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

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

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

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

The Iowa GOP convenes today after flooding derailed its originally scheduled state convention last month. John Deeth is liveblogging the proceedings over at his blog.

Please share any thoughts you have about the Republicans’ prospects or strategies in our state.

By the way, Deeth wrote an interesting post on the uncontested races for the Iowa House and Senate. Republicans left one Democratic state senator and 20 Democratic state representatives without a challenger. Democrats failed to field a candidate in six Republican-held Senate districts and 10 House districts.

UPDATE: David Yepsen notes that Mike Huckabee’s presence signals he may run for president in 2012 if John McCain loses to Barack Obama this year. Yepsen also sees the Iowa GOP moving to the right:

Steve Scheffler, the head of the Iowa Christian Alliance, easily ousted longtime national committee member Steve Roberts by a vote of 788 to 543.  Kim Lehman, the head of the Iowa Right to Life, defeated state Rep. Sandy Greiner for the job of national committeewoman by a vote of 729 to 484.

Roberts and Greiner were seen as the older, more centrist candidates who sought to make the party a big tent that appealed to a wide, diverse group of people.  Scheffler and Lehman said the party needed to take strong stands on social issues in order to attract voters and inspire workers.  Yet centrists argue these positions turn off independents and mainstream voters needed to win elections.

At one level, their election is further evidence of the rightward drift of the Iowa GOP and how it’s been hijacked by a narrow ideological faction that sometimes seems bent on turning the GOP into a church instead of a political party.

But it’s also a recognition that the party machinery is in sad shape and some Republicans want a shake-up in management.  While Scheffler and Lehman are most definitely on the right hand side of the spectrum, they are also respected for their organizational skills.

The desire for new management bodes ill for state party chairman Stewart Iverson when the central committee meets after the November election to elect a chair for the coming year.  (He just replaced Ray Hoffman as party chair, has little time to right the organizational ship, but will still take the rap for any Republican defeats in the fall.)

Polk County GOP chairman Ted Sporer, who is allied with Scheffler and Lehman supporters, is making noises about challenging Iverson if he runs.

Not long ago I wrote about tension between Governor Chet Culver and advocates for organized labor in Iowa.

The Des Moines Register reported this week that labor layer Mark Hedberg has created a few hundred fake milk cartons with Culver’s photo under the word “MISSING”:

“Have you seen me?” the cartons read. “Description: Democratic Governor with alleged loyalty to Iowa workers and Labor. … Approach With Caution: May have developed amnesia and is known to throw fits when reminded of his promises. If found, please call 1-800-NOT-LOYAL.”

The Uncommon Blog of Iowa posted a photo of the fake milk cartons.

The Des Moines Register described the text on Hedberg’s creations:

BRAND NAME: The brand name of the milk is C Abunchof Hot Air. Under that label, it says: “Empty words added. Grade F homogenized pasteurized.”

SLOGANS: One side says “got chet?” and “High hopes by voters. Broken promises by Chet.”

NUTRITION INFORMATION: In the nutrition chart, the serving size is “1 term (4 years).” It goes on: “Amount of Support Per Serving: Hot Air 600, Empty Words 520.” There’s a breakdown of a fictitious percentage of daily values: corporate terrorist money 100%, secret health care legislation 100%, raising taxes on Iowa workers 100%, broken promises to labor 100%. It cites 0% for public employee union rights, fair share, prevailing wage, choice of doctor, employee misclassification and leadership.

“Corporate terrorist money” supposedly refers to a $5,000 campaign contribution to Culver from Agriprocessors, which allegedly has committed numerous labor and safety violations at its meat-packing plant in Postville.

The Register quoted Hedberg as saying that no union helped him pay for or assemble the fake milk cartons. His professional web site lists AFSCME and seven other unions as clients.

I’ve got four comments and one question regarding the issues Hedberg raised.

Comment 1: This wasn’t the best time to tease Culver about being missing on the job.

I find myself in rare agreement with Des Moines Register columnist John Carlson, who noted that Culver has been “anything but missing” in recent weeks. He’s been out there talking with Iowans in dozens of flooded communities.

Comment 2: Aside from collective bargaining, which refers to a bill Culver vetoed (House File 2645), most of Hedberg’s complaints apply equally to the Democratic leadership in the state legislature.

After all, it was the Iowa House and Senate which passed bills Hedberg doesn’t like (such as the cigarette tax increase) and failed to pass things he wants (such as “fair share” or “prevailing wage” legislation).

The Register quoted Hedberg as blaming Culver for the inaction: “He lost an opportunity to work out a joint party agenda and get it passed,” Hedberg said. “He didn’t take the initiative.”

My recollection is that Culver did support the “fair share” proposal. If the votes weren’t there to pass that or other measures important to organized labor, the solution is to elect more and better Democrats to the Iowa legislature.

The major labor unions in this state recognize this and are working to expand the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.

The money Hedberg spent on his publicity stunt would have been better spent supporting the campaigns of Democratic incumbents or challengers who are good on labor issues. I’m sure he knows who they are.

Comment 3: Regarding the collective bargaining bill that Culver vetoed, I believe that labor advocates are wrong to put all of the blame for that mess on the governor.

As I’ve written before, I support the substance of the collective bargaining bill. However, the way that bill was passed would have made Culver look like a tool of organized labor if he had signed it.

The solution is for the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate to pass a collective bargaining bill the normal way next year. That is, get the proposal out in the open early in the session and allow full debate. Don’t let someone offer it as an extra-long amendment after the “funnel” deadline for introducing new legislation has passed, and then try to limit debate on the measure.

With several more Democrats in the Iowa House and Senate, we could get a good collective bargaining bill through with no problem.

Comment 4: I suspect that publicity about organized labor being mad at Culver is on balance good for the governor. Who can claim that he is beholden to “special interest” unions when a labor lawyer is giving him low ratings on their issues and the Iowa Federation of Labor’s newsletter publishes this?

“The 2008 Legislative Session will go down in Iowa labor history as the session when a Democratic governor turned his back on the unions that enthusiastically supported him and helped get him elected,” the newsletter said. “When Gov. Culver vetoed the public sector collective bargaining bill, not only public workers, but all of labor was stunned by what they felt was an out-and-out betrayal.”

If Hedberg’s goal is to drum up more business for his law firm, fake milk cartons making fun of Culver might achieve that. But if the goal is pressuring the governor to spend more political capital on supporting labor’s legislative agenda, I don’t see this working.

The milk cartons give the serving size for Culver as “1 term (4 years).” But let’s get real. Labor unions are not going to support a Democratic primary challenger to Culver in 2010, and they are not going to support his Republican opponent.

This whole controversy will probably help Culver’s reelection campaign more than it hurts.

Which leads me to my question for labor advocates who are angry with Culver:

Do you have any reason to believe that Mike Blouin, whom AFSCME and some other unions endorsed in the 2006 Democratic primary for governor, would have signed the collective bargaining bill under the same circumstances, or would have done more to adopt “fair share” or “prevailing wage” legislation?

If so, I’d like to hear why. I never did fully understand the union support for Blouin. It’s not as if Blouin’s economic development work focused on creating union jobs or promoting collective bargaining. If anything, he got more money and support from Chamber of Commerce types than Culver.

Let’s elect a stronger Democratic majority in the Iowa House and Senate. If good labor bills are adopted through normal legislative procedures in 2009, I expect Culver to sign them.

UPDATE: Someone has e-mailed me to note that AFSCME and other unions endorsed Blouin not because they thought he’d be better on labor issues, but because they thought Culver couldn’t beat Jim Nussle.

That was also my impression (although I have no contacts inside those unions).

I think that if they’d gotten their wish and Blouin had won the primary, we would have a governor no more supportive of collective bargaining or “fair share” than Culver, and perhaps even less supportive.  

cross-posted around the blogosphere

On July 4 I marched with volunteers and staff for Jerry Sullivan, Democratic candidate in Iowa House district 59.

We don’t hear much about state legislative races on national blogs, because it would be overwhelming to keep up with what’s going on all over the country.

But you should get involved on behalf of a good Democrat running for your state’s Assembly, House or Senate. Five reasons why are after the jump.

As always, post a comment or send me an e-mail if I’ve left out a noteworthy event.

If you have kids and live in central Iowa, this coming week is your last chance to see the Asian elephant Rosie and her calf JP at the Blank Park Zoo in Des Moines. July 13 will be their last day at the zoo.

Monday, July 7:

It’s Edna Griffin day at the Fort Des Moines Museum and Education Center, 75 S.E. Army Post Road in Des Moines. Sixty years ago, Griffin “led a series of protests that ultimately enforced Iowa’s civil rights statutes after she was refused service at a Katz Drug Store in downtown Des Moines because she was black.”

The Des Moines Register reports:

The tribute to Edna Griffin, who served in the Women’s Army Corps in World War II, includes a 2 p.m. ceremony for naming a room at the Grimes State Office Building, 400 E. 14th St., and a 7 p.m. theatrical tribute at the Fort Des Moines Museum and Education Center, 75 S.E. Army Post Road.

The tribute will be done by Ruth Ann Gaines and Maureen Korte, with music by John Cheatem, and a march to remember Iowa’s civil rights heroes. Both events are free. For more information, call 282-8060. […]

To recreate the mood of the era, the tribute uses monologues derived from interviews with people involved with Griffin’s protests of the store and subsequent lawsuit.

