Senator Tom Harkin’s commitment to end the abuse of the filibuster hasn’t waned just because Democrats managed to find 60 votes to pass health insurance reform. Harkin discussed the current dysfunction in the Senate with Ezra Klein:

In the past, we’ve always had one or two or three senators who would try to block something. The most famous was Jesse Helms. He could tie people up in a conniption. But the thing is, when he went too far, his leader, Bob Dole, wouldn’t put up with it. Neither would Trent Lott. And later on, even Bill Frist. You allow him to do so much, and after awhile, you say, that’s enough.

Now we have more of the Jesse Helms. The Vitters and DeMint and Coburn, and maybe throw in Inhofe and a couple other newcomers, and they now run the minority. You don’t have a minority leader putting them in check, saying we have to work together. Dole would never put up with what’s going on over there. Neither would Trent Lott. We’ve had 101 objections from Republicans to proceeding. […]

You’re supposed to filibuster something that is a deep seated issue. But in September, we had an extension on unemployment insurance. We had a filibuster that lasted over three weeks. They held up everything. And in the end, the vote was 97 to one. Filibusters are no longer used to debate something, but to stop everything. […]

The idea is to give some time for extended debate but eventually allow a majority to work its will. I do believe there’s some reason to have extended debate. If a group of senators filibusters a bill, you want to take their worries seriously. Make sure you’re not missing something. My proposal will do that. It says that on the first vote, you need 60. Then you have to wait two days, and on the third day, you need 57 votes. And then you need to wait two days, and on the third day, it’s 54 votes. And then you’d wait another two days, and on the third day, it would be 51 votes.

Harkin told Klein he will start looking for co-sponsors for this measure next month. Freshman Senator Jeff Merkley presumably will be an ally, as he has advocated reform of Senate procedures. Unfortuantely, Harkin is likely to run up against stiff resistance, and not only from Republicans. The de facto supermajority requirement for conducting Senate business empowers corporate hacks like Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln and Evan Bayh, who caucus with Democrats but don’t support most of the progressive agenda.

Merry Christmas, Bleeding Heartland readers! Although my family doesn’t celebrate the holiday, I do enjoy listening to Oy to the World, the klezmer Christmas album by the Klezmonauts (samples here). Their arrangements make the songs sound festive, which is surprisingly rare in Christmas music. It’s Jesus’ birthday, after all.

I got a kick out of this cartoon by Steve Sack of the Minneapolis/St. Paul Star Tribune: a Christmas card from the Republicans (NOel).

What’s cooking at your house today? If you missed it last week, read the amazing diary about Christmas dinner in Provence by Asinus Asinum Fricat/Patric Juillet.

I’m not that ambitious, but the kids helped me make gingerbread yesterday. I use the recipe from the Laurel’s Kitchen cookbook: 2 1/2 cups flour, 1 tsp baking soda, 1 tsp cinnamon, 2 tsp ginger, 1/2 tsp salt in one bowl. 1 egg, 2/3 cup blackstrap molasses, 1/3 cup honey, 1 cup buttermilk (or kefir), 1/3 cup melted butter mixed in another bowl. Combine wet and dry ingredients, pour into greased 9 x 9 pan and bake at 350 F for about 40 minutes (a few minutes less in my oven).

My husband used to request noodle kugel every Christmas, but I just made that last week for Chanukah, so tonight we’re having roast chicken instead. After the jump I posted my noodle kugel recipe, adapted from my mother’s to include more protein and less fat and sugar.

On December 23 the U.S. Census Bureau released its last state population estimates before the 2010 census. Swing State Project highlighted this report by Election Data Services containing six different projections for how Congressional reapportionment will play out after the 2010 census is complete. DavidNYC posted charts showing expected gains and losses for various states in all six Election Data Services scenarios as well as in one projection by Polidata.

Sadly for Iowans, we stand to lose one Congressional district under all projections. So do our neighbors Minnesota and Illinois, although Minnesota is close to the edge and may hold on to all its seats depending on the real census numbers. Missouri, which was long expected to lose one of its districts, now appears be holding steady.

