You might be an Iowa politics junkie if you are excited to see the new absentee ballot numbers in the morning. Follow me after the jump for tables showing the absentee ballots requested and returned statewide and in each of the four Congressional districts, updated to include the latest data from the Iowa Secretary of State’s Office.

I’m compiling all the tables on this page to make it easier to spot trends in the numbers. Note that the number of ballots returned is still quite low, because most of the 99 county auditors are starting to mail ballots this week.

Yesterday, some Iowa Republicans were crowing about how much better their party is doing this year on early GOTV. Although Democrats have requested more ballots than Republicans, GOP ballot requests were up by a greater percentage than Democratic requests compared to the 2010 campaign. I suspect one factor is the Republican mass mailing of absentee ballot request forms, which hit mailboxes shortly after Labor Day and created a surge in ballot requests to county auditors.

The Iowa Democratic Party’s mass mailing of absentee ballot request forms reached supporters between September 18 and 20. Over the next week to ten days, I’ll be closely watching the Democratic numbers to see whether the “low-hanging fruit” produce a big jump in ballot requests. Since yesterday, Democrats added significantly more ballot requests than Republicans did in each of the four Congressional districts. Statewide, total ballots requested by Democrats increased from 57,869 as of September 21 to 63,485 as of September 22. Republican requests increased from 31,099 to 33,073.  

This evening a U.S. military official confirmed to news media that airstrikes have begun in a part of Syria largely controlled by the terrorist group ISIS. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain are partnering with the U.S. on the airstrikes, though the extent of their cooperation is not yet clear. The Obama administration had previously announced plans for “targeted actions against ISIL safe havens in Syria — including its command and control, logistics capabilities, and infrastructure,” according to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. I don’t understand the endgame, since the Obama administration has vowed not to cooperate with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Last week, the U.S. House and U.S. Senate authorized the Obama administration to train and arm “moderates” in Syria and Iraq. But in a pathetic act of cowardice, Congress approved the president’s request as part of a huge must-pass spending bill, rather than as a stand-alone measure. Why should anyone respect the separation of powers if most members of Congress would rather punt than have a serious debate over whether to get the country more directly involved in a civil war? Especially since no one seems to know who these moderate Syrian rebels are. For all we know, we will be inadvertently training the next group of terrorists in the region, or supplying weapons that will fall into the wrong hands.

The funding bill containing the military authorization language passed the U.S. House by 273 votes to 156, with bipartisan support and opposition. Iowans Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) were among the 114 House Democrats who voted yes. Representatives Tom Lataham (IA-03) and Steve King (IA-04) were among the 159 Republicans who voted yes.

When the same bill passed the U.S. Senate by 78 votes to 22, Senators Chuck Grassley (R) and Tom Harkin (D) both voted yes. Rebecca Shabad and Ramsey Cox reported for The Hill, “The ‘no’ votes included several senators seen as prospective presidential candidates in both parties, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).” Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with Democrats and is considering a presidential campaign, voted no. Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, considered a possible presidential candidate if Hillary Clinton does not run, voted yes.

Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread. I will update this post as needed with Iowa political reaction to the airstrikes in Syria. But don’t hold your breath: last week I did not see any official statement from anyone in Iowa’s Congressional delegation about having voted to authorize weapons and training for rebel groups in Syria and Iraq.

This morning the Iowa Secretary of State’s Office started posting absentee ballot statistics for this year’s general election. They will update the chart on weekdays here (pdf).

As in 2012, Bleeding Heartland will update the absentee ballot totals daily as they become available. The first set of numbers are after the jump. I’ve organized the data a bit differently from the Secretary of State’s Office. For each day’s totals, I will create two charts: the first shows the number of absentee ballots Iowans have requested, in each of the four Congressional districts and statewide. The second shows the number of absentee ballots county auditors have received from voters, in each of the four Congressional districts and statewide. (For now, those numbers are small, because most of the county auditors have not yet mailed ballots to voters who requested them.)

In-person early voting will begin on September 25 at county auditors’ offices. Some counties will open satellite locations for in-person early voting as well. When an Iowan votes early at the auditor’s office, that counts as an absentee ballot requested by the voter and as an absentee ballot received by the auditor on the same day.