Representative Bruce Braley (IA-01) begins his annual “Congress on Your Corner” tour on Monday.  “Congress on Your Corner” meetings are designed to give Iowans an opportunity to meet with Braley to discuss their concerns, discuss recent initiatives in Congress, and open casework.

Here is Braley’s public schedule for the day:  

8:00 am                    Waterloo/Cedar Falls Congress on Your Corner

                                   Cedar Falls Conference Center

                                    3712 Cedar Heights Dr .

                                    Cedar Falls , Iowa      

11:00am                    Parkersburg Congress on Your Corner

                                   Parkersburg Veterans Memorial Building

                                    205 Colfax St .

                                    Parkersburg , Iowa

2:00pm                    Waverly Congress on Your Corner

                                   Waverly Public Library

                                   1500  W. Bremer Ave.

                                   Waverly, Iowa

The Environmental Protection Commission will hold a general discussion meeting from 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. July 7 at King’s Pointe Resort, 1520 Lakeshore Drive in Storm Lake. This meeting will be followed by a walking tour of Storm Lake, starting at the resort at 3:00 p.m. At 6:00 p.m., the committee will attend the Storm Lake Preservation Association Picnic at the Storm Lake Municipal Golf Course Club House at 1528 Lakeshore Drive.  

Tuesday, July 8:

Lots going on at the Environmental Protection Commission’s monthly meeting:

The Department of Natural Resources will update the Environmental Protection Commission on the status of flooding events in Iowa and summarize its response efforts to the flood at the monthly EPC meeting July 8. They will also discuss how land use practices can contribute to flooding.

The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. at King’s Pointe Resort, 1520 Lakeshore Drive in Storm Lake. The meeting is open to the public, with public comments starting at 10:30 a.m.

During the meeting, the EPC will also consider a proposed rule to establish criteria for awarding grants to independent recycling redemption centers. The DNR received $1 million in grants from the state’s general fund to improve these centers.

The EPC will also hear a proposal to update the Water Quality Standards Antidegradation Policy, which sets minimum requirements for the state to follow in order to conserve, maintain and protect existing uses and water quality.

DNR geologist Claire Hruby will discuss manure application on frozen or snow-covered ground at 1 p.m. on Tuesday. This issue was raised in May with an EPC motion. The EPC also received a petition from the Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement to limit or ban this practice. ICCI has amended its petition and granted an indefinite extension on the usual 60-day period for response to the petition.

Look for more information about the agenda items on the DNR Web site under Commissions and Boards at www.iowadnr.gov.

Join Senators Staci Appel, Amanda Ragan, and Becky Schmitz for a fundraising reception to benefit the Senate Majority Fund:

Women of the Senate”

Past, Present & Future

Tuesday, July 8th from 5:30-7:30 PM

at the home of Roxanne Conlin

2900 Southern Hills Circle, Des Moines 50312

Join us for an evening of good food and drink and to support the Senate Democratic Majority Fund.  Valet Parking will be provided.

Suggested Contribution Levels:

Host: $1000      Sponsor: $500

Patron: $250      Supporter: $125

Guest: $50

Click here to contribute.

*all online contributions before July 6th will be recognized at the event

Please RSVP if you can attend. (The link to RSVP was broken–I would call the Senate Democrats office.)

Bruce Braley will hold a telephone town hall meeting on July 8 at 7 pm Central Daylight Time:

The purpose of the call is to allow Rep. Braley and his staff to discuss federal assistance available to flood victims and answer questions about federal disaster programs.

The technology employed by Braley will call out to thousands of Iowans in the First District who can then choose to participate in the forum when reached.

Iowans who wish to call in to the town hall themselves should contact one of Rep. Braley’s district offices for a call-in number and passcode.

Nearly 5,000 residents of the district participated in Braley’s first telephone town hall meeting last month, which was about gasoline prices.

One Iowa’s “Coffee House/Happy Hour” will be at the Ritual Cafe, 13th Street between Grand and Locust in downtown Des Moines, from 5:00 to 6:45 pm on July 8:

At One Iowa, we believe all families should have equal protections and responsibilities; the way to achieve this is through marriage.  As we continue our work toward Marriage Equality, this month we are focusing on the newly released comic (hot off the presses) “Iowa’s Noble Courage In Civil Rights” and the recently shot video “United for Equality.”

On Tuesday, One Iowa has the honor to host Andrea Fehring, our Marriage Equality Educator at Ritual; she will talk about the comic and video, and discuss how you can become more involved in this campaign toward equality.  Andrea’s presentation will start at 5:30pm. […]  

For questions, please contact One Iowa at (515)288-4019, or you can visit our web site at www.oneiowa.org.

Thursday, July 10:

A huge list of prominent Iowa Democrats including former Lt. Governor Sally Pederson & Jim Autry and Charlotte & Fed Hubbell are hosting a fundraiser for Becky Greenwald on July 10 from 5:00 to 6:30 pm at Dos Rios restaurant on 4th Street and Court Avenue in downtown Des Moines:

Contribution levels:

$1,000 – Host             $500 – Sponsor           $250 – Supporter        $100 – Friend

Please make checks payable to: Becky Greenwald for Congress

RSVP (515) 987-2800 or BeckyGreenwald@gmail.com

Individual contributions limited to $2300 and are not tax deductible.  Corporate contributions are not permitted.

Becky Greenwald for Congress * Iowa 4th District

P.O. Box 608 * Perry, IA  50220 * 515-564-3883 * www.beckygreenwald.com

Friday, July 11:

IowaPolitics.com is holding another “Cookies and Conversation” program at Drake University from 1:30 to 2:30 pm:

The program, “Food, Fuel, and Iowa ‘s Future Energy Needs” will feature panelists:

Bill Northey, Iowa’s Secretary of Agriculture; Frank Cownie, Des Moines Mayor; John Norris, Chairman of the Iowa Utilities Board; and Roya Stanley, Executive Director of the Iowa Office of Energy Independence.

The event is free, but reservations are required. Free cookies and beverages will be served.

Doors will open at 1 p.m. The program will be held in Levitt Hall, in Old Main, at 25th and University.

If you can attend please RSVP to Julie Rutz at rutz@IowaPolitics.com or call 515.226.8774. If you cannot attend but are interested in the program Mediacom will be taping the program and rebroadcasting it on its Connections Channel and Video On Demand program. The schedule will be posted on our Website at http://www.iowapolitics.com/ as soon as it becomes available.

Sunday, July 13:

House district 59 candidate Jerry Sullivan is holding a fundraiser at the Great Midwestern Café, 1250 NW 128th St in Clive, from 5 pm to 7 pm:

Partner: $500

Host: $250

Sponsor: $100

Friend: $50

Checks can be made out to Sullivan for State Representative.

Please RSVP with Mike at (614) 561-9117 or mmccall@iowademocrats.org.

The rest of the press release from Sullivan’s campaign is after the jump. It includes a link to his ActBlue page.

The Des Moines Register reported on Thursday that

On the same day a new statewide smoking ban went into effect [July 1], several bar and restaurant owners filed a petition in Polk County District Court seeking to overturn the ban.

The Iowa Bar Owners Coalition, based in Clinton County; the Clinton Organized Bar and Restaurant Association; Froehlich Properties; and longtime smoker Ron Oveson filed the petition in Des Moines on Tuesday.

The group’s attorney, George Eichhorn, said he’s seeking a temporary injunction on the enforcement of the ban until the case can go to trial.

That’s former state Senator George Eichhorn, who last month just barely lost the Republican primary to run against U.S. Senator Tom Harkin.

Some restaurant and bar owners wanted to challenge the exemptions granted to casinos and other venues. Former Governor Tom Vilsack had expressed a willingness to take the case, as long as the lawsuit was aimed at overturning the exemptions and not at overturning the ban itself. Apparently no court anywhere in the U.S. has struck down a smoking ban.

However, some people say Iowa’s new law is more extreme than other restrictions on public smoking, to the point of being “monstrous” and “vicious” and “cruel”.

In his comments to the Register, Eichhorn suggested that was the angle he would pursue:

Eichhorn said the state adopted “radical” regulations that affect a lot of private businesses but did not take the necessary precautions to protect them. However, he said he thought the state made sure that it would still benefit monetarily.

“I think that Iowa has done some rather unusual things,” he said. “We will get some good results out of this lawsuit.”

I suspect that the people footing the bill for this lawsuit will be sorry they didn’t listen to this guy:

Randy Stanford, a Des Moines small business owner who organized Iowans for Equal Rights, said no smoking ban has ever been overturned.

“They can waste their money any way they want, but there’s only one legal issue,” he said. “I wish there was a way to challenge the entire bill and be successful, but there isn’t.”

The only option is to “get rid of the unfair exemptions that are in the bill,” he said.

I noticed that Iowans for Equal Rights was not among the groups that filed the petition in Polk County on Tuesday. Anyone know whether that group may still be planning to challenge the exemptions to the smoking ban?

According to this report by Jason Hancock at Iowa Independent,

At least 20 employees of the Iowa Democratic Party have been demoted or fired and a coordinated state-wide campaign was essentially disbanded, replaced by a focus on the presidential bid of Sen. Barack Obama.

Details are sketchy, but the changes could have an impact on November’s legislative races, with field staff that was previously working for down-ticket races now being placed on the payroll of Obama’s presidential campaign and working almost entirely on its behalf.

