Cedar Rapids-based businessman Steve Rathje confirmed on January 2 that he will run for Congress in Iowa’s second district. A press release posted to his Facebook page emphasizes his experience cutting waste and creating jobs as a business owner. He is scheduling appearances around the district for later this month, and his campaign website is here.

Rathje is best known as one of the Republican candidates in the 2008 U.S. Senate primary. He finished third but not far behind Christopher Reed and George Eichhorn. His website indicates that he will be running as a more conservative alternative to Mariannette Miller-Meeks, who was Congressman Dave Loebsack’s opponent in 2008 and is running again this year.

Rathje and Reed will have an uphill battle in the primary, as they will be splitting the votes of Republicans for whom Miller-Meeks isn’t right-wing enough. I doubt either of them can beat her, but Reed probably has a better chance to make the primary competitive than Rathje. Not only has Reed already announced his candidacy in IA-02 and lined up a bunch of county coordinators, he has also received quite a few wingnut endorsements: former presidential candidates Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter, the National 9/12 Patriots, the Minutemen Patriots and America’s Independent Party.

Any thoughts on the upcoming campaign in IA-02 are welcome in this thread. I still find it remarkable that there isn’t a social moderate running in the GOP primary in this D+7 district.

UPDATE: John Deeth took a closer look at Reed’s county chair list and noticed Johnson County supervisor candidate Lori Cardella. When I clicked on the list again, I saw that Reed’s Jefferson County chair is Stephen Burgmeier, the unsuccessful GOP candidate in last year’s special election in Iowa House district 90.

State officials say Iowa’s road death toll in 2009 is the lowest since 1945, the Des Moines Register reported on January 2. There were 371 recorded traffic fatalities last year, although the number could rise slightly if additional deaths are reported from the end of December. Register reporter Mike Kilen noted several factors that helped reduce the number of fatal accidents: Iowans cut back on miles driven because of the recession, cars and roads are safer, and more people are wearing seat belts. Smart policing was also at work:

“The emphasis has really been placed on the drunken driver, with 20 to 25 percent of fatalities involving drinking,” [Iowa State Patrol Chief Col. Patrick] Hoye said.

The state patrol initiated Safe Saturdays this summer, putting more troopers on the roads on Saturday nights during June, typically the deadliest month.

“The (drunken driving) arrests went way up and there was a dip in the deaths,” he said.

We’ll never know who is walking around alive today because state troopers wisely focused on the most dangerous drivers at the most dangerous times. All who devised and carried out those policies deserve credit.

In November Iowa Republicans announced a “Liberty Agenda” that included this proposal:

Restore the number of State Troopers to the pre-1998 level within the next five years.

Since 1998, the last year in which Republicans controlled state government, the number of State Troopers has dropped from 355 to 288.

During the upcoming legislative session, I will be curious to hear how Republicans make the case for hiring as many state troopers as we had in 1998. I don’t pretend to know what the ideal number of state troopers is for Iowa, but it seems like they decided the 1998 level was needed because Republicans controlled state government at that time. Aren’t Republicans supposed to be for using state resources efficiently and not expanding the size of government for its own sake?

Kilen asked Scott Falb, the driver safety specialist for the Iowa Department of Transportation, about ways to reduce road deaths further. Falb suggested several changes but did not mention increasing the number of state troopers:

Improvements to roadways, such as rumble strips on center lines and shoulders and engineering tweaks, would help lower fatalities even more in the future, Falb said.

Proposed laws to restrict cell phone use and texting while driving, added restrictions on younger drivers and seat belt requirements for anyone in a vehicle under the age of 18 would also help lower the number of deaths, he said.

If the legislature decides to restrict cell phone use while driving, lawmakers should note that hands-free cell phones are no safer for drivers than ordinary cell phones. This New York Times piece on distracted driving explains why.  

The Justice Department and U.S. Department of Agriculture have been accepting public comments in advance of a series of workshops on “competition and regulatory issues in the agriculture industry.” The first workshop is scheduled for March 12 in Ankeny.

