave off this recession is:

“People use all kinds of terminology; I don’t care if you call it a second supplemental or a second economic [stimulus] package — to me there are all kinds of things that we need domestically — but we need finish this job [war supplemental] before we can start thinking about the next one”

This pains me. Not only are House Democrats punting on telecom immunity, they’re putting war spending ahead of domestic spending.

As I wrote on myDD, Bush’s first economic stimulus package just didn’t work. We didn’t get the big sweeping surge of economic growth we were promised. Even what good news we’ve gotten was drowned out by a chorus of  story after story of bad economic news. The costs of living are growing rapidly as employment becomes harder to find. Food is getting more expensive as food bank lines grow longer. The longer Congress waits to act, the worse things will get.

And the states can’t wait for the aid that Democratic leaders say must be included in a second stimulus package either. State spending is the last prop holding up the economy and is at a tipping point. More than half of the states are facing crippling budget shortfalls that total $48 billion for the upcoming fiscal year. In the absence of aid from the federal government, states have been forced to cut vital services for many of our most vulnerable citiznes. The Center on Budget and Policy Prioritiesgives outlines the chopping block:

At least 12 states have implemented or are considering cuts that will affect low-income children’s or families’ eligibility for health insurance or reduce their access to health care services.

At least 10 states are cutting or proposing to cut K-12 education; three of them are proposing cuts that would affect access to child care.

At least 11 states have proposed or implemented reductions their state workforce. Workforce reductions often result in reduced access to services residents need.

And when states are forced to do things like cut their state workforce, the economy suffers even more. According to CNN/Money:

With falling revenue from sales and income taxes, and property-tax declines looming, states, cities and towns have already laid off tens of thousands of government employees. Many expect more job cuts ahead as public officials struggle to balance their budgets.

Economists say that cutbacks in jobs and spending by local governments could be a major drag on the overall economy.

It’s cool that Obey recognizes the need for a  second stimulus package. But he also needs to understand that each day he lets pass without doing something means the economic hole we’re in is that much deeper and is going to require that much more federal spending to help us get out of.

I received this action alert today from Smart Growth America:

Dear [desmoinesdem],

Can you believe the impact rising gas prices are having across the country?

Here in D.C., people are abandoning their cars and taking the Metro in record numbers. But most Americans don’t have options like Metro for relief — they don’t have access to convienient public transportation or live in walkable, connected neighborhoods. For years, our leaders have underinvested in these solutions, and now we’re paying the price as fuel prices rise by the day.

We need to demand better transportation choices that can help us get where we need to go — while saving money, conserving oil, and fighting global warming. Urge your Congressional member to support more funding for transit, biking, and smart growth by clicking on the button below to send them a message.

Congressional members Earl Blumenauer and Ellen Tauscher are leading an effort to invest in transit and smart growth — please ask your Representative to join them!

Thanks for your support.

Steve Davis

Smart Growth America

Please feel free to forward this to any of your friends and colleagues who might be interested in taking action or receiving alerts like this one in the future. If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for news and alerts here.

Keep track of SGA’s current advocacy work and get valuable resources to bolster your own efforts on our action page.

You can click here to

write and tell your representative to sign onto a letter from Reps. Earl Blumenauer and Ellen Tauscher urging Congress to increase funding for public transit, biking, public transportation, and walkable neighborhoods in federal climate legislation. Note: you can edit or personalize the text of the email below, which will help strengthen your message. Feel free to personalize it or add a story of your own from your legislator’s district.

At Daily Kos, Devilstower offers five Good Ideas that are Bad Politics. They are:

A five year moratorium on new highway construction

End to single-purpose zoning

Bus Rapid Transit with Dedicated Lanes

Relaxing automotive safety laws

Fifty-five Mile an Hour Speed Limit

Click the link to read the case he makes for each of those. I agree with all of them except relaxing the safety rules. He makes some intriguing points, but I don’t think that change would produce the effect he’d like to see.

Yesterday, Daily Kos user bink wrote this diary: Amtrak Has Too Few Usable Train Cars Left. The gist is that demand for passenger rail is skyrocketing because of high gasoline prices, but Amtrak has a limited ability to lay on more trains because it has been starved of adequate funding for so long.

