Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush told a New York audience on Monday

that his party needed to abandon a strategy of appealing to “older white guys” and that it “doesn’t take a rocket scientist” to understand that demography matters in politics. […]

Republicans can’t win new voters “by narrowing your party and purifying your party and all this nonsense,” he said.

And he blasted some of the rhetoric from congressional Republicans against immigration, such as Iowa Rep. Steve King as “shameful and so insulting … [it’s] totally out of the mainstream of conservative thought.”

Iowa blogger Shane Vander Hart fumes,

If [Bush] is running in 2016 then he’s running a clinic on how to guarantee one loses the Iowa Caucus.

First lesson if you want to lose attack Congressman Steve King (R-IA).  […] The grassroots identify with Congressman King and his position on the issues. So when Bush takes a crack at him in New York of all places… well that shows he lacks the sense to run a successful campaign in Iowa.

I doubt Jeb Bush is focused on winning the Iowa caucuses. I think he’s focused on the GOP not losing presidential elections until the end of time.

Winning the presidency is not about pandering to social conservatives in Iowa. Republicans can’t win just by improving their performance among white voters. They need more support from fast-growing demographic groups. Specifically, as Bush knows very well, they need to do better among Latino voters in Florida. King may have won the battle against comprehensive immigration reform, but his national prominence on this issue is a nightmare for Republican strategists.  

State Representative Julian Garrett won yesterday’s special election in Iowa Senate district 13 by 3,908 votes to 2,627 for Democrat Mark Davitt, according to unofficial results (59.8 percent to 40.2 percent). He carried both the election-day vote and and the early vote.

During the 2014 legislative session, Democrats will retain a 26 to 24 Iowa Senate majority. Garrett will face re-election next year but will be heavily favored unless one of the far-right Republicans who sought the nomination for the special manages to defeat him in the primary. In 2012, Mitt Romney defeated Barack Obama by 51.4 percent of the vote to 47.2 percent in Senate district 13.

Iowa will be better off without Kent Sorenson’s toxic presence in the state Senate, even though Garrett’s victory makes this Senate district a safer Republican hold next November.

Garrett will soon resign as state representative, forcing a special election in Iowa House district 25 in early January. After the jump I’ve posted a map of that district, covering Madison County and parts of Warren County. In 2012, Garrett defeated Democratic challenger Katie Routh by 9,082 votes to 7,487 (54.8 percent to 45.1 percent), while the presidential vote in House district 25 split 54.1 percent for Romney, 44.3 percent for Obama.

Mark Jacobs officially launched his campaign for Iowa’s open U.S. Senate seat today. I’ll post a roundup of news clips and early thoughts on his strengths and weaknesses tomorrow.

First, I want to highlight the biggest reason Jacobs will be a serious contender for the nomination: the poor fundraising by other declared Republican candidates for Senate.

Republican State Representative Julian Garrett has the wind at his back going into today’s special election in Iowa Senate district 13. The district covers Madison County and most of Warren County. According to local elections officials, Republicans have returned 398 absentee ballots in Madison County, compared to 173 returned ballots from registered Democrats and 75 from no-party voters. In Warren County, Republicans have returned 947 ballots, compared to 767 from Democrats and 157 from no-party voters. Garrett lives in Madison County and represents that county plus parts of Warren County in the Iowa House. Democratic candidate Mark Davitt grew up in Madison County and has long lived in the Indianola area, representing much of Warren County in the Iowa House for six years.

There’s no way to know yet which party was more successful identifying early supporters among independents, but GOP activists were able to generate more ballot requests and returns from partisans. As of November 1, Senate district 13 contained 13,291 registered Democrats, 15,037 Republicans, and 15,968 no-party voters.

Republican Senator Kent Sorenson’s resignation opened up this seat. If Garrett wins, Democrats would maintain a 26 to 24 majority in the Iowa Senate. A win for Davitt would expand the majority to 27-23. Regardless of today’s outcome, Senate district 13 will be on the ballot in 2014.

