Speaking to a small crowd at the Iowa State Fair yesterday, Governor Terry Branstad said he was “proud as governor to have stood up for and fought for the interests of agriculture.” You can watch the video on the Des Moines Register’s website and read highlights in O.Kay Henderson’s report for Radio Iowa or Jason Noble’s summary for the Register:

He described his defense of Beef Products Inc. and its lean finely textured beef against charges that it was unhealthy “pink slime”; his support for wind energy; his efforts to maintain the current renewable fuel standard for ethanol content in gasoline; and his opposition to California chicken cage standards that could harm Iowa egg producers.

Branstad certainly was a vocal advocate for “pink slime,” even depicting the product as some kind of superior health food. He’s eager to defend one company’s use of methods many consumers find repulsive, but I doubt the Terrace Hill chef is serving him many meals containing lean finely-textured beef.

Renewable energy advocates in Iowa would not characterize Branstad as a champion for wind. I’ve never heard of him lifting a finger to support “distributed generation” policies, which would benefit a much broader group of farmers and landowners than the large wind farms now dotting rural Iowa.

True, the governor has argued strenuously for maintaining the Renewable Fuels Standard, contradicting his usual stance against “big government regulations” and federal mandates. However, it’s debatable whether the RFS is as important to Iowa’s economy as some interest groups claim.

Branstad can pander all he wants about “the State of California with its wacky ideas,” but the lawsuit he joined on behalf of Iowa is lacking in logic and unlikely to overturn California’s egg law. It’s also ironic that a governor who claims to oppose “activist judges” is pinning his hopes on them in this case and in another lawsuit challenging a different California law.

Meanwhile, Branstad has either done nothing or actively impeded solutions on several issues that pose an enormous threat to Iowa agriculture. We’re losing world-class topsoil at an alarming rate, diminishing the future productivity of our land. Yet Branstad vetoed millions of dollars this year for Iowa watershed and land stewardship projects. Nor has he ever proposed funding the Natural Resources Trust Fund, which Iowa voters approved four years ago.

“Superweeds” resistant to the most prevalent herbicides are spreading across Iowa. Branstad has never advocated for or promoted more sustainable farming methods, which could address the weed problem more effectively than dumping more toxic chemicals on the land. Incidentally, Big Ag’s preferred approach to battling superweeds could could put a lot of Iowa vineyards and fruit growers out of business–never mind the potential risks to human health.

I was so focused on the environmental impacts of Governor Terry Branstad’s recent vetoes, I failed to look closely at other appropriations in a supplemental spending bill he axed. Today I learned from Democratic State Senator Rob Hogg,

Saturday is the 50th anniversary of the start of Freedom Summer and the murder of Schwerner, Goodman and Chaney – it is too bad Governor Branstad vetoed the $300,000 the Legislature appropriated on a bipartisan basis to help the African-American Museum of Iowa collect Iowa’s civil rights history and educate the public about these historic events.

There it is on page 4 of Senate File 2363: $300,000 for “an oral history of civil rights” at the African-American Museum of Iowa in Cedar Rapids.

It’s maddening that Governor Branstad has no problem with tens of millions of dollars in tax giveaways to wealthy corporations, yet he pleads fiscal prudence when vetoing spending like this, which serves the public interest without major impact to the state budget. Many of the 1950s and 1960s civil rights activists have already passed away, and those who haven’t are senior citizens. “Freedom Summer” was a major event in 20th century American history. Some Freedom Summer veterans with connections to Iowa City or the University of Iowa have already told their stories to historians or recorded their memories on paper or film. The Historical Iowa Civil Rights Network are doing their part too, and you can follow their work here. I’m disappointed that the African-American Museum of Iowa won’t have the funding to collect and archive these stories on a larger scale.  

It’s one of the oldest tricks in any governor’s playbook: schedule media events for bill signing ceremonies you want the public to hear about, while burying bad news late on a Friday, after reporters have filed their stories. I was worried Governor Terry Branstad would make big cuts to environmental funding just before Memorial Day weekend, as he had cut food bank money two years ago.

Instead, Branstad’s office released the news about this year’s spending vetoes after dinnertime on Friday, May 30. Hours earlier, the governor had welcomed reporters, lawmakers, and members of the public to watch him sign a bill legalizing the possession of cannabis oil to treat seizure disorders, as well as a bill altering Iowa’s HIV transmission law.

Follow me after the jump for the gory details. I no longer consider 2014 a good year for Iowa environmental funding.

Governor Terry Branstad plans to sign a bill that would allow possession of cannabis oil for the treatment of some seizure disorders, he announced while taping Iowa Public Television‘s “Iowa Press” program today. He noted the bill will help some children with epilepsy, and he’s satisfied its “limited” scope will not increase abuse of marijuana in smokeable form.  

The governor also said he will sign a bill banning the sale of e-cigarettes to children, adding that his wife is a “militant” anti-smoker. Trouble is, that bill was backed by tobacco industry lobbyists. Many public health groups lobbied against the bill.

