The multimillion-dollar cost of excluding Planned Parenthood as a provider in Iowa’s new family planning program will come directly out of the health and human services budget, Iowa Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Charles Schneider has confirmed to Bleeding Heartland. Republican lawmakers and Governor Terry Branstad have committed to creating a fully state-run program because federal rules do not allow states to disqualify Planned Parenthood from the Medicaid Family Planning Waiver. Under that waiver, federal funds have covered 90 percent of the Iowa Family Planning Network’s costs for many years.

In contrast, the state will be on the hook for every dollar spent on the new family planning services program. According to a fiscal note prepared by non-partisan legislative staff, that program is estimated to “increase General Fund expenditures by $2.1 million in FY 2018 and $3.1 million when implemented for a full year in FY 2019.”

The governor proposed using part of Iowa’s federal Social Services Block Grant funding to cover that cost, which is consistent with spending bills House Republicans approved during the 2015 and 2016 legislative sessions.

Instead, “a general fund appropriation in the health and human services budget” will pay for the new family planning program, Schneider said during an interview following the April 8 legislative forum in Waukee. After reviewing the proposal from the governor’s office, he explained, he chose to file “our own [bill] that didn’t take the money from the Social Services Block Grant.”

It’s understandable that Republican appropriators rejected Branstad’s idea. As Bleeding Heartland discussed here, the Social Services Block Grant is not a reliable funding stream. The U.S. House Ways and Means Committee leader has called for eliminating the grant, and House Republicans voted to do so last year.

But Republican plans to give up millions of federal family planning dollars look even more foolish now than they did a few months ago, when one considers Iowa’s worsening state revenue picture and the huge spending cuts already inflicted on human services.

Becci Reedus, executive director of The Crisis Center of Johnson County, wants state and federal lawmakers to remember that “prevention almost always ends up being cheaper than treatment.” -promoted by desmoinesdem

Our politicians and policymakers will face many important decisions in the coming months. Now more than ever, those leaders need to hear from all of us about the issues impacting our community.

As executive director of The Crisis Center of Johnson County, one of my jobs is to educate our policymakers and the public about the needs of the people we serve. Our programs help thousands of people with diverse needs, but there are some common themes we see among our clients.

Iowa is blessed with an unusually large number of competitive state legislative districts, thanks to our non-partisan redistricting process. Most election years, at least half a dozen Iowa Senate seats and twice as many House seats are in play. Campaign finance reports showing where candidates and party leaders are spending the most money provide the best clue on which legislative races are worth watching.

That said, most years at least one little-noticed candidate pulls off a big upset in an Iowa House or Senate district neither party was targeting. Now-disgraced Kent Sorenson won his first race in 2008, taking a House seat that had been considered safe for Democrats. Two years later, Kim Pearson got no help from GOP leaders en route to winning a House seat where the Democratic incumbent had been unopposed the previous election. Republican Mark Chelgren won an Ottumwa-based Senate district for the first time by ten votes. That seat had been considered so safe that the Democratic incumbent was knocking doors for a colleague in another district during the final weekend. I learned later that internal GOP polling had Chelgren almost 20 points down a couple of seeks before the election.

I can’t shake the feeling that in this strange campaign with two unpopular presidential nominees, something weird will happen in a down-ballot race no one is watching. So before I get back to Bleeding Heartland’s last few battleground Senate and House race profiles, a few words on why I feel a race in Iowa’s southeast corner could produce a shocking result.

What’s on your mind, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread: Some exceptionally sad news caught my eye recently:

A new investigation by the Associated Press and the USA Today network found that in the first six months of 2016, children aged 17 or younger “died from accidental shootings — at their own hands, or at the hands of other children or adults — at a pace of one every other day, far more than limited federal statistics indicate.” Alaska and Louisiana had the highest rates of accidental child shooting. A separate feature in the series focused on three incidents that killed two teenage girls and seriously injured another in Tama County, Iowa.

Government research on accidental gun deaths is nearly non-existent, because more than two decades ago, the National Rifle Association persuaded Congress to defund gun research by the Centers for Disease Control.

Meanwhile, the AP’s Scott McFetridge reported last week on the growing hunger problem in Storm Lake. The problem isn’t lack of jobs–the local unemployment rate is quite low–but a lack of livable wages. Iowa-born economist Austin Frerick mentioned Storm Lake and other towns dominated by meatpacking plants in his guest post here a few months ago: Big Meat, Small Towns: The Free Market Rationale for Raising Iowa’s Minimum Wage.

I enclose below excerpts from all of those stories, along with some good news from the past week:

The African-American Hall of Fame announced four new inductees, who have done incredible work in higher education, criminal justice, community organizing, and the practice of law.

Planned Parenthood marked the 100th anniversary of the first birth control clinic opening in the country on October 16. Click here for a timeline of significant events in the organization’s history.

Drake University Biology Professor Thomas Rosburg will receive this year’s Lawrence and Eula Hagie Heritage Award from the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation. Rosburg is a legend among Iowans who care about native plants, wetlands, and prairie restoration.