Today’s press release from the Secretary of State’s Office noted that “demand for absentee ballots with 43 days before the election is much higher this year for all party affiliations than at a similar point in 2010.” Absentee ballot requests as of September 21 totaled 112,178 statewide, compared to 56,725 at this point in Iowa’s last midterm election campaign. Registered Democrats had requested 57,869 absentee ballots (versus 34,318 at this point in 2010), Republicans had requested 31,099 ballots (12,710 in 2010), and no-party voters had requested 23,043 ballots (9,664 in 2010). Click here for more information about voting early, or to download an absentee ballot request form.

Note that not every mailed-in absentee ballot will count. Some ballots mailed late will not get a postmark proving voters sent them before election day. John Deeth goes over other common errors that can lead to absentee ballots not being counted, such as voters not signing the “affidavit envelope” or re-opening the affidavit envelope after sealing it. Everyone planning to vote by mail needs to read the instructions carefully and follow them exactly.

UPDATE: I should have noted that if this year’s turnout is similar to 2010, about 1.1 million Iowans will cast ballots, meaning that roughly 10 percent of those likely to participate in the midterm have already requested a ballot. The Republican Party of Iowa’s first mass mailing of absentee ballot request forms went out in early September, while the Iowa Democratic Party’s went out last week.

SECOND UPDATE: Adding latest daily numbers after the jump.

Over the weekend, Staci Appel’s Congressional campaign released a new television commercial responding to Republican claims that she is weak on fighting terrorists. I’ve enclosed the video and transcript after the jump. From a statement accompanying the ad release:

“Our campaign is not going to stand by and let David Young’s Washington cronies play politics with national security in a desperate attempt to save his sagging campaign,” said Appel Campaign Manager Ben Miller. “David Young should join former Congressman Boswell, veterans across the 3rd district and others in renouncing this ridiculous and over-the-top idea that an Iowa mother of six thinks terrorists should have passports.”

Obviously, David Young will do no such thing. He must be grateful that while his campaign suspends its own advertising (presumably for lack of funds), the National Republican Congressional Committee has picked up the slack. Their charge has occupied the media space for nearly a week, putting Appel on the defensive. Every spot she runs responding to the NRCC’s charge represents air time she can’t spend promoting her own positive message.

Research on the media’s role in “agenda-setting” and “priming” suggests that when there is extensive news coverage on a particular topic, the public may be more likely to evaluate candidates in that context. As far as I’m concerned, the sooner Appel can get back to talking about bread and butter economic issues, the better. I understand the need to respond to a false charge, but she needs voters to make up their minds based on domestic policy issues that play to Young’s weaknesses.

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread. I live-blogged yesterday’s gubernatorial debate, for those who missed it.

Today’s Sunday Des Moines Register includes a big feature by Jason Noble and Jeffrey C. Kummer on the $13.8 million spent so far on television commercials to influence Iowa’s U.S. Senate race. I’ve posted some excerpts after the jump.

Does anyone else think we’ve passed the point of diminishing returns on tv ads in this race? The vast majority of ads aired have been negative, and the overall quality has been poor. One of the biggest anti-Ernst spenders, NextGen Climate Action, has not produced a decent commercial yet. Most of the output has been so bad, I honestly believe Braley would be better off if NextGen had not gotten involved in this campaign at all. The Sierra Club’s spots are only marginally better. Some of the Braley campaign’s own negative ads have struck me as potentially effective, but at this point I suspect most Iowans are tuning out political ads. The volume has been overwhelming in the targeted media markets.

Pro-Republican groups, starting with fronts for the Koch brothers and now including one of Karl Rove’s outfits, keep pounding at the same two points to make Braley look bad: he insulted Senator Chuck Grassley and allegedly all Iowa farmers, and he missed a lot of House Veterans Affairs Committee meetings. But I have to wonder: once someone has heard 500 times about Braley’s alleged insult to Iowa farmers, will hearing it another ten or twenty times make any difference? Craig Robinson thinks Republicans are putting too many eggs in these baskets, and I tend to agree. The biggest accomplishment of these anti-Braley ads has been to force the Democrat to spend a lot of his money countering these charges (for instance, with tv spots on his connection to his grandparents’ farm or about what he has done for Iowa veterans). They have dictated the terms of his positive messages.

Probably the best outside ad money spent so far has been by the Chamber of Commerce. They’re running ads with Senator Chuck Grassley and Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey endorsing Ernst. Simple, positive messages.

