I wrote this piece primarily for readers outside Iowa, but since Bleeding Heartland has some of those too, I’m posting it here as well as at several national blogs.

Growing up liberal during the Reagan years taught me to go into elections expecting to be disappointed. Watching high-ranking Democrats in Congress fail to challenge the premise behind the dreadful and unnecessary proposed bailout of Wall Street, I share thereisnospoon’s concern that Democrats will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again.

But looking at the polling trends in the presidential race and in key Senate races, even a pessimist like me has to admit that a big Democratic wave seems quite possible.

Currently Democrats seem poised to pick up 12 to 18 seats in the House and five to six Senate seats. If we are on the verge of a wave, Democrats could win more than that, including a few districts where the Republican incumbent never saw it coming.

Waves can drag down well-funded incumbents with tremendous clout. Democratic losers in 1994 included House Speaker Tom Foley and my own 18-term Congressman Neal Smith.

This is a thread for discussing House districts and Senate seats that may seem likely Republican holds today, but which could shock us on November 4.

I’ll get the ball rolling by telling you about Iowa’s two House districts currently held by Republicans.

In the fourth district (D+0), Becky Greenwald faces Tom Latham, who has remarkably little to show for his seven terms in Congress. I went over many reasons I think Greenwald can win this race here.

Latham understands that it will be a big Democratic year in Iowa, judging from his first television commercial (which glosses over his lockstep Republican voting record). David Kowalski noticed that Latham’s campaign website avoids mentioning that he is a Republican (see, for instance, this bio page). Aside from the odd newspaper clipping on his site that refers to him as R-Iowa, you would never be able to tell which party he belongs to.

IA-04 shows up as “likely Republican” on House rankings, in part because Latham sits on the House Appropriations Committee and in part because he has been re-elected by double-digit margins in the past. However, 2002 was the only time Latham faced a well-funded challenger, and that was a bad year to be a Democrat running for Congress. Greenwald had raised more by June 30 than our 2006 candidate against Latham raised during his whole campaign, and she’s fundraised aggressively since then. She is already up on television and recently got the endorsement of EMILY’s list.

Whatever pork Latham has brought back to his district is nothing compared to what Neal Smith brought to central Iowa during his 36 years in Congress, and that didn’t stop voters from giving Smith the boot in 1994.

Now let’s look at Iowa’s fifth district (R+8), where Rob Hubler is running against one of the most atrocious House Republicans, Steve King. I laid out my case for why Hubler can win this race at Bleeding Heartland, but here are the highlights.

Hubler is the first Democrat to run a real campaign against King, who does not have a big war chest and has not been campaigning actively. Although Republicans maintain a voter registration edge in IA-05, Democrats have made big gains since 2006, putting Hubler in position for an upset if he wins independents by a significant margin. King’s extreme views and tendency to make bigoted, embarrassing statements are a turn-off to moderates.

Also, an internal poll of the district for Hubler’s campaign showed the generic ballot for Congress virtually tied at 36 percent for the Democrat and 38 percent for the Republican.

Nearly three months ago, the editor of the Storm Lake Times newspaper wrote:

Republican despondence also may be a threat to incumbent Rep. Steve King, R-Kiron. Scoff if you will, but again recall that Harkin defeated incumbent Bill Scherle and Bedell knocked off incumbent Wiley Mayne in the post-Watergate landslide. The atmospherics may be similar this year.

Like I said at the top, upsets happen in wave elections. After winning in 1974, Tom Harkin represented most of the southwest Iowa counties now in IA-05 for five terms, until his election to the U.S. Senate in 1984. Berkley Bedell represented most of the northwest Iowa counties now in IA-05 for six terms, until he retired because of health problems caused by Lyme’s disease.

Despite Sarah Palin’s presence on the ballot, I do not believe Republicans in western Iowa are going to be fired up to turn out this November. During the past month five separate polls have shown Barack Obama above 50 percent in Iowa and leading John McCain by double digits. McCain has never campaigned much in Iowa, skipping the caucuses in 2000 as well as 2008. He’s against ethanol subsidies, which causes him to underperform in rural Iowa. Certainly McCain lacks the appeal George Bush had to conservatives here in the last two elections.

Harkin is cruising against a little-known Republican challenger for the U.S. Senate, and King is not giving his supporters any reason to believe he’s concerned about Hubler. Why should the western Iowa wingnuts put a lot of effort into getting their voters out?

Meanwhile, Obama’s campaign has at least half a dozen field offices in both IA-04 and IA-05 to drive up turnout among Democrats and other Democratic-leaning voters.

Clearly, Greenwald and Hubler go into the home stretch as underdogs. But who thought Dave Loebsack was going to beat Iowa Congressman Jim Leach two years ago? Democrats put tons of money and effort behind a strong challenger to Leach in 2002 and came up short. As a result, Loebsack got no help from the DCCC or outside interest groups in 2006, and just about everyone viewed IA-02 as “likely Republican.”

Carol Shea-Porter’s amazing victory in New Hampshire’s first district seemed just as improbable two years ago. She was massively outspent by the Republican incumbent and got no help from the DCCC. By the way, NH-01 is D+0 and mostly white, as is IA-04.

The partisan lean and demographic profile of IA-05 (mostly white and largely rural) is similar to KS-02 (R+7), where Nancy Boyda came from behind to beat a Republican incumbent in 2006. The DCCC did get involved in that race, but it didn’t appear to be a very likely pickup before the election.

Two weeks ago Stuart Rothenberg mocked the DCCC for putting “absurd races” (including the Hubler-King matchup) on its list of “Races to Watch” and putting long shots on the “Red to Blue” and “Emerging Races” list. James L. already took down Rothenberg in this great post for Swing State Project, so I won’t pile on.

I will say, however, that I have put my money where my mouth is by giving as much as I can afford to Hubler and Greenwald.

Somewhere, somehow, some unheralded challengers will give House or Senate Republicans the surprise of their lives on November 4. So, Bleeding Heartland readers, who’s it gonna be?

The Obama campaign continues to hold events promoting early voting, and former Missouri Senator Jean Carnahan will tour southern Iowa with this message today and tomorrow:

Des Moines – On Monday and Tuesday, former Missouri Senator Jean Carnahan will travel to South-central and Southeast Iowa to hold town hall meetings on the issues facing Iowans in this election and to talk about the importance of early voting.

“With so much at stake in this election we are thrilled to have Senator Carnahan back in Iowa to talk about Barack Obama’s commitment to issues important to Iowans and to encourage Iowans to early vote,” said Jackie Norris, Iowa State Director for Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.

Senator Carnahan will be talking about issues important in this election, as well as encouraging Obama supporters to vote early so they can volunteer on election day.

Early voting in Iowa has begun and the Obama campaign has set up a voter information hotline, 877 – IA08VOTE, for Iowans to call to get information on how they can vote. Iowans can also visit iowa.barackobama.com for more information.

DETAILS FOR SENATOR CARNAHAN’S STOPS:

MONDAY, September 29th

Creston Early Vote for Change brown bag lunch

11:30 AM

209 N. Maple St.

Creston, IA

Lamoni Early Vote for Change townhall meeting

1:30 PM

Linden St. Coffee House

104 S. Linden St.

Lamoni, IA

Centerville Early Vote for Change townhall meeting

4:00 PM

Tangleberries

104 West Jackson St.

Centerville, IA

Ottumwa Early Vote for Change townhall meeting

6:00 PM

Wapello County Campaign for Change Field Office

226 West Main Street, Suite 203

Ottumwa, IA

TUESDAY, September 30th

Fairfield Early Vote for Change coffee

8:15 AM

Jefferson County Campaign for Change Field Office

108 West Palm Drive

Fairfield, IA

Keokuk Early Vote for Change brown bag lunch

11:45 AM

The Hotel Iowa

401 Main St.

Keokuk, IA

I’ve written before about why Democrats should support Rob Hubler, who’s running against Steve King in Iowa’s fifth Congressional district.

We can all agree that Hubler is a good Democrat with a compelling biography, while King is among the worst of the worst House Republicans.

But when I talk to Democrats about this race, I’ve noticed that too many people assume King cannot be beaten because Iowa’s fifth district is too Republican (its Cook Partisan Voting Index is R+8).

In fact, ten Democrats currently represent Congressional districts with a partisan index of R+8 or higher, and another 14 Democrats represent Congressional districts that have a partisan index between R+5 and R+8. In 2006, Democrats came close to winning several districts that tilt far more strongly to Republicans than King’s.

2laneIA and DemocracyLover in NYC have written good pieces on why Hubler is a solid contender in IA-05. Click those links to read about Hubler’s active campaign, King’s strangely dormant campaign, and an encouraging poll of the fifth district (which among other things showed the generic Congressional ballot virtually tied). King has faced only token opposition in past elections, but Hubler and his staff have been working in all of the 32 counties.

I want to step back and examine the partisan lean of IA-05 and how it relates to other red districts represented by Democrats.

As I mentioned above, IA-05 has a Cook Partisan Voting Index of R+8. That means that averaging the results from the last two presidential elections, the Republican candidate received about 8 percentage points more than the national average in Iowa’s fifth district.

The partisan index number reflects only the presidential vote. However, plenty of Congressional districts lean Republican for president while electing Democrats to represent them in the House. Such ticket-splitting has occurred in western Iowa. During the 1970s and 1980s, Tom Harkin represented many of the southwest counties now in IA-05 for five terms, and Berkley Bedell represented most of the northwest counties in the district for six terms.

It’s worth noting that Harkin and Bedell were first elected in the Democratic wave election of 1974, but they were able to hold their seats even in strong Republican years like 1978 and 1980 (and in Bedell’s case 1984; Harkin ran successfully for Senate that year).

Also, remember that this year’s Republican presidential nominee is not nearly as popular in the fifth district as George Bush was in 2000 and 2004. On the contrary; some polls have shown Barack Obama leading John McCain even in western Iowa. McCain has little field operation here, while Obama’s campaign has at least a half-dozen offices in IA-05 to help maximize Democratic turnout.

