Good news has been in short supply lately for supporters of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s presidential candidacy. But Gingrich told Seema Mehta of the Los Angeles Times this week that he’s turning things around:

“The fact is a month of media barrage is painful, and it slowed a lot of things down,” [Gingrich] said, before marching in a Fourth of July parade in Clear Lake, Iowa. “Our numbers will not be as good as we would like, and candidly, the consultants left us in debt. But every single week since they left we’ve been cutting down the debt, and we raise more than we spend in a week.”

Way to blame on the media for your own big mouth and lazy approach to campaigning, Newt. If you’re asking people to elect you president, you should at least be able to keep your own organization’s spending in line with its revenues.

Gingrich hasn’t given up on competing in the Iowa caucuses. His new spokesman R.C. Hammond told the Des Moines Register’s Jason Clayworth that the campaign will rely on the kindness of strangers volunteers. One of the most important free laborers will be former Representative Greg Ganske. He was part of the giant Republican “Class of 1994” in the U.S. House, taking down legendary Democrat Neal Smith in what was then Iowa’s fourth district. Ganske stepped up to be Gingrich’s finance chair in Iowa and is giving the candidate some money tips:

Ganske has already advised Gingrich to stop chartering expensive private planes and to instead fly commercial airlines, preferably in coach.  He’s also advised Gingrich to skip the Ames straw poll, a major Republican presidential shindig that will be held Aug. 13th.

“It’s basically who can buy the most buses to transport people in and then throw the biggest party,” Ganske said. “Basically it’s a fundraiser for the party.”

When a campaign is flat broke, the candidate shouldn’t need to be told to stop chartering planes. Then again, Gingrich developed an expensive airplane habit in his years running the American Solutions 527 organization.

Gingrich has no choice but to skip the Ames straw poll because he couldn’t afford to put in a bid for a spot outside the venue.

Last time Ganske made Iowa campaign news, he was hosting a fundraiser for Jim Gibbons, the Congressional candidate who lost badly to State Senator Brad Zaun in the 2010 IA-03 Republican primary, despite support from power-brokers in Iowa and Washington. Ganske’s been out of office for a long time, and rightly or wrongly, many Republicans feel his flaws as a candidate cost the GOP the 2002 U.S. Senate race against Tom Harkin. But beggars can’t be choosers. Gingrich should be thankful that anyone with any clout in Iowa offered to assist his hopeless cause.

The son of one of Linn County’s most influential Republicans during the past three decades will run for the Iowa House as a Democrat in 2012. Daniel Lundby on July 5 launched his campaign in the new Iowa House district 68. This swing district covers most of Marion (a suburb of Cedar Rapids) and some rural areas of Linn County, including the small towns of Ely and Bertram. As of April 2011, the new House district 68 contained 6,834 registered Democrats, 6,290 Republicans and 7,871 no-party voters.

Lundby’s Republican opponent will be Iowa House Local Government Committee Chairman Nick Wagner. He has represented current district 36, covering suburban and rural parts of Linn County, since winning an open-seat race in 2008.

Lundby’s first campaign press release refers repeatedly to his late mother, Mary Lundby. She was co-chair of the Linn County Republican Party before being elected to the Iowa House in 1986. After four terms as a state representative, she won several terms in the Iowa Senate, where she was among the more moderate Republicans. During the final weeks of the 2006 legislative session, she surprised most Iowa politics-watchers by ousting Stew Iverson as Senate Republican leader. She stepped down from the Senate in order to run for Linn County supervisor, but she dropped out of that race for health reasons. She died of cancer in early 2009.

Daniel Lundby’s message to Linn County voters will be that today’s Republican Party no longer shares his mother’s values. From yesterday’s campaign press release:

“My mother believed in a common sense approach to solving problems through partisan politics.  I want to bring that common sense back to the Iowa House.  My mother also strongly cared about children in Iowa and wanted them to get the best education possible.  Unfortunately, the needs of our young people now seem less important with the Republicans insisting on zero percent growth for local schools and education cuts to state universities.  None of which my mother would approve of.  Nor would she support cutting programs that protect our natural resources and our environment.  She would definitely not support attempts to deny equal rights to any Iowan.  Being my mother’s son, I want the chance to continue her work for a better Iowa.”