Republicans in the U.S. Senate again blocked a vote on one of President Barack Obama’s judicial nominees yesterday. Robert Wilkins has served on the U.S. District Court for Washington, DC since his unanimous confirmation in 2010. But a cloture motion on Wilkins’ nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit failed with just 53 votes out of the 60 needed to end debate. Iowa’s Senator Chuck Grassley is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee and has led recent filibusters on two other nominees to the D.C. Circuit, claiming the court’s workload does not justify additional judges. In a floor statement that I’ve posted after the jump, Grassley made the same assertion but added a new twist:

There is no crisis on the D.C. Circuit, because they don’t have enough work to do as it is. […]

Even though we have a very real and very serious crisis facing this country because of Obamacare, the other side is desperately trying to divert attention to anything but the Obamacare disaster.

I’ve also posted statements below from the National Women’s Law Center and the Alliance for Justice, which again called for Senate rules reform. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution says that presidential nominees need a super-majority to be confirmed by the Senate.

UPDATE: I did not realize that Judge Wilkins filed the lawsuit against the Maryland State Police “that helped popularize the term ‘driving while black'” during the 1990s.

I’ve added some clips at the end of this post on the growing momentum for changing Senate rules to end fillibusters of judicial nominees.

Former Iowa Secretary of State and State Senator Paul Pate confirmed today that he will not run for Congress in the open first district. Speaking to James Q. Lynch of the Cedar Rapids Gazette, Pate said the race was “very winnable” but would take him too far away from family.

The U.S. House race, which would involve a GOP primary in June 2014, would be long, Pate said. “It’s every two years so it never lets up, it’s a swing district, so whether you’re Democrat or Republican you’ll be battling every time.”

Right now, Pate’s more interested in “watching my grandchildren, taking them to music class or [dance] or gymnastics.”

“I want to watch them grow up. It only happens once and I want to be there,” he said.

Pate’s family circumstances haven’t changed since he indicated in September that he was leaning toward running for Congress. The main difference is that State Representative Walt Rogers joined the Republican field. Lynch reported,

Pate didn’t endorse Rogers, but said “whether he’s the guy or he inspires the others to get off their tails and go out and do it, I’m hopeful it changes the picture for Republican side in a positive way.”

With former State Representative Renee Schulte also passing on the IA-01 race, the Republican field appears to be set. Rogers will have the most establishment support, business owner Rod Blum will draw strength from the “Liberty” crowd, and I don’t know what Steve Rathje’s constituency is supposed to be.

Governor Terry Branstad suggested at his regular weekly press conference this morning that he is open to changing state law to provide for run-off elections where no candidate wins at least 35 percent of the vote in a primary. Under current law, a Democratic or Republican special nominating convention is required if no candidate hits the 35 percent threshold in the primary for a state or federal office. You can listen to the audio from Branstad’s press conference at Radio Iowa. He starts talking about this issue around the 16-minute mark.

At least seven GOP candidates are running for Iowa’s open U.S. Senate seat, with more considering, and five Democrats are running in the first Congressional district. I would not rule out a clear winner emerging in both contests next June, but I also would not be surprised to see a convention decide at least one nomination, especially in the Senate race.

Eleven states, mostly in the South, currently provide for run-off elections in come primaries. Historically, the system has been seen as a way to prevent African-American candidates from winning primaries in the former Confederacy, although that may be a myth. I can see the case for holding a run-off election between the top two vote-getters in a crowded primary, rather than letting a small number of party insiders choose the nominee at a convention.

Share your own thoughts in this thread.

UPDATE: I did not realize that Republican Party of Iowa Chair A.J. Spiker had his own reform ideas for the system. Details are after the jump.

Roughly 800 people came to Altoona on Saturday night to celebrate Governor Terry Branstad’s birthday and raise money for his re-election campaign. The featured speaker was House Budget Committee Chair and 2012 Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan. Listening to his remarks at Radio Iowa’s website, I didn’t hear a serious contender for the presidency in 2016.

Three big things were missing from Ryan’s speech.

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread. Here are a few links to get a conversation started.