Austin Frerick, an Iowa native and economist who has worked at the Institute for Research on Poverty and the Congressional Research Service, examines state assistance to poor children 20 years after federal welfare reform. -promoted by desmoinesdem

Nine-year-old Kaylie moved into a cheap motel after her mother got evicted. They have no refrigerator. Kaylie retrieves ice from the ice machine and fills the sink with it to keep the milk cold. When they have milk. Kaylie is just one of the approximately 110,000 Iowa children living in poverty, up 44 percent since 2000. Frontline profiled Kaylie and several other poor Iowa children in the acclaimed episode “Poor Kids.”

This year marks the 20th anniversary of President Clinton’s Welfare Reform. Prior to the reform, any poor mother and child in this country received a monthly subsistence check. This law changed that. It destroyed that safety net. It removed this promise and left states free to almost eliminate welfare. Politicians promised innovation by devolving power to states on the premise that they would come up with new ways address poverty but that never happened (Iowa’s last innovation meeting occurred in 1996). They promised it would get poor mothers back to work, but the programs proved ineffective (Iowa allocates less than 6% of funding to job assistance).

Most welfare dollars don’t even go directly to poor children anymore. Most states, including Iowa, use this money to supplement funding elsewhere. Twenty years later, there are now more poor kids receiving less support. We have let the bottom fall even further for our most vulnerable.

Iowa should abandon its current failed welfare system and instead enact a Social Security program for all of its children. This idea builds on the simple notion that parents know what is best for their children, and it would remove layers of ineffective bureaucracy.

Happy Labor Day, Bleeding Heartland readers! If you are enjoying a three-day weekend, thank the labor activists from past generations who made it possible. In fact, go ahead and thank the organized labor movement for every weekend off.

The Iowa Policy Project’s latest report on the Cost of Living in Iowa found that “Nearly 114,000 Iowa families”–close to 19 percent of the state’s working households–“do not earn enough to provide for a basic standard of living without public supports, despite one or more full-time wage earners in the family.” Part 1 estimates how much a family needs to get by in Iowa, taking into account expenses for “rent, utilities, food prepared at home, child care, health care, transportation, clothing and other household necessities,” but not “savings, loan payments, education expenses, any entertainment or vacation, social or recreational travel, or meals outside the home.” Part 2 explores how many Iowa families aren’t earning enough to cover essentials, and shows that “rural regions have substantially higher shares of working families with incomes below self-sufficiency.”

For political junkies, Labor Day kicks off the most intense phase of the general election campaign. Candidates at all levels can use help identifying supporters and getting them signed up to vote early. Direct voter contacts are particularly important for state legislative races. I highly recommend Laura Hubka’s 15 tips for volunteers knocking on doors. Two years ago, I posted my own canvassing dos and don’ts.

One of my funniest door-knocking experiences happened on this day last year. I was canvassing in Beaverdale for Des Moines school board candidate Heather Anderson. Normally I would not be out on a holiday, but the school board election was scheduled for September 8, the day after Labor Day. One house on my walk list already had a Heather Anderson sign in the yard. I decided to knock anyway, in case the supporter needed extra literature to give to friends and neighbors, or a reminder about the polling place location and opening hours. During our conversation, the voter said, “You know who else is for Heather? Bleeding Heartland. She’s on our side.” Yeah, I heard that…

Hillary Clinton is scheduled to appear at the Quad Cities Labor picnic later today. I’ll update later with a few links. I enclose below a video her campaign released this week featuring Ruline Steininger, a 103-year-old supporter in Des Moines. Echoing what I’ve heard from many women including former Lieutenant Governor Patty Judge and my mother-in-law, Steininger commented that when she was in high school, the only career options were to become a teacher or a nurse. She views Clinton as “more prepared” than anyone has ever been for the presidency, and also thinks her election would let “little girls know that you can be anything you want to be in this country. People won’t have to wonder whether they’re going to be a school teacher or a nurse. The sky’s the limit now. You can be president.”

I only knew one of my grandparents well. Although I didn’t get many chances to talk politics with my grandmother, I’m confident that if she were still alive, she also would be voting for Clinton. Having been active in the Sioux City Maternal Women’s Health League (later a founding organization in Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa) during the 1940s, she probably would not need to hear more than “defund Planned Parenthood” to turn her off voting for any Republican.

Lisa Desjardins and Daniel Bush reported for National Public Radio this week on the Donald Trump campaign’s “jaw-dropping gap in the ground game.” Clinton has “more than three times the number” of field offices in battleground states. In Iowa, Democrats have at least 25 “coordinated campaign” offices open around the state, possibly more by now. Trump and the Republican Party of Iowa have nine offices open, according to NPR’s data.

Speaking of jaw-dropping: Trump’s volunteers, including those participating online, are being asked to sign an absurdly broad and in some places illegal “non disclosure form.” Among other things, the volunteer must promise not to “demean or disparage” the Trump campaign or any member of Trump’s family or any Trump business, “during the time of your service and at all times thereafter.” Attorneys tell me this document probably would not be enforceable because of legal flaws such as lack of consideration. The illegal part: requiring volunteers to promise that none of their employees will volunteer for Clinton.