The projections reveal how hard the current recession has hit many sun belt states that boomed during the earlier part of this decade. California is no longer projected to gain any Congressional districts, for the first time since 1850, according to Charles Lemos, and the state might even end up losing a district. North Carolina won’t add a district, and Arizona and Florida will likely gain only one rather than two districts, as seemed probable a couple of years ago. Meanwhile, New York will lose only one district rather than two.

The final census numbers could hold a surprise or two, but Iowans will have to manage with only four representatives in the House. The redrawn third district is going to determine whether Iowa retains three House Democrats or has to settle for 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans. Like John Deeth, I worry about our chances running Leonard Boswell against Tom Latham if the new IA-03 includes Story County.

Bleeding Heartland user ragbrai08 wrote a great piece in March reviewing the work of the 2001 redistricting commission and analyzing three possible maps of Iowa carved into four districts.

Guest poster possumtracker1991 took us to an alternate reality in which Iowa has politicized redistricting here. It’s an absurdly gerrymandered map showing how four Democratic-leaning districts could be created in Iowa if we didn’t have a non-partisan commission leading the process.

David Flores, convicted of killing Phyllis Davis in April 1996, may get a new trial, the Des Moines Register reports today:

In a rare move, Polk County District Judge Don Nickerson ruled that David Flores’ constitutional right to due process was violated because a key police report naming another suspect was never turned over to his original defense lawyer.

Nickerson also found to be credible new testimony this year from a woman who said that suspect, Rafael Robinson, admitted he accidentally shot Davis.

Nickerson’s ruling indicated those two elements likely would have affected the outcome of Flores’ trial in 1997. […]

Polk County Attorney John Sarcone said Wednesday he “respectfully but strongly” disagreed with the judge’s decision. He has asked the state attorney general’s office to appeal the ruling to the Iowa Supreme Court on his office’s behalf.

An appeal before the state’s high court typically takes nine months to a year. The court can opt not to hear an appeal. In that case, Sarcone would have to decide whether to try Flores anew or set him free.

The Des Moines Register has a timeline of the Flores case here, as well as a good piece by Lee Rood on seven people who “cast doubt on evidence that helped convict Flores.” Commenting on the case last year, Rob Warden of the Center for Wrongful Convictions at the Northwestern University School of Law

said he’s never heard of an alleged wrongful conviction case in which three separate people came forward independently to name another suspect.

“There’s an extremely high probability that he’s innocent,” said Warden, whose [center] has helped exonerate dozens of people. “The fact that you now have three people who don’t have any connection to each other and no discernible motive to do anything but tell the truth is just extremely persuasive.”

Speaking to the Des Moines Register yesterday, Polk County Attorney Sarcone dismissed the police report implicating Robinson as “two or three levels of hearsay.” I am no lawyer, but if multiple witnesses also say Robinson killed Davis, it is hard for me to believe prosecutors could prove Flores guilty beyond reasonable doubt in a new trial.  

Senators approved the health care reform bill 60-39 as Vice President Joe Biden presided over the Senate’s first Christmas Eve session in at least four and a half decades. It was the expected party-line vote, with Republican Jim Bunning absent.

More updates and reaction to this vote to follow.

Yesterday Tom Harkin asked for unanimous consent to move up the final health care vote to make it easier for some members to spend Christmas with their families, but Republican David Vitter of Louisiana said no.

Speaking of health care maneuvering, Joe Lieberman’s brand has taken a hit this month. It’s no mystery why. As Nate Silver observed here and here, being at the center of the health care reform debate tends to bring senators’ approval ratings down.

Recent polls have shown Chuck Grassley still above 50 percent approval, but with far less support than he has enjoyed for most of his career. He has already been running some positive television ads, but I don’t think he’ll be able to get his numbers back up to the 70 percent range by next year’s election. Nevertheless, Grassley’s Democratic challenger will need to make a broad-based case against him, because his double-dealing on health care reform won’t be the focus of news coverage next fall.

