Posts Tagged ‘joni ernst’
Note: Joni Ernst will be in Cedar Rapids at noon today and Des Moines at 5:00. See below for details.
Friday Mach 17 9 AM
Ackley Public Library 401 State St.
Friday March 17, 1 PM
Alden Public Library 1012 Water St.
Friday March 17 – 9 AM
Devils Glen Hy-Vee 2900 Devils Glen Road
Every Friday 9AM at the Happy Joe’s ,2430 Spruce Hill Drive, Bettendorf, IA
Friday March 17 – 1:15 PM
Britt City Hall, 170 Main St. South
Friday March 17: Noon – With Senator Ernst
Coe College – Sinclair Auditorium 1220 1st Ave NE
Friday March 17, 2:45 PM
Crystal Lake Library, 120 5th St.
Friday March 17, 9:30 AM
Greatest Grains, 1600 North Harrison St.
Friday March 17 – 5 PM WIth Senator Ernst
Drake University – Sheslow Auditorium, 2507 University Ave
Friday March 17 11:30 AM
Ellsworth Community College, Equine Center, 707 Ellsworth Ave
Friday March 17- Noon.
Palms Supper Club, 4920 Ave O, Fort Madison
Friday March 17 – 9 AM
Garner Library 416 State St.
Friday March 17 – 11 AM
Kanawha Fire Station 104 South Main
Friday March 17, Noon
Pizza Ranch 104 North Runger Ave.
Friday March 17 10:15 AM
Steamboat RIck Public Library, 511 West Market St.
Senator Joni Ernst’s regional directors will hold traveling office hours throughout the month of March. Senator Ernst will not be at the traveling office hours.
Representatives from Senator Ernst’s office will be available in counties throughout the state to assist Iowans with problems or questions about eligibility involving issues like Social Security, veterans’ benefits, military affairs, passports, immigration issues, and other federal programs.
Wednesday, March 8, 2017
3:00 PM – 4:00 PM
Fairfield Public Library
104 W. Adams Avenue
Tuesday, March 14, 2017
10:30 AM – 11:30 AM
Coralville Public Library
Meeting Room B
1401 5th Street
Black Hawk County
Friday, March 10, 2017
2:30 PM – 3:30 PM
Hudson Public Library
401 5th Street
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
3:00 PM – 4:00 PM
Altoona City Hall
407 8th Street SE
Tuesday, March 7, 2017
11:00 AM – 12:00 PM
Bettendorf Public Library
Upstairs Conference Room
2950 Learning Campus Drive
Dave Bradley and I met with a Joni Ernst staffer Wednesday. We expressed our concerns about what the senator was going to do as far as her vote on repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). We shared our concerns and fears about Trump in general and about what happens to people who will lose their health care.
He was a nice, intelligent young man. You could have mistaken him for an Iowa City liberal. He was very sympathetic and agreed with us that we are living in a terrifying time; he said everyone he knows is also terrified. But that didn’t stop him from relying on easy Republican cliches that weren’t exactly true, to put us off.
He said that we needed to understand that what we hear in the news is just polarizing politics, and that when Senator Ernst actually votes on actual policies that Senator Ernst will rely on a reasoned process. (Dave and I shared a sidelong glance here).
Politely pointing out that based on everything we’ve seen so far, reason seems to have a very small place in the process, we expressed our skepticism that all would be well, no need to worry.
The nice young man assured us that the Ernst team gets it, that they understand all of the complex issues. It would all be taken into consideration before she decides how to vote.
We said something like, well you sure could’ve fooled us, and Dave asked the staffer to ask Senator Ernst if she might make a public statement as to her intentions as far as voting to repeal ACA, raising the Medicare eligibility age, or cuts to Social Security.
He claimed that “no one” really knows what is going to happen or what the alleged replacement Obamacare bill was going to have in it, so she couldn’t really make a public statement.
Nevertheless, if as he claims, we had nothing to worry about, a public statement from Senator Ernst as to what her current thoughts are about Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare could certainly be helpful, we suggested. So he scribbled a note in a tiny notebook and said he would pass it on.
He was a Nice Young Man just doing his job, explaining to us How Things Work. He was practiced enough at handling constituents that I did start to wonder if we really knew what we were talking about.
Part of the answer came just hours after we met with the senator’s representative.
Senator Joni Ernst joined Grassley and their Republican colleagues Wednesday night in voting to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) with no replacement on the horizon. See Midnight Health Care Massacre
Thanks to the influence of the gun lobby, US Senators (including Grassley and Ernst) have vowed to deny President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee a hearing—never mind an up or down vote. But the Constitution is clear: It’s the President’s job to nominate Supreme Court justices, and it’s the Senate’s job to consider them.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that he can’t imagine the US Senate confirming a nominee that is not endorsed by the NRA. Since when did the gun lobby get to decide?
Tell Grassley and Ernst: it’s time to fulfill their constitutional responsibility, consider Chief Judge Merrick Garland and restore the Supreme Court to nine justices.
Jeremy Brigham, Executive Director
Iowans for Gun Safety
The organization that funded Joni Ernst, Trees of Liberty, no longer exists, disappearing after doing nothing but financing her campaign. That and other probable illegalities are discussed here. Take a trip down memory lane as the lawyer for the Center for Media and Democracy explains what they did.
“A few months ago when the tax filings for Freedom Partners came out, Freedom Partners being the conduit for Koch money, we found out that in 2014, Trees of Liberty was entirely funded by the Koch political network. Trees of Liberty the group that came out of nowhere, dropped an incredible amount of money on this Iowa GOP senate primary race, was entirely funded by the Koch Brothers, and the Koch political network, and ultimately, broke the law in the process. That is what we allege in our complaint.” Read the complaint here.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a non-profit legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions. For more information, please visit crewsmostcorrupt.org/press/entry/complaint-ernst-backing-koch-group-broke-law.
This article make it clear that our U.S. Senator Joni Ernst, has no interest in working to clean up Iowa’s water. She and her fellow GOP cronies are more worried about power and posturing. Following President Obama’s veto of her proposal to block new federal regulations to protect our drinking water, she said the new rule is “complex, burdensome and overreaching” and “this rule is not about clean water. Rather, it is about how much authority the federal government and unelected bureaucrats should have to regulate what is done on private land.”
No Senator Ernst, the rule is in fact about clean water. And yes, if someone is poisoning the water supply, I want my government to do something about it.
WASHINGTON — Sen. Joni Ernst, stymied by a presidential veto, said she would explore other ways to stop a White House rule regulating small bodies of water that she says will hurt Iowa and other states.
Late Tuesday, President Barack Obama vetoed a congressional resolution that Ernst sponsored in the Senate and would have blocked the new federal “waters of the United States” regulations.
Obama told members of Congress the new rule “is critical to our efforts to protect the nation’s waters and keep them clean.” The president said he could not support Ernst’s resolution because it blocks progress and denies businesses and communities “the regulatory certainty and clarity needed to invest in projects that rely on clean water.”
Ernst said the rule is “complex, burdensome and overreaching” and she would look for other ways to scrap it. She did not outline what other options are available.
“We all want clean water — that is not disputable,” Ernst said. “However, this rule is not about clean water. Rather, it is about how much authority the federal government and unelected bureaucrats should have to regulate what is done on private land.”
The Iowa Republican said the rule gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate water on 97 percent of land in Iowa, which could threaten the livelihood of people across the state.
Republicans and farm groups have said the rule gives the government too much power to regulate their land and potentially subject ditches, stream beds and self-made ponds to new oversight. Farmers worry they would have to pay for costly environmental assessments and apply for more permits.
The administration has said the Clean Water Rule is needed to clarify the Clean Water Act by specifying the types of bodies of water regulated by the 1972 measure.
Collin O’Mara, president of the National Wildlife Federation, said a veto was the right decision to protect the nation’s waterways.”Every American who hunts, fishes, swims or kayaks — or who just wants to drink clean water from the tap — will benefit from this rule,” he said.
Our country has many points of divisiveness. One of the most polarized is the issue of abortion. It is unlikely that opinion will ever move decisively in either direction. None of this “information” presented through the carefully edited videos is new nor surprising. The graphics display what any thinking person has already understood about the process of abortion. Visualizing the procedures of removing the organs that I will donate upon death is just as unappetizing, and also just as (un)relevant to the separate discussion of legalizing either action. Where do I go for civil, productive discourse on this subject when faced with distractions such as the interjection of irrelevant factoids? It may very well be that Planned Parenthood provides a very tiny percentage of women’s health care nationally, but for their clients, they are almost always the only option.
How do we find a starting place for dialogue when you disrespect their cancer screening work by saying that they don’t even do the mammograms in house, when you know that no other primary caregivers do those in house either? Planned Parenthood arranges the appointments and payments/insurance for mammograms to be done at specialized radiology departments off-site, just like my private doctor does for mine.
The “Greater Access Act” will not replace Planned Parenthood’s efforts to get birth control to those who want it, yet can’t afford to pay for it. This will mean more unplanned pregnancies. That will mean more abortions, legal or not. Your casual slander of people like my mother and aunt, people you haven’t met, along with their many colleagues at Planned Parenthood who have a much more Christ-like understanding of compassion, inhibits civil dialogue.
Reflect on an example we can take directly from Christ. Adultery is one of the grave sins listed in our Ten Commandments. When Jesus is facing a woman guilty of this, and a crowd of people ready to enact the legally encouraged punishment of stoning her to death for this, does He ask to throw the first stone? Does He preach that we should punish her for the crime? Say that we should make an example of her as a deterrent to others contemplating adultery? That we should “teach her a lesson?” He does not say that adultery is no longer a sin or crime. He does not seek to make more laws restricting behavior, or dispute her guilt. Where do you see yourself in this scene, Senator? Standing with the crowd, with a stone in your hand, staring with gaping mouth at Jesus, wondering why He isn’t jumping at this perfect chance to punish sin? Can we not find room in this example to let abortion be the private issue that it is, and not the government’s concern?
Given that women throughout time have sought abortions, and will continue to do so regardless of laws, let us examine the goals and efficacy of anti-abortion laws through that lens.
We know from past experience that a zero abortion rate will never be reached. Women will continue to get abortions, but through unregulated providers, with higher maternal death rates. Women will die specifically from anti-abortion laws. Knowing this, do we see the goal of these laws being to punish women who seek abortions? This seems fruitless and vengeful. Or do we find a place where we can turn together towards our common goal of reducing the number of abortions to as few as possible? Better knowledge of the biology of reproduction, and access to birth control lower abortion rates. We will never get all humans to agree on sexual morality boundaries, but we can promote the use of contraception and get closer to the goal of fewer abortions.
Soldier up, Senator. Come visit the “front lines” of a Planned Parenthood office with me. Hear their words, respectfully, in person. Ask the clients in person about their other options and the compassionate care they do receive.
DES MOINES — Iowa Democratic Party Chair Dr. Andy McGuire today released the following statement on the bill from U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst to defund Planned Parenthood health clinics:
“As a doctor, I understand that the quality, affordable health services provided by Planned Parenthood clinics throughout Iowa and nearby states allow nearly 60,000 women and men to meet their health care needs. By singling out this organization, Senator Ernst and her fellow Republicans are constructing economic and accessibility barriers to health care that will make it harder for women and families to lead healthy lives.”
To weigh in on the bill contact Senator Joni Ernst’s nearest office:
Washington, D.C. – 202-224-3254
Des Moines – 515-284-4574
Davenport – 563-322-0677
Cedar Rapids – 319-365-4504
Sioux City – 712252-1550
Council Bluffs – 712-352-1167
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) announced her co-sponsorship of S.339 to repeal the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” also known as ObamaCare. The Iowa Senator is among 47 original cosponsors to the bill, introduced by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), which authorizes full repeal 180 days after enactment in order to allow a six-month window to replace ObamaCare with patient centered, affordable, quality solutions.
“Too many Iowa families and businesses have been hurt by the painful effects of ObamaCare – from rising costs, to losing access to doctors, to hampering businesses’ abilities to hire new employees. We must start over by repealing and replacing this disastrous law in order to craft and implement real solutions for affordable, patient centered alternatives,” said Senator Ernst.
Twelve participants in the Great March for Climate Action made a reprise visit to Washington, D.C. last Wednesday.
Ed Fallon, march founder, tried to get meetings with the White House and the Environmental Protection Agency to coincide with the end of the march last September, however, key people were unavailable at the time.
The White House meeting did happen, with Dan Utech, special assistant to the president for energy and climate change; Rohan Patel, special assistant to the president and deputy director of intergovernmental affairs, and Angela Barranco, associate director for public engagement at the White House Council on Environmental Quality. My story about the meeting in the Iowa City Press Citizen is here.
Fallon was unable to attend the meeting with EPA later that day. Marchers met with Joseph Goffman, senior counsel, assistant administrator for air and radiation and Mark Rupp, deputy associate administrator for intergovernmental relations. After the EPA meeting, marchers fanned out and met with their congressional representatives.
The Great March for Climate Action was not a stroll in the park for the core group of 35 marchers who made some or all of the way from Los Angeles to Washington. There were physical challenges including weight loss, foot and leg problems, fatigue and stress. They dealt with extreme weather events physically, notably in Nebraska where they encountered a giant hailstorm unlike any they had previously experienced. More than anyone I know, Fallon and company walked the walk, experiencing personal hardship to do so. The meetings in Washington were both a culmination and a new beginning for participants in advocating for climate action.
“Officials recognize that climate change is difficult for many people to grasp,” Fallon said. “The eight months along the march route allowed us to experience the situation directly, and this places us in a unique position of credibility.”
In addition to the White House meeting, Fallon called on Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst, and Representatives Dave Loebsack (IA-02) and David Young (IA-03) to advocate for climate action. While the results of the meetings were mixed, marchers had the ear of their elected representatives. All four politicians voted for a bill to build the Keystone XL pipeline, something the marchers adamantly oppose.
On Friday, Fallon posted a photo of himself and Miriam Kashia of North Liberty with Senator Joni Ernst on his Facebook page.
“Between driving, meetings and presentations, I’m behind on getting these posted,” Fallon wrote. “Our meeting with White House staff on climate change: very encouraging! Our meeting with Senator Joni Ernst: not so much.”
Having gained standing by walking the walk on climate change, it opened doors. What marchers found on the other side wasn’t all they had hoped. While they were away from Iowa, the electorate brought to power our most conservative congressional delegation in a while, notably absent Senator Tom Harkin.
In effecting progressive change there are two important parts. Electing people who represent our views and advocating for our causes with them. In 2014, progressives did not fare so well on the former, which makes the latter more difficult.
While some may not like looking at photos of Fallon and company posing with these politicians, they are doing their part for progressive change. If we don’t like the current crop of politicians, we can’t give up.
“Obviously we were all disappointed with the outcome of the last election, and there are a lot of reasons for it and I’m happy to take on some of the blame,” said President Barack Obama at the House Democratic Issue Conference on Thursday. “But one thing I’m positive about is, when we’re shy about what we care about, when we’re defensive about what we’ve accomplished, when we don’t stand up straight and proud… we need to stand up and go on offense, and not be defensive about what we believe in.”
It’s an open question whether progressives will get organized for the next election. It’s clear we won’t unless we emulate the Great March for Climate Action and walk the walk—beginning now.