Iowa's Clout May Increase Under Waxman
Iowa may have been a big winner in today's epic vote that stripped a major committee chairmanship from the senior member of the House of Representatives.
Rep. Henry Waxman of California was elected chair of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, defeating incumbent John Dingell of Michigan. The vote was a 137-122 secret ballot in a closed door meeting, but Rep. Bruce Braley of Waterloo was one of three speakers on Waxman's behalf.
The Politico reports that Braley "lash(ed) out at Dingell for standing in the way of environmental reforms. He even complained that the speaker had to go around him to enact a renewable energy bill during the Democrats' first year in power."
The Waxman-Dingell rivalry that culminated in today's vote goes back decades. “It was like Zeus and Thor in there, hurling lightning bolts at each other. You just wanted to duck and get out of the way,” California Rep. George Miller, another leading Waxman supporter, told Congressional Quarterly. Despite mixing his Greek and Norse pantheons, Miller chairs the Education and Labor committee, and Iowa's Dave Loebsack is seen as a close Miller ally.
"Congressman Loebsack is looking forward to working with Chairman Waxman to repair our broken health care system and to reform our nation's energy policy," said a Loebsack spokesperson.
The switch is seen as a loss for the seniority system and a gain for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a fellow Californian who has long been close to Waxman.
"If it moves, it goes through the Commerce Committee" is the old Capitol Hill saying about the committee's broad jurisdiction over legislation, and in Waxman, the Obama administration will have a more certain ally than Dingell on energy and climate change issues. The change benefits wind and ethanol producing Iowa. Waxman has long supported stronger clean air and fuel efficiency standards. Dingell, as befits his Detroit area district, is a staunch auto industry defender.
Another way the move helps Iowa: Dingell and his wife, Democratic National Committee member Debbie Dingell, are among the leading critics of Iowa's first in the nation caucuses, and played big roles in Michigan's move to leapfrog past the DNC-approved primary calendar. Less clout for the Dingells means more clout for Iowa at scheduling time. (Having a friend of the caucuses in the White House won't hurt, either.)
Dingell was first elected at age 29 in a 1955 special election to replace his late father, and is on track to set a record early next year as the longest serving member in the 220 year history of the House. But despite being the "new guy," Waxman has been in the House 34 years, joining Congress in the 1974 Watergate class that included Tom Harkin.
Dave Loebsack etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
Dave Loebsack etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
20 Kasım 2008 Perşembe
13 Kasım 2008 Perşembe
Johnson County Canvass Facts
Election 2008: Johnson County By The Numbers
The canvass is done and the 2008 election is in the books. Time to dig really deep into the Johnson County numbers. And we can dig deeper than ever before. Thanks to changes in the law, we now get the absentees broken out by precinct, and not just all lumped together. That makes a big difference when more voters in your county vote absentee than on Election Day.
Obama won the early vote in every single Johnson County precinct. You might have guessed from the party breakdown of the requests--58 percent Democratic to 15 percent GOP with the rest no party or third-- but we now officially know. The early vote was closest in tiny Monroe Township, which Obama carried by one vote.
In four precincts -- Coralville 6, Big Grove, Madison and Monroe -- Obama trailed on Election Day but won the combined, overall vote on the absentees. So if nothing else, the new law takes away bragging rights from Republicans who, in past years, could have claimed they "won" those precincts.
But McCain did win two precincts fair and square on the combined results. Sharon and Washington, in the southwest corner, saw big enough Election Day wins to offset Obama's early vote leads. Those two townships have long leaned Republican, but weren't enough to save Jarad Klein against Democrat Larry Marek in House District 89.
Looking at the combined vote, Obama ran at 75 percent in Iowa City and 64 outside, for an overall percentage of 69.9. Better than LBJ's 68.1-- but damn, I really wanted that 70. McCain ended up at 28.4--just below Dole, just above Bush 41 in 1992. But remember, those were three way races. (Trivia: Perot wasn't the strongest third party candidate ever in Johnson. That would be John Anderson in 1980.)
The most likely McCain voter was an Election Day voter in Washington Township, at 61 percent. The most likely Obama voter would be an early voter in Iowa City 21, which went -- wait for it -- 90 percent Obama, 9 percent McCain on the absentee. (This is the precinct where, on the Election Day vote in 2000, Bush ran third behind Nader.) Still, that's not the most insane absentee margin for Precinct 21; Mary Mascher was at 91, and Harkin was at 92. That's with opponents, but it's getting near the margin you see for unopposed candidates running against the write-in line.
Not much evidence of ticket splitting, especially on the Republican side where the top of the slate bunched tightly together. Miller-Meeks led Team GOP at 30 percent, with McCain at 28 and Reed at 25. Harkin ran about five points ahead of Obama. Loebsack ran about five points behind Obama, which roughly equals the five points that the third party candidates won.
The Election Day voter was more likely to choose the straight ticket (30.5 percent) than the early voter (23 percent). 24 percent of all Election Day voters marked Straight D, vs. 14 percent of early voters. Democratic straight tickets led Republicans 4 to 1 on the early vote and 1.5 to one on Election Day. That's roughly in proportion to the rest of the voting behavior.
But a lot of voters who don't mark the straight ticket line still vote mainly in one party. How else to explain the 55 percent that Rebecca Spears polled in House District 79 despite dropping out of the race months before and not even having the ambition to bother getting her name off the ballot?
None of that is really all that crucial, beyond the bragging rights of "Democrats won really big" vs. "Democrats won really, REALLY big." The breakdown is more interesting when you look at Johnson County's closest race, the conservation bond.
When the absentees went up at 70 percent Yes on Election Night, I thought: "It has to break even at the polls to win" the required 60 percent. It didn't quite happen, as Election Day was 51 percent no, but with five absentees for every four ballots at the polls, Yes made it with 60.8 percent. (The biggest loser on Election Day? No, not Chris "Not Tom Harkin" Reed. The jail.)
Opponents got a late start on their Flip No campaign, while supporters worried that the earliest early voters would "undervote," or skip the issue.
The problem with comparing early vote and Election Day is that the early voters were a heavily Democratic pool, so it's hard to figure out whether the margins are because the No campaign started late, or if the early voters were more inclined to support Yes in the first place. But it turns out the undervote was pretty much comparable across the board, ranging from 8.9 percent for rural Election Day voters to 13.5 percent for Iowa City absentee. The rurals were slightly more tuned in to the race, and significantly more opposed, but were outnumbered by Iowa City.
Even in the student precinct absentee vote, a lot of which was cast at satellites three weeks before Election Day, the undervote peaked at around 25 percent.
Overall, it was a little higher than the 10 percent undervote rate we saw in the 2000 jail vote, and just a little below the 12.6 percent undervote on the Idiot Amendment.
