|
|
Thursday, March 31
SS: So Where Do We Stand?
by
Chad Thompson
on Thu 31 Mar 2005 12:49 PM CST
 SS: So Where Do We Stand?
This
morning there were reports from the latest stop on the SS Phase-Out
"Bamboozlepalooza" tour. So where do our elected officials stand?
The picture here definitely seems clearer, at least from Chuck Grassley:
From the Washington Post:
"Today, the public has not found his personal account approach compelling," Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) said in an interview late Tuesday, less than 24 hours before appearing with Bush at Kirkwood Community College here.
...Grassley, chairman of the Senate panel responsible for Social Security, said in a separate interview Tuesday afternoon: "I
don't think [Bush] has made much progress on solving the solvency issue
or what to do about personal accounts. It concerns me because as time
goes on, I was hoping [Bush] would be able to make my job
easier. We are not hearing from the grass roots that, by golly, you
guys in Congress have to work on this." Grassley supports private Social Security accounts.
The home-state Des Moines Register noted something a little different:
"I'm gaining confidence," Grassley said. "I'm gaining confidence because of the fact that [Bush] is working so hard."
But
Grassley, an Iowa Republican and chairman of the influential Senate
Finance Committee, remained skeptical about whether Americans would
embrace personal investment accounts. Bush spent most of his time Wednesday promoting the controversial proposal.
But
Grassley, who controls the agenda for the committee that oversees
Social Security and supports the idea of allowing younger workers to
invest part of their payroll taxes in government-managed accounts, said
the public is "not closer in buying into personal accounts."
The NY Times also noted this:
Representative Jim Leach, a moderate Iowa Republican who flew with Mr.
Bush back to Washington on Air Force One, said they did not discuss
Social Security on the flight. Mr. Leach is one of several Republicans
who have not taken a position on individual accounts, and he says he
has heard plenty of resistance from constituents.
So -
what's going on? It seems that the constituents (i.e. "The Iowa
Public") are against phasing out Social Security - removing the fixed
benefit plan that we've come to count on.
However, the administration is definitely convincing Iowa's GOP Representatives to "stick to principle" and vote against the will of their constituents.
Folks, write this one down and remember it come election time in 2006.
Another note from elsewhere: pstans at the Democratic Underground reported on a town hall meeting held by Tom Latham.
The verdict: Latham is also perfectly willing to defy his constituency in order to support phase-out.
I pointed out to Latham that his web site and the pamphlet he mailed
out stated he is adamantly opposed to privatization, and I was glad to
see that. But is he really opposed to Bush's privatization plan? He
then tried to redefine privatization, and he would not say one way or
another if he supported Bush's privatization plan. Others pointed out
to him how misleading he is with his stated opposition to
privatization. I think he is very vulnerable on this issue, and he came
off to many as quite evasive and deceiving on this and other issues.
So, three congressmen leaning "phase out" against their
constituents (Grassley, Latham, Leach), two going silent (King, Nussle
- hey, isn't there another race in 2006?) and two against (Boswell,
Harkin).
Wednesday, March 30
Cedar Rapids Arm-Twisting
by
Chad Thompson
on Wed 30 Mar 2005 12:44 PM CST
Cedar Rapids Arm-Twisting
For those of us stuck in "other places than Cedar Rapids" today, we've
been watching the various news sites and listening to the radio to hear
of any news coming from the latest stop on the Phase Out Tour.
From the Des Moines Register comes this little tidbit:
Shortly after landing around 10
a.m., Bush also joined Des Moines radio host Jan Mickelson of WHO-AM
(1040) for an interview at a Cedar Rapids diner before the event at
Kirkwood.
The interview included Sen.
Chuck Grassley, the Iowa Republican and chairman of the influential
Finance Committee. Bush's visit was seen as an attempt to bolster
Grassley's commitment to changing the decades-old financial safety net
for seniors.
Grassley, who generally
supports [Bush]'s call for changing the program, has expressed
doubt that Congress possesses the political will to approach the
popular financial safety net for seniors.
"I appreciate the chairman,"
Bush told Mickelson. "He's got some political courage which is
necessary to take care of tough problems. Sen. Grassley and I have
dedicated ourselves to tackling the tough problems."
Two things jump out at me immediately:
1) The inclusion of Chuck Grassley.
2) The seeming exclusion of Jim Leach. (Later reports can verify.)