Thanks to all the readers whose accounts informed Thursday’s post on Republican message-testing in key Iowa House races. Democratic State Representative Todd Prichard posted on Facebook that his wife was a respondent on one of these calls. Good news: she’s still voting for him, even after hearing all the awful things he supposedly did. I am seeking details about similar telephone surveys that may be ongoing in battleground Iowa Senate districts. My e-mail address is near the lower right corner of this screen.

Governor Terry Branstad wore a pink tie and many colleagues remarked on history made yesterday at the Capitol, as Linda Upmeyer became the first woman to preside over the Iowa House as speaker, as well as the first child of an Iowa legislative leader to rise to the same position. Erin Murphy’s take on the milestone is worth a read.

As in recent years, social issues were almost entirely absent from the leaders’ opening remarks to their Iowa House and Senate colleagues. State budget priorities dominated the comments relating to public policy, with Republicans emphasizing the importance of not spending too much and Democrats emphasizing the need to spend enough on education and other vital services. No one mentioned Branstad’s call to extend the penny sales tax for school infrastructure and divert part of the revenue stream to water programs.

The good news is, the federal government won’t shut down before the end of the current fiscal year on September 30, 2016. The bad news is, members of Congress snuck some awful provisions in the “omnibus” budget bill and package of tax cut or tax credit extensions that just cleared the U.S. House and Senate. You know leaders aren’t proud when they bury news about a deal during another event occupying the political world’s attention, in this case Tuesday night’s Republican presidential debate. I enclose below background on key provisions in the bills, as well as statements from the Iowans in Congress. I will update this post as needed.

The House held separate votes on the “tax extenders” and the omnibus. Republicans were nearly united in support of the tax bill (confusingly named “On Concurring in Senate Amdt with Amdt Specified in Section 3(b) of H.Res. 566”), which passed yesterday by 318 votes to 109 (roll call). The Democratic caucus was split; Naomi Jagoda and Cristina Marcos reported for The Hill that House Democratic leaders “opposed the tax package” but “did not whip their members against it.” Republicans Rod Blum (IA-01), David Young (IA-03), and Steve King (IA-04) all voted for the tax extenders; so did Democratic Representative Dave Loebsack (IA-02), one of 77 House Democrats to do so.

Loebsack was the only Iowan to vote for the omnibus bill, which easily passed this morning by 316 votes to 113 (roll call). Most of the Democratic caucus supported the bill that keeps the federal government open for at least nine more months; just 18 Democrats voted against it.

Although House Speaker Paul Ryan and his team persuaded 150 Republicans to vote for the budget measure, 95 Republicans opposed it, including all three Iowans. Blum and Young appear to have concluded that the bill was simply too expensive. King’s main objection was that none of his nine amendments were included in the final deal. Click through to read the texts of those amendments, which would have barred the use of appropriated funds for: enforcing the 2010 Affordable Care Act (health care reform law); implementing President Barack Obama’s executive orders to provide temporary protection against deportation for some immigrants who entered the country without permission; enforcing the U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide; supporting any activities of Planned Parenthood Federation of America or any of its clinics, affiliates, or successors; implementing or enforcing any change to the U.S. EPA’s Waters of the United States rule; resettling refugees; implementing the multilateral deal struck earlier this year to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons; implementing any regulation that stemmed from the recent international agreement to combat climate change; or expanding the use of H-2B visas.

The Senate combined the tax extenders and budget bills into one package, which passed this morning by 65 votes to 33 (roll call). Iowa’s Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst both voted no; in the statements I’ve enclosed below, Grassley went into greater detail about his reasons for opposing the package. However, earlier this week he released a separate statement bragging about some of the provisions he helped to insert in the tax legislation. Members of Congress from both parties use that sleight of hand.

Among the presidential candidates, Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul voted against the omnibus, Lindsey Graham voted for it, and unbelievably, Marco Rubio missed the vote. What is wrong with this guy? He “has missed more than half of the Senate’s votes since October,” Jordain Carney reported for The Hill. I think not showing up for Senate work will hurt Rubio in Iowa, though not having a strong field operation will hurt him more.

The Senate is now adjourned until January 11 and the House until January 5. During the winter recess, Bleeding Heartland will catch up on some of the Iowa Congressional voting not covered here during the late summer and fall.

The Des Moines metro area has made plenty of “best places” lists during the last five years, but Chamber of Commerce types won’t be bragging about the top ten ranking that appeared last week. After examining “the disparities between white and black Americans in several economic and social measures” across the country, Thomas C. Frohlich and Sam Stebbins of the 24/7 Wall St. website “identified the 10 worst cities for black Americans.” The authors noted, “Four of the cities with the worst racial inequality are in Illinois, two are in Iowa, and all are in the Midwest.”

Follow me after the jump to learn why the Des Moines metro area ranked ninth and the Waterloo/Cedar Falls metro area tenth on this list.

This morning, business owner Desmund Adams became the first Democratic candidate in Iowa’s third Congressional district. His campaign is on the web here as well as on Facebook and Twitter. State Representative Ako Abdul-Samad attended the event and confirmed to me that he will support Adams for Congress. Former State Senator and gubernatorial candidate Jack Hatch was there too and told me he is “encouraging” Adams to run.

I enclose below more background on Adams and five themes from his remarks today, along with details on first-term Representative David Young’s record in those areas.