Way, way below the 47 percent undervote on the last judge on the ballot. Just anecdotally, the judge percentages seemed almost identical to four years ago, maybe slightly up. I'm seeing 79 percents where I was seeing 77s or 78s. Guess the Iowa Christian Alliance campaign--vote no on all judges till they answer our surveys the way we want with details on abortion and gay marriage--didn't have much traction in the People's Republic. (It also got announced late, which doesn't help in a 55 percent early vote county.)
One voter in 300 skipped the presidential race, which is comparable to past years. Weird, but it's a free country. One interesting thing: presidential write-ins were way up. The county had 60 or 80 of those each of the last four elections, but this year there were 342, more than any one of the third-party candidates. I haven't looked at them, but I suspect the Hillary PUMAs and the Ron Paul diehards are behind it.
The president-only vote is in the range of the 4 percent that skipped the two-way Senate race or the 5 percent who blew off the multiple-choice congressional contest. But there's no way to cross-reference that. Someone could have voted, say, for president, skipped the other high-on-the-ballot races, and jumped down to the conservation bond.
No particular geographic pattern to the write-ins or third parties, who all rounded down to 0 percent. Nader finished third, but waaay below the 6 percent he polled here in 2000. Almost the same exact number of votes as he got in 2004; 90 percent of the Nader vote evaporated after 2000 and didn't come back.
Libertarian Bob Barr was fourth, followed by Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party, with Cynthia McKinney at sixth. In fact, McKinney polled fewer votes than the Green straight ticket line. In Iowa, an individual ballot mark overrides the straight ticket. That means at least 23 people marked the Green straight ticket, and then crossed over to vote for someone else for president.
McKinney may have been hurt by the change in state law that gave the Greens and Libertarians a minor party, "political organization" status. Until this year the only way to get any sort of party status was to poll 2 percent for president (like Nader did in 2000) or governor. Now that there's a petition process, there's much less impetus to vote Green Party at top of the ticket. You don't have to choose between the presidency and the G on your voter card, and I'd guess that some Greens felt getting the Republicans out of the White House was a higher priority than McKinney's percentage in an obscure canvass book. Unless they were among the four people who read my world exclusive interview and voted for Gloria LaRiva.
The canvass is done and the 2008 election is in the books. Time to dig really deep into the Johnson County numbers. And we can dig deeper than ever before. Thanks to changes in the law, we now get the absentees broken out by precinct, and not just all lumped together. That makes a big difference when more voters in your county vote absentee than on Election Day.
Obama won the early vote in every single Johnson County precinct. You might have guessed from the party breakdown of the requests--58 percent Democratic to 15 percent GOP with the rest no party or third-- but we now officially know. The early vote was closest in tiny Monroe Township, which Obama carried by one vote.
In four precincts -- Coralville 6, Big Grove, Madison and Monroe -- Obama trailed on Election Day but won the combined, overall vote on the absentees. So if nothing else, the new law takes away bragging rights from Republicans who, in past years, could have claimed they "won" those precincts.
But McCain did win two precincts fair and square on the combined results. Sharon and Washington, in the southwest corner, saw big enough Election Day wins to offset Obama's early vote leads. Those two townships have long leaned Republican, but weren't enough to save Jarad Klein against Democrat Larry Marek in House District 89.
Looking at the combined vote, Obama ran at 75 percent in Iowa City and 64 outside, for an overall percentage of 69.9. Better than LBJ's 68.1-- but damn, I really wanted that 70. McCain ended up at 28.4--just below Dole, just above Bush 41 in 1992. But remember, those were three way races. (Trivia: Perot wasn't the strongest third party candidate ever in Johnson. That would be John Anderson in 1980.)
The most likely McCain voter was an Election Day voter in Washington Township, at 61 percent. The most likely Obama voter would be an early voter in Iowa City 21, which went -- wait for it -- 90 percent Obama, 9 percent McCain on the absentee. (This is the precinct where, on the Election Day vote in 2000, Bush ran third behind Nader.) Still, that's not the most insane absentee margin for Precinct 21; Mary Mascher was at 91, and Harkin was at 92. That's with opponents, but it's getting near the margin you see for unopposed candidates running against the write-in line.
Not much evidence of ticket splitting, especially on the Republican side where the top of the slate bunched tightly together. Miller-Meeks led Team GOP at 30 percent, with McCain at 28 and Reed at 25. Harkin ran about five points ahead of Obama. Loebsack ran about five points behind Obama, which roughly equals the five points that the third party candidates won.
The Election Day voter was more likely to choose the straight ticket (30.5 percent) than the early voter (23 percent). 24 percent of all Election Day voters marked Straight D, vs. 14 percent of early voters. Democratic straight tickets led Republicans 4 to 1 on the early vote and 1.5 to one on Election Day. That's roughly in proportion to the rest of the voting behavior.
But a lot of voters who don't mark the straight ticket line still vote mainly in one party. How else to explain the 55 percent that Rebecca Spears polled in House District 79 despite dropping out of the race months before and not even having the ambition to bother getting her name off the ballot?
None of that is really all that crucial, beyond the bragging rights of "Democrats won really big" vs. "Democrats won really, REALLY big." The breakdown is more interesting when you look at Johnson County's closest race, the conservation bond.
When the absentees went up at 70 percent Yes on Election Night, I thought: "It has to break even at the polls to win" the required 60 percent. It didn't quite happen, as Election Day was 51 percent no, but with five absentees for every four ballots at the polls, Yes made it with 60.8 percent. (The biggest loser on Election Day? No, not Chris "Not Tom Harkin" Reed. The jail.)
Opponents got a late start on their Flip No campaign, while supporters worried that the earliest early voters would "undervote," or skip the issue.
The problem with comparing early vote and Election Day is that the early voters were a heavily Democratic pool, so it's hard to figure out whether the margins are because the No campaign started late, or if the early voters were more inclined to support Yes in the first place. But it turns out the undervote was pretty much comparable across the board, ranging from 8.9 percent for rural Election Day voters to 13.5 percent for Iowa City absentee. The rurals were slightly more tuned in to the race, and significantly more opposed, but were outnumbered by Iowa City.
Even in the student precinct absentee vote, a lot of which was cast at satellites three weeks before Election Day, the undervote peaked at around 25 percent.
Overall, it was a little higher than the 10 percent undervote rate we saw in the 2000 jail vote, and just a little below the 12.6 percent undervote on the Idiot Amendment.
Way, way below the 47 percent undervote on the last judge on the ballot. Just anecdotally, the judge percentages seemed almost identical to four years ago, maybe slightly up. I'm seeing 79 percents where I was seeing 77s or 78s. Guess the Iowa Christian Alliance campaign--vote no on all judges till they answer our surveys the way we want with details on abortion and gay marriage--didn't have much traction in the People's Republic. (It also got announced late, which doesn't help in a 55 percent early vote county.)