Francis Thicke, a dairy farmer and Democratic candidate for Iowa secretary of agriculture, submitted this comment to the DOJ’s Antitrust Division. Excerpt:

Economists tell us that when four firms control 40% or more of a market, that market loses its competitive nature. Currently, four firms control 83.5% of the beef packer market; four firms control 66% of the pork packer market; four firms control 58.5% of the broiler market. The turkey, flour milling, seed, and other agricultural markets are similarly concentrated.

The anticompetitive effects of market concentration is further compounded by the fact that some of the top four firms in each market category are also among the top four in other markets. For example, Tyson is number one in beef packing, number two in pork packing, and number two in broilers. This kind of horizontal integration encourages firms that dominate in several markets to manipulate prices in order to increase their market share. For example, when beef and broiler prices are profitable, a firm with dominant market share in beef, broilers, and pork can take measures to prolong the unprofitability of the pork market in order to force out firms that deal only in pork-while maintaining its own firm’s overall profitability through the beef and broiler market sectors.

A good current example of the farm-level effects of market concentration is the milk market. Recently, dairy farmers have been experiencing record losses due to low farm-gate milk prices. At the same time, the largest dairy processor, Dean Foods-that is purported to control 40% of U.S. dairy processing-has posted record profits over the past two quarters. Clearly, Dean Foods has found a modus operandi that enables it to isolate itself from the market forces bearing on dairy farmers.

I am glad to see Thicke raise this issue, which affects the well-being of so many family farmers. I do not recall Iowa’s current Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey or his predecessor Patty Judge sounding the alarm about excessive concentration in the agriculture industry. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Last month the Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering released a report on consolidation in the seed industry, which has left farmers with “fewer choices and significantly higher prices in seed.” You can read more about that report at La Vida Locavore and Iowa Independent.

Blog for Iowa recently published a lengthy interview with Thicke that is worth reading. Here are the links to part 1, part 2, part 3 and part 4.

Clem Guttata at West Virginia Blue is pledging to reduce his carbon footprint by 10 percent and gives you 10 ways to reduce your own carbon emissions in 2010.

Jill Richardson at La Vida Locavore resolves to read “everything by Daryll Ray that I could get my hands on,” and she’s provided a bunch of links for anyone who wants to do the same.

Mamacita at Mother Talkers plans to get rid of 10 percent of the stuff in her house, start keeping a dream journal, make one new friend and get out of some ruts.

I feel so boring by comparison: get more sleep, do 20-30 minutes of cardio 5 days a week and lose 10 pounds. Also, be more patient with my kids when they are pushing my buttons, start holding regular family meetings, light candles every Friday night and read more by Marshall Rosenberg. Finally (and most unlikely to happen), de-clutter my house, little by little.

I like my chances of keeping my food resolutions, though: buy only locally produced meat from sustainable farmers, try to avoid fruits and vegetables out of season (except for frozen ones), make soup once a week during the cooler months and once a month during the summer.

What resolutions are you making for the new year?

Happy new year, Bleeding Heartland readers!

Ten years ago today I was making pancakes when the future Mr. desmoinesdem told me Boris Yeltsin had resigned. I was living overseas and didn’t know I’d be moving back to Iowa someday. I wasn’t reading any blogs and didn’t imagine I’d ever be writing one for a hobby. I didn’t know anything about breastfeeding or babywearing or cloth diapers.

So much has changed for me during the past decade, but one thing remains the same: I stay home on New Year’s Eve to avoid drunk drivers.

There are many “best of” and “most important” lists floating around the blogosphere this week. Here are a few good posts and threads:

Talking Points Memo announced the Golden Duke Award winners for this year.

Annie Lowrey compiled the top takedowns of 2009.

Chris Bowers says the best development of the decade was the expansion of the internet, and the Obama administration’s protection of net neutrality was the “top political moment of the first year.”

Asinus Asinum Fricat lists the best and worst foods and food trends of the decade.

Mother Talkers users sum up the decade in six words.

Links to all of the year’s “I Got The News Today” diaries at Daily Kos, “tributes to American service members who died as a result of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” can be found here and here.