Governor Terry Branstad and Democratic State Senator Jack Hatch are holding their second debate tonight in Burlington. The discussion will focus on economic issues. C-SPAN is televising the debate (channel 95 in the Des Moines area). I’ll be live-blogging after the jump. I expect to hear a lot of bogus statistics from Branstad about jobs he allegedly created. Reality: no economist or labor market analyst tracks the fake statistic the Branstad administration made up (“gross over the month job gains”). That’s just a fiction to allow Branstad to claim he’s on track to create 200,000 jobs. Also, median incomes in Iowa have not grown significantly.

Any comments about the debate or the governor’s race in general are welcome in this thread.  

UPDATE: Appel’s response ad is here.

For decades, Republicans have tried to win elections by painting Democrats–especially Democratic women–as soft on crime or weak on national defense. So no one should be surprised by the smear at the heart of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s latest attack on Staci Appel in Iowa’s third district. Taking out of context comments Appel made during her first debate with David Young, the NRCC is claiming Appel supports “passports for terrorists.”

Background and details are after the jump, along with the latest ads from both sides. Politico’s “Morning Score” reported on September 18 that David Young’s campaign has “gone dark”–not airing any television commercials–for the time being. It’s not clear whether the Young campaign is running short of funds or simply taking a break while the NRCC does the heavy lifting. Typically candidates will run positive ads while outside groups run attacks. The NRCC already has a positive spot running about Young as well as the misleading ad they’ve launched against Appel.

Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks is on the air with her first television commercial in her third campaign against Representative Dave Loebsack in Iowa’s second Congressional district. Her debut ad from the 2010 campaign contained entirely negative material about the incumbent. In contrast, the new spot jumps quickly from saying Loebsack is part of the problem to positive statements about Miller-Meeks. That strikes me as a more effective message, especially for reaching voters in counties that weren’t part of IA-02 during her previous two Congressional campaigns. Notably, Miller-Meeks is emphasizing her credentials as a doctor and a veteran. This ad says nothing about the three years she spent in state government running the Iowa Department of Public Health.

After the jump I’ve enclosed the video and transcript of “Problem.” I am seeking comment from Miller-Meeks’ campaign on where the commercial is running. The 24 counties in IA-02 are located in five separate media markets (Cedar Rapids, Quad Cities, Des Moines, Ottumwa-Kirksville, and Quincy, Illinois), making it fairly expensive to reach all voters in the district.

Any comments about the IA-02 campaign are welcome in this thread. I consider this race an uphill battle for the challenger.

Since the June primary, I haven’t written much about the first Congressional district campaign between former Iowa House Speaker Pat Murphy and longtime business owner Rod Blum. In theory, the race could be competitive. IA-01 leans Democratic with a partisan voting index of D+5, meaning that in the last two presidential elections, voters living here skewed about 5 percent more Democratic than the nationwide electorate. Crucially, this is a midterm, not a presidential year. The latest figures from the Iowa Secretary of State’s office indicate that the 20 counties in IA-01 contain 156,344 active registered Democrats, 134,313 Republicans, and 186,446 no-party voters. Hardly an overwhelming advantage. The right Republican could win this district.

Nevertheless, I doubt Blum has a strong chance in IA-01 for three reasons. First, the hero to the “Liberty” crowd and Steve Forbes is not moderate enough to win a lot of crossover voters. Blum applauded a key vote that led to last year’s federal government shutdown. The Republican won’t be able to run up the score in his home county either, because both Murphy and Blum are from Dubuque.

Second, Bruce Braley’s Senate hopes are dead in the water if he doesn’t get a strong Democratic turnout in the Congressional district where he is best known to voters. So his campaign and the Iowa Democratic Party have incentive to focus on GOTV in the key IA-01 counties. Unless the “coordinated campaign” is an epic failure, Murphy should benefit.

Third, as in Iowa’s second Congressional district, we haven’t seen a lot of activity from outside groups in IA-01. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is committed to defending this seat, but to my knowledge has not spent any money on radio or television commercials here. Likewise, the National Republican Congressional Committee put Blum in its top tier of challengers but hasn’t reserved air time or spent significant money against Murphy. I believe they would do so if they smelled a real opportunity here.

We haven’t seen much polling on this race. In August, Murphy released partial results from an internal poll indicating that he was ahead by 51 percent to 40 percent. Blum countered with his own internal showing Murphy leading by just 40 percent to 35 percent. Take those with a grain of salt, as with all internals.