Democratic voter registration has greatly increased in all parts of the state. While Republicans still have a voter registration edge in the fifth district, the growing ranks of Democrats can put Hubler in position for an upset if he beats King among independent voters by a significant margin.

Certainly the Republican candidate has to be favored in a district with an R+8 lean, but it is by no means unprecedented for a Democrat to overcome that partisan slant. Here’s a list of the Democrats who represent Congressional districts that are at least R+5 (please correct any omissions in the comments):

Dan Boren in Oklahoma 2 (R+5)

Melissa Bean in Illinois 8 (R+5)

Bill Foster in Illinois 14 (R+5)

Charlie Melancon in Louisiana 3 (R+5)

John Spratt, South Carolina 5 (R+6)

Collin Peterson, Minnesota 7 (R+6)

Zach Space in Ohio 18 (R+6)

John Salazar Colorado 5 (R+6)

Bud Cramer in Alabama 5 (R+6)

Ben Chandler in Kentucky 6 (R+7)

Nancy Boyda in Kansas 2 (R+7)

Baron Hill in Indiana 9 (R+7)

Heath Shuler, North Carolina 11 (R+7)

Don Cazayoux in Louisiana 6 (R+7)

Chris Carney in Pennsylvania 10 (R+8)

Brad Ellsworth in Indiana 8 (R+9)

Travis Childers, Mississippi 1 (R+10)

Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin, South Dakota at-large (R+10)

Ike Skelton, Missouri 4 (R+11)

Earl Pomeroy, North Dakota at-large (R+13)

Nick Lampson, Texas 22 (R+15)

Gene Taylor, Mississippi 4 (R+16)

Chet Edwards, Texas 17 (R+17)

Jim Matheson, Utah 2 (R+17)

You would think that all of these Democrats would be skating on thin ice, representing such Republican territory. However, if you look at lists of competitive House districts (for instance, at Swing State Project, Open Left or the Cook Political Report), you will notice that many of these seats are considered safe for the Democratic incumbent.

Boyda, Herseth-Sandlin and Pomeroy are among the Democrats representing deep-red districts with demographic profiles similar to IA-05 (mostly white and largely rural).

Another notable fact is that Democrats seem to pick up several deep-red seats in good years for the party across the country. So, Boyda, Space, Shuler, Carney and Ellsworth all won their seats for the first time in the 2006 election. Cazayoux, Foster and Childers all won their seats in special elections during 2008.

I also want to mention several districts where Democrats lost narrowly in 2006 despite a massive partisan advantage for the Republicans. Those include Wyoming’s at-large seat (R+19), Idaho’s first district (R+19), Ohio’s second district (R+13), and Colorado’s fourth district (R+9). This year Colorado’s fourth and Alaska’s at-large seat (R+14) are both considered tossups.

My point is that it would not be unprecedented for a Democratic challenger to defeat a Republican incumbent in a district like IA-05. King is still favored to win here, but there are good reasons the DCCC put this seat on its “Races to Watch” list.

If you live in the fifth district, I encourage you to sign up to volunteer for Hubler’s campaign. This Saturday is a district-wide volunteer day. You can also help by telling your friends and neighbors about Rob and encouraging them to vote for “a servant, not a King.”

Whether or not you live in the district, I hope you will donate to Rob’s campaign. King’s war chest is not particularly large for an incumbent. Strong fundraising for Hubler by the September 30 deadline will help persuade the DCCC to become more actively involved in this race.

With your help, Iowa’s west can be won.

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.

This time it’s a Marist poll, conducted between September 18 and September 21, showing Barack Obama beating John McCain in Iowa by 51 percent to 41 percent. That makes five polls in the last month showing Obama above 50 percent and with a double-digit lead here.

How do you like not being a swing state anymore?

Remember, people need to vote for Democrats all the way down the ticket. If Obama wins Iowa by 10 points or more, we should be able to win seats in Congress and the state legislature.

Saw this on Daily Kos on Tuesday:

From Iowa City, Iowa, a friend of mine writes:

“I saw am interesting omen last night.  They’ve closed the local McCain campaign office.  I go by there once or twice a week and I noticed last night that it appeared to be empty.  I double checked this AM and, indeed, it appears abandoned.”

After the jump I’ve posted addresses for the “victory offices” currently listed on this page of the Iowa for McCain-Palin website. The contacts listed for each office appear to be employees of the Iowa Republican Party.

Clearly the Iowa Republican Party will keep some field offices open to GOTV for statehouse races, even if the McCain campaign has transferred staff out of Iowa.

Bleeding Heartland readers, your mission (should you choose to accept it) is to check whether any McCain offices you’ve noticed in your area are still open. You can post a comment in this thread or e-mail me at desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com to let me know whether the offices have been shut down.

UPDATE: An alert reader writes:

I swung past 413 Northwestern Ave in Ames this morning.  It looked like mostly a Latham operation.  There are 15-20 Latham signs plastered across the front of the building but only one McCain-Palin sign, on the lower portion of the front door.  There is also a single Reed sign and maybe one sign for someone else, but I didn’t get a good look at that one.  I didn’t go inside but there were cars parked outside and it looked like it was still open.  

Thanks, and keep e-mailing me with reports like these.

If you were a loyal Republican foot-soldier seeking re-election in a state that’s trending Democratic, where the Democratic presidential candidate has a commanding lead over your party’s nominee as well as a much bigger ground game in your own Congressional district, you might want to reinvent yourself.

Late last week, Tom Latham did just that in his first television commercial of this election cycle. You can view the ad at Latham’s campaign website. It focuses on a bill Latham introduced to address the nursing shortage in Iowa.

Judging from the content of this ad, Latham recognizes that 2008 will be a big Democratic year in Iowa.

Neither the commercial nor the campaign’s accompanying press release (which I’ve posted after the jump) mention that Latham is a Republican. Instead, they note that he authored “bipartisan legislation” in a specific area.

Polls typically give Democrats an edge on handling health care and education. Even someone watching this ad with the sound turned down can see that Latham is portraying himself as sensitive to these issues. Here are the words that flash on the screen during the commercial:

Nursing Shortage (footage of ambulance with siren, nurse alongside patient on stretcher)

Iowa Faces Severe Nursing Shortage (hospital scenes)

Bipartisan Legislation (Latham sitting and writing)

Help Nurses Repay Education Loans (nurse with patients)

Tom Latham (as he talks with one of the nurses quoted in the ad)

In addition, Latham’s ad features three testimonials from nurses. One of them is “nurse practitioner Linda Upmeyer,” wearing a white nurse’s coat with a stethoscope around her neck, who says, “Tom has done a wonderful job of hearing the need and translating that into legislation.” Conveniently, the ad fails to identify Upmeyer as the Republican state representative from Iowa House district 12.  

The press release announcing Latham’s television ad is even more blatant about running away from the Republican label. It describes Latham as “bipartisan” twice and notes that he “teamed up with Wisconsin Democratic Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin to introduce this bill in the United States Congress.”

I never thought I’d see the day when the conservative Republican Latham would brag about working with Baldwin, who is openly gay and has one of the most progressive voting records in Congress. Latham’s voting record as a whole could hardly be more different from Baldwin’s.

Not only does Latham’s ad avoid mentioning his party affiliation, it seems designed to address the gender gap by having a female voice-over and three women nurses do almost all of the talking. The only male voice you hear is Latham’s at the very end, saying “I’m Tom Latham, and I approved this message.”

Democratic candidates tend to do better among women, and the disparity may be even greater this year in IA-04. Becky Greenwald is giving Iowans the chance to send a woman to Congress for the first time.

One clever feature of this ad is that it implies Latham has delivered for Iowa’s nurses, without mentioning whether the bill he authored has any chance of becoming law. The wording of the press release suggests that the bill has not advanced:

Latham teamed up with Iowa nursing and health care professionals through numerous roundtables around the state to listen to their unique perspective and input on what was needed. He then wrote legislation and teamed up with Wisconsin Democratic Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin to introduce the bill in the United States Congress.

You would think that someone who spent 14 years in Congress (12 of them as part of a Republican majority) would be able to point to some concrete achievement on behalf of nurses or in the area of health care.

Instead, the Latham campaign talks about his “trusted leadership” on the nursing shortage, when he has nothing to show for this “leadership” other than writing one bill that went nowhere.

By the way, Latham signaled last week that he is not willing to defend the totality of his record in a public forum. He declined an invitation from KCCI-TV and the Des Moines Register to debate Greenwald during prime-time television. Latham also refused invitations to debate in August.

In a debate, Latham might have to explain why he talks about helping nurses repay their student loans in his commercial, when he voted for enormous cuts to federal student loan programs in 2005 and 2006.

As a challenger, Greenwald has lower name recognition than Latham, and understandably used her first television ad to introduce herself to voters. With Latham avoiding debates and using skillful image construction to conceal his ineffectiveness, I believe Greenwald will need to run some television ads that spell out why she is seeking to replace “Iowa’s low-yield Congressman.”

Barack Obama may be crushing John McCain in Iowa, but that is no excuse for you to slack off.

In July I wrote about five reasons to get involved in state legislative races. My reasoning was:

 1.  The 2010 census looms, to be followed by redrawing Congressional districts in most states.

  2. Many policy matters are determined at the state level.

  3. Getting progressive Democrats elected to state legislatures will build our bench for future House, Senate or gubernatorial races.

  4. You probably can find a competitive statehouse race near you, no matter where you live.

  5. Your individual actions are more likely to make a difference in a statehouse race.

In addition to donating directly to good state legislators and legislative candidates, I give to the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, which supports statehouse candidates across the country.

I was pleased to learn on Friday that the DLCC is accepting nominations for candidates to be included in its “40 essential races” program.

Dear [firstname]:

It is no easy task to pinpoint a handful of essential candidates among the thousands of competitive legislative races this year, but that is exactly is what we at the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee intend to do over the next three weeks.