If this story is accurate, it could be very bad news for down-ticket candidates. Obama’s campaign needs only to win the statewide popular vote, and no doubt its field plan will reflect that reality. They have every reason to focus on increasing turnout in Democrat-rich, highly-populated areas.

However, most of those precincts are in the first, second and third Congressional districts, and/or in urban state legislative districts where Democratic incumbents are safe.

I was hoping that the Iowa Democratic Party’s coordinated campaign would put a special emphasis on getting out the vote in the fourth and fifth Congressional districts, as well as in the battleground districts for the Iowa House and Senate.

Governor Chet Culver recently donated $100,000 from his campaign fund to the Iowa Democratic Party’s coordinated campaign. If I were Culver, I’d want to make sure that turnout efforts focused on building larger Democratic majorities in the state legislature.

Hancock’s article for Iowa Independent notes that

the biggest impact could be on state legislative candidates, who depend on the pooled resources of the coordinated campaign for much of their volunteer coordination and get-out-the-vote programs. Candidates in close races had already paid the initial fee to join the coordinated campaign — up to about $10,000 each — before word leaked out that the Obama campaign would not participate in the joint effort. Money that was paid into the coordinated campaign by candidates will be used to fund the summer canvass and, if financially possible, to extend the canvass through November.  Canvassers will focus on down-ticket races.  The rest of the Democratic operatives deployed around the state will report directly — and exclusively — to the Obama campaign.

The situation mirrors what happened in Colorado, where the Obama campaign announced last last month it would not be joining the state’s coordinated campaign and instead would operate alongside it. The move drew criticism from some Colorado Democrats who fear the party will end up duplicating efforts and squandering resources.

The difference is that Colorado is likely to be much more closely contested in the presidential race.

Obama is heavily favored to win Iowa’s electoral votes. He has never trailed McCain in a head-to-head poll in Iowa. The Democratic voter registration edge has increased substantially in Iowa during the past year, thanks largely to the caucuses in January. Obama has a strong statewide network of volunteers, while John McCain has never built an organization here and barely campaigned here before the caucuses.

I am concerned that Iowa Democrats will lose some close districts as a result of letting the Obama campaign run the statewide field operation. For the first time in my life, a Democrat is running a strong campaign in my own House district 59. As an environmental activist, I know we can’t make headway on a number of important issues unless we get more good Democrats to the statehouse.

I would like assurances from the Obama campaign that they will dedicate substantial GOTV resources to the key legislative districts, and not only to the areas likely to produce the largest number of presidential votes for Obama.

UPDATE: Open Left user Valatan raised another good point:

if anyone wins in Iowa, they owe their victory to Obama’s machine, not the Iowa Democratic party’s GOTV machine.  I wonder if this is quietly happening everywhere, or just in the swing states.

I’ve asked a lot of other state bloggers whether the Obama campaign will coordinate all GOTV in their states. Someone from Missouri wrote back to say that Missouri Democrats would never allow that to happen, because in 2004 the state Democratic Party cooperated with the Kerry campaign, and then the Kerry campaign pulled the plug on all GOTV in Missouri in October.

That makes me even more worried. What if Obama is feeling very confident in Iowa by October, but looks like he may be in trouble in other states? Could his campaign shut down the bulk of his Iowa field operation in order to invest the resources elsewhere?

Whether Obama wins Iowa by 5 percent or 10 percent is of no concern to me, but whether we have 51 or 53 or 55 or 57 Democrats in the Iowa House could make or break a lot of important legislative initiatives in 2009.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[…]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Well, count this guy out:

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

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

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

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

– Chuck Davis, Urbandale

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

Jason Hancock has a story up at Iowa Independent about labor unions working hard to increase the Democratic majorities in the Iowa legislature.

It’s clear that members of the labor community are still furious that Governor Chet Culver vetoed a collective-bargaining bill passed toward the end of this year’s session:

Ken Sager, president of the Iowa Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO, said the 2008 legislative session ended on a sour note, but he hopes that be used as motivation in the future.

“A lot of our members are very disappointed and angry that we were finally able to get a [collective bargaining] bill through the legislature and we couldn’t get the governor’s signature,” he said. “We were very surprised, and we’ve heard from a number of legislative leaders who were just as stunned as we were. Now, we’re trying to focus that anger in a productive way to help build the labor movement for the future.”

In the federation’s most recent newsletter, the veto was put in much starker terms.

“The 2008 Legislative Session will go down in Iowa labor history as the session when a Democratic governor turned his back on the unions that enthusiastically supported him and helped get him elected,” the newsletter said. “When Gov. Culver vetoed the public sector collective bargaining bill, not only public workers, but all of labor was stunned by what they felt was an out-and-out betrayal.”

Cityview weekly’s “Civic Skinny” column recently commented on the strained relationship:

It wasn’t on his schedule, but [Culver] showed up the other day at the dedication of the Iowa Workers Monument. Skinny wasn’t sure what that means – so she turned to the Senior Analyst for Civic Skinny, who had a ready explanation. “This was organized labor’s effort to recognize Iowa’s workers that started way back in 2004. With the collective bargaining veto, it would have added insult to injury to have skipped the event, but he didn’t put it on his public schedule or send out a press release to promote the dedication of the monument – which is located on state property,” the Senior Analyst analyzed. Then, morphing into a Senior Cynic, he added: “Maybe this was the advice he got from the same pollsters that advised him to veto the collective bargaining bill.” “Way back in 2004” is code for “during the Vilsack administration,” and several Vilsack people – including the former governor himself – are on the Monument committee, which might be another reason Culver didn’t play up the dedication.

I wish labor unions every success in helping elect more Democratic legislators who are strong on their issues.

If Culver had asked for my advice, I would have encouraged him to sign the collective-bargaining bill. I wasn’t persuaded by the arguments that corporate and Republican interest groups made against it.

That said, the Democrats in the legislature badly bungled the passage of the bill, in my opinion.

Let’s take a step back.

In 2007 the slim Democratic majority in the House was unable to hold together to pass the “fair share” bill that would have weakened Iowa’s right-to-work law. This was one of the hot-button issues from the earliest days of the session, and it was a blow to the leadership’s credibility not to get it through.

Statehouse leaders tried a different tactic with the collective-bargaining bill this year. Instead of making clear early in the session that it would be one of their priorities, they let it be added as a 14-page amendment to a different bill, after the first funnel deadline had passed.

In theory, bills need to be approved by a legislative committee before that funnel deadline in order to be voted on during the legislative session. There are exceptions (the leadership can introduce new bills after the funnel), but in general, major initiatives are not supposed to be introduced after the funnel date.

Then, Democrats tried to limit debate over the collective bargaining proposal, prompting Senate Republicans to take unusual steps to force debate on it.

As I said above, I support the substance of the bill. I understand why it would be advantageous for the leadership not to tip their hand early in the session about the collective bargaining bill. Doing so would have given opponents more time to mobilize against it and lean on the less reliable members of the Democratic caucus.

But look at this situation from Culver’s perspective. The Democrats in the legislature looked like they were afraid to debate the collective bargaining measure in broad daylight. That’s what is implied when you introduce a major policy initiative as a long amendment and limit debate before forcing it through on a party-line vote.

I have no idea whether Culver vetoed the bill over substantive disagreements or solely because of political considerations, but I understand his reluctance to get behind a controversial bill approved in this manner.

Let’s elect more good Democrats to the legislature. They should be able to pass a strong collective bargaining bill next year without giving the appearance of trying to slip it in under the radar.

Then Culver should sign it without hesitation.

There seem to be two distinct ideas emerging for financing the massive reconstruction project Iowa will have to enact to deal with the tragic and disastrous floods we’ve experienced this spring (on a quick side note, I sure hope that summer fares us better).  The first is to tap into the state’s so-called “rainy day” fund (no pun was intended, I’m sure) and the other is to borrow money and essentially create debt.  Both are the logical responses to a natural disaster of this magnitude.  I think it was a Johnson County emergency management official who said this was “our own Katrina.”  Whether he meant that in terms of sheer destruction or bad planning or reactions to the event, I’m not sure.  But the statement still leaves an impact.

Once we get beyond the human and emotional costs of the flooding, we will ultimately have to deal with the political ramifications of financing the reconstruction.  Governor Culver seems to prefer using the state’s rainy day fund.  Senate Majority Leader Gronstal says he’s open to incurring debt.  So what are we to do?

At first glance, Gov. Culver’s idea would seem to the most politically feasible and publicly attractive option on the table.  The state and taxpayers won’t have to incur debt or use their taxes to pay off the bills because they’ll just use the extra money they have right now to reconstruct Iowa.  But I think there should be serious consideration of incurring debt to finance the reconstruction.

To me, the root of the problem is whether we want to rebuild or reconstruct what has been destroyed.  Those mean different things.  Rebuilding implies we’ll bring things back to the status quo, maybe with some minor improvements.  Reconstruction implies a step forward and desire to plan and implement improvements and to change the way we do things.  Iowa needs the investment in the future and needs to show that the state has the ability and capability to plan effectively, plan efficiently, and act with speed to solve problems and fix what has broken.

Incurring debt isn’t such a bad thing, as David Yepsen told us yesterday.  There are reasons to consider it.  Tapping into the rainy day fund isn’t a bad idea either.  But will either one be enough?