Loras College surveyed 300 voters in IA-01 earlier this month and found Murphy barely ahead, by 34.6 percent to 33.0 percent, with 32.3 percent either undecided or refusing to answer. Both candidates have been campaigning around the district, but neither Murphy nor Blum started running general election television commercials until this month, which could explain the high number of undecideds. On the other hand, Loras doesn’t have a long track record in polling, and that survey had a relatively small sample and a relatively large margin of error (plus or minus 5.6 percent). The cross-tabs included some unusual findings, such as Murphy barely ahead among women and Blum barely ahead among men. If true, that would be a big red flag for Murphy, who defeated three women candidates in the Democratic primary. While Republican blogger Craig Robinson draws big hope from this aspect of the Loras poll, I am skeptical that the gender gap we’ve seen in so many elections for decades is magically absent from this race. The margin of error for a subsample of a poll is always larger than the margin of error for the whole survey.

After the jump I’ve posted the first two general election ads for Murphy and the debut general election ad for Blum, as well as the spot Blum ran before the GOP primary. They all look solid to me. Any comments about the IA-01 race are welcome in this thread.  

I’ve been to Whiterock Conservancy lots of times, but last week was my first visit in the company of naturalist and photographer Eileen Miller. Walking through a seep near the Middle Raccoon River, Eileen showed me quite a few native plants that I’d never recognized before, including this week’s featured wildflower. Flat-topped aster (Doellingeria umbellata) is also commonly known as flat-topped white aster or parasol whitetop. I’ve enclosed several photographs after the jump.

This post is also a mid-week open thread: all topics welcome.

 . . but it's debateable how good the polling of House 71 is.

I got a call last evening on my cell which is issued to a number (I thought) in the Story County phone exchange.  It's from 801-685-8913, Murray, Utah, from “National Polling”. Basic demographical data is asked, and then they ask me if I know these two names: Mark Smith & Jane Jech. Hell, no, I say. 

Okay, moving on, whom do you support for Governor, Senate . . etc. Operator specifically names *all* the names on ballot for each race, with party affliation. How likely am I to vote; what am I registered as? 

Getting back to Smith and Jech, do you like/dislike either? Whom will you vote for, Mr. Smith, the Democrat, or Ms. Jech, the Republican?

Thank you, end of call. 

Iowa’s U.S. Senate campaign has been stuck in a holding pattern for most of the summer. Seven straight opinion polls showed either a tied race between Bruce Braley and Joni Ernst, or one candidate ahead by 1-2 percentage points, well within the margin of error. For weeks, I’ve seen negative ads against both candidates almost every day on television, with a positive spot occasionally sprinkled in. I keep hearing the same anti-Braley or anti-Ernst ads again and again on radio too. Since no major external event has occurred to change the dynamic of the race, I was expecting to see more statistically tied polls at least until the first of three debates to which the candidates have agreed.

Instead, last week Loras College released a poll showing Braley ahead by 45.3 percent to 40.5 percent. Braley had better favorability ratings than Ernst.

Today Quinnipiac released a poll showing Ernst ahead by 50 percent to 44 percent. Ernst had better favorability numbers, led among independents, and had a much bigger lead among men than Braley’s lead among women.

The Loras poll of 1,200 likely voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.82 percent. The Q-poll of 1,167 likely voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percent. At least one of these polls is way off. Neither Loras nor Quinnipiac have polled in Iowa before this election cycle, so we don’t have a track record to judge them by. For what it’s worth, the available evidence hasn’t convinced me that either Braley or Ernst has a significant lead, and here’s why.

UPDATE: Fox News is out with their latest Iowa poll: Braley and Ernst are at 41 percent each. Notably, the sample includes 36 percent self-identified Democrats, 34 percent Republicans, and 25 percent independent/other.

Here’s something you don’t see every day: an independent expenditure for a positive commercial. Yesterday the National Republican Congressional Committee started running a tv ad in Iowa’s third district featuring retiring Representative Tom Latham and U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley endorsing David Young.

I can’t remember the last time I saw a commercial from the NRCC or its counterpart, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, that didn’t attempt to tear down the other candidate. Unfortunately for Democrats, this spot is probably way more effective than the NRCC’s previous effort to undermine Staci Appel. Latham won the newly configured IA-03 by a comfortable margin in 2012, carrying every county but Polk, and losing Polk by a much smaller margin than Mitt Romney did. Grassley has carried all of the sixteen counties in IA-03 in every U.S. Senate election that I can remember.

After the jump I’ve posted the video and annotated transcript of the new commercial. Any comments about the IA-03 race are welcome in this thread.

