Corporations already have too much control over American political discourse, and that problem will only get worse thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Citizens United case. Adam B posted excerpts from the decision and the dissents.

The SCOTUS blog posted the complete text of the ruling and linked to many reactions and commentaries.

Election law expert Richard Hasen concludes that the court just killed campaign finance reform:

It is time for everyone to drop all the talk about the Roberts court’s “judicial minimalism,” with Chief Justice Roberts as an “umpire” who just calls balls and strikes. Make no mistake, this is an activist court that is well on its way to recrafting constitutional law in its image. The best example of that is this morning’s transformative opinion in Citizens United v. FEC. Today the court struck down decades-old limits on corporate and union spending in elections (including judicial elections) and opened up our political system to a money free-for-all.

The Des Moines Register assessed the impact on Iowa law, suggesting that our state may not be able to continue to ban corporate campaign contributions. (I thought this ruling pertained to independent expenditures by corporations, not direct corporate donations to candidates.) Kathie Obradovich collected some comments from Iowa politicians. Democrats slammed the ruling–not that they’ve accomplished anything on campaign finance reform since taking power.

All in all, a depressing day for our sorry excuse for a democracy. Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread.

UPDATE: Representative Leonard Boswell has introduced a constitutional amendment to overturn this ruling:

“I have introduced this important legislation because the Supreme Court’s ruling strikes at the very core of democracy in the United States by inflating the speech rights of large, faceless corporations to the same level of hard-working, every day Americans,” Boswell said in a statement. “The court’s elevation of corporate speech inevitably overpowers the speech and interests of human citizens who do not have the coffers to speak as loudly.”

Boswell said House Joint Resolution 68 would disallow a corporation or labor organization from using any operating funds or any other funds from its general treasury to pay for an advertisement in connection with a federal election campaign, regardless of whether or not the advertisement expressly advocates the election or defeat of a specified candidate.

“Corporations already have an active role in American political discourse through million-dollar political action committees and personal donations to campaigns,” Boswell said. “The legislation I introduced will prevent the Wall Street corporations that received billions in taxpayer bailout dollars from turning around and pouring that same money into candidates that will prevent financial regulation on their industry. No American should have to turn on the TV and see AIG telling them how to vote.”

Four years ago, Chris Rants was one of Iowa’s most powerful political figures. He won an Iowa House seat in his 20s and rose to the position of speaker in his mid-30s. But politics can be a tough business, as Rants learned when the Republican House caucus lost its majority in 2006 and replaced him as leader after losing more seats in 2008.

Since launching his gubernatorial bid last summer, Rants has logged more than 45,000 miles and discussed policies in more depth than anyone else in the field. However, the powers that be in the Iowa GOP don’t reward effort or substance. This week Rants announced that his campaign raised just $78,000 in 2009 and had $6,400 on hand at the end of December. Even State Representative Rod Roberts ended the year in a stronger financial position despite having a lower profile and entering the race later.

Rants knows how to raise money, as you can see from the Rants for State House Committee filings from the last five years (enter “Rants” in this search engine). During October 2008, ethanol baron Bruce Rastetter wrote Rants checks for $30,000 and $70,000. In other words, one major donor gave the then House minority leader more money in one month than Rants managed to raise in half a year for his gubernatorial campaign. Speaking to IowaPolitics.com,

Rants said fundraising froze and pledges never came through after [Terry] Branstad got into the race in mid-October. “The donor community just clammed up,” he said. “We couldn’t compete.”

Rants said most of his campaign finance money was spent on staff, research, Web development and just keeping his campaign going since last spring. The only ads he placed were online.

“The reality is Terry Branstad will raise more money,” Rants said. “But we will raise more issues. …If issues matter, we’ll have a good spring.”

Rants insists he is in the governor’s race for the duration and won’t seek re-election to the Iowa House. On one level I admire him for not packing it in like Christian Fong did after the money dried up. He is also correct to highlight the many contrasts between Branstad’s current campaign rhetoric and his record as governor.

But Rants’ experience underscores the importance of treating people well. As House speaker, Rants had a reputation for being a bully (or “intense,” driven and “abrupt,” as some of his friends have put it). When you’re up, maybe it works to be feared rather than loved. But when you’re down, people won’t be there for you. After all his years of service in the legislature, Rants has not found a single current or former Iowa House member to endorse his gubernatorial campaign, to my knowledge. Even Republicans will admit that Branstad isn’t too sharp and was a mediocre governor, but he is amiable and connects well with people on a personal level.

Ambitious pols everywhere, take note.

LATE UPDATE: Rants discussed his money problems with The Iowa Republican:

Rants admitted that, once former Governor Terry Branstad entered the race, his ability to raise funds ceased. He said a number of pledges to his campaign never came in, his phone calls were not returned, and raising funds became nearly impossible. When describing his fundraising situation, Rants told TheIowaRepublican.com, “If you are looking for loyalty, get a dog.” He contends that Branstad’s entrance into the race hurt him more than any other candidate in the race.