Leaders in both parties expect IA-03 to be competitive in 2016. Young is on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s target list and in the National Republican Congressional Committee’s incumbent protection program. The latest figures from the Iowa Secretary of State’s office indicate that 150,925 active registered Democrats, 162,921 Republicans, and 162,161 no-party voters live in IA-03. The district covers sixteen counties in central and southwest Iowa. About two-thirds of the Democrats and more than half of all registered voters reside in Polk County, containing Des Moines and most of its suburbs.

I hope to see a competitive Democratic primary, which would help raise the eventual nominee’s profile and likely sharpen his or her skills on the stump. Other potential candidates include State Senator Matt McCoy, former Governor Chet Culver, and Jim Mowrer, the 2014 Democratic nominee against Steve King in IA-04. Since Young’s 2014 opponent Staci Appel ruled out a repeat Congressional bid, I have not heard of any Democratic women actively considering this race, but if one emerges, the EMILY’s List political action committee may get involved on her behalf.  

Four-term Democratic incumbent Dave Loebsack and his three-time Republican challenger Mariannette Miller-Meeks are debating in Iowa City tonight, starting at 7 pm. Iowa Public TV is live-streaming the event here. I’ll post updates after the jump.

Any comments about the race in Iowa’s second Congressional district are welcome in this thread.

UPDATE: The archived video is now available at IPTV’s site. My comments are below.  

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread.

Sunday’s Des Moines Register includes a good feature by Lauren Mills of IowaWatch.org and the Iowa Center for Public Affairs Journalism. She lays out how payday lenders are “burying Iowans” in debt. Iowa Senate Ways and Means Committee Chair Joe Bolkcom pointed out that the payday lending business model depends on “locking people into this cycle of debt.” Previous research has indicated that payday lenders cost Iowa consumers about $36 million per year. Mills reports that this industry spends heavily on campaign contributions and lobbying the Iowa legislature. Lobbyists talk a good game about jobs and helping people who need cash for emergency expenses. But think how many more jobs could be created if Iowans living paycheck to paycheck had $36 million more to spend on goods and services, rather than on outlandish “loan shark rates.”

Mills reports that legislation to regulate interest rates charged by payday lenders has been stalled. Bolkcom said Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal won’t bring up the bill unless it can pass the Republican-controlled Iowa House. House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer called that a “convenient excuse” for the Senate not to act. I haven’t noticed her or any other House Republicans acknowledging this problem, though.

The best chance for Iowa lawmakers to address payday lending was during the period when Democrats controlled “the trifecta.” In 2007, the Iowa House and Senate approved, and Governor Chet Culver signed, a bill capping interest rates on car title loans. (Such legislation had been stalled for years when Republicans controlled the Iowa House, although it attracted bipartisan support in both chambers in 2007.) Three years later, Bolkcom and then Iowa House Democrat Janet Petersen made a major push to pass a similar interest rate cap on payday lenders. However, industry lobbyists warned that such a law would put payday lenders out of business, as had happened with car title lenders. A wide range of organizations supported the payday lending reform, including the Iowa Attorney General’s office, the Iowa Catholic Conference, the Child and Family Policy Center, and Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement. But ultimately, the House version of that bill died when conservadem State Representative Mike Reasoner sided with two Republicans to kill it in subcommittee.

Some Iowa local governments, most recently in Waterloo, have passed zoning rules to try to prevent payday lenders from targeting low-income neighborhoods. But state regulations are the only realistic way to stop the cycle of debt perpetuated by lenders who keep borrowers coming back for more high-interest loans and cash advances. Iowans on the edge are paying the price for the legislature’s failure to act years ago.

A new working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research points to significant long-term benefits for children in poverty whose families received cash transfers through the first U.S. government welfare program. Researchers used census, World War II and death records to compare male children of mothers who received help through the federal Mothers’ Pension program between 1911 and 1935 to male children whose mothers applied for help but were rejected from the program. You can read the full research paper here (pdf) or access it here. I’ve posted a few excerpts after the jump.

The main takeaway: “Male children of accepted mothers received one-third more years of schooling, were less likely to be underweight, and had higher income in adulthood than children of rejected mothers.” The study did not include female children of early welfare recipients because name changes through marriage make it much harder to track long-term outcomes for girls.  

We liberals have been fighting the wrong battle with the Minimum Wage.  I am not sure whether liberals understand the economics of the minimum wage and choose to ignore them, or whether we just don’t understand basic principles of economics.  I can’t do much about the former, but I can at least shed some light on what actually happens when we raise the minimum wage.

We liberals all share a fundamental belief that government has the power and the resources to improve the standard of living of the poor and the middle class in this country.  Because we have the power and the resources, we have an obligation to take action to do so.  But we should also do no harm in the process, especially to those whose lives we are trying to improve.  The Earned Income Tax Credit is a more efficient way to accomplish our objectives, at a lower cost to society as a whole, with fewer unintended consequences that end up hurting poor people.

The U.S. Senate approved a compromise five-year farm bill this afternoon by 68 votes to 32 (roll call). As occurred in the House of Representatives last week, the farm bill drew substantial support from both caucuses. At the same time, a sizable number of conservative Republicans opposed the bill because of the costs, while some liberal Democrats voted no because of cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps. Iowa’s Democratic Senator Tom Harkin voted for ending debate on the farm bill yesterday and for the conference report today. Republican Senator Chuck Grassley voted no on cloture and on final passage.