The Iowa Supreme Court has put a stay on a state rule prohibiting doctors from prescribing abortifacient drugs to patients through a videoconferencing system, according to an e-mail blast from Planned Parenthood of the Heartland this evening. Excerpt:

Today, the Iowa Supreme Court extended the stay on the Iowa Board of Medicine’s telemedicine abortion ban, ensuring that thousands of women in Iowa will continue to have access to safe, constitutionally protected abortion while we fight to permanently reverse the ban.

As our fight for Iowa women continues, we’re pleased that the court has upheld this right, and we’re proud to continue to provide the same exceptional care that we always have, no matter what.

We also are gratified that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) filed an amicus brief supporting PPHeartland’s request for a stay. This important group of medical providers understands and agrees that a woman and her doctor – not politicians – should be making personal health care decisions.

Planned Parenthood recently appealed last month’s Polk County District Court ruling that allowed the rule adopted by the Iowa Board of Medicine to go into effect. Bleeding Heartland summarized the key points in the case here. Seven of Planned Parenthood’s nine Iowa clinics that offer abortion services have been using the telemedicine system. If the state rule had been implemented pending appeal, women would have had to drive to clinics in either Iowa City or Des Moines in order to access medical abortions in the presence of a doctor.

At this writing, the judicial order has not yet been posted on the Iowa Courts website. I will update with a link when available.  

Iowa City ranks tenth on Livability.com’s second annual list of “100 Best Places to Live” among small to mid-sized cities in the U.S. Looking at 2,000 cities with populations between 20,000 and 350,000, researchers calculated each city’s “LivScore” using 40 data points falling under eight broad categories, explained in more detail here: amenities, demographics, economy, education, health care, housing, social and civic capital, and transportation. The website said of Iowa City,

Annual cultural events and a strong literary history with writers like John Irving and Flannery O’Connor have helped shape Iowa City, home to the University of Iowa. The college community offers a hardy arts and entertainment environment along with good health care for residents, highlighted by Mercy Hospital and the University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics.

Iowa City has previously been recognized as Iowa’s most walkable city.

Farther down the list of “Best Places to Live,” Iowa cities mentioned were Ames at number 30, West Des Moines at number 57, Cedar Rapids at number 65, and Des Moines at number 82.

Livability.com explained the methodology underlying the list here. The website tweaked the criteria they used last year to compile the first “Best Places to Live” list:

Specifically, we wanted to add some more variables about health care; look at the role of proximity to institutions like hospitals, colleges and universities; and create a better balance between our survey questions and the topics we were measuring. We created some new variables including a measure of racial and ethnic diversity and a rather unique look at the diversity of housing stock.

Those changes allowed Iowa City to move up from number 47 last year to this year’s top ten. Iowa’s highest-ranking city on Livability.com’s inaugural list was Cedar Rapids at number 30, followed by Ames at number 32. Des Moines was ranked number 70 and West Des Moines number 77 last year.

Former State Senator Staci Appel released her Congressional campaign’s fourth district-wide television commercial today. Whereas Appel’s first three spots had an entirely positive message (see here, here, and here), the new ad contrasts her background as a lifelong Iowa resident with Republican candidate David Young’s 20-year career as a “Washington insider.” In a press release today, Appel’s campaign manager Ben Miller commented, “There is a clear choice in this campaign between Staci Appel, who has lived in Iowa her entire life and worked in Iowa to cut government waste and balance budgets, and David Young, who has spent the last 20 years in Washington, D.C and is part of the problem.”

For his part, Young is campaigning on a promise to bring “a dose of Iowa reality to Washington.” His campaign has also highlighted work he’s done for Iowans as U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley’s chief of staff, as well as his record of listening to voters’ concerns.

I’ve posted the video and annotated transcript of the new Appel commercial after the jump. Any comments about the IA-03 race are welcome in this thread.

UPDATE: Young’s “good meal” commercial hasn’t gone over well with many Republicans, according to The Iowa Republican blogger Craig Robinson. I’ve enclosed an excerpt from his post below.

If campaign strategy is anything to go by, four-term U.S. Representative Dave Loebsack is a creature of habit. Loebsack’s debut television commercial launched late last week, and I’ve enclosed the video and transcript after the jump, with my initial thoughts about the message. The biographical information and visuals echo Loebsack’s opening commercial from his 2010 re-election campaign. The ad highlights the same public policy he led with in 2012. The same narrator performs the voice-over. The mid-September launch is precisely when he went up on the air in 2010 and 2012. (Loebsack’s not the greatest fundraiser in Congress, so he can’t afford to advertise district-wide for more than a couple of months.)