Using the information and resources we’ve gathered so far this cycle, we will identify 40 candidates in top races all across the country who need help in this election. For our part, we will provide these candidates with strategic support and promote their races among our partners and allies.

We also know that there are plenty of strong Democrats throughout the country with the potential to win important districts whose races are just emerging — so we are asking for your help to find them.

While we reveal the list of our targets, we will also accept nominations for an additional 10 candidates to go on our essential races list. Please submit a name:

http://www.dlcc.org/action/200…

And while you’re on our site, will you also take a minute to make a contribution of $25 or more?

Every dollar that you give will go directly into taking the fight to the Republicans who want to control our state houses. With your help, we will elect leaders who won’t let the GOP pass their radical policy agendas or redraw districts to create a permanent conservative majority. Can you support us today?

http://www.dlcc.org/action/con…

The DLCC is committed to electing Democratic majorities all across the country, but in order to win in competitive states, we need support from friends like you.

Thank you for all that you do,

Michael Sargeant

Executive Director

Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee

I asked someone at the DLCC whether these “essential races” will mostly feature challengers or incumbents. I was told that most of the targeted races involve Democratic challengers trying to take Republican-held seats. However, some will be incumbents, and some will be challengers trying to hold Democratic seats.

I encourage progressives to get informed about the key races in your state, then go to the DLCC site and nominate the candidate of your choice for this program.

For example, strong Democratic challengers seeking Republican-held seats in Iowa include Jerry Sullivan in Iowa House district 59 and Swati Dandekar in Senate district 18 (both seats are open because of Republican retirements).

A good candidate trying to hold the open Iowa House district 29 is Nate Willems, a former regional director for Howard Dean and occasional contributor to MyDD.

Incumbents being targeted this year in Iowa include Eric Palmer in House district 75, Elesha Gayman in House district 84,  and Tom Rielly in Senate district 38.

Please let the good candidates in your state or region know about the DLCC program.

You can also set up your own ActBlue page to raise money for your favorite candidates, whether or not they are named an “essential race” by the DLCC. Century of the Common Iowan blogger noneed4thneed created this page to support Tim Hoy in House district 44, Sharon Steckman in House district 13, Gayman, Palmer, and Sullivan.

Vox Populi provides information about three good Indiana House candidates on this ActBlue page.

Remember, even if your state is not competitive in the presidential campaign and your representatives in Congress are safe incumbents, you can probably find a swing statehouse district not far from where you live.

We can’t afford to neglect those down-ticket races. Donate, volunteer, and spread the word.

A new Research 2000 Iowa poll for the Quad-City Times shows Barack Obama beating John McCain by 53 percent to 39 percent. Obama’s lead among independents is 55-37.

Two days ago, Survey USA released an Iowa poll that found Obama ahead 54-43 (which I discussed here). Before that, CNN/Time and Selzer and Associates for the Des Moines Register also found Obama to be above 50 percent in Iowa, with McCain at least 10 points behind.

Get active with one of our down-ticket Democratic campaigns. We have a great opportunity to elect more Democrats on Obama’s coat-tails.  

Survey USA becomes the third pollster (after CNN/Time and Selzer and Associates for the Des Moines Register) to find Barack Obama above 50 percent in Iowa, with a double-digit lead over John McCain. The poll found Obama ahead 54-43:

Among women, Obama leads by 20 points; among men, Obama and McCain tie.

Among voters younger than Barack Obama, Obama leads by 15. Among voters older than John McCain, Obama leads by 9. Among voters who are in-between the two candidates’ ages, Obama leads by 7.

Among white voters — 95% of Iowa’s likely voters — Obama leads by 8 points.

11% of Republicans cross over to vote for Obama; 8% of Democrats cross over to vote for McCain; Independents break for Obama by 9 points.

John McCain leads among Republicans, conservatives, those who attend church regularly, pro-life voters, those focused on terrorism, among the 16% of likely voters who say they may yet change their mind, and in Southwest Iowa. Obama is slightly ahead in Northwest Iowa and leads by double digits in the northeast and southeast portions of the state.

Yes, the Big Ten Battleground States poll showing Obama and McCain tied in Iowa is an outlier.

I’m thinking the McCain/Palin rally in Cedar Rapids on Thursday is the last we will see of the Republican ticket before November. We may get another visit from Joe Biden, but I doubt Obama is going to spend any more time in Iowa before the election either.

Side note: Rob Hubler and Becky Greenwald have to be encouraged by the news that Obama is slightly ahead in northwest Iowa and far ahead in northeast Iowa.

The Big Ten Battleground Poll released today shows Barack Obama and John McCain virtually tied in Iowa, with Obama at 42.7 percent and McCain at 42 percent when leaners are not added, and Obama and McCain both at 44.8 percent with leaners.

I am not buying it.

It’s not just that Selzer and Associates, which has an excellent track record in Iowa, released a poll four days ago showing Obama ahead 52-40. It’s not just that CNN/Time released a poll two weeks ago showing Obama ahead 55-40.

It’s the fact that according to a commenter at MyDD who has dug into the methodology, the Big Ten Battleground polls did not weight the data according to turnout projections.

The reason Ann Selzer was right about the Iowa caucuses was that she weighted the results to reflect the record turnout she expected (about 60 percent of caucus-goers being first-time caucus-goers).

The Big Ten Battleground poll supposedly has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent, but not weighting the results to reflect likely turnout of various demographic groups could introduce far more bias than that.

To cite one egregious example, this Virginia poll showing McCain ahead by 9 points was not weighted for race. As a result, it assumes that black voters will comprise less than 10 percent of the electorate in November.

Despite the fact that blacks were approximately 20 percent of voters in Virginia in November 2004, when John Kerry did nothing to target the state.

Despite the fact that the current Democratic nominee is black and is targeting Virginia with 35 field offices.

It’s worthless to even release a Virginia presidential poll with such ridiculous assumptions regarding turnout.

I suspect that the Big Ten Iowa poll has some similar erroneous assumption, perhaps underestimating Democratic or youth turnout.

On the other hand, I hope the McCain/Palin campaign starts spending lots of time and money in Iowa, hoping that we are a swing state. That will be pouring resources down a sinkhole for them.

I give a lot of credit to the West Des Moines Valley High School students who have started a support group for peers planning to abstain from sex. Probably most high school students are not ready for sexual intimacy, but few would be willing to admit it like the teenagers who participate in this group.

However, I hope that these Valley students, along with all teenagers who take virginity pledges, still receive medically-accurate and comprehensive sex education.

A study released by the National Institutes of Health in 2001 showed mixed results for virginity pledges:

Teens who pledged to remain a virgin until marriage began sexual activity much later than their peers who did not take such a pledge, according to an analysis of data from a study funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) and several other Federal agencies. On average, teens who took a public or written pledge to remain abstinent until marriage delayed having sex about one-third longer than comparable teens who had not pledged, the analysis showed. However, the effectiveness of pledging depended on the student’s age. Among older teens (18 and older), pledging had no effect. Among 16 and 17 year olds, pledgers delayed sex significantly compared to non-pledgers. Among the youngest teens, the effect of pledging depended strongly on the social environment of the teen’s school.

Although the analysis showed that pledgers delayed sexual intercourse, it also indicated that among those teens who eventually did begin to have intercourse, pledgers were less likely to use contraception than were non-pledgers. […]

The researchers found that the effectiveness of pledging among the youngest teens depended on the characteristics of their school. In socially “open” schools – those in which students had a large number of friends and romantic ties outside the school – the effectiveness of pledging increased with the number of students who pledged. In fact, each one percent increase in the proportion of students pledging resulted in a two percent increase in delaying sexual intercourse. Pledgers appeared to need the social support of fellow pledgers in order to remain abstinent.

The researchers observed a very different effect in socially “closed” schools. In these schools – where most friendships and romantic ties occur within the school – a higher percentage of pledgers actually decreased the pledge’s effectiveness. If comparatively few adolescents in these schools pledged, pledging was effective in delaying sexual intercourse. However, if 30 percent or more of the students pledged, pledgers were no more likely to delay sexual intercourse than were non-pledgers.

I have no idea whether Valley would be considered an “open” or “closed” school. It is so large that presumably most students have friends within the school. However, when I was at Valley in the 1980s, a significant number of students had friends at other high schools whom they knew through church groups or extracurricular activities.

Whether or not Valley’s social networks tend to remain within the school, it is critical for the abstinence pledgers to understand how to protect themselves whenever they do decide to have sexual relationships. An eight-year study released in 2005 also underscored this point:

Teenagers who take virginity pledges — public declarations to abstain from sex — are almost as likely to be infected with a sexually transmitted disease as those who never made the pledge, an eight-year study released yesterday found.

Although young people who sign a virginity pledge delay the initiation of sexual activity, marry at younger ages and have fewer sexual partners, they are also less likely to use condoms and more likely to experiment with oral and anal sex, said the researchers from Yale and Columbia universities.

“The sad story is that kids who are trying to preserve their technical virginity are, in some cases, engaging in much riskier behavior,” said lead author Peter S. Bearman, a professor at Columbia’s Institute for Social and Economic Research and Policy. “From a public health point of view, an abstinence movement that encourages no vaginal sex may inadvertently encourage other forms of alternative sex that are at higher risk of STDs.”

Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa’s website has tons of information and links for teenagers here.

The topics covered include developing sexuality, preventing unplanned pregnancies and sexually-transmitted diseases, as well as this page on why “It’s OK to say, ‘No Way!’” to teen sex.

Maybe someone out there who knows the inner workings of EMILY’s List can explain to me why this group has not put money behind Becky Greenwald, the Democrat challenging loyal Republican foot-soldier Tom Latham in Iowa’s fourth Congressional district.

I have been going over the list of Democratic women running for Congress whom EMILY’s List is supporting, with a particular focus on the six challengers most recently added to this group in early August. I do not mean to knock any of those candidates, and I recognize that every race has its own dynamic.

