Public Hearing on HF 2420/”Fair Share”

PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE

SPONSOR:  House Labor Committee, Rick Olson, Chair

SUBJECT:  House Study Bill 702, An Act concerning public employee collective bargaining, including provisions allowing reasonable reimbursement for employee organization services provided to certain executive branch employees, and including applicability provisions.

DATE:  Wednesday, February 17, 2010

LOCATION:  House Chamber

TIME:  5:00 pm to 8:00 pm

TIME LIMIT FOR TESTIMONY:  Individual testimony will be limited to three minutes

SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY:  Submission of written testimony is encouraged but not required

TO SIGN UP TO TESTIFY:  Call the Legislative Information Office (LIO) at 515-281-5129 or visit the LIO office in the basement of the Capitol

TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY BY EMAIL:  Testimony may be emailed to the Legislative Information Office at lioinfo@legis.state.ia.us.  Please type “Testimony” in the subject line.

The Iowa Policy Institute has a great analysis on the potential harm of HF 2420 to Iowa:

http://www.iowapolicyinstitute.com/uploads/IPI_Whitepaper_on_Right_To_Work.pdf

Guest Commentary: Brian Donegan of Can-Do Conservatives of America

brian_mikeMy name is Brian Donegan and I am a nearly-27 year old conservative from Lawrenceville, GA (Just northeast of Atlanta).  I am legally blind and am affected by other disabilities that I was born with (the technical term for these are “defects” I call them “blessings”).  While I have a lot of challenges in my own life I am striving to make this country a better place.  I consider myself very blessed and one of my favorite things to do is to “pay it forward” by giving back to my community.  For example, I am an active volunteer for a local private school for special needs children.

I have always been interested in the political process.  At an early age I realized that some day I would be old enough to vote and I wanted to be able to perform my civic duty responsibly by being an educated citizen.  Ever since 2000 I have voted in each election (even the local elections) but prior to 2008 I never got involved with the process.  That definitely changed when I was an extremely active volunteer for Governor Mike Huckabee’s presidential campaign.  I have been heavily involved in politics ever since and my activity level increases with each month that goes by.          

I paid a lot of attention to the race for RNC Chair at the beginning of this year.  There were many excellent candidates for that post, including the elected Chair, Michael Steele.  However I left the process discouraged.  Each candidate came forth with a plan.  These plans called for reaching out to various population groups.  (African Americans, Hispanics, Women, young voters, etc).  While this is definitely necessary to get the Republican Party back on track, these plans left one important group out, the disabled. 

For many years,the disabled has been “championed” by the Democrats with their promised entitlements.  More importantly they reach out to the disabled and at least pretend to care about us.  Therefore we tend to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats by default. 

I believe that my future, the future of the disabled, and all Americans will be better under freedom and liberty, and not socialism.  This is why I feel it is important to change the story and give the disabled a voice in the Conservative movement.  To further this goal I have founded an organization called the Can-Do Conservatives.  Our mission is as follows: 

We are looking for a hand up, not a hand out. We are in favor of liberty and freedom to pursue the American dream like anyone else.

We resolve that we cannot have the freedom to pursue the “American Dream” under socialism.

We are in favor of less but competent government that allows us to retain our dignity while getting the help and assistance we need.

We are in favor of an economic system that allows us the freedom to move up the economic ladder through hard work and determination, most especially enacting the FairTax.

We are in favor of reforming health care by focusing on preventative care that will lower the cost and burden on the individual.

We are in favor of passing a Veteran’s bill of rights. They are our heroes and deserve all the thanks and help we can give them after serving and fighting to protect our freedom.

We are in favor of reforming education to allow the freedom to choose how our children our educated and to increase competition in order to improve the system so everyone wins.

We believe in the sanctity and value of human life, from conception until death.

It is my hope that in the coming months and years that this organization will grow to having an active website and a chapter in each state of the country. In time we aim to join the ranks of the Christian Coalition, The Young Republicans, the College Republicans, and the Federation of Republican Women as a major conservative group. 

Please visit our website for more info and become a supporter on Facebook,  I wish to thank the Iowa Defense Alliance for their support of the movement thus far and I look forward to making my first out-of-state trip for the organization to Iowa this September.

Fong, Branstad, oh my!