The special legislative session to deal with this issue is going to happen; it has to.  But the debate will be a lengthy one.  And it will result in tough decisions.  Contrary to what others argue, waiting to see what the federal government will pay for is not an option.  If this truly is “our Katrina” then we all know that federal disaster response is horrid.  The state must act soon.

I recently received a fundraising letter from Senator Staci Appel (Senate district 37), and it contains the following paragraph:

As a freshman legislator, I also had the great opportunity to manage House File 2212 (The Healthy Indoor Clean Air Act) when it came before the Iowa Senate. I was happy to work in a bipartisan effort to pass this important piece of legislation. This legislation will protect workers and individuals all across Iowa.

I’ve been writing posts supporting the smoking ban all year, but I never thought to refer to it only as “The Healthy Indoor Clean Air Act.” Many people might not even realize Appel is talking about the smoking ban. Who’s against healthy, indoor clean air?

This kind of thing is what separates the pros from the amateurs.

Earlier this month the Iowa Department of Public Health released draft regulations for implementing the smoking ban that will go into effect on July 1. You can view the draft regulations here.

The Des Moines Register reported a few days ago that the people who have always opposed the smoking ban are furious about the IDPH’s draft rules:

“In my mind and in the minds of just about every single legislator I’ve talked with in the past week – and that’s about 20 or so – this is an absolute perversion of the legislative intent. Period,” said Rep. McKinley Bailey, a Webster City Democrat who voted against the bill in April.

The state’s administrative rules are intended to help clarify and implement laws and spell out details of enforcement. The Legislature’s Administrative Rules Review Committee discussed the proposed rules for the smoking ban Wednesday.

The Legislature this year approved a ban on smoking, effective July 1, in almost all indoor public places, including bars and restaurants. One provision in the law allows bar owners to permit smoking in their outdoor patio areas but prohibits restaurants from allowing outdoor smoking.

The rules, also effective July 1, say that bar food is limited to ice, pre-packaged snacks, popcorn, peanuts and the reheating of commercially prepared foods that do not require assembly, such as frozen pizza.

Under that definition, bars that have a grill and serve a burger, for example, would be considered a restaurant.

McKinley Bailey is a good Democrat, but I think he’s wrong on this issue. A restaurant is commonly understood to mean “a place where meals are served to the public.” I looked that up in several dictionaries.

If you look up definitions of “bar,” you will find that it refers to a counter or an establishment where beverages, especially alcoholic beverages, are served. Some of the definitions mention that food may be served at bars as well. The IDPH draft regulations account for this, by explaining the types of food that a bar may serve.

If you allowed every establishment that serves drinks to evade the smoking ban, you’d have hundreds of restaurant owners placing a few tables outside and declaring themselves to be “bars.”

It seems reasonable to say that if a business is serving the public food cooked to order, that establishment is a restaurant subject to the smoking ban.

I want to address this part of the Register article as well:

“This is a clear case where a state agency is going beyond the scope of the intended legislation,” said Tom Baldwin, owner of Drink, a Clive bar.

Roughly 3 percent of Drink’s sales are from food. But because of the proposed rules, the facility would be considered a restaurant for the purposes of enforcement of the statewide smoking ban, he told the rules committee Wednesday.

Baldwin has a simple choice to make. If he thinks that his business depends on letting patrons smoke, he can stop serving meals cooked to order and serve pre-packaged food instead. By his own admission, food accounts for only about 3 percent of his business’s sales.

Or, if he feels that cooking food for customers is vital for his business, he can go smoke-free.

Either way, I don’t think his argument about legislative intent holds water.

As I’ve written before, the research on smoking bans suggests that they do not hurt the bottom line. This report is worth reading in full, but here is the main conclusion:

A significant body of scientific research has been accumulated on the economic impact of smoking bans on hospitality business, particularly bars and restaurants. The only research that shows any long-term negative effect on bar or restaurant sales is unscientific research that has been sponsored by the tobacco companies.

All independent published studies conducted in the US and Canada that used tax data in the analysis concluded that “smoking restrictions do not impact negatively on hospitality sales, employment, or tourism activity in the long run.”

The current economic climate, with rising costs for food and transportation hitting restaurants and forcing many consumers to reduce their discretionary spending, is a genuine threat to the hospitality industry. In contrast, restaurant and bar owners’ anger over the new smoking ban is misplaced.  

Senator Tom Harkin has announced who made the second cut in his “Building Blue” contest:

Dear [desmoinesdem]:

After two rounds of voting and several thousands of votes cast, I am proud to announce the top 5 House and top 5 Senate candidates that you voted for to receive $2,000 and advance to the final round.

For the Iowa State House you voted for:  Elesha Gayman D-84, Gretchen Lawyer D-36, Eric Palmer D-75, Mark Smith D-43, and Andrew Wenthe D-18.

For the Iowa State Senate you voted for: Jeff Danielson D-10, Swati Dandekar D-18, Mike Gronstal D-50, Tom Rielly D-38, and Sharon Savage D-40.

Congratulations!

Thanks to your strong support for progressive values, each of these outstanding candidates for the Iowa general assembly will receive a $2,000 contribution and are now eligible to win the grand prize of another $5,000 contribution and a fundraising email.

Please click here to make your voice heard by voting for one of these fine progressive candidates in our final round.

Voting for the final round will be open from now through June 17, so please remember to tell your friends and family and help build Iowa blue by voting for your favorite candidate today.

Thank you for supporting all of the candidates that have participated in our Building Blue contest so far and congratulations to our first money winners!

Sincerely,

Senator Tom Harkin

People, please don’t vote for Mike Gronstal. He does not need more cash for his campaign. In fact, I think it would be a nice gesture for him to donate the $2,000 he receives from Harkin to Democrats facing tough Senate races.

A couple of months ago John Deeth wrote this great feature on the battleground races for Iowa House and Senate.

Of the five Senate candidates remaining in Harkin’s contest, only Dandekar and Rielly are also on Deeth’s list of candidates facing close contests. I recommend voting for one of them in the final round.

Of the five House candidates remaining in Harkin’s contest, Gayman, Lawyer and Palmer are all running in battleground districts, according to Deeth. I would choose one of them in the final round.

To vote, go to http://www.tomharkin.com. You can pick one House candidate and one Senate candidate.

Today is the last day to select one Iowa House candidate and one Iowa Senate candidate you’d like to see Harkin give money to this year:

http://www.tomharkin.com/

Bleeding Heartland users advocated for various candidates in this thread:

http://www.bleedingheartland.c…

I live in Iowa House district 59, which includes Windsor Heights, Clive and parts of West Des Moines. Republicans have held this seat since before I was born, but I am convinced that Windsor Heights Mayor Jerry Sullivan has a strong chance to flip this district for the Democrats.

Judging from two calls I received in the past 48 hours, some Republicans are worried about that possibility too.

On Sunday evening I got a robocall from “Survey 2000” claiming to have a brief 30-second survey for me to answer. The first question was whether I planned to vote in the June 3 Democratic primary. The second was whether I planned to vote for Jerry Sullivan or Mark Matel in the primary. Then the push-polling started.

I jotted down what I could with pencil and paper, but the robocall voice went fast, so I don’t have anything close to the verbatim wording of the call.

One question asked whether a candidate’s position on a woman’s right to choose was important, and followed up with some language suggesting that Jerry Sullivan does not support that right.

The next question asked whether I thought elected officials should keep our taxes low, and followed up by saying that Windsor Heights property taxes were very high while Sullivan was mayor.

Finally, there was a question and follow-up information relating to Sullivan’s support for last summer’s Project Destiny referendum, which failed by a huge margin.

This call had all the telltale marks of a push-poll. No demographic information was collected, so the results could not be analyzed in any useful way by a campaign or a public polling firm. Only negative information about one candidate was pushed. In contrast, a legitimate message-testing poll, such as the one commissioned by Congressman Leonard Boswell’s campaign in January, will test positive and negative messages about one or more candidates.

I jotted down the phone number given at the end of the call. It went by fast, but I think I wrote it down correctly: 703-263-2511. I tried to call that number and got only busy signals.

On Monday at about 4:15 pm, I got a different robocall. This was not a fake poll, but it was otherwise similar to the call I received Sunday night.

This time a woman’s voice said she was calling from “Survey 2008” (which was pronounced “Survey two zero zero eight”) with important information about the primary coming up on June 3.

First, she said that Windsor Heights property taxes went from one of the lowest to the second-highest in the Des Moines metro area while Jerry Sullivan was mayor.

Then, she said that Sullivan worked to pass Project Destiny, which was supported by wealthy business interests.

Then, she said Sullivan was believed to support ending a woman’s right to choose an abortion.

The phone number given at the end of this call was 703-263-1908, which probably is a different phone line at the same office that produced the call I got Sunday evening.

First things first: I contacted Sullivan’s campaign manager and confirmed that the candidate is pro-choice. There is no basis for these calls suggesting that he would seek to end a woman’s right to choose. I suspect that they tried that line because Sullivan is Catholic and has a Catholic-sounding name, and they figured this argument would hurt him with Democratic primary voters.

A neighbor called me yesterday to report getting a nasty robocall about Sullivan. When we compared notes, it was obviously the same call. She assumed that Sullivan’s opponent in the Democratic primary, Mark Matel, was behind the call, but my hunch is that these calls were not arranged by any of the rival candidates for this seat.