However, after comparing Greenwald’s race to those of other candidates, I remain puzzled that EMILY’s list is not more involved in IA-04.  

Follow me after the jump for more.

I’ll put up my weekly calendar of events sometime tomorrow, but I wanted to make sure to post these event announcements quickly:

Des Moines, Iowa – On Monday, September 15th, former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig and Sarah Sewall, Faculty Director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, will visit Iowa on behalf of the Obama campaign.  Danzig and Sewall will hold national security forums in Grinnell, Marshalltown and Cedar Falls to discuss Senator Obama’s plans to move America in a new direction and make our country safer.

The details of the events are:

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 15TH, 2008

12:30 PM CDT

National Security Forum with Richard Danzig and Sarah Sewall

Grinnell College, Joe Rosenfield Center – Room 209B, 1115 8th Ave in Grinnell

3:15 PM CDT

National Security Forum with Richard Danzig and Sarah Sewall

Iowa Veterans Home – Malloy Hall Bird Lounge

1301 Summit Street in Marshalltown

5:30 PM CDT

National Security Forum with Richard Danzig and Sarah Sewall

University of Northern Iowa, Maucker Student Union – Elm Room, 113 Mauker Union in Cedar Falls

The Des Moines Register features its latest Iowa poll in the Sunday edition, showing Barack Obama leading John McCain 52 percent to 40 percent among likely voters. The poll surveyed 801 Iowans by telephone, including 616 who said they would definitely vote in November.

If you click the link you can read the exact wording of questions asked, but it’s not clear whether the likely voter screen involved anything other than whether a person said he or she would definitely vote.

It’s the second poll in a row to show Obama above 50 percent in Iowa, with a double-digit lead. A Time/CNN poll taken after McCain selected Sarah Palin but before Palin and McCain spoke at the Republican convention showed Obama beating McCain 55-40 in Iowa, leading in every region of the state and even among rural voters.

Other findings from the Des Moines Register’s new Iowa poll:

Just 18 percent of respondents think the country is headed in the right direction, while 74 percent say it is on the wrong track.

George Bush is at 25 percent approval, 71 percent disapproval. Repeat after me: most unpopular president in history!

Tom Harkin leads Christopher Reed in the U.S. Senate race by 53 percent to 34 percent.

Chuck Grassley’s approval rating is still high at 69 percent. Democrats’ only hope is to pick up so many Senate seats this year that Grassley decides to throw in the towel before the 2010 election. He hasn’t been getting along too well with Iowa Republicans lately, and it’s never fun serving in the minority in Congress.

I love that McCain and Sarah Palin will waste part of this Thursday campaigning at the Eastern Iowa Airport outside Cedar Rapids. Sorry, but Iowa is not really a swing state in this year’s presidential race.

I learned today that in addition to receiving help from the Patriot Corps, Rob Hubler just got another big boost in his campaign against jackass award-winning incumbent Steve King.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee put Iowa’s fifth district on its list of “Races to Watch.”

Daily Kos user 2laneIA wrote a great diary about what that designation means, along with other reasons that Hubler is poised to retire Steve King.

I encourage you to click over and read that piece, which includes data from an fifth district poll showing that King is vulnerable. Here are a couple of my favorite passages in 2laneIA’s piece:

Steve King seems to be barely running.  He has no campaign organization, has made fewer than ten town hall appearances in August, (where he was haunted by an infestation of giant chickens for refusing to debate), and is relying on the same old tired wedge issues such as immigration and gay marriage to get the electorate worked up.

By contrast, Hubler has opened campaign offices across the district and has a good field campaign running.   He has been campaigning for months, appearing at county fairs and chamber of commerce meetings in 32 counties.

[…]If Rob makes some significant gains before the end of September, the DCCC will open their wallets in time for some effective media.  This race is a two-fer.  Defeating King isn’t just taking away one more GOP congressional vote and electing a great progressive Democrat.

The DCCC may become more actively involved in this “race to watch” if they like what they see over the next few weeks.

You can help convince them to get involved by donating to Hubler’s campaign today. Then ask a few of your friends to donate as well.

If you live in Iowa’s first, second or third Congressional districts, you are already represented by safe Democratic incumbents. Put some of your money behind a strong challenger trying to turn IA-05 blue.  

cross-posted at La Vida Locavore

Sometimes one small step against confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) leads to another.

Over at Iowa Independent, Jason Hancock reports that

A member of the state’s Environmental Protection Commission who has been labeled by critics as “pro-factory farms” has stepped down.

Ralph Klemme, a former Republican state representative from LeMars, resigned from the nine-person oversight panel, which is part of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, late last week. He told the Coalition to Support Iowa’s Farmers that the commission’s “increasing tilt against agriculture” was his main reason to step down.

The commission’s recent vote to reject permits for two hog confinements in Dallas County appears to have been a major factor in Klemme’s decision.

I was against Klemme’s appointment to this commission in 2007 because of his involvement with corporate agriculture groups.

My suspicions were warranted. In a statement welcoming Klemme’s resignation, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement recounted his record of looking out for agribusiness instead of the environment:

Klemme voted in May to approve a large hog factory in Greene County that was overwhelmingly opposed by local residents, county officials and local business leaders. He also voted against a common-sense rule that would have limited the amount of manure that factory farm owners could be spread on soybean crops.

Governor Chet Culver should replace Klemme with someone committed to protecting the environment. Otherwise why call it an Environmental Protection Commission?

I am hopeful because several of Culver’s appointments to this body have been quite good.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t underestimate the clout of corporate agriculture groups that will lobby the governor to replace Klemme with a person who is equally sympathetic to their interests. We saw this summer that agriculture trumped the environment on the task forces associated with the Rebuild Iowa Commission.

Whoever takes Klemme’s place on the Environmental Protection Commission, I view his resignation as a healthy sign. The majority of commission members are not willing to look the other way regarding the environmental impacts of CAFOs.

Here are the details:

Rally with Joe Biden

Paul R. Knapp Animal Learning Center

Iowa State Fairgrounds

East University Ave. and East 30th St.

Des Moines, IA 50317

Monday, September 8th

Doors Open: 2:15 p.m.

Program Time: 3:15 p.m.

RSVP

http://iowa.barackobama.com/bi…

The event is free and open to the public; tickets are not required but an RSVP is encouraged. Space is available on a first come, first served basis.

For security reasons, do not bring bags. Please limit personal items. No signs or banners allowed.

I won’t be there this afternoon, but I would love to read a first-person account of the event. If you were there, please post a comment in this thread, or write a diary and I will promote it to the front page.

Here’s an example of a good write-up of a John McCain/Sarah Palin town-hall meeting in New Mexico.

This diary about a Biden event in Florida has lots of pictures and YouTubes.

If you don’t have a camera with you, just write what you can remember about Biden’s speech, how he answered questions, the mood in the crowd, or anything you found interesting about the event.

David Yepsen has a good column in Sunday’s Des Moines Register urging Iowa’s political parties to improve the caucus system. He reasons that Iowa is less likely to retain its first-in-the-nation status if our state parties do not correct some of the flaws in the caucus process.

I would go further and state that Iowa does not deserve to remain first unless the parties make some changes in the caucus system. Actually, if I were in charge of reforming the nominating process, I would ban caucuses for the purposes of presidential selection. The parties in Iowa will never adopt primaries, though, because of New Hampshire’s law stating that it must hold the first primary.

After the jump I’ll go over the reforms Yepsen proposes, which would go a long way toward addressing the flaws in the Iowa caucus system. I will then add a few ideas of my own.

For background, here are links to the diaries I wrote last year on the Iowa caucus system:

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 1 (basic elements of the caucus system)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 2 (corrects an error in part 1 and discusses who is over-represented and who is under-represented when delegates are counted)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 3 (why it’s hard to turn out caucus-goers)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 4 (more about why caucus turnout is low)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 5 (on second choices and caucus math)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 6 (on how precinct captains help their candidates before caucus night)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 7 (why it’s hard to figure out how well the candidates are doing in Iowa)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 8 (on the many ways to win your precinct)

How the Iowa caucuses work, part 9 (analyzes common arguments made in favor of the caucus system, along with my response to those arguments)

because if it were I would have to cover Republican candidate Dave Hartsuch a lot more often. He’s the social conservative who beat longtime moderate incumbent Maggie Tinsman in the 2006 Republican primary for Iowa Senate district 41. His main campaign strategy against Congressman Bruce Braley seems to be to repeat right-wing talking points with no basis in fact.

However, I noticed in Sunday’s Des Moines Register that Hartsuch is staking out new ground by criticizing Braley’s support for bicycling:

Braley has joined the Congressional Bike Caucus, a group aimed at promoting safer roads, more bikeways, convenient bike parking and increased recognition of cycling. He is a freshman lawmaker representing Iowa’s 1st District, where bicycling has grown in popularity as a green method of transportation.

State Sen. David Hartsuch, a Bettendorf Republican who is opposing Braley’s bid for re-election in November, said he is not against bicycling. But Hartsuch has a different view on federal involvement in bicycling.

“I don’t think it’s a proper federal function to put money into bicycling,” Hartsuch said. “I think the federal government exists for national defense and the promoting of the general welfare. I think states are quite capable of building their own bicycle ways, and I don’t think the federal government should be having a national bicycle network. It’s not the same as a national highway or the interstate highway system. Bicycling is a rather local thing.”

Braley recently told reporters in Des Moines that one of his priorities is expanding the availability and quality of Iowa’s more than 1,000 miles of multipurpose recreational trails.

He also wants to restore the 52-mile Cedar Valley Nature Trail in northeast Iowa, which sustained millions of dollars in flood damage.

Hartsuch must be joking. Does he have any idea how many local road projects would never get built without federal funding? The proposed northeast Polk County beltway is a perfect example of a road that would benefit only a small number of central Iowa residents and property owners, but would require hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding.