So last week I listened to GOP gubenatorial candidate Christian Fong be interviewed by Steve Deace. I was pretty excited when I heard he was going to be on after hearing a lot of hype about him. By the end of the interview I was cringing because of his awkward performance. Right now I feel a lot of people are pushing Fong just because he is young and a minority. As I’ve written before, the GOP needs to move beyond being seen as the party of old, white men and use conservative values to attract younger and minority voters. But, we can’t be practicing identity politics where we promote someone JUST because they are young and a minority and overlook the fact that they have little public policy substance or not enough government experience and donate money to liberals. Let’s leave the identity politics to the Democrats. That’s not to say I don’t admire Fong’s life story. It is very admirable. For an interesting take on Fong, go here.

Speaking of old, white men in the GOP,  former Gov. Terry Branstad is rumored to be considering another run for the governorship. At first I was astonished and then I remembered back to a couple of weeks ago when he was speaking  at the Ames Conservative Breakfast. All the Story County GOP party insiders were drooling over the the former governor like tweens at a Jonas Brothers concert. And nothing surprises me any more about the GOP here in Iowa, so Branstad running again actually makes sense now. The GOP’s strategy and thought processes are still stuck in the 80s so  leave it to the Republicans to re-nominate a 4-term governor who was elected in 1982. And since 1982 was the year of my birth, I dedicate this top hit from that year to Gov. Branstad for a little motivation should he decide to throw his hat in the ring.

And This Kids is What is Wrong With the GOP

This is going to come off as a rant and that’s exactly what I intend it to be. When some diet coke and cheez-its can’t cure my frustration, I turn to blogging. Tonight I and another IDA member attended our local county GOP meeting. I won’t tell you the name of the county, but it rhymes with glory. We figured we would at least make some attempts to get involved locally with the party and offer our services to make a difference. Not to brag, but we have lots of ideas on how to move the party forward and we are REALLY good envelope stuffers. This other member has offered ideas  to party leadership but has been rudely ignored but we rolled up to the meeting anyway.

First, we were not greeted or welcomed by anyone. Nobody, even the chair, came up to introduce themselves. I’m not that high maintenance but I would at least like a greeting when I go to a meeting/group I’ve never been to before and there are only 15 or so people in the room. Really not a good impression for new people wanting to be involved in the party.  Second, the meeting was BORING. A complete snoozer. The most heated topic was about the donuts that are provided by the sheriff’s department to their employees. I don’t know about you, but that sure gets me fired up. Yeah, right!  Third, I think I was the youngest person in the room at 26. I was one of 5 women, the rest were middle-aged White guys. That’ll bring in the new voters and party volunteers. Fourth, the other IDA member with me gave a passionate speech and after was treated rudely by an elected county official in front of the whole group. Thanks for making us feel welcome. Guess we won’t be bringing up any more ideas.  Fifth, it really is a good ole’ boys club. And I just ain’t one of the good ole’ boys. I never want to be and I never will be.

So, what did I learn from my experience? My county GOP doesn’t really want to move the party forward. They don’t want help or input from new people. The GOP really is the party of middle-aged White guys. The leadership of the party really are just party hacks and good ole’ boys. They do not fully understand the needs and wants of voters and seem to be in it for themselves. If this same dynamic is reflected in county GOP meetings across the country and in the national party, you have have the recipe for why the GOP is in such a mess.

I can at least say I’ve tried to work with my local GOP. After tonight though, all my political activity will be outside the party either with HuckPAC (like the Bob VP event) or independently. What else is a girl to do?

Bob Vander Plaats- Chuck Norris Approved

Today Bob Vander Plaats picked up an endorsement from Chuck Norris. In his column in Human Events, Norris had chuck norristhe following to say about Vander Plaats and two other out-of-state gubenatorial candidates (John Kasich of Ohio and Judge Roy Moore of Alabama)

I encourage you to spread the word about these gentlemen and patriots, learn about their platforms, support their campaigns, and see to it that they are elected in their gubernatorial races. Theirs is leadership we can trust. I’m convinced that if we are to win back America, it’s going to start in the heartland and spread out from there because of the influence of leaders like them.
   
Don’t like what you see in government? Tired of incumbent lethargy and inactiveness? Does a political issue grind on you like fingernails on a chalkboard? It comes down to this: Either you will change our country or your opponents will, and if you let them change it, you might not like the outcome.
   
Elect John Kasich, Bob Vander Plaats and Judge Roy Moore!