Branstad has not decided whether to sign the dog racing bill, which would end greyhound racing at one casino in Council Bluffs and get a non-profit casino in Dubuque off the hook for subsidizing the races. His concern isn’t the massive giveaway to dog breeders and kennel owners, which makes no sense to me. Rather, he is worried that lobbyists for horse racing interests didn’t get their cut from the bailout. O.Kay Henderson reports for Radio Iowa,

“I understand the benefits that the people in Council Bluffs and Dubuque see from this, and the greyhound industry,” Branstad says. “My concern is the horse industry was left out of this.” […]

However, the governor’s concern is over provisions in the bill that would give the greyhound industry authority to strike deals to simulcast dog and horse races at any of the state’s casinos and get all of the profit from it. Today simulcasting deals are only allowed at the casinos in Altoona, Council Bluffs and Dubuque and Iowa’s horse industry gets the financial take.

“There is some concern that I’m hearing from my friends in the horse industry. I’ve always been close with them,” Branstad says. “We have a very big and significant horse industry in the state of Iowa.”

Branstad has ’til June 2 to decide whether to sign or veto the bill.

“I’m trying to weigh all those things,” Branstad says. “I want to do something that’s fair to all the communities involved and fair to all the parties and the one group that seems to be, because of the simulcasting provisions of that bill, having some concerns is the horse industry and so I’m carefully reviewing that,” Branstad says. “I have not made a final decision.”

Environmental activists in Iowa are nervously awaiting the governor’s decision on a bill to expand solar tax credits and several spending bills that include record-high funding for the Resource Enhancement and Protection (REAP) conservation program. The governor recently said he is concerned about various parts of a supplemental spending bill that contained $5 million of the REAP funding. In 2012, Branstad line-item vetoed half a million dollars for Iowa food banks on the Friday before Memorial Day.

The Iowa House and Senate wrapped up the 2014 session during “Soil and Water Conservation Week.” While certain environmental programs did well in the budget for fiscal year 2015, the legislature did not adequately address some of the biggest problems affecting Iowa’s soil and water.

The Iowa Environmental Council blog linked to several recent articles by “top experts on Iowa soil conservation,” who “expressed alarm about the state of our soil” and in particular the rapid rate of erosion. Along with other kinds of agricultural runoff, soil erosion contributes to toxic algae blooms in rivers and lakes, not only in Iowa and neighboring states but also across much of the U.S. Nutrient pollution is a major reason that more than half of the country’s rivers and streams are “in poor condition for aquatic life.”At the end of this post, I’ve enclosed an infographic explaining how toxic algae blooms form and how to prevent them.

Iowa lawmakers continue to throw money at the state’s Nutrient Reduction Strategy, without insisting on numeric criteria for nitrogen and phosphorous levels in water and without the goals, timelines and monitoring needed to assure Iowans that waterways are becoming cleaner. In fact, the fiscal year 2015 appropriation for the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship removed wording requiring that money for watershed projects be used to reduce nutrients. Follow me after the jump for the disturbing details.

Be careful what you brag about in politics. Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz highlighted alleged cost savings to the state in his Congressional campaign’s first television commercial. As journalists looked more closely at staff reorganization in the Secretary of State’s Office, they discovered details that will likely derail Schultz’s aspirations in IA-03.

Ryan Foley of the Associated Press was the first to report that Schultz kept his political appointee Jim Gibbons on the payroll for seven months after deciding to eliminate Gibbons’ position. It’s not clear what work, if any, Gibbons was doing during his final months as a state employee.

Yesterday Foley reported for the Associated Press and Jason Clayworth reported for the Des Moines Register on more political appointees whom Schultz allowed to work from home after requesting their resignations in 2011 and 2012. I’ve posted excerpts from both stories after the jump, but you should click through to read them in full. In a statement to the Des Moines Register, Schultz defended his actions:

“What the liberals in the media are ignoring as they level their attacks against me, is that the Department of Administrative Services, the state’s personnel experts, advised my office that instead of severance an agency could keep an employee on payroll longer than they are required to come to the office, so long as the employee was available for phone calls and questions from home. […] If the media had real integrity they would be thanking me for protecting Iowa’s election integrity and finding ways to save Iowa taxpayers more than $200,000.”

I doubt that excuse will fly in a GOP primary where voters have several other credible candidates to choose from. Schultz has some powerful backers and donors, but so do a few rivals with less baggage. Even if Schultz surprises me by winning the Republican nomination in IA-03, the latest revelations provide plenty of ammunition for Staci Appel in the general election–not that we needed more proof that Schultz has been ineffective in his current position. He pursued the wrong priorities and spent federal funds on his own crusade rather than how they were intended to be used.  

During the legislative session that just ended, the Iowa House and Senate approved substantial increases in funding for some key environmental programs.

Lawmakers committed to providing $25 million to mark the 25th anniversary of the Department of Natural Resources’ Resource Enhancement and Protection program (REAP) achieved their goal. REAP had only been funded at the $20 million level once before during the past two and a half decades. The REAP money came from three separate bills appropriating funds for the 2015 fiscal year; I’ve posted details after the jump. Many REAP-funded projects have a lasting positive impact on local communities for decades. Click here for more background on the kind of projects REAP has supported around Iowa.

Last month, Linn County Supervisor Brent Oleson posted a guest diary warning about legislative proposals that would indirectly undermine REAP by changing the program’s funding formula. Fortunately, the conference committee agreement negotiated by Iowa House and Senate members did not include that language in the final bill.