Jerome Armstrong and MyDD users suggested the most important elections and Congressional votes of the decade. My list of the most important Congressional votes: Bush 2001 tax cuts, PATRIOT Act, Iraq War authorization, Medicare Part D, Bush energy bill, Obama stimulus package.

I agree with most of Chris Cillizza’s list of the top 10 U.S. Senate races of the decade.

What were the top Iowa elections of the decade? The Gore, Bush and Obama victories in the presidential races are obvious choices. I would also add Tom Vilsack’s and Tom Harkin’s wins by relatively large margins in 2002, a bad year for Democrats across the country. That was when Iowa Republicans should have realized they had serious problems, but it didn’t really hit them until they lost control of the state legislature in 2006.

What would you say were the most notable statehouse races from the decade? There were so many great races in 2006 and 2008, including Eric Palmer defeating Danny Carroll twice in House district 75. Dave Hartsuch’s 2006 primary victory over Maggie Tinsman in Senate district 41 was another sign that there was no room for social moderates in the Iowa GOP. I’m still disappointed that we couldn’t elect Jerry Sullivan in House district 59 last November.

Aside from elections, the most significant political event in this state during the past decade has to be the Iowa Supreme Court’s Varnum v Brien ruling. Few people would have predicted that Iowa would be among the first states to have marriage equality.

Please post your own memories of the best or the worst from the year and the decade that passed.

One of my pet peeves is when interest groups release rank legislators according to how they have voted on a few key bills. These scorecards can be helpful as a general guideline, but some lawmakers game the system by voting the “right” way on a scorecard issue but voting with the other side on procedural measures. A classic example was when some pro-choice and environmental groups gave Senator Joe Lieberman credit for voting against confirming Justice Samuel Alito, even though Lieberman had voted against the filibuster that was the only realistic way to keep Alito off the Supreme Court.

Progressive Punch has a search engine that lets you view how individual members of Congress have voted in certain issue categories. Even more useful, Progressive Punch has incorporated a “crucial vote” score that includes bills and procedural measures that passed or failed by narrow margins. You’d be surprised by how many Democrats have high Progressive Punch ratings overall but much lower crucial vote scores, indicating that “when the chips were down,” these people were not reliable allies.

But even the Progressive Punch rating system doesn’t tell the whole story, because committee and floor votes aren’t the only way for legislators to exercise their power.

Yesterday Environment Iowa reminded me of the problems with scorecards when the group announced its rating of Iowa’s members of Congress. The scores were based on “seven votes in the Senate ranging from an economic recovery bill with investments in public transit and energy efficiency to legislation saving the nation’s coasts from offshore drilling,” and 15 votes in the House “including funding to make schools more energy efficient and legislation protecting the Great Lakes.” Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Leonard Boswell (IA-03) received 100 percent scores, while Representative Dave Loebsack (IA-02) scored 93 percent and Representative Bruce Braley (IA-01) scored 80 percent. Environment Iowa commented, “These numbers include a few absences from key votes that occurred during the floods of 2008.”

A few things are very wrong with this picture.  

John Nichols posted his annual “most valuable progressives” list at The Nation this week, and he named Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement as the “most valuable grassroots advocacy group”:

For three decades, Iowa CCI has built and maintained remarkable rural-urban coalitions to fight factory farms, urban blight and abuses of Latino and Asian immigrants. In the current financial crisis, the group has ramped up its activism on behalf of banking reforms that free up credit for small farms, businesses and families while cracking down on payday loan operations. When the American Bankers Association held its annual convention in Chicago, National People’s Action called for protests that declared, “We didn’t break the banks–the big banks broke us!” Iowa CCI, long a backbone member of the NPA coalition, showed up in force. Viewers of Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now! got a flavor of the group’s in-your-face activism as Iowa farmer Larry Ginter brought activists from across the country to their feet with his cry, “If you are from rural America and tired of bank greed, stand up! If you are from urban America and you’re tired of bank greed, stand up! If you think it’s time to put people first and hold banks accountable, stand up!”

In January Jason Hancock profiled Iowa CCI for the Iowa Independent. The group has a very large statewide membership and works on a wide range of issues. However, at the state capitol they are outgunned by interests blocking campaign finance reform and increased regulation of factory farms.