Several Bleeding Heartland readers have asked me about last week’s Loras College poll, showing Loebsack ahead of Miller-Meeks by 48.7 percent to 32.1 percent among 300 likely voters in the second Congressional district. I have a hard time believing those results, partly because Loras doesn’t have a long track record with polling. In addition, the statewide sample for the Loras poll includes too high a proportion of no-party voters for a mid-term election. Although a plurality of Iowa registered voters are independents, no-party voters comprised only about a quarter of the electorate in the last three Iowa midterm elections (click through for reports on turnout in 2010, 2006, and 2002). Perhaps most important, Loebsack defeated the less-credible challenger John Archer by a little more than 12 percent in 2012, a presidential election year. So I consider it unlikely he’s 16 points ahead of Miller-Meeks, who came fairly close to beating him in 2010.

By the same token, I don’t believe the Tarrance Group survey that the Miller-Meeks campaign hyped in mid-August, showing her trailing Loebsack by just 45 to 42 percent. Internal polls are always suspect, especially when the campaign releases almost no information about the sample demographics, question wording or question order.

Miller-Meeks and her suporters are optimistic because the district leans less Democratic than the one where Loebsack won his first three elections to Congress. The old IA-02 had a partisan voting index of D+7, whereas the current district is D+4. The latest figures from the Iowa Secretary of State’s Office indicate that the 24 counties in IA-02 contain 165,834 active registered Democrats, 139,034 Republicans, and 180,843 no-party voters. In contrast, Democrats had a voter registration advantage of nearly 48,000 in IA-02 going into the 2010 general election, when Loebsack defeated Miller-Meeks by about 11,500 votes. Notably, Loebsack’s current district includes the Quad Cities area (Scott County), traditionally more Republican-leaning than the Cedar Rapids area (Linn County), which was part of his old district. Under the previous map, Bruce Braley narrowly lost Scott County to his GOP challenger Ben Lange in 2010.

That analysis overlooks a few salient points, though. Since Iowa lawmakers adopted the current map of political boundaries, Loebsack has had three and a half years to build up his name recognition and support in the Quad Cities. He’s attended hundreds of public events there. He’s gone to bat for the Rock Island Arsenal, a major local employer. Nor are the new IA-02 counties a natural base of support for Miller-Meeks, who has spent most of her career in the Ottumwa area. In fact, her woefully under-funded opponent Mark Lofgren carried Scott County and neighboring Clinton County, as well as his home base of Muscatine, in this year’s Republican primary to represent IA-02.

I suspect we would have seen a greater sense of urgency from Loebsack’s campaign and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee if Democratic polling indicated a close race here. The DCCC swooped in to rescue Loebsack in 2010, running a couple of negative spots against Miller-Meeks in the final weeks. I’ll believe Miller-Meeks has a real shot if we see more independent expenditures for both candidates than occurred in IA-02 during the Loebsack’s race against Archer. While the National Republican Congressional Committee placed Miller-Meeks on the top tier of their program for challengers, I have seen no sign that the NRCC plans to spend significant money on this race.

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread.

The weather is perfect in Indianola this afternoon for the roughly 5,000 people expected to attend Senator Tom Harkin’s final “Steak Fry” event. At least 200 journalists will be on hand, mostly to see Hillary Clinton’s first appearance in Iowa since the 2008 caucuses. If you see a lot of “Hillary doesn’t appear to have much of an Iowa problem” stories tonight and tomorrow, remember that you heard it here first, and repeatedly.

I stand by my prediction that Hillary Clinton will face only token Democratic opposition in Iowa and elsewhere if she runs for president again. But in case she doesn’t run, 2012 Harkin Steak Fry headliner Martin O’Malley is building up a lot of goodwill among Iowa Democrats. In addition to raising money for key Iowa Senate candidates this summer, the Maryland governor’s political action committee is funding staffers for the Iowa Democratic Party’s coordinated campaign, gubernatorial nominee Jack Hatch, and secretary of state candidate Brad Anderson. I still don’t see O’Malley running against Clinton in any scenario.