One voter in 300 skipped the presidential race, which is comparable to past years. Weird, but it's a free country. One interesting thing: presidential write-ins were way up. The county had 60 or 80 of those each of the last four elections, but this year there were 342, more than any one of the third-party candidates. I haven't looked at them, but I suspect the Hillary PUMAs and the Ron Paul diehards are behind it.
The president-only vote is in the range of the 4 percent that skipped the two-way Senate race or the 5 percent who blew off the multiple-choice congressional contest. But there's no way to cross-reference that. Someone could have voted, say, for president, skipped the other high-on-the-ballot races, and jumped down to the conservation bond.
No particular geographic pattern to the write-ins or third parties, who all rounded down to 0 percent. Nader finished third, but waaay below the 6 percent he polled here in 2000. Almost the same exact number of votes as he got in 2004; 90 percent of the Nader vote evaporated after 2000 and didn't come back.
Libertarian Bob Barr was fourth, followed by Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party, with Cynthia McKinney at sixth. In fact, McKinney polled fewer votes than the Green straight ticket line. In Iowa, an individual ballot mark overrides the straight ticket. That means at least 23 people marked the Green straight ticket, and then crossed over to vote for someone else for president.
McKinney may have been hurt by the change in state law that gave the Greens and Libertarians a minor party, "political organization" status. Until this year the only way to get any sort of party status was to poll 2 percent for president (like Nader did in 2000) or governor. Now that there's a petition process, there's much less impetus to vote Green Party at top of the ticket. You don't have to choose between the presidency and the G on your voter card, and I'd guess that some Greens felt getting the Republicans out of the White House was a higher priority than McKinney's percentage in an obscure canvass book. Unless they were among the four people who read my world exclusive interview and voted for Gloria LaRiva.
22 Ekim 2008 Çarşamba
Loebsack Miller-Meeks Debate
Loebsack Stands by Record, Miller-Meeks Attacks Congress
"I'll put my record up against anyone's," first-term Rep. Dave Loebsack said in Tuesday night's 2nd Congressional District debate in Cedar Rapids, as his Republican opponent, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, attacked a "do-nothing" Congress.
In closing remarks in the KCRG-sponsored debate, Miller-Meeks criticized Loebsack for voting with the Democratic leadership "98 percent of the time" and for accepting political action committee money. "America is not divided," Miller-Meeks said, "Congress is divided."
Loebsack said that despite Miller-Meeks' contention, he had never taken a no PAC money pledge, and that he listens to his constituents. "I've been back to the district every weekend, except for the times I went over to Iraq and Afghanistan," said Loebsack, citing trips to the war zones he made as a member of the House Armed Services Committee.
"You didn't listen to your constituents on the bailout bill," Miller-Meeks retorted.
The candidates clashed on Social Security and health care. Miller-Meeks favored a move toward at least partial individual accounts on both fronts. Loebsack endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's health care plan, and said any move toward privatizing Social Security was risky. "Right after he was re-elected, George Bush pushed this risky scheme, and it was rejected by the American people," he said.
Panelist James Lynch of the Cedar Rapids Gazette cut to the chase and asked about Miller-Meeks' nickname for Loebsack, "Do-Nothing Dave." "We haven't seen leadership... when it comes to flood relief or the bailout bill," said Miller-Meeks.
"As a freshman, I think I've accomplished quite a lot," said Loebsack, citing the $4.6 billion Midwestern Disaster Tax Relief Act he cosponsored with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley that was included in the revised bailout plan.
At that point, Miller-Meeks tossed out a well-rehearsed "You're no Chuck Grassley" line.
The two-candidate format in a TV studio, with questions from journalists rather than the public, made for a more formal debate than the previous four-way debate in Coralville. Longer responses gave the major party candidates more opportunities to flesh out their proposals.
Green candidate Wendy Barth and independent Brian White participated in the earlier debate, but were not invited by KCRG. Barth liveblogged her responses to debate questions from an Iowa City coffee shop.
Loebsack took many opportunities to mention communities in the southern tier of the district. "I've been to Ottumwa 41 times," he said, citing Miller-Meeks' home town.
Loebsack also named Obama four times, and Republican nominee John McCain once. Miller-Meeks did not mention McCain's name.
Iowa Independent's Lynda Waddington contributed to this report.
"I'll put my record up against anyone's," first-term Rep. Dave Loebsack said in Tuesday night's 2nd Congressional District debate in Cedar Rapids, as his Republican opponent, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, attacked a "do-nothing" Congress.
In closing remarks in the KCRG-sponsored debate, Miller-Meeks criticized Loebsack for voting with the Democratic leadership "98 percent of the time" and for accepting political action committee money. "America is not divided," Miller-Meeks said, "Congress is divided."
Loebsack said that despite Miller-Meeks' contention, he had never taken a no PAC money pledge, and that he listens to his constituents. "I've been back to the district every weekend, except for the times I went over to Iraq and Afghanistan," said Loebsack, citing trips to the war zones he made as a member of the House Armed Services Committee.
"You didn't listen to your constituents on the bailout bill," Miller-Meeks retorted.
The candidates clashed on Social Security and health care. Miller-Meeks favored a move toward at least partial individual accounts on both fronts. Loebsack endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's health care plan, and said any move toward privatizing Social Security was risky. "Right after he was re-elected, George Bush pushed this risky scheme, and it was rejected by the American people," he said.
Panelist James Lynch of the Cedar Rapids Gazette cut to the chase and asked about Miller-Meeks' nickname for Loebsack, "Do-Nothing Dave." "We haven't seen leadership... when it comes to flood relief or the bailout bill," said Miller-Meeks.
"As a freshman, I think I've accomplished quite a lot," said Loebsack, citing the $4.6 billion Midwestern Disaster Tax Relief Act he cosponsored with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley that was included in the revised bailout plan.
At that point, Miller-Meeks tossed out a well-rehearsed "You're no Chuck Grassley" line.
The two-candidate format in a TV studio, with questions from journalists rather than the public, made for a more formal debate than the previous four-way debate in Coralville. Longer responses gave the major party candidates more opportunities to flesh out their proposals.
Green candidate Wendy Barth and independent Brian White participated in the earlier debate, but were not invited by KCRG. Barth liveblogged her responses to debate questions from an Iowa City coffee shop.
Loebsack took many opportunities to mention communities in the southern tier of the district. "I've been to Ottumwa 41 times," he said, citing Miller-Meeks' home town.
Loebsack also named Obama four times, and Republican nominee John McCain once. Miller-Meeks did not mention McCain's name.
Iowa Independent's Lynda Waddington contributed to this report.
21 Ekim 2008 Salı
2nd District Debate Liveblog
2nd District Debate Liveblog
Here's the second 2nd CD debate. I'm watching it like regular folks on TV; no time to drive to Cedar Rapids.
Only two candidates this time: Dave and MMM. Barth is liveblogging her responses. Bruce Aune promises to be firm on time. MMM wins the toss and elects to kick so we start with Dave and the economy.
