Sparse Change?

Traditionally presidential political campaigns are high on ideals and low on results--for every big idea that is adopted, there are hundreds more that never see the light of day. Is it any wonder that the electorate is sour to Washington DC's ways and means?

Politics is the "art of the possible" and thus there are many mediums employed to create this "art". Legislation is sculpted by lobbying interests, painted by public policy gurus, digitally enhanced by spin doctors, and then sometimes acted on by politicians whose world view is occluded by the next election cycle.

Are we the "nation of whiners" that John McCain supporter and former Senator Phil Gramm says we are? If he means that we complain that those we send to Washington to represent us don't live up to our expectations, then, yes, we are guilty as charged. We like to think of our leaders as living up to their predecessors, after all this is the USA, land of constant improvement.

The fact is that most of us don't really participate in the messy world of policy. The language of legal documents makes our eyes glaze over and so we wait for it to be cut up by the press and advocacy groups into easily digestible pieces. However, in legislation, like all things involving planning, the devil is in the detail. Buried in most legislation are bits and pieces that are added on, aka "pork". Sometimes the pork is tasty pork and other times it is a trade-off to get the legislation through committee.

The point of all this is that for real change to happen in Washington, we need to be better consumers and voters and push for things like clean legislation. Without insisting that the way business is done in Washington is changed, it won't make as much difference who we send there.

Legislative Session Ends - How Did It Go?

For the record, state legislators don't get rich by being public servants. On the other hand, it's a certainly above the living wage.

For calendar years 2007 and 2008, unless modified, legislators are paid an annual salary as follows:
Members $25,000
President of the Senate $37,500
President Pro Tempore $27,000
Speaker $37,500
Speaker Pro Tempore $27,000
Senate Majority Leader $37,500
Senate Minority Leader $37,500
House Majority Leader $37,500
House Minority Leader $37,500

State Legislators receive a $118 a day stipend while the legislature is in session. After 110 days, the stipend ends. Saturday, the stipend ended and with it the budget work of the legislators. This is exclusive of travel expenses which ballpark between $11,000 to 13, 500 a year. Then there is $300 a month for for legislative district constituency postage, travel, telephone costs, and other expenses. Legislators may enroll in the state health and disability insurance programs at the same rate as a full-time state employee.

So here is my report card on these fine women and men who earn between $50,180 and $65,180 a year to serve us.

+++ Anti-gouging legislation around payday and car title loans. As more middle class people are experiencing the effects of mortgage lending practices that are less than exemplary, this legislation addresses unfair business practices aimed at the poor. 280% interest on a loan is unconscionable, it needed to be addressed and with the Dems in control, it was. Grade: A +

+++ The anti-discrimination bill and anti-bullying bill are great legislation and the legislature should be commended for putting aside partisanship to address inequities in our state. Iowa will become the 19th U.S. state to ban workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and the 10th to ban discrimination on the basis of gender identity. It still comes down to the local level to enforce the law, but it is important that these tools are there. Grade: A

++ Same Day Voter Registration and verified voting bills- Anything that makes it possible for a person to vote is aces in my book. Evidence in other states that use it show that it does not increase voter fraud and actually gets more people to the polls. Good job legislators. In the final hours, the house also passed a verified voting bill that will help to make sure every vote is counted. Grade A

+ Increasing the state minimum wage is half a victory because future increases are not tied to cost of living factors--translated this could mean another 10 years before the minimum wage increases. A living wage should always be the goal because the end result is less dependence on our state tax base to take care of the basic needs of its citizens. Employers feel picked on when it pushed on them, but in the end everybody wins when people have more disposable income to spend. Grade: B

+ Raising teacher salaries was victory, but whether it will be enough to encourage more Iowans to become teachers to address the baby-boomer retirements that are just down the road remains to be seen. Teachers definitely deserve the increase and, again, these increases should be attached to cost of living factors. Grade: B

+ Keg Registration is a good tool to bring in accountability on those who purchase beer or underage persons. In Iowa City we have more than our share of house parties and given the incidence of rape and other assaults that occur, this may help. Grade: B

= + The cigarette tax increase may be a good tool, but I'm skeptical as to how the taxes will be used over time. South Dakota reports that at $1.53 per pack, cigarette sales are declining but revenue is increasing. It is logical to believe that the same will be true fro Iowa in the short-run. So-called "sin taxes" are low hanging fruit, but unless they address the "sins"--it is ill gotten gain to the state coffers. Grade: C +