The comment about “equal rights” alludes to the fact that Mary Lundby was one of four Iowa Senate Republicans to vote against a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in 2004. That amendment failed by a single vote in the upper chamber. Had it passed, the Varnum v Brien lawsuit challenging Iowa’s Defense of Marriage Act probably would never have been filed.

I’ve posted a detailed map of the new House district 68 after the jump, along with the full text of Lundby’s campaign announcement.

Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty started running his presidential campaign’s second television commercial in Iowa today. The 30-second spot describes victories for Pawlenty in battles with public workers and Democrats in Minnesota.

Most of the Republican presidential candidates haven’t launched paid advertising in Iowa yet, but Pawlenty needs to make headway before the Republican Party of Iowa’s straw poll in Ames, now less than six weeks away. His camp also appears to be feeling pressure to halt Representative Michele Bachmann’s momentum in Iowa.

The video, annotated transcript and other news from the Pawlenty campaign are after the jump.  

Hope everyone in the Bleeding Heartland community is enjoying the long holiday weekend. Sounds like the weather across Iowa will be pretty good for the celebrations on July 3 and 4. I love the Windsor Heights parade.

Setting off fireworks at home is illegal in Iowa (rightly so in my opinion), but the law isn’t strictly enforced. Stay safe and remember that firecrackers are one reason July 4 can be a difficult holiday for veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder.

This is an open thread, so all topics are welcome. A few things caught my eye this week:

As of July 1, Iowa boaters are subject to the same blood-alcohol limits as people driving motor vehicles. A long-overdue bill to that effect finally made it through the legislature this year.

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources warned against swimming at six Iowa park beaches because the water contains high levels of fecal bacteria. The no swimming advisories apply to Emerson Bay at West Okoboji Lake, Geode near Danville, Beed’s near Hampton, Backbone near Strawberry Point, Lacey-Keosaqua near Keosaqua, and Springbrook near Guthrie Center. DNR staff have found high readings for bacteria in many other Iowa lakes this summer, so swim at your own risk and try not to swallow any water.

If you find a nice non-feces-contaminated swimming spot, remember that “drowning doesn’t look like drowning,” so it’s important to know the signs that someone is in trouble in the water. Drowning is the second-leading cause of accidental death for children.

I was not happy to learn that organic, “uncured” hot dogs with “no nitrates or nitrites added” do in fact contain nitrates and nitrites, often just as much as in conventional processed meats.

Danny Wilcox Frazier’s photo essay called “Out of Iowa” isn’t new, but I only found it recently. Worth clicking through.

The Iowa House and Senate finally passed a budget and got out of town yesterday with only about eight hours remaining before the end of the fiscal year.

Every legislative session has its own dynamic, and I’ve been thinking about what surprised me most about this year’s maneuvering in the capitol.  

The last day of fiscal year 2011 has arrived, and Iowa lawmakers still have not completed work on next year’s budget. Several pieces have cleared the Iowa House and Senate after backroom deals were reached on some contention issues. Notably, House Republicans and Senate Democrats reached a compromise on preschool and K-12 school funding. However, abortion language is still holding up the health and human services budget bill, covering a huge chunk of Iowa government spending.

More details about this week’s budget deal-making are after the jump. I will update this post throughout the day as news emerges from the Iowa House and Senate. Legislators plan to pass a one-month stopgap budget to keep state government funded while Governor Terry Branstad reviews the budget bills that reach his desk. (The governor has the power to item-veto certain appropriations.) As of this morning, the same abortion dispute blocking the health and human services bill is holding up passage of the stopgap budget.

Democratic and Republican negotiators gave up trying to find a compromise on property tax reform earlier this week. Both the Iowa House and Senate have passed property tax reform legislation, but the approaches differ vastly from one another and from Branstad’s preferred approach. If the governor calls a special legislative later this year, property taxes may come back on the agenda.

UPDATE: The last budget bills passed during the afternoon on June 30. The House approved the 30-day stopgap budget, 87 to 7. State representatives who voted no were Democrats Vicki Lensing, Mary Mascher, Mary Wolfe, Cindy Winckler and Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, and Republicans Tom Shaw and Kim Pearson.

The Health and Human Services budget conference committee report passed the Iowa House by a 61 to 33 vote. Most Republicans present voted yes, and most Democrats present voted no. Eight Democrats voted yes: Dennis Cohoon, Curt Hanson, Dan Muhlbauer, Brian Quirk, Andrew Wenthe, Chris Hall, Helen Miller, and Lisa Heddens. Four Republicans voted no: Kim Pearson, Glen Massie, Tom Shaw, and Jason Schultz. In other words, Republicans had the votes to pass the health and human services budget without any support from House Democrats.

The Iowa Senate approved the health and human services budget by a 27 to 18 vote. I don’t know yet who crossed party lines but will update once the Senate Journal containing roll call votes has been published.

After the jump I’ve added more details on the compromise Medicaid abortion coverage language. According to State Senator Jack Hatch, there will be “no change” to the circumstances in which Iowa women can receive Medicaid coverage for abortion costs.

Scroll to the end of this post for closing statements from House and Senate leaders of both political parties. Everyone sounds relieved to see the end of the third-longest session in Iowa legislature history.

About 61 percent of Iowa registered voters, including overwhelming majorities of Democratic and no-party voters, support same-sex marriage rights, according to a new survey conducted by graduate students at Drake University. The same survey indicated that 62.5 percent of Iowa voters oppose a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage. Those are the highest levels of support for marriage equality I’ve seen in any Iowa polling. I am skeptical that an opinion poll conducted in a more traditional way would find similar numbers.

More results from the online survey and details about its methodology are after the jump.

The Cedar Rapids City Council has rescinded a project labor agreement approved last December for the $75 million downtown Convention Complex project. Governor Terry Branstad’s administration said it would withhold $15 million in I-JOBS state funding for the convention project, because Cedar Rapids had violated his executive order against project labor agreements (full text of order here). Cedar Rapids Mayor Ron Corbett and other city officials maintained that the governor’s executive order did not apply to project labor agreements signed before Branstad took office.

The dispute seemed likely to be settled in court after the governor rejected two compromise offers from Corbett. However, the convention center is a crucial part of Cedar Rapids’ downtown revitalization plans, and construction could not go forward without the $15 million in I-JOBS money. So Corbett negotiated a different solution:

In turn, the city has agreed to rescind the project’s project labor agreement – the governor opposes such agreements on public projects – between the city and the Cedar Rapids/Iowa City Building and Construction Trades Council.

Meanwhile, the city is promising the trades council that the city will use a project labor agreement on the $21-million renovation of the city-owned Five Seasons Hotel next to the Convention Complex and the new $10-million parking ramp across First Avenue East from the hotel and Convention Complex. Neither project involves state funds.

“Everybody gets a little, everybody gives a little,” said Corbett, a former speaker of the Iowa House of Representatives. “We have an agreement with all the parties, and that’s how compromise is supposed to work. … Ultimately, the taxpayer wins because they aren’t involved in a costly legal dispute.” […]

The City Council voted last night to formally rescind the existing agreement with the trades council and to develop a new project labor agreement with the council on the hotel and ramp projects.

According to Rick Smith of the Cedar Rapids Gazette, federal litigation is pending over the Branstad administration’s decision to set aside project labor agreements on state-funded projects in Coralville and Marshalltown. The Central Iowa Building and Construction Trades Council and the Cedar Rapids/Iowa City Building and Construction Trades Council jointly filed that lawsuit.

UPDATE: I agree with Todd Dorman:

I’m a little disappointed that we’ll probably never get an definitive answer on whether Branstad’s order, as it applies in local projects like this one, oversteps his executive authority. The order as written is remarkably broad and sweeping and seems to extend the governor’s power far beyond the executive branch he controls. It reads a lot like legisaltion, and that, as the term implies, is usually the job of the Legislature.

Essentially, the legislature approved a state grant program in a a bill signed by a governor, in this case the Big Lug [Chet Culver]. Then, Branstad takes office and issues an order that in turn modifies the terms of that legislation, and for that matter, any legislation that hands out state dollars for a local projects, without any legislative input or approval. Enforcing his order amounts to the deappropriation of millions of dollars simply by executive edict.

I’m not sure why any lawmakers, regardless of party, would be OK with that sort of precedent. Republicans who think it’s swell now won’t feel that way when a Democratic governor takes Branstad’s precedent and runs.

The Branstad administration’s disregard for local authority is one of the most under-reported stories of the year. I’m not talking only about this executive order, but also about Branstad’s preferred property tax reform plan and zero growth for K-12 budgets, both of which would leave local officials with fewer options.

President Barack Obama visited the Alcoa Davenport Works on Tuesday to tout his economic policies. One of the largest employers in the Quad Cities area, the Alcoa plant “returned to its pre-recession employment numbers and is hiring more workers this summer,” thanks to a new supply agreement with the European firm Airbus. Obama said the economic crisis that began before he took office “demanded that we make some tough decisions — decisions that we now know have pulled our economy back from the brink and put us on a better path.” In particular, he mentioned federal aid for worker training and a federal program designed to connect engineering universities with manufacturers. The president also praised Alcoa managers for adapting to market conditions, changing an outmoded sheet metal product to a product now in high demand.

It’s fantastic that Alcoa Davenport Works is back to pre-recession employment, and the jobless rate in the Quad Cities is about 6.6 percent, well below the national average. But in most of the United States, unemployment and underemployment are still at historically high levels. The Department of Labor’s jobs report for May was “very disappointing,” prompting the Calculated Risk blog to note, “This is a better pace of payroll job creation than last year, but the economy still has 6.95 million fewer payroll jobs than at the beginning of the 2007 recession. At this pace (157 thousand jobs per month), it will take almost 4 years just to get back to the pre-recession level, or sometime in late 2014 or early 2015!”

I don’t see how photo ops will convince American voters that Obama has helped put the economy on the right track. When bringing down the unemployment rate should be the administration’s top priority, Obama has bought into austerity politics instead. Probably sometime within the next month, he will agree to another major drag on the economy (big federal spending cuts) as a price for getting Congress to raise the debt ceiling. Conservative commentator David Frum argued persuasively here that “Obama is his own worst enemy”:

With unemployment at 10% and interest rates at 1%, the president got persuaded that it was debt and interest that trumped growth and jobs as Public Issue #1.

[…] Back in 2008, Obama made two big promises: a tax cut for everybody earning less than $250,000 and an Afghan surge. […] In the very different circumstances of 2009, both promises rapidly showed themselves to be counter-productive. The “tax cut” promise caused Obama to direct almost one-third of his big stimulus into an individual tax rebate that no economist would have regarded as effective, for reasons explained by Milton Friedman more than 40 years ago. […] He proceeded with both, leading to the two biggest problems of his presidency: a stimulus that added hugely to the national debt while under-delivering on jobs and an expanded Afghanistan war that must end in a reversion to the same disappointing status quo that prevailed before the Afghan surge. Obama probably anticipated both results. And yet he staggered forward anyway. As ready as Obama is to surrender to uncongenial political pressures, he is strangely inattentive to negative real-world results.

Share any thoughts about Obama’s Iowa visit or economic policy in this thread. After the jump I’ve posted statements released by Democratic Representatives Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack. The Quad Cities area has been part of the first Congressional district (Braley’s territory), but under Iowa’s new map Scott County will be in the second district, where Loebsack is running for re-election in 2012.

Advocates for more sustainable food and agriculture policies are alarmed by cutbacks Des Moines Register management announced last week. Closing the newspaper’s Washington bureau and laying off agriculture correspondent Philip Brasher will leave the public less informed about decision-making in the capital, with implications far beyond the Register’s circulation area in Iowa.

U.S. House members lack consensus on the three-month-old military intervention in Libya, and so do Iowa’s five representatives to that body, judging from two votes taken on June 24. Details on the failed attempts to either authorize or defund our mission in Libya are after the jump.

The Des Moines Register’s new poll of 400 likely Republican caucus-goers indicates that Representative Michele Bachmann is gaining ground. Selzer and Co surveyed Iowans between June 19 and 22, and the margin of error for the sample of likely caucus-goers is plus or minus 4.9 percent. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney leads the field with 23 percent support, but he has already indicated that he won’t invest heavily in Iowa this cycle. Bachmann nearly matched Romney in the Register’s poll with 22 percent. Former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain placed a distant third with 10 percent, followed by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Representative Ron Paul (7 percent each), former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (6 percent), former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (4 percent) and former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman (2 percent).

Romney’s best numbers are among moderates, people with less than a college education, and those earning less than $50,000 per year. Bachmann did particularly well with respondents who are very conservative, well-educated and/or between the ages of 45 and 64. The encouraging poll numbers will give her more buzz just as she is scheduled to formally announce her candidacy (for the second or third time) in Waterloo on June 27.

The results are terrible for Pawlenty, who doesn’t seem to be getting any traction out of his large staff and many Iowa visits. Putting a less-bad spin on the numbers,

Republican pollster Randy Gutermuth pointed out that the Iowa Poll took place before Pawlenty’s television ads, direct mail and other paid voter outreach had time to penetrate.

“It’s way too early to be writing off Tim Pawlenty,” said Gutermuth, who is not affiliated with any presidential candidate. “I’m sure they’d rather be leading today, but I don’t think they’re jumping out of buildings either.”

Maybe not jumping out of buildings, but eager to change the subject as soon as this poll came out. On June 26, Pawlenty’s campaign announced the formation of an Iowa Legislative Steering Committee. Legislators serving on the committee cover all regions of the state: Iowa Senators Randy Feenstra (district 2), Rob Bacon (district 5) and Shawn Hamerlinck (district 42), and State Representatives Chip Baltimore (district 48), Joel Fry (district 95), Erik Helland (district 69), Chris Hagenow (district 59), Steve Lukan (district 32), Linda Miller (district 82) and Matt Windschitl (district 56). Unfortunately for Pawlenty, all the endorsements in the world won’t turn things around unless the candidate starts connecting with caucus-goers. Right now Bachmann leads him even as a second choice for Iowans who prefer Romney–and that’s without any of the candidates picking apart Pawlenty’s fiscal record and heavy state borrowing.

Speaking of the Register’s opinion polls and caucus coverage, the Sunday paper announced that Jennifer Jacobs will be the Register’s chief political writer. She replaces Thomas Beaumont, who took a job with the Associated Press this spring.

Any comments about the Republican presidential race are welcome in this thread.

UPDATE: Douglas Burns tells us what a top British bookmaker says. Even before this poll was released, Ladbrokes gave Bachmann the best chance of winning the Iowa caucuses.

SECOND UPDATE: More detailed questions results from the new Iowa poll are here. I’ve highlighted some interesting results from the “issue” questions after the jump.

Iowa legislative leaders made significant progress toward avoiding a government shutdown this week. After the Senate approved new budget bills on Tuesday and Wednesday, negotiators reached new compromises on Thursday. Conference committees cut deals on two-year budgets for economic growth, justice and agriculture/natural resources. The Iowa Senate then passed those three compromise bills on Friday with bipartisan majorities. Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal expressed confidence that the House and Senate can finish work on the budget in time for the end of the fiscal year on June 30. Early next week I’ll publish more details on the budget compromises taking shape. To my knowledge, statehouse Democrats and Republicans are still far from agreeing on property tax reform, which Governor Terry Branstad has said must get done this year.

Branstad won a major victory by getting legislators to pass a two-year budget. Senate Democrats had previously warned that biennial budgeting would facilitate a “power grab” by the governor. On Friday the Iowa Senate unanimously approved a bill to address that concern, limiting how much money the governor can transfer between legislative sessions.

The Rebuild Iowa Office, a temporary agency created by then-Governor Chet Culver after the historic 2008 floods, closed this week as scheduled. Lynn Campbell published a good piece about the office and its work. The closure isn’t timely, as western Iowa deals with major flooding along the Missouri River.

“We still feel that there is a need for a recovery office of some sort – they can call it whatever they want – to continue to focus on all these disasters that are happening over and over again,” said Ron Randazzo, Rebuild Iowa’s strategic planner. […]

Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division now will be the lead agency for the state’s disaster response and recovery.

But Susan Judkins Josten, RIO’s intergovernmental affairs director, said the Legislature hasn’t acted on a transition plan and hasn’t required the homeland security division to change its operations. The state also doesn’t have plans to retain the knowledge developed by RIO.

Leading Iowa Republicans aren’t worried. House Speaker Kraig Paulsen told Campbell that he never supported creating a separate office to handle disaster recovery efforts. Governor Terry Branstad was scathing in comments to Rod Boshart:

“I think it really turned out to be kind of an ineffective agency and I think the Legislature was right in their decision in 2009 to sunset it,” the governor said. “All RIO did was paper shuffling and coordination. […]”

Branstad said he believes his administration has established a better system of direct accountability and management by having the state’s Homeland Security and Emergency Management agency take the lead on dealing with disasters such as the current flooding along the Missouri River, while other state agencies address funding issues with the federal government, public safety and other issues.

“In my opinion there’s been money wasted in having an extra layer” that has now been eliminated, the governor said. “When you have to go through a coordinating agency and you have the paperwork involved, it just slows things down. I think the change will be for the better, speed things up, cost us less, be much more efficient and make it possible for people to get straight answers quicker.”

Democratic State Senator Rob Hogg praised RIO officials for keeping the focus on flood prevention efforts as well as disaster recovery. I share Hogg’s concern that in RIO’s absence, no state agency will push for better floodplain management in Iowa. Branstad did virtually nothing on that front after Iowa’s 1993 flooding (at the time the worst ever) and hasn’t pushed for action since returning to office.

In happier news, New York became the sixth state to legalize same-sex marriage last night. Four Republicans in the GOP-controlled state Senate voted for the marriage equality bill, which Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo immediately signed into law.

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

Six candidates joined the bidding yesterday as the Republican Party of Iowa auctioned off space for the Ames straw poll event. Representative Ron Paul ponied up $31,000 for the best spot to pitch a tent outside the August 13 festivities. Four years ago, front-runner Mitt Romney used that spot, but the well-financed Romney is ditching this year’s straw poll.

The other candidates to pay at least $15,000 for guaranteed spots at the venue and on the straw poll ballot were Representative Michele Bachmann, former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain, former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, and (coming way out of right field) Representative Thad McCotter of Michigan. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was conspicuously absent from the bidding. Candidates who didn’t bid yesterday may secure a spot on the straw poll ballot later. Among the possibilities: Texas Governor Rick Perry.

Follow me after the jump for more on the Republican campaign trail in Iowa, including new endorsements and Pawlenty’s first television commercial.

Yesterday the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved H.R. 2018, the “Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011.” Environmental groups have dubbed this legislation the “Dirty Water Bill of 2011.” Iowa Democrat Leonard Boswell was in the majority that approved the bill 35 to 19, even though no the committee held no public hearings to determine the bill’s impact on water pollution. The roll call (pdf) shows that 30 Republicans and five Democrats voted yes, while 18 Democrats and one Republican voted no.

H.R. 2018 would amend the Clean Water Act “to preserve the authority of each State to make determinations relating to the State’s water quality standards, and for other purposes.” The House Transportation Committee says the bill “restricts EPA’s ability to second-guess or delay a state’s permitting and water quality certification decisions under the CWA after the federal agency has already approved a state’s program.” So, in states where major polluting industries have political clout, citizens would lose federal water quality protections. As Kate Sheppard observes, “In practice this would mean each individual state gets oversight over water policy, taking us back to the days of the Cuyahoga River fire and Love Canal, before Congress passed a federal law in 1972.”

Members of Congress introduced this bill last month in response to draft guidelines that the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers released in April. Those guidelines were designed to address two Supreme Court rulings from the past decade, which “narrowly interpreted the scope of waters covered by the [Clean Water] Act, putting in doubt pollution safeguards for many vital wetlands, lakes and streams.” Click here for more background on those court rulings.

Boswell is the only Iowan currently serving on the transportation committee. His office did not release a statement on H.R. 2018 and has not yet responded to my request for comment on why he voted for this bill. I will update this post with Boswell’s explanation if and when I receive it. The EPA has said that agricultural runoff is the biggest source of pollution in U.S. waterways. Boswell’s voting record has generally aligned with agribusiness interests, and it’s been obvious for decades that Iowa policy-makers have failed to adequately control agricultural pollution.

Eight-term incumbent Boswell faces a tough re-election contest next year against nine-term Republican Representative Tom Latham in the Iowa’s new third Congressional district. It’s a relatively balanced district in terms of voter registration, but Latham is likely to have much more money to spend on his campaign. To win another term, Boswell will need to outperform the top of the Democratic ticket in rural areas of the new IA-03.

After the jump I’ve posted the full text of H.R. 2018, along with a Sierra Club statement describing it as “the most significant weakening of the Clean Water Act since Congress enacted comprehensive federal clean water legislation in 1972.” During yesterday’s committee meeting, Democrat Tim Bishop of New York offered an amendment seeking to neutralize this bill. His amendment stated that none of the provisions in the Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act “would apply to waters that are a source for public drinking water, provide flood protection, are a valuable fish and wildlife habitat, or are coastal recreational waters.” The committee defeated his amendment by voice vote.

FRIDAY UPDATE: Still no comment from Boswell’s office on this vote. I have added below the House Transportation Committee’s summary of H.R. 2018.

President Barack Obama announced a slight change in our Afghanistan policy on television last night.

[S]tarting next month, we will be able to remove 10,000 of our troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year, and we will bring home a total of 33,000 troops by next summer, fully recovering the surge I announced at West Point. After this initial reduction, our troops will continue coming home at a steady pace as Afghan security forces move into the lead. Our mission will change from combat to support. By 2014, this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security.

He asserted that the U.S. undertakes this drawdown “from a position of strength,” as the Al Qaeda terrorist network is now “under more pressure than at any time since 9/11.” He said the U.S. can achieve its goal to allow “no safe-haven” from which terorists “can launch attacks against our homeland, or our allies.” Obama also linked his gradual drawdown to boosting the U.S. economy:

Over the last decade, we have spent a trillion dollars on war, at a time of rising debt and hard economic times. Now, we must invest in America’s greatest resource – our people. We must unleash innovation that creates new jobs and industry, while living within our means. We must rebuild our infrastructure and find new and clean sources of energy. […]

America, it is time to focus on nation building here at home.

We’d have more resources to invest in the U.S. economy if we were bringing more troops home sooner. By the end of next summer our troop presence in Afghanistan will still be larger than it was when Obama became president. He ordered at least 21,000 additional U.S. troops to that war zone before the surge of 30,000 troops he announced at West Point in December 2009. Recent polling suggests a majority of Americans support withdrawing troops from Afghanistan at a faster pace.

We’d also be better positioned to “focus on nation building” at home if the president had not agreed to extend all the Bush tax cuts and bought into the austerity politics that makes another federal stimulus package unthinkable.

After the jump I’ve posted the full text of Obama’s televised remarks, along with comments released by Democratic Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Leonard Boswell (D, IA-03). Boswell praised Obama’s plan “to significantly reduce troops by the end of the year” as “an important first step in lessening our military presence and financial obligations in Afghanistan.” In contrast, Harkin said U.S. troops should be brought home from Afghanistan at a faster pace, saying, “We cannot justify the continued loss of life” and “can’t sustain the nearly $10 billion we are spending each month in Afghanistan this year.” Harkin questioned our presence in Afghanistan following the killing of Osama bin Laden. He was among 27 U.S. senators (24 Democrats, two Republicans and one independent) who wrote to Obama earlier this month urging “a shift in strategy and the beginning of a sizable and sustained reduction of U.S. military forces in Afghanistan, beginning in July 2011.”

I will update this post if other members of Iowa’s Congressional delegation comment on Obama’s speech. Representative Dave Loebsack (D, IA-02) is the only Iowan on the House Armed Services Committee. Last month Representative Bruce Braley (D, IA-01) called for “immediate withdrawal of our combat troops from Afghanistan,” bringing them home by the end of this year.

In related news, the U.S. Senate on June 21 unanimously confirmed Leon Panetta as the new Secretary of Defense. Greg Jaffe reported on outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ reaction to Obama’s speech last night:

“I support the President’s decision because it provides our commanders with enough resources, time and, perhaps most importantly, flexibility to bring the surge to a successful conclusion.” It’s clear that Gates would have preferred the surge troops stay in place through the end of 2012. But his statement suggests he still believes that the military will have enough forces to continue with the current counterinsurgency strategy.

UPDATE: Braley’s statement is now also below. He doesn’t agree with Obama’s plan and wants troops to come home sooner.

LATE UPDATE: Loebsack’s statement is now below.

Five months into Rick Green’s tenure as editor of The Des Moines Register, the newspaper is culling its newsroom staff again. The sad details are after the jump.

Governor Terry Branstad today: “I just want to assure the people of Iowa that I know what I’m doing.”

He has “no written plan” for how state government will function if a 2012 budget hasn’t been adopted by June 30. But no worries, he’s “been through emergencies before,” “understands and respects the responsibility that I have” and will use emergency powers if necessary to provide “the services the people need.” Anyway, Branstad told reporters, “There’s not going to be a shutdown.”

This budget standoff should have been resolved weeks ago, and the governor has been a big part of the problem. Despite improving state revenue collections, Branstad demanded significant cuts in education and human services when submitting his draft budget in January. A few months later, he line-item vetoed a Democratic tax cut priority, having raised no objections to that policy when legislators negotiated that bill with the governor’s staff in the room.

When the Iowa legislature’s scheduled adjournment date passed with little progress toward a 2012 budget, Branstad said don’t worry, we have plenty of time, we just need to “get serious” about working things out with “patience and perseverance.” But instead of advocating for a middle ground between House Republicans and Senate Democrats, Branstad decided in May to insist on the House Republican general fund spending target ($5.99 billion). That figure was about $160 million less than what Branstad proposed in his own draft budget. Moving away from the middle ground made no sense, because by the spring, Iowa’s revenue projections for fiscal year 2012 had improved compared to late last year.

Now Senate Democrats have agreed to the Republican overall spending target, but the governor won’t make significant concessions on Democratic funding priorities. The parties are still far apart on spending levels for human services, for example.

Iowans deserve more from Branstad than “trust me,” the government won’t shut down, and if it does, I know what to do.

Catching up on news from Congress, the U.S. House on June 16 approved an Agriculture appropriations bill for fiscal year 2012. House Republican leaders worked hard to whip up support for the bill, which squeaked through on a 217 to 203 vote (roll call). Of Iowa’s five House members, only Republican Tom Latham (IA-04) voted for final passage. He is close to House Speaker John Boehner. Steve King (IA-05) was among 19 Republicans to vote no; that group included “tea party” favorites like Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, Ron Paul of Texas and Jeff Flake of Arizona. Every Democrat present voted against the agriculture appropriations measure, including Iowans Bruce Braley (IA-01), Dave Loebsack (IA-02), and Leonard Boswell (IA-03).

Latham did not send out a news release on passage of this bill, which is odd, since he serves on the House Appropriations Committee. Then again, Latham also didn’t officially comment on House passage of the Defense Authorization Act last month.

Many Democrats opposed the agriculture appropriations bill because of big spending cuts like $600 million less for the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) nutrition program and a $30 million less for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. That commission is supposed to protect the public from fraud and manipulation of commodities markets. Loebsack and Boswell didn’t release statements explaining their vote against the agriculture appropriations legislation, despite the fact that Boswell serves on the House Agriculture Committee. Braley charged that the bill would hurt the Iowa economy in this statement to the media on June 16:

“Since the start of this Congress, we’ve seen a sustained attack on Iowa farmers and our state’s economy. This bill is just the latest to threaten the thousands of jobs that depend on agriculture and the ethanol industry. I voted against previous bills that threatened Iowa jobs and I voted against this bill today because I will always stand up for Iowa farmers, jobs and our middle class families.”

King didn’t draw attention to his vote against final passage of the appropriations measure, but he hailed the House votes on both of his amendments (only one of which passed). King’s statements and background on his amendments are after the jump. I also discuss how the Iowa delegation voted on other important amendments brought to the floor during two hours of debate. Sometimes all five Iowans voted the same way, sometimes they split on party lines, and sometimes King stood alone.

Iowa’s current fiscal year ends on June 30, which gives Governor Terry Branstad, Republican leaders in the Iowa House and Democratic leaders in the Iowa Senate just ten days to approve a 2012 budget without disrupting state government operations. Although the parties have settled on a total spending target for the next fiscal year, they are still at odds over funding for key programs. They appear to have made no progress toward a compromise on commercial property tax reform, which Branstad demands as part of any final budget deal.

Lots of links on spending priorities, rival tax proposals and government shutdown scenarios are after the jump.

UPDATE: Scroll to the end for further details Senate Democrats released on June 20 regarding a budget compromise.