After this morning’s health reform vote, the Senate moved on to raise the debt ceiling. Retiring Republican George Voinovich of Ohio voted yes, making up for the no vote by Democrat Evan Bayh of Indiana.

UPDATE: On Tuesday Chris Bowers previewed some of the key fights coming up as House and Senate members reconcile their bills in conference.

From a statement Richard Trumka of the AFL-CIO released today:

SECOND UPDATE: This chart at the Washington Post site shows how each senator voted, how much he or she has received in campaign contributions from the health industry, and what percent of that state’s residents lack health insurance.

Krusty Konservative launched a haiku contest today, and I figured, why should Republicans have all the fun?

A haiku consists of “three unrhymed lines of five, seven, and five syllables.”

I look forward to reading your entries. Here’s my first shot:

Ignoring record

the MasterCard governor

throws stones from glass house.

I’ll update this post later if inspiration strikes.

UPDATE: Wow, things got nasty over in Krusty’s thread. Meanwhile, I thought of another:

For lack of ideas

or a fresh campaign message,

“Nancy Pelosi.”

MarketWatch reported Monday that investors “embraced the health-care sector” on news of the Senate Democrats’ compromise on health care reform.

Oh no! Representative Leonard Boswell must be quaking in his boots now that the National Republican Campaign Committee is running this robocall against him in Iowa’s third district:

“Leonard Boswell spent 2009 helping liberal Speaker Nancy Pelosi push a massive government takeover of health care, a cap-and-trade energy bill that will increase costs for Iowa workers, and a massive $787 billion pork-laden spending bill that he called a stimulus but that has not helped the Iowa economy. Tell him your New Year’s resolution is to watch his votes in 2010 to make sure he is voting for Iowa families, not the liberal agenda of the Democrat party leaders in Washington.”

For years, Republicans have trotted out versions of this script against Boswell: blah blah blah Nancy Pelosi blah blah blah liberal agenda blah blah blah Democrat Party. It hasn’t resonated before, so why would it work now?

Specifically, I don’t think they will get far running against the stimulus package. Even in a weak economy, Boswell will be able to point to dozens of programs from the stimulus bill that benefited Iowa families. He has brought money to the district through several other bills passed this year as well. The Republican alternative, passing no stimulus and freezing federal spending, would have made the recession far worse.

The health care bill doesn’t even contain a weak public insurance option, let alone a “government takeover.” I don’t dispute that there will be plenty for the Republicans to attack in that bill, but Boswell will be able to point to items that benefit Iowans, such as new Medicare reimbursement rates to benefit low-volume hospitals (including Grinnell Regional Medical Center and Skiff Medical Center in Newton).

Boswell fought for concessions in the climate change bill that weakened the bill from my perspective but will be touted by his campaign as protecting sectors of the Iowa economy. Anyway, many people’s utility bills are lower this winter because the recession has brought down natural gas prices.

It’s fine with me if the NRCC wants to drain its coffers by funding robocalls like this around the country. I doubt they will scare Boswell into retirement or succeed in branding him as a Washington liberal.

In the least surprising news of the month, State Senator Jerry Behn has dropped out of the Republican gubernatorial primary and endorsed Terry Branstad. Behn never looked like a serious contender, and my only question is what took him so long? Credit for the scoop on this story should go to Christian Ucles, who noticed ten days ago that Behn’s campaign website had been taken down.

Behn’s exit leaves four Republican candidates for governor. Branstad and Bob Vander Plaats have the funding and large base of support to go the distance in the primary. State Representatives Chris Rants and Rod Roberts will be cash-poor and without an obvious base. It seems logical that one or both would drop out of the governor’s race in time to run for the Iowa House again. The filing deadline is in March.

Last week Rants told Bret Hayworth of the Sioux City Journal that he is in the gubernatorial campaign to stay and will not run for House district 54 in Sioux City again. He can’t have much money in his campaign account, but if he mainly needs to drive himself around the state and doesn’t plan to run ads, he won’t need much money.

I’ve haven’t heard Roberts rule out running for Iowa House district 51 again, and that district in the Carroll area might be more ripe for a Democratic takeover if Roberts left it open. When the campaigns release their fundraising numbers in January we’ll get a better sense of how broke Rants and Roberts are. My best guess is that Roberts will be the next to fold.

What do you think, Bleeding Heartland readers?

UPDATE: A few days ago Roberts told the Marshalltown Times-Republican, “I have discovered there is a place for me in this field. I have no intentions of backing out.”

Des Moines Rotary voted down an applicant for the first time in the chapter’s history, Rekha Basu reported in her Des Moines Register column on Friday. Susy Robinette is well-known in the community as a former news anchor for Des Moines’ NBC affiliate and a former reporter, anchor and news director at the Fox affiliate here. Apparently 11 members of the club rejected her application because she is now the chief development officer at Planned Parenthood of the Heartland (previously Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa).

Therese Wielage is club president and a personal friend of Robinette’s. “I think Susy would be a good member for any club, but I respect that she’s representing an organization that some people in the club have issues with,” Wielage said. […]

It only takes 11 “no” votes out of 334 members to torpedo a nominee, and that’s just what Robinette got. That disturbs member Joy Corning, the former Republican lieutenant governor. While calling the Rotary a wonderful organization that does good work in the community and world, she said, “It is very unfortunate that a very small minority has inserted their own personal convictions into the process and has done a hurtful thing to a notable woman who works for one of the outstanding non-profits in our community.”

Member Janet Phipps Burkhead, a lawyer and general in the Iowa National Guard, who sponsored Robinette, says she’s embarrassed for the club. “I don’t think that what took place is in the spirit of Rotary,” she said.

[…]The immediate past president of another Des Moines Rotary club, the Rotary Club of Des Moines, A.M., said though its members are conservative, they’re “very open.” In fact, said Dennis Linderbaum, president of the Iowa Health Foundation, he’d happily sponsor Robinette for membership there. He calls Planned Parenthood “a very important organization in regard to women’s health and to the strength of families.”

KCCI-TV reported on the story here. Officials would not release the names of the members who voted against Robinette, but Wielege said they are reviewing by-laws that allow 11 out of 334 members to block an application.

If you know anyone in Des Moines Rotary, you might want to mention that you were disappointed to learn that a small minority of people who dislike Planned Parenthood’s mission took it out on Robinette.

If you know anyone in the Rotary Club of Des Moines, A.M., you might want to mention that it would reflect well on them to welcome Robinette as a member.

Alternatively, please consider donating to Planned Parenthood in Robinette’s honor.

Last night the U.S. Senate voted 60 to 40 to move forward with debate on the health insurance reform bill. All senators who caucus with Democrats voted for cloture, and all Republicans voted against. The breakthrough came on Saturday, when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid secured Senator Ben Nelson’s support with extra money for Medicaid in Nebraska and new language on abortion.

At Daily Kos mcjoan published a good summary of what’s in the latest version of the bill.

Reid reportedly promised Nelson a “limited conference” on this bill, meaning that very few changes will be made to the Senate version. However, it’s far from clear that the House of Representatives will approve the Senate’s compromise. About two dozen House Democrats plan to vote against health care reform no matter what, meaning that it will only take 15-20 more no votes to prevent supporters from reaching 218 in the House.

Bart Stupak, lead sponsor of the amendment restricting abortion coverage in the House bill, has been working with Republicans against the Senate’s abortion language. Meanwhile, the leaders of the House pro-choice caucus have suggested the Senate language may be unconstitutional.

Even before Reid struck the final deal with Nelson, Representative Bruce Braley told the Des Moines Register, “I think the real test is going to be at the conference committee and if it doesn’t improve significantly, I think health care reform is very remote based on what I’m hearing in the House.”

Senator Tom Harkin has done several media appearances in recent days defending the Senate compromise. He seems especially pleased with the Medicaid deal for Nebraska:

The federal government is paying for the entire Medicaid expansion through 2017 for every state.

“In 2017, as you know, when we have to start phasing back from 100 percent, and going down to 98 percent, they are going to say, ‘Wait, there is one state that stays at 100?’ And every governor in the country is going to say, ‘Why doesn’t our state stay there?’” Harkin said. “When you look at it, I thought well, god, good, it is going to be the impetus for all the states to stay at 100 percent. So he might have done all of us a favor.”

Ezra Klein has posted some amazing spin this morning about how the Senate bill is “not very close to the health-care bill most liberals want. But it is very close to the health-care bill that Barack Obama promised.” Sorry, no. Obama campaigned on a health care plan that would control costs and include a public insurance option, drug re-importation, and letting Medicare negotiate for lower drug prices. Obama campaigned against an individual mandate to purchase insurance and an excise tax on insurance benefits.

Those of you still making excuses for Obama should listen to what Senator Russ Feingold said yesterday:

“I’ve been fighting all year for a strong public option to compete with the insurance industry and bring health care spending down,” Feingold said Sunday in a statement. “Unfortunately, the lack of support from the administration made keeping the public option in the bill an uphill struggle.”

Republican Senator Olympia Snowe was about as unprincipled and two-faced during this process as White House officials were. She voted for the Senate Finance Committee’s bill in October and had suggested her main objection to Reid’s compromise was the inclusion of a public health insurance option. Yet Snowe remained opposed to the bill even after the public option was removed last week. Because of her stance, Reid cut the deal with Nelson. The supposedly pro-choice Snowe could have prevented the restrictions on abortion coverage from getting into the bill if she had signed on instead.

Speaking of Republicans, the Iowa Republican posted this rant by TEApublican: “Nebraska And Huckabee Respond To Ben ‘Benedict’ Nelson’s Christmas Senate Sellout.” If you click over, be prepared to encounter mixed metaphors and misunderstandings about what this “reform” does. Still, the rant is a good reminder of how Republicans will still scream about government takeovers even though corporate interests got everything they wanted out of the bill.

Josh Kraushaar reported for the Politico on Friday that the “National Republican Congressional Committee is getting clobbered by their Democratic counterparts on the fundraising front”:

The DCCC raised $3.65 million for the month, and ended November with $15.35 million cash-on-hand. It still holds $2.66 million in debt from last election cycle.

The NRCC only raised $2.34 million in November, and spent $2.16 million, hardly adding to their overall cash total. The committee now has $4.35 million in its account, while still owing $2 million in debt.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Democrats lose 20 to 30 House seats nationally next year. That said, if the NRCC can’t build up a decent war chest now, with unemployment high and support for health care reform sinking, they may not be able to convert favorable conditions into a huge wave. NRCC officials have talked about targeting dozens of seats, but they’re a long way from having the money to fund that many challengers.

The five Republicans competing in a primary to face seven-term incumbent Leonard Boswell should assume that they won’t get much help from the NRCC during the general election campaign. Iowa’s third Congressional district is not among the most vulnerable Democratic-held House seats. That’s not to say Boswell couldn’t lose, especially if Iowa’s employment market remains weak throughout next year. But I agree with David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report, who told the Des Moines Register, “I think it’s fair to say if Democrats are losing any of their seats in Iowa next year, they’ll be suffering large losses across the country.”

If Boswell looks like he is in trouble next year, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will certainly spend money on his behalf. Boswell is in the DCCC’s Frontline program.

Speaking of the GOP primary in IA-03, I got a kick out of Dave Funk criticizing Boswell for securing $750,000 in federal funds for the renovation of the former Des Moines Public Library building (which is now owned by the World Food Prize Foundation). Somehow I doubt third district voters will be outraged that Boswell obtained some federal help for this $30 million project in downtown Des Moines.

Chanukah’s over, but there’s still time to shop for Christmas presents.

Blog for Iowa highlighted 12 great locally-owned places to shop in Iowa. Many of them feature locally-produced foods and hand-made crafts. For those heading to Prairieland Herbs and Picket Fence Creamery near Woodward, I would recommend driving 10 minutes up the road to Northern Prairie Chevre. Their little store carries items from many other local businesses.

If you want toys, clothes or accessories for babies or small children, try out one of these Des Moines-area businesses:

Simply for Giggles

The Stork Wearhouse

Little Padded Seats

VannyBean Baby Organics

The toy store on the lower level of Valley West mall

After the jump I’m re-posting a diary I wrote last December on no-clutter holiday gift ideas. Another way to support locally-owned businesses is to buy your friends or relatives services or entertainment that they might not treat themselves to or can’t afford.

Also consider donating to a local non-profit that means a lot to your loved one.

Please post your own ideas in the comments.

For a guy who claims to be proud of his record, former governor Terry Branstad sure has a funny way of showing it.

On one issue after another, Branstad takes credit for things he didn’t do and evades responsibility for things he did. So, the governor who kept two sets of books boasts about enacting budget reforms that that other people pushed in response to his fiscal mismanagement.

The governor who used state bonding more than once says that politicians who create debt should be voted out of office.

Pressed on his record of expanding gambling in Iowa, Branstad has suggested he had little choice in the matter: “What was I supposed to do? Over 70% of the people wanted it even though I was personally opposed to it.”

Now Branstad is playing the same game on the Road Use Tax Fund and the idea of eliminating federal deductibility from Iowa’s tax system.

David Barton, a self-styled constitutional expert who founded the socially conservative WallBuilders organization, has endorsed Bob Vander Plaats for governor:

“Bob Vander Plaats epitomizes the leadership our Founding Fathers envisioned when they stood up for our individual liberties,” Barton said in a prepared statement. “He knows that it’s the hard work and unfettered creative spirit of individuals made this country and states like Iowa great. He knows that more bureaucracies, more government employees, higher taxes and increased government spending will crush Iowa. And, he’ll articulate that message in winning fashion.”

Here’s some background on Barton’s vision for America, chock full of Biblical interpretations supporting right-wing public policies. Barton spoke to the Iowa Christian Alliance this fall (click that link to watch videos). His organization hosts a large annual “ProFamily Legislators Conference.”

Barton’s endorsement may help Vander Plaats raise money from around the country as well as recruit volunteers in Iowa. Vander Plaats will particularly need financial support from out of state in order to compete with Terry Branstad, who built relationships with many major donors and local activists during his four terms as governor.

I’ll be curious to see whether conservative activists looking to “take back the Republican Party” through primaries will focus on Iowa’s gubernatorial race in the winter and spring. Vander Plaats already has the backing of former presidential candidate and current Fox TV host Mike Huckabee as well as pop culture icon Chuck Norris. Vander Plaats also was featured on the cover of Focus on the Family’s national magazine in November.

The House of Representatives approved the Jobs for Main Street Act yesterday by a vote of 217 to 212. No Republicans supported the bill; the nay votes included 38 Democrats and 174 Republicans (roll call here). Iowa Democrats Bruce Braley, Dave Loebsack and Leonard Boswell all voted for the bill, while Republicans Tom Latham and Steve King voted with the rest of their caucus. (This year has been a refreshing change from 2005-2007, when Boswell was often among 30-some House Democrats voting with Republicans on the issue of the day.)

More details are after the jump.

I’m likely to ignore future e-mails from MoveOn.org Political Action after reading the last two appeals they’ve sent me. They are raising money off the health care reform battle while absolving President Obama from blame for the pitiful state of the Senate bill.

Excerpts from the MoveOn.Org appeals and some commentary are after the jump.

A lot of major Republican donors co-hosted a fundraiser last night for Jim Gibbons’ Congressional campaign in Iowa’s third district. The big names included Bruce Rastetter, Gary Kirke, Denny Elwell and John Ruan, as well as Greg Ganske, who represented Iowa’s fourth Congressional district (including Polk County) from 1995 to 2003.

Apparently none of these people were put off by the ludicrous tax holiday proposal Gibbons floated last week. Geraldine had a great post on that at the Iowa Progress blog, by the way.