Loebsack: We need another recovery plan. Focus has to be on jobs and infrastructure. Not just roads and bridges -- schools and sewers ("mundane" but important to local govts.)
MMM: Any stimulus package is deficit spending. Repatriating funds, mentions capital gains tax cuts, corporate tax cuts.
Dave: Infrastructure and jobs will help bring about recovery. Extend unemployment benefits..
MMM: Economists say slowdown will be shortlived. It would be faster to cut payroll tax.
James Lynch asks about "Do Nothing Dave." MMM: Congress HAS done little, "we haven't seen that visionary leadership from Congress." Dave hasn't introduced much, no leadership on flood relief and bailout. Tom Latham did more on flood relief. "It didn't come up until the bailout bill."
Dave: "As a freshman I've accomplished quite a lot." Largest increase in financial aid since the GI Bill. Military Pain Care Act. "4.6 billion for flood victims" with Grassley.
MMM: "You are no Senator Grassley" If small business isn't bringing $ in you can't go forward. "Small business peple have not been helped."
Dave: Small business is in there, it was I bipartisan effort, I even cosponsored Steve King. "I'll put my record up against anyones."
Biofuels. Dave: Need to move beyond corn to cellulose ethanol, switchgrass. They have more room to stretch out than they did in the 4 way debate. Seems more formal, must be teh studio setting. I got renewable fuel standards in the farm bill. "And my leadership isn't all that thrilled about ethanol and biofuels."
MMM: Corn ethanol also produces multiple other products. Doesn't mean we shouldn't do other as well. Oh and a plant Dave referenced is gone now.
Dave: Other renewable fuels, esp. wind. Jobs jobs jobs.
MMM: I drive a hybrid.
Bruce asks about No Child. MMM: School bureaucracy sometimes gets in the way of good teachers. We want accountability for teachers, but how to measure. Measure students progress against themselves and not across board.
Dave: A lot of concerns about NCLB. Goals are laudable but a massively underfunded mandate. "It's been largely punitive." Longitudinal models do make sense. "We have a high stakes one sixe fits all" teach to the test approach.
Both candidates drop in biograhy points here.
MMM: We need to unleash the teachers and increase the standards.
dards.
Dave: Schools need flexibility with special ed.
Lynch: home ownership. Dave: House bill allowed bankruptcy judges to help restructure mortgages, a "bottom up" approach.
MMM thinks that'll harm the credit markets. Instead we should have guaranteed 20% of home value. Lenders don'r reaally want to foreclose, it's a money loser.
Dave: Crack down on predatory lending. Some borrowers were irresponsible, but some lenders were predatory. MMM concurs.
Beth Malicki asks about campaign finance. MMM: Restates the question several ways, and I've got shoes. And some PAC bashing.
Dave: I'd agree on shoes, that's how I won. We need reform. I've never taken a no PAC pledge, and I listen to my constituents. I've been back home every weekend that I wans't in Iraq. "I think we should have public financing" and personal spending limits.
MMM: Your constituents said vote no on bailout and you didn't listen.
Bruce asks about the war. Dave: Take care of the vets first. (VFW endorsement) We need a safe responsible withdrawal. "The focus has to be on Afghanistan." and Pakistani border.
MMM: As a vet, I'd rather have my rep vote for supplies for troops. Says VFW does not endorse. We need better troop retention.
Dave: I'm well aware of troop retention issues. "We will have more conflicts."
MMM: Incentive pay, decrease retirement age.
Beth Malicki: Social Security privatization. MMM: Again restates question and eats some time. "Allow people under 50 to put small portion into personal accounts." Average stock gain is 10% a year.
Dave: Bush pushed this "risky scheme" and it was rejected. Raise the cap. "Make sure that those who can pay do pay."
MMM: "The greatest risk for your money is the government. I might take my chances by divesting it."
Lynch: War on terror. Dave: Recommit to Afghanistan. Two trips to Afghanistan, one to Pakistan. "All the experts have told us that this is in fact where the terrorists are." Need to improve relationship with Pakistan to increase cooperation.
MMM: Surviellance with due process. "On a field of battle it's difficult to gather evidence while fending off an enemy."
Dave: "We're a country that has values the world looks to" and we can't lose sight of those values.
Loebsack has mentioned Obama and Biden in passing once each; not so from MMM.
Bruce: Health care: availability or cost control? MMM: "Both." Bashes single payer briefly. "A universal health care model cannot control costs or encourage personal responsibility." But we're smart, we can figure it out. Mentions individual accounts, that sounds like what she means.
Dave: We had bipartisan support for SCHIP but Bush vetoed it twice. I hope Obama or McCain signs it.
MMM: The vetoed bill would have just expanded an ineffective federal program, some $ didn't go to kids. Would reduce people in private sector.
Dave: I don't believe in consumer-driven plans, consumer is at a disadvantage. "But I do support Barack Obama's plan."
Lynch follows up on health care. Dave: Obama's plan is feasible and can be paid for. Let Bush tax cuts expire. We can do better on drug cost and prevention.
MMM: Obama plan not portable. Let people buy insurance across state lines. (That's the plan: privatize!) "Massachusetts plan (hat tip to the Mitt! He goes unnamed.)
Dave: MMM plan "wrong way to go." State mandates require certain things to be covered. "We have to protect the consumer."
MMM: Wants an ala carte system, inserting some fertility and age jokes.
Malicki: Postville and immigration. MMM: Employer accountability, everification. Comprehensive immigration reform and faster route to citizenship. Guest worker program.
Dave: Will need bipartisan comprehensive reform. I voted for more border agents and evirfication. Employer sanctions.
Closing statements. Dave: Starts with the bio points, positive role of govt in his life. Financial aid bill, Military Pain Care, disaster relief.
MMM: "America is not divided, it's Congress that's divided." "I am not a politician" (er, you're on a BALLOT) and "sometimes we ask the government to do too much." Gets all the bullet points in: PACS, 98% vote with Democratic leadership (as if that's a bad thing in a Democratic district...)
I'm not seeing a knockout on either side and I'm not convinced that anyone undecided was watching. That's all for now...
Afterthought: Loebsack names Obama four times (and McCain once); Miller-Meeks names McCain not at all. And my IowaIndy colleage Lynda at Essential Estrogen writes it more coherently and spells it better than I do.
Here's the second 2nd CD debate. I'm watching it like regular folks on TV; no time to drive to Cedar Rapids.
Only two candidates this time: Dave and MMM. Barth is liveblogging her responses. Bruce Aune promises to be firm on time. MMM wins the toss and elects to kick so we start with Dave and the economy.
Loebsack: We need another recovery plan. Focus has to be on jobs and infrastructure. Not just roads and bridges -- schools and sewers ("mundane" but important to local govts.)