President Bill Clinton will speak today as well. That’s got to be a tough act to follow. No one can get a crowd of Democrats going like he can. I’ll update this post later with highlights from the event and news coverage. I hope other Bleeding Heartland readers will share their impressions. C-SPAN will carry the main speeches, starting at 2:00 pm. That will be on channel 95 in the Des Moines area.

People who choose a career in politics tend to fall into one of two groups: the “hacks” who work on campaigns, and the “wonks” who immerse themselves in public policy. Paulee Lipsman, who passed away on Thursday in Des Moines, was a rare person who excelled in both fields. She worked on many election campaigns and was a dedicated volunteer for the Iowa Democratic Party at all levels, from the Scott County Democrats all the way up to representing Iowa on the Democratic National Committee. Arguably, she had more influence on the state during more than 20 years of work on the Iowa House Democratic research staff (the later years as director). Staff rarely if ever receive public recognition for any legislation that comes out of the Iowa House or Senate, yet lawmakers could not do the job without them.

I didn’t know Paulee well, but when I talked with her, I was always impressed by her deep knowledge of state government and policy. She enjoyed spinning scenarios as much as the next political junkie, but her passion didn’t end with getting Democrats elected. She was driven to improve public policy, and her views were grounded in facts.

Over the past few days, Iowa Democrats have posted many tributes to Paulee on social media. I enclose some of those words below, along with excerpts from her obituary. Several staffers, lawmakers, or lobbyists expressed gratitude for how Paulee helped them learn the ropes when they were newbies at the State Capitol. She was a role model for women working at the statehouse and a strong supporter of Democratic women running for state office.

Phil Specht’s words in one thread rang especially true: “One of the things I loved about her was even though both of you knew she was smarter and knew more (about practically anything) she would never talk down to anyone.” Presidential candidates sought out Paulee Lipsman’s support–both John Kerry and Joe Biden bragged about her endorsement in press releases. But she wasn’t the type to drop names or pull rank on anyone.

Until I read the Des Moines Register’s piece on Paulee’s passing, I did not know that she had been raped or that she filed an influential lawsuit related to that case during the 1980s. Roxanne Conlin was one of Paulee’s closest friends and represented her in that lawsuit. I’ve enclosed some of her comments about the case below. Paulee retired from the Iowa House Democratic research staff in 2010 to work on Conlin’s campaign for U.S. Senate.

UPDATE: During a stop in Des Moines on September 17, Vice President Joe Biden said, “Paulee Lipsman was a remarkable, remarkable woman. She was not only a friend of mine, but she was a tireless advocate for fairness and equality. I know that she will be greatly missed.”

The Iowa legislature’s Cannabidiol Implementation Study Committee met Thursday to discuss problems related to the implementation of the new law intended to allow Iowans to use cannabis oil to treat seizure disorders. Although the law went into effect on July 1, families who lobbied for measure are not yet able to purchase the oil derived from marijuana plants, because of various legal hurdles. Ten lawmakers (five from each chamber and five from each political party) serve on the study committee: State Senators Joe Bolkcom (D), Bill Dotzler (D), Steve Sodders (D), Charles Schneider (R), and Mike Brietbach (R), and State Representatives Walt Rogers (R), Clel Baudler (R), Linda Miller (R), John Forbes (D), and Bob Kressig (D).

Tony Leys reported for the Des Moines Register that the committee voted 9-1 to recommend that the state reschedule marijuana from “a Schedule I drug, meaning its use for any reason is illegal,” to “a Schedule II drug, which could be used for medical purposes.” Rogers was the dissenting vote. The committee voted 6-4 for “a motion to recommend allowing the closely regulated production and distribution of medical marijuana for approved patients. The motion did not specify what type of marijuana, but it did say the state should not tax the products.” Baudler, at one time Iowa’s most vocal opponent of medical marijuana, joined the five Democrats on the committee to approve that motion. However, Leys noted that Baudler “strenuously opposes expanding the law to let people possess marijuana to treat other conditions, such as cancer or Crohn’s disease. The committee rejected a motion to recommend such an expansion.”

The committee’s recommendations are not binding on the Iowa House and Senate, which will go back into session next January.

Not to take anything away from the suffering of Iowans with seizure disorders, but I don’t understand why lawmakers would want to approve medical cannabis for those conditions only and not for a range of other chronic or life-threatening diseases, which affect thousands of people here. Other states have created workable programs limiting access to those with genuine medical needs, and a majority of Iowans support legalizing the medical use of marijuana. Oncologists have been quietly recommending cannabis to cancer patients for at least four decades.