Senate File 2349 allocates Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund money, which mostly comes from gambling revenues. That bill included $9.6 million for lake restoration funding during the 2015 fiscal year, a big improvement on the recent past when lawmakers approved just $5.5 million for lake restoration projects. The Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund bill also included $2 million “for the administration of a water trails and lowhead dam public hazard statewide plan.” Just a few years ago, environmental groups including Iowa Rivers Revival were fighting for even $1 million in state funding for rivers. The only downside to the river funding was that the conference committee went with House-approved language allocating the whole $2 million to low-head dam removal and water trails. Iowa Rivers Revival preferred the Senate-passed bill, which contained $1 million for that purpose and $1 million to launch a new Iowa River Restoration Program. You can find the Senate-passed version of Senate File 2349 here and the conference committee report describing agreed changes in detail here (the river funding is discussed on pages 4-5 of the Senate bill).

Governor Terry Branstad hasn’t signed any of these appropriations bills yet, so funding for REAP and Iowa lakes are rivers is not a sure thing. I would be surprised if he item-vetoed any of these appropriations, although in 2011, Branstad vetoed river restoration funds that lawmakers had allocated for fiscal year 2012.

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

The Iowa legislature got out of town on May 2, 110 calendar days after the 2014 session began. That’s ten days after lawmakers’ per diem payments ran out but earlier than in any year since 2010, when Democrats held majorities in both chambers. After the jump I’ve posted closing remarks delivered by the top Iowa Senate Democrats (Majority Leader Mike Gronstal and President Pam Jochum) and the top Iowa House Republicans (Speaker Kraig Paulsen and Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer). A series of posts next week will focus on some of the more significant legislative results from the session, as well as important bills that never did pass.

I’ve also enclosed Gronstal’s prepared remarks on the final Iowa Senate vote of the session: granting subpeona power to the Government Oversight Committee to continue investigating various scandals in Governor Terry Branstad’s administration. Gronstal emphasized that the resolution is “narrowly drafted” and “not a criminal investigation. The goal is not to convict people. The only goal is to find out what went wrong [in state government] and how to fix it.” The resolution passed by voice vote just before the Senate adjourned on Friday morning. Iowa Senate Minority Leader Bill Dix blasted what he called a “dangerous” and “underhanded partisan move.” He claimed the “disruption of separation of powers” will invite “a state constitutional crisis,” and that the Oversight Committee’s investigation is politically motivated.

Finally, in non-legislative news, Patrick Caldwell reported for Mother Jones this week on a remarkably shady deal involving Danny Carroll in 1996. At the time, Carroll was a real estate agent in the Grinnell area and an Iowa House Republican. He currently chairs the Republican Party of Iowa–though probably not for much longer. After reading Caldwell’s piece, I want to know why anyone supposedly committed to Christian values would participate in a scheme to take advantage of an elderly widow with debts.  

Iowa lawmakers are finally getting the hang of divided control–or maybe they just want to get out of town early in an election year. During the 2011 legislative session, Iowa House Republicans and Senate Democrats were still arguing about state budget targets well into June and didn’t approve final spending bills until the very last day of the fiscal year.

In contrast, legislative leaders agreed on fiscal year 2015 spending targets seven weeks ago. On April 23, both the Iowa House and Senate approved the conference committee report for the education appropriations bill. Details on the education budget debate, final funding levels and roll calls are after the jump.

Amazingly, the legislature may be ready to adjourn for the year by the end of next week.

Matt Schultz is touting his management of the Iowa Secretary of State’s office in a television commercial promoting his campaign in Iowa’s third Congressional district.

But new reports by Ryan Foley of the Associated Press indicate that when reorganizing the Secretary of State’s office, Schultz showed preference to a political appointee and allowed him to keep collecting a large salary despite doing little if any work for the government.

The applicant pool for Iowa’s judicial vacancies has been declining in recent years, Mike Wiser reported for the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier on March 30. Iowa courts administrator David Boyd has been analyzing trends across the state and concluded that during the past decade, “The applicant pools [for District Court judgeships] were shrinking not only in terms of quantity but in quality, too.”

Applications for court vacancies are down by about half of what they were 10 years ago in four of the eight judicial districts, and down by a third in another two, according to Boyd’s figures.

Wiser’s article identifies three main reasons for the trend. First, District Court judges earn an annual salary of $138,130, which is well above the state average but below what high-performing attorneys can earn in private practice. Iowa Supreme Court Chief Justice Mark Cady asked state legislators to increase judges’ pay by 4.5 percent, but State Representative Gary Worthan, who chairs the Iowa House Appropriations subcommittee on the judicial system told Wiser, “we’ve got other priorities this year.”

Second, years of state budget cuts to court support staff have also made the work of a judge less appealing, according to several people Wiser interviewed.

Finally, University of Iowa School of Law professor Patrick Bauer and others cited the successful 2010 campaign against retaining three Iowa Supreme Court justices. That crusade was the first and perhaps the last time a politically unpopular ruling ended judges’ careers in Iowa. Nevertheless, it has deterred some attorneys from aspiring to become judges. Bob Vander Plaats and his fellow social conservatives failed to end marriage equality in Iowa, but they have left their mark on the judicial system.