Fortunately, Braley is under no threat whatsoever. Iowa’s first district has a partisan index of D+4, based on how it voted in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. But Democrats have substantially increased their voter registration edge in IA-01 since then. Also, Barack Obama’s coattails are likely to help Braley in his eastern Iowa.

Furthermore, Braley had $419,222 cash on hand as of June 30, while Hartsuch had raised $16,661 for his Congressional bid and had $12,664 cash on hand.

So, I don’t plan to write much about the Braley-Hartsuch race this fall. But don’t let that discourage Bleeding Heartland readers from posting a diary here if there is any interesting news from the first district campaign.

Getting back to transportation policy, I learned from this Register article that Congressman Dave Loebsack of Iowa’s second district and Congressman Leonard Boswell of Iowa’s third district are also in the Congressional Bike Caucus. Good for them.

Since Boswell sits on the House Transportation Committee (like Braley), I hope we can count on him to support new priorities in the highway bill due to be considered by Congress in 2009. I would also like to see Boswell and Braley join Loebsack in backing efforts to make transportation policy part of any forthcoming legislation on global warming.

The members of the Rebuild And Grow Board of Directors submitted a public petition to the Cedar Rapids City Council this week requesting an intensive one-year plan for dealing with flood recovery and reconstruction in the city.

Rebuild And Grow is an affiliate of Beacon of Hope/New Orleans, and its leaders consulted with disaster recovery groups in New Orleans in forming the recommendations.

The full text of Rebuild And Grow’s petition to the Cedar Rapids City Council is after the jump. The council is expected to respond in writing within a week.

If you would like to send comments or support for this citizen petition to the mayor and council members, click here.

Rebuild and Grow has also written “a ten page report on what we learned during our intensive training and internship with Neighborhood Self-Help Disaster Recovery Groups in New Orleans.” To request a copy of that report, send an e-mail to floodsurvivor AT aol.com.

                                                   

I don’t see much evidence that Barack Obama has a problem with women voters. He leads among women by more than Al Gore or John Kerry did at the same time during their own presidential campaigns. The most recent Iowa poll shows Obama leading by six overall but by 12 among Iowa women.

(UPDATE: A new national poll commissioned by EMILY’s list shows Obama leading among women by 12. He leads among women of all age groups, but his narrowest margin is among baby boomer women. Like Digby said, Don’t put baby boomer in the corner.)

Among purveyors of conventional wisdom, however, there is still a perception that Obama has work to do among women voters, and particularly the women who preferred Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

The Obama campaign has been scheduling women’s outreach events to address this issue. Today Governor Kathleen Sebelius is campaigning around central Iowa, and one of her appearances is a lunch in Des Moines specifically geared toward women.

Last Friday I attended a different women’s event featuring Dana Singiser. She served as Director of Women’s Outreach for Clinton’s presidential campaign before joining the Obama campaign as Senior Adviser for the Women’s Vote.

Singiser wrote the Obama campaign memo on John McCain’s “woman problem,” released earlier this week.

Join me after the jump for more.

The Progressive Patriots Fund, chaired by Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, is holding an online vote to determine which of nine featured candidates will receive a $5,000 donation. Both Becky Greenwald and Rob Hubler are on the list.

You can cast your vote on this page and read short bios of all the featured candidates on this page.

Please vote and tell your friends about this opportunity to raise more money for your candidate.

2laneIA posted a great diary at Daily Kos with photos of activists in chicken suits outside one of Representative Steve King’s recent town-hall forums. Do click over, not just for the pictures. I love this line:

We used to think King was a chicken hawk.  Now he’s just plain old chicken.

I also enjoyed the way 2laneIA referred to the recent publicity stunt by King and other House Republicans as “the Exxon Sleepover Camp on the House floor.”

Background on King’s excuse for not debating Rob Hubler is here.

Hubler staff and volunteers will be out canvassing in more than a dozen towns today. Go here for more details.

Go to Hubler’s campaign website to get more involved in his effort to send Steve King into early retirement.

UPDATE: Anyone in southeast Iowa have a chicken suit? Apparently King is doing a fundraiser with Mariannette Miller-Meeks, the GOP candidate against Dave Loebsack, on Monday, August 18 at 6 pm at The Drake in Burlington.

Rob Hubler, Democratic candidate for Congress in the fifth district, will speak at the Iowa State Fair on Wednesday, August 13. You can catch him at the Des Moines Register’s soap box on the Grand Concourse at 2:30 pm. According to an e-mail I received from the campaign, “Rob will be talking about our changing energy needs, his plan to strengthen our economy, and our continuing commitment to our veterans.”

The e-mail adds:

If you can’t be there in person join us by listening to Rob at 11 o’clock [on August 13] on Jan Michelson’s radio show on WHO-1040AM broadcast live from the State Fair.

I won’t be at the fair on Wednesday, and I may not be near a radio that morning, but I want to welcome Hubler to Des Moines by reminding Bleeding Heartland readers of five things you can do to help him send Steve King into early retirement.

1. Donate to his campaign. King has more money than Hubler, as most incumbents do, but his cash on hand as of June 30 was only about $243,000–hardly an intimidating war chest by Congressional standards. The grassroots should be able to help Hubler narrow the money gap substantially.

2. Sign up for one of the 11 canvasses Hubler’s campaign is organizing for this Sunday, August 17:

Sunday marks our first large door-to-door operation and we need your help to talk to friends and neighbors about Rob’s vision for the future.  Nothing is more effective than having a neighbor drop-by their door with a piece of literature about Rob.  King will be pushing the same tired messages- but with your help we can show Iowa that there is a clear choice in this election and that Rob Hubler is the candidate who will best represent us in Washington; but we can’t win without your help!

Please contact Beth at our Council Bluffs office (712) 352-2077 or email her at beth@hublercongress.com to meet up with supporters near you. Don’t forget to bring two friends to join you!

We will be having canvass parties in the following towns:

Council Bluffs                                   Creston              

Clarinda                                           Sioux City

Spencer                                           Spirit Lake

Onawa                                             Storm Lake

Le Mars                                           Lamoni

Carroll

If you don’t see your town listed, we will be coming your way soon; contact us to help set up a joint canvas in your area.

I just came across this research paper on why canvassing is such an effective tool for reaching voters. Haven’t had a chance to read it yet, but it looks interesting.

Incidentally, Hubler will be at AtlanticFest this Saturday, August 16, so spread the word if you have friends or family nearby.

3. Kick in a few more bucks to Hubler’s campaign.

Every dollar you give now is worth several dollars in October. Even if you gave recently, can you afford another ten bucks?

$10 buys a canvass packet (clipboard, literature, etc) that volunteers need to get Rob’s message to voters.

4. Keep your eye and your camera on Steve King. Douglas Burns listed King’s town hall meeting schedule at Iowa Independent. Click the link for details about events in Sioux Center and Sioux City on August 15, Council Bluffs, Red Oak, Creston and Denison on August 19, and Spencer and Storm Lake on August 22.

August 11 marked two years since the notorious “Macaca moment”, which started to turn the tide against Virginia Senator George Allen in his race against Jim Webb. It couldn’t have happened if S.R. Sidarth hadn’t caught Allen on tape trying to bully and humiliate him with a racist slur.

The “Macaca” story launched a media narrative about Allen’s racial insensitivity, and blogger Mike Stark pushed the ball further down the field a couple of weeks later by shouting out a question no journalist would have dared to ask the senator (click the link for details). The Allen campaign’s denials led to a wave of news reports about the way Allen had casually used racial slurs before holding public office.

We all know King likes to shoot off his mouth. He appears to be incapable of feeling embarrassed by his ravings, but the broader public may not be so forgiving.

If you don’t have a camera, ask to borrow a friend’s camera or simply go and take detailed notes of any offensive comments. (You might need a large sheet of paper.)

5. Talk a few friends or relatives into donating to Hubler’s campaign. Tell them about this race and send them the link to Hubler’s website. We’ve got a strong candidate and need to get more Democrats engaged in the fifth district contest.

I was reading the Press-Citizen today, and local rabblerowser Donald Baxter hit on a brilliant idea. Why doesn't Iowa have an “arts license plate”? We already have the highly successful REAP plate, a heritage plate, an education plate, and most recently a “share the road” plate that benefits the Iowa Bicycle Coalition. (Just look at all the specialty plates the state already offers!)Iowa should join other states like Florida and California in offering a specialty Arts plate, with the proceeds going toward a central organization like the Iowa Arts Council.

Here is an example design by Mr. Baxter (used with permission). An added bonus is that it makes use of the currently endangered Jackson Pollock painting at the University of Iowa Museum of Art.

Here is a link as well to the original blog post by Mr. Baxter. I think it's a great idea, and if you do as well–it might be worth bringing up to our local candidates.

Mike Glover of the Associated Press wrote a piece this week on the huge money advantage that Senator Tom Harkin and Iowa’s five U.S. House incumbents have over their opponents.

I’ll have more to say on this topic in future posts, but for now I want to note one thing: although nearly all incumbents are able to outspend their opponents, that advantage is not always enough to overcome a national tidal wave toward the other party.

Bruce Braley, Dave Loebsack and Leonard Boswell all represent districts with a Democratic tilt (of varying degrees) in what is likely to be a very big Democratic year.

The odds-makers might favor Tom Latham and Steve King now, but in a big year for the challenger’s party, money and the other advantages of incumbency are not always enough to win.

Just ask Neal Smith, who was an 18-term incumbent and had more clout than any Iowan currently serving in the U.S. House. I can’t find campaign finance statistics going back that far, but I would bet that he spent more trying to keep his seat in 1994 than Republican Greg Ganske spent in taking him down.

Democratic House Speaker Tom Foley spent “what aides say may total $1.5 million to $2 million, a staggering amount for a House race” in 1994, but he still lost to George Nethercutt in Washington’s fifth district.

Chris Bowers had the most accurate final House forecast in 2006. But what did he write in his first forecast following several states’ primaries in September of that year?

