Search Results for ‘reading the news’
Chase has the story - it looks like our friends at the Iowa College Republicans have decided to throw their own sweaty hat into the ring that is the Iowa blogosphere. If the first few days are any indication, it’s going to be a riot.
Here’s a gem from dreamboat and Executive Director Matt Beckstein:
I look forward to reading the insights of the many brilliant minds with the “right” perspectives, and laughing at the argument postings of the morally-challenged leftists. I’d like to encourage professional dialog however, with the exceptions of those who genetically lack the mental capacity on the left, we must be fair of course.
A google search for “argument postings” elicts 34 results. They must have their own language or something. Go figure.
Simon Stevenson at Bleeding Heartland had this to say about the new look College Repubs:
The college republicans have exactly one woman out of their ten executive board members. On the plus side for diversity, I am under the understanding that gay men are actually overrepresented.
For the record, we didn’t say it.
October 16th, 2007
Iowans for Tax Relief recently announced that it was backing a primary candidate against incumbent Republican Clarence Hoffman in the Republican primary in State House District 55 (Ida County and parts of Crawford, Monona and Woodbury County). Hoffman is a fifth term Representative who crossed party lines to support the bill banning discrimination based on sexual orientation.
This is the second time Iowans for Tax Relief has backed a primary candidate against an incumbent Republican so far for the 2008 cycle. The first State Representative that they tried to primary, Walt Tomenga in House District 69 (Johnston and Grimes) has since announced his retirement. This has set up a vicious primary between ITR’s preferred candidate, Erik Helland, and former Iowa basketball player Al Lorenzen who is backed by moderate Republicans like former Governor Robert Ray.
However, while Iowans for Tax Relief is trying to find candidates who represent the true conservative nature of these districts, they’re neglecting that these are actually relatively moderate districts. Neither of these districts are Republican strongholds. In fact, Chet Culver received over 45% of the vote in both districts in 2006. Under normal circumstances, these seats would probably not be top Democratic priorities to pick up seats in the State House. But Iowans for Tax Relief drastically changes that.
With Iowans for Tax Relief’s continued effort to purge the Republican Party of anyone who slightly deviates from its extremist agenda, it’s safe to say that regardless of what happens on the day of the Primary Election, a lot of Republicans will be unhappy. This is especially true if Iowans for Tax Relief’s anointed candidate wins. An win by either or both Helland and Schultz would continue the trend of moderate Republicans like Robert Ray and Maggie Tinsman being isolated in their party and allow a great opportunity for a moderate Democratic candidate to appeal to these disenchanted Republicans and have a good chance at winning what would normally be a safe Republican seat.
Iowans for Tax Relief is certainly doing a good job of making the Republican Party more conservative. But at a terrible cost to any attempt by Republicans to build a majority. For a group that so admires Ronald Reagan, one would think that they would expand their reading in scriptures to include Reagan’s 11th commandment. Instead, they seem more concerned with obscure passages in Leviticus. Passages that Iowa Republicans will have many more years to study while they are in the minority.
October 15th, 2007
Cross-posted at Iowa Independent
As the Iowa legislative session came to a close early Sunday, House Democrats marveled that they had passed all but one of the items on their legislative agenda. The next day, they learned that they were short one more thing: a caucus member. The two issues were not unrelated.
On Monday, Rep. Dawn Pettengill, a Democrat from Mount Auburn, announced that she was becoming a Republican. Over the session, Pettengill had become increasingly estranged from the Democratic Party. When Iowa House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a Democrat from Des Moines learned of the news—after the press—he was “disappointed, not surprised,” he said in a phone interview yesterday. “It was more of a shift on paper. We tended not count on her to be a team player, even on procedural matters.” Pettengill did not return calls for comment.
While Pettengill clashed with her former party on a variety of issues, perhaps the most significant one was the proposed Fair Share bill, which would have allowed public employee unions to charge fees for services given to nonunion workers. “In the end, it was a pretty scaled down, reasonable proposal,” McCarthy said. It would ensure that workers “kick in their fair share of those services.”
Fair Share, despite being passed in the Iowa Senate, never came to a vote in the House because, McCarthy said, “We just didn’t have the votes to get it done.” McCarthy said that the proposal had the support of 50 Democrats in the caucus but lacked that crucial 51st. “We don’t have that large a majority.” One Democratic representative, Ray Zirkelbach of Monticello is currently serving in Iraq, and in addition to Pettengill, two other members of the Democratic caucus refused to support the bill. McCarthy declined to name those representatives.
McCarthy said that on the way to regaining the majority in the 2006 elections, some conservative Democrats ran, or were recruited, to defeat Republican incumbents. Keeping them on board for certain issues, he said was “challenging.” In the interview, McCarthy did not seem angry that the bill failed to pass; he simply stated matter-of-factly that “the answer is to continue to try to educate [reluctant members] and to pick up a few more seats” in order to make up for deserters.
According to the Des Moines Register, the Democratic leadership spent four hours trying to convince its caucus members to support the bill, and that Pettengill emerged with “tears on her face when she left the room where Democrats were meeting in private.”
McCarthy bristled at the suggestion that he had tried to strong-arm people for support. “I definitely didn’t,” he said. “We used tough arguments trying to convince people… We did that through civil and respectful conversation.” McCarthy said, “The argument that we were strong-arming people was coming from right wing Republican propaganda.” The charge, he said, was “a falsehood, a lie.”
In the end, McCarthy, said that he was not sure whether Pettengill’s defection could have been prevented. “She’s gone through a fairly significant emotional journey this session,” he said. “She was formerly a close person friend with me. That friendship had withered away, and she became more distant with members of her caucus.”
He also questioned the logic of Pettengill’s decision. Not only had she joined a party that, according to McCarthy, sent 27 negative mailings against her in the last election—“some of the most vicious, vile, mean spirited negative campaigning I’ve ever seen”—but that the party she joined was out of power. “We can’t find anybody within the last 30 years that leaves the majority party and the power to deliver to her constituents,” he said. “If I were a constituent, I would be shocked and outraged that she gave up the ability to deliver in exchange for feeling good.”
McCarthy agreed with the idea that Pettengill was reading her district wrong, that it is not as conservative as she believes. “I think,” he said with resignation, “she’s confused.”
May 3rd, 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
Today’s Des Moines Register has this Jane Norman story “Harkin raises money, perhaps to run again” about how Tom Harkin has raised $362,000 in the last quarter of 2006. Aside from wondering why else Tom Harkin would raise money for his Senate account besides a re-election bid, the article points out that “Harkin is doing everything to indicate he will seek re-election in 2008.” Although there were some rumors that he might retire, those have been pretty throughly debunked. The Register’s headline writers should start actually reading the news stories before they write the headline.
January 31st, 2007
The rumors are going around, and Vilsack is set to appear with Hillary in DC this week at a Democratic Governors Association press conference. Here’s how the Register reports it:
Some pundits as well as Democratic activists have suggested Vilsack would be a good fit on a ticket with Clinton as presidential nominee. Both are active in the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, and both have insisted they will not demand a specific date for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
A few days back, Hotline proposed some theories about the role Hillary could play in the race for the ‘08 Democratic nomination. Theory 1:
…unless she either doesn’t run or appears very vulnerable early on , one theory of the case holds that they will spend their time cozying up to her and tearing into each other. (Grover Norquist endorses that theory, too.) At least in part, they’ll try to use the primaries to audition for the general election.
To be clear: Bayh, Warner, Bill Richardson, Tom Vilsack — they all want to be president, not vice president. But they will almost certainly hedge their bets. They will not run a true-blue, rouse-the-base primary campaign.
Theory 2, however, simply says that Hillary is too polarizing a figure and won’t get anywhere. In that case, though, candidates might still stick to centrist rhetoric in an effort to distinguish themselves from Clinton (if the voters aren’t convinced by Hillary’s current centrist bent).
Frank Luntz’s piece today doesn’t talk much about this, but Luntz does attempt to lay out a strategy for Hillary to get elected. I’m really not sure a short, public essay could possibly prove useful to a presidential campaign, but here’s his first recommendation:
First, she must be herself. Her recent tack to the right - from equivocating on the Iraq war, to supporting a ban on flag burning - is fooling no one and is seriously agitating her liberal base. The reason Hillary became so popular in the first place was her unflinching willingness to tell it like it is. She must say what she means, and mean what she says.
Similarly, recent efforts by Clinton to inject religious references into her speeches to prove she’s a person of faith is like fingernails on a chalkboard to Democrat primary voters. Clinton must win the primary first - then worry about the general election. If Democrats really cared about religion, they’d be Republicans.