The Iowa legislature’s second “funnel” deadline passed late last week. To remain eligible for debate during the remainder of this year’s session, most legislation needed to have passed one chamber as well as a committee in the other chamber. There are a few exceptions to the rule, namely appropriations bills and some tax measures. Rod Boshart listed the most significant “dead” and “alive” bills for the Cedar Rapids Gazette. The Iowa House Republican staff compiled a more comprehensive list of “second funnel survivors,” including bill summaries. The Iowa Senate Democratic staff highlighted the most important bills passed by the Senate that died in the House.

After the jump I’ve enclosed more links and some analysis on bills that died as well as those still under consideration. From my perspective, the most surprising casualty of the funnel was a bill to extend the statute of limitations for sex crimes against children (see the “safety and crime” section below).

Any comments on pending legislation in the Iowa House or Senate are welcome in this thread.  

Iowa’s Resource Enhancement and Protection program (REAP) celebrates its 25th anniversary this year. Among the most successful conservation initiatives in Iowa history, REAP has cumulatively distributed about $300 million to thousands of projects across the state. It is mostly funded through gaming revenues that go into the state’s Environment First Fund. In theory, REAP “is authorized to receive $20 million per year until 2021,” but the state legislature has never fully funded REAP to the authorized level. This year’s budget included $16 million for REAP, and Governor Terry Branstad kept that item at the same level in his draft budget for fiscal year 2015.

Today about three dozen non-profit organizations gathered at the State Capitol for the annual Environmental Lobby Day organized by the Iowa Environmental Council. I attended the event because I’m active in the IEC and in several of its member organizations. At a press conference organized by the IEC, four speakers emphasized the need to increase conservation funding: Republican State Senator David Johnson, Democratic State Senator Bob Dvorsky, Iowa Natural Resource Commission Chair Margo Underwood, and Rod Marlatt, executive director of the Fayette County Conservation Board. Dvorsky particularly emphasized his goal to secure $25 million in funding for REAP in the coming fiscal year, in honor of the program’s 25th anniversary.

Because REAP-supported projects are often popular locally, the program has mostly escaped the partisan divisions that have led to the demise of some state initiatives. Today the Iowa House approved a resolution celebrating the 25th anniversary of REAP. Remarkably, 96 of the 100 state representatives co-sponsored this resolution, which House Democrat Chuck Isenhart proposed. Now that they’re on record agreeing, “Iowans strongly believe that the Resource Enhancement and Protection Program is a successful venture worthy of the continued support of the General Assembly,” let’s hope they will put a lot of money where their mouths are. The $25 million in REAP funding has an excellent chance of clearing the Iowa Senate, since Dvorsky chairs the Appropriations Committee. Will the Iowa House go along? The many state lawmakers who spoke with Environmental Lobby Day exhibitors today included House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer and several members of the House Appropriations Committee.

After the jump I’ve posted background on the REAP program from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources website, including a map showing how much REAP funding has gone to each of Iowa’s 99 counties. I also enclosed a press release from the Iowa Environmental Council, with highlights from speakers at the conservation rally.

If any Iowa Democrat deserves a primary challenge, it’s three-term State Senator Joe Seng. Although the Davenport-based veterinarian represents one of the Democrats’ safest urban districts, Seng is anti-choice and supported Republican calls for a vote against marriage equality in 2010. As chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, he has helped pass several bills that are good for industrial agriculture but bad for the environment, especially clean water. In addition, Seng himself challenged three-term U.S. Representative Dave Loebsack in the IA-02 Democratic primary two years ago, so he couldn’t claim the moral high ground against a primary challenger for his state Senate seat.

I was excited to see yesterday that another Democratic candidate, Mark Riley, had filed papers to run in Senate district 45. When I realized Riley was Seng’s Republican opponent in 2010 and ran an independent campaign against Iowa House Democrat Cindy Winckler in 2012, I became disappointed. Was he just a fake like the “Democrat” who ran against State Representative Ako Abdul-Samad in 2010?

I sought comment from Riley about why he was running as a Democrat in Iowa Senate district 45, having campaigned as a Republican in the same district a few years ago. I’ve posted his response after the jump. You be the judge. Riley would have my serious consideration if I lived on the west side of Davenport.  

A study released this week shows that across the U.S., trips on public transportation reached a level in 2013 not seen since 1956. During the past two decades, public transit ridership has increased far beyond population growth, fueled not only by aging baby boomers but also by a generation of young people less likely to drive than their predecessors. After the jump I’ve posted a summary of the American Public Transit Association’s findings. You can download the full report on 2013 public transit ridership here (pdf).

Earlier this year, the Des Moines Area Regional Transit (DART) released data showing “DART’s ridership increased more than 7 percent in the first six months of fiscal year 2014, compared to the same period of fiscal year 2013. Ridership totaled 347,213 in December – a 15 percent increase over December 2012.” Click through for details on the fastest-growing bus routes. In recent years, DART built a new central station in downtown Des Moines and redesigned or expanded many of its routes. During the past six months, DART has made it easier for people to plan bus trips. Smart phone users will be pleased to learn, “DART bus stops now display on Google Maps. This addition allows users to see locations of bus stops as well as get route information including what bus routes serve the stop and when the next bus is scheduled to arrive. A similar feature is also available on Bing Maps and the MyDART Trip Planner.” Speaking to Radio Iowa, DART’s general manager Elizabeth Presutti said young people, “young professionals particularly” increasingly want public transit for their work commutes, while “a growing senior population” in the Des Moines area is also “looking for alternative transportation options.”

Many Iowans think of public transit as something for large urban areas, but bus service is a viable alternative to driving in smaller communities too. The American Public Transit Association’s study showed rising bus ridership in cities with a population under 100,000. Express buses that take people from small towns to work, shopping or other services in larger towns nearby need to more available across Iowa, especially considering our aging population.

President Barack Obama’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2015 includes more funding for public transit, rail, and other alternatives to driving. Those investments will be a tough sell in the Republican-controlled U.S. House, but data show that Americans increasingly want to use public transit when that option is available.  

Iowa’s Constitution lays out a straightforward process for changing state law: first, a bill needs to pass the Iowa House and Senate by a simple majority in both chambers. Then, the governor signs the bill into law. Alternatively, state legislators can pass a new law without the governor’s support, by over-riding a veto with a two-thirds majority in both chambers.

Iowa House Republicans and Governor Terry Branstad don’t like current state law on setting state funding for K-12 education a year in advance. However, they lack support in the Democratic-controlled Iowa Senate for changing that law through the normal legislative process. So, they have decided they can pretend the law doesn’t exist.

It appears that nothing short of a court order will change their minds.

A new report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows that Iowa and many other states fail to incorporate enough long-term fiscal planning in the budget process. Click here to read the executive summary of the thoroughly researched piece by Elizabeth McNichol, Vincent Palacios, and Nicholas Johnson. Click here to download the full report (pdf).

After the jump I’ve posted the two-page fact sheet on Iowa, which scored only 4.5 out of a possible 10 and ranked 37th among the states. I’ve also enclosed a sidebar explaining the ten criteria they used to evaluate state fiscal planning. Table 1 toward the bottom of this page shows that Iowa received full marks under three categories: consensus revenue estimates, legislative fiscal offices, and budget status reports. Iowa received half-credit in three more categories: multi-year fiscal notes, pension oversight, and well-designed rainy-day funds. Iowa received zero marks in four categories: multi-year forecasting, a projection of future costs to deliver the “quantity and quality of services to residents that it is delivering in the current budget period,” pension funding and debt level reviews, and oversight of tax expenditures.

For years, the Iowa Policy Project and the Iowa Fiscal Partnership have been sounding the alarm on how Iowa needs to start calculating the costs of various tax breaks and tax credits.

While you’re at it, read the Iowa Fiscal Partnership’s recent background piece on why “Iowa lawmakers must recognize the long-term impact of tax cuts on spending choices. Past choices will force future legislatures to lower investments on critical services on which economic growth depends.”

The January 23 edition of the Iowa House Republican newsletter contains a mix of news and spin on a wide variety of topics, such as the state budget, the minimum wage, the check-off for corn growers, distracted driving, marijuana use and even a controversy over whether states should charge sales tax on “take-n-bake” pizzas.

From my perspective, the most interesting nugget was the effort to explain House Republicans’ stubborn refusal to comply with a state law that passed nearly two decades ago with strong bipartisan support. Iowa Senate Democrats are determined to set “allowable growth” levels for K-12 school budgets in the time frame laid out by the law. But Republicans are not budging from the position they staked out last year: no early notice for school district leaders who need to plan their budgets.

Immediately following Governor Terry Branstad’s Condition of the State address to Iowa legislators yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal told Iowa Public Television that he “didn’t hear anything I disagreed with.” Not every Iowan who closely follows state government shared his reaction. State Senator Jack Hatch, the leading Democratic challenger to Branstad, slammed the governor’s “very shallow agenda” of “low expectations.”

After the jump I’ve posted more detailed comments from Hatch and a few other Iowa Democrats, as well as statements released by several non-profit organizations, which called attention to important problems Branstad ignored or glossed over.  

Governor Terry Branstad delivered his annual “Condition of the State” address to Iowa lawmakers this morning. By Branstad’s standards, it was not a partisan speech. He drew several standing ovations from legislators in both parties, and it’s easy to imagine the Democratic-controlled Iowa Senate embracing most of the policies he advocated. In fact, immediately after the speech, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal told Iowa Public Television’s Dean Borg that he “didn’t hear anything” he disagreed with. Gronstal did get in a quick jab at the governor, though, pointing out that Branstad hailed “predictability” for the state budget, which is what statehouse Democrats are seeking for school districts. During the last two years, House Republicans and Branstad have refused to comply with Iowa law requiring the legislature to set allowable growth levels for K-12 school districts a year in advance.

Highlights from the governor’s speech are after the jump. Click here to read the full text, as prepared. Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread.

Stylistic note: for a guy who’s been in politics as long as Branstad has, he keeps his eyes glued to his script a lot. Experienced public speakers typically make more eye contact with the audience.  

The Iowa House and Senate convened today to begin the 2014 legislative session. All of the opening remarks reflected on key achievements of the 2013 session, such as compromise bills on commercial property tax cuts, education reform, and providing health care to low-income Iowans. All of the speeches called for more bipartisan work this year, and all stressed “pocketbook” issues such as improving education and building the middle class rather than social issues. But Republican and Democratic leaders take different priorities into the 2014 session.