After the jump I’ve posted statements from Harkin and Grassley explaining their stance on the farm bill. Click here for details on the contentious provisions of the farm bill. For once I am inclined to agree more with Grassley than with Harkin. In many respects the conference report was a missed opportunity and won’t serve the interests of Iowans or Americans generally.

I also sympathize with Grassley’s outrage at “a select few members dismantling a provision that was passed by wide, bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate.” Congressional rules should be changed so that the conference committee can alter only provisions that differed in the House and Senate bills, not consensus language from both versions.  

On the other hand, I suspect Grassley cast this protest vote because he knew his support wasn’t required to get the farm bill to President Barack Obama’s desk. As disappointing as this legislation is, Iowa’s economy truly needs stability and predictability in federal agricultural programs.

UPDATE: Added Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey’s comments below.  

President Barack Obama will finally have an opportunity to sign a five-year Farm Bill into law. The U.S. House approved the conference committee report today by 251 votes to 166, and the U.S. Senate is expected to approve the deal this week. The House roll call shows an unusual partisan split. Iowa’s four representatives were all among the 162 Republicans and 89 Democrats who voted for the final deal. But 63 House Republicans and 103 Democrats voted no, a mixture of conservatives who objected to spending in the $956 billion bill and liberals who opposed cuts to nutrition programs.

Although 41 representatives and senators served on the conference committee (including Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Steve King), the four top-ranking members of House and Senate Agriculture Committees hashed out the final details. King’s controversial amendment aimed at California’s egg regulations was left on the cutting room floor.

After the jump I’ve posted several takes on the farm bill’s key provisions and comments from the Iowa delegation.  

In an excellent two-part series on food stamps and the need for food assistance in Iowa, Mike Wiser caught Iowa Department of Public Health Director Mariannette Miller-Meeks in an embarrassing lie:

“The No. 1 food item bought with food stamps in Iowa is Mountain Dew,” said Miller-Meeks, director of the Iowa Department of Public Health [in a speech to the World Food Prize Hunger Week symposium in October].

Several in the audience of a few hundred — an international crowd of academics, journalists and nonprofit types — shook their heads or smiled with bemusement. Phones came out, tweets were sent.

But what Miller-Meeks said wasn’t true.

At least not in any verifiable way. The Iowa Department of Human Services — the state agency that oversees the food stamp program, correctly called Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, or SNAP, in Iowa — doesn’t track food purchases down to the brand of soft drink. Asked where she came up with the statistic, Miller-Meeks later said through a spokesperson she “found it online” but couldn’t remember where.

Bleeding Heartland has long argued against cutting food assistance for many reasons. The SNAP program addresses real need efficiently and is rarely abused. In addition, government spending on food assistance has tremendous “bang for the buck” compared to most other policies designed to stimulate the economy. I recommend reading the full text of Wiser’s latest reports on the rhetoric and reality of the food stamp debate and on reasons private aid agencies are struggling to help all the hungry Iowans.

Today I want to speculate on how a fake “fact” about food stamp purchases landed on Miller-Meeks’ radar.

Governor Terry Branstad announced today that his administration and officials in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have struck a deal over the Iowa Health and Wellness Plan, our state’s alternative to a straightforward Medicaid expansion. Earlier this week, federal officials approved most of the proposal but rejected a provision that would have kicked some low-income Iowans off the plan if they failed to pay monthly premiums. Under the tentative agreement, Iowa would still be able to charge premiums to some people who did not meet wellness criteria, but those people would not lose coverage for not paying the premiums. A statement released by the governor’s office is after the jump.

Branstad had the option of appealing the HHS decision, and Iowa House Speaker Kraig Paulsen suggested yesterday that Iowa officials should fight for the whole plan state legislators approved in May. Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal argued that the governor should “take the deal” federal officials approved: “It wasn’t the whole nine yards, but it was about 8.9 yards. It was most of what we asked for.” Commenting on this evening’s news, Senate President Pam Jochum said, “Hallelujah. Amen. […] I can’t imagine the governor would have wanted to be held responsible for 55,000-plus people losing coverage come Jan. 1.”

Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread. Charging even small health insurance premiums to people making less than $11,000 a year is stupid in my opinion, but this compromise is better than no coverage for tens of thousands of Iowans.

P.S.- Can’t help noticing how just like the messaging from his re-election campaign, the governor’s press releases invariably mention Lieutenant Governor Kim Reynolds whenever possible. I doubt she played any role in these negotiations or the governor’s decision not to appeal the HHS decision on the Iowa Health and Wellness Plan.

UPDATE: Added comments from Representative Bruce Braley (D, IA-01) below. Last week he wrote to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius urging the federal government to approve a waiver for Iowa.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has granted a waiver for Iowa’s alternative to the Medicaid expansion foreseen under the 2010 health care reform law. Governor Terry Branstad signed the Iowa Health and Wellness Plan compromise into law in June, and state officials submitted a formal request for a waiver in August. Iowa elected officials from both parties as well as many non-profit organizations with a stake in the outcome had urged Health and Human Services to approve the plan.