= - Some in the progressive community may disagree with me on this point, but the $100 million fund to "grow our bio-economy, create new jobs and help make Iowa the renewable energy capital of the world" may be a boondoogle, particularly if it ends up mainly supporting the likes of ADM, Mid-American and Alliant Energy. The make up of the 18 member board (7 voting members appointed by the governor and 4 by the Iowa Utilities Board, with a separate seven-member board will monitor applications for funding projects under the plan, with Republican and Democratic lawmakers serving as non-voting members to provide oversight.) and will steer this ship and it will be very interesting to see who is named to the board--think Board of Regents and you can see how this could be a mess.

Had this legislation specifically promoted research and business start-ups in Iowa, it would be a very exciting prospect. Our state universities could benefit from this project, as could the state economy. According to Chet Culver's campaign promise "Iowa Power Fund will require that that the jobs created provide good wages and good benefits and that any company that misuses Iowa Power Funds or doesn’t provide the jobs promised will have to pay taxpayers back with penalties and interest." We'll see. Grade: C

- - Economic Development around removing the requirement that casinos be located on water. Casinos are BAD for any state's economy for two important reasons: 1) Regardless of the income the state derives from the casinos, localities ALWAYS suffer in the long run a) because the temptation to open more and more casinos reduces local impact b) the cost of human services to people with gambling and other addictions is VERY expensive. 2) Local development is hampered by citizens who use their disposable income to gamble as opposed to invest in their community, hence putting more control in the hands of the state for economic development dollars, hence politicizing who gets what and how. Grade: F


Legislation that didn't happen but should have:

* As expected VOICE was not passed in this session. This legislation should be a top priority for the next session, particularly as we move toward the 2008 elections. In short, Voter Owned Iowa Clean Elections will lessen the impact of special interest dollars and more importantly level the playing field so that more Iowans can be involved in state-level politics.

Many Democrats who now run all three legislative branches of the state government have supported this when they were the minority party, but a trifecta tends to lead to short term memory.

* Fair Share legislation. Probably one of the most divisive pieces of legislature, but needed, given the desire to quash union-representation. On the other hand, unions have got to earn their keep. In a "Right to Work" states, without Fair Share all workers to accrue the same benefits as their union counterparts without taking on the risk, which is part of what paying dues supports. No doubt this will come up again.

* Rental Deposit legislation. For low-income renters, the ability to recoup their deposits in a timely fashion can be the difference between having a place to live and being homeless, this legislation should come up in the next session.

* Funding housing trust funds through a portion real estate transaction fees. To establish a steady funding stream for local housing trust funds to finance low-income affordable rental and owner-occupied housing, this bill needs to be enacted soon. It makes sense to have affordable housing options that allow families to be stable (which translates to stabilityin the workforce, higher achievement for children in schools, and safer neighborhoods) and this a tool to accomplish the goal.

* Universal Health Care. This is a a piece of legislation that matters both to employers and the uninsured. It is also a big ticket item. Employers looking for places to locate look favorably on states with state-run programs, particularly those who are unionized. It is also true that as Iowa already has one of the oldest populations, it is important to bring and/or keep young Iowans in the state and great health care is important to that goal.

* Clean Water. the Iowa River is the 3rd most endangered waterway in North America. But polluted waterways hinder Iowa's agricultural future. No clean water, no agriculture.

The advocacy group, American River, released the report, which cited toxins, nitrates and untreated sewage as the reasons for the pollution which put the Iowa River on the list. It's the first time an Iowa river was included on the list.

Susan Heathcote, water program director for the Iowa Environmental Council, said about 98 miles of the Iowa River is impaired. "It's our namesake river," she said. "We're not necessarily saying it's the most polluted river in the state, but it's emblematic of so many of Iowa's rivers."

Stop the Repo Madness

What benefit is it to the average US taxpayer if housing is repossessed? Business decisions like these end up being paid for by all of us. If lenders make risky loans, it makes sense that they figure out a way to help the people they put into these homes to keep them.

From the BBC

The slowing housing market is a problem for lenders

A coalition of civil rights groups in the US has called on sub-prime lenders to stop repossessing borrowers' homes.

They want a six-month moratorium on foreclosures and say the industry should move borrowers onto loans with more favourable terms.

Sub-prime lenders provide loans such as mortgages to people with poor credit records, but they tend to charge higher rates of interest.