If any Bleeding Heartland readers know which major GOP donors are on board with Brad Zaun in this primary, please post a comment or shoot me an e-mail: desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com. I wonder how long it will be before Zaun and Gibbons start attacking each other as well as incumbent Leonard Boswell.

Rival Republican candidate Dave Funk’s been passed over by the GOP bigwigs. I’m curious to see how much he can raise from smaller donors who buy into his ill-informed comments on energy policy and other matters. Will the “Tea Party” crowd get involved on his behalf?

UPDATE: The Iowa Republican published the host list for Zaun’s upcoming fundraiser.

Democratic strategists who are counting on a bounce from passing fake health care “reform” won’t be comforted by the latest poll numbers. Highlights are after the jump.

Environment Iowa posted an important statement here today, and I encourage you to click over and read the whole thing. I want to highlight a few passages:

   *       To avoid the most catastrophic impacts of global warming, the U.S. needs to cut power plant emissions roughly in half over the next 10 years.

   *       Nuclear power is too slow to contribute to this effort. No new reactors are now under construction and building a single reactor could take 10 years or longer, while costing billions of dollars.

   *       Even if the nuclear industry somehow managed to build 100 new nuclear reactors by 2030, nuclear power could reduce total U.S. emissions over the next 20 years by only 12 percent. […]

In contrast to building new nuclear plants, efficiency and renewable energy can immediately and significantly reduce electricity consumption and carbon emissions. The report found that:

   *       Efficiency programs are already cutting electricity consumption by 1-2 percent annually in leading states, and the wind industry is already building the equivalent of three nuclear reactors per year in wind farms, many of which are in Iowa.

   *       Building 100 new reactors would require an up-front investment on the order of $600 billion dollars – money which could cut at least twice as much carbon pollution by 2030 if invested in clean energy. Taking into account the ongoing costs of running the nuclear plants, clean energy could deliver 5 times more pollution-cutting progress per dollar.

   *       Nuclear power is not necessary to provide carbon-free electricity for the long haul. The need for base-load power is exaggerated and small-scale, local energy solutions can actually enhance the reliability of the electric grid.

Click here to download “Generating Failure: How Building Nuclear Power Plants Would Set America Back in the Race Against Global Warming.” Other excerpts from the executive summary:

Nuclear power is expensive and will divert resources from more cost-effective energy strategies.

   * Building 100 new nuclear reactors would require an up-front capital investment on the order of $600 billion (with a possible range of $250 billion to $1 trillion), diverting money away from cleaner and cheaper solutions. Any up-front investment in nuclear power would lock in additional expenditures over time.

   * Over the life of a new reactor, the electricity it produces could cost in the range of 12 to 20 cents per kilowatt-hour, or more. In contrast, a capital investment in energy efficiency actually pays us back several times over with ongoing savings on electricity bills, and an investment in renewable power can deliver electricity for much less cost.

   * Per dollar spent over the lifetime of the technology, energy efficiency and biomass co-firing are five times more effective at preventing carbon dioxide pollution, and combined heat and power (in which a power plant generates both electricity and heat for a building or industrial application) is greater than three times more effective. In 2018, biomass and land-based wind energy will be more than twice as effective, and offshore wind power will be on the order of 30 percent more effective per dollar of investment, even without the benefit of the renewable energy production tax credit. (See Figure ES-2.)

   * By 2018, and possibly sooner, solar photovoltaic power should be comparable to a new nuclear reactor in terms of its per-dollar ability to prevent global warming pollution. Some analyses imply that thin film solar photovoltaic power is already more cost-effective than a new reactor. And solar power is rapidly growing cheaper, while nuclear costs are not likely to decline.

Please send this link to friends who believe we must expand nuclear power in order to meet our electricity needs while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists has also concluded that “the U.S. does not need to significantly expand its reliance on nuclear power to make dramatic cuts in power plant carbon emissions through 2030-and that doing so would be uneconomical.”