As noted yesterday,
Jim Leach's own sales pitch on SS Phase Out fell flat in Iowa City -
and it probably wouldn't be that much of a stretch to say that he'll
feel pressure to vote against any such proposal from his constituents.
Grassley, however, is an interesting case. I have not seen
anything strongly worded from Grassley, who seems to have his finger
firmly planted in the wind. He's "generally supportive," yet is
placing enough distance between himself and the Bush position that he
could (he hopes) cleanly run away from the pending disaster.
This is another case in point why sometimes you have to look beyond
"the candidate" when voting - sometimes you have to look at the
leadership of his party.
The other item that's interesting: this tour isn't aimed at pressuring Democrats - it's aimed at pressuring Congressional Republicans, who will be eager to run away from an issue that will bear no fruit in 2006.
It's up to us to keep the pressure on.
UPDATE: I wonder who this comment was aimed at?
"Now is the time to fix it, and I think there is a political price for not getting involved in the process."
Bush added: "I think there is a political price for saying, `It's not a problem, I'm going to stay away from the table.'"
Suicide Gene Bill Passes Iowa Senate
by
Linda Thieman
on Wed 30 Mar 2005 04:39 AM CST
 Suicide Gene Bill Passes Iowa Senate
by Iowa State Rep. Mark Kuhn (D-Floyd)
Dear Friends,
SF 259,
the companion bill to HF 259, passed the [Iowa] Senate by a vote of
33-16 with 1 absent. I wrote and distributed a two-page letter to
the Senate [yesterday] asking them for further discussions before
passage of the bill, which is sure to be signed by Governor
Vilsack. My last ditch attempt to persuade the Senate to defer on
the bill for this legislative session and call for the appointment of
an interim study committee to study the issue failed. There was a
verbal agreement among Senate leaders to call for the appointment of an
interim study committee, but that was not written into the bill, and it
is not known if even that will happen. Even if it does, it's like
shutting the barn door after the cows are in the cornfield.
I want
to thank each of you for your support during consideration of this
bill. You all played a unique and important role in opposing this
bad piece of legislation. In conclusion, let me say that a democracy
void of discussion is not representative of the voices of the
people. Legislators introducing these preemptive seed laws are
not acting on behalf of the people they represent, they are acting
despite the will of the people.
Thank you for going against the grain and standing up for what's right.
Keep lookin' up,
Rep. Mark Kuhn, Mark.Kuhn@legis.state.ia.us
P.S. Please be assured I'll be writing Governor Vilsack ASAP to ask him to veto this legislation.
Click here to email Gov. Vilsack asking him to veto this dangerous bill.
 A big thank you from Blog for Iowa to Rep. Mark Kuhn for taking the lead on this important issue.
Submitted by Larry Hanus of Waterloo
Tuesday, March 29
Protest Bush at Kirkwood in Cedar Rapids on Wednesday, March 30th
by
Linda Thieman
on Tue 29 Mar 2005 03:05 PM CST
 Protest Bush at Kirkwood in Cedar Rapids on Wednesday, March 30th
Junta
puppet George W. Bush is coming to speak at Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids on Wednesday,
March 30, in Johnson Hall at 12:15 p.m. Loyal Americans who
believe in Social Security will be holding
a peaceful protest across from Johnson Hall. We will meet at the baseball diamond across from Johnson Hall at 10am. Please bring signs and lots of people!
Join us as we protest Bush's attack on America's retirement. This
protest includes the IDP, labor unions, the Hawkeye Labor Council, Linn
County Democrats, Kirkwood students and other groups. The
protest will be held at 66th Street and Kirkwood Blvd SE. Parking is
available on 66th St. and other side streets. Some signs will be
available.
However, if you'd like to ATTEND the event, tickets are available through Grassley's office in Cedar Rapids.
MEETING:
The puppet's "A Conversation on Strengthening Social Security" [read
DESTROYING it] is scheduled for 12:15 p.m. at Kirkwood Community
College.
Here are Grassley's office's coordinates in Cedar Rapids:
206 Federal Building
101 1st Street, S.E.
Cedar Rapids, IA 52401
(319) 363-6832
Fax: (319) 363-7179
According
to Alejandro Andreotti, the woman in Grassley's office said people can
just stop by and pick up a ticket. She also told him that they
distributed a number of them to Kiwanis and Rotary clubs throughout the
state.
Andreotti
writes: If you can go to the talk, get yourself a ticket. Don't
wear any donkeys on your shirt or other obvious signs of
progressivism. If you get in, don't scream a question. Be
respectful [even if you have to gag].