However, Governor Terry Branstad may appeal today’s decision, because federal officials rejected a provision he insisted on during negotiations with Democrats in the Iowa legislature.

Roughly 800 people came to Altoona on Saturday night to celebrate Governor Terry Branstad’s birthday and raise money for his re-election campaign. The featured speaker was House Budget Committee Chair and 2012 Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan. Listening to his remarks at Radio Iowa’s website, I didn’t hear a serious contender for the presidency in 2016.

Three big things were missing from Ryan’s speech.

Today members of the U.S. House and Senate began conference committee negotiations on the farm bill. The last five-year farm bill expired in 2012, and the latest extension of most federal farm programs (except for some related to conservation and sustainable agriculture) lapsed on September 30. Two Iowans are on the 41-member conference committee: Democratic Senator Tom Harkin and Republican Representative Steve King (IA-04).

One issue is likely to dominate the Congressional talks: funding levels for nutrition programs, especially the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. This summer, both Harkin and Republican Senator Chuck Grassley voted for the Senate farm bill, which cut SNAP by about $4 billion over 10 years. Iowa’s four U.S. House members split along party lines when the House approved a Republican bill with $39 billion in cuts over the same time frame. Keep in mind that regardless of what happens in the farm bill talks, all SNAP recipients–including an estimated 1 million veterans and approximately 421,000 Iowans–will see their food assistance reduced as of November 1. Click here for a detailed report on those cuts, which will occur as extra funding from the 2009 federal stimulus bill runs out.

After the jump I’ve posted the latest comments about the farm bill from Iowa politicians.

UPDATE: Added King’s opening statement from the conference committee meeting below.

SECOND UPDATE: Added new comments from Harkin.

Two weeks into the partial federal government shutdown, U.S. Senate leaders appear close to a deal to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling while a new joint budget committee negotiates “a replacement for the automatic spending cuts known as sequestration.” After the jump I’ve posted details on last week’s Congressional votes related to funding the federal government and preventing a possible default.

Although Iowa is reportedly the state least affected by the shutdown, because we lack national parks and have few military facilities, thousands of Iowans in the National Guard are still without paychecks. Thousands more who receive benefits through the Women, Infants and Children nutrition program will suffer if the shutdown extends into next month, because WIC is only funded through October.

The lack of a new farm bill arguably affects more Iowans directly than the shutdown does. The latest temporary extension of federal farm programs expired on September 30. At the end of this post, I’ve included some news and comments on efforts to pass a comprehensive farm bill.

It’s time for a new post on how Iowa’s representatives in the U.S. House and Senate are handling the ongoing shutdown of non-essential federal government operations. (Click here for details on Congressional votes and Iowa political reaction up to October 1.)

Thousands of Iowans who work for the federal government or serve in the National Guard still have no idea when they’ll receive their next paycheck. The best news I’ve heard all week is that an estimated 66,000 Iowa women and children who receive benefits through the WIC program will get their checks for October, at least.  

Although there has been no progress toward an agreement on a continuing spending resolution, I’ve noticed one big change in Iowa Congressional voting during the last few days. Whereas Representatives Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) were sticking with most of their fellow Democrats in earlier votes on federal spending, this week both Braley and Loebsack have joined House Republican attempts to fund the federal government in bits and pieces. Follow me after the jump for more details.

Iowa’s “C+” average in a new report on The State of Women in America masks a large disparity in Iowa’s ranking across the three dozen factors measured. Anna Chu and Charles Posner of the Center for American Progress compiled the report released this week. The fact sheet on Iowa is here, and these interactive tables show how Iowa compares to other states overall and on each metric. I’ve listed the metrics considered in each area after the jump. This page explains in more detail the methodology and data used to measure the states.

The C+ grade for Iowa reflects a ranking of 21st out of 50 states when all factors are considered. Iowa did best in the “health” area, with an A- grade and a ranking of seventh. The percentage of our state’s population lacking health insurance is relatively low. Several reproductive rights issues were examined, which means that our state’s grade and rank might be far lower if the Iowa Senate had not been under Democratic control these past few years (blocking efforts to restrict access to legal abortion).

In the “economic security” area, Iowa was ranked 32nd and received a D+ grade. Those low marks reflect the gender gap in wages, especially for Iowa women of color, and the lack of any state policy on “paid family, medical, or temporary disability leave.”

Iowa’s worst marks were in the “leadership” area, where our state got an F and ranked 42nd among the states. Who can be surprised, given our dismal record of electing women to high office? The Carrie Chapman Catt Center for Women and Politics at Iowa State University has an extensive database of reports on women’s representation in Iowa government at the local, state, and federal level. The Center for American Progress also noted the fact that “Women hold only 33.3 percent of the managerial jobs in Iowa, despite making up 51 percent of the state’s population.”

The U.S. House voted mostly along party lines on September 19 to cut the leading federal food assistance program by $39 billion over the next decade. Iowa’s four representatives split in the expected way: Republicans Tom Latham (IA-03) and Steve King (IA-04) supported the “Nutrition Reform and Work Opportunity Act,” while Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) voted no. In fact, the roll call shows that not even the bluest Blue Dog Democrat supported this bill.

After the jump I’ve posted comments on this vote from some of the Iowans in Congress, along with the latest Iowa and national figures on food insecurity and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as “food stamps.”

Public policy has been slow to make a dent in the obesity epidemic, which turns out to be “a lot more deadly than previously thought.” But a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control shows that Iowa is one of eighteen states where obesity among low-income preschoolers declined by a statistically significant amount from 2008 through 2011. An estimated 14.4 percent of low-income two- to four-year-olds in Iowa were obese in 2011. Iowa Department of Public Health officials credited several programs with helping to reverse the trend.

Adult obesity is still a major health problem, according to the latest “F as in Fat” report by the Trust for America’s Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Iowa had the twelfth-highest adult obesity rate in the country at 30.4 percent in 2012. The sort-of good news was that for the first time in decades, obesity rates held steady in most states. But it’s depressing to see that the adult obesity rate exceeds 20 percent in even the “healthiest” state of Colorado now. As recently as 1991, not a single state had an obesity rate that high.

Speaking to Radio Iowa about the new obesity estimates, Iowa Department of Public Health Director Mariannette Miller-Meeks had sensible advice:

“People don’t have to go out and do a programmed physical aerobics program for 30 minutes or an hour or two hours a day. […] Just eating less, a plant slant to your diet, and trying to get in 30 minutes of exercise a day.”

Mark my words: the Iowa Farm Bureau and other groups representing industrial agriculture will go nuts over Dr. Miller-Meeks encouraging Iowans to bring “a plant slant” to their diet, especially if she runs for Congress a third time in Iowa’s second district. But here’s an inconvenient truth for Big Ag: peer-reviewed research shows that “meat consumption is associated with obesity” in U.S. adults.

Here’s the second inconvenient truth: even if everyone ate responsibly and exercised regularly, Americans would be more prone to obesity because of exposure to certain chemicals, such as the endocrine disruptors Bisphenol-A (BPA) and phthalates, and some organotins used in pesticides. Long-term, low-level exposure to the prevalent herbicide atrazine can cause insulin resistance and obesity too (click here for an explanation of that research in layman’s terms).

Three years ago, a White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity called on federal and state agencies to “prioritize research into the effects of possibly obesogenic chemicals.” That won’t happen in my lifetime, at least not in Iowa.

P.S.- For anyone wondering, Iowa Department of Public Health Medical Director Dr. Patricia Quinlisk warns against ingesting a tapeworm as a weight-loss method.

Last week brought a good reminder that state boards and commissions don’t always rubber stamp the governor’s desired policies. Although Governor Terry Branstad has made clear that he wants to push back the start of the K-12 school year in Iowa, the State Board of Education on August 1 voted five to two against a Department of Education proposed rule change. Background and further details are after the jump.

After last month’s embarrassing failure to pass a five-year Farm Bill in the U.S. House, Republicans moved new legislation yesterday that included funding for agricultural programs but excluded the nutrition programs that have been embedded in farm bills for decades.

After Democrats forced a long slog through procedural votes, the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act barely passed by 216 votes to 208. Every Democrat present voted against the bill, as did twelve Republicans. The rest of the GOP caucus voted yes, including Representatives Tom Latham (IA-03) and Steve King (IA-04). Last month, King tried but failed to muster sufficient conservative support for a farm bill including big cuts in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (more commonly known as food stamps). Iowa Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) rejected yesterday’s bill. They were among the small group of House Democrats to support the previous version of the farm bill despite cuts in nutrition programs that drove away most of their caucus.

Comments from Senator Tom Harkin and most of Iowa’s House delegation are after the jump. I will update this post as needed with more comments from Iowa candidates or elected officials. At this writing, I don’t see anything about yesterday’s vote on Latham’s Congressional website. According to Radio Iowa, Latham “said he was disappointed with the process, but pleased the House was ‘at least able to pass the agriculture portion.'”

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers?

As Ryan Koopmans first reported at On Brief: Iowa’s Appellate Blog, at least one Iowa Supreme Court justice seems to have changed his mind about the unanimous ruling issued last December in a gender discrimination case. The decision drew national media attention after justices determined that the plaintiff, Melissa Nelson, was not discriminated against for being a woman, but fired as “an isolated employment decision based on personal relations.” Koopmans wrote this week, “Chief Justice Cady issued an order withdrawing the December opinion and stating that the court would resubmit the case, without oral argument, this Wednesday, June 26.  There’s no indication of when the court will issue its new decision […].”

Nelson’s attorney filed a petition to rehear the case soon after the ruling was announced. The Iowa Supreme Court has granted only five requests for re-hearings in the past decade, Jeff Eckhoff reported for the Des Moines Register. Koopmans commented, “I expect that there will be at least one opinion coming out in favor of Melissa Nelson. The question is whether that opinion is the majority or the dissent.”

For those sympathetic to Paula Deen, who says she’s not a racist and no longer uses “the N-word,” I recommend reading what’s been alleged in the lawsuit filed against her. Her disturbing behavior goes way beyond using offensive language from time to time. She deserves to lose her Food Network show and her various endorsement contracts. I’ve disliked Deen ever since she started profiting from a diabetes drug after promoting an unhealthy diet for years. DeWayne Wickham said it well in this column, which I’ve excerpted after the jump.

This is an open thread: all topics welcome. Congratulations to the Cedar Rapids Gazette’s Todd Dorman on 20 years working in journalism.

Reanna Lewis of Des Moines delivered a brave and moving commencement address at Hoover High School this year. The Sunday Des Moines Register posted the audio of Lewis’ speech and published a partial transcript in the paper’s June 9 edition. The points she raised are so important that I’ve transcribed her whole speech after the jump.

How well do you focus on intellectual tasks when you are hungry, stressed out, or exhausted? Lewis spoke frankly about how her family’s emotional and financial struggles could have derailed her high school education. Child poverty and food insecurity are huge problems in Iowa. Nothing in the governor’s education reform blueprint or the final bill he signed last week will address those problems. Iowa students will not achieve on a world-class level until we improve our social safety net. Teacher training, classroom size, educational philosophy and student assessments can only go so far.

The Register’s lead editorial on Sunday pointed out, “Students can’t learn if they are hungry or sick. […] Students who drop out don’t necessarily do so because the courses are too difficult or teachers don’t have enough time for them. They leave because they are struggling outside school. From funding human services to helping families secure a living wage, Iowa can do more to help these families.” Amen to that.

Less than 24 hours after the Republican-controlled Iowa House approved language to enact Governor Terry Branstad’s Healthy Iowa Plan, the Iowa Senate voted on party lines today (26 to 24) to reject the House version of Senate File 296. A conference committee will now attempt to work out a compromise on whether to expand Medicaid to all Iowans earning up to 138 percent of the poverty line, as the 2010 federal health care reform law envisioned.

After the jump I’ve posted a video of Senate President Pam Jochum speaking on the Senate floor today to contrast Medicaid expansion with the governor’s plan. I’ve also enclosed details on Branstad’s highly implausible claim that his plan would cost poor Iowans less out of pocket than expanding Medicaid. Senate Democrats have pointed out that Iowans living in poverty could never afford the co-pays and premiums envisioned in the Healthy Iowa Plan.

Finally, I’ve added below excerpts from the Iowa Hospital Association’s latest blog post explaining why Medicaid expansion is a better choice than the governor’s plan.

Last week Governor Terry Branstad finally introduced legislation to enact his Healthy Iowa Plan instead of the Medicaid expansion foreseen under the 2010 federal health insurance reform law. Strangely, neither the governor’s office nor the Iowa House Republican caucus held a news conference or even posted a press release about House Study Bill 232. The bill arrived at the statehouse on Thursday, April 4, after many legislators had left for the weekend.

So far House and Senate Republicans appear united behind Branstad’s approach, while the governor’s office strives to counter the obvious case against his plan (costs more, covers less). I’ve posted arguments for both sides and other news links after the jump.

Last night the Iowa Senate approved Senate File 296, a bill to expand Medicaid, on a strictly party-line vote of 26 to 23. You can listen to the entire Senate debate (approximately 90 minutes) at Radio Iowa. I’ve posted highlights from the debate after the jump, along with the full list of 52 organizations that have registered their support for Senate File 296. Some corporations and organizations have have registered their lobbyists as undecided on Senate File 296, but at this writing, not a single organization is registered against the Medicaid expansion.

Yesterday the U.S. House approved a bill seeking to prevent the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services from allowing states to lift work requirements for federal welfare benefits. Republican arguments for the bill echoed false claims from Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign.  

Five years ago this week, I was hospitalized with an infection that might have become life-threatening or permanently debilitating had I not had health insurance coverage, which allowed me to receive a relatively early diagnosis. Every day in this country, uninsured people hunker down, hoping their health problem will go away without an expensive doctor’s visit. That’s one of many reasons studies have shown that expanding Medicaid saves lives.

Governor Terry Branstad sounds determined not to expand Medicaid, but none of his arguments can withstand scrutiny.

UPDATE: Branstad confirmed on February 23 that he will not agree to expand Medicaid. Added details and other related news below.

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? A few links related to Iowa demographics are after the jump, along with highlights from this week’s “Iowa Press” program, featuring Republican Party of Iowa Chair A.J. Spiker and Iowa Democratic Party Chair Tyler Olson.

This is an open thread.

Forty years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Roe v Wade. Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread. I’ve posted many links about abortion rights and availability below.  

What’s on your mind this long weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread. I posted some links below to get a conversation going.

UPDATE: Scroll down for excerpts from the inaugural speech and some reaction from Iowa political figures.

Governor Terry Branstad just finished delivering his annual Condition of the State speech to Iowa House and Senate members. He unveiled a new property tax reform plan, which would cut commercial property taxes by 20 percent over four years. Previously the governor had called for cutting commercial property taxes by 40 percent. Branstad also urged legislators to approve the key points of education reform proposals he released yesterday. Finally, he outlined three policies that, in his view, would help Iowa become the healthiest state in the country.

Links and more details are after the jump. I will update this post later with more information and reaction. The video of Branstad’s speech will be available on IPTV.org and will be broadcast statewide on Iowa Public Television at 6:30 pm on January 16.

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread.

After the jump I’ve posted a bunch of links about finances and spending, large and small.