MMM: Any stimulus package is deficit spending. Repatriating funds, mentions capital gains tax cuts, corporate tax cuts.
Dave: Infrastructure and jobs will help bring about recovery. Extend unemployment benefits..
MMM: Economists say slowdown will be shortlived. It would be faster to cut payroll tax.
James Lynch asks about "Do Nothing Dave." MMM: Congress HAS done little, "we haven't seen that visionary leadership from Congress." Dave hasn't introduced much, no leadership on flood relief and bailout. Tom Latham did more on flood relief. "It didn't come up until the bailout bill."
Dave: "As a freshman I've accomplished quite a lot." Largest increase in financial aid since the GI Bill. Military Pain Care Act. "4.6 billion for flood victims" with Grassley.
MMM: "You are no Senator Grassley" If small business isn't bringing $ in you can't go forward. "Small business peple have not been helped."
Dave: Small business is in there, it was I bipartisan effort, I even cosponsored Steve King. "I'll put my record up against anyones."
Biofuels. Dave: Need to move beyond corn to cellulose ethanol, switchgrass. They have more room to stretch out than they did in the 4 way debate. Seems more formal, must be teh studio setting. I got renewable fuel standards in the farm bill. "And my leadership isn't all that thrilled about ethanol and biofuels."
MMM: Corn ethanol also produces multiple other products. Doesn't mean we shouldn't do other as well. Oh and a plant Dave referenced is gone now.
Dave: Other renewable fuels, esp. wind. Jobs jobs jobs.
MMM: I drive a hybrid.
Bruce asks about No Child. MMM: School bureaucracy sometimes gets in the way of good teachers. We want accountability for teachers, but how to measure. Measure students progress against themselves and not across board.
Dave: A lot of concerns about NCLB. Goals are laudable but a massively underfunded mandate. "It's been largely punitive." Longitudinal models do make sense. "We have a high stakes one sixe fits all" teach to the test approach.
Both candidates drop in biograhy points here.
MMM: We need to unleash the teachers and increase the standards.
dards.
Dave: Schools need flexibility with special ed.
Lynch: home ownership. Dave: House bill allowed bankruptcy judges to help restructure mortgages, a "bottom up" approach.
MMM thinks that'll harm the credit markets. Instead we should have guaranteed 20% of home value. Lenders don'r reaally want to foreclose, it's a money loser.
Dave: Crack down on predatory lending. Some borrowers were irresponsible, but some lenders were predatory. MMM concurs.
Beth Malicki asks about campaign finance. MMM: Restates the question several ways, and I've got shoes. And some PAC bashing.
Dave: I'd agree on shoes, that's how I won. We need reform. I've never taken a no PAC pledge, and I listen to my constituents. I've been back home every weekend that I wans't in Iraq. "I think we should have public financing" and personal spending limits.
MMM: Your constituents said vote no on bailout and you didn't listen.
Bruce asks about the war. Dave: Take care of the vets first. (VFW endorsement) We need a safe responsible withdrawal. "The focus has to be on Afghanistan." and Pakistani border.
MMM: As a vet, I'd rather have my rep vote for supplies for troops. Says VFW does not endorse. We need better troop retention.
Dave: I'm well aware of troop retention issues. "We will have more conflicts."
MMM: Incentive pay, decrease retirement age.
Beth Malicki: Social Security privatization. MMM: Again restates question and eats some time. "Allow people under 50 to put small portion into personal accounts." Average stock gain is 10% a year.
Dave: Bush pushed this "risky scheme" and it was rejected. Raise the cap. "Make sure that those who can pay do pay."
MMM: "The greatest risk for your money is the government. I might take my chances by divesting it."
Lynch: War on terror. Dave: Recommit to Afghanistan. Two trips to Afghanistan, one to Pakistan. "All the experts have told us that this is in fact where the terrorists are." Need to improve relationship with Pakistan to increase cooperation.
MMM: Surviellance with due process. "On a field of battle it's difficult to gather evidence while fending off an enemy."
Dave: "We're a country that has values the world looks to" and we can't lose sight of those values.
Loebsack has mentioned Obama and Biden in passing once each; not so from MMM.
Bruce: Health care: availability or cost control? MMM: "Both." Bashes single payer briefly. "A universal health care model cannot control costs or encourage personal responsibility." But we're smart, we can figure it out. Mentions individual accounts, that sounds like what she means.
Dave: We had bipartisan support for SCHIP but Bush vetoed it twice. I hope Obama or McCain signs it.
MMM: The vetoed bill would have just expanded an ineffective federal program, some $ didn't go to kids. Would reduce people in private sector.
Dave: I don't believe in consumer-driven plans, consumer is at a disadvantage. "But I do support Barack Obama's plan."
Lynch follows up on health care. Dave: Obama's plan is feasible and can be paid for. Let Bush tax cuts expire. We can do better on drug cost and prevention.
MMM: Obama plan not portable. Let people buy insurance across state lines. (That's the plan: privatize!) "Massachusetts plan (hat tip to the Mitt! He goes unnamed.)
Dave: MMM plan "wrong way to go." State mandates require certain things to be covered. "We have to protect the consumer."
MMM: Wants an ala carte system, inserting some fertility and age jokes.
Malicki: Postville and immigration. MMM: Employer accountability, everification. Comprehensive immigration reform and faster route to citizenship. Guest worker program.
Dave: Will need bipartisan comprehensive reform. I voted for more border agents and evirfication. Employer sanctions.
Closing statements. Dave: Starts with the bio points, positive role of govt in his life. Financial aid bill, Military Pain Care, disaster relief.
MMM: "America is not divided, it's Congress that's divided." "I am not a politician" (er, you're on a BALLOT) and "sometimes we ask the government to do too much." Gets all the bullet points in: PACS, 98% vote with Democratic leadership (as if that's a bad thing in a Democratic district...)
I'm not seeing a knockout on either side and I'm not convinced that anyone undecided was watching. That's all for now...
Afterthought: Loebsack names Obama four times (and McCain once); Miller-Meeks names McCain not at all. And my IowaIndy colleage Lynda at Essential Estrogen writes it more coherently and spells it better than I do.
9 Ekim 2008 Perşembe
2nd District Debate
2nd District Debate Live Baby Live
2:30 and hello from the Schwab Auditorium at the Coralville Library for the four way 2nd District Debate. Congressman Dave Loebsack is facing off with the three rivals -- Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Green Wendy Barth, and independent Brian White.
Opening statements start with Barth. She praises the AARP for inviting the third parties. "My single issue is sustainability," she says, and says thousand of issues fall under that umbrella. "It means having a lifestyle that continues generation after generation. Our lifestyles have to change. We can embrace that change or deny change."
Loebsack next. "I ran in 2006 because I was fed up with a system that was broken. I wanted to once again make government a positive force in people's lives." Cites his committee work. "I have worked tirelessly to provide for our troops and provide oversight to the Bush Administration's Iraq policies."
Miller-Meeks "I have not been a party affiliated person working hard to elect candidates. I got tired of seeing Congress doing nothing but seeing who was the victor in a partisan fight," citing Social Security, health and energy policy.
White: "What does 'change' mean? What is the change they're talking about? I ask you to really think about that. Do you really believe Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, can bring about that change? The only way we bring about real change is to change Washington first." He says term limits, getting rid of PACs, and ethics reform are the way to do that.
AARP rep Richard Tibbets asks if health care is a fundamental right. "It should be a right of all people on the planet," says Barth. "I'm perfectly comfortable with the term socialized medicine." Loebsack: "It is clearly a right, but hasn't been the case in this country. We have 45 million people in the richest country in the world without insurance. It's downright immoral." He supports portability and no preconditions.
Miller-Meeks: "As an affluent country, one of the responsibilities we have is health care. We should have a system that encourages personal responsibility." I didn't catch every word.
White: "The real issue is how do we make it affordable for everyone. We have to get rid of the interest groups that are tying it down."
"How can civil liberties be preserved while addressing terrorism?" Loebsack says the initial Patriot Act went too far and he would have voted no. "I don't believe we should impinge too much on our civil liberties. It's got to be a balancing act." Miller-Meeks: "We need an active and a vigilant press because they hold officials feet to the fire and they have an investigative arm." Says measures need timelines. White: "We have to protect civil liberties as a priority. We need to do it the same way the criminal system does -- with probable cause." Barth: "There's never going to be 100% safety. We have to protect ourselves but can't be paranoid."
Long term care starts with MMM. She mainly talks about existing programs and AARP long term care insurance programs. White: "The focus has to be in building a medical home so physicians can make home visits." Barth: "The big issue is the community that you're in, having people come in to make sure you're OK. The question is how we're going to build community." Moderator almost skips Loebsack, who says he backs the Community Health Choice Act.
Medicaid allocation for home care vs. nursing home care. Whit notes that the question is circular--you shift funding by shifting funding. "The answers are simple. The reason I'm running is nothing gets done." Barth: "The way to get things done seems to be to get a rich person to think they can get richer by doing it," and pushes the VOICE act "to get the money out of politics." They;re getting meta here.
"It's a question of priorities, of generating the political will, and of building coalitions across party lines" says Loebsack. MMM: "it's a combination of both public and private efforts."
Social Security privatization. Barth: "I hesitate to do anything to risk that, esp. in the stock market. It needs to stay an entitlement." Cap should be raised. "It's a terrible idea" to privatize," says Dave L. "President Bush pushed this idea after his idea and it was roundly rejected by the American people." MMM: "Social Security funds should not be used in the general budget. That's part of the reason we have a problem now. We need to have a congress that lives within its means and not continue to rob the SS fund." White: "We need to lift the cap on the fund, and we need to up the benefits." Only 45 seconds an answer, hard to stretch out.
Will you forgo congressional benefits and live with the Medicare the rest of us do with capped benefits? "I have to answer that first" says the incumbent. "I'm open to any kind of renegotiation." MMM: "I would be happy to forgo them, I don't think I'm better than any other citizen." (This is a really demagogic question.) MMM: Caps would require more thought. White "These are simple solutions, we just need to do them." The moderator keeps skipping the fourth candidate each time. "Thank you for treating us equally," says Barth when she's skipped.
Disability employment and ADA. MMM: "We want everyone to be productive and have to think outside the box a little bit." White acknowledges that the ADA was a good bill; "we did do something in Congress." The less involvement the federal govt has in this, the better" saying it can be better handled locally.
"I'm curious about this worker shortage MMM is talking about" says Barth, saying people are hurting for jobs. Loebsack cites the ADA Restoration Act passed this Congress to upgrade and update the ADA.
Tax reform and Fair Tax. "I am a huuge flat tax supporter," says White. "No loopholes, no deductions, none of that. It's very simple." Barth: "A progressive tax system is better," responds Barth. "There should be a Peace Tax so people can say 'I don't want any of my money going to the military,'" and says there should be similar options for sicial programs.
"We have to stop tax incentives for companies going overseas," says Loebsack, who says flat of "fair" tax proposals hurt the middle class. Bush tax cuts should not be extended. "Time is money," says MMM citing tax preparation costs. "I advocate an optional flat tax and then we could go to further tax reform."
Income and class disparity. "A lot of it comes from gaming the system in the financial markets," says Barth. Credit market needs to be re-regulated. Loebsack cites the Bush tax cuts again. "We have to extend the tax cuts for lower and middle classes." Also calls for alternative minimum tax reform. "If we don't reform it it'll catch the middle class." MMM calls for more stringent education requirements and immigration in the global economy. "The first thing you do is get rid of everything in Washington including the interest groups," says White, drawing the first applause of the debate.
Renewable energy. "Wind energy has been a boon to Iowa's economy" says Loebsack. "Clearly we can do better and reduce our dependency on foreign oil." "We need to go to a more electric based economy," says MMM, dissing natural gas (take that, T. Boone!) She mentions several other methods, including nuclear. White reads a modern-sounding quote on energy independence; his punch line is that it's from the Carter era. If we're going to put all our eggs in the ethanol basket, we need to look at other crops besides corn, said Barth. "I'm running out of time, I'm just getting started." "It's not fair," Loebsack says in sympathy.
"We should have flex fuel vehicles with electric engines," says MMM; the next question kind of becomes a second go around. Strictly speaking, it's a CAFE question.)"I'm not big into government control and dates, but we have to do it now because we've been listening too long to the oil company special interests in Washington," says White. "I'm also for making the number of miles we drive by making our communities closer together and producing more of our food locally," says Barth. Loebsack voted for higher CAFE "but we've got to do more."
How would you respond to another Postville? "I am for amnesty, but we need to incorporate them into the system," says White, calling for corporate sanctions. "It takes way too long to become a citizen." Barth noted that illegals paid into the system without getting anything out of it. "We need to treat these people like people." "Agriprocessors itself was a very bad actor. We need to hold our employers accountable, and need to give them the tools to be accountable," says Loebsack. He also supported more border security. "We need to ramp up the immigration system and have a clear system of why someone can immigrate," says MMM, adding that Bush has been poor on enforcement.
The Bailout. "That was the biggest mistake you made was voting for that," says Barth looking at Loebsack. "They want us middle class taxpayers to bail them out." Again, running out of time. "Those are the two toughest votes I've had to take. The downside of not doing anything, I feared, were worse." Second bill included $4.6 billion for flood victims and wind tax credits. MMM: "The risk has been passed on globally and we're paying the price for that." White: "In ten days they threw away one third of the revenue we get in taxes. I'm disgusted. Both the Democrats and Republicans hands are dirty in this," White says getting sustained applause.