This should concern anyone who wants to see more passenger rail options available to Iowans.

By the way, Barack Obama wants to invest more in rail transportation, while John McCain has opposed funding for Amtrak for many years.

Time for another post on transportation policy. Today I’ll go over reasons to give Americans more alternatives to driving, as well as ways individuals can reduce their own vehicle-miles traveled.

One way of looking at the issue is to assess the cost of not changing our transportation policy. James Howard Kunstler sounds the alarm in a Washington Post editorial published on Sunday. His piece, called “Driving Toward Disaster,” addresses

the desperate wish to keep our “Happy Motoring” utopia running by means other than oil and its byproducts. But the truth is that no combination of solar, wind and nuclear power, ethanol, biodiesel, tar sands and used French-fry oil will allow us to power Wal-Mart, Disney World and the interstate highway system — or even a fraction of these things — in the future. We have to make other arrangements.

[…]

And that’s the worst part of our quandary: the American public’s narrow focus on keeping all our cars running at any cost. Even the environmental community is hung up on this. The Rocky Mountain Institute has been pushing for the development of a “Hypercar” for years — inadvertently promoting the idea that we really don’t need to change.

Years ago, U.S. negotiators at a U.N. environmental conference told their interlocutors that the American lifestyle is “not up for negotiation.” This stance is, unfortunately, related to two pernicious beliefs that have become common in the United States in recent decades. The first is the idea that when you wish upon a star, your dreams come true. (Oprah Winfrey advanced this notion last year with her promotion of a pop book called “The Secret,” which said, in effect, that if you wish hard enough for something, it will come to you.) One of the basic differences between a child and an adult is the ability to know the difference between wishing for things and actually making them happen through earnest effort.

[…]

Fixing the U.S. passenger railroad system is probably the one project we could undertake right away that would have the greatest impact on the country’s oil consumption. The fact that we’re not talking about it — especially in the presidential campaign — shows how confused we are. The airline industry is disintegrating under the enormous pressure of fuel costs. Airlines cannot fire any more employees and have already offloaded their pension obligations and outsourced their repairs. At least five small airlines have filed for bankruptcy protection in the past two months. If we don’t get the passenger trains running again, Americans will be going nowhere five years from now.

Though many Americans may still be in denial about the need to improve other modes of travel, the message is becoming more mainstream every day.

A case in point is this long column by Rox Laird on the front page of the Sunday Des Moines Register’s opinion section: Mapping our future: Look to past for city life without cars. Laird made an excellent case for developing better alternatives to driving in the Des Moines metropolitan area. I recommend reading the whole column.

As a companion piece, the Des Moines Register’s editorial board published a call to change our transportation agenda:

The Des Moines MPO is beginning work on a plan that will set the transportation agenda for the next 30 years. The process – which begins with a public hearing this week (see accompanying box for details) – is an opportunity for local leaders to reconsider the traditional focus on accommodating automobiles and to focus more on better accommodating alternatives, such as buses, ride-sharing, vanpooling, bicycling and walking.

The reality is that in a Midwestern city like Des Moines, the automobile for at least the foreseeable future will remain the dominant mode of transportation. For better or worse, we have designed our cities around cars, and driving our own personal vehicle is the preferred means of transportation for most.

Still, it is time for transportation planning to include more opportunities for people to park the car and walk, cycle, roller-skate or catch a bus or a trolley for many short trips. That could be possible even with modest changes in the plans for residential and commercial districts. These small changes could have a significant impact on fuel consumption, greenhouse-gas emissions and personal fitness.

It will take time to rebuild our passenger rail system and improve public transit, walking and bicycling options within cities.

If you want to take immediate action to reduce the vehicle miles you travel by car, a fast and effective way is to start carpooling. This feature article from Cityview profiles Ann Pashek, who estimates that she saves about $4,500 on gas alone by using the Des Moines Area Regional Transit’s rideshare program to commute to her downtown Des Moines job from her home in Winterset. She also saves money on parking and vehicle maintenance.

My brother-in-law carpools to work most days in Washington, DC, and saves a lot of money as well. An added incentive in the Washington area is the high-occupancy vehicle lane on the beltway. Making one of the lanes on I-235 a high-occupancy vehicle lane would quickly increase the number of commuters carpooling to work.

Click on that feature article from Cityview to read about four other ways you can get around while dramatically reducing your gas usage.

On a related note, Markos put up a post this weekend about Walk Score, a site that evaluates your home’s location in terms of the ability to reach various kinds of amenities on foot. Markos noted that his home in the Bay Area scored an 88 (out of a possible 100), while George W. Bush’s Prairie Chapel ranch scored a zero.

My house in Windsor Heights (an inner-ring suburb of Des Moines) scored 48, although I noticed that the list of walkable amenities the site drew up did not include the Windsor Heights Hy-Vee under the grocery section. So your Walk Score might not be completely accurate. Still, it should give you an idea of how good your neighborhood is for pedestrians.

Another very useful web-based tool is the Housing + Transportation Affordability Index, developed by the Center for Neighborhood Technology and the Center for Transit Oriented Development.

The concept is simple:

Planners, lenders, and most consumers traditionally measure housing affordability as 30 percent or less of income. The Housing + Transportation Affordability Index, in contrast, takes into account not just the cost of housing, but also the intrinsic value of place, as quantified through transportation costs.

By clicking this link, you can check statistics for 52 different metro areas in the U.S. (unfortunately, no Iowa cities made the cut). It’s easy to see how certain parts of a big metropolitan area look more affordable if you are only considering housing costs, but are relatively more expensive once you factor in transportation costs as well.

But what if you don’t like walking, carpooling, bicycling or taking the bus, and you’re wealthy enough that you don’t feel the pinch when you fill up your tank?

Remember that a smart transportation policy, which reduces vehicle-miles traveled, is an essential part of any comprehensive strategy to combat global warming.

Smart Growth America has tons of information on this at their website, including a link to the report “Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change.”

The number of vehicle miles traveled per capita in the U.S. has increased at three times the rate of population growth in recent decades. Continued increases in vehicle miles traveled threaten to wipe out any reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions we could achieve by improving mileage or using cleaner fuels.

Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Tom Carper (D-DE) have introduced the Complete Streets Act of 2008 in the Senate. Norm Coleman (R-MN) is also a co-sponsor. Representative Doris Matsui (D-CA) has introduced a companion bill in the House called the Safe and Complete Streets Act of 2008. Please urge your representatives in Congress to co-sponsor this important legislation.

Final note: I read in March that George W. Bush’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2009 would cover a projected shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund by taking money away from public transportation projects.

I have to ask, is there any policy this president doesn’t get wrong?

We already devote way too little funding to public transit compared to road-building. Here’s hoping that rising gas prices will prompt the Democratic-controlled Congress to put more money, not less, into public transportation projects.

My family will be taking some day trips and overnight trips around Iowa this summer, and we prefer to eat at good, locally-owned restaurants, if possible.

Please post a comment if you can recommend any place, and mention significant details such as what kind of food they serve, if it is kid-friendly, if they source food locally, and so on.

Here are some examples:

The Waveland Cafe is a classic diner in Des Moines on University Avenue near Polk Blvd. They serve breakfast all day, and it’s a kid-friendly place, but it gets crowded for lunch, especially on weekends.

India Star on 56th and Douglas in Des Moines is our favorite Indian restaurant in the area. The food is classic north Indian and not very spicy. There are plenty of options for vegetarians. If you want to eat there with small kids, try the lunch buffet, because otherwise it can be a long wait for your food.

The Phoenix Cafe in Grinnell serves great food and sources many ingredients from local farmers.

The Red Avocado in Iowa City also includes a lot of locally-sourced food on its vegetarian menu.

Where are some other good, locally-owned places to eat in Iowa?

Tom Harkin has right-wing bloggers in a tizzy because he recently suggested that the military tradition in McCain’s family has given him a dangerously imbalanced worldview:

“I think one of the problems that John McCain has is that his grandfather was an admiral, his father was an admiral,” Harkin said on a conference call with Iowa Independent and other media. “He comes from a long line of just military people. I think his whole world view, his life view, has been shaped from a military viewpoint and he has a hard time of thinking beyond that. And I think he’s trapped in that, so everything is looked at sort of from his life experiences as always having been in the military and I think that can be pretty dangerous.”

I see what Harkin is getting at–McCain’s background makes him unlikely to get us out of Iraq and perhaps more likely to get us involved in other wars. Still, I don’t think this is good messaging against McCain. Americans are not going to reject his candidacy because he comes from too military of a family.

Harkin was on more solid ground when he talked about McCain’s “scary” temper. McCain has a long history of losing it that suggests he lacks the temperament to be president. This is a huge mark in Barack Obama’s favor, because Obama is much more even-tempered.

But for those who are tired of talking about McCain’s anger management problem, I offer ten more reasons not to support the GOP nominee:

1. Mr. Straight Talk can’t keep his story straight when it comes to Iraq, the economy, tax cuts or other issues. Brave New Films shows you the evidence in “The Real McCain 2”:

2. McCain has employed senior campaign workers with a history of lobbying for foreign corporations or brutal foreign regimes. In fact, the man McCain chose to run this summer’s Republican National Convention is a lobbyist whose firm represented the Burmese junta.

McCain’s campaign has fired at least six employees this month because of their lobbying ties, including his national finance co-chairman Tom Loeffler, whose firm collected millions from Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments.

Even so, McCain is still employing Senior Political Adviser Charlie Black, who has lobbied for:

   * Ahmed Chalabi, the smooth talking Iraqi exile who helped manufacture the WMD charges against Saddam Hussien that led the U.S. to invade.

   * Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos, found guilty of torture, executions, disappearances, and human rights violations, who hired Black to “improve” his image in the U.S.

   * Somali dictator Mohamed Siad Barre, who’s army massacred between 40,000 and 50,000 civilians in two years.

   * Dictator Mobuto Sese Seko of Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo), who amassed a vast personal fortune and repressed rival political parties while his country’s children starved.

   * Angolan rebel leader Jonas Savimbi of UNITA, an ally of apartheid-era South Africa, who started a civil war which claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and ordered the torture and murder of countless opponents.

   * Nigerian Dictator Ibrahim Babangida ran a one-party regime, who arrested his opponents, and murdered journalists.

3. McCain has only released two years of his own tax returns and none of his wife Cindy’s tax returns, despite a growing consensus that the public has a right to know about McCain’s personal finances.

Why should you care? Because in the past Cindy McCain had business dealings with a crook whom Senator McCain helped bail out. We need to know if similar conflicts of interest exist today.

4. McCain’s campaign has underpaid for the use of his wife’s corporate jet, even though the self-styled campaign finance reformer has backed legislation that would require candidates to pay the real costs of using corporate jets.

Even after his hypocrisy on this issue was exposed, McCain continues to use his wife’s corporate jet for campaign purposes.

5. McCain’s foreign policy in in all meaningful ways the same as George Bush’s.

6. McCain is running for president on his “vast experience,” but he keeps confusing Sunnis with Shiites, even after being corrected by his buddy Joe Lieberman.

7. McCain says a lot of the problems in the U.S. economy are just “psychological.”

8. McCain’s judicial appointments would likely be the same kind of extreme conservatives George Bush has favored:

The Senator has long touted his opposition to Roe, and has voted for every one of Bush’s judicial appointments; the rhetoric of his speech shows that he is getting his advice on the Court from the most extreme elements of the conservative movement.

9. McCain’s campaign has been bashing Obama for supposedly being willing to negotiate with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, but McCain said two years ago that the U.S. would have to engage Hamas if that group were running the Palestinian government.

10. McCain’s campaign blog misleadingly portrays the GOP candidate as a progressive, even though his voting record and stands on the issues are hard-line conservative.

For more on McCain’s record, see the Democratic National Committee’s new clearinghouse for research about him and MoveOn.org’s list of Ten Things You Should Know about John McCain.

By the way, McCain’s continuing problem with fundraising suggests that a lot of Republicans have their own reasons for not supporting the GOP nominee.

It’s incredible to think that even after a campaign that dragged on for months longer than the Republican nominating battle, the Democratic nominee is likely to have a financial edge over McCain this fall.

Feel free to post comments about other reasons not to support McCain that I’ve left out.

Marc Hansen’s latest column for the Des Moines Register is about non-smokers who plan to start going back to various restaurants and bars after the public smoking ban goes into effect on July 1.

I know that was true for me after the Waveland Cafe went smoke-free last fall.

Although Hansen’s column is mainly anecdotal, studies in other parts of the country have shown that smoking bans are not bad for businesses.

Consider this an open thread on how the smoking ban will affect where you go out to eat or drink (whether or not you smoke).

Marc Hansen’s latest column goes over the hidden benefits of rising gas prices. For instance, people may reduce driving speeds on the highway to improve mileage, which will save gas and save lives.

His piece also mentions that higher prices at the pump have increased the number of people using various forms of public transit in a lot of cities.

The New York Times published a similar article on Saturday: Gas Prices Send Surge of Riders to Mass Transit. That piece gives examples of growing demand for public transit all over the country, not only in cities with historically strong systems such as New York and Boston, but also in Denver, Minneapolis, Seattle, Dallas-Fort Worth, San Francisco, Houston, Nashville, Salt Lake City, and Charlotte, NC.

This isn’t rocket science. If the price of gas keeps going up, count on more people to be looking for alternatives to driving.

Trouble is, the Iowa legislature just adopted (and Governor Culver signed) the TIME-21 transportation plan, which does not require any of the increased transportation funding to be spent on public transit.

People can’t switch to the bus if there is no bus line running through their neighborhood and going somewhere they need to go, and they can’t take the train if there is no commuter rail in their metro area.

We’ve spent hundreds of millions of dollars on rebuilding and expanding I-235 through Des Moines and the suburbs, yet we didn’t even put in a high-occupancy vehicle lane to encourage carpooling. (A high-occupancy vehicle lane can only be used by vehicles carrying at least two licensed drivers.)

Our elected and appointed officials need to be more forward-thinking when it comes to transportation and economic development generally.

It’s great that Amtrak is talking about adding passenger rail service to link Iowa City and the Quad Cities to Chicago, but we also need more alternatives to driving that Iowans can use on a daily basis.

For much more on what a smart transportation policy would look like, check out this page at the Smart Growth America website.

Nice try. Two top executives from Regency Homes sought to avoid repaying about $2.7 million plus interest owed to Wells Fargo on personal lines of credit:

A Polk County district judge rejected arguments from Richard Moffitt, Regency’s chief executive, and John Gamble, Regency’s former chief financial officer, that Wells Fargo & Co. exerted “undue influence and economic duress” against the executives and prevented them from repaying the debt.

The men – along with Regency executives Jamie Myers and Rob Myers – say Wells Fargo put a chokehold on the leaders’ income in December 2007, when it demanded all net proceeds from Regency’s property sales. The leaders claim Wells Fargo’s actions denied them their ability to repay their personal lines of credit.

Moffitt had a $2 million line of credit with Wells Fargo; Jamie Myers, Regency vice president, has $1.5 million; part owner Rob Myers had $1 million; and Gamble had $750,000. Leaders said the lines were used to invest in residential and commercial developments.

The sound you don’t hear is the world’s saddest song being played on the world’s smallest violin.

Give me a break. These guys had a pretty good run during the housing bubble. I am sure that they accumulated plenty of securities and other assets that could be liquidated in order to repay personal lines of credit.

Too many Americans are happy with “high risk, high reward” investments as long as they are reaping the rewards. When they get burned by the risks, they try to weasel out of paying the price.

Meanwhile, “Iowa banks with ties to Regency Homes or other real estate-related businesses continue to report troubles with loans to that industry.” It will be a while before we know the full extent of the fallout from Regency’s suspension of operations last month.

The Iowa Citizen Action Network sent out this action alert on Wednesday:

ECONOMIC RECOVERY THAT INVESTS IN  AMERICA

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This year Iowa Citizen Action Network (ICAN) has been talking about the need to invest in Iowa by expanding health care coverage for  kids, and our

state legislature has taken bold steps to meet this need in the coming years. Now as Iowans continue to struggle with a whole host of economic issues including health care, foreclosures, unemployment, and the rising cost of gas and food; We must tell Congress to take bold action to invest in  America .

America is now in a recession. The economy has lost 296,000 private sector jobs in the past quarter.  Unemployment claims have surged upwards to a four-week average of 376,000. And many Americans are still in jobs, but with reduced hours. Now things are getting a lot worse.

Together we can ensure that Congress passes a package that provides a shared recovery and an economy that works for all of us.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

URGE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND SENATORS TO DO

MORE TO REVERSE THE RECESSION

Congress is currently discussing a growth package that would stimulate the economy and provide relief for low-to-moderate-income people. It’s up to us to make sure their proposals succeed in reversing the impact of the recession for ordinary Iowans.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

CALL TODAY — YOU CAN MAKE THE DIFFERENCE!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Time is of the essence: the House and Senate leaders are discussing what should be included in an economic recovery package that can invest in the people who are most impacted by the recession.  That’s why we need to call our representatives right now and tell them to vote to help people recover from the recession.

Call Your U.S. Representative toll free 1-888-460-0813* on May 7, or 1-202-224-3121 any other day. Both reach the capitol switchboard.

Call right now and urge Sen. Harkin, Sen. Grassley, and your representative to vote for recession relief for low-to-moderate income people. Find your Rep. at: www.house.gov.

Too often Congress loads these emergency stimulus packages with corporate tax breaks and gimmicky gestures toward working people, so I appreciate ICAN’s efforts to move these deliberations in the right direction.

If you aren’t already convinced that the housing market is in big trouble, maybe this article from Saturday’s Des Moines Register will change your mind:

Iowa’s largest home builder, Regency Cos. of Des Moines, has laid off the entire staff of its home building business and left behind 300 homes that lenders and buyers will now have to sell or finish.

Jamie Myers, president of Regency, told 103 people working at Regency Homes offices in West Des Moines and Cedar Rapids on Friday afternoon that their jobs had been eliminated and that construction would halt. Myers said it became impossible for the company to continue after a lending agreement with Wells Fargo & Co. ended in December without a renewal.

“We don’t have the cash flow to pay them,” he said of employees.

Myers said it’s hoped that enough money will be generated from the sale of homes already built to pay lenders and contractors.

Myers didn’t rule out a bankruptcy for the company, which concentrates in the Ames, Cedar Falls, Cedar Rapids, Des Moines and Iowa City areas.

The prize for the most absurd spin of the week has to go to Rich Krier of Krier Homes Inc. in Indianola, who

didn’t see Regency’s troubles as a particularly bad omen for the Iowa home building industry. “It’s like a borrower having a problem with a bank,” he said.

He cannot be serious. Regency is not just like any old borrower. We are talking about the giant among home-building firms in Iowa. If Wells Fargo pulled the plug on their loan arrangement, they must be pretty sure that the housing market is in a severe downturn.

The archives of the Bonddad Blog have plenty of material explaining the housing bubble and subsequent downturn.

I wish we could get back some of that prime farmland that home-builders turned into suburban housing. Clearly the new housing that has been built in recent years exceeds market demand in Iowa.

Ed Fallon sought to connect Leonard Boswell with unwelcome trends in Iowa agriculture during three campaign events on April 12. An accompanying press release from the challenger’s campaign noted:

Fallon served on the Iowa House Agriculture Committee for six years and believes that the rampant consolidation of the hog industry and the explosion of confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) are impacting family farming and rural community viability.

Fallon noted that in 1995, a bill (HF 519) changed Iowa law to enable a drastic shift in hog production from family farms to corporate giants such as Iowa Select, DeCoster, Murphy, and Premium Standard.    

Fallon said, “As it happens, the President of the Iowa Senate at that time was Leonard Boswell, my opponent in this race. While I worked with fellow House Democrats to block passage of HF 519, Leonard Boswell helped get it passed in the Senate. ”

Fallon says he [is] disappointed that the Democratic Legislature in Iowa has done nothing on this issue and would recommend a moratorium at the federal level.

It’s not the first time Fallon has emphasized the differences between himself and Boswell on agriculture policy. That Iowa bill passed in 1995 features prominently on the agriculture page of Fallon’s campaign website.

Fallon made the point again in an interview with Iowa Independent blogger Dien Judge last month.

Can Fallon, who represented an urban district in the Iowa House, persuade third-district voters that he is the better candidate on farm issues?

The agriculture page on Boswell’s campaign website reads:

“Iowa’s farmers are among our greatest assets and they deserve our support.”

Congressman Boswell grew up on a farm in rural Iowa and returned to Iowa to farm after his service in the military.  He successfully led his local farmer’s co-op through the farm crisis of the 1980s, when he served as its chair.  Today, Boswell is guided by the values and common sense he learned as a farmer.

In Congress, Boswell has been a friend to agriculture.  He is one of two Iowa Representatives to serve on the House Agriculture Committee and one of only 37 farmers in the entire Congress.  He voted in favor of the most recent Farm Bill, which makes historic investments in conservation, nutrition, fruit and vegetable production, and renewable energy while maintaining a strong safety net for America’s farmers and ranchers.

During his tenure in Congress and on the Agriculture Committee, Boswell has fought for increased market transparency, expanding renewable energy production, increasing value-added agricultural products, keeping marginal land out of agricultural production, increased working lands conservation programs, and to keep a real safety net for our nation’s producers.

Speaking to Iowa Independent, Fallon suggested that Iowa needs to build more local food networks and diversity of crops produced:

“Before I got involved in politics I did some farming, but I messed up my back bad enough that wasn’t going to happen anymore. But to me, we need to create local markets for food products where we can help broaden the base of agriculture. I mean, we’re always going to be a leader. Iowa’s always going to be a leader in corn, soybean, hog and cattle production. But why can’t we also regain some of our status with fruits and vegetables and dairy? There are so many other areas. We can do anything here when it comes to agriculture; we can do it all.”

In the same interview, Fallon acknowledged that he has “a lot more to learn” about federal agricultural policy, since his “focus in agriculture has been on Iowa issues, as they related to the Legislature’s role.”

Boswell seized on that admission in his own interview with Dien Judge, which Iowa Independent published on April 11:

Ask Boswell about his primary race, and he’ll say he’s ready for the challenge. He’s proud of his record and isn’t shy about criticizing his opponent. “I’ve had some very good success with different areas of conservation and energy and alternative fuels, which is something I’ve been involved in for many, many years. And I’ll continue to be there,” said Boswell. He said Fallon is always “trying to think of something to be critical about,” when “by his own admission he knows very little, if anything, about agriculture.”

“But I do know about agriculture, and I’m hands-on. I was actually born in a farmhouse. I spent my years growing up farming, and then my friends and neighbors called me off to the Army and I went off for a period of time. And when I came back, I went right back in the same neighborhood and took the risks and made the investment to farm. We went through a farm crisis, not only running a farm operation of my own but also in leadership of my local cooperative. You know, I have that under my belt. And by comparison, he doesn’t have anything like that.”

Boswell said federal agriculture policy is of the utmost importance to Iowa’s 3rd District, and it’s important to have an experienced hand in the Congress. “I think folks will figure that out,” he said. “And so I’m just going to keep on trying to do the good job that I try to do. We’re not going to hit every ball, but we sure try. And overall, I feel good about what I’ve done. So I bring to the table a lot of things that he just has no ability to bring to the table.”

Boswell has occasionally cited his experience as a farmer to justify Congressional votes that have nothing to do with agriculture. For instance, when a participant in a telephone town-hall meeting asked Boswell to defend his vote in favor of the bankruptcy bill in 2005 (which most House Democrats opposed), Boswell replied:

“I am a survivor of the farm crisis, and saw folks that bankrupted when they really had the ability to pay back,” said Boswell, who owns a cattle farm in southern Iowa. “It seems to me like when we sign our name on the line and promise to pay, that we have a responsibility if we have the ability to pay.”

At the same time, more help and counseling are needed to assist consumers from falling too deeply into debt, Boswell said. He said he worked very hard to not fall into bankruptcy when he faced financial problems with his own farm operation.

Although I can’t find a link right now, I recall Boswell justifying his vote to permanently repeal the estate tax (another Republican-backed effort opposed by most House Democrats) by saying we need to protect family farms. But as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows in its discussion of estate tax “myths”,

Despite oft-repeated claims that the estate tax has dire consequences for family farms and small businesses, there is in fact very little evidence that it has an outsize impact on these groups.  Indeed, the American Farm Bureau Federation acknowledged to the New York Times that it could not cite a single example of a farm having to be sold to pay estate taxes.

My guess is that anyone in the third district who is satisfied with current federal policy on farm subsidies and other agricultural issues will support Boswell in the June 3 primary.

But bringing up the expansion of CAFOs in Iowa, and connecting that with the law Boswell supported in 1995, could help Fallon with Democrats who are concerned with environmental problems associated with CAFOs. They include city and suburban dwellers as well as some rural residents who have seen the quality of life in their communities decline. Fallon has been an outspoken proponent of “local control” over the siting of CAFOs (currently Iowa law does not grant counties any zoning authority over agricultural operations).

You can read the full text of the Fallon campaign’s April 12 press release on agricultural issues after the jump.

My husband and I both got direct-mail pieces from Congressman Leonard Boswell today.

I noticed that Boswell for Congress paid for this one, as opposed to the last three campaign-style mailers, which American taxpayers funded.

The front shows a large color photo of Boswell, with a smaller black-and-white photo of George W. Bush in the upper left corner. The text reads:

While Bush squandered a strong economy…

Leonard Boswell has been a

CHAMPION for Iowa’s middle class

When you open the mailer, page 2 consists of a large photo of Boswell standing next to a worker. The text at the bottom reads:

Congressman Leonard Boswell

DELIVERS for the middle class

Page three has three photos of Boswell talking with small groups of men and women. The text on the rest of the page reads:

Leonard Boswell is working to end the Bush recession

-Voted to increase the minimum wage and to support small business

-Helping reduce the cost of health insurance for small businesses through tax credits

-Working to balance the budget and provide tax relief to Iowa’s working families

-Creating thousands of future jobs for Iowans with new ethanol and renewable fuel standards

Leonard Boswell

Taking on George Bush for the Changes We Need

The back page has a photo of Boswell with his wife Dody. The text reads:

Congressman Boswell is working for Iowa’s new economy

-Making Iowa a leader in he green jobs revolution

-Creating high paying, new energy jobs

-Helping reduce the cost of health insurance for small businesses through tax credits

-Increasing the minimum wage

-Providing tax relief to Iowa’s working families

For more information: www.boswellforcongress.com

Democratic Primary – June 3rd

The bottom has contact information for the campaign as well as the notice, “Paid for by Boswell for Congress.”

In a rare post not related to Barack Obama, Gordon Fischer put up a press release from Leonard Boswell’s campaign over at Iowa True Blue. (Note to the Boswell campaign: please start sending your press releases to desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com.)

The release notes that the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy recently gave Boswell a 100 percent 90 percent “A” grade for his work on behalf of the middle class. Boswell’s campaign also mentioned that a different group recently named him the most powerful U.S. representative from Iowa, and was ranked the 135th most powerful person among the 435 members of the U.S. House.

You can find more details about how the Drum Major Institute compiled its Congressional scorecard on middle class issues, as well as ratings for all 535 members of Congress, by clicking here.

The full text of Boswell’s press release is after the jump.

David Yepsen has a pretty good column in Sunday’s Des Moines Register: Stimulus deal might do harm. A one-time tax rebate didn’t fix the economy when Gerald Ford was president, and it won’t fix the economy now.

Yepsen doesn’t mention some of the other things wrong with this package–namely, that the Republicans got the “business incentives” they were looking for, while Democrats “dropped calls for increases in food stamps and an extension of unemployment compensation”.

To his credit, John Edwards denounced this charade: “This is another example of Washington deserting working people and the middle class.”

I am not aware of any statement from Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama criticizing the bogus “stimulus package.”

The job creation plan Edwards announced last month would actually stimulate the economy.

Clinton and Obama have also released economic stimulus packages, and my impression is that Clinton’s is a little better than Obama’s. But neither of them seems willing to call out their fellow members of he Congressional club for agreeing to George Bush’s sham.

Although Edwards is not going to win the Democratic nomination, I want him to stay in the race as long as he is speaking truths that Obama and Clinton avoid.