Sunlight Seeker
Look up national or state donors or check where your Congresspeople are getting their money.
Media Campaign Tools
The Democratic Agenda
*Tips & Talking Points for Letters to Editors
Email The Media
*Email Iowa and national media, five at a time
Framing The Message
*UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language to dominate politics
Simple Framing
*A step-by-step guide on how to frame progressive issues, by George Lakoff
DemSpeak
*Values Inventory, Message Identification and Development, Engagement & Rapport Strategies, Framing and Reframing Language, Strategic Development and Deployment of Frames, Mediaspace Injection Choreography, and Framing/Media Crossfire training of Capitol Hill Legislators, new TV spokespersons for progressives, Talk Radio callers, and Progressive Leaders
| March 2005 |
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
Sam Garchik - Mon 02 Jun 2008 10:10 AM CDT
atomburke - Fri 23 May 2008 03:49 PM CDT
salman - Fri 23 May 2008 06:28 AM CDT
megelso - Sun 11 May 2008 09:10 AM CDT
no4gman - Tue 29 Apr 2008 01:07 AM CDT
|
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.
Tuesday, March 15
John Drury: Killing The Small Towns Won't Save Iowa
by
John Drury
on Tue 15 Mar 2005 05:26 PM CST
Killing The Small Towns Won't Save Iowa
by John Drury
Back in February, I wrote about the local government tax reform committee working with the Governor to create significant changes to the way our local governments do business in Iowa. They have come out with an idea on the sharing of services. Let’s have a look.
The 6 year plan calls for regions to be set up either by the existing 15 community college districts or by the 16 regional planning districts. A state board would be created. Eventually, regional leaders would emerge and would then hold a series of meetings with city and county leaders to determine which services could be shared. These community leaders would need to decide which sharing plan they would want to participate in and these proposals would end up on voter’s ballots for approval. If the communities do not approve sharing plans within 6 years, they would be penalized. These penalties would probably include not being able to raise property taxes, but the details are somewhat sketchy so there could be others. In essence, the plan would force Iowa communities to share services and penalize those who do not.
I think the obvious assumption on behalf of the committee members here is that all local governments are wasteful and are the real culprit in the rise of property taxes. One with any knowledge of what the state legislature has pulled in the last few years with regards to local governments can’t help but see this as some sort of master plan to kill off the small towns in Iowa.
A few years ago, the state legislature balanced their budgets on the backs of local governments when they essentially took away or reduced property tax credits. If that wasn’t bad enough, they did it after the governments had certified their budgets leaving them no other choice but to cut basic services. In the case of our state’s capital city, that meant lights out for many of their streetlights. We know where that ended.
Apparently, cutting and eventually eliminating those property tax credits wasn’t enough. They continue to think that local governments are wasteful and duplicitous and never get to experience first hand the kind of difficulties the legislators have in balancing a budget. “We’ve been experiencing a lack of revenue and have to deal with it, it’s time the cities take some of the cuts too," they argue. Local governments across Iowa, particularly the dwindling small towns, have dealt with declining revenues for years. They have been creative, they have been efficient and some have already shared services to make ends meet.
Representative Bill Schickel, R- Mason City, was quoted as saying that local leaders have nothing to fear about this plan because the proposal calls for sharing. He compared it to growing up and having to share a car with his two brothers. “My brothers and I, the three of us, shared one car after we graduated from high school because that’s the only way we could afford it. We didn't consolidate what we were doing,” he said.
Maybe not, Bill, but if one of your brothers had the car, and you wanted to go somewhere, you didn’t go.
Our local governments serve important roles. Consolidation will only make these 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.
Friday, March 11
John Drury: Political Irony At Its Finest ...
by
John Drury
on Fri 11 Mar 2005 09:03 AM CST
 Political Irony At Its Finest ...
Here's a bit of political irony for you to ponder today. A group of
Mason City students, who really just want their education funded, are
holding an art auction to raise money for art supplies. Among the
featured "artists" is none other than Representative Bill Schickel of
Mason City, a man who has consistently voted to underfund their
education. Too bad Representative Schickel only paints a pretty picture of education
dollars for these students.