NH-01 drops off the board since upset winner Shea-Porter has only 3% of her opponent’s cash

And in his final House update, published on November 6, 2006, Bowers still had Shea-Porter’s race in the “likely Republican” category, commenting, “If she wins, Carol Shea-Porter will become a legend.”

Her shocking victory in New Hampshire’s first district over an entrenched Republican incumbent was indeed legendary.

Obviously, it’s better for a challenger to have as much money to spend as possible, which is why you should donate to Rob Hubler and Becky Greenwald, and why I would like to see our ultra-safe Democratic incumbents giving more to the DCCC and DSCC.

But I strongly disagree with the contention that a money advantage makes Tom Latham and Steve King as safe as Iowa’s Democratic incumbents this year.

UPDATE: In the comments, riverdog9 asked why I would encourage people to give to the DCCC instead of directly to the candidates. That was not my intention, and I apologize for any misunderstanding.

To clarify, individual Democratic voters should give directly to the Congressional candidates, unless you’re one of those people who can afford to give more than the maximum donation of $2,300 to a candidate for federal office. In that case, you should give $2,300 directly to the candidate and any extra money to interests groups that are supporting that candidate.

Safe Democratic incumbents should give more to the DCCC and DSCC, because campaign finance law allows unlimited transfers of funds from members of Congress to those committees, and unlimited expenditures by those committees on behalf of candidates in individual districts.

The U.S. House is in its summer recess, but a bunch of Republicans are giving speeches in the chamber calling for a special session to deal with energy policy.

When there’s an opportunity to score political points without accomplishing anything on behalf of constituents, you know Steve King will be on the scene. Rob Hubler, Democratic candidate to represent Iowa’s fifth district, was rightly dismissive:

Hubler accuses King of grandstanding rather than working to find a “real” resolution. “This is another example of how it is better to go before the camera and try to make some kind of a show out of something,” Hubler says.

Hubler opposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, something King supports, as Hubler says there’s a less than six-month supply of oil there and that wouldn’t dramatically reduce the price of gasoline. “I think we need to have a comprehensive approach. We need to understand that we have gotten to where we are because of bickering and because of arguing and because of a lack of congress — Republicans and Democrats — to really look at the future and say, ‘What do we need to be doing?,'” Hubler says. “We need to be looking at alternative, green answers. We need to get nuclear power onto the discussion table.”

Personally, I believe expanding nuclear power is too expensive and too risky, but by all means make it part of a comprehensive discussion on energy policy. I believe its shortcomings will be exposed when compared to less costly options for generating more power or reducing our electricity usage.

But getting back to the point of this diary, it’s typical of Steve King to seize any chance for a monologue as opposed to engaging in real dialogue. Last week King refused an invitation from the Sioux City Journal and the League of Women Voters to debate Hubler. King’s letter to the editor of the Sioux City Journal is after the jump, along with Hubler’s statement on the importance of public debates.

I was amused by King’s excuse for not participating in this debate. He blamed the Sioux City Journal and its “attacks on my character,” adding:

If there are to be Congressional debates, they will take place in a neutral environment.

I wonder what kind of “neutral environment” would satisfy King. He was willing to spend at least an hour answering friendly questions from his fans on a constituent conference call, but his staff screened out SW Iowa Guy’s efforts to ask him about debating Hubler.

I predict that King will find excuses for rejecting all invitations to debate, unless they come from some group like the pro-corporate Club for Growth, which gave King a 98 percent rating on its latest scorecard.

UPDATE: I missed this hilarious passage from John Deeth’s write-up at Iowa Independent:

King spoke Monday on a darkened House floor, next to a giant photo of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, with the words “I am trying to save the planet” underneath.

King said Pelosi has decided that “saving the planet is worth more than saving the Homo sapiens.”

You’ll never catch Steve King trying to save the planet, that’s for sure!

By the way, Representative Tom Latham is echoing the House Republicans’ talking points on energy policy. Becky Greenwald got it just right in her response:

Greenwald suggests Latham should be embarrassed by his fellow Republicans who are staging a sort of sit-in in the U.S. House of Representatives. “I just look at it more as an election year prank and we have serious work that needs to be done and compromising and discussion that needs to happen and not be trying to pull stunts to garner attention,” Greenwald says.

Greenwald would support drilling for oil along a greater expanse of the U.S. coastline if oil companies prove they’ve fully explored the 68 million acres of ocean ground they’ve already been awarded leases to tap for oil.  “When you think about it, that’s two times the physical size of the state of Iowa and so I’d like to understand why we don’t make use of those lands and that offshore drilling that’s already available,” she says.

If she’s elected to congress, Greenwald says she’ll back greater federal support of alternative energy industries like wind energy, which she says puts Iowans to work in good-paying jobs that cannot be outsourced. “We absolutely need a comprehensive energy policy that’s going to take us into the next several decades,” she says. “We need to be addressing it from all angles.”

Latham went up on the radio last week with an ad touting his support for more offshore oil drilling in the U.S. His rhetoric is consistent with a new Republican strategy document calling on Congressional candidates to put energy issues front and center in their campaigns.

Let’s improve Iowa’s representation in Congress. Get involved in Hubler’s campaign or in Greenwald’s campaign if you have time or money to spare.

cross-posted around the blogosphere

On Saturday a fundraising solicitation arrived in the mail from Iowa Senator Tom Harkin. It asked me to confirm delivery of the enclosed “supporter card” within ten days, and also to “help keep my 2008 re-election campaign on the road to victory” with a special contribution.

Funny, I wasn’t aware that Harkin needed any extra help. Everyone in the election forecasting business has labeled this seat safe for him. The available polling shows Harkin with a comfortable lead.

According to Open Secrets, Harkin had $4.1 million cash on hand at the end of the second quarter. His little-known Republican opponent, Christopher Reed, has raised a total of $11,765 for his Senate campaign and had $292 (two hundred and ninety-two dollars) on hand as of June 30.

Harkin’s letter got me thinking that we need a “Use It Or Lose It” campaign for 2008.

Join me after the jump for more.

Life has to be a little discouraging for Christopher Reed, the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Iowa. Everyone in the election forecasting business has labeled this seat safe for Tom Harkin. The available polling shows Harkin with a comfortable lead.

According to Open Secrets, Harkin has raised more than $8 million since he was last re-elected to the Senate. The incumbent had $4.1 million cash on hand as of June 30.

In contrast, Reed has raised a total of $11,765 for his Senate campaign and had $292 on hand as of June 30.

But look on the bright side: Cityview went through Reed’s FEC filings and found that the Republican has used about $600 in campaign funds to buy new clothes. Also, he’s had several haircuts on the campaign’s dime this year.

Presumably Reed ran for Senate to build his name recognition among Iowa Republicans for future races. But even if he never runs for office again, he’ll have a few suits, shirts and ties to show for his trouble.

Iowa Politics has this press release from Representative Tom Latham’s campaign about

a statewide radio ad highlighting Latham’s work to lower gas and energy prices for Iowa families.

The sixty second ad reinforces Latham’s continued commitment to renewable energy but also discusses the need for Congress to work immediately to increase domestic energy supplies that America controls.

“$4.00 a gallon gas hurts Iowa families,” notes Latham in the ad. “And they’re frustrated with leaders in Congress for not doing more about it – and they have every right to be.”

“I have always been, and will continue to be, a strong supporter of alternative energy research and production, but we need to work for solutions that get Iowans from point A to point B without busting their family budget.”

Latham has been working in Congress on legislation aimed at increasing our domestic supply of affordable that will lower gas and energy prices through the increased use of our current resources, to include off-shore drilling and drilling in ANWR.

Latham recently told Iowa Independent that Republicans can ride high gas prices to victory this November. It’s not clear to me why this is a big selling point for the GOP–shouldn’t they have been doing something to reduce our dependence on foreign oil during the years Republicans controlled Congress as well as the presidency?

Anyway, some Republicans clearly believe that this issue will save them from an otherwise hostile political environment. Last week John McCain started running a television ad blaming Barack Obama for high gas prices because Obama opposes more offshore oil drilling.

The rapid response from Becky Greenwald’s campaign points out the various misleading aspects of Latham’s radio ad:

For Immediate Release                                                                      Contact: Erin Seidler

July 29, 2008                                                                                                         515-537-4465

Latham Runs Misleading Ad on Drilling To Divert From Votes Against Immediate Gas Price Relief

Waukee, IA – This week, Tom Latham’s campaign released a radio ad misleading voters about offshore drilling. Experts agree that offshore drilling will do nothing to lower gas prices for seven to ten years, and its clear that this ad is a diversion from Latham’s votes against opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on existing leases. (McClatchy, 6/18/08)

“I’m running for Congress because of these sort of shenanigans. Latham is trying to get Iowans to think about leasing 2,000 more acres when 68 million acres already leased are open, untapped and will lower prices. Latham is trying to divert attention from his failure to support immediate relief through opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on existing leases,” said Becky Greenwald, Candidate for Congress in Iowa’s 4th District. “Is it too much to ask for leaders to be honest with us?”

Unfortunately, Latham, like George Bush decided to play politics with gas prices. Last week, he voted against a bill that would release 70 million barrels of oil from the strategic oil reserve to bring relief from high gas prices. This bill would bring almost immediate relief to high gas prices. (H. Res. 6578)

And two weeks ago, Latham voted against a bill to force oil companies to drill on existing leases. There are 68 million acres of federal land already leased by oil companies. That is two times the size of the state of Iowa available for energy production that is now sitting idle. (H.R. 615)

Instead, Democrats in Congress and Becky Greenwald are fighting for a comprehensive energy policy that includes in the short term, opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on almost 68 million acres of existing leases.

In the long term, Becky will fight to invest in a green energy industry here in Iowa by investing in ethanol, wind energy, biodiesel, and other homegrown, alternative forms of energy.