I doubt that either Matel or Republican Susan Murphy have the resources to fund this kind of operation, even if they wanted to. I assume that Chris Hagenow, the favorite to win the Republican nomination, is focused on winning his primary race, although he may have raised enough money to fund calls like these.

The language on taxes used in both calls suggests to me that a Republican interest group is behind them. Iowans for Tax Relief has endorsed Hagenow, so that group might be a prime suspect. I am sure they would rather not see the relatively inexperienced Hagenow run against someone with Sullivan’s background in business and public service.

It’s also possible that the Iowa Republican Party decided to spend money on roughing up Sullivan in the Democratic primary. Presumably the seat would be easier for Republicans to hold if Sullivan loses the primary, or if they can damage his reputation among the loyal Democratic voters who show up for primaries.

The phone numbers given at the end of the calls should point toward the firm that produced them, but that would not necessarily reveal what candidate or entity paid for the calls.

If you receive calls pushing negative information on any candidate this year, please take as detailed notes as you can. That’s easier when there is a live caller, because you can ask him or her to repeat the questions. Stay on the line until the end of the call and write down the phone number, which they are legally required to give. Then contact the campaign of the candidate being attacked in the call, so they know right away what is going on.

I also encourage Bleeding Heartland users to put up a diary at this blog if you receive any push-poll or obnoxious robocalls this year.

I learned from Representative Tyler Olson today that the Iowa Department of Public Health has released draft regulations to implement the public smoking ban set to go into effect on July 1. Go to www.iowasmokefreeair.gov to read and comment on the regulations.

I was tough on the House Democrats earlier this year for putting so many exemptions in the smoking ban, but I understand that those were necessary to get the bill through the lower chamber.

Legislators removed some of the exceptions when the House and Senate versions were reconciled in conference. My hope is that a court may strike down some of the exemptions that remained in the final version of the bill.

For those who are still bent out of shape about the new law, I again offer my 10 suggestions to help smokers stop whining about the smoking ban.

The press release I got today from Representative Tyler Olson is after the jump.

Last week I told you about Senator Tom Harkin’s contest to determine which Iowa House and Senate candidates will receive campaign donations from him.

Anyone can sign up at his website and vote for their favored candidates (though as

John Deeth noted, Harkin has excluded a few candidates who are challenging Democratic incumbents).

Today Harkin sent out this mass e-mail announcing the first-round winners:

After over a week of voting and thousands of votes cast on TomHarkin.com for Iowa’s best and brightest progressive leaders, I am proud to announce the top 20 House candidates and the top 10 Senate candidates.

For the Iowa State House you nominated:  Tom Avenarius (D-32), McKinley Bailey (D-9), Cayle Baresel (D-17), Frank Best (D-87), Ron Fedler (D-91), Gene Ficken (D-23), Elesha Gayman (D-84), Tim Hoy (D-44), Kurt Hubler (D-99), Gretchen Lawyer (D-36), Larry Marek (D-89), Chris Nelson (D-58), Eric Palmer (D-75), Matthew Pfaltzgraf (D-70), Mark Smith (D-43), TJ Templeton (D-3), James Van Bruggen (D-4), Pat Van Zante (D-71), Andrew Wenthe (D-18), Nate Willems (D-29).

For the Iowa State Senate you nominated: Randy Braden (D-20), Swati Dandekar (D-18), Jeff Danielson (D-10), Mike Gronstal (D-50), Mary Jo Wilhelm (D-8), Pam Jochum (D-14), Tom Rielly (D-38), Sharon Savage (D-40), Steve Sodders (D-22), Frank Wood (D-42).

The level of enthusiasm you displayed in the nominating round of our “Building Blue” competition shows that Iowa Democrats are fired up and have the energy we need to win in November.

Now the fun part of our competition really gets under way.

Starting today and ending Tuesday, June 3rd, you and your friends and family can click here to vote for your favorite candidate.

The top 5 vote getters from the House and Senate will each receive a $2,000 donation for their campaigns.

These 10 finalists will then advance to the final round, starting June 4, where you will then pick the winner of a $5,000 contribution.

Thank you for supporting these legislative candidates and congratulations to all of these leaders for their service to the people of Iowa.

Be sure to visit www.TomHarkin.com today to vote for your favorite candidate in the second round.  And let’s continue building Iowa blue for November.

Sincerely,

Senator Tom Harkin

If you plan to vote for any candidates for the second round, I urge you not to select Democrats in safe seats. For instance, Mike Gronstal does not need any extra money from Harkin to get re-elected.

Please choose either candidates trying to win Republican seats, incumbents who are being targeted by the GOP, or candidates trying to hold seats vacated by retiring Democrats.

You can use this comment thread to make the case for the candidates you’re supporting.

The Des Moines Register reported on Monday that a group of business owners is raising money to challenge the smoking ban that is slated to go into effect on July 1.

They have not yet retained an attorney, in part because they have not reached a consensus about the right legal angle. Some want to challenge the law’s exemptions, recognizing that there is little hope of getting the whole bill overturned:

Randy Stanford, a Des Moines small business owner who organized Iowans for Equal Rights, said no smoking ban has ever been overturned.

“They can waste their money any way they want, but there’s only one legal issue,” he said. “I wish there was a way to challenge the entire bill and be successful, but there isn’t.”

The only option is to “get rid of the unfair exemptions that are in the bill,” he said.

Stanford said the exemptions give some over-21 entertainment venues a financial advantage over others. “How can they say it won’t hurt the other small businesses when they say it’ll hurt the casinos?” he asked.

As for exactly which exemptions would be targeted, Stanford said: “That would be up to the judge. I have no clue what they would strike.”

The Register reported that some of the businesses want to retain former Governor Tom Vilsack, who said he would be open to taking the case if it focuses on overturning the law’s exemptions:

“It would be sort of reinforcing the law,” he said. “The Constitution requires you to treat people equally. … I think we have a legitimate argument.”

Vilsack said he has not yet been officially asked to represent anyone, but if he is asked, his law firm would first have to ensure there would be no potential conflicts.

“I feel very strongly about this. This is significant and important,” Vilsack said. “When we craft laws, even though there may be political reasons for exemptions, the Constitution may not recognize those exemptions.”

From my perspective, this is all good. The exemptions were needed to get the smoking ban through the Iowa House. Now that it has been signed into law, I would be pleased to see a court strike them down. That would protect even more Iowa workers and their children from the many health hazards associated with secondhand smoke.

While the casino owners and their lobbyists would fume, research suggests that their anger would be unfounded. Contrary to what many business owners in the hospitality industry believe, smoking bans do not hurt the bottom line. On the contrary, smoking bans often lead to increased sales, as well as other economic benefits for businesses. Many people will go back to places they’ve been avoiding because of the smoke.

I supported the Culver administration’s efforts to expand the bottle bill, even though I disagreed with some aspects of the bill the governor submitted to the legislature this year.

That said, this story from the Sunday Des Moines Register was troubling:

Word came from the lieutenant governor: If gambling lobbyists didn’t help deliver the bottle bill, they were likely to see the death of a much-coveted bill that would provide a financial advantage for casinos.

The behind-the-scenes maneuvering in the Legislature illustrates the political capital Gov. Chet Culver’s administration was willing to spend on the bottle bill – even if it caused lobbyists angst.

Some gambling lobbyists said it would be awkward, and possibly unethical, to lobby for a bill in which their clients either had no stake or had conflicting interests, and they declined to do it.

[…]

Lt. Gov. Patty Judge is unapologetic about asking gambling lobbyists for their help with the bottle bill, even though it caused turmoil in the rotunda. “I talked to a lot of people about that and asked for their help, and I will sure admit that,” Judge said. “I asked anybody within my earshot to help me with the bottle bill.”

She said she did not consider her request to the gambling lobbyists an ultimatum.

Judge’s spokesman, Troy Price, said: “There was never a ‘You do this or else.’ That was never issued.”

If this article is accurate, then what Judge did does not sit well with me.

We all know that “you pass my bill and I’ll pass yours” is a normal way of conducting business in any legislature. I don’t like drawing lobbyists into this practice, though. They should not weigh in on issues that have no bearing on their clients.

In fairness to Judge or anyone else in the Culver administration who may have been on board with this strategy, it’s clear that Iowa legislative leaders are not going to expand the bottle bill just because it’s the right thing to do. (For more on why adding a deposit to more types of beverage containers would be good for the environment, check out the website of the Container Recycling Institute.)

It’s also clear that the broad bipartisan public support for expanding the bottle bill is not enough to overcome the resistance from the grocery and bottling industries.

It says a lot about our Democratic leadership in the legislature if Judge or others thought the only way to counteract the influence of certain industry lobbyists was to enlist other lobbyists to support the bottle bill.

Democrats should be willing to expand recycling programs without needing that kind of a push.

For some reason, I occasionally receive mass mailings from the Iowa Republican Party. Usually I toss these in the recycling bin without reading them, but for some reason I opened the latest one, which arrived this week.

It was a letter from state chairman Stew Iverson, who urged me to make a donation and thereby become an “official Member” of the party. He even enclosed a personalized membership card for me.

I won’t bother transcribing the whole letter, because it was the usual GOP language about big, bad, liberal Democrats and their social programs, “bloated budgets” and higher taxes that will take away your hard-earned money.