Be ready
with two questions: a softball (so as to appease the handlers), and a
real one. Try to make your story something the handlers might
pick up.
Grassley
came out [Sunday] voicing serious doubts about the privatization of
SS. If the tickets are actually going to Rotarians and Kiwanis,
Bush might not find such a receptive crowd in Iowa.
Thanks to Alejandro Andreotti for submitting the meeting info, and to JoyAnn and Trish Nelson for submitting the protest info.
SS Phase Out A Hard Sell In Eastern Iowa
by
Chad Thompson
on Tue 29 Mar 2005 12:28 PM CST
SS Phase Out A Hard Sell In Eastern Iowa
Jim Leach went to Iowa City to sell snake-oil, and the locals weren't buying.
Even temperatures nearing 70 degrees Monday didn't stop more than 80
people from gathering at the Iowa City Public Library to oppose Social
Security reform proposals.
Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, hosted a
community meeting for about two hours, with discussion primarily
focused on fixing Social Security, although there were also questions
about the Iraq war and the growing federal deficit.
Hands immediately sprang into the air following Leach's 15-minute opening statement on Social Security.
"I'm
agitated with the way things have been going in Washington, D.C., these
past few months," said Jean Parker of North Liberty. "I don't think
they need to change Social Security -- especially in the way it's been
advertised."
Others, including people on their lunch break, University of Iowa students and senior citizens, mirrored Parker's concerns.
...The student population would be largely
affected by Social Security changes. [George W.] Bush has promised only
those near or at retirement age that changes to their benefits won't be
affected.
"There is so little reality about the bill," said Ann
Bovbjerg of Iowa City. "The most insulting is saying, 'you'll be OK
(seniors), it's the younger generation who won't be.' Who are these
younger people? They are your kids and my kids."
No one in attendance voiced support for the proposals that have been introduced by Bush.
...In
his opening remarks, Leach called Social Security "the most important
social program in the United States, arguably the most successful
program in the world." In
case anyone is curious (or near Kirkwood Community College) - the
latest stop on the Social Security Phase Out tour is coming to Kirkwood
tomorrow.
Here's the information from the Des Moines Register.
HOW TO GET THEM: Tickets for Bush's Wednesday event on Social
Security at Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids are available
through U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley and U.S. Rep. Jim Leach.
THE EVENT: Doors for the event, which is free and open to the public, open at 10 a.m. and close at 11:30 a.m.
INFORMATION: Contact the Cedar Rapids offices of Grassley at (319) 363-6832 or Leach at (319) 363-4773.
If anyone attends and has a "live action" report - send it in, and we'll post it! (blog@democracyforiowa.com)
Sunday, March 27
Congressman Latham Supports Oil Drilling in Alaska
by
Trish Nelson
on Sun 27 Mar 2005 10:19 AM CST
 Congressman Latham Supports Oil Drilling in Alaska
Radio Iowa
by Bob Fisher, KLSS, Mason City
While there's much outcry about
the recent U.S. Senate vote to permit oil-drilling in Alaska's Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge, the measure's future is uncertain in the
House. Iowa Congressman Tom Latham, a republican from Alexander, says
he'd support the move, if proper considerations are followed.
Latham says, "If things can be done in a very environmentally friendly
way, we certainly have desperate needs as far as lessening our
dependency on foreign oil."
Latham
says the budget bill that includes the oil-drilling provision also
contains opportunities for renewable resources like ethanol, soy
diesel, biomass and wind energy. Latham says he hopes the nation gets a
legitimate energy bill.
The U.S.
Geological Survey says ANWR's coastal plain represents the largest
untapped oil reserve in the United States, containing between six and
16-billion barrels. The nation currently uses about 20-millon barrels a
day.
(Click here to read the entire story)
Click here to contact Congressman Latham: tom.latham@mail.house.gov
 Click here to receive action alerts from Rapid Response - Iowa
Tuesday, March 22
John Drury: Killing The Small Towns Won't Save Iowa Redux
by
John Drury
on Tue 22 Mar 2005 03:37 PM CST
 Killing The Small Towns Won't Save Iowa Redux
by John Drury
Last week I wrote on the regional government plan that the state
legislature has been working on. And as I got to thinking more about
it, I realized some things that I didn’t touch on in last week’s
column, so with your forgiveness, I’m going to talk about that issue
again.
