Iowa’s most endangered U.S. House incumbent and some of his high-profile policy positions remain unpopular among voters in the first Congressional district, according to a new survey. Two-term Representative Rod Blum has trailed named challengers in Democratic polls taken before news broke about his shady internet company.

Adding to the incumbent’s troubles, many competitive Iowa House races will take place within the 20 counties that make up IA-01. Recent special legislative elections suggest that GOTV campaigns for down-ballot candidates could drive Democratic turnout significantly higher than the level seen in 2014, when Blum was first elected.

As the Iowa legislature considers extending sales tax to internet purchases and some other goods and services that are now exempt, Randy Bauer explains what’s at stake and other factors that have eroded sales tax revenues. -promoted by desmoinesdem

For many American taxpayers, April 17 is understood as the 2018 due date for federal (and many state) income taxes. It also features prominently in state and local tax discussions, as it is the date when the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case that may impact on remote sales and use tax collection practices for state and local governments.

While that would be a major development and boon to many state and local governments, it is really only part of the story.

Supreme Court Limits on Collection of Sales Tax by Remote Sellers

The case to be heard next month, South Dakota vs. Wayfair, concerns sales tax collection related to sales conducted over the Internet. Two 20th century Supreme Court cases, Bellas Hess v. Illinois (1967) and Quill v. North Dakota (1992) have established limits on government’s ability to compel collection of sales taxes on remote transactions. In the Bellas Hess case, the high court determined that physical presence in a state was necessary to require the seller to collect sales tax for catalogue sales transactions conducted via phone or mail. As the catalogue sales era declined and the Internet became a more important part of commerce, the court extended this “nexus via physical presence” standard to include e-commerce transactions via Quill.

Background on Major State and Local Tax Revenue Sources

In general, the three largest revenue sources for state and local governments are property taxes (the largest local government source) and individual income and sales and use taxes. In the last few decades, sales taxes have become the largest state tax revenue source, and several states have sought to increase the use of this consumption-based tax source while reducing the use of income-based taxes.

There are credible arguments for relying on a consumption-based tax. For one, the tax is collected in generally small increments, which allows taxpayers to base purchasing decisions around their ability to pay. These small incremental payments also reduce the “sticker shock” that often comes from large lump sum payments of property and individual income taxes. Consumption taxes will also be borne by nearly all consumers – unlike, say, income taxes that can often be avoided by a large number of citizens.

That said, there is no “perfect tax,” and sales taxes are no different. All taxes will have a negative impact on economic activity (the “deadweight loss” associated with the increased cost for goods and services subject to tax). Sales taxes are also considered to be something of a regressive tax, in that lower income individuals and households tend to pay a higher percentage of their income as tax. Some of this concern is reflected in exemptions for broad categories of goods and services – all states exempt prescription drugs from sales tax, and a majority do the same for food. It is also possible to use refundable credits via the individual income tax to reimburse lower income taxpayers, as is done in several states.

Sales Tax and e-Commerce

As Amazon boxes on our doorsteps have become a ubiquitous part of everyday commerce, the revenue loss associated with the Quill case has become a significant concern to state and local governments. As Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy noted in a 2015 concurring opinion (where he signaled his willingness to reconsider the decision in Quill), “When the Court decided Quill, mail-order sales in the United States totaled $180 billion. But in 1992, the Internet was in its infancy. By 2008, e-commerce sales alone totaled $3.16 trillion per year in the United States.”

That number continues to grow – according to Internet Retailer, U.S. web sales in 2016 reached $394.86 billion, or 11.7 percent of the nation’s total retail sales ($4.846 trillion).

State Strategies to Heighten Sales Tax Collection

In the face of this significant revenue loss, states have pursued a number of strategies to deal with the revenue loss. The first strategy was to seek to address the Court’s concerns in Quill, by working to simplify and develop greater consistency in sales tax statutes, primarily around definitions and other requirements directed at those who collect the tax.

The Streamlined Sales Tax Initiative was initiated by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) in 1999. The goal was to increase uniformity that would either lead to greater vendor voluntary collection or the reconsideration of the two Supreme Court decisions. As of 2017, 24 states participate in the program as full members. While this is a significant number of states, several major states (such as California, Texas and New York) do not, which limits the agreement’s impact. While it is true that there are vendors who are voluntarily complying with this initiative and collecting tax on behalf of the participating states, it will likely never reach the necessary “critical mass” from a compliance perspective.

The next foray came via the U.S. Congress. Via its authority to regulate interstate commerce, Congress could establish a national requirement for collection of state and local sales taxes on purchases via the Internet (or, for that matter, on catalogue and phone sales as well). Bills have been introduced for many years in Congress to do just that, and they have, in recent years, also received support from major “bricks and mortar” retailers who argue the existing taxing structure creates a double standard that harms this segment of the retail market.

From a tax policy perspective, the point is well taken: a commonly accepted principle of taxation is “horizontal equity” – that taxpayers in similar circumstances should be treated fairly. When local retail establishments are required to collect this tax but remote sellers are not, the resulting price disparity is a perfect example of horizontal inequity.

To date, no version of the “Marketplace Fairness Act” has made its way through the legislative process. It came (somewhat) close in 2013, when the bill was passed by the Senate on a bipartisan 69-27 vote. However, it did not clear the House, and current efforts to revive the bill do not look promising.

It is important to remember that sales (or use) taxes are nearly always owed on these remote purchases – the issue isn’t one of creating a new tax but getting compliance with payment of the existing tax. As previously noted, an advantage of the sales tax is it is paid in hundreds/thousands/millions of separate transactions. The downside is that it is administratively difficult to collect the tax from the hundreds/thousands/millions of consumers who, if the tax isn’t collected at the time of purchase, are to remit it to comply with state and local sales tax statutes.

As a result, state legislatures have resorted to a variety of statutory strategies to induce sales tax collection. Some of the first attempts related to creating nexus beyond mere physical presence. This was initiated by the State of New York in 2008, often referred to as the “Amazon tax.” Under the New York State statute, a rebuttable presumption is created that a nonresident Internet seller has nexus with the State for sales/use tax purposes if (i) the nonresident has agreements with in-state companies whereby potential customers are referred to the nonresident, and (ii) the nonresident’s gross receipts from customers under such an agreement exceed $10,000 during the previous four quarters. According to a report by the New York State Comptroller, since the law’s inception, online retailers remitted $360 million in sales taxes (on over $4 billion in taxable online sales) as of February 2012.

Since that first state foray – and the litigation that followed – other states have also considered and/or adopted similar legislation. It could be argued that the multiple state efforts to create “Amazon nexus” has proven successful, as Amazon is (as of April 1, 2017) collecting sales tax on sales in all 50 states. Additional attempts to create “economic nexus” (where the amount of sales into a state alone creates sufficient grounds to require collection of the tax) have become popular, with many states enacting this type of statute.

State Efforts to Create an Economic Nexus Standard to Compel Collection of Sales Tax

The economic nexus standard was first adopted by the States of Alabama and South Dakota – and South Dakota legislative and policymakers have been up-front about the fact that the economic nexus statute was crafted as a method to bring the issues of Quill back before the Supreme Court. Several other states passed economic nexus standards last year, including Indiana, Maine, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee (done by rule) and Wyoming. The South Dakota statute is now the one before the high court.

A somewhat different state strategy has been undertaken by the State of Colorado, which enacted a law focused on enticing retailers to collect the tax or face significant paperwork requirements. The law, which survived court challenges (including the U.S. Supreme Court declining to review it, and then U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Neil Gorsuch writing a concurring opinion strongly implying that, given the opportunity, the Supreme Court should overrule Quill), requires retailers that do not collect sales taxes to file a report with the State Department of Revenue on how much their Colorado customers have purchased and to inform customers that they may owe state taxes on the purchases. The law requires large online retailers to send customers a notice every time they buy something to explain that they may owe use tax; if the customer makes more than $500 a year in purchases, the retailer must also send them an annual summary of their purchases. The seller must also file an annual report with the State detailing customer name, billing and shipping addresses and the total amount spent each year.

Other states have replicated this approach. Advocates for the policy believe that it will better inform consumers of their obligation to pay use tax on their out-of-state purchases or lead to sellers voluntarily collecting the tax to escape the reporting requirements (for both them and their customers). States who adopted Colorado-type reporting standards (all effective July 1, 2017) include Alabama, Louisiana and Rhode Island.

What’s At Stake?

The revenue at stake in this area is significant. While the estimates of lost revenue vary considerably (and some of the “lost revenue” estimates include Amazon sales that are now applying sales tax in all 50 states), there is little doubt that it is “real money” to state and local governments. The federal General Accountability Office (GAO) estimated that state and local governments could have collected up to $13 billion more in 2017 if they’d been allowed to require sales tax payments from online merchants and other remote sellers. That said, that estimate comprises a significant amount of business-to-business sales – and pretty good data suggests there already is reasonable compliance by businesses through payment of use tax on at least the majority of these transactions.

Besides the obvious issues related to revenue loss and impact on the economy, what are the issues on both sides of this controversy? Those who support the Quill standard (or at least something other than unfettered state ability to compel collection of the tax by sellers) argue that the thousands of different taxing jurisdictions and definitions make collecting the tax overly burdensome.

It is notable, however, that in the years since Quill, a number of Internet-based businesses have cropped up to handle the administrative side of determining the tax that is owed and applying it to electronic transactions. Meanwhile, the thousands of vendors who already comply with varying state and local sales taxes suggest this is not unsolvable. In fact, much of the effort on the seller side has been focused on providing some reimbursement for collection of the tax – which suggests the issue is more one of economics than legal compliance. While opponents also argue that the burden will fall disproportionately on small businesses, it is notable that the state “economic nexus” statutes to date have included an exemption for businesses with low levels of sales into a state.

On the other side of the argument, supporters of collection point to Justice Kennedy, when he noted, “There is a powerful case to be made that a retailer doing extensive business within a State has a sufficiently ‘substantial nexus’ to justify imposing some minor tax-collection duty, even if that business is done through mail or the Internet.” After all, “interstate commerce may be required to pay its fair share of state taxes.” D.H. Holmes Co. v. McNamara, 486 U.S. 24, 31 (1988).

My guess is that the Supreme Court will, in some way, overturn its ruling from Quill – perhaps via the “substantial nexus” approach Justice Kennedy suggests. The question will be how far the court goes and whether their action leads the Congress to consider finally taking action to create something of a national standard for nexus and the amount of obligation to collect the tax that might be imposed on sellers.

While any greater latitude for state and local governments in collecting these taxes will be welcome news, my personal belief is that there are bigger issues at play relating to sales tax and the U.S. economy, and some of the focus on South Dakota v. Wayfair blinds policymakers to more fundamental issues.

Sales Tax Erosion of the Base

The fact is that the sales tax base has been eroding for decades, using common measures such as sales tax collections as a share of personal income. While state and local governments have attempted to ameliorate these declines through rate increases, that creates its own set of problems.

Why is this happening? There are several reasons. For one thing, legislatures continue to provide new or expanded exemptions from the tax (after all, most every legislator loves to cut taxes). In Iowa, a good example is the broadened sales tax exemption for supplies used in the manufacturing process. When passed in 2016, that exemption was estimated to reduce revenue by approximately $29 million a year, but it now looks like a revenue loss in the neighborhood of $100 million a year.

Some of the reduction in sales tax revenue is simply a function of demographics. As a population, we continue to get older – and as we get older, we generally make fewer purchases, per capita, that are subject to the sales tax.

Sales Tax Statutory Construction

An even bigger problem, in my estimation, concerns how state sales tax statutes are structured. The state sales tax statues generally were written in the early part of the 20th century, when most consumption consisted of tangible goods. As a result, nearly all state sales tax statute will broadly tax all tangible goods – the standard generally is that tangible goods are presumed to be subject to tax unless specifically exempted. On the other hand, relatively few services were a part of everyday commerce; as a result, the statutes generally presume that services are not subject to tax unless specifically enumerated.

This “double standard” related to sales tax on consumption has become increasingly more important, as what we consume has gradually – but dramatically – shifted from goods to services. Fifty years ago, about two-thirds of consumption was tangible goods, but now about two-thirds is services. Absent legislative action to change the standard of presumption related to consumption subject to the sales tax, states have had to rely on the often heavy lift of identifying specific services to be subject to tax. This is a difficult process, and few states (generally only those with the greatest reliance on sales tax) have been able to broadly apply the tax to services.

This trend is likely to continue in the coming years. For one thing, health care has become a huge service industry in this country. An example of how health care and the consumption tax code have played out in Iowa is instructive. In 1999, the Iowa legislature passed and Governor Tom Vilsack signed into law a sales tax exemption for goods and services related to non-profit hospitals. At the time of passage, the fiscal note suggested the annual cost of exempting these services (granted, some goods as well, but mostly services) was about $15 million. However, when the Department of Revenue issued its tax expenditure report in 2000, the cost was now estimated at $53.7 million. It ballooned to $108.4 million in 2005, $125.4 million in 2010 and $160.6 million in 2015.

Several governors – Republicans and Democrats alike – have made attempts to significantly broaden the sales tax base to include more services. However, to date, those efforts have been largely unsuccessful.

If states are to rely on consumption taxes as their primary revenue source, they will have to come to grips with a system that has mostly ignored well over half of what is actually consumed. While changes to collection of taxes from Internet sales are nice, it is still only improving collection rates on a minority of consumption – and that is, in the long run, a losing proposition for state and local governments.

Randall Bauer is a director in the Management and Budget Consulting practice for the PFM Group. Since 2005, he has led its state and local government tax policy practice. He has numbered nearly half the state and many large local governments among his clients. Prior to joining PFM, he spent 18 years in state government, including serving for seven years as Governor Tom Vilsack’s State Budget Director.

A survey is testing brief, positive messages about two-term Representative David Young in Iowa’s third Congressional district. A respondent took notes on the call on the evening of March 14.

My first thought was that the National Republican Congressional Committee or some outside group supporting GOP House candidates commissioned the poll. The phrases about Young didn’t have the level of detail I would expect from a survey designed by a campaign, and the question order was somewhat unusual.

On the other hand, Federal Election Commission filings don’t appear to show any expenditures by Young’s campaign on polling during the third or fourth quarters of 2017. Perhaps this survey is the incumbent’s early attempt to see where he stands.

Tanya Keith makes her case for the local option sales tax on the Polk County ballot. Cross-posted from the Hat Trick Renovation blog. -promoted by desmoinesdem

When we first moved into River Bend, I owned a baby shop downtown called Simply for Giggles. We had only lived here a couple weeks when I realized I had to close my store because I wanted to spend more time with my family, and in my neighborhood. I feel so comfortable and happy in this place, it made me sad to go to work every day. I also realized that this neighborhood needed my skill set. I love to take risks, I have a degree in Interior Design, and I’ve done construction. There were so many houses in my neighborhood….heck…on my block, that needed a champion. Hat Trick Renovation is the continuation of that idea.

My work gives me a heightened awareness of the urban blight problem Des Moines means to address with the 1 percent sales tax vote on Measure A this Tuesday, March 6th. City Council member Josh Mandelbaum wrote a great breakdown of how I feel about the measure elsewhere on Bleeding Heartland. One of the biggest reasons I’m voting yes is I hate getting to the store and realizing I’ve left my 30-40 percent off coupon at home. I want roughly 1/3 of this money to come from outside the county.

But that’s getting ahead of myself. I’ve seen many people pose the question that we don’t need this money in the first place. We just need to belt tighten. This view is so out of sync with my daily worldview, I had to take people on a visual tour of what I see every day to show why I feel voting yes is the least regressive option. Des Moines’ urban core needs our help, and this sales tax is the lowest impact way to help those neighborhoods.

Heather Ryan makes her case against the local option sales tax for Iowa’s largest county. -promoted by desmoinesdem

In case you haven’t heard, there is a special election scheduled on the intentionally obscure date of Tuesday, March 6, 2018. Polk County residents must decide if they believe an additional 1 percent sales tax will help solve their financial woes. I will be voting “No.” Twice if I don’t get caught. Here’s why:

A government that does not provide adequate services is more regressive than a sales tax, writes Des Moines City Council member Josh Mandelbaum in this case for Polk County residents to support the measure on the March 6 ballot. -promoted by desmoinesdem

There is a cliché that the start of one’s term in public service is like drinking from a fire hose. My experience the last few months definitely shows the merit of the cliché. More comes at you quickly than you can possibly absorb. The budget is a perfect example of this, but in the case of the budget, I don’t have the luxury of time because local budgets must be certified by the end of March. I want to share with all of you some of what I have learned.

In examining the budget, one thing becomes clear quickly: the city will not be able to maintain its current service levels without new revenue or significant increases in property taxes.

Iowa Senate Republicans are barreling ahead to debate a regressive tax plan that would reduce state revenues by 10 to 15 percent within five years. Senate Ways and Means Committee Chair Randy Feenstra, lead author of Senate File 2383, continued to describe his proposal as “bold, pro-growth tax relief” after a non-partisan analysis projected massive revenue losses.

Meanwhile, newly-released records show that in communications with other GOP senators, Feenstra greatly understated the cost of an earlier draft of his tax proposal. The documents don’t indicate whether the head of Senate’s tax-writing committee misunderstood numbers provided by the Iowa Department of Revenue or misrepresented them to downplay the price tag. (Feenstra has not responded to my inquiry.)

What is clear: the Department of Revenue never predicted that deeply cutting taxes would produce “excess” economic growth. Which isn’t surprising, since no economic boom materialized in states like Kansas and Louisiana after Republicans destroyed those states’ ability to pay for essential services.

Adapted from a post Tanya Keith wrote for Hat Trick Renovation, the blog for her company, where she works to restore historic houses in the urban core of Des Moines. -promoted by desmoinesdem

The current version of the Iowa Senate tax bill would reduce the Iowa State Historic Tax Credit from $45 million to $35 million, starting next fiscal year, and repeal the tax credit in 2025. That would be a huge loss for neighborhoods and main streets in Iowa. Many of our projects at Hat Trick Renovation are only viable because of state historic tax credits. Often older buildings need so much work, it can cost more to restore them than the building will eventually be worth. However, once restored, these buildings become beautiful, irreplaceable structures that will last far longer than modern day construction.

Not only are tax credits a vital part of our work in saving historic buildings in Des Moines, they are also good for the financial health of our state.