One line jumped out at me. It is underlined in the letter, but I can’t figure out how to make it underlined here:

It’s time to join together and stop the Democrats from gaining more seats in 2008!

Is that the best they’re hoping for?

Can’t they even pretend to their own supporters that the goal is retaking the Iowa House and Senate for the GOP? There is nothing in the letter suggesting that my donation will help put Republicans back in power. There is nothing about the positive agenda the Republicans would enact if they regained control of the legislature. It is all about trying to limit the damage Democrats can do.

In case you had any doubts, know that Iowa Republicans are still downbeat about their election prospects. It seems like not much has changed since a prominent Republican told the Des Moines Register in January:

“We’ll be lucky with anything we get this year,” said Steve Roberts, a Republican National Committee member from Des Moines. “I don’t think there are a lot of people with high expectations this year. It’s a long road back for us this time.”

Don’t be complacent. Get involved in a statehouse race. If your district is not competitive, volunteer for a Democrat in another district that is up for grabs, or at least donate to one or more candidates you believe in.

I’ll be helping Jerry Sullivan take House district 59 for the Democrats. Republicans have represented my district since before I was born, and it’s time for that to change.  

Senator Tom Harkin plans to donate money to the campaigns of several Democrats running for the Iowa House and Senate, and he wants us to help him choose the recipients:

Dear :

In 2004, George Bush won Iowa.

In 2006, Iowa Democrats turned things around and won with hard work and organization.

To ensure that Iowa remains blue in the general assembly and votes to put a Democrat in the White House we need to build upon our grassroots infrastructure and give our general assembly campaigns the resources they need to be successful this November.

That is why I have launched a new online contest called “Building Blue” on www.tomharkin.com.  I am going to provide $30,000 in contributions to support Iowa Democratic House and Senate candidates.

Please visit www.tomharkin.com/action/building-blue and nominate your favorite State House and Senate candidate to be eligible to receive up to $7,000 for their campaigns.

The nomination round is open from today until May 27th, so please forward this email and tell your friends and family to vote for your favorite candidates.

The top 20 House and top 10 Senate candidates that you nominate will move on to the second round, which will run from May 28 – June 3.  The top five House and top five Senate candidates will each receive a $2,000 donation and move on to the third and final round of voting.

The final round runs from June 4 – June 17, where the top vote-getter from the House and the top vote-getter from the Senate will each win a grand prize of an additional $5,000 contribution.  I will also send a fundraising email on behalf of the winners of the Building Blue contest.

So please support our terrific general assembly candidates by taking part in the Building Blue contest.

Please visit www.tomharkin.com/action/building-blue today and help build a blue Iowa in 2008.

Thank you for your support and good luck!

Senator Tom Harkin

Think about who deserves to be nominated. My criteria will include how competitive the district is, because extra money may be more influential in a close race.

If you can spare some cash for a good Democrat, today or tomorrow would be an excellent time to donate.

May 14 is the last day of the current reporting period, and the media as well as the Republican Party will be scrutinizing those fundraising totals to figure out where the strong and weak candidates are.

So far during this reporting period, I’ve donated to five candidates for the Iowa legislature:

Jerry Sullivan

Eric Palmer

Elesha Gayman

McKinley Bailey

Nate Willems

Speaking of Nate, here is an update on his campaign that I received by e-mail recently:

Today I am putting online Natewillems.com.  I am calling it a “1.0” because the site is still in its infancy.  It covers the essentials, though, and should give you a sense as to what is motivating me to run to represent House District 29.  Please take a moment to visit http://www.natewillems.com

May 14th is the last day this campaign’s first reporting period.  These early reporting periods are the most crucial to my campaign.  Though this seat has been held by a Democrat for 12 years, the Republicans will look at any open seat as a potential opportunity to take a seat back.  I need to raise as much money as possible in these early reporting periods to dissuade the Republicans from investing heavily in District 29.

We are very close to having raised $30,000 in the first two months of this campaign.  Please consider making a contribution today through my ActBlue account:

https://secure.actblue.com/con…

Of course, we do still have a regular mailbox: Citizens for Willems, P.O. Box 213, Lisbon, IA 52253.

Many of you have already donated.  I thank you again very much for your donation, but ask that you consider making another contribution to get us past this $30,000 goal.  

Many of you are intending to donate at some point and I ask you to make your contribution now.  

There are thousands of doors yet for me to knock on and countless people to meet.  With your financial support, I can spend more time knocking on doors and less time raising money.  https://secure.actblue.com/con…

Don’t forget, take a look at www.natewillems.com

Thank you very much.  I look forward to seeing you again soon.

Nate

—

(319) 929-4543

Please find a good Democrat and make a donation today.

The Des Moines Register editorial board must have been reading my mind when they published another editorial calling on legislators to repeal Iowa’s English-only law.

As I’ve written, Democrats who cut the deal to approve that law in 2002 assured us that it was a symbolic measure, and that plenty of exceptions were written into the law.

Last month a judge in Polk County ordered the Secretary of State’s office to stop providing voter information in languages other than English. Secretary of State Mike Mauro has decided not to appeal that ruling.

Now Republicans are bent out of shape because the Iowa Department of Transportation published a public notice in Spanish as well as English:

Iowa Senate Minority Leader Ron Wieck, a Sioux City Republican, objected Thursday after he read a DOT public meeting notice in the Sioux City Journal printed in Spanish and English. It advised residents of a public hearing to discuss proposed improvements on Interstate Highway 29.

“We have spent an entire legislative session listening to the Department of Transportation state that they do not have the money they need for Iowa’s infrastructure,” Wieck said. “While I believe that a strong infrastructure is important, I am concerned with this type of frivolous spending. …

“Instead of clamoring for more money from the taxpayers of this state, maybe we should look at our bloated bureaucracy and trim the fat.”

What a joke. Who is harmed by a DOT public meeting notice in multiple languages? How much money would they save by printing all public meeting notices in English only–a few thousand dollars?

A representative of the DOT said they have printed public meeting notices in other languages as well as English for years. The Iowa Attorney General’s office is currently reviewing whether this practice can continue despite the law making English the official state language.

Will any Democrat have the courage to introduce a bill to repeal this law? It’s not as if adopting the law has prevented Republicans from scoring political points on this issue. As long as the law stands, Republicans will keep scouring public documents for any sign of Spanish or other languages so they can demagogue.

This is not about illegal immigration. This is about preventing government from effectively serving Iowa residents whose native language is not English. It’s mean-spirited and unwelcoming, and I would like to see more leadership on this issue from our elected Democrats during the 2009 legislative session.

This week Governor Culver signed into law a bill that establishes a statewide 1-cent sales tax for school infrastructure. That tax will replace the local-option sales tax for school infrastructure, which has been adopted in all 99 counties.

The problem with the local-option sales tax has been that school districts in counties with a large retail base get much more funding per student than school districts in counties without many local retail options. Why should students in Warren County have to learn in crumbling schools because there are more shopping options in Polk and Dallas counties?

A few years back there was an uproar in Des Moines when it emerged that the school district didn’t have enough money to fix up all the schools. Partly that was due to poor budgeting, but the explosion of big-box retail in Dallas County played a role as well, because fewer local-option sales tax dollars were staying in Polk County.

Des Moines’ alternative weekly Cityview doesn’t like the new law. They may be right that the motivation for passing it was to make sure voters wouldn’t be able to ditch the extra penny sales tax. The old law forced counties to get voters to renew the local-option sales tax every ten years, and many people think Polk County voters would have rejected any proposal to renew the local-option tax approved in 1999.

The new statewide sales tax won’t expire until 2029.

Cityview is also troubled by the move away from “local control,” but here I am 100 percent with IowaVoter:

This crazy local-option sales tax was created in a previous Republican-run legislature.  It siphons money from counties with little retail trade to counties with larger trade, such as Polk county.  It sounds like something rural Republicans should have opposed, but they always go for regressive taxes.  The local control aspect took the burden off them, too.

Thank Democrats for partly fixing this folly.  The tax is still regressive but now it will give rural areas a fair shake.  Republicans lost control of the legislature for a reason.  Democrats should not shrink from the burden of correcting old errors, even if Republicans drag their feet.

Cityview doesn’t seem to get how the current system operates and is bothered that the new law

expects taxpayers in Des Moines, for example, to bail out crumbling schools in Sioux City or Davenport or some other place where we have no say in how our money is being spent. It isn’t that Iowans shouldn’t bond together to help one another, but it should be left to local taxpayers to vote on how their money is spent as a way to keep school districts in line – not a group of bureaucrats.

But of course, the current system gives people in the majority of Iowa’s counties little more than the illusion of local control. Whether or not they approve a local-option sales tax in their own county, they still end up pumping money into school districts located in other counties–and neither they nor their local school boards have any say in how that money is spent.

Students should not be punished for living in a county without many retail options.

Over at Iowa Independent, Douglas Burns has put up another post complaining about the tough bill on public smoking that the legislature adopted earlier this month.

Burns offers 10 ways to deal with the smoking ban which, in his words, will introduce “a radical cultural change in many shot-and-a-beer, small-town taverns that dot the Iowa landscape.”

One of his suggestions is:

2. Take your anger out on Gov. Chet Culver, Big Brother Democrats and Turncoat Republicans

To be a one-issue voter for the rest of your life is crazy. But the smoking ban is an example of effete urban Iowans monkeying around with the small businesses of rural Iowans. If it’s smoking today, what’s next for government intrusion into small businesses? Will we go the way of New York City and ban certain fatty foods to the point where chicken-fried steaks must be served without gravy?