US sub-prime lender New Century filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday.

'Reckless and unaffordable'

The civil rights groups say that a predicted wave of foreclosures stems from "reckless and unaffordable loans", for which the lenders must bear some responsibility.

Without intervention, sub-prime foreclosures will impose the greatest drain on African-American and Latino wealth ever experienced in this country Hilary Shelton, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

The National Council of La Raza, which campaigns on behalf of Hispanic Americans, says the problem is that most sub-prime loans start with favourable fixed interest rates that later change into adjustable-rate mortgages.

The group says that higher risk borrowers should be moved into sustainable 30-year fixed rates.

Adjustable rates have caused particular problems following two years of interest rate rises from the Federal Reserve between 2004 and 2006.

Congress At It's Best

From Raw Story

After questioning a Republican congressmember's "decency" for seeking to restrict housing reconstruction funds for Hurricane Katrina and Rita victims, a Democratic Representative was barred from speaking Wednesday from the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. By a vote of the House's membership, his speaking privileges were quickly restored, and the Member apologized--but, boy did he make his point! Watch the C-SPAN clip at the end of the story.

Click Here For The Full Story

Dave Loebsack -- Please Support the Lee Amendment

Progressive representatives Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey, Maxine Waters, Keith Ellison, Maurice Hinchey and our own Jerry Nadler proposed an amendment to the $93 billion supplemental appropriations bill for a fully-funded, systematic withdrawal of U.S. soldiers and military contractors from Iraq by December 31, 2007.

Grass roots groups are asking us to call our representatives and tell him or her to support the Lee Amendment to restrict Pentagon spending in Iraq to funding only the safe withdrawal of U.S. troops and contractors by the end of this year at the latest.

Call toll-free: 1-888-851-1879

Although this amendment has the staunch support of progressive allies in Congress, it faces a tough battle. If the Lee Amendment fails, we will urge our representatives vote NO vote on the supplemental appropriation in the coming weeks.

Following is the text of the Lee Amendment:

AMENDMENT TO H.R. _____, AS REPORTED
(SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, 2007)
OFFERED BY MS. LEE OF CALIFORNIA
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:

SEC. ___. (a) Funds appropriated for Operation Iraqi Freedom or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense under any provision of law may be obligated and expended within the Republic of Iraq only for the purpose of providing for—

(1) the continued protection of members of the Armed Forces who are in Iraq participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Department of Defense contractor personnel who are in Iraq performing contracts related to such Operation, pending and during the withdrawal of such members of the Armed Forces and such contractor personnel; and

(2) the safe and complete withdrawal from Iraq of all members of the Armed Forces and contractor personnel described in paragraph (1) pursuant to a plan that provides for completion of the withdrawal not later than December 31, 2007.

(b) Nothing in subsection (a) shall be construed to prohibit or otherwise restrict the use of funds available to any department or agency of the United States to carry out diplomatic efforts or social and economic reconstruction activities in Iraq.

Loebsack Co-sponsors Murtha Redeployment Resolution

H.J.Res.18 - Resolutions are non-binding

JOINT RESOLUTION

To redeploy U.S. forces from Iraq.

Whereas Congress and the American people have not been shown clear, measurable progress toward establishment of stable and improving security in Iraq or of a stable and improving economy in Iraq, both of which are essential to `promote the emergence of a democratic government';

Whereas additional stabilization in Iraq by U.S. military forces cannot be achieved without the deployment of hundreds of thousands of additional U.S. troops, which in turn cannot be achieved without a military draft;

Whereas more than $471 billion has been appropriated by the United States Congress to prosecute U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan;

Whereas, as of the drafting of this resolution, 3,026 U.S. troops have been killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom;

Whereas U.S. forces have become the target of the insurgency;

Whereas, according to recent polls, over 91 percent of Sunni Iraqis and 74 percent of Shiite Iraqis want the U.S. forces out of Iraq;

Whereas polls also indicate that 61 percent of the Iraqi people feel that the attacks on U.S. forces are justified; and

Whereas, due to the foregoing, Congress finds it evident that continuing U.S. military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the people of Iraq, or the Persian Gulf Region, which were cited in Public Law 107-243 as justification for undertaking such action: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That:

Section 1. The deployment of United States forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable date.

Sec. 2. A quick-reaction U.S. force and an over-the-horizon presence of U.S. Marines shall be deployed in the region.

Sec. 3. The United States of America shall pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy.