Search Results for ‘grinnell college students’
All over Iowa, students are working through their student governments to pass resolutions opposing President Bush’s plan to increase the number of troops in Iraq. They want to send a message: students will no longer tolerate fumbling or equivocation from elected representatives on the Iraq war. Too much is at stake to be sending more troops to Iraq without an end in sight, benchmarks by which to measure success or failure, or a clear definition of victory.
Here at Grinnell, we’re proud to be the first school in Iowa to pass a resolution against the President’s gamble. Yesterday, our student election board certified the results of the vote—81% of students voiced their opposition to Bush’s plan with over half of the student body participating. Today, the text of our initiative was sent to our Members of Congress. It is our hope and faith that they will realize that there are better options in Iraq than a senseless surge. It’s time for our President and his party to reappraise the war.
If you would like to learn more about our student campaign against Bush’s plan, or receive any help passing a resolution at another college, email democrat@grinnell.edu
February 22nd, 2007
I have to admit something right up top: I am a reluctant subscriber to the Atlantic (Monthly). It came free as some credit card rewards program, so I get it. I’m not always proud of it, but whatever.
So when a fellow IowaProgress team member told me that I should check out the March issue for a mention of the local State House race here last year (between Democrat Eric Palmer and ousted Republican Danny Carroll), I was pleased to find it already sitting on my coffee table. Then I started reading it (online version here), and even before I finished the second sentence, I knew I wasn’t going to be happy. Here’s how writer Joshua Green begins:
A tough loss can be hard to swallow, and plenty of defeated politicians have been known to grumble about sinister conspiracies. When they are rising stars like Danny Carroll, the Republican speaker pro tempore of Iowa’s House of Representatives, and the loss is unexpected, the urge to blame unseen forces can be even stronger—and in Carroll’s case, it would have the additional distinction of being justified.
Yes, Danny Carroll was a rising star, victimized by “unseen forces” at work in House District 75. Perhaps had Carroll simply leaned on this leading consulting firm a little more, he would’ve won. But these “unseen forces” at work weren’t ghosts, ghouls, or the powerful anti-pumpkin lobby, it was something of a gay political stealth force (led by this man), out to get good little homophobes like Danny.
Yes, it is true that Eric Palmer got money from out-of-state donors, and perhaps some of them are gay. Some of them are also probably straight. Many out-of-state donors give money to one person hoping that their opponent will lose, and many of them do so on the basis of the different candidates’ political positions. Danny Carroll got money from such donors (although much of it was channeled through Christopher Rants’s PAC), as did Eric Palmer. This is not news.
It seems that even Danny himself didn’t think there was anything to this story at first. In fact, Danny probably had the right idea before the reporter tried to change his interview subject’s mind mid-interview. This paragraph is the kicker:
Carroll was just sitting down to dinner but agreed to talk about his loss, which he attributed to the activism of Grinnell College students. A suggestion that he’d been targeted by a nationwide network of wealthy gay activists was met with polite midwestern skepticism.
Yup, that’s right: Danny’s pretty sure it was us. We’re pretty sure it was us. And the number of college students who voted for Eric Palmer is remarkably close to the number of votes Danny lost by. But Joshua Green still blames the gays. Green convinces Danny to look at the IECDB reports from the 2006 race, and here’s where things go from there:
Scrolling through the thirty-two-page roster of campaign contributors revealed plenty of $25 and $50 donations from nearby towns like Oskaloosa and New Sharon. But a $1,000 donation from California stood out on page 2, and, several pages later, so did another $1,000 from New York City. “I’ll be darned,” said Carroll. “That doesn’t make any sense.” As we kept scrolling, Carroll began reading aloud with mounting disbelief as the evidence passed before his eyes. “Denver … Dallas … Los Angeles … Malibu … there’s New York again … San Francisco! I can’t—I just cannot believe this,” he said, finally. “Who is this guy again?”
Eric Palmer got $1,000 from New York?!?!?! And more donations from Dallas and Denver?!?!?! Shucks! I guess that means Eric won because of the gay agenda then.
Seriously, though, how is this puff piece journalism? People with certain interests donate to political campaigns across the country all the time, on both sides. Not everyone knows why every donor donates, and in many cases the candidates don’t even know what a donor’s agenda might be. It isn’t like Eric had a huge resource advantage over Danny, either. It may be sensational because a few of Palmer’s donors were gay, but it is certainly nothing new.
