Hours before three controversial PATRIOT Act provisions were set to expire, Congress approved a bill extending the provisions until June 1, 2015. At the Open Congress blog, Donny Shaw summarized the legal points:

They include the authority for “roving” wiretaps that allows the government to monitor computers that may occasionally be used by suspected terrorists, the “tangible records provision” that requires banks, telecoms and libraries to hand over any customer information the government requests without being allows to inform the customer, and the “lone wolf” provision allowing the government to track terrorists acting independently of any foreign power or organization.

Congress approved a three-month extension of those provisions in February. The bill that just passed was a compromise between House Republican and Senate Democratic leaders who disagreed on how far to extend the powers. A House bill would have extended the “lone wolf” authority permanently and the others for six and a half years. A Senate bill would have extended all three powers until the end of 2013.

Many senators have complained that the PATRIOT Act provisions in question undermine civil liberties, but few had the stomach to filibuster the bill when the Senate considered a motion to proceed on May 23. Iowans Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley were among the 74 senators voting for considering the PATRIOT Act extension (roll call). Just eight senators voted to filibuster this bill; another 18 senators did not vote on the motion to proceed.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid used a legislative maneuver to block various amendments seeking to reform the PATRIOT Act from receiving votes on the floor yesterday. The Senate voted on just two amendments, both submitted by Republican Rand Paul. Motions to table those amendments passed with overwhelming majorities, 91 to 4 and 85 to 10. Both Harkin and Grassley voted to table Paul’s amendments.

Harkin and Grassley disagreed on final passage of the bill, however, as they did when the last extension came to a vote in February. Grassley was among 72 senators voting for the four-year PATRIOT Act extension; Harkin was among the 23 voting against it (roll call).

The bill then went to the House for consideration. After some debate it passed on Thursday evening by a vote of 250 to 153. The roll call shows that Democrat Leonard Boswell (IA-03) and Republicans Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05) all voted yes, while Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) voted no, with the majority of their caucus. Quite a few House members crossed party lines on this bill; 31 Republicans voted no, while 54 Democrats voted yes. Iowa’s House delegation split the same way in February when the three-month PATRIOT Act extension passed.

After the House voted to concur with the Senate amendment to the bill, the PATRIOT Act extension went to President Barack Obama’s desk. Because the president is in France, White House officials said Obama signed the bill before midnight using some kind of “autopen” machine. That’s the first I ever heard of that technology.

After the jump I’ve posted a memo from Grassley on the PATRIOT Act extension, which the Republican senator’s office sent to the media on Thursday evening. At this writing I have not seen press releases on this vote from Harkin, Braley, Loebsack, Boswell, Latham or King.

Glenn Greenwald wrote a good post on the cynicism of Democrats who have been using the Republican talking points of yesteryear to browbeat colleagues into rubber-stamping the PATRIOT Act extension.

UPDATE: Added King’s press release on this vote after the jump.

James Hill of ABC News reported this week,

The United States Department of Justice has green-lighted the prosecution of former presidential candidate John Edwards for alleged violations of campaign laws while he tried to cover up an extra-marital affair, ABC News has learned. […]

Edwards has been the focus of a lengthy federal investigation focusing on hundreds of thousands of dollars allegedly provided by two wealthy supporters. The government will contend those were illegal donations that ultimately went to support and seclude his mistress, Rielle Hunter.

Some unnamed sources suggest Edwards’ legal team is working on a plea agreement so that he would not have to stand trial. But a high-powered attorney for Edwards, former White House counsel Greg Craig, sounds ready to fight, asserting that “not one penny from the Edwards campaign was involved,” there is “no civil or criminal precedent for such a prosecution,” and the “Justice Department has wasted millions of dollars and thousands of hours on a matter more appropriately a topic for the Federal Election Commission to consider, not a criminal court.” Ben Smith reports for Politico that Craig

is said to be pushing for a trial and arguing that prosecutors will not be able to win in the vague and untested terrain of campaign-finance law – as he made clear in a defiant statement to reporters Wednesday. Edwards’s longtime friend and lawyer Wade Smith, a fellow veteran of the North Carolina courts, is said to be more inclined to settle. And Edwards himself appears, associates say, to be sorely tempted to take his chances in an arena that made his career and his fortune.

“John needs money. He needs to work, so he can’t give up his law license,” said a source who knows Edwards but who requested anonymity. “He thinks, ‘I get in that courtroom, I get in front of a North Carolina jury…’ “

For the sake of Edwards’ three children under age 18, I would advise him to settle in order to avoid jail time. But I don’t know the legal terrain and have no idea what his chances would be to escape conviction. If conducting an affair during a presidential campaign is any guide, Edwards isn’t risk-averse. Then again, Craig may just be posturing to negotiate a better plea deal for his client.

As far as I know, the money allegedly used to cover up Edwards’ affair came from large donations to his One America Committee (a PAC)–not his 2008 presidential campaign funds. I don’t know whether that makes any difference as a point of law.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

UPDATE: Defense attorney Jeralyn Merritt discusses the case here:

If the U.S. Attorney is demanding a plea to a felony count, I suspect John Edwards will fight. I hope he does. Regardless of your opinion of John Edwards and his personal life, he’s the sole parent now to two young children. Mistreating a donation as a gift (particularly if you relied on the advice of your legal counsel in doing so), when there is a paucity of court decisions defining the difference between them, seems over the top.

If Edwards is offering to plead to a misdemeanor and probation, the Government should grab his proffered ounce of flesh and forego insisting on a pound. The only reason to demand a felony is to justify the cost of the Government’s absurdly lengthy and intrusive investigation.

Jan Crawford reports for CBS News on the arguments underpinning a potential Edwards defense:

Edwards’ legal team argues that the prosecution’s theory is unprecedented and wrong. They say there is only one case involving gifts to federal candidates that’s even remotely comparable — and it not only is distinguishable, but also was merely an advisory opinion by the FEC that never has been cited as authority for a criminal prosecution.

In that case, the FEC said a proposed gift to a federal candidate was illegal because the donor wouldn’t have made it if the candidate weren’t running for office. Edwards, on the other hand, had long-standing personal relationships with donors Fred Baron and Bunny Mellon that continued after he withdrew from the race. In fact, Edwards had lunch with Mellon on Thursday.

The U.S. Senate rejected motions to proceed with considering four draft budgets for the 2012 fiscal year yesterday. Democratic leaders scheduled the vote primarily to get Republicans on the record supporting the budget that passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives last month. That blueprint, also known as Paul Ryan’s budget, foresees big changes to the Medicare program and became a central issue in Tuesday’s special election in New York’s 26th Congressional district.

Senator Chuck Grassley voted for two out of the three Republican proposals on the table, including the Ryan budget, while Senator Tom Harkin voted against all three GOP budgets as well as President Barack Obama’s budget blueprint.

Details on the votes and proposals are after the jump.

Two new reports examine how well Iowa and other states are serving people who travel on foot or by bicycle. Yesterday Transportation for America released Dangerous by Design 2011: Solving the Epidemic of Preventable Pedestrian Deaths. The report looks at factors contributing to 47,700 pedestrian deaths and more than 688,000 pedestrian injuries that happened in the U.S. from 2000 through 2009. Iowa didn’t emerge as one of the most dangerous states for pedestrians, but our state did conform to national trends showing ethnic minorities, lower-income residents, senior citizens and children are at greater risk of dying as pedestrians struck by vehicles.

Iowa placed sixth on the League of American Bicyclists 2011 Bicycle Friendly States rankings, but our state scored much better in some categories than others. Falling short in a couple of areas cost Iowa the “silver” or “bronze” recognition that several other states received.

Follow me after the jump for details from both reports and many other transportation links, including an update on passenger rail funding in Iowa.

Governor Terry Branstad seems to have thrown in the towel on his plan to replace Iowa’s universal voluntary preschool program for four-year-olds, judging from comments he made at town hall meetings today:

The budget impasse has dragged on so long Republican Gov. Terry Branstad doubts it will be possible to implement his plan for restructuring voluntary preschool for Iowa 4-year-olds in the 2011-12 school year.

“At this point in time, I think that’s unlikely to happen,” Branstad said May 24 about his plans to implement a need-based scholarship system that would require all parents to pay at least part of the cost of sending their children to preschool. Parents with higher incomes would pick up a larger share of the cost under his plan.

That was greeted with applause at a Branstad town hall meeting in Elkader and at another in Oelwein Tuesday afternoon.

However, Branstad and House Republicans have not agreed to fund the preschool program, projected to cost about $70 million in the 2012 fiscal year. Lonna Powers, director of a preschool in Oelwein, told Branstad and Lieutenant Governor Kim Reynolds that “it’s questionable whether I can hire certified staff and whether families can afford to send their children” during the coming school year without state funding.

The Republican-controlled Iowa House voted in January to repeal the voluntary preschool program for four-year-olds, but the Democratic-controlled Senate stripped that section out of a major “deappropriations” bill. The House again voted to scale back preschool spending in March, but the Senate did not act on that legislation (House File 535).

Education spending has emerged as the biggest obstacle to a broad budget agreement between House leaders and the governor on the one hand and Senate leaders on the other. Democrats contend that with Iowa projected to have approximately $1 billion in various surplus accounts as of June 30, the state can easily afford the $65 million it would cost to fund 2 percent allowable growth for K-12 school budgets in fiscal year 2012. Democrats also say the governor’s proposed cuts in state funding to public universities, private and community colleges are “severe and unnecessary.” Republicans insist on a general fund budget below $6 billion in fiscal year 2012, which would require some cuts in education spending. After the jump I’ve posted the Senate Democrats’ list of 10 budget areas on which they demand some compromise from Branstad. The top five are all connected to education.

This week the budget negotiations have become more productive, according to Branstad and House Speaker Kraig Paulsen. Notably, I haven’t seen such optimistic comments from leading Senate Democrats. Branstad expects a budget agreement by the first week of June, but if that doesn’t materialize he will stay in Des Moines, sending Reynolds on an Asian trade mission he is scheduled to lead next month.  

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland announced yesterday that the organization and Planned Parenthood of Southeast Iowa “have signed a letter of intent to merge into one affiliate by June 30, 2011.” Founded in 1964, Planned Parenthood of Southeast Iowa currently serves residents in seven counties through clinics in Burlington, Fort Madison, Keokuk, Mount Pleasant, and Washington. The merged organization will be called Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and will serve women and men in “twenty-five health centers in Iowa, four health centers in Nebraska and three Education Resource Centers in Des Moines, Lincoln and Omaha.” After the jump I’ve posted the full press release announcing the merger plans.

Once the merger is complete, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland will be the only Planned Parenthood affiliate in Iowa, serving residents across the state. In 2009, the largest Iowa affiliate (then called Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa) merged with Planned Parenthood of Nebraska and Council Bluffs to form Planned Parenthood of the Heartland.

Last December, Planned Parenthood of East Central Iowa signed a letter of intent to merge with Planned Parenthood of the Heartland. That merger is now complete. Planned Parenthood of East Central Iowa was founded in Cedar Rapids in 1980 and had served a five-county area (Linn, Jones, Jackson, Dubuque and Delaware) since 1990.

After a slow start, the Republican presidential campaign is ratcheting up in Iowa. Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty formally announced his candidacy in Des Moines today. Over the weekend former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain made his campaign official too.

Arguably the biggest news of the past few days was Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels ruling out a campaign. Many Republican insiders had hoped he would beef up the weak declared field against President Barack Obama.

Links, quotes, and analysis are after the jump.

Three weeks have passed since the Iowa legislature was supposed to adjourn for the year, and Democratic Senate leaders are nowhere near a final deal with Republican House leaders or Governor Terry Branstad. It’s common for the endgame at the statehouse to take a few extra days, but I had expected more progress toward a grand budget compromise by now. Democrats want at least some allowable growth for school budgets, but Republicans insist Iowa can’t afford any increase–despite the fact that state surpluses at the end of the current fiscal year will be larger than projected.

Some compromise will have to be found over the next six weeks to avoid huge problems when the 2012 fiscal year begins on July 1. A detailed post on disputes over the state budget is in progress, but for now feel free to do some scenario spinning in the comments.

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

It’s a great time to get out and enjoy nature in Iowa, especially if you like wildflowers. Bluebells are mostly done for the year, but there are still a few spring beauties around. Columbine, mayapples (umbrella plants) and Virginia waterleaf are among the wildflowers hitting their stride right now. We recently discovered some big patches of wild ginger blooming too.

Yesterday Senator Chuck Grassley and almost all his Senate Republican colleagues blocked a motion to end debate on the nomination of Goodwin Liu for the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (roll call). Tom Harkin and all but one Senate Democrat voted for the cloture motion. A 40-year-old law professor at the University of California in Berkeley, Liu had strong academic and legal credentials. Conservatives opposed his liberal policy views as well as his criticism of President George W. Bush’s Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. During his confirmation hearing in March, Liu said the conclusion of his 2006 testimony against Alito showed “poor judgment.”

Liu would have been the only Asian-American on the 9th Circuit panel, which covers territory where more 40 percent of Asian-Americans live. Some observers have suggested that Republicans wanted to keep Liu off the appeals bench to prevent him from being a future U.S. Supreme Court nominee. (Similar concerns were raised about Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor when President Bill Clinton nominated her for an appeals court judgeship in the 1990s.) President Barack Obama has drawn criticism for the “slow pace” of his judicial nominations, but he had nominated Liu three times for this post.

Liu was the second high-profile Obama appointee filibustered this month. On May 9, Grassley and most of his Senate Republican colleagues blocked a motion to end debate on the nomination of James Cole for deputy attorney general. The president had nominated Cole for the position in May 2010, naming him as one of six recess appointees in December after Republicans long delayed considering his nomination.

Cole has extensive experience in private practice and in various Justice Department positions. He is best known for being the House Ethics Committee special counsel who investigated then Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1997. Gingrich ultimately paid a $300,000 fine for breaking House ethics rules; Cole discussed that investigation at length in this 1997 interview.

Grassley didn’t mention the Gingrich investigation in his lengthy prepared floor statement opposing Cole’s nomination. Grassley cited the Justice Department’s failure to cooperate with investigations into whistleblower allegations, as well as a 2002 op-ed piece Cole wrote advocating criminal trials in U.S. civilian courts rather than military tribunals for terrorism suspects. Finally, Grassley criticized Cole’s work as an independent consultant hired in 2004 to monitor the insurance giant AIG’s compliance with a securities fraud settlement.

The least convincing part of Grassley’s statement on Cole was this: “I have been consistent in my opposition to recess appointments over the years.” Trouble is, President George W. Bush “made 171 recess appointments, of which 99 were to full-time positions.” I do not recall Grassley filibustering a Bush nominee for any position.

Grassley may have been especially upset by Obama’s December 2010 batch of recess appointees because they included Norm Eisen for U.S. ambassador to the Czech Republic. The U.S. had been without an ambassador to that country for two years, and Grassley was the lone senator holding up Eisen’s nomination. He “accused Eisen of improperly firing an inspector general for partisan political reasons”; Eisen denied that claim. In January, Grassley and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Darrell Issa wrote to White House Counsel Bob Bauer, calling Eisen’s appointment “particularly inappropriate.”

UPDATE: After the jump I’ve added Grassley’s official statements on the Goodwin Liu nomination and the failed cloture vote. I also added the full prepared floor statement from Grassley on May 18, explaining his reasons for opposing Liu. These prepared remarks do not include statements Grassley made on the Senate floor that day, asking rhetorically whether Liu thinks “we’re the communist-run China.” Speaking in the chamber, Grassley suggested that by discussing how conservatives use terms like  “free enterprise” and “private ownership of property” as code words, Liu was implying that “if you get government more involved, like they do in China, it’s somehow a better place.”

Donald Trump’s decision not to run for president put the Republican Party of Iowa in an awkward position, because he was supposed to keynote the party’s June 10 Lincoln dinner fundraiser. While Iowa GOP officials waited to hear whether Trump would keep his promise, even WHO television reporter Dave Price (a favorite among conservatives) couldn’t get a call back seeking comment. The state party finally got the bad news today and released this statement:

Earlier today the Iowa GOP was informed that Mr. Trump will not attend and keynote the June 10 Lincoln Dinner. Citing Mr. Trump’s unique appeal and the close proximity to the event, the Iowa GOP has decided to cancel the 2011 Lincoln Dinner.

Iowa GOP Chairman Matt Strawn issued the comment below following Mr. Trump’s decision to cancel his appearance at the Lincoln Dinner.

“In Iowa, your word is your bond. We are disappointed that Mr. Trump has chosen not to honor his commitment to Iowa Republicans.”

I know three weeks isn’t a lot of time, but I’m surprised party leaders couldn’t find some other well-known Republican to step up at the last minute. The Iowa GOP probably has already incurred printing and other expenses related to renting the Polk County Convention Complex for the event. Now money collected for record ticket sales will have to be refunded.

Maybe Iowa Republicans are better off not hitching their wagon to that horse, though. People with an unfavorable view of Trump greatly outnumber those who view him favorably, according to several recent national polls.

UPDATE: How bizarre.

On Friday, apparently stung by criticism from the spurned Iowans, Trump offered to travel to Iowa and speak if the Republicans would change their minds and hold the dinner.

“I promise you that my speech will be fantastic. My word is my bond,” he wrote to Matt Strawn, chairman of the Iowa Republican Party. […]

The state party’s response was essentially thanks, but no thanks. […]

“Iowa Republicans have moved on,” is all party spokesman Casey Mills had to say Friday afternoon.

A Trump aide released a copy of the letter, in which the tycoon said he had thought it would be inappropriate for him to give the speech once he decided not to run for president.

“I truly believe that this honor should be given to one of the other candidates or potential candidates, who could use this invaluable opportunity to get their word out,” he wrote. “I was very surprised and saddened to read that you canceled the event, and hence, called you immediately to let you know that if you wanted me to be there, I would be ready, willing and able.”

A bill to expand offshore drilling for oil failed to advance in the U.S. Senate yesterday. Iowa’s Chuck Grassley was among 42 Republicans who voted to proceed with considering the Offshore Production and Safety Act of 2011 (roll call). Five Republicans joined every Democrat present, including Tom Harkin, in voting against the motion, which needed 60 votes to pass.

This bill was written as the Republican way to address high gasoline prices, in contrast with Democratic efforts to repeal oil company tax breaks. Although oil market experts agree that more drilling in the outer shelf won’t affect prices at the pump, I am surprised that no Senate Democrats backed yesterday’s motion to proceed. When the House of Representatives approved a different offshore drilling bill two weeks ago, a large chunk of the Democratic caucus (including Iowa’s Leonard Boswell) voted with Republicans.

In other Senate news, Grassley hasn’t announced how he will vote on House Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan’s budget: “[Grassley] said the burden is on Senate Democrats to explain why they haven’t introduced their own alternative budget.” I would be shocked if Grassley voted against Ryan’s plan. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell isn’t whipping his colleagues to vote for the legislation, probably because Democrats plan to make proposed Medicare reforms the centerpiece of the 2012 election campaign. But Grassley doesn’t have to worry about being re-elected.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was poised to capitalize on Mike Huckabee’s decision not to run for president. Gingrich announced his Iowa leadership team last week. Chaired by House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer, who endorsed Gingrich months ago, the high-powered crew includes activist and attorney Craig Schoenfeld as executive director, Iowa House Speaker Pro Tempore Jeff Kaufmann as senior policy advisor, Katie Koberg (former vice-president of Iowans for Tax Relief) as deputy director and Will Rogers as grassroots director.

Huckabee’s announcement sparked a wave of “Iowa is wide open” news coverage, just as Gingrich was set to kick off a five-day Iowa tour. In 2010 Gingrich quietly helped raise $200,000 for the campaign against retaining three Iowa Supreme Court judges, which might have helped him with the social conservatives who were Huckabee’s base supporters.

It all started to go wrong Sunday…

A Republican-led filibuster blocked Senate consideration today of a bill that would end “tax breaks for the five largest oil companies: Exxon Mobil, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips and Chevron.” Click here for more detail on tax breaks that would be eliminated. The 52 to 48 vote in favor of proceeding with the “Close Big Oil Tax Loopholes Act” failed because 60 votes are needed to overcome a filibuster. The roll call shows that Iowa’s Chuck Grassley voted against the motion to proceed, as did all but two Senate Republicans. Tom Harkin voted for considering the bill, as did all but three Democrats.

I’m all for ending oil company subsidies, but this bill was about optics rather than good energy policy. Andrew Restuccia wrote in The Hill,

Democrats’ pledge to continue pushing the bill signals that they view the effort as a winning political issue amid $4-a-gallon gas, soaring oil company profits and growing concern about the deficit. […]

Democrats say the bill would save $21 billion over the course of 10 years, savings that can be used to reduce the deficit at a time of increased belt-tightening.

Those talking points would be more convincing if party leaders had genuinely tried to end oil subsidies when Democrats controlled the U.S. House and had close to 60 votes in the Senate. It also makes no sense to focus this bill on the biggest oil companies, rather than the sector as a whole. Democrats apparently wrote the bill that way because of those companies’ large profits in the first quarter of this year.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told journalists today that he will press for ending oil companies’ tax breaks as part of legislation on raising the debt ceiling. The U.S. hit its current debt ceiling yesterday and won’t be able to pay all its bills if Congress does not act to raise the ceiling by August 2. I believe President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats are playing a losing game by making budget negotiations part of a deal on raising the debt ceiling. When it was time to raise the government’s borrowing limit in 1995, President Bill Clinton wisely refused to let Republicans use the occasion to “backdoor their budget proposals.”

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

UPDATE: After the jump I’ve added a statement Grassley released on May 17, calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to approve the proposed Keystone XL Canadian pipeline project. Grassley depicts that project as a way for the Obama administration to help reduce the cost of gasoline. But an analysis commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy earlier this year suggested that building this pipeline might cause oil and therefore gasoline prices to rise in the Midwest. Environmental groups have raised many objections to the Keystone XL project as well.

SECOND UPDATE: I’ve also added below excerpts from a report by the Congressional Research Service on “the extent to which proposed tax changes on the oil industry are likely to affect domestic gasoline prices.” The report briefly explains the five tax breaks that would be repealed under the bill senators filibustered.

On a party-line 26 to 23 vote, the Iowa Senate today approved a bill to restrict the locations of clinics where abortions are performed after 20 weeks gestation. Senators also rejected an attempt to bring up a broader ban on abortions after 20 weeks.

Follow me after the jump for background and details on the Senate debate, including the various amendments Republicans offered.

I could never understand why anyone thought Donald Trump was serious about running for president. A notorious germaphobe is not going to give up a show on network television in order to work the Iowa Republican house party and county fair circuit. Even if he did, his donations to various Democrats and assorted socially liberal statements would sink him in a Republican primary.

Anyway, Trump confirmed today that his recent speeches and press conferences were just a massive publicity stunt he is not running for president in 2012. President Barack Obama’s team will be disappointed; Trump replaced former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as the candidate they would most like to run against.

Dave Weigel sees the Republican Party of Iowa as the second-biggest loser from Trump’s aborted presidential campaign. Trump is scheduled to headline the Iowa GOP’s Lincoln dinner on June 10. (Weigel says the Regnery publishing house is the biggest loser, because they have a Trump policy book scheduled to come out this summer.)

Iowa Republicans are desperate to get serious candidates out here campaigning. Presidential hopefuls and their PACs bring money to county Republican party committees and GOP statehouse candidates. Governor Terry Branstad’s big message at his weekly press conference this morning was that the race is wide open and everyone has a shot in Iowa, not just social conservatives. Branstad has said he won’t endorse a presidential candidate before the caucuses.

Any thoughts about the Republican race for the presidency are welcome in this thread. After the jump I’ve posted excerpts from a guest editorial in the Sunday Des Moines Register by the former chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party. He claims Iowa Republicans “have marginalized themselves.”

P.S. I’ve never been a fan of Lawrence O’Donnell, but he was right to say that NBC executives should have revealed earlier this spring whether the network had renewed Trump’s “Celebrity Apprentice” for another season.

P.P.S. Seth Meyers got in some good Trump jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner last month.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee announced on his Fox show last night that he will not be a candidate for president in 2012. I doubt many people were surprised, because Huckabee had done little to lay the groundwork for a campaign. Shortly after Huckabee visited Iowa on a book tour earlier this year, his 2008 state campaign manager Eric Woolson signed on with former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty. Several other influential Huckabee backers from the last go-around are committed to other candidates as well, including State Senator Kent Sorenson and Wes Enos (now backing Representative Michele Bachmann) and former leaders of the Iowa Family Policy Center (supporting Judge Roy Moore).

It’s anyone’s guess who will benefit most from Huckabee’s absence. Every poll of Iowa Republican caucus-goers I’ve seen this year has put Huckabee in the lead. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney typically places second in those surveys, but he has signaled that he won’t campaign hard in Iowa this year. Judging from how other potential Republican presidential candidates reacted to yesterday’s news, Huckabee’s endorsement will be highly prized.

This story caught my eye: former Governor Chet Culver is co-chairing the National Popular Vote campaign, which seeks to ensure that the winner of the presidential election is the candidate who receives the most popular votes. Since a U.S. constitutional amendment to abolish the electoral college would never be ratified by enough states, the National Popular Vote campaign is seeking to prevent a repeat of the 2000 presidential election.

I was surprised to see Culver on board. When an Iowa Senate committee approved legislation in 2009 to assign Iowa’s electors to the winner of the nationwide popular vote (if enough other states approved the same reform), Culver spoke out against the bill. He warned, “If we require our Electoral College votes to be cast to the winner of the national popular vote, we lose our status as a battleground state.” Then Secretary of State Michael Mauro also opposed the bill, saying, “Under this proposal, it is hard to foresee Iowa maintaining its dominant role and expect candidates to spend their final hours campaigning in our state when they will be focused on capturing the popular vote in much larger states.” Todd Dorman views the national popular vote campaign as an “end-around” the normal constitutional amendment process, but I support the getting rid of the electoral college by the only practical means available. The president should be the person who receives the most votes.

May is Bike to Work Month, and the Iowa Bicycle Coalition has lots of resources to support recreational or commuter bicyclists. The Urban Country Bicycle blog posted about a study that showed the average worker in this country works 500 hours a year (about two hours per working day) just to pay for their cars.

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

UPDATE: Not surprisingly, Huckabee’s Fox News contract played a big part in his decision not to run for president.

Governor Terry Branstad used his weekly press conference on May 16 to urge Republicans candidates to compete in Iowa:

“This is probably going to be the most wide-open, competitive race we’ve ever had for the Iowa caucuses,” Branstad said. “This is a state where a candidate – with hard work and retail politics, going to all 99 counties and meeting with people and answering the questions – this is a state where you can effectively launch a campaign. And it’s not too late.” […]

Branstad publicly took issue with [former New Hampshire GOP Chair Fergus] Cullen’s editorial, which said, “Iowa Republicans have marginalized themselves to the point where competing in Iowa has become optional.”

“Mr. Cullen couldn’t be further from the facts,” Branstad said. “The truth is that Iowa is a full-spectrum state. I think the primary election that I won last year proves that. I would also point out that the front-runner, Mike Huckabee, made a decision over the weekend, which is momentous. He is not running this time, which means he got the largest block of votes in the Iowa caucuses four years ago and those are up for grabs.”

Cullen’s editorial is here; I posted excerpts here.

Branstad’s close associate Doug Gross, who co-chaired Mitt Romney’s 2008 campaign in Iowa, has long warned that the caucuses are not hospitable to moderate candidates. In November 2008, he said, “[W]e’ve gone so far to the social right in terms of particularly caucus attendees that unless you can meet certain litmus tests, if you will, you have a very difficult time competing in Iowa.” But Gross had a very different message today:

I think this is a different year because largely with Huckabee getting out, you’ll have multiple social conservatives in the race. As a result of that, they’ll divide up a lot of the Caucus vote and there’ll be an opportunity for a mainstream Republican to come in and do surprisingly well here. If I were Mitt Romney and I wanted to be the nominee for president, I’d play in Iowa this time because if you win in Iowa this time you have a chance to win the nomination.”

Talk radio conservative Steve Deace shared his perspective as an enthusiastic Huck supporter in 2008 who has grown disillusioned more recently: “Ideologically, the Huckabee of today sounds a lot more like the Rod Roberts of 2010 than the [Bob] Vander Plaats of 2010.”

Democrat Scott Ourth will run for the Iowa House in the new district 26 next year, he announced today. Indianola is the population center of the district, which covers most of southeast and northern Warren County, excluding Cumming and Norwalk. Ourth lost to Republican Glen Massie by about 950 votes (51 to 44 percent) in Warren County-based Iowa House district 74 in 2010. Taking out Norwalk gives the new district 26 slightly better Democratic performance, but it is still a swing area containing 6,927 registered Democrats, 6,417 Republicans and 6,755 no-party voters as of April 2011. After the jump I’ve posted a district map and Ourth’s campaign announcement.

Ourth works as public affairs director for the non-profit organization Disability Rights IOWA. He was previously director of public affairs for Warren County, and before that worked for Iowa House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Ourth has worked on numerous Democratic campaigns, including Tom Vilsack’s first gubernatorial race, Chet Culver’s 2006 run for governor, and Representative Leonard Boswell’s re-election efforts in 1998, 2000 and 2008. Warren County isn’t in Boswell’s current Congressional district, but it was part of the territory he represented during the 1990s and is in the third Congressional district again under Iowa’s new map. In order to beat Representative Tom Latham, Boswell will need strong Democratic turnout in Warren County (among other things). Ourth could benefit from GOTV efforts for the Congressional campaign.

Ourth’s likely opponent, first-term State Representative Massie, irritated House leaders earlier this year when he helped prevent a 20-week abortion ban from getting out of the Human Resources Committee. Republican blogger Craig Robinson wrote last month, “Without help from the Kent Sorenson and others on the ticket, Massie is going to struggle. [The Iowa Republican] has also heard that Massie is telling people that he may not seek re-election.”

Yesterday the Iowa Senate Ways and Means Committee advanced a bill that would restrict where abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy can be performed in Iowa. The bill is aimed at stopping Dr. Leroy Carhart from opening a new clinic in Council Bluffs without adding new restrictions on a woman’s right to have a late-term abortion. However, Republican leaders in both chambers of the state legislature spoke out against that approach yesterday. Details and next steps in this controversy are after the jump.

UPDATE: Added comments from anti-choice Democratic State Senator Tom Hancock below.

State Representative and Iowa House Education Committee Chair Greg Forristall (district 98) created an unfortunate teachable moment yesterday. A Pottawattamie County deputy stopped Forristall’s vehicle after seeing him drive uphill on the wrong side of Iowa Highway 92, nearly causing a head-on collision:

Forristall told the officer he had consumed some gin earlier in the day. Nearly two hours after being stopped, his blood alcohol content was .276, more than three times the legal limit, according to sheriff officials.

The deputy seized a bottle of gin that was nearly ¾ full from Forristall’s vehicle. He was arrested on a charge of driving while intoxicated, cited for driving on the wrong side of the road and released later on a $1,000 bond.

Forristall issued a statement apologizing to “my family, friends and constituents,” adding that “I fully accept the consequences of my actions.”

I doubt this incident will end his political career. Last year, Republican State Representative Erik Helland (district 69) didn’t draw any general-election opponent despite a drunk driving arrest in the summer. There weren’t many write-in votes against Helland, and he was named House majority whip after the November election.

House district 98, covering Mills County and part of Pottawattamie, is so heavily Republican that Forristall hasn’t had a Democratic opponent the last two general elections. Redistricting put him in the new House district 22, covering most of Pottawattamie outside Council Bluffs. The district has a huge Republican voter registration advantage.

Iowa politicians from both parties have been arrested for drunk driving in recent years. It should not be so difficult for lawmakers to ask someone else for a ride when they feel like drinking, especially if they have had enough to reach a blood alcohol level of 0.276. That level can cause “severe motor impairment” and/or loss of consciousness. It’s lucky that no one was injured before the officer stopped Forristall.

Efforts to move Iowa’s water quality enforcement from the Department of Natural Resources to the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship face an uncertain future in the Iowa Senate after clearing the Iowa House in March.

But even if the DNR retains authority over most of the state’s water programs, the agency will have more trouble assessing the state’s polluted waterways. That became clear yesterday when DNR Director Roger Lande announced more than 100 layoffs, citing anticipated funding shortfalls in the fiscal year that begins July 1. Iowa lawmakers have yet to agree on a 2012 budget, but appropriations for key natural resource programs are almost certain to decline. Lande axed three positions in the DNR’s bureau that monitors water pollution.

Looks like Governor Terry Branstad is getting the “change in attitude” he sought for the DNR. More background and details are after the jump.