 We here at Iowa Defense Alliance agree with Chuck on this one– Bob is a great guy and is a great candidate for Iowa governor. After winning yesterday’s straw poll and picking up the endorsementof Gov. Mike Huckabee, Bob is running far ahead of any other GOP contenders.

We’ve Been Fighting the Wrong Battle

Disclaimer: This post is really directed to my fellow conservative Christians. So those of ya’ll that do not ascribe to this label, please don’t be hatin’ on me.

Two weeks ago as I was awaiting the gay marriage ruling from the Iowa Supreme Court, I came to the realization that the court would indeed rule in favor of legalizing gay marriage. You see I had just read two news articles that convicted and scared the crap out of me.  One talked about a new study that showed 21% of teen girls  and 18% of teen boys have “sexted”. Sexting basically means taking semi-nude or nude pictures of yourself and sending them via text to other people. Another article I read reported that in 2005 40% of all children born in the US were born out-of-wedlock.

My stomach dropped after I read these articles. I realized that we would never “win” the battle over gay marriage if we don’t  first “win” the battle over the sexual immorality that is rampant among heterosexuals in our country, including our children. Let’s face it, we have FAILED to show the joy and satisfaction that comes through knowing Christ and obeying His commands. We have FAILED to stop sexual sin even within our own churches. Do we really think God will change our politicians and society’s hearts towards the gay marriage issue if we don’t first address the fact that 1 in 5 teens today are sending nude pictures of themselves to their peers and the majority of teens have had sex by the time they graduate high school? Folks, we’ve been fighting the wrong battle. While we’ve been protesting gay marriage and lobbying our politicians to vote on the gay marriage issue, we’ve ignored those around us steeped in their own sexual sin. We’ve put more time and effort into our political efforts than being witnesses to those right in front of us.

Until we flood the cable news networks, protest in front of the Capitol and put our time and effort into addressing the issues of out-of-wedlock births and pre-marital sex, we will NEVER win the battle over gay marriage. I’m not saying that fighting gay marriage isn’t a good or worthy cause and I know there are several Christians who devote their time to addressing issues of sexual immorality. However, we cannot continue to ignore what has been right in front of our faces while we’ve been protesting, writing letters to the editor, and campaigning against gay marriage. So while we continue to fight the battle over gay marriage, lets be prayerfully asking God to forgive us and give us the same righteous anger for the sexual sin that has been occuring right in front of us.

Where Does it Stop?

With the Iowa State Supreme Court set to begin hearing arguments next month on Iowa’s gay marriage ban and the whole chaos erupting over Proposition 8 in California, there is are some lingering questions I have about the issue of marriage as a “right”. At this point it is hard to change anybody’s mind on the matter and debate over gay marriage usually seems to go nowhere with both sides yelling so loud they can’t hear what each is saying. So, I’m not going to write a post about IDA’s position on the matter as most readers probably can figure it out.

However, I am going to ask a question: where does it stop? Where does extending the right to marry stop? The reason given for overturning gay marriage bans has rested on equal protection and due process. Now, I’m not a lawyer but I am curious to see if judges, lawyers, and gay rights activists feel that these rights should be extended to polygamist relationships or to marriage between an overage individual and an underage individual such as this case in Nebraska. Maggie Gallagher talks about this in an article from a couple of years back. Take note of the section about Jonathan Turely, a respected legal expert.

What about polygamy? Is that the natural next step? When people ask me this, my stock answer has become, “I don’t know, go ask the guys in the Harvard Law School faculty lounge.” Because if the California decision stands, there simply is no longer any case to be made we have begun to win the war for judicial restraint. If a court can rule that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right (i.e., one deeply rooted in our nation’s traditions) then it can make up anything. Elite legal minds get to figure out what they think and break it to the rest of us once they’ve decided.

The Washington Blade, one of the nation’s leading gay newspapers, took up this question more thoughtfully than I do in its June 6 issue. The experts they consulted are somewhat divided on the question. But Prof. Jonathan Turley, for one, calls on gay-marriage advocates to make a clean breast of what the new “right-to-marry” principle means: Adult polygamists who “do not believe in child brides,” he told the paper, should be allowed to formalize their relationships.

“I don’t like polygamy but that’s not what’s important here,” Prof. Turley said. “[T]here will have to be a new definition of marriage because it’s disingenuous to say that gays and lesbians should be included in marriage but then for them to exclude others.”

Columnist Charles Krauthammer takes up the issues in a 2006 article:

As Newsweek notes, these stirrings for the mainstreaming of polygamy (or, more accurately, polyamory) have their roots in the increasing legitimization of gay marriage. In an essay 10 years ago, I pointed out that it is utterly logical for polygamy rights to follow gay rights. After all, if traditional marriage is defined as the union of (1) two people of (2) opposite gender, and if, as advocates of gay marriage insist, the gender requirement is nothing but prejudice, exclusion and an arbitrary denial of one’s autonomous choices in love, then the first requirement — the number restriction (two and only two) — is a similarly arbitrary, discriminatory and indefensible denial of individual choice.

So the question remains, where does it stop?

Gay Rights Activists Pour Money Into Iowa Races

As the McCain camp begins to implode and lay the blame at the feet of Sarah Palin, we here at IDA join Steve Deace and the Iowa Family Policy Council in encouraging Iowa conservatives to focus their last bit of energy and attention on local Iowa races.

Last year (March 2007) an article appeared in The Atlantic featuring Colorado gay rights activist Tim Gill and his crusade to turn state legislatures across the country to Democratic control in an effort to promote gay rights. This article details Gill’s successful effort to change control of the Iowa legislature and oust Danny Carroll, former speaker pro tempore of the Iowa House who is now running again for his old seat.

See the following excerpts from this article to see Gill’s strategy. Note that he works with both liberals AND moderate Republicans to advance his agenda:

Gill’s principal interest is gay equality. His foundations have given about $115 million to charities. His serious involvement in politics is a more recent development, though geared toward the same goal. In 2000, he gave $300,000 in political donations, which grew to $800,000 in 2002, $5 million in 2004, and a staggering $15 million last year, almost all of it to state and local campaigns.

 But several years ago, a growing number of his peers began to sense that they were playing in the wrong arena. “A lot of [gay donors] are driven, cycle to cycle, by the notion that there’s going to be an epiphany—that one day they’ll wake up and accept us,” he said. “But this group had spent millions of dollars on philanthropy, and yet woken up the morning after the election to see gay-marriage bans enacted all across the country.”

Together, Gill and Trimpa decided to eschew national races in favor of state and local ones, which could be influenced in large batches and for much less money. Most antigay measures, they discovered, originate in state legislatures. Operating at that level gave them a chance to “punish the wicked,” as Gill puts it—to snuff out rising politicians who were building their careers on antigay policies, before they could achieve national influence.

Gill’s idea was to identify vulnerable candidates like Danny Carroll and move quickly to eliminate them without the burden of first having to win the consent of some risk-averse large organization or board of directors. Another element of this strategy is stealth. Revealing targets only after an election makes it impossible for them to fight back and sends a message to other politicians that attacking gays could put them in the crosshairs.

Convinced his approach was sound, Gill decided to go big. When I visited his headquarters last fall, liberals were working alongside conservatives on a list compiled by his top consultants—one a national Democratic consultant, the other a former Karl Rove protégé—of seventy races in which a key antigay candidate was vulnerable or the outcome of a race was likely to affect control of the legislature.

In the 2006 elections, on a level where a few thousand dollars can decide a close race, Gill’s universe of donors injected more than $3 million, providing in some cases more than 20 percent of a candidate’s or organization’s budget. On Election Day, fifty of the seventy targeted candidates were defeated, Danny Carroll among them; and out of the thirteen states where Gill and his allies invested, four—Iowa, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Washington—saw control of at least one legislative chamber switch to the Democratic Party. (In Massachusetts, Travis decided to retire rather than seek reelection.)

One component of Gill’s strategy includes courting that element of the Republican Party that’s open to compromise, while at the same time making clear that gay bashing will now come at a price.

Seems like Mr. Gill has figured out to promote his agenda and that agenda starts in state and local races. While social conservatives have been more concerned with national races, Gill and his people have been pulling the rug out from underneath the people of our state. Iowans should be outraged at the amount of money being poured into Iowa races by Gill and people associated with him. In fact, the opponents of several of the candidates that we support here on IDA receive money from people associated with Gill.

To see how much money Gill and Co. have poured into Iowa races go to Let Us Vote Iowa.