If this was our 15 minutes of national media fame, I’m going to be very disappointed.
February 13th, 2007
As we dive deeper into the 21st century, the intersection of technology and politics becomes more and more apparent. If the last election featured Meetups and the emergence of the blogosphere, 2006 could be the year of social networking. According to the National Journal, both parties have created their own unique sites, and the number of politicians on MySpace and Facebook has skyrocketed as politicians try to harness the power of young people.
So who is harnessing this power? Facebook has the answer.
A tool called Election Pulse (login might be required) allows us to see which candidates Facebook users have endorsed. Here’e the rundown:
Gubernatorial race: Culver leads Nussle 52 to 42 percent.
CD 1: Braley leads Whalen 55 to 45 percent.
CD 2: Leach leads Loebsack 57 to 43 percent.
CD 3: Boswell leads Lamberti 74 to 26 percent.
CD 4: Latham leads Spencer 57 to 43 percent.
CD 5: King leads Schulte 68 to 27 percent.
So what does it all mean? Well, if you compare recent polls, it seems that Facebook users (basically college students) have similar opinions to the rest of the state’s residents — with the exception of the 3rd CD (and the gubernatorial race to a lesser extent which polls show is closer). Boswell is destroying Lamberti among Facebook users. Young people in the 3rd CD (including Grinnellians) and across the country have responded overwhemlingly to this farmer from Southern Iowa. If college students turn out for Boswell at the actual — rather than virtual — polls at this rate, Lamberti can kiss his chances of winning goodbye.
September 26th, 2006
I’ve been told a lot recently that I’m the future of America; I’m the reason it is important to fund education, fix the health care system, and reign in the escalating deficit; I’m the future of the Democratic Party. Sure this is from some hand-squeezing, baby-kissing politicians seeking to win in November, and I know that it is good campaign rhetoric. But I also think it is true. In fact, not only are we the future of the Democratic Party, we are the present. My colleagues and I register the voters, we knock the doors, and we make the calls; we organize visits from candidates, we interview them, and we blog about them. We are not the only ones, but our contribution is significant. We do this not just on our campus — although that in itself is a substantial task — but in the county as well, and there are many others like us across the state and the country. We work by and large for free. Given these candidates’ propensity to pay lip service to our services, I would’ve thought they would be willing, if not eager, to include us at party-building events. Such events help prepare us for that ‘future’ that we are supposed to figure so prominently into, and also inspire and motivate us to keep doing our work in the present.
I would’ve thought, for instance, that they would want us to be able to attend the Jefferson Jackson Dinner on October 14. This is an important annual event in Iowa politics, one that in the past students have been able to attend. Last year several candidates for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination were there, providing many of us students a first introduction to Chet Culver. We also met recent college grads working on campaigns or for the IDP. Sure, we sat in the nosebleeds, but the point is that for $20 we got to go listen to prominent Iowa politicians and feel like we were actually part of the Democratic Party.
This year I was excited to see that Bill Clinton is going to be the keynote speaker. When I learned that the cheapest seats would cost $100 a person, I was disappointed, to say the least. As much as I would like to go to the JJ Dinner and hear the Big Dog, as a student (and someone who spends hours every week in unpaid get-out-the-vote efforts) I can’t afford to shell out $100 for one meal. I know I’m not the only student in this position.
What accounts for the exorbitant increase in ticket prices? Well, given that in the past year food prices haven’t skyrocketed and the Hy-Vee Hall Events Center hasn’t suddenly become immensely popular, it seems that it might have something to do with the former president’s fee for the engagement. Rumored to be over a quarter million dollars, it looks like maybe the IDP is passing that expense onto us. It is a move that makes financial sense, but it also sends the message that low-income or financially burdened Democrats (like students) aren’t important members of the party.
This message is incongruous with what many politicians I’ve spoken to recently are telling me. Everyone from U.S. Congressmen to gubernatorial candidates keeps repeating that we students are the future of the party. At a Grinnell College Democrats event yesterday, Pat Murphy and Eric Palmer commended us for having such a large and active group, saying that we would have a major impact on the elections. The thing is we know it. While it is nice to hear, the words are empty in the face of such an inconsiderate exclusion from a major party event. Regardless of from where this oversight arose, it would be hypocritical and ungrateful of the party not to make some allowances for those of us that may be unable to make generous financial contributions, but who have given our equally valuable time.
September 21st, 2006
Mark Warner’s PAC, Forward Together, is holding an online vote to determine which Iowa legislature candidates it will give $5000 (House) or $6500 (Senate). It’s a great perk that presidential hopefuls do this sort of thing in Iowa, since that amount of money really makes a huge difference in a state race.
Please cast your vote for Eric Palmer now.
Eric Palmer is challenging extremist conservative Danny Carroll, who he came painfully close to unseating in ‘04. Carroll has had the benefit of visits from conservative fundraising powerhouses John “I’m a panderer not a uniter” McCain, Sam “I hate evolution” Brownback, Haley “I hate Jews and Blacks” Barbour, and Newt “My conservatism doesn’t need explaining” Gingrich. He’s also received a ton of money from convicted felon Thomas Grabinski.
Just to remind you a little more why Eric Palmer deserves your vote (as if you haven’t heard our spiel before), Carroll is also known for his attempts to suppress Grinnell College students’ votes and his outlandish ideas about gay marriage.
Please take a moment to make Mark Warner give Eric some dollas.
September 19th, 2006
You’ve all seen the movie, but now Forbes Magazine is here to tell us what Kevin Costner knew way back in 1989: It’s Iowa. Well actually, according to Forbes’s new list, The Best States for Business, Iowa is a pretty great place to live, but maybe not so heavenly for businesses.
By the numbers Iowa was ranked the 1st in quality of life (looking at “index of schools, health, crime, cost of living and poverty rates”), but 25th overall. This is probably due to its low, low ranking of 47th in labor (”educational attainment, net migration and projected population growth”), beating out only West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Iowa also fell below the half-way mark in economic climate and growth prospects, scoring 31 and 41, respectively.
This brings up some issues looming large in the gubernatorial campaign such as how to get people to come to Iowa and stay in Iowa once they’ve received their diplomas. This is apparent in all of the major campaign topics–education, health care, and the economy. Forbes may think that Iowa is a great place to live, but not a lot of young people stay here after graduation. Back in April I remember Andy McGuire asking me and a few other Grinnell College Democrats what it would take for us to stay here after graduation–something none of us were planning on doing. We liked the sound of bridge health insurance and, you know, good jobs. Although I think a friend of mine wanted a major league sports team as well.
The Blouin-McGuire ticket was not the only one that realized this problem, of course. Culver’s website provides this tidbit:
We can do even better by building on, rather than disinvesting in, our higher ed institutions, so that more students stay in Iowa after graduation and, along with their faculties, help to build the research and manufacturing spin-offs that higher ed has generated for economies elsewhere. My plan will expand investments in colleges across Iowa, including creating Centers of Excellence at each of our public colleges and universities so that each can become a generator of world-class new businesses and economic activity, and better integrate all facets of higher ed with business.
Nussle, on the other hand, says he wants to “empower parents to be more involved in their children’s education,” which sounds like a euphamism for school voucher, something he has consistently supported in the past for private and parochial schools. I guess Nussle isn’t too excited about public schools, or the constitution for that matter, considering he has also voted to allow prayer in schools and also voted in 1994 to only give federal aid to schools that allowed voluntary prayer. I guess that is why the NEA rated him 17% on public education.
August 30th, 2006
Tuesday, Danny Carroll is hosting a fundraiser in a private room on Grinnell College’s campus with John McCain. It’s no secret that McCain has run to the right (Exhibit A), but he has never quite been the hero everyone thinks he is (Exhibit B).
But for anyone who is still attached to the idea of John McCain the “straight-talker” (and the “straight talk” motif kind of outlives its purpose when the attribution is plastered all over his PAC web site, straighttalkamerica.com), know that the candidate he’s shilling for is very much not a straight talker. Here are some of the very un-straight claims Danny Carroll has made:
- Grinnell College students should not have the right to vote for their state representative (in this 2004 mailing).
- Gay marriage is a bad idea because it would allow two men to marry for business reasons (in the 2004 Grinnell College SCIPE-sponsored debate).
- He was the reason why Newton — about 15 minutes away from his house district — got its new speedway and stadium (in the 2006 “Carroll Chronicle”, which Danny sent out in the newspaper in Oskaloosa and Grinnell).
John McCain became popular when he ran against George W. Bush, because he was the Republican everyone wanted to win the primary. Then Bush smeared him, and McCain fell into line. Now it’s McCain’s turn to be front-runner, and he won’t be outflanked (or out-Roved) by anyone this time. For a campaign based on “straight talk,” he seems to spend a little too much time raising money for people like Danny Carroll.
Of course, this means Eric Palmer could use your money now more than ever.
August 14th, 2006
Danny “I’m not that fond of democracy or gays” Carroll and the Repugs are at it again. Apparently someone has commissioned a push poll targeting the Democratic candidate for Danny’s seat, Eric Palmer. Since I definitely couldn’t say it any better, here’s the LTE in it’s entirety:
Last night I received a telephone “survey” regarding elections. The survey must have been commissioned by a Republican Party organization, the Danny Carroll campaign (House District 75) or the Jim Nussle campaign.
Toward the end of the survey, the caller said that she would “give [me] some information” and then asked me if that information changed my feelings about my vote in the race for House District 75. Each piece of information portrayed Democratic candidate Eric Palmer in a negative light.
One of the “negative” comments the caller made about Eric Palmer was that he has served as a criminal defense lawyer. The organization behind this survey, and everyone involved in it, should be ashamed. In our democracy, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. And in our democracy, even those who are eventually found guilty are entitled to legal representation.
Such representation exists to prevent the abuse of government power. We need only look at the world around us to see what happens when citizens are not entitled to protection within the legal systems in their countries.
Democracy is a fragile thing. “Surveys” such as this erode it. By criticizing Eric Palmer for providing criminal defense services, the sponsors of this survey demonstrate that they are willing to chip away at our precious democracy for the sake of potential political gain.
— Harriett Dickey-Chasins, Grinnell.
We’ve already seen reports of this kind of dirty politics in other races, but it’s really a shame to see it so close to home. You may remember that last election season Danny’s constituents received a mailing calling Grinnell College students “1,000 east-coast liberal kids” and implying that we don’t deserve to vote. Danny claimed not to have known about that slanderous mailing. Well, if Danny really wants to show he’s above this chicanery, he should openly denounce such tactics (and call off his henchmen). But I guess an issues-based campaign would be scary for him.
July 9th, 2006
Saturday was a busy day, as a crowd of nearly 1,000 people — including college students, community members, and others from around the Midwest — gathered to hear the 2004 Democratic nominee for the presidency speak about the Iraq war and the importance of dissent. The Harris Concert Hall was packed to capacity.
After the event, Senator Kerry thanked the Campus Democrats volunteers for all of their hard work, and I want to echo his gratitude once more here: thank you to everyone who helped to make this possible. This event — and the interest it generated in the community — will make a difference in the elections this fall, and that’s awesome.
I’m not going to go over his message, because it has been chronicled here, here, here, and in over 150 other news outlets across the country and around the world; but I will say that the crowd was receptive and enthusiastic. And really big.
There was moment when Hannah and I (and probably a few Kerry staffers) gasped and bit our tongues, as a student (Truman Scholar Eli Zigas ‘06) called to Kerry from the back of the hall asking him to take questions as the Senator started shaking hands after the speech. Kerry said yes! I can’t imagine he takes questions from crowds that big very often, so it’s interesting and kind of cool that he did. And it’s particularly cool because he answered the questions well and nobody said anything obnoxious. That was a big relief for everyone, I think.
I’m proud we were able to accommodate a major political speech at Grinnell, and I think all of us who helped (including over 30 volunteers) were happy with the way things turned out.
Once again, Grinnell College is the center of the political universe. Almost.
May 7th, 2006
This is something I think will be pretty exciting. Some hard work on our good friend Grant Woodard’s part has meant that we can finally release this information to you.
Senator John F. Kerry will give a major speech on the Iraq war this Saturday afternoon in the Harris Concert Hall. The event is open to the public, and we expect a large audience of students and other concerned Iowans.
This will be Kerry’s first visit to Grinnell College since the 2004 presidential caucus.
I thought yesterday’s circus was a big deal, but we’re in for another high profile week.
April 29th, 2006
Previous Posts