With statehouse races in the fall, smokers and those who don’t like the creep of big government into Iowa life should send a message by voting against smoke ban supporters. Better yet, contribute to their opponents. The ban was generally a Democratic brainchild and product, but some Republicans jumped off the Bridge Over the River Common Sense on this one, too.

I’ve got 10 suggestions for the smokers like Burns who feel oppressed by “effete urban Iowans” (which isn’t even accurate, if you look at the list of legislators who voted for this bill):

1. Quit using that “what will they ban next, fast food?” analogy. The smoking ban is nothing like the government trying to control people’s consumption of fatty food, because eating unhealthy food doesn’t affect other people’s health the way second-hand smoke does.

2. Acknowledge that your choice to smoke in a bar or restaurant prevents employees of those establishments from choosing not to inhale smoke. It’s easy for you to say that people who don’t like smoking should get another job. Maybe that “shot-and-a-beer, small-town tavern” is the only game in town for that employee. Maybe family obligations require someone to work evenings and weekends, when a large portion of the jobs available are in restaurants or bars.

3. Recognize that what seems inconvenient to you may allow pregnant women to avoid second-hand smoke and the increased risk of miscarriage and stillbirth that accompanies it.

4. Remember that pregnant women exposed to second-hand smoke have a higher risk of delivering a low-birth-weight baby, which is associated with a greater chance of various health problems.

5. Instead of complaining about having to step outside for a cigarette, think about the future babies who will not have an elevated risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome because you did not expose their pregnant mothers to second-hand smoke.

6. Think of all the men and women who work in that place you like to smoke who will no longer have to work in an environment that raises their chance of getting cancer, heart disease or chronic lung problems.

7. Recognize that this smoking ban will probably save you money if it pushes you to smoke less or even quit.

8. Take up Burns’ suggestion to pursue the free smoking-cessation counseling offered by the Iowa Department of Public Health’s Tobacco Control Division. Then you can treat yourself to something nice with the money you save on cigarettes.

9. If you own a restaurant or bar where smoking has been allowed up to now, take heart; research in other parts of the country suggests that you will not lose business because of the smoking ban. I know that I eat more often at the Waveland Cafe in Des Moines since the owner made it smoke-free last November.

10. If you own a different kind of business where smoking has previously been permitted, remember that smoking bans bring hidden economic benefits to many businesses, including “reduced absenteeism, reduced insurance costs, and reduced cleaning and maintenance costs.”

Feel free to add to my list in the comments section.

On the last day of the 2008 session, the legislature approved big raises for Iowa’s top elected officials, the Des Moines Register reported on Monday.

Governor Chet Culver (D) would get nearly a 10 percent raise, Attorney General Tom Miller (D) would get about an 11 percent raise, and 23 percent pay hikes would go to Lieutenant Governor Patty Judge (D), Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey (R), State Auditor David Vaudt (R), Secretary of State Mike Mauro (D), and State Treasurer Michael Fitzgerald (D).

The article says the raises are intended to bring the elected officials’ salaries in line with what the top administrators of several state departments receive. It seems like quite a big jump to me, though. I would be happier with a law granting routine cost-of-living adjustments to top elected officials.

What do you think?

It’s a very busy week. Please put up a comment if you know of anything important going on that I’ve left out.



Tuesday, April 29:

IowaPolitics.com and Drake University are hosting a forum at which top leaders from Iowa’s House and Senate will discuss the 2008 session and election year. The forum will be held from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at Levitt Hall in Old Main at 2507 University Ave. on the Drake University campus. The event is free and open to the public, but reservations are required. More details about the event and how to reserve a spot are after the jump.

The DNR will convene a stakeholders meeting at 1 pm and a public meeting at 6:30 pm in the Scott County Administrative Center, 600 W. 4th St in Davenport, to discuss air pollution in Scott County. A recent DNR report showed that fine particulate matter air pollutant levels in Scott County have exceeded Clean Air Act standards from 2005 through 2007. More background and details are after the jump.

Ed Fallon will appear on Mac’s World Radio Show, 98.3 WOW.FM (show starts at 2:45 pm)

Metro Arts Alliance of Greater Des Moines and other hosts present a reception to honor the artists selected for the City of Des Moines 2007 Performance Report, Following Your Lead: The Road Ahead, 5-7 pm 800 19th Street (corner of 19th and Center) in Des Moines

Sierra Club, Iowa Global Warming Campaign and I-RENEW present the Everyday is Earth Day event, featuring a free film screening of “Global Warming: the Signs and the Science,” 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at the Cedar Falls Public Library, 524 Main St. in Cedar Falls (more details about this event are after the jump)



Wednesday, April 30:

The DNR will hold a stakeholders meeting at 1 pm and a public meeting at 6:30 pm to discuss air pollution in Muscatine County (more background after the jump). The meetings will be at the Muscatine County Conservation Board Environmental Learning Center, 3300 Cedar Street in Muscatine.

Tom Henderson, chairman of Polk County Democrats (live) and Comedian Jeff Kreisler (via phone) will appear on Mac’s World, 98.3 WOW-FM, 3 pm to 4 pm.

Thursday, May 1:

One Iowa presents May Day Mayhem–Free Food, Cheap Drinks with other LGBT and progressive professionals. Special guest Evan Wolfson from Freedom to Marry. Star Bar, 2811 Ingersoll in Des Moines, from 5 pm to 7 pm. Light appetizers, cash bar, and a chance to mingle with other LGBTA Professionals. Please RSVP by April 30th (288-4019).

Ed Fallon will be at Green Drinks, Saints Rest Cafe, 919 Broad St. in Grinnell, beginning at 7 pm

Friday, May 2:

Ed Fallon will be at the Eastside Senior Center, 1231 E. 26th St. in Des Moines, beginning at 11:45 am

Comedian Jeff Kreisler will do a show for the Polk County Democrats, Val Air Ballroom, 301 Ashworth Road, West Des Moines. Dinner will be served at 5:30 P.M., program begins at 6:30 P.M. Cash bar available. Regular tickets – $25.00 per person (Dinner and show only) 5:30 P.M. Host Reception with Elected Officials and Jeff Kreisler – $75.00 per person (includes dinner and drink tickets). Tickets are available by calling 515-285-1800; for $27.50 at the Val Air box office or through any Ticketmaster outlet.

Saturday, May 3:

Iowa Citizen Action Network 2008 annual convention, 10 am to 5 pm at the Hilton Garden Inn, 8600 North Park Drive in Johnston (suburb of Des Moines). Jim Hightower will be the keynote speaker. More details about the day’s workshops are after the jump, or you can see a flier for this event at

http://www.iowacan.org/ICANCON…

Iowa Corridor’s second annual Hike to Help Refugees in Iowa City (more details are after the jump)

Maifest parade in the Amana Colonies, starting at 10 am

I-RENEW is hosting a tour of the Clipper Turbine Works, the largest wind turbine manufacturer in the U.S., in Cedar Rapids at 1 pm. At 3 pm, Brian Crowe from Iowa’s Office of Energy Independence will speak about the agency’s activities at the Coffee Talk Café, located off Kirkwood Avenue down the road from Clipper. More details about these events are after the jump.

The Tulip festival in Pella runs from May 1 to May 3 as well.

The Polk County Democrats sent out an e-mail request from the Iowa House Democrats. Someone who will be managing a Democratic House candidate’s campaign is coming to Des Moines for training next week and will need housing in Polk County the nights of April 29 and 30.

If you have a spare room or fold-out couch for a campaign manager next week, please call Mehgan Lee Operations Manager/Deputy Finance Director for the Iowa House Democrats:

Work: (515) 974-1702

Her cell phone number was also in the e-mail, but I’m not going to post that on a public blog.

The Des Moines Register reports, “A Des Moines pizza delivery driver who was suspended after he shot an alleged armed robber said today that he has been fired.”

http://www.desmoinesregister.c…

They are giving him two months’ severance pay (minimum wage only, not making up for tips he would have earned) and, at his request, paying for counseling.

State Senator Brad Zaun (Republican of Urbandale) says he is following through on his threat to boycott the pizza chain:

“I think what he did was the right thing,” Sen. Brad Zaun, a Republican from Urbandale, said earlier this month. “If was in a situation to protect my family, protect myself, to continue being a father, I would’ve done the same thing.”

[…]

“I think it’s the wrong decision by Pizza Hut and I will not be buying any more Pizza Hut products,” he said. “You tell me any Iowan that was in his situation, that had a gun put to his head, how they would’ve reacted differently.”

I feel sorry for this guy. He violated company policy against carrying guns, but his fears for his safety were founded, as he was held up at gunpoint during a shift. Statistically, the gun you carry is unlikely to be used in self-defense, but in his case it sounds like it was.

At the same time, I understand why Pizza Hut is letting him go. If they make an exception for him and some other delivery driver who carries a gun uses it in an unlawful way (for instance, gets road rage and shoots at some car that cut him off), Pizza Hut would face a major liability lawsuit.

My dad, who was an attorney, used to say, “Tough cases make bad law.” In this case, I think that means that the Pizza Hut rules should reflect what’s most safe for the public most of the time, and not this exceptional situation.