A Polk County district court ruling related to one of Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz’s pet projects called attention to the fact that Schultz was in Switzerland for the American Swiss Foundation’s 24th annual Young Leaders Conference, a weeklong event. Whether the secretary of state should attend a foreign junket like this at any time is debatable. But it’s ridiculous for him to have planned to be out of town when Iowa’s 99 county auditors were gathering in Des Moines to discuss election-related issues. The Iowa Democratic Party and the only declared Democratic candidate for secretary of state blasted Schultz. I’ve posted their comments below, along with the official defense from the Iowa Secretary of State’s spokesman.

Speaking of Schultz’s pet projects, here’s some important news from last month: the federal judge who wrote a key ruling upholding Indiana’s voter ID law now believes he got that case wrong.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced on Friday that it is proposing to alter the Renewable Fuel Standard on how much ethanol must be blended into gasoline. The announcement upset Iowa elected officials from both parties. After the jump I’ve posted statements from Governor Terry Branstad, Lieutenant Governor Kim Reynolds, and all of the Iowans in Congress except for Representative Tom Latham (R, IA-03), who has not commented on this issue to my knowledge.

The Associated Press reported this week on how the push to produce corn-based ethanol has damaged the environment in Iowa and elsewhere.

One last outrage: Will Potter reported for Mother Jones about a case that “could make it harder for journalists and academics to keep tabs on government agencies.” The FBI is going to court to prevent its “most prolific” Freedom of Information Act requester from accessing hundreds of thousands of pages of documents.

All four Iowans in the House of Representatives voted today for the Keep Your Health Plan Act “that allows insurance companies to offer health plans that were cancelled for not meeting new requirements under ObamaCare.” Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) were among the 39 Democrats who crossed party lines to support the bill, joining Tom Latham (IA-03), Steve King (IA-04), and almost all the Republicans present.

Braley and Loebsack both voted for the Affordable Care Act in 2010 and have opposed most of the Republican bills to repeal the health care reform law. For instance, Iowa’s representatives split on party lines when the House voted in August a bill “to prevent the IRS from enforcing any aspect of ObamaCare,” and when the House voted in July to delay the individual mandate to purchase health insurance.

However, occasionally Braley and/or Loebsack have gone along with GOP efforts to alter the Affordable Care Act. In 2012, Loebsack voted with Republicans to repeal a 2.3 percent tax on medical device manufacturers. In July of this year, Braley joined Republicans to pass a bill delaying the employer mandate to provide health insurance for one year. (President Barack Obama had already announced his decision to delay the employer mandate, despite the financial and political costs of doing so.)

Given the media firestorm over some Americans losing the health insurance plans Obama promised they could keep, I’m not surprised Braley and Loebsack ran for cover today. Both had narrow escapes in 2010 and may face tough election campaigns in 2014.

After the jump I’ve enclosed comments from some of the Iowans in Congress on today’s vote and on the president’s administrative “fix” that may allow some people to keep insurance policies that would have been cancelled for not meeting ACA requirements. (Few Iowans need this fix, because Wellmark and most other health insurance providers were already allowing Iowans to keep their individual policies for another year.) I also enclosed details on why Obama has threatened to veto the bill that passed the House today. Senator Tom Harkin is determined to prevent it from passing the U.S. Senate.

UPDATE: Added a statement from Latham below. Also, the Koch-funded group Americans for Prosperity wasted no time in signaling that they will attack Braley on “Obamacare” regardless of this vote. I doubt he’s gained any political protection for the U.S. Senate race.

SECOND UPDATE: Added new comments from Braley.

Next Tuesday, Iowans in Senate district 13 (Warren and Madison counties) will elect either Republican Julian Garrett or Democrat Mark Davitt as successor to the disgraced Kent Sorenson. Last night I saw a television commercial promoting Garrett several times on CNN. I don’t know whether the spot is running on broadcast networks as well. UPDATE: Bleeding Heartland user rockm points out in the comments that the ad is running on Des Moines area broadcast networks.

I wasn’t able to find it on YouTube, but I got it on tape, and I’ve posted my annotated transcript after the jump. You can see one still shot from the ad on Garrett’s Facebook page.

Garrett isn’t hiding his party affiliation in this Republican-leaning district; his red and white campaign logo includes an elephant. But in an apparent effort to distance himself from Washington-style politics, this commercial portrays Garrett as a pragmatist interested in “fixing problems,” not “fixing the blame.” It also emphasizes his “life on the farm,” not mentioning his long career as an attorney.

Iowa’s four representatives to the U.S. House split on two bills passed this week, while a bill all of them support moved closer to final approval. Details are after the jump.

The writing was on the wall this summer, but U.S. House Speaker John Boehner made it official yesterday: the Republican-controlled House of Representatives will not take up the bipartisan Senate-passed immigration reform bill, nor will the House ever go to conference committee negotiations on that bill.

It’s a triumph for Representative Steve King (IA-04), who has made it his mission to stop any effort to grant legal status or citizenship to undocumented immigrants.

It’s time for an update on the legal conflict between Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz and voter rights advocates over Schultz’s efforts to remove “potential non-citizen registrants” from Iowa voter rolls. The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa and the League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa are suing to block the rule and won an important court victory yesterday. Follow me after the jump for background and details.

Iowa wildflower Wednesday is on hiatus, but here’s an open thread. What’s on your mind, Bleeding Heartland readers?

I didn’t manage to post a Veterans Day linkfest on Monday, but I was interested in this article about the “long decline of veterans in Congress.”

Military service was once almost a prerequisite for service in Congress. Veterans comprised more than three-fourths of both the House and Senate at one point last century. Since then, their membership has declined to about 20 percent of both chambers.

Of the Iowans now serving in Congress, only Senator Tom Harkin is a veteran. Several Iowa candidates for federal office have served in the military, though, including Steve King’s Democratic challenger Jim Mowrer and Republican U.S. Senate hopefuls Sam Clovis and Joni Ernst.

The suicide rate among U.S. veterans has long been a national disgrace. The Military Suicide Research Consortium provides information on the problem and resources for those needing help.

Speaking of national disgraces, roughly 900,000 veterans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps) saw their food assistance benefits cut at the beginning of November. The SNAP cuts King and other House Republicans are demanding in conference committee negotiations over the farm bill would deny federal food assistance to approximately 170,000 low-income veterans.

Representative Tom Latham fell for some Veterans Day-themed satire about MSNBC host Chris Hayes. A good reminder that deleted tweets and Facebook posts never truly disappear.  

Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller launched his campaign for a ninth term today with events in Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, and Dubuque. His official statement, posted below, elaborates on Miller’s recent response to critics of his work and highlights the following “achievements for Iowans in the last three years”:

1. Miller’s “leadership in negotiating the national mortgage servicing settlement with major banks,” resulting in “payment of more than $40 million to Iowa homeowners and funding the Iowa Mortgage Help Hotline, which has helped thousands of Iowans with mortgage foreclosure issues.” (Roughly 6,000 Iowa borrowers received checks for $1,480 as part of the settlement–hardly adequate compensation for losses they suffered because of lenders’ mortgage servicing abuse.)

2. Protecting consumers against various kinds of fraud.

3. Helping to prosecute both violent and white-collar criminals, strengthening laws against child pornography and enticement of minors, improving victim assistance services to Iowans who have suffered from family violence or sexual assault.

4. Saving millions of taxpayer dollars by defending the state in various lawsuits.

5. Protecting the environment through “18 enforcement actions during the last three years involving air pollution, water pollution, and illegal solid waste disposal.”

Miller also promised to work on more issues during his next term, including “abuses by for-profit colleges,” “shoddy debt collection practices,” “ways to strengthen human trafficking and consumer protection laws,” and “the challenges of the e-cigarette.” UPDATE: Radio Iowa posted audio from one of Miller’s press events today.

I have not heard of any Republicans planning to challenge Miller in 2014. He was unopposed in 2006 and defeated Brenna Findley by a comfortable 55.5 percent to 44.4 percent margin in 2010 despite being outspent during the campaign and facing negative television commercials.

Scott Brown and Rick Santorum have a lot in common besides both visiting Iowa this week. Both are former U.S. senators who lost re-election bids. Both are considering running for president in 2016. Both claim humble roots and have called on the Republican Party to do more to appeal to working-class voters.

The two men have very different views on how GOP candidates can accomplish that goal.

Republicans in the U.S. Senate successfully filibustered yet another judicial appointment today. President Barack Obama had nominated Cornelia Pillard to serve on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. But a cloture motion failed to gain the 60 votes necessary under Senate rules to end debate on her nomination. Two Republicans joined all of the Democrats present, including Iowa’s Tom Harkin, to vote for cloture, but the motion still failed 56 to 41 (roll call). As with Caitlin Halligan and Patricia Millett, two other Obama nominees defeated by GOP filibusters, opponents did not even try to pretend Pillard was not qualified to serve on the court. Rather, Grassley (the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee) again claimed the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals does not have a large enough caseload to justify eleven judges.  

After the jump I’ve posted Grassley’s floor statement explaining his vote against confirming Pillard. I’ve also enclosed a statement from the Alliance for Justice, which has thoroughly debunked Grassley’s arguments about the D.C. court’s caseload. Senate Democrats made a huge mistake by not embracing Harkin’s call for filibuster reform years ago.

Catching up on news from last week, Texas Governor Rick Perry spoke at a lunch hosted by Americans for Prosperity and headlined the Polk County GOP’s fall dinner in Des Moines on November 7. O.Kay Henderson posted the full audio from Perry’s evening speech at Radio Iowa. After the jump I’ve posted some highlights from his remarks as well as an interview Perry gave the Des Moines Register and comments he made to Iowa reporters.

The Texas governor is trying to reinvent himself as a guy focused on economic policy and pragmatic problem-solving. I tend to believe in the adage, “You only get one chance to make a first impression.” Perry blew his big opening in the late summer of 2011, and I expect Iowa Republican caucus-goers to be more interested in other governors, such as Scott Walker of Wisconsin or Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. That said, Republicans have on several occasions nominated a candidate during his second run for the presidency, and I think governors tend to be more appealing to GOP primary voters than current members of Congress. Furthermore, several candidates will be fighting over the “uncompromising conservative” niche, so Perry might as well distinguish himself by rejecting purity tests and saying, “I’d rather have a half a loaf than no loaf.”

Any comments on Perry’s prospects in the 2016 Iowa caucuses or the presidential primaries are welcome in this thread.  

Anyone else following the Virginia attorney general election saga? With some provisional ballots still to be counted, Democrat Mark Herring leads Republican Mark Obenshain by just 117 votes out of more than 2 million cast last Tuesday. Michael McDonald and Dave Wasserman have been posting frequent updates on the situation. No matter who holds a slight lead when the official canvass concludes, there will certainly be a recount. But as Brad Friedman points out,

Unfortunately, a “recount” in Virginia is much less than it might appear. Most of the state’s votes are cast on 100% unverifiable Direct Recording Electronic (DRE, usually touch-screen) voting systems, on which it is impossible after an election to know if any vote cast on them actually reflects the intent of any voter. Those votes will not be able to be “recounted” at all. Rather, according to § 24.2-802 (D) of the Code of Virginia [PDF], a “recount” of DRE votes consists of little more than checking the results tapes printed out by the machines at the end of Election Night once again. […]

So there is no way to know if any of the DRE votes, the majority of those cast, are actually accurate, as per any voter.

Very close elections for state legislative seats or local offices are routine in Iowa, and we could easily have a statewide contest decided by a margin as narrow as the Herring/Obenshain race. But at least Iowa would be able to recount the ballots cast, because in 2008, our state legislature approved and Governor Chet Culver signed a law requiring paper ballots to be used in all Iowa counties. Before that law passed, some counties had already invested in touchscreen machines, but Secretary of State Mike Mauro strongly lobbied for paper ballots everywhere in the state. The governor initially favored a plan that would have involved retrofitting rather than replacing touchscreen voting machines. But he relented, and Senate File 2347 eventually passed by 47 votes to 1 in the Iowa Senate and 92 votes to 6 in the Iowa House.

Thanks to the advocates and all the Iowa elected officials who made sure the nightmare unfolding in Virginia would never happen here.

P.S. – We could do more to improve our system of post-election audits.