Will she? And is she really the vicious liberal that Luntz thinks she is in the first place? Perhaps, but it’s not looking like it right now.
I should also note that our coverage of 2008 contenders has been spotty of late. Our schedules haven’t permitted us to attend the candidates’ appearances across the state (which isn’t to say we don’t like getting the invitations, so thanks to the staffers who have kept us on their mailing lists…), so we’ve been reading Chris’s coverage on PoliticalForecast. We hope to get better as our schedules permit, but we still plan to spend more time analyzing the political issues facing Iowa than we’ll spend on national political celebrity watch.
And check out MyDD’s presidential straw poll, now reinstated. Chris Bowers rightly discontinued it four months ago because of how repetitive the results were, but maybe things will be different now.
July 17th, 2006
I don’t know how many newspapers are planning to endorse Democratic primary candidates (I haven’t caught any others so far, and I know it’s sort of uncommon to endorse candidates in a party primary), but today the Iowa City Press-Citizen endorsed Fallon:
Rather than being dismissed as a mere leftist, Fallon’s commitment to individual freedom weaves in and out of partisan labels. His grassroots support could bring a surprise on June 6, and we believe he engages in the type of politics that we would like to see more of.
But more than that, they go candidate-by-candidate in a way that seems to provide a list of preferences: (3) Culver, (2) Blouin, and (1) Fallon.
We have toyed with the idea of endorsing a candidate (or candidates, if we do it individually) here, but I don’t know if any of us feels like it would really help in the long run.
After reading that endorsement, though, I might try to do something on my own in the days before I have to skip out (when I start work with the party in June). If a tree falls in the forest…
May 28th, 2006
The economy of central Iowa — and, in particular, the area immediately around us in Grinnell — took a huge blow yesterday, when Whirlpool executives announced that they planned to close the Maytag plant in Newton in 2007. The city of Newton was practically built around Maytag, which was founded in Newton over 100 years ago, and which currently employs 1,200 Newton residents. So that’s 1,200 jobs that won’t be in Newton anymore in a year and a half.
Drew has already posted about the impact this might have on the Boswell-Lamberti congressional race, and the IDP followed his lead this morning in a press release that made roughly the same arguments:
“The merger was anti-competitive, as Rep. Boswell warned, and has now resulted in a devastating loss of jobs in Newton,” said Mike Milligan, executive director of the Iowa Democratic Party. “Jeff Lamberti’s poor decision to back the merger ignored other potential buyers of Maytag who wanted to keep the operations working in Newton. And now, worst of all, he is trying to avoid accountability.”
In fact, the IDP’s entire main page is dominated by various incumbents’ comments on the Maytag announcement. They know what I don’t think anyone has wanted to say out loud yet: incumbents get blamed for stuff like this, even when they shouldn’t be. Everyone reading this probably already knows that it’s not Vilsack’s fault and it’s not Boswell’s fault, but — unless the IDP and the politicians themselves get the word out really, really well — it’s going to hurt incumbents in the polls. So we really need to work on this now. Especially if union support goes down in the area, it could hurt Boswell a lot.
But I’m very interested to see what kind of an impact this is going to have on the surrounding area, including Grinnell and Marshalltown. Something tells me that jobs are going to get a lot harder to find here, too, as more people start competing for the same number of jobs.
What are some things we can do to solve the problem? Well, in this poorly written Register article (hopefully it’ll get cleaned up by an editor soon), I found this particularly interesting:
Robert Henderson, a Maytag union representative, said health care costs and the rising cost of health insurance likely contributed to the plant closing. He also said top managers and other white collar workers will continue to have insurance while others will lose out.
That sounds like something the Democrats in Des Moines are trying to fix, so hopefully they’ll be able to take care of that soon. And since most of this post has been a downer, I’ll close with another quote from the Register piece — this time a kind-of funny one:
Maytag workers learned the news shortly after 8 a.m. today. After the news was delivered, officials closed the plant for the day, said Maytag workers, who had gathered at Snook Inn Sandwich Shop. Workers were expected to report back to work on Thursday.
“I’m still digesting it,” said Carroll Simbro, as he ate cheesy potatoes and fried eggs.
May 10th, 2006
I haven’t seen anyone else comment about the most recent Rasmussen Iowa poll, so I’ll point out a few highlights. First and foremost is the fact that every single Democratic candidate has made gains on Nussle, culminating in Culver now reaching a 6 point lead over Nussle. Reading further into the Poll, however, and we can see just how polarized politics, and particularly “hot-button issues” are becoming in Iowa. For example, even though the primary hasn’t happened yet, only 12% of voters have not made up their mind about Nussle, a guaranteed candidate. Seems like a lot of money is going to be wasted this summer and fall preaching to either the choir or deaf ears. If only campaign money could be spent on something more important…like the things the politicians are promising (you know, crazy stuff, such as.. education, or health care).
In other news, the Register reports that Mike Johanns, former Gov. of Nebraska and current Secretary of Agriculture, has now learned what everyone in Iowa has known for years: the current subsidy system is broken.
One of my favorite senators, our Tom Harkin, is bringing a resolution to the Senate that calls for America to withdraw from Iraq by Dec. 31st at the latest. Another of my favorites, Russ Feingold, is trying to attach similar legislation to emergency spending bills. I give props to those in Congress who are willing to stand up and offer actual time frames for bringing home the troops, rather than politicians who just proffer vagueries and false promises as they see more and more Americans lose favor with the war.
In more national news, it appears Karl Rove has returned to what he does best: trying to get Americans to remember that Democrats are the enemy, not terrorists or insurgents. I guess we really do have them nervous about 2006. I for one will enjoy Bush’s final two years as the lamest of lame duck presidents ever to exist.
May 8th, 2006
When we contacted the three campaigns about conducting these interviews, the Fallon campaign was the first to respond. And they forwarded our questions on to not one, but three staffers: Volunteer Coordinator Rob Sand, Canvass Director Christina Jens, and Grassroots Organizer Adam Mason. And, while it made my job editing and compiling a little more complicated, I’m not complaining, because this interview, like the others, provides some pretty interesting reading.
IowaProgress: How did you get involved in politics?
Rob Sand: I was much more active with skateboarding at the beginning of high school than anything in politics beyond reading the newspaper. I didn’t feel like I could have much of an impact.
After my friends and I kept getting kicked out of skate spots, though, I got pissed and decided to start a campaign to get Decorah (my hometown) to build a public skatepark. It took nearly 2 years, and by the time the concrete was poured I had quit skating (too busy with the project), graduated high school, and left town. But the project taught me that one person can make a difference- I don’t think its cool for many in our cynical generation to think that, but I do. The skatepark made politics/public affairs my passion, and that’s why I’m working for Ed.
Christina Jens: My family’s always been politically aware. It was a common topic of conversation at the dinner table growing up. I fell into organizing in my last year of college. I unintentionally found myself heading up one of the student organizations at Iowa State, and the following summer also fell into a job canvassing with the State PIRGs. Much to my simultaneous joy and dismay, I discovered that I loved it.
Adam Mason: Studied Political Science, had early goals of being Diplomat, Foreign service ambitions. Became disenchanted with the system. Worked odd jobs from retail management to construction to janitor to hotel mgmt. Always found myself staying up to date on issues, world politics especially, Dc politics… Started reading about this Ed Fallon Guy in early 2005, liked wht he was saying, and started volunteering. A position to Organize came open in the Summer of 2005, and although I had no official political experience, was brought on and have been learning it, loving it, and hopefully accomplishing it.
IP: What do you do in off years when there aren’t elections? (Or what did you do before you joined this campaign?)
RS: I graduated college in December, took a graduation celebration vacation in January, and started here in February. Most folks I know switch between policy and campaign work depending on the year, or do consulting for other campaigns (school board, bond issues, voter referendum). Also, there’s always organizing for next year!
CJ: I spent 5 years canvassing and directing canvass operations for non-profit organizations around the country. I decided to come back to Iowa a year and half ago and worked providing technical support for customers of a local ISP. At the beginning of the year I decided I needed to get back in to organizing, and volunteered on a local school referendum campaign, and worked a couple temp jobs before joining the Fallon for Governor staff. After this election season, I plan to stay active in politics; the capacity is yet to be determined.
AM: See above, but also: As this is my first campaign, I hope to be involved with an Ed Fallon administration. 2008 Presidential Candidates will probably be beginning soon after this November’s elections- as much as I hate to think about it. (So much talk about them already) and I would love an opportunity to continue working for Candidates I believe in (Russ Feingold) I would also consider the not-for-profit arena as a way to work along issue lines to continue helping people. (Social Justice, Clean Elections, Living Wage…)
IP: In this gubernatorial election, the candidates are using the internet a lot more than they did last time around. What role do you think the internet (both your campaign sites and online news outlets and blogs) will play in this election? In what ways has the internet changed Iowa political campaigning?
RS: The internet far surpasses any other tool for organizing and communication. It allows campaigns to organize and communicate with supporters, and allow supporters to organize and communicate amongst themselves. I think the sense of ownership the web provides citizens over the campaign is unparalled as a tool for getting volunteers and supporters to get more and more involved, and its the work those supporters do that can make the difference.
I think blogs are journalism’s last best hope, outside of a president with the intestinal fortitude to break up the media monopolies. Corporate media ownership demands returns for shareholders and reporting the news takes second place to that. Tough, investigative journalism- the kind we really need- demands too many resources and gives small returns, so our media quality is suffering. You can find a lot of stories breaking on blogs today. Even though few people read them, reporters are among their readers. So those investigations by “citizen reporters” usually end up making the papers and shaping the media agenda.
I honestly think any candidate that ignores what is being said in the blogosphere and power of the web is a losing candidate.
AM: It is very interesting to watch conversations in online communities. They are more lasting than just a speech or conversation, and therefore have the potential to reach more voters, and influence/involve that many more opinions. We have also seen the rise of online fundraising in the last few election cycles. As PAC’s continue to hold successful online fund drive’s, we see that this is a tool not to underestimate. I am not sure that the internet is revolutionizing the Iowa political climate, as many of the state’s voters are those that are slowest to embrace technology. However, as technology becomes more integrated, I look for the internet’s role to evolve. That being said, for those that do embrace technology, we must try and offer a campaign site that is exciting, interactive, and accessible. It is also beneficial to monitor and participate in blogs to share ideas and information.
IP: What role do you think students (should) play in Iowa politics?
RS: Its a cliched Catch-22 that politicians don’t listen to young people because they don’t vote, and young people don’t vote because politicians don’t listen. The last place to look for the instigation of major change is elected officials, so I think its up to us. Our generation needs to get off our asses and demand that there be a better situation for ourselves as adults and for our kids when they come around. 15% of us are doing a damn fine job, but at some point we have to stop talking to ourselves and get out there to engage our politically disengaged peers- but without sounding holier-than-thou or preachy. Blogging helps, talking to friends helps, organizing helps more. Sorry to offer a lot of bland platitudes…
CJ: An active one.
AM: Students have a long history of doing the “grunt work” of campaigning. They are the quickest and most willing to jump at opportunities Canvassing, phone banking, and in general just volunteering. As well they should, the decisions that are being made now in statehouses and in Washington will affect them for many many years to come. By becoming informed and active, they help ensure spirited debate, active campaigns, and voter participation.
IP: Iowa has a mix of urban voters and rural voters. Is it difficult to account for both groups in crafting your message?
RS, CJ, AM: It may be for some candidates. Ed Fallon has a common sense message that appeals to voters from all backgrounds. While he’s from Des Moines, he’s also served on the Agriculture Committee and is familiar with issues that affect all Iowans.
IP: (Specific for Fallon campaign) Your campaign has refused to take money from PACs (and has refused some other traditional forms of political contributions). Some have predicted that Nussle will have a record amount of cash for the general election. How will you deal with that inequality if yours is the campaign that wins the primary?
RS, CJ, AM: Ed Fallon has a long history of winning campaigns where he’s been outspent. We will address the issue through continuing to build our grassroots support and talking about the need to address the way that political campaigns are financed. We’re the only campaign that can provide a clear contrast to Nussle in this regard.
IP: Why is your campaign the best suited to beat Nussle?
RS, CJ, AM: We provide the clearest contrast to Nussle. Ed Fallon will continue to advocate for responsible land use, ensuring that all Iowans have access to healthcare, adequately funding out education system, and ensuring that our state’s government is accountable to Iowans, not to corporate sponsors.
IP: Do you have a funny anecdote you’d like to share? Or anything else to add?
RS: Anyone who’s ever canvassed for a job can tell you unbelievable stories. My favorite is the Balitmore, MD senior citizen who stepped out from him front door after I knocked on it and offered a fight with, “Just try me, boy!” while his wife chided him from inside. The 80-year-old man who answered in just bikini briefs was interesting too; I held my clipboard in the perfect position to block… things. Canvass: its the best job you’ll ever have.
May 3rd, 2006
Previous Posts