“I know that investing in renewable fuels will reduce our reliance on foreign oil and bring down gas prices and create thousands if not hundreds of thousands of jobs in rural America, including Iowa’s 4th District,” Greenwald continued. “It’s time for a solution, not diversion tactics.”

The bolded passages were bold in the original, by the way.

Latham’s advocacy of more oil drilling will do nothing to solve our energy problems. Even the president of the Teamsters Union, which has long supported increased oil drilling in the U.S., declared last week that

“We must find a long-term approach that breaks our dependence on foreign oil by investing in the development of alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal power.”

Furthermore, public opinion on this matter may not be where Latham thinks it is. The polling firm Rasmussen says the public is divided on whether more drilling is the answer:

A new Rasmussen Reports national survey, taken last night (Monday), finds that 45% think placing more restrictions on energy speculators is more important , while 42% take the opposite view that allowing offshore oil drilling is more important.

A major partisan divide on the issue, like the split in Congress, is evident, however. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Republicans say lifting the ban is the highest priority, while 59% of Democrats – and 48% of unaffiliated voters — say controlling speculators is more important. Only 29% of unaffiliateds say lift the ban first.

Unaffiliated or “no-party” voters have a slim plurality among registered voters in Iowa’s fourth district, and there are about 8,000 more Democrats than Republicans in the district.

If Rasmussen’s findings are accurate, it seems that Latham is out of step with his district.

If you reject Latham’s misleading spin on energy policy, please donate to Greenwald’s campaign to help her respond on the air. This race will be very competitive if she can raise enough money to get her message out. Remember, the fourth district has a partisan index of D+0, meaning that its vote in 2004 closely matched the nationwide partisan split.

Final note: Latham’s press release says the radio ad is running statewide. That’s a lot more expensive than just running the ad in fourth district markets.

Is he trying to raise his profile outside his district to pave the way for a gubernatorial bid in 2010? If he loses to Greenwald, he could start campaigning for governor immediately. But even if he wins re-election, serving in Congress isn’t much fun when you’re in the minority party.  

Douglas Burns has the story at Iowa Independent: Joe Trippi’s consulting firm will be raising money and crafting media messages for Rob Hubler, the Democratic candidate running against Congressman Steve King.

The fifth district is the most Republican in Iowa, but by no means is it out of reach for Hubler.

Big upsets happen in big landslide years, and that’s what this year is shaping up to be.

Hiring Trippi will help Hubler put this race on the map for Washington, D.C.-based groups that could help defeat King, who is reviled by many progressives.

UPDATE: Don’t miss 2laneIA’s diary on this development at Daily Kos.

I’ve added a press release from the Hubler campaign after the jump.

When I suggested yesterday that Steve King is not an effective representative of his constituents in the fifth district, I failed to consider that from time to time he holds telephone town-hall meetings.

SW Iowa Guy suffered through one of those on Tuesday and provides a humorous account of the experience. Callers were screened so that King was able to field only friendly questions during an hour or so on the line.

One passage in Iowa Guy’s post jumped out at me:

Health Care: King stated that he opposes universal access to health care. He advocates Health Savings Accounts and said that families can deposit over $5,000.00 per year to such an account and by the time they are ready to retire they will have over one million dollars. This is all well and good, but most working families can ill afford the necessities, let alone save for health care. This also fails to address the unemployed and under-employed and uninsured.

Do Republicans expect Americans to buy into this Health Savings Account concept? If my husband and I had donated the maximum amount to those accounts for several years, we would still be in the hole without our health insurance (and we are reasonably healthy people).

A typical, complication-free pregnancy with no medical interventions in the hospital cost us around $3,500 each time for prenatal care and delivery, plus about $5,000 each time for the normal hospital stay of less than 48 hours. If I had given birth to either of my children by cesarean section, the hospital bills would have been in the $10,000 to $20,000 range, even without any complications such as baby spending time in the neonatal intensive care unit.

I had a flukey infection this winter that sent me to the hospital for a week and ended up costing somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000 (considering not just the hospital stay, but also the various tests and procedures). That would wipe out years of deposits in a Health Savings Account if we had to rely on one of those instead of health insurance.

If anyone in our family ever got a really expensive illness to treat, such as cancer, you can forget about any private savings account covering the cost.

It’s not realistic to think that families will be able to build up Health Savings Accounts worth a million dollars by the time they retire. Only a small fraction of Americans could afford to do that, and even then they’d have to be lucky and stay healthy in the meantime.

As Iowa Guy notes, a single-payer system modeled on Medicare makes a lot more sense.

Calling all volunteers: if you’ve got a few hours to spare this weekend, the Obama campaign would love to have you participate in one of the 26 neighborhood canvasses they have planned.

Go here to RSVP.

Most of the door-knocking will be on Sunday afternoon, but a few places will do it on Saturday morning or afternoon.

Here are the places and times where canvassing will happen. I have added the county name next to the city or town:

Ames Canvass (Story County)

Sunday 1 pm

Fort Dodge Canvass (Webster County)

Sunday 12 pm

New Hampton Canvass (Chickasaw County)

Sunday 1 pm

Anamosa Canvass (Jones County)

Sunday 2 pm

Fort Madison Canvass (Lee County)

Sunday 1 pm

Newton Canvass (Jasper County)

Sunday 10 am

Cedar Rapids Canvass (Linn County)

Sunday 12 pm

Guttenberg Canvass (Clayton County)

Sunday 1 pm

Ottumwa Canvass (Wapello County)

Sunday 12 pm

Clinton Canvass (Clinton County)

Sunday 2 pm

Indianola Canvass (Warren County)

Sunday 10 am (I haven’t heard of a Sunday morning canvass in Iowa–maybe you should double-check the time when you RSVP)

Sioux City Canvass (Woodbury County)

Sunday 12 pm

Council Bluffs Canvass (Pottawattamie County)

Sunday 12 pm

Iowa City Canvass (Johnson County)

Saturday 10 am

Waterloo Canvass (Black Hawk County)

Sunday 1 pm

Davenport Canvass (Scott County)

Sunday 12 pm

Iowa City Canvass (Johnson County)

Sunday 12 pm

Waukee Canvass (Dallas County)

Sunday 1 pm

Des Moines Canvass (Polk County)

Sunday 1 pm

Knoxville Canvass (Marion County)

Sunday 1 pm

Waverly Canvass (Bremer County)

Saturday 12 pm

Dubuque Canvass (Dubuque County)

Sunday 1 pm

Mason City Canvass (Cerro Gordo County)

Sunday 1 pm

West Des Moines Canvass (Polk County)

Sunday 1 pm

Winterset Canvass (Madison County)

Sunday 12 pm

Des Moines Canvass # 2 (Polk County)

Sunday 1 pm

If you click the link above to RSVP, you will get more details about where and when to meet up.

Please consider posting a diary here afterwards about your experience. Those are fun to read. You don’t have to include photos–you can just tell the story, like icebergslim did here and clarkent did here.

By the way, John McCain’s campaign website now lists contact information for five field offices in Iowa. It’s not clear from that page whether a sixth office will open in southeast Iowa at some point, or whether field operations for southeast Iowa will continue to be run out of the state headquarters in Urbandale, as they appear to be now.

I reported recently that the Obama campaign has 15 field offices open in Iowa, with two more planned in Cedar Rapids and Iowa Falls. I have since heard that there will also be an office opening in West Des Moines, so the total number of offices in this state will be at least 18.  

Campaigns against incumbents are never easy, but Iowa’s fourth Congressional district is very winnable for Becky Greenwald.

When you run for office, certain things are out of your control, like the nationwide political climate or the partisan makeup of the electorate.

Greenwald is fortunate to be challenging Representative Tom Latham this year, when Democrats have their first registration edge in the fourth district since it was redrawn. According to the June 2008 numbers released by the Secretary of State’s office, the fourth district has 128,482 registered Democrats, 120,694 registered Republicans, and 145,223 voters registered with no party affiliation. Also, the national political climate is favorable to Democrats. IA-04 has a partisan index of D+0, meaning that its vote in 2004 closely matched the nationwide partisan split.

Latham told Iowa Independent that Republicans can win this year’s elections by focusing on high gas prices and the Iraq War. However, the National Republican Congressional Committee, which exists to elect Republicans to the U.S. House, has given GOP incumbents very different advice: run on personal and local issues. An NRCC strategy document notes that Republican candidates who lost special Congressional elections this year did not establish “themselves and their local brand in contrast to the negative perception of the national GOP.”

If fourth district residents let national issues guide their votes down-ticket, Greenwald will do well to keep tying Latham to the Iraq War and leadership of the Republican Party.

So what’s standing in her way? The biggest advantage of incumbency is often money, and this race is no exception.

Charlotte Eby, a commentator for the Mason City Globe-Gazette, assessed this race in a recent column:

After the record-breaking turnout at the Iowa caucuses, the Democratic Party has amassed a voter registration advantage that has grown to more than 90,000 in Iowa.

Democrats also will have presidential candidate Barack Obama and U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin at the top of the ticket to help drive turnout. […]

Latham’s had strong Democratic challengers in the past that he’s been able to fend off. But his district, which includes Mason City, Ames and suburban counties surrounding Des Moines, has become more of a swing district as Democratic registration has swelled. Democrats now outnumber Republicans in the district for the first time ever.

Watch for Greenwald’s campaign to paint Latham as a Republican in lockstep with Bush administration policies, a record that might not be popular with the changing electorate.

First though, Greenwald will have to raise enough money to compete with Latham’s war chest, which sat at more than $700,000 as of the last filing period.

If Greenwald is competitive in raising money, the 4th District race could be the race to watch this fall.

David Yepsen’s latest column in the Des Moines Register reaches the same conclusion:

The key for Democrat Greenwald, a 55-year-old former Garst and Pioneer marketing executive from Perry, is money. Will national Democratic money sources – especially Emily’s List – pour dollars into her contest with Latham?

To get them to make that investment, Greenwald must first convince them she’s viable and has got a credible financial base of her own.