You can follow Iowa CCI on Facebook here and on Twitter here.

On Monday Governor Chet Culver appointed Bret Mills as the new director of the Iowa Department of Economic Development. Mills will replace Fred Hubbell, who agreed to serve as interim IDED director this fall after Mike Tramontina resigned due to problems with Iowa’s film tax credit.

Up to now, Mills has been director of the Iowa Finance Authority. Also on Monday, Culver appointed Joe O’Hern to replace Mills as IFA director. For the last three months, O’Hern has been interim deputy director of IDED.

In addition, Culver announced plans to move the HOME Investment Partnership program from IDED to the Iowa Finance Authority: “This not only will help streamline our housing efforts, but it will ensure that IDED is staying true to its mission: attracting new businesses, growing current companies, and retaining and creating jobs statewide.”

The press release from the governor’s office contains more background on the HOME program and short official bios of Mills and O’Hern. Given their qualifications, they should have no trouble being confirmed by the Iowa Senate.

The film tax credit fiasco sparked the turmoil at IDED, and the department won’t issue new credits under that program for the remainder of this fiscal year. However, film credits already awarded will cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.

The upside is that all state tax credits are being subjected to much more scrutiny. Debates about scrapping or scaling back some of the business tax credits will be among the most contentious issues of the 2010 legislative session. Ordinarily, I would not expect legislators to defy any well-funded corporate interests, but this year the budget is so tight that I see no way they can continue with the status quo. Lee Rood reported for the Des Moines Register earlier this month:

Iowa’s incentives for filmmaking may have been the most generous in the country, but they were not the first of the state’s tax credits to skyrocket in cost.

Over the years, other carrots offered by the state to stimulate job creation, development and research have grown dramatically – while sometimes being subject to limited oversight.

A Des Moines Register review of some of the state’s biggest tax credit incentives found state leaders had reason to worry about runaway costs, lack of transparency and waste long before Iowa’s botched attempt at using tax breaks to jump-start a film industry made international news.

That review found the state auditor had identified almost identical oversight problems in another tax credit program; state law required almost no outside oversight of some of the biggest credit programs; and authorities already knew that a portion of projects that tapped the most widely used programs had problems […]

In yesterday’s Register, Rood reviewed five tax credits that “could cost the state more money over the next five years than the film-making tax incentives […] for research, job training, historic preservation, development in distressed areas and high-quality jobs.”  

Congressman Steve King is the guest on Iowa Public Television’s “Iowa Press” program this week. Unfortunately, it sounds like no one on the panel asked our ACORN-obsessed representative about last week’s Congressional Research Service report, which cleared ACORN of violating any federal regulations during the past five years, or about the federal court ruling that halted a Congressional ban on federal funding for ACORN.

But don’t worry, King served up plenty of nonsensical right-wing talking points yesterday. You can watch the program on Iowa Public TV this weekend, but a few highlights are after the jump.

Catching up on some news from last week, the Senate confirmed more than 30 of President Obama’s nominees right before Christmas, including Iowa’s own John Norris for a spot on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Norris and his wife Jackie Norris were key early Obama supporters here. After Obama’s inauguration, Norris served as chief of staff for Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, but he always planned to move to the FERC if possible. He is well qualified for the position after spending several years on the Iowa Utilities Board.

Jackie Norris served as chief of staff to First Lady Michelle Obama for several months before moving to a senior advisor position at the Corporation for National and Community Service.

John Norris’ confirmation was overshadowed by news that the Senate rejected six Obama nominees without even giving them a vote. The most prominent name on that list was Dawn Johnsen, Obama’s choice to head the Office of Legal Counsel. For more on that story, read commentaries by Daniel de Groot at Open Left, bmaz at Firedoglake, and Turkana at the Left Coaster. Senator Ben Nelson helped Senate Republicans stall Johnsen’s nomination in the spring.

UPDATE: Kay Henderson posted Norris’ official bio and some statements reacting to his confirmation at the FERC.

Since few media outlets have a reporter assigned to the labor beat anymore, we’ve heard little this year about one of President Obama’s best cabinet appointments: Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis.

Tracy Kurowski wrote a good post at Blog for Iowa about the Department of Labor’s annual Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities, released three weeks ago (full report here). The gist is that Solis is getting her department “back to the business of looking out for labor rather than commerce.” Some highlights are after the jump, but you should go read Kurowski’s whole post for more details and background.

An alert Bleeding Heartland reader got a recorded phone call around dinnertime today (Monday), featuring former Governor Terry Branstad.

Apparently there were a couple of questions about how Governor Chet Culver is doing and his handling of spending and the budget. Branstad’s recorded voice touted his own record on economic policy.

The call also asked if the listener would support a constitutional ammendment limiting marriage to between one man and one woman, and if the listener would vote for Branstad in the upcoming Republican primary.

According to my e-mail tipster, the call said it was paid for by the Branstad for Governor comittee, and gave a phone number as well as the address for Branstad’s campaign website.

This particular household has two registered Democrats and no registered Republicans, and the homeowner has had the same phone number for more than 15 years. Either the calling firm was using a bad list, or Branstad’s campaign is reaching out to find Democrats who aren’t happy with Culver.

Have any other Bleeding Heartland readers received this call? If so, please post a comment with details, or send me an e-mail at desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com.

Remember, it’s helpful not to hang up on political robocalls or surveys. Stay on the line and take notes, if possible, about the content of the call, who paid for the message, and so on.

UPDATE: Another reader tells me he got the call but hung up on it, and there are two registered Democrats in his household as well.

SECOND UPDATE: If Branstad’s campaign is trying to identify Democrats willing to cross over to vote for him in the Republican primary, it makes me wonder what their internal polling says about Branstad’s prospects against Bob Vander Plaats.

THIRD UPDATE: State Representative Tyler Olson of Cedar Rapids got the call too.

Not content to push for a balanced-budget constitutional amendment in his own state, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty has endorsed the idea of a federal constitutional amendment to require Congress to pass balanced budgets every year. The Wall Street Journal’s Amy Merrick observes,

Previous efforts to pass a national balanced-budget amendment have foundered in Congress. Many lawmakers believe deficit spending can help boost the U.S. economy during downturns, and calls to balance the budget sometimes fade as other priorities surface.

It would be insane to restrict the federal government’s ability to run deficits during a recession. That’s not just something many members of Congress “believe,” it’s a consensus view among economists. But don’t worry, Pawlenty isn’t entirely rigid on the subject of deficit spending:

Mr. Pawlenty’s proposal for a federal amendment would include exceptions for war, natural disasters and other emergencies. The U.S. has been at war for most of the past decade.

No self-respecting Republican ever let spending worries stand in the way of a blank check for war.

Although it’s tempting to laugh at Pawlenty’s proposal, I think highlighting the budget amendment could boost his standing in the 2012 presidential race. His idea isn’t outside the GOP mainstream; leading Republicans proposed a federal spending freeze instead of the stimulus bill Congress passed in February. Republican politicians in Iowa have also embraced Hoovernomics.

The idea could prove popular with the GOP rank and file too. Mike Huckabee gained a lot of traction in Iowa during the summer of 2007 by being the only Republican to endorse the so-called “fair tax.” That idea is even wackier than a federal spending freeze during a recession, but many caucus-goers embraced it.

Any comments about Pawlenty’s prospects or the Republican presidential field are welcome in this thread.

I posted my haiku diary at a few other places and liked so many of the entries.

Favorites are after the jump.

Assuming the House and the Senate pass whatever health insurance bill comes out of the conference committee, Republicans and Democrats are likely to highlight the reform during next year’s campaigns. Recent polls have shown that most Americans don’t expect action by this Congress to improve the quality of their own health care or reduce its cost. Complicating matters for Democrats, key provisions of the bill won’t take effect until 2013 or 2014, giving Republicans plenty of time to exploit fears about the so-called “government takeover” of health care.

After the jump, Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Senator Chuck Grassley preview messages we’ll hear from GOP candidates across the country, while Senator Tom Harkin summarizes some “immediate benefits” of the health insurance reform.

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.