Medicare shortfall. "I fought against Pres Bush's proposal to cut physician reimbursement rates," says Loebsack, saying they got modest rate increases. MMM: "We need to see if we need to shift costs between individuals." "It's been over regulated to the point where more people can defraud the system," says White, a UIHC attorney. "When you invite third party candidates, you get a perspective you haven't heard before" says Barth, advocating single payer.
Prescription drug cost reform. "Competition is a good thing," says MMM. "I see patients on too many medications that they may not need." The donut hole makes people reassess. White blames pharmaceutical profit margins as the worst aspect of health cost, again getting applause. Barth: "We should have price controls on our drugs, that's what Canada has." "We need to fill that donut hole" says Loebsack.
Marriage penalty tax: "I'm in favor of repealing the entire tax code," offers MMM. "Marriage is a church thing and not a govt. thing," says White, who returns to drug costs. (I think White may have a front row claque but it's hard to tell) "That penalty shouldn't be there, no doubt about it," says Loebsack. "The government does not negotiate as well as individuals who are getting the benefit" says MMM returning to drugs.
War and peace issues. "It needs to be a multinational approach," says White, "I can't stand the finger pointing of who voted for what in Iraq. Put away the rhetoric and just handle our foreign affairs."
"We're not fighting a war on the adjective 'terror,' we're killing a lot of people," says Barth.
"We have to reorient our foreign policy and have more creative diplomacy" says DL citing his visits to the war. "The real enemy are in Afghanistan and the border areas of Pakistan.," saying we need to recommit to Afgh. MMM cites her own military service. "When we vote to send in troops, we have a responsibility to support those troops," says MMM, getting applause from her side of the room.
Barth says she'll blog if elected; "you deserve to know what's going on." The question is about future forums, which they all say is a good idea. There's another debate on the 21st -- just the two major parties. White says this is the first he's heard of it ans asks DL and MMM to go to bat for him and Barth. Loebsack notes his VFW endorsements. " Being for veterans is not a partisan issue," says Loebsack. "We've had record increases for the VA on a bipartisan basis." MMM says a forum for every county in the district -- which she proposed and didn't get.
Closing statements let them stretch out a bit. We need to make a sustainable, happy and healthy lifestyle," says Barth. ""I'd appreciate your vote as a vote for sustainability."
"My job is to give Iowa a voice, to fight for what's right," says Loebsack. "It is tough to fight through the gridlock, but we got some things passed into law" citing education and veterans, ad the flood relief tax package. "We know there's much more to do." Applause from the left side of room (the physical is the political, with Dems on the left side of the room. There don't seem to be a lot of uncommitted folks here, though White gets some applause from both sides of the room.)
"We don't have advocates who are there fighting for us," says MMM. "Do they follow through on their campaign commitments." "If you've only been in one place you have a very limited viewpoint. I look through a different prism." Applause on the right of the room.
White: "Congressman Loebsack started his re-election campaign right away and raised $400,000 from interest groups in three months. We need to change the system, and the only way we do that is get the parties out. I don't want to be a politician -- I want to see our politics change."
The moderator thanks everyone for watching the timekeeper. But that was the real limiting factor here. Handshakes all around.
2:30 and hello from the Schwab Auditorium at the Coralville Library for the four way 2nd District Debate. Congressman Dave Loebsack is facing off with the three rivals -- Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Green Wendy Barth, and independent Brian White.
Opening statements start with Barth. She praises the AARP for inviting the third parties. "My single issue is sustainability," she says, and says thousand of issues fall under that umbrella. "It means having a lifestyle that continues generation after generation. Our lifestyles have to change. We can embrace that change or deny change."
Loebsack next. "I ran in 2006 because I was fed up with a system that was broken. I wanted to once again make government a positive force in people's lives." Cites his committee work. "I have worked tirelessly to provide for our troops and provide oversight to the Bush Administration's Iraq policies."
Miller-Meeks "I have not been a party affiliated person working hard to elect candidates. I got tired of seeing Congress doing nothing but seeing who was the victor in a partisan fight," citing Social Security, health and energy policy.
White: "What does 'change' mean? What is the change they're talking about? I ask you to really think about that. Do you really believe Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, can bring about that change? The only way we bring about real change is to change Washington first." He says term limits, getting rid of PACs, and ethics reform are the way to do that.
AARP rep Richard Tibbets asks if health care is a fundamental right. "It should be a right of all people on the planet," says Barth. "I'm perfectly comfortable with the term socialized medicine." Loebsack: "It is clearly a right, but hasn't been the case in this country. We have 45 million people in the richest country in the world without insurance. It's downright immoral." He supports portability and no preconditions.
Miller-Meeks: "As an affluent country, one of the responsibilities we have is health care. We should have a system that encourages personal responsibility." I didn't catch every word.
White: "The real issue is how do we make it affordable for everyone. We have to get rid of the interest groups that are tying it down."
"How can civil liberties be preserved while addressing terrorism?" Loebsack says the initial Patriot Act went too far and he would have voted no. "I don't believe we should impinge too much on our civil liberties. It's got to be a balancing act." Miller-Meeks: "We need an active and a vigilant press because they hold officials feet to the fire and they have an investigative arm." Says measures need timelines. White: "We have to protect civil liberties as a priority. We need to do it the same way the criminal system does -- with probable cause." Barth: "There's never going to be 100% safety. We have to protect ourselves but can't be paranoid."
Long term care starts with MMM. She mainly talks about existing programs and AARP long term care insurance programs. White: "The focus has to be in building a medical home so physicians can make home visits." Barth: "The big issue is the community that you're in, having people come in to make sure you're OK. The question is how we're going to build community." Moderator almost skips Loebsack, who says he backs the Community Health Choice Act.
Medicaid allocation for home care vs. nursing home care. Whit notes that the question is circular--you shift funding by shifting funding. "The answers are simple. The reason I'm running is nothing gets done." Barth: "The way to get things done seems to be to get a rich person to think they can get richer by doing it," and pushes the VOICE act "to get the money out of politics." They;re getting meta here.
"It's a question of priorities, of generating the political will, and of building coalitions across party lines" says Loebsack. MMM: "it's a combination of both public and private efforts."
Social Security privatization. Barth: "I hesitate to do anything to risk that, esp. in the stock market. It needs to stay an entitlement." Cap should be raised. "It's a terrible idea" to privatize," says Dave L. "President Bush pushed this idea after his idea and it was roundly rejected by the American people." MMM: "Social Security funds should not be used in the general budget. That's part of the reason we have a problem now. We need to have a congress that lives within its means and not continue to rob the SS fund." White: "We need to lift the cap on the fund, and we need to up the benefits." Only 45 seconds an answer, hard to stretch out.