So far, it’s been an uphill task. According to the latest campaign-finance disclosure reports, Greenwald had only $81,800 in the bank on June 30. Latham had 10 times that amount: $832,388. Greenwald had to get through a four-way primary in June, then had to suspend fundraising in Iowa during the floods. Donors in the Democratic money centers of Des Moines, Iowa City and Cedar Rapids were preoccupied.

Raising money isn’t the easiest task in the world, but candidates have more control over fundraising than they do over massive shifts toward the other party on various issues and among many different demographic groups.

Rarely can a challenger raise enough cash to match the incumbent’s spending dollar for dollar. But when the wind is at your back, that often isn’t necessary.

Upsets happen in big landslide years. Just look at what happened to Neal Smith, who had represented Iowa’s fourth district since 1958 until Greg Ganske brought him down in the 1994 Republican landslide. Smith had more seniority and clout in 1994 than Latham has now. I couldn’t find information about the candidates’ spending in that race, because the Open Secrets database doesn’t go back that far. But I’ll bet that Ganske did not win by raising more money than Smith. Ganske was boosted by a national Republican wave and partisan shifts following the 1990 census and redistricting.

Greenwald has a big cash-on-hand disadvantage now, but her campaign has been working hard to raise money in July. I’ve received e-mails from personal friends asking me to donate, as well as two letters from the campaign (one signed by Tom Harkin, Leonard Boswell and Bruce Braley, the other signed by Tom and Christie Vilsack).

I’ve already given to her campaign, but my husband and I are digging deeper to donate again this month.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has not reserved any air time in Iowa yet, but they are watching this race, as is EMILY’s list, which seeks to elect pro-choice, Democratic women at all levels of government.

I expect one or both of those groups to get involved in the IA-04 race, assuming Greenwald produces strong numbers this month. The Des Moines and Mason City media markets are not that expensive, compared to districts where many other challengers need to purchase paid media.

The infrastructure will be there to support heavy Democratic turnout in this district. Barack Obama’s campaign has already opened four field offices in IA-04, with a fifth office planned.

Also, the fourth district has been receptive to strong Democratic candidates in recent years. Speaking to Iowa Independent two weeks ago, Greenwald made this point:

“This is not a campaign that was launched on a whim,” she said. “This is not just a campaign that’s based on hope that I’ll do well. Sen. Harkin won 28 of the 28 counties in the 4th District in 2002. The 4th District is the only district in Iowa in which he carried every single county. Gov. Culver, when he ran in 2006, carried 22 of the 28 counties in the 4th District.”

Please donate to Greenwald’s campaign before the end of July.

UPDATE: I didn’t realize Karl Rove was coming to Des Moines today to raise money for Latham. A press release from Greenwald’s campaign is after the jump. Also, you can view this YouTube she taped in response to Rove’s visit:

I love how Greenwald referred to Rove in this clip: “Today, Karl Rove, the man who is too busy to even testify before Congress, is going to be in Iowa raising money for Tom Latham.”

If you’d like to meet Rob Hubler, the man trying to spare Iowans two more years with Steve King in Congress, you’ve got plenty of chances on the county fair circuit this weekend:

Thursday, July 24

1:30 p.m.  Harrison County Fair, Missouri Valley

4:30 p. m. Page County Fair, Clarinda

7:00 p.m.  Union County Fair, Afton

Friday, July 25

12 noon   Adair County Fair, Greenfield

2:15 p.m. Audubon County Fair, Aubudon

      (Aububon fundraiser in evening)

Saturday, July 26

12 noon   Sac County Fair, Sac City

3 p.m.     Plymouth County Fair, LeMars

6 p.m.    Pottawattamie County Fair (Westfair), Council Bluffs

        (Council Bluffs fundraiser in evening)

Sunday, July 27

12 noon    Cass County Fair, Atlantic

5:30 p.m.  Clarke County Fair, Osceola

If you want more details about either of the fundraisers, you can call the Hubler campaign headquarters for information or to RSVP: 712-352-2077

For your reading enjoyment, I give you Texas Nate’s latest diary: King embarrasses Iowa, self again

This guy is all class.

According to the Des Moines Register, about 160 immigrants face deportation “because their U.S. citizen spouses died less than two years after their marriages and before the survivors’ permanent residency applications were approved.”

A bipartisan group in Congress, including some conservative Republicans, is trying to change the law so that these widows’ and widowers’ residency applications can be reviewed individually. Otherwise these unfortunate people are forced to fight deportation while also dealing with a bereavement and in some cases looking after children.

Who’s the one person loudly objecting to this law? None other than fifth district Representative Steve King. In addition to being generally concerned about our “runaway immigration policy,” he has specific problems with the bill:

King also said more protections were needed to ensure immigrant spouses have good moral character or that they planned to come to the United States prior to the spouse’s death.

“A soldier, man or woman, could get drunk in Bangkok, wake up in the morning and be married, as will happen sometimes in places like Las Vegas or Bangkok, be killed the next day, and the spouse who was a product of the evening’s celebration would have then a right to claim access to come to the United States on a green card,” King said.

Remember, this bill would have U.S. immigration officials review applications on a case-by-case basis. I doubt a marriage of drunk people who barely knew each other would be deemed legitimate.

Anyway,

He said he agreed with the sentiment in the bill but Congress cannot take care of “every sad story that we have and if we do that, we are going to create a lot more sad stories in the United States from the people that will take advantage.”

His position has befuddled advocates of changing the penalty […].

“I’ve never come across anybody who actually voiced opposition,” said Brent Renison, an Oregon immigration lawyer […].

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., who sponsored the bill in committee, said the “widow penalty” is one of the top reasons for private relief bills in Congress.

But why do something humane that will also save members of Congress the time they spend on passing these private relief bills?

Better to continue making a name for yourself as the guy who can always think of a reason not to help immigrants.

If Congressman Steve King hadn’t already won the “jackass award,” someone would need to give it to him for the way he behaved at a House Judiciary Committee hearing this week.

It’s no secret that King isn’t interested in the Congress serving as a check or balance on executive power. As we saw just a few weeks ago, King believes former White House spokesman Scott McClellan could have “done this country a favor” by keeping his mouth shut about alleged lawbreaking and lying in the Bush administration.

Apparently not satisfied with his efforts to sidetrack the McClellan hearings, King used one parliamentary trick after another on Tuesday to prevent Democrats on the Judiciary Committee from effectively questioning Douglas Feith, the former number three Pentagon official.

You really have to click over to Dana Milbank’s story for the Washington Post and read the whole thing to fully grasp how disgracefully King behaved. He and Congressman Darrell Issa (the wallet behind the recall of California Governor Gray Davis a few years back) were so disruptive that, according to Milbank, “Three and a half hours later, Feith had become but an asterisk at what was supposed to be his hanging.”

Not that it’s any big deal–Feith was only a key architect of the Bush administration’s policy on torture and false claims about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

As usual, King appears to be proud of his outrageous behavior. I learned from this piece by Douglas Burns that King’s campaign has prominently featured Milbank’s article on the incumbent’s website.

Incidentally, as far as I can tell, King’s campaign site ripped off Milbank’s whole article, rather than posting a link to the Washington Post site with an short excerpt. Are members of Congress subject to copyright law?

Anyway, King is proud to stand in the way of meaningful Congressional oversight of the executive branch. But don’t get the wrong idea. He doesn’t believe Congress should be powerless. Iowa Guy 2.0 recently reminded me that King went on record three years ago saying Congress could abolish federal courts, cut their funding or instruct the Department of Justice not to enforce court rulings if judges didn’t behave.

Separation of powers seems to be too difficult a concept for King to grasp.

Getting rid of King would not only benefit the residents of Iowa’s fifth district, but would also further the cause of proper Congressional oversight. Please kick in some cash to Rob Hubler, the Democratic nominee to represent Iowa’s fifth district.

It’s a Republican-leaning district (R+8), but we just won Mississippi’s first Congressional district, which tilts even more strongly to the GOP.

King has a money advantage, but his cash on hand of $251,000 is not a dominating war chest compared to what other incumbents have at their disposal.

Also, the Iowa wingnuts may be crazy, but they aren’t crazy about John McCain. The GOP presidential candidate will have a much weaker turnout operation in Iowa than Barack Obama, and the editor of the Storm Lake Times thinks King may be vulnerable given the atmosphere of “Republican despondence.”

If I haven’t convinced you with this post or my previous work highlighting King’s more embarrassing moments, take it from Texas Nate, who declared King to be “the worst Congressman of them all” in this MyDD diary. That’s quite a statement coming from Nate. They’ve got some really bad ones representing parts of Texas.

UPDATE: Ted Mallory, who lives in King’s district, has drawn a cartoon about King’s behavior in the Feith hearing:

http://tedstoons.blogspot.com/…

The Center on Sustainable Communities (COSC) sent out an e-mail reminding members that Habitat for Humanity’s eight Restores in Iowa are available to help people affected by the flooding rebuild.

The full text of the e-mail is after the jump. It includes contact information for Restores in Council Bluffs, Davenport, Des Moines, Hiawatha (suburb of Cedar Rapids), Iowa City, Mason City, Sioux City, and Waterloo.

Click here to learn more about COSC’s mission and work in our state.

Last week Senator Tom Harkin announced the winners of his “Building Blue” contest.

Apparently Oskaloosa residents were well-represented among the more than 5,000 Iowans who voted, because Representative Eric Palmer (HD 75) and Senator Tom Rielly (SD 38) were the winners. They will each receive $5,000 from Harkin’s campaign fund.

They already received $2,000 from Harkin’s fund for advancing to the final round of the contest, as did the other Democratic House and Senate candidates listed here.

Both Palmer and Rielly are first-term incumbents being targeted by Republicans. We should be able to hold both seats, especially since the Obama campaign has a field office up and running in Oskaloosa already. But we’ll need all hands on deck, so chip in to their campaigns if you can, and volunteer if you live in the area.