I’ve summarized below the key points Iowa House and Senate majority and minority leaders raised today. I also enclosed lengthy excerpts and in some cases the full texts of their opening day speeches.

Click here for a tentative schedule of key dates during the 2014 legislative session. Lawmakers tend to finish their work earlier in election years than in odd-numbered years, but I highly doubt they will be ready to adjourn by March 30, as House Speaker Paulsen hopes. They will be lucky to finish work on the state budget by April 22, when lawmakers stop receiving per diem payments.

Four Democratic state legislators and the leader of Iowa’s largest public employee union filed a lawsuit yesterday seeking to block Governor Terry Branstad’s administration from closing the Iowa Juvenile Home in Toledo (Tama County) this month. Joining AFSCME Iowa Council 61 President Danny Homan are gubernatorial candidate Senator Jack Hatch, Senator Steve Sodders (whose district includes Toledo), Iowa House Minority Leader Mark Smith, and former Iowa House Speaker Pat Murphy. The lawsuit alleges that it is unconstitutional for Branstad to close the home after signing into law budget appropriations for operating the home in fiscal years 2014 and 2015. An official statement from the plaintiffs is after the jump, along with a brief summary provided by Sodders.

When Iowa Department of Human Services Director Chuck Palmer announced in December that the Iowa Juvenile Home would be closed after all the resident girls were relocated, he said the “difficult decision” was in the best interests of the girls who had lived there. Yesterday Governor Branstad also cited the interests of “those kids who’ve been mistreated and abused and not gotten their education.”

Over the past year, the Des Moines Register’s Clark Kauffman has documented outrageous practices at the Iowa Juvenile Home, including long placements in isolated cells. In October, a task force appointed by Branstad recommended reforms for the facility. The lawsuit alleges that at the governor’s direction, DHS Director Palmer disregarded the task force’s recommendations and will unlawfully use funds appropriated for the Juvenile Home for other purposes.

In 2012, the Iowa Supreme Court found that Branstad had improperly used his line-item veto power to change how state funds were allocated. This case is somewhat different but poses similar constitutional questions.

I don’t regret marrying at the tender age of 16.  I don’t regret that not long after turning 18, I gave birth to a beautiful daughter.  I don’t regret the strange combination of jobs I’ve held:  motel manager, office manager of a retirement community, coffee shop owner.  As far as life choices go, I have but one lament. 

I don’t have a college degree.

In fact, I haven’t a high school degree.

Iowans have the ear of our Iowa legislators — voice your support to help establish a statewide River Restoration Program. Submit your comments by Tuesday, Dec 10th. 

Hopes to bring passenger rail service from Chicago to Iowa City and eventually to Des Moines and Council Bluffs appear to be dead. For the last three years, State Senator Matt McCoy tried to secure state matching funds for a federal passenger rail grant, citing many possible economic benefits to Iowa. Both Governor Terry Branstad and Iowa House Republicans have opposed allocating funds toward new passenger rail. Speaking to the Sunday Des Moines Register’s William Petroski, McCoy blamed Iowa House Republicans, not the governor, for killing the project. House Speaker Kraig Paulsen told the Register that his caucus did not see the project as a “wise investment.”

I’ve posted excerpts from yesterday’s story after the jump. Neither McCoy nor Paulsen mentioned that the Iowa House speaker works for a trucking company. The trucking industry generally opposes improvements to rail infrastructure. Paulsen’s closed mind on passenger rail is one reason I was disappointed when he decided against running for Congress.

UPDATE: Added new comments from Branstad after the jump.

Governor Terry Branstad announced yesterday that he had accepted the resignation of David Worley as commandant of the Iowa Veterans Home in Marshalltown. After the jump I’ve posted the official press release, including Worley’s resignation letter. His successor will be retired Brig. Gen. and former State Representative Jodi Tymeson, whom Branstad named chief operating officer at the Iowa Veterans Home in May. At that time, the governor’s staff dismissed claims that Worley (a holdover from Chet Culver’s administration) had created a hostile work environment at the home. I never understood why Branstad would create an entirely new management position for Tymeson if Worley truly had “the governor’s full faith and confidence.”

I also enclose below comments from Iowa Senate Veterans Affairs Committee Chair Daryl Beall and State Senator Steve Sodders, who represents the Marshalltown area. Beall presided over a lengthy Senate hearing on alleged problems at the Iowa Veterans Home in May, after which Sodders called for a full investigation of Worley’s conduct.

Veterans’ advocate Bob Krause, who is exploring a run for governor, discussed Worley’s resignation and ways to improve conditions for Iowa Veterans Home staff and residents in an open letter, which I’ve posted below.

I’ll say this for Branstad: he knows how to bury a story. On a slow news day, Worley’s resignation might have generated a lot of Iowa media coverage and questions about why the governor waited so long to replace him. Instead, this news will be overshadowed by coverage of the federal government shutdown and the new health insurance exchanges.

Iowa’s constitution allows the governor to line-item veto provisions in appropriations bills, and Governor Terry Branstad has used that power to overrule legislative decisions on many spending proposals, large and small. Among this year’s line-item vetoes, perhaps the most controversial was Branstad’s surprising decision to ax $13 million for mental health services. That line item was intended to cushion the blow for counties as Iowa reorganizes its mental health care delivery system. (In the past, available care depended greatly on a patient’s county of residence.) Despite broad bipartisan support for this appropriation and a large state budget surplus, Branstad decided that counties didn’t need extra help with mental health services.

This week four Democratic state senators and one Republican asked Branstad to help fix the mess he created, which has already led to some service cuts.

David Osterberg stepped down yesterday as executive director of the Iowa Policy Project, Iowa’s leading think tank. A legendary figure in this state’s environmental community, Osterberg served six terms in the Iowa House, chairing the Agriculture Committee for four years and the Energy and Environmental Protection Committee for two years. He has received honors and awards from many non-profit organizations and was the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate against Chuck Grassley in 1998.

In 2001, Osterberg created the Iowa Policy Project “to bring a fact-based focus to public policy issues affecting Iowa families.” The organization’s research reports and Iowa Policy Points blog are must-reads for anyone interested in state policy. In conjunction with the Des Moines-based Child and Family Policy Center, the Iowa Policy Project also publishes valuable research on the Iowa Fiscal Partnership website. The latest Iowa Fiscal Partnership report shows how food assistance programs in the Farm Bill affect thousands of Iowans.

I was pleased to read in the statement enclosed below that Osterberg will keep working with the Iowa Policy Project on energy and environment research, and longtime assistant director Mike Owen will take over as executive director.  

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.

Governor Terry Branstad signed into law today a bill setting Iowa’s health and human services budget for the next fiscal year and establishing a new “Iowa Health and Wellness Plan” for low-income Iowans not currently covered by Medicaid. The full text of Senate File 446 is available here. Division XXXIII contains the language on the Iowa alternative to expanding Medicaid, a compromise struck in the closing days of the legislative session last month.

After the jump I’ve posted some links and comments on today’s news. As far as I can tell, Branstad has not yet explained why he is happy to accept federal funding for the Iowa Health and Wellness Plan, likely to be more expensive than expanding Medicaid would have been. Earlier this year, he made a huge fuss about how we can’t afford such a program because of the federal deficit, and how we can’t trust the feds to live up to their funding promises.

Yesterday Governor Terry Branstad traveled to Hiawatha, the home base of Iowa House Speaker Kraig Paulsen, to sign a wide-ranging bill on property taxes, income taxes, and the earned income tax credit. Senate File 295 passed both chambers of the Iowa legislature with bipartisan support. Every Republican voted for the bill, as did all but six Senate Democrats and thirteen House Democrats, named here. You can read the full text of Senate File 295 here. Bleeding Heartland covered the key points in the deal here.

The property tax law is one of the most important outcomes of this year’s legislative session. It will be a major theme in next year’s campaigns for governor and the state legislature. After the jump I offer five perspectives on this law: three from supporters of the deal and two with a gloomier view of its likely impact.

Iowa House Speaker Kraig Paulsen is thinking seriously about running for Congress in the open first district, covering 20 counties in northeast and central Iowa. He hasn’t given a timeline for making up his mind and has said he’s trying to figure out “what’s the best way to serve Iowans. What meets their needs?”

I would suggest that Paulsen consider this cold, hard reality: he is unlikely to serve Iowans as a member of Congress, because he would lose the GOP primary in IA-01.

UPDATE: Scroll to the end of this post for a sixth reason.

This year’s cool, wet spring was a blessing at first, reducing drought conditions substantially across Iowa. But now that the state has chalked up the wettest spring in 141 years of record-keeping, many communities are dealing with major flooding again. Flooding forced the closure of Highway 14 north of Marshalltown and prompted emergency sandbagging in downtown Iowa City and Cedar Rapids. You can see high water threatening downtown Cedar Rapids on Friday, and today the basement of the rebuilt city hall flooded. Water was pumped across some lanes of Highway 30. The lack of rain on Friday may have prevented the worst-case scenario in some cities.

At the downtown Des Moines Farmers Market this morning, several vendors told me they have “more water than they need” but not a devastating amount of moisture–yet. Farmers in many parts of the state haven’t been so lucky. Either rains have prevented them from planting, or floodwaters are washing away recently-planted crops.

Governor Terry Branstad was on vacation for most of the past week but has issued disaster emergency proclamations for 47 Iowa counties. He and Lieutenant Governor Kim Reynolds plan to tour flood-affected areas in eastern Iowa on Monday.

Any news or comments about the Iowa flooding are welcome in this thread.

JUNE 3 UPDATE: Dry weather over the weekend helped mitigate the flooding in Cedar Rapids and Iowa City, but Coralville Lake is not expected to crest until June 7.

Speaking to reporters in Des Moines on June 3,

Branstad resisted the notion that this year’s floods or last year’s drought conditions could be linked to climate change or that the state could do anything to prevent such events from happening.

“Weather is always going to change,” said Branstad, who’s serving his fifth term as Iowa’s governor. “I’ve been governor during droughts and floods and we just went from a drought to a flood.

The Iowa Senate wrapped up its work for the year shortly after midnight on May 23, and Iowa House members adjourned about 11 hours later. Lawmakers in both parties have been congratulating themselves for compromising on some big issues that ended in stalemate the previous two years. Rod Boshart compiled an excellent list of what the legislature did and didn’t approve during 2013.