Will you forgo congressional benefits and live with the Medicare the rest of us do with capped benefits? "I have to answer that first" says the incumbent. "I'm open to any kind of renegotiation." MMM: "I would be happy to forgo them, I don't think I'm better than any other citizen." (This is a really demagogic question.) MMM: Caps would require more thought. White "These are simple solutions, we just need to do them." The moderator keeps skipping the fourth candidate each time. "Thank you for treating us equally," says Barth when she's skipped.
Disability employment and ADA. MMM: "We want everyone to be productive and have to think outside the box a little bit." White acknowledges that the ADA was a good bill; "we did do something in Congress." The less involvement the federal govt has in this, the better" saying it can be better handled locally.
"I'm curious about this worker shortage MMM is talking about" says Barth, saying people are hurting for jobs. Loebsack cites the ADA Restoration Act passed this Congress to upgrade and update the ADA.
Tax reform and Fair Tax. "I am a huuge flat tax supporter," says White. "No loopholes, no deductions, none of that. It's very simple." Barth: "A progressive tax system is better," responds Barth. "There should be a Peace Tax so people can say 'I don't want any of my money going to the military,'" and says there should be similar options for sicial programs.
"We have to stop tax incentives for companies going overseas," says Loebsack, who says flat of "fair" tax proposals hurt the middle class. Bush tax cuts should not be extended. "Time is money," says MMM citing tax preparation costs. "I advocate an optional flat tax and then we could go to further tax reform."
Income and class disparity. "A lot of it comes from gaming the system in the financial markets," says Barth. Credit market needs to be re-regulated. Loebsack cites the Bush tax cuts again. "We have to extend the tax cuts for lower and middle classes." Also calls for alternative minimum tax reform. "If we don't reform it it'll catch the middle class." MMM calls for more stringent education requirements and immigration in the global economy. "The first thing you do is get rid of everything in Washington including the interest groups," says White, drawing the first applause of the debate.
Renewable energy. "Wind energy has been a boon to Iowa's economy" says Loebsack. "Clearly we can do better and reduce our dependency on foreign oil." "We need to go to a more electric based economy," says MMM, dissing natural gas (take that, T. Boone!) She mentions several other methods, including nuclear. White reads a modern-sounding quote on energy independence; his punch line is that it's from the Carter era. If we're going to put all our eggs in the ethanol basket, we need to look at other crops besides corn, said Barth. "I'm running out of time, I'm just getting started." "It's not fair," Loebsack says in sympathy.
"We should have flex fuel vehicles with electric engines," says MMM; the next question kind of becomes a second go around. Strictly speaking, it's a CAFE question.)"I'm not big into government control and dates, but we have to do it now because we've been listening too long to the oil company special interests in Washington," says White. "I'm also for making the number of miles we drive by making our communities closer together and producing more of our food locally," says Barth. Loebsack voted for higher CAFE "but we've got to do more."
How would you respond to another Postville? "I am for amnesty, but we need to incorporate them into the system," says White, calling for corporate sanctions. "It takes way too long to become a citizen." Barth noted that illegals paid into the system without getting anything out of it. "We need to treat these people like people." "Agriprocessors itself was a very bad actor. We need to hold our employers accountable, and need to give them the tools to be accountable," says Loebsack. He also supported more border security. "We need to ramp up the immigration system and have a clear system of why someone can immigrate," says MMM, adding that Bush has been poor on enforcement.
The Bailout. "That was the biggest mistake you made was voting for that," says Barth looking at Loebsack. "They want us middle class taxpayers to bail them out." Again, running out of time. "Those are the two toughest votes I've had to take. The downside of not doing anything, I feared, were worse." Second bill included $4.6 billion for flood victims and wind tax credits. MMM: "The risk has been passed on globally and we're paying the price for that." White: "In ten days they threw away one third of the revenue we get in taxes. I'm disgusted. Both the Democrats and Republicans hands are dirty in this," White says getting sustained applause.
Medicare shortfall. "I fought against Pres Bush's proposal to cut physician reimbursement rates," says Loebsack, saying they got modest rate increases. MMM: "We need to see if we need to shift costs between individuals." "It's been over regulated to the point where more people can defraud the system," says White, a UIHC attorney. "When you invite third party candidates, you get a perspective you haven't heard before" says Barth, advocating single payer.
Prescription drug cost reform. "Competition is a good thing," says MMM. "I see patients on too many medications that they may not need." The donut hole makes people reassess. White blames pharmaceutical profit margins as the worst aspect of health cost, again getting applause. Barth: "We should have price controls on our drugs, that's what Canada has." "We need to fill that donut hole" says Loebsack.
Marriage penalty tax: "I'm in favor of repealing the entire tax code," offers MMM. "Marriage is a church thing and not a govt. thing," says White, who returns to drug costs. (I think White may have a front row claque but it's hard to tell) "That penalty shouldn't be there, no doubt about it," says Loebsack. "The government does not negotiate as well as individuals who are getting the benefit" says MMM returning to drugs.
War and peace issues. "It needs to be a multinational approach," says White, "I can't stand the finger pointing of who voted for what in Iraq. Put away the rhetoric and just handle our foreign affairs."
"We're not fighting a war on the adjective 'terror,' we're killing a lot of people," says Barth.
"We have to reorient our foreign policy and have more creative diplomacy" says DL citing his visits to the war. "The real enemy are in Afghanistan and the border areas of Pakistan.," saying we need to recommit to Afgh. MMM cites her own military service. "When we vote to send in troops, we have a responsibility to support those troops," says MMM, getting applause from her side of the room.
Barth says she'll blog if elected; "you deserve to know what's going on." The question is about future forums, which they all say is a good idea. There's another debate on the 21st -- just the two major parties. White says this is the first he's heard of it ans asks DL and MMM to go to bat for him and Barth. Loebsack notes his VFW endorsements. " Being for veterans is not a partisan issue," says Loebsack. "We've had record increases for the VA on a bipartisan basis." MMM says a forum for every county in the district -- which she proposed and didn't get.
Closing statements let them stretch out a bit. We need to make a sustainable, happy and healthy lifestyle," says Barth. ""I'd appreciate your vote as a vote for sustainability."
"My job is to give Iowa a voice, to fight for what's right," says Loebsack. "It is tough to fight through the gridlock, but we got some things passed into law" citing education and veterans, ad the flood relief tax package. "We know there's much more to do." Applause from the left side of room (the physical is the political, with Dems on the left side of the room. There don't seem to be a lot of uncommitted folks here, though White gets some applause from both sides of the room.)
"We don't have advocates who are there fighting for us," says MMM. "Do they follow through on their campaign commitments." "If you've only been in one place you have a very limited viewpoint. I look through a different prism." Applause on the right of the room.
White: "Congressman Loebsack started his re-election campaign right away and raised $400,000 from interest groups in three months. We need to change the system, and the only way we do that is get the parties out. I don't want to be a politician -- I want to see our politics change."
The moderator thanks everyone for watching the timekeeper. But that was the real limiting factor here. Handshakes all around.
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)