Mason City Globe Gazette Local News Story
Posted online: Friday, March 11, 2005 12:03 AM CST
Auction will benefit art education
By DEB NICKLAY, Of The Globe Gazette
MASON CITY — A reduction in
K-12 art supply dollars has prompted local students to spearhead an Art
Auction on Sunday at the Salsbury Room at MacNider Art Museum.
A silent auction of student and local celebrity art will be held from 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. The show ends at 4:30 p.m.
The event is a joint effort of the Mason City Youth Task Force, the Mason City Chamber of Commerce and Mason City schools.
Students
in the YIELD (Youth Investing Energy in Leadership Development) said
students are having to purchase their own supplies.
"I
have taken art every semester in high school and we really struggle;
teachers keep telling us to be conservative with the supplies," said
YIELD student Brittany Ewing, 17, from Mason City High School. "There
just aren't enough to go around."
Ewing said students have to buy paint brushes, photo paper, colored pencils and even glue for art classes.
Helping
Ewing mold the idea was fellow junior and YIELD student, Logan Shurtz,
17. With the help of other YIELD students, all art teachers in Mason
City public schools and Newman Catholic Schools were contacted to have
students submit items to the auction.
There
will be 75 to 100 items available from K-12 students, as well as those
crafted by well-known local people such as radio personality Harry O, Rep. Bill Schickel and Jay Hansen, director of Prairie Ridge Treatment Center.
All media will be represented, Ewing said, "from pottery to painting, as well as some great photographs."
Shurtz said students and teachers have embraced the idea.
"People can come and buy, or just come and enjoy all the art," Shurtz said.
Reach Deb Nicklay at 421-0531 or deb.nicklay@globegazette.com.
Tuesday, March 8
John Drury: Taking Care Of The Least Among Us Is The Least Our Legislature Can Do
by
John Drury
on Tue 08 Mar 2005 09:19 PM CST
Taking Care Of The Least Among Us Is The Least Our Legislature Can Do
by John Drury
This
week is known as funnel week in the Iowa legislature, the week where
bills must get passed out of committee to have a chance for passage
this session. The funnel deadline only applies to policy bills; tax and
spending bills or legislation introduced by leaders of either party
aren’t subject to the funnel deadline.
And while the work of this session will certainly focus after this
week, it’s perhaps more interesting to look at bills that appear to be
dead this session; one of which is Iowa’s minimum wage. I attended a
legislative forum over the weekend and was given a fact sheet on this
issue. I want to take an opportunity to share some of that information
with you.
Iowa’s minimum wage is stuck at $5.15 per hour. The 200,000 Iowa
workers that work for minimum wage in this state pull in a whopping
$10,712 yearly. This puts them at $5,000 below poverty level for a family
of three. Iowa is a low wage state, ranking somewhere around 40th in
the country. This is embarrassing, it is wrong and Iowa must do better.
There are four bills that have yet to pass out of committee that will
increase Iowa’s minimum wage. Two in the House, HF 105 and HF111; and
two in the Senate, SF 120 and SF 94. These bills ought to be headed for
debate and yet they are destined for the circular file.
Opponents to raising the minimum wage will tell you that since the
federal minimum wage is $5.15, there’s no reason or precedent for
Iowa’s to be higher. That is simply not true; 14 states and the
District of Columbia each have a higher minimum wage than the federal
rate. Many other state legislatures are starting to take action on this
issue, and Iowa is not even willing to debate it. Not only is Iowa not a leader on this issue, we aren’t even a very good follower.
Opponents also say that it will hurt Iowa’s economy to raise the
minimum wage higher than the federal rate. Again, not true; between
1990-1996, most of the time Iowa’s rate was higher than the federal and
not only did it not hurt us, it helped us. Our state output grew and
unemployment actually dropped.
And when those arguments fail, they say that it will hurt small
businesses by “driving up their costs.” While wage costs will go up,
studies have shown that businesses recoup some of that cost by higher
productivity, increased worker morale, lower absenteeism and lower
recruiting costs.
Iowa’s minimum wage is beyond shameful. I encourage you to contact your
legislators and get them to pass a bill out of committee on this. Tell
them to take their pick, as any of the four bills I mentioned will raise
the minimum wage and do it responsibly. At the very least, we need a
debate. Iowa should not be competing against China and Mexico for who
will work for the lowest wage.
|
DFIA Events Calendar
Add Your Event Here
|