Yesterday CBN ran a fabulous piece on Gill and his influence on state races. Danny Carroll and Chuck Hurley from the Iowa Family Policy Council are interviewed. You can see the clip here. As you go vote, remember what Gill says in the CBN clip

“we successfully flipped legislatures around this country from Republican control to Democratic control and the net result is always good for gay people. Always.”

The Hypocrisy of Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell

As I wrote on Monday, I attended a debate hosted by the Ames Chamber of Commerce and the League of Women Voters for the Iowa House candidates in the Ames area. One topic that got brought up was the issue of special interests and their role in the election process. All three Democratic candidates decried the influence of special interests and voiced that they would be in favor of laws that would restrict this influence.

Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell of House District 45 was in attendance and was the most outspoken opponent of the influence that special interests have in elections. See this article here from the Ames Tribune quoting Wessel-Kroeschell from Monday’s debate.  So, to keep her honest I decided to see if her rhetoric matched reality. What I found digging through her campaign disclosure reports for this election shows that, in fact, her rhetoric DOES NOT match reality. I found that Wessel-Kroeschell received contributions from 21 special interest groups (political action committees; PACs). A variety of PACs contributed to Wessel-Kroeschell’s cause, which you can see from her campaign disclosure reports here and here. By my calculations, special interests have donated a total of $8,200 to her campaign. I will highlight two of the most interesting contributions below:

  • Rainbow Equality PAC ($150)- this PAC is located in Indianola and has also given $1000 to Sen. Mike Gronstal– see here. I couldn’t find a website for this PAC but given it’s name you all probably can figure out what type of legislation they support.
  • Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa/Meskwaki ($500)- this is the tribe that owns the Meskwaki Casino in Tama, IA. See their website here. What makes this contribution especially interesting is that Wessel-Kroeschell is very proud of her “yes” vote on the smoking ban (she glowed on Monday night when she talked about the ban). However, casinos such as the Meskwaki are exempt from the smoking ban. Things that make you go “hmmmmmm”.

I was absolutely shocked by what I found in my research on Rep. Wessel-Kroeschell. How can an elected official sit and face her constituents and blatantly lie? Stating in a public debate that you have issues with the influence that special interests have in elections but yet you receive contributions from 21 special interest groups is a double-standard and the actions of a hypocrite. The citizens who live in Iowa House District 45 deserve better representation. Wessel-Kroeschell’s opponent, Ryan Rhodes, is someone who will serve the people of District 45 honestly and respectfully. His support for lower taxes, less spending, and more government accountability and transparency are what the the people in District 45 need and deserve. And if you are wondering how many special interest groups have donated to Ryan’s campaign look here. Let me know what you find.

Ames Area Iowa House Candidates Debate

Tonight the candidates for the Iowa House of Representatives in districts 10, 45, and 46 (Ames area) particapted in a forum hosted by the Ames Chamber of Commerce and League of Women Voters. Candidates in attendance were Rep. Dave Deyoe (R) and Susan Radke (D) (District 10), Ryan Rhodes (R) and Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell (D) (District 45), and Eric Cooper (Lib) and Rep. Lisa Heddens (D) (District 46). Each candidate was allowed an opening and closing statement. One question came from the moderator and the rest of the questions were asked by members of the audience.

There were several questions asked of the candidates that cut across a wide variety of issues from taxes to the smoking ban, education, Right to Work, prisons, and imminent domain. Unfortunately no questions were asked about the sanctity of life and marriage. Stark differences between the candidates were seen on all these issues. The three Democratic women must have all read the same talking points before the debate because their answers were pretty much all the same. Both Rep. Wessel-Kroeschell and Rep. Lisa Heddens proudly stated they voted for the smoking ban and Susan Radke said she would have voted for the ban. Deyoe, Rhodes, and Cooper all vehemently voiced their opposition to the measure. Additionally, Deyoe, Rhodes, and Cooper clearly stated the need to reign in state spending and cut taxes while the Democrats seemed to not object to more state spending. Rep. Wessel- Kroeschell plainly stated that public institutions need more money and used the fact that she sends paper and dry-erase markers to school with her children as an example of how public education needs more funding.

The greatest line of the night came from Susan Radke who stated that it was “a privilege to pay taxes.” Mad props goes to the Libertarian candidate Eric Cooper. While I don’t agree with everything he said, he definitely had articulate answers and reasons to why we need limited government.

If you live in Ames and were not able to go, the debate will be replaying on Channel 16 throughout the week.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 694 other followers