We all can appreciate the desire to finish a big project before a holiday weekend, and since legislators stopped receiving per diem payments weeks ago, they understandably wanted to get out of town as quickly as possible. However, I found it disturbing that votes were held before most lawmakers, let alone members of the public, had time to digest final conference committee deals on education reform, an alternative to Medicaid expansion, property taxes, and the health and human services budget. Transparency isn’t just a buzzword. Had journalists and advocacy groups been able to look over the last-minute compromises, people might have discovered problematic language or even simple drafting errors, which could produce unintended consequences after Governor Terry Branstad signs these bills into law.

I have a lot of questions about the final education reform bill and the plan to provide health insurance to low-income Iowans, particularly those earning between 101 percent and 138 percent of the poverty level. I also need more time to sort through the budget numbers and final changes to the standings bill. After the holiday weekend Bleeding Heartland will examine the important results of the legislative session in more detail. For now, I’ve posted after the jump details on who voted for and against the major bills approved this week.

UPDATE: In the May 24 edition of the On Iowa Politics podcast, statehouse reporters Mike Wiser and James Lynch discussed how the big issues came together “behind closed doors,” with no public scrutiny or oversight. Lynch commented that to his knowledge, the conference committee named to resolve the impasse over Medicaid expansion never formally met, except perhaps for one organizational meeting. Lynch recounted one occasion when Iowa House Republican Dave Heaton was briefing journalists about the health care talks, and the journalists asked when that happened, since there hadn’t been any public notices of conference committee meetings. According to Lynch, Heaton replied, “We’re not having meetings, but we’re meeting.” Senate President Pam Jochum said that negotiations between Democratic State Senator Amanda Ragan and House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer produced the “key to Iowa’s health care compromise.” Notably, Upmeyer didn’t have a prominent role in passing the House health insurance plan, nor was she named to the conference committee assigned to merge the House and Senate proposals.

Speaking to journalists on May 22, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal and Jochum weren’t able to answer a specific question about compromise wording reached regarding Medicaid coverage of abortions. That was no minor issue–it was the last sticking point holding up approval of the health and human services budget. In effect, Gronstal told journalists, you can see the wording after the final bill is published.

When news broke last week of a tax compromise skewed toward business, I wondered why Senate Democrats would agree to pass that bill without progress toward Medicaid expansion, one of their top priorities. Governor Terry Branstad was saying legislators should adjourn after approving a budget, education reform and the tax deal, returning later this year for a special session on health insurance coverage for low-income Iowans. In my opinion, Democrats would be insane to give Republicans what they want on taxes now, hoping for Medicaid expansion later.

Today several signs point toward a possible deal on Medicaid coverage before the end of the legislative session.

State Senator Kent Sorenson claims to have made some Iowa House Republicans unhappy by helping the advocacy group Iowa Pro-Life Action pressure state representatives over abortion funding. Currently, Iowa’s Medicaid program covers abortions under very limited circumstances. In fact, our state is among the most restrictive in this area. Nevertheless, a compromise worked out on the final day of the 2011 legislative session angered many conservatives. Some Iowa Republicans have pushed for a total ban on Medicaid-funded abortion.

In a Facebook post last night, Sorenson lambasted members of his own party who do not keep their promises on the “pro-life” issue. He claimed that some House Republicans “are considering filing ethics charges against me” because he signed a letter Iowa Pro-Life Action sent to lawmakers. Looking through the Iowa House Code of Ethics, it’s not clear to me which rule Sorenson might have violated. House Republican staffer Josie Albrecht told me by telephone that she was not aware of any pending ethics complaints by legislators against Sorenson.

I enclose the full text of the Facebook post after the jump. At this writing, it has been “shared” by 63 Facebook users, including conservative talk radio hosts Steve Deace and Jan Mickelson.

Sorenson is already facing an ethics investigation related to alleged paid work for Michele Bachmann’s presidential campaign. I have been wondering whether Republicans might be better off with a different nominee in Iowa Senate district 13 next year. However, an uncompromising stand against abortion funding would serve Sorenson well if he faced a GOP primary challenger.

Does anyone still doubt that Governor Terry Branstad plans to run for a sixth term next year? Those not convinced should read Mike Wiser’s report on the full-time staffer just hired by Branstad’s re-election campaign.

Meanwhile, Democratic State Senator Jack Hatch dropped a couple of hints lately about a possible run for governor.

One of the ten closest Iowa legislative races last year was in House district 68, where Democrat Daniel Lundby defeated two-term State Representative Nick Wagner by 117 votes, 50.3 percent to 49.6 percent. I’ve been expecting Wagner to attempt a political comeback in 2014, as Governor Terry Branstad recently withdrew his nomination to serve on the Iowa Utilities Board.

If Wagner attempts to return to the statehouse, he will need to get through a GOP primary first, because yesterday Ken Rizer announced his campaign in House district 68. I’ve posted background on Rizer and Lundby after the jump, along with a district map and the latest voter registration totals.

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 night the Iowa House approved by 51 votes to 49 a version of Governor Terry Branstad’s alternative to expanding Medicaid. Two Republicans opposed the plan, but State Representative Dave Heaton fell in line despite his major doubts about the bill.

Details on the vote and highlights from the debate are after the jump.