With the possible exception of Johnson County, nowhere in Iowa has seen more brutally hard-fought Democratic primaries than the south side of Des Moines. State Senator Matt McCoy’s decision to challenge Polk County Supervisor John Mauro has set up an “epic battle of the titans” in the county’s fifth district, covering most of the south side, plus downtown and central neighborhoods of the capital city (a map is at the end of this post).

A poll currently in the field includes positive information about both candidates but negative messages about McCoy alone.

State Representative Ako Abdul-Samad’s tribute to his friend Jonathan Narcisse. -promoted by desmoinesdem

Jonathan Narcisse, advocate, media presence, and publisher of several newspapers, including “The Bystander,” Iowa’s most enduring publication geared towards an African American audience, died last Saturday, February 17. He was 54–young, but not unusual for a black man in America.

He was also my former campaign manager, business associate, peer, and friend. So I write this with sadness in my heart for the loss Iowa experiences as a result of his death, and with joy in my soul that he is no longer in pain.

Matt Chapman reports from today’s Iowa Senate committee hearings on a massive tax bill published the previous day. -promoted by desmoinesdem

Senate Republicans dropped Senate Study Bill 3197 on February 21, scheduling a subcommittee on the tax plan first thing the following morning and a full Ways and Means Committee to consider the bill shortly after lunch. They had employed a similar shock-and-awe tactic last week to get Senate Study Bill 3193 through the legislature’s “funnel” on the last possible day. That bill, modeled after a Florida law deemed unconstitutional, called for drug testing Medicaid and food assistance (SNAP) recipients, along with quarterly instead of yearly recertification and work requirements.

In opening comments on his tax proposal, Senate Ways and Means Chair Randy Feenstra said SSB 3197 was “bold” and would save Iowans an average of $1,000 in taxes. You can watch the whole meeting on video here.

Senator Pam Jochum, the ranking Democrat on the committee, said she was looking forward to input from EMS and firefighters, among others, since this bill would end deductions. She was also concerned that there was no fiscal impact statement and wanted to be sure it fit the budget. Jochum asked Feenstra if he had any data he could share.

The official Iowa Senate Republican tax plan would repeal the state’s popular Solar Energy Systems tax credit later this year.

Ways and Means Committee Chair Randy Feenstra introduced Senate Study Bill 3197 on February 21 and scheduled a subcommittee meeting on the 130-page bill for 8:00 am the following morning. Sweeping changes to individual and corporate income tax rates could reduce state revenue by more than $1 billion annually, though the details are unclear, because no fiscal analysis is publicly available.

Although the bill would create a new legislative committee to “comprehensively review and evaluate each tax credit” (pages 31-2), it also calls for scaling back or eliminating some tax credits, with the solar incentive the first to go.

Governor Kim Reynolds proposes eliminating federal deductibility as part of a broad tax reform plan, she revealed today during her first Condition of the State address to Iowa lawmakers. She’ll have to spend some political capital to get that idea through the legislature. In a plot twist, the fiercest opposition will come from members of her own party, including leaders of the House and Senate tax-writing committees.

The Iowa House and Senate convened Monday with the usual big promises and platitudes about working together to build a better future for Iowans.

Behind the optimistic rhetoric, all signs point to another contentious legislative session. The opening day speeches by Republican and Democratic leaders, enclosed in full below, revealed almost no common ground about the focus of lawmakers’ work and no indication that the most important bills will incorporate Democratic ideas. My takeaways:

Zach Wahls announced his candidacy today in Iowa Senate district 37, where Democratic State Senator Bob Dvorsky plans to retire at the end of 2018. Janice Weiner launched her campaign for the same seat earlier this week, but Wahls will be heavily favored to win the Democratic nomination.

Follow me after the jump for background on both candidates and the political landscape in this must-hold district for Democrats.

“Not sure who the author is on this one,” State Senator Randy Feenstra wrote to me on December 15, about an hour after Bleeding Heartland had published a detailed memo from the Iowa Department of Revenue about numerous proposed tax cuts and sales tax expansions. The chair of the upper chamber’s Ways and Means Committee added, “small reductions, not sure who put this one together. However, thanks for sharing! Very grateful as I need to find out if this member is running rogue over the Senate plan.”

A week earlier, Feenstra had distributed the same document to all of his fellow Republican senators, describing it as “my idea of a tax plan” and “one of my final runs that I have had the DOR work on.”

Clear majorities of Iowans disapprove of how the state legislature and executive branch are handling mental health care, Medicaid, education funding, and taxes, according to the latest statewide survey by Selzer & Co for the Des Moines Register and Mediacom.

Even worse for Republicans: more than 70 percent of respondents said each of those issues would be a “major consideration when you choose how you will vote in the 2018 election.”

Iowa Republican senators are considering a proposal to reduce individual and corporate tax rates and eventually phase out the state’s already-limited inheritance tax. The plan would increase revenue by making more goods and services subject to the sales tax, but those provisions would be difficult to move through the legislature, and even if enacted, would replace a small fraction of the money our cash-strapped state stands to lose from the tax cuts.

Governor Kim Reynolds told journalists this week she won’t reveal specifics about her tax plan–a top priority for 2018–until she delivers her Condition of the State address on January 9. She indicated she is waiting to see how Congress amends the federal tax code.

However, Senate GOP lawmakers and staff have received a detailed set of proposals for review. Bleeding Heartland obtained a lengthy memo describing “the tax reform plan prepared for the Governor’s Office” and estimating the fiscal impact of those changes. As with pending GOP legislation at the federal level, the largest benefits would flow to the wealthiest Iowans.

Governor Kim Reynolds made a strategic error by not distinguishing herself from her predecessor in any meaningful way, judging by the new Iowa poll by Selzer & Co for the Des Moines Register and Mediacom.

Changing course on even one high-profile policy could have demonstrated strong critical thinking and leadership skills. Instead, Reynolds is in effect running for a seventh Terry Branstad term. Unfortunately for her, Iowans are inclined to think it’s “time for someone new” in the governor’s office.

Despite being the most senior member of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee, Iowa’s Senator Chuck Grassley is not among the Congressional Republicans who will hash out a final tax bill. The Senate voted on December 6 to go to conference with House members, but Grassley revealed on Twitter this morning that he “was dropped” as a conferee.

Presumably GOP leaders want to distance themselves from Grassley’s recent comment that repealing the estate tax would reward “the people that are investing […] as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.” Those remarks have received massive nationwide media coverage, mockery, and condemnation.

Some Republicans had hoped the House would quickly send the Senate’s tax bill to President Donald Trump. However, in their unprecedented haste to rewrite massive legislation after an unfavorable report from the Joint Committee on Taxation, key GOP senators introduced errors in the bill approved over the weekend.

Notably, revised language on the corporate alternative minimum tax would increase taxes on many companies, sending business interests into “revolt.” Lily Batchelder, a law professor and former chief tax counsel for the Senate Finance Committee explained that issue in a series of tweets I’ve posted after the jump, along with a chart highlighting the key differences between the tax bills House and Senate Republicans have already passed. Other sloppily-drafted provisions “could be easily gamed” or “could open broad avenues for tax avoidance,” according to tax experts quoted by Politico’s Brian Faler.

Both bills would provide generous tax breaks to wealthy individuals while raising taxes on tens of millions of lower and middle-income households.

House Republican leaders have signaled they will agree to repeal the individual mandate to purchase health insurance, which was part of the Senate bill. By 2025, that provision would reduce the number of people with health insurance coverage by an estimated 13 million nationwide and by 125,600 in Iowa.

Approximately 125,600 more Iowans would be uninsured by 2025 if President Donald Trump signs into law a tax bill repealing the individual mandate, according to new estimates from the Center for American Progress. The coverage losses would be highest in the fourth Congressional district, primarily due to far more people becoming unable to purchase more expensive policies on the individual market.

In fact, the Center for American Progress projects that 56,600 residents of IA-04 would become uninsured over the next seven years, more than twice as many people as in any of Iowa’s other three Congressional districts.

Follow me after the jump for Iowa’s statewide and district-level numbers.

Voters in Iowa’s first district favor an unnamed Democrat over two-term Representative Rod Blum by 51 percent to 43 percent, according to a new survey by Public Policy Polling. Respondents in the same survey opposed the tax bill U.S. House Republicans approved last month by a 50 percent to 44 percent margin.

The Not One Penny coalition, formed in August to oppose any tax cuts “for millionaires, billionaires and wealthy corporations,” commissioned the survey in IA-01 and five other Congressional districts. The group has also launched a new round of television commercials targeting Blum and Representative David Young in Iowa’s third district. Not One Penny previously ran television commercials in August in IA-01, IA-03, and six other Republican-held House districts.

Meanwhile, the End Citizens United political action committee confirmed yesterday that Blum is among the “Big Money 20” Congressional Republicans it will target in 2018.

How large an estate could a working person build by investing rather than spending “every darn penny they have” on “booze or women or movies”? Jon Muller ran some numbers. -promoted by desmoinesdem

Senator Chuck Grassley commented on what he sees as the motivation behind opposition to eliminating the estate tax, as reported by the Des Moines Register.

“I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies…”

As someone who resembles his remarks, I decided to run some numbers. Consider the following assumptions:

U.S. Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst joined all but one of their Republican colleagues to approve a $1.5 trillion tax cut and health care policy overhaul late last night. Whereas Ernst had told Iowans, “I look forward to carefully reviewing tax reform legislation in the Senate,” the final vote “came after Senate Republicans frantically rewrote the multi-trillion dollar legislation behind closed doors to win over several final holdouts,” Politico reported.

Responding to Iowans who have contacted their offices about tax policy, U.S. Senate Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst have misrepresented how the latest Republican bill would affect lower and middle-income taxpayers.

Representatives Rod Blum (IA-01), David Young (IA-03), and Steve King (IA-04) joined most of their Republican colleagues in the U.S. House today to pass a tax bill that would greatly increase the federal deficit, conferring most of the benefits on corporations and people far wealthier than most Iowans. Tens of millions of low to moderate-income Americans would pay more in federal taxes if its provisions became law, because a number of tax credits and deductions would be scrapped or scaled back.

To cite just one example: ending a tax break for out-of-pocket medical expenses would have a “catastrophic effect on disabled people” as well as anyone who spends a substantial amount on chronic health conditions or fertility treatments.

Meanwhile, an estimated 203,000 Iowa children would be either fully or partially left out of the expanded Child Tax Credit included in the House bill. Repealing the estate tax, which applies “only to the value of an estate that exceeds $5.5 million per person ($11 million per couple),” would benefit about 70 Iowa families in 2018, some 0.2 percent of all estates.

House Republicans know their tax plan will cost many Americans more. For that reason, before bringing the bill to the floor–with no hearings–they waived a rule that “had been put in place to make it difficult to increase taxes.”

Thanking a veteran is easy. Tackling problems that face veterans is hard.

At no time is that political reality more apparent than on the 11th day of the 11th month.

The usual expressions of respect and gratitude can be found in the latest batch of Veterans Day tweets by Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst and Representatives Rod Blum (R, IA-01), Dave Loebsack (D, IA-02), David Young (R, IA-03), and Steve King (R, IA-04).

After the jump I’ve posted some concrete ways members of Congress could show they care about veterans. This is an open thread: all topics welcome.

Reviewing the Democratic “tidal wave” in Virginia on Tuesday, Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report commented, “You can’t really look at tonight’s results and conclude that Democrats are anything other than the current favorites to pick up the U.S. House in 2018.” A backlash against President Donald Trump and Congressional Republican efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act fueled strong Democratic turnout, sinking far more Virginia GOP state legislators than expected.

That’s not the only reason Representative Rod Blum should be feeling more nervous about winning a third term in Iowa’s first Congressional district.

“There is no civil discourse left and it is really sad,” Governor Kim Reynolds said yesterday, adding, “We ought to be able to debate ideas because that’s how you get to consensus.” Reynolds lamented the “vitriol” that dominates the current “vicious” political climate.

Today the Reynolds/Gregg campaign announced that Representative Steve King will be a co-chair. A written statement described the governor as “humbled by the endorsement” from a “strong defender of freedom and our conservative values” who is “independent, principled, and is fighting the good fight in Washington, D.C.”

You can posture as a consensus-seeker, or you can brag about support from a walking highlight reel of mean-spirited and dehumanizing rhetoric. Not both.

Leadership is the theme of Cedar Rapids Mayor Ron Corbett’s opening commercial promoting his gubernatorial candidacy. In the first half of the 60-second spot, a woman whose home was “nearly destroyed” in 2008 says the mayor “delivered” on his promise “to rebuild our city better than ever.”

Corbett then tells listeners, “the floods in Cedar Rapids proved that we can’t wait for things to get better on their own.” Without mentioning current Governor Kim Reynolds, Corbett asserts that “Iowans can’t afford the status quo,” and the state needs “a bold new leader in the governor’s office” to “slash income tax rates and champion conservative solutions.”

Republican Representatives Rod Blum and David Young have approval ratings below 40 percent and re-elect numbers below 50 percent, according to new surveys from Public Policy Polling.

The Patriot Majority Fund, a super-PAC that largely opposes GOP incumbents, commissioned polls in nine House districts around the country, including the two in Iowa that Democrats will target next year.

To all the Democrats who want to hear directly from each contender in the Iowa governor’s race before deciding how to vote next June: this post’s for you.

Since Bleeding Heartland published seven pitches for gubernatorial candidates from a major party event this summer, Todd Prichard has left the race and Ross Wilburn has joined the field.

All seven Democrats running for governor appeared at the Progress Iowa Corn Feed in Des Moines on September 10, speaking in the following order: Cathy Glasson, Fred Hubbell, John Norris, Ross Wilburn, Jon Neiderbach, Andy McGuire, and Nate Boulton. I enclose below the audio clips, for those who like to hear a candidate’s speaking style. I’ve also transcribed every speech in full, for those who would rather read than listen.

As a bonus, you can find a sound file of Brent Roske’s speech to the Progress Iowa event at the end of this post. With his focus on single-payer health care and water quality, Roske should be running in the Democratic primary. Instead, he plans to qualify for the general election ballot as an independent candidate, a path that can only help Republicans by splitting the progressive vote.

“It is time for Democrats to stop treating the presidency like it’s the only office that matters,” said South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, in one of the most memorable lines from his speech at the Progress Iowa Corn Feed in Des Moines on September 10. He missed a Notre Dame home football game weekend to spend time here, because in his view, we are facing “the most important season for progressives in our lifetime. And so much of what has to happen—so much of what has to change—starts right here in the middle of the country.”

Last year’s rout in state legislative races allowed Iowa Republicans to enact a long list of destructive policies. Although today’s school board elections are non-partisan, as are the city council and mayoral races in November, the turnout level and outcomes should provide some clues about whether Democrats and progressives are able to translate their anger into effective political action.

Buttigieg recognizes the challenges facing a party at a low point nationally and in states like Indiana and Iowa. On the plus side, he is convinced Democrats already have a message that can resonate with voters, and “It’s not even complicated.”

The Apple corporation’s plan to build a “state-of-the-art data center” in Waukee is attracting national attention and ridicule for a state and local incentives package worth more than $4 million to the country’s most profitable company for every long-term job created.

While Governor Kim Reynolds celebrated yet another deal to fleece taxpayers, one encouraging sign emerged last week: more Iowa politicians are willing to say out loud that this approach to economic development doesn’t pay for itself.

The juxtaposition of last week’s “Waukee Scores Apple Server Farm” story with the “Iowa Nursing Home Budget Crisis” story revealed to me, the advanced rot of political obeiesance to corporations at the expense of badly frayed public resources and services.

The Los Angeles Times column on the subject put it as well as could be stated. Of course Bleeding Heartland covered the nursing home crisis here.

After reading the LA times story, it was darkly funny to read this story in the New York Times about Mr. Cook, CEO of Apple, “Barnstorming for Moral Responsibility”.

Not only are these corporate out-of-state care facilities taking advantage of our citizens on the low end of the scale, you have the richest, most profitable company on the planet, literally skimming future dollars off the top!

Those of you with Apple stock are probably grateful for your good fortune. Maybe those dividends will offset the taxes we may have to pony up to recover what Apple is taking away.

(When you look at the size of the tax breaks Iowa coughed up at a time when the DHS budget shortfall puts hundreds of people at risk,it makes me wonder if Mr. Cook might consider adding some of his latte allowance to fund Iowa’s ailing social programs? Frankly, I think we’ll have a better shot at convincing him than we will waiting for the Reynolds administration to Think Different.)

State Treasurer Mike Fitzgerald swore in Dr. Phil Miller yesterday as the newest member of the Iowa House. At a House Truman Fund event a short while later, I asked the winner of the August 8 election in House district 82 about his plans and goals as he prepares for the 2018 legislative session.

Are Iowa Democrats more likely to support a successful businessman who is not a politician? Are they sympathetic to the argument that a self-funding candidate for governor is less susceptible to influence by special interests? Are they more impressed by private- or public-sector jobs Fred Hubbell has held, or by his charitable giving to causes like Planned Parenthood?

A recent survey of Democratic voters appears to be the Hubbell campaign’s first attempt to answer those and other questions.

Declaring that “economic concentration is the fundamental issue of our time,” Austin Frerick launched his candidacy for Congress in Iowa’s third Congressional district today.

In a news release, he said, “For too long, agricultural monopolies like Monsanto have been milking Iowa’s farmers with high seed costs. I’m tired of watching career politicians stand aside while huge corporations push around average Iowans.”

Cedar Rapids Mayor Ron Corbett fleshed out his case against Governor Kim Reynolds as a manager of state finances this week, saying she is behaving like former Democratic Governor Chet Culver. During the 2010 campaign, then-candidates Terry Branstad and Reynolds derided Culver as “Big Debt Chet.” Now, Corbett asserts, “instead of learning from Governor Culver, she’s mirroring from Governor Culver.”

As the leading GOP rival to Reynolds, Corbett will make fiscal policy a central issue in his gubernatorial campaign. But is Reynolds really on track to borrow more money for the state than Iowa’s last Democratic governor did?

If you haven’t had a chance to hear directly from the Democrats running for governor, Bleeding Heartland has you covered with audio and highlights from the speeches at Thursday night’s big Hall of Fame event in Des Moines.