To
recap, the plan calls for regions to be set up by the existing 15
community college districts. A state board would be created and
eventually, there would be a series of meetings with regional leaders
to determine which services could be shared. These proposals would end
up on voter’s ballots in each community for approval. If the
communities do not approve sharing plans within 6 years, they would be
penalized. These penalties include not being able to raise property
taxes, and not being eligible for some state grants.
In other
words, voters of communities would have to approve sharing plans with
regional governments. If they didn’t approve a plan in 6 years, they
would be “penalized” by the state. One of the penalties discussed is a
freezing of property taxes at the current rate.
And this
is where it gets interesting. If the “penalty” is a freezing of
property taxes where they are now, isn’t that actually an incentive for
the voters to not share?
I mean, wouldn’t the voters take a fixed rate as opposed to a variable
when it comes to property taxes? There’s certainly no guarantee that
property taxes will go down as a result of the sharing. In fact, there
are examples showing that sharing services doesn’t necessarily save any
money.
What
this plan really comes down to is the state legislature is punishing
local governments. When the voters do not approve a sharing plan, local
governments will not have the ability to raise the funds needed to
provide the services their citizens demand. If they are not able to
provide those services, the smaller communities will have an even
tougher time attracting people to their communities and eventually they
will cease to exist; and at that point the state legislature can
declare mission accomplished.
The
state legislature likes to blame local governments for rising property
taxes. Well, in north Iowa, where the population is dwindling, perhaps
the rising property tax rates are at least partly due to a smaller base
of taxpayers to spread out the costs. And perhaps the dwindling
population is due to the lack of any real strategy when it comes to
bringing high paying, good jobs to the region. We won’t get into what
is happening to Iowa’s air and water.
The
legislators in favor of the plan will argue that local governments
shouldn’t have the ability to continue to raise property taxes beyond
what is reasonable. I agree, and there are already limitations in
place. And those same legislators will argue that state has to deal
with declining revenues and so should the local governments. And those
same legislators, in the face of declining revenues, continue to pass
tax cuts and loopholes that don’t make any sense. I guess it’s
difficult for me to have sympathy for those who impose hardship on
themselves.
Enacting
this plan will further enable the incompetent approach we are taking to
economic development and rebuilding our rural economy. I said this last
week, but it bears repeating: our local governments serve important
roles. Consolidation will only make services more difficult to provide.
Our state government should be focused on improving the overall health
of the state without trying to murder the small towns.
Monday, March 21
Counterpoint Extra: Ted Remington Now Appearing Weekly on Sinclair Action
by
Trish Nelson
on Mon 21 Mar 2005 11:55 AM CST
Counterpoint Extra: Ted Remington Now Appearing Weekly on Sinclair Action
The rational counter to "The Point," "The Counterpoint"
critiques and corrects the daily editorial by Sinclair Broadcasting's corporate
vice president, Mark Hyman, that is broadcast on all Sinclair-owned television
stations across the country.
Congratulations to Ted Remington whose conscientious analysis of Sinclair Broadcasting's "The Point" by Mark Hyman can now also
be found weekly on Sinclair Action. Go Ted!
by
Iowa's Ted Remington
I'm
proud to announce that beginning this week, I am contributing a regular
"Counterpoint" essay for SinclairAction that will appear on their
website. However, I will still maintain [The Counterpoint] blog
independent of SinclairAction or any other organization.
The
Counterpoint feature that appears on SinclairAction will be a "kinder,
gentler" version of what you see [on the Counterpoint]. On a weekly
basis, I'll write a response to a chosen edition of "The Point" from
the previous week and/or comment on general trends in Mark Hyman's
rhetoric. There will be less snide asides from me and more pure fact
checking and analysis. However, the goal is the same - to provide a
balance to "The Point" and to identify and critique Hyman's
simplifications, distortions, and falsehoods.
Like
what you see [on the Counterpoint], the commentary that appears
courtesy of SinclairAction represents my individual point of view, not
the editorial voice of the organization (i.e., I'm not on the
SinclairAction payroll). However, SinclairAction is offering me an
opportunity to contribute to their ongoing efforts to monitor Sinclair
Broadcasting and keep them honest (to the extent that's possible).
I'd like
to thank the good folks at SinclairAction as well as Media Matters for
America for the encouragement and support they've provided!
Click here to view a recent segment of "The Point" where Mark Hyman defames Ted Remington.
|
|