While Rants lacks the necessary funds to wage much of a traditional campaign, Rants gave no indication that he was about to get out of the race. When asked about how much money is in his campaign account, Rants knew the amount to the penny. “It’s enough to keep gas in the car,” Rants said.

Sounds like he will stay in to the end.

Remember, the off-year Iowa caucuses are this Saturday, January 23, at 1 pm. Democrats can click here and enter your zip code to find your caucus location. Polk County Democratic Party executive director Tamyra Harrison explained the benefits of attending an off-year caucus here.

Some non-profit advocacy organizations have drafted resolutions for supporters to offer at their precinct caucuses. If adopted, these resolutions will be forwarded to the county platform committee. For example, 1000 Friends of Iowa is encouraging supporters to offer this resolution on responsible land use.

I noticed some job listings and other helpful information in the Iowa Environmental Council’s electronic newsletter.

Value Chain Partnerships, an “Iowa-based network for food and agriculture working groups,” has a new website: www.valuechains.org.

The Environmental Law & Policy Center (ELPC) is hiring “a Policy Advocate to work in our Des Moines office to promote clean energy, clean water and conservation projects in Iowa. […] For more information, visit http://elpc.org/category/jobs#… or email Andrew Snow at asnow@elpc.org. Application Deadline is Jan. 30, 2010.

Plains Justice is hiring “a Resource Director who will report to the CEO and work co-operatively with the Board, attorneys and other staff and volunteers to raise, manage and evaluate effective use of financial resources. Demonstrated fundraising success required. […] Contact info@plainsjustice.org for detailed job description. No phone calls please.”

There’s a position open for an “Iowa Great Lakes Watershed Coordinator,” who “will work in Spirit Lake, Iowa, to manage and coordinate the implementation of the objectives of a water quality conservation project and activities, conservation planning and application of practices, information and education and other related activities essential to the district and NRCS.” Application Deadline: January 26, 2010. For a complete job description, salary, hiring requirements, and how to apply, go to http://cleanwateralliance.net/…

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is hiring someone to support its Upper Mississippi River project. “Successful candidates will have relevant academic training in the natural, agricultural or social sciences and experience in environmental advocacy. The position is located in Ames, Iowa. A strong commitment to natural resource conservation, environmental protection, and public health is essential. To apply, submit a cover letter and resume to employment@ewg.org.  For more information and a job description visit http://www.ewg.org/jobs.”

Calling high school seniors: Keep Iowa Beautiful is offering up to four $500 scholarships. “Students across Iowa enrolling in an Iowa college or university to major in community enhancement or environmental areas of study are eligible. Students can download the application on-line at http://www.keepiowabeautiful.c… Deadline for application: must be postmarked by February 1, 2010. Please contact the KIB office at 515-323-6507 with any questions.”

Details about events coming up in the next ten days are after the jump.

Even before the Bay State debacle, Democrats faced no easy path forward on health care reform. If House Democrats like Bart Stupak, Anthony Weiner and Jerrold Nadler are to be believed, there are not 218 votes in the House for passing the Senate health care bill unchanged. Nor should there be, given the weak state-based exchanges in that bill and an excise tax that will encourage employers to downgrade the coverage they provide. Accepting a promise from the White House that problems will be fixed later would be idiotic. If the president didn’t keep his campaign promises to let Medicare negotiate for lower drug prices or allow re-importation of prescription drugs from Canada, why would he keep any promises made to House Democrats now?

Key labor leaders are calling on Congress to pass a separate bill through the reconciliation process (requiring only 51 votes), while “simultaneously” passing the Senate bill in the House. I don’t know what they have in mind for that separate bill besides fixing some of the problems with the excise tax on expensive health insurance policies.

Ezra Klein would prefer something like what labor is advocating (House swallows Senate bill, hopes for fixes through reconciliation), but the other option he lays out here seems far superior to me:

Democrats could scrap the legislation and start over in the reconciliation process. But not to re-create the whole bill. If you go that route, you admit the whole thing seemed too opaque and complex and compromised. You also admit the limitations of the reconciliation process. So you make it real simple: Medicare buy-in between 50 and 65. Medicaid expands up to 200 percent of poverty with the federal government funding the whole of the expansion. Revenue comes from a surtax on the wealthy.

And that’s it. No cost controls. No delivery-system reforms. Nothing that makes the bill long or complex or unfamiliar.

I would add a few more things to that smaller bill, like the money for primary care clinics that Senator Bernie Sanders has been fighting for.

Democrats could then offer the insurance reforms you can’t pass through reconciliation as regular bills. Will the Republicans dare to vote against allowing re-importation of prescription drugs, or revoking the insurance industry’s anti-trust exemption? Will they dare to vote against banning insurance companies from discriminating because of pre-existing conditions? I don’t think so. We should be able to get 60 votes for all of those reforms and more. If we can’t, everyone will be able to see who stood up for consumers and who voted to protect corporate interests.

The smaller bill wouldn’t solve all of the status quo problems with health care delivery, but neither would the Senate bill. Politically, this course would be less risky as well.

Feel free to tell me why I’m wrong in the comments.

Iowa Secretary of State Michael Mauro doesn’t make the news often, but he has done very well in his first term. I particularly