Still, I can’t help but feel that this guy did not deserve to be fired. I hope he gets another, better, job offer soon, and I hope counseling will help him deal with this traumatic experience.

I could probably count the number of times I’ve eaten at Pizza Hut in the last ten years on one hand, so I can’t say this episode will affect my likelihood of going there again.

How about you? Are you less likely to order from Pizza Hut now?

Lynda Waddington has written a good profile of Pat VanZante, who is running in Republican-held House District 71 this year. She sounds like a great candidate. That includes most of Marion County and part of Jasper County.

I would like to see more in-depth coverage of our statehouse candidates and their races at this blog.

I encourage all Democratic campaigns to consider posting here to keep us up to date. I plan to promote all diaries by Democratic candidates in Iowa to the front page.

Just got this e-mail from the Polk County Democrats:

From the Obama Campaign:

Dear Polk County Democrats,

The presidential season is still upon us and it has been fabulous to have watched the campaigns evolve in Iowa and continue to battle their way through the rest of the country.

As we all know, regardless of who the nominee is, we have work to do together as Democrats to elect a Democratic President to the White House and keep our Congress controlled by the Democrats

In the spirit of unity, we wanted to make it clear that the Obama campaign is not promoting a candidate in any of the local, state or congressional campaigns. We reject any efforts that give that impression.

If you have any questions and want to reach our campaign, please don’t hesitate to send an email to iowa@barackobama.com and we will get back to you.

Some of you may have heard about an upcoming Obama rally on Saturday. The Nation for Change Rally is being organized SOLELY by a grassroots group of Iowa Obama supporters who are excited about Senator Obama and would like to spread his message. If you would like more information on the event (Saturday, April 19th at 2:30 pm at Capitol) please email Cheryl Fasano at angelswings51@hotmail.com.

Sincerely,

The Iowa Obama Campaign

Anyone know what this is about? I have not heard of any state, local or Congressional candidates trying to claim they have Obama’s backing.

I know that Ed Fallon is planning to be at that Obama rally on Saturday. Are they worried that the appearance will be construed as an endorsement of Fallon by Obama?

A Public Policy Update from

1000 Friends of Iowa arrived in my in-box this afternoon. It urges citizens to contact legislators to ask them to vote no on House File 2691 and Senate File 2420.

You can find your legislator through this site:

http://www.legis.state.ia.us/F…

To call members of the House, dial (515) 281-3221; for members of the Senate, dial (515) 281-3371.

You can contact Governor Chet Culver’s office at (515) 281-5211, or use an e-mail form here:

http://www.governor.iowa.gov/a…

The full text of the action alert is after the jump, but here are some highlights. The two main problems with these identical bills are:

  1. There is no fix-it-first policy to assure us that maintenance will come first, and in this legislation, the new money could be wasted on expensive new roads.

  2. Public transit does not receive additional, annual funding with the new money. Additional, reliable state funding for transit would help more Iowans avoid high gas prices, and would create more vibrant communities.

Stephanie Weisenbach, program coordinator for 1000 Friends of Iowa, explains why the lack of a “fix-it-first” policy is a problem:

House File 2691 and Senate File 2420 would put up to $126 million more a year into roads. This may look okay on the surface, but here’s the real scoop on this road policy:

The allocation of the funding doesn’t make maintenance the foundation of funding decisions. Sixty percent of it would go to the state for highways, twenty percent to counties, and twenty percent to cities. HERE’S HOW IT WOULD BE SPENT:

   * The Iowa DOT, which would receive a lion’s share of the funding, could waste the money on expensive highway projects for speculative development interests. The legislation lacks language to prioritize maintenance of highways and interstates.

   * Cities could spend their funding on whatever roads they choose- existing OR new – meaning some developers could put the pressure on to fulfill wish lists for new roads.

   * Counties would have to spend their funding primarily on maintenance. However, after learning about the maintenance needs of county roads, it’s obvious that the way this funding would be distributed won’t satisfy maintenance needs of many Iowa counties.

In light of record oil prices and projections that gasoline may cost $4 a gallon soon, you would think that Iowa legislators might see the value of investing more resources into alternative forms of transportation. Unfortunately, you would be wrong:

The Lost Opportunity for Transit:

Transit funding is shuffled to another source or revenue in this legislation, but not increased. In this maneuver of state revenue, the percentage of revenues that transit receives is moved to another pot of money than it’s current source. Its percentage of funding of this mix of revenues was 4 percent in the old system, and 4 percent in the new system due to this legislation. This is essentially the same amount, about 10 million depending on the fluctuation of fees that are paid. Lawmakers could have bumped up that percentage and provided a few million extra dollars of reliable money each year to urban and rural transit systems statewide. But they haven’t.

Iowa’s state funding for public transit seems particularly inadequate when you compare it to what our neighbors to the north provide, as I learned from this recent radio news story:

Legislature “Missing the Bus” On Transit Funding?

April 11, 2008

Des Moines, IA – With gas prices soaring ever higher, more Iowans are turning to public transit to get around. However, such transportation is not getting much attention at the statehouse as the legislative session winds down. With lawmakers making final decisions on dividing up the money, transit providers say they need a reliable, annual source of funding from the state.

John Rodecker with Key Line Transit in Dubuque says his agency only receives about $170,000 a year in state assistance.

“We have a budget of $2.4 million for FY 09. Needless to say, it’s a small drop in the bucket of our overall budget.”

The Twin Cities transit agency in neighboring Minnesota receives 63 percent of its operating budget from its state government. In contrast, Des Moines Area Regional Transit gets only six percent of its budget from the state of Iowa. Manager Brad Miller says that’s not enough.

“State assistance is predicted to go down next year from what it was this year, despite our rising operating costs.”

Miller and Rodecker agree that a stronger commitment to funding transit in Iowa will help conserve limited oil resources and create more vibrant communities.

Dick Layman/Craig Eicher, Public News Service – IA

The full text of the action alert from 1000 Friends of Iowa is after the jump. It contains much more background information on the subject.

Mary Mascher put up a post at Blog for Iowa a few days ago detailing action on several bills last week at the legislature. I recommend keeping an eye on that blog for legislative news as we get closer to the end of the session.

I read in the Des Moines Register that yesterday both chambers passed a compromise smoking ban bill, which covers almost all public places:

Iowans will still be able to smoke in the gambling areas of casinos, although smoke would be prohibited in casino restaurants, gift shops, bars and employee areas.

They can smoke in the outdoor areas of bars, the outdoors areas of county fairs and the State Fair except the grandstands, in limousines and in retail tobacco stores.

Other exemptions are designated areas of correctional facilities, the state veterans home in Marshalltown and Iowa National Guard facilities.

I’m pleased that restaurants and bars will be smoke-free. That will protect a lot of employees from second-hand smoke, and I doubt it will hurt business. The Waveland Cafe in Des Moines has no seen business drop off since it went smoke free last fall, because people like me, who had avoided bringing their families, are now eating there more often.

I was interested to read that the smoking ban did not have enough Democratic votes to pass either the House or the Senate. In both chambers, a majority of Democrats were joined by a small number of Republicans. The Register has the roll-call vote on this bill, in case you want to see how your representatives voted.

Governor Culver’s office indicated that he “looks forward” to signing the bill.

The Senate on Monday passed a bill expanding health insurance coverage for children, including some young adult children. According to the Des Moines Register,

The bill now returns to the House, which passed a less specific version last month.

A children’s welfare advocate who expressed doubts about the original House bill praised the version that passed in the Senate Monday.

“I think we’re getting there. We’re getting there,” said Carrie Fitzgerald, senior health policy associate for the Child and Family Policy Center. She said the new bill includes more specifics, such as measures to prevent eligible children from being taken off public programs.

As my husband and I have learned during the past five years, the cost of health insurance for young, healthy adults increases once you have a child, and with every additional child. If a parent’s employer does not provide your health insurance, the cost of a private plan can easily be out of reach for middle-income families.

It’s short of the universal access to health care we need in this country, but making more children eligible for low-cost state insurance plans is a step in the right direction.

Take the poll after the jump, and if you like, explain your vote in the comments section.

Take the poll after the jump, and if you like, explain your vote in the comments section.

This schedule of legislative forums went out over the Sierra Club e-mail list. After the jump, I put the whole list of forusm scheduled for Friday and Saturday. Chances are, one will be going on near you.

It sounds like there is not enough support in the Iowa House to pass a bill expanding the 5-cent deposit to juice, water and sports drink containers. Instead, a commission will study recycling issues, including the bottle bill, and report back to legislators for next year’s session.

I hope legislators will pass comprehensive reform of the bottle bill next year, and not just toss this commission’s report on recycling in the recycling bin. Action on this front is several years overdue.

This action alert went out on the Sierra Club’s Iowa list. Apparently the Iowa Senate approved this constitutional amendment on a strong bipartisan vote. House members need to hear from you about this effort to secure sustainable funding for natural resources and outdoor recreation.

The amendment does not raise the sales tax, but it stipulates that the next time the legislature raises the state sales tax, 3/8 of a cent of the increase must be dedicated to natural resources and outdoor recreation programs.

The full action alert, with background on the amendment and a sample letter to a legislator, is after the jump.

John Deeth wrote a great piece for Iowa Independent about “The Battleground Districts” that will decide who controls the Iowa legislature.

You might want to bookmark this analysis of five House races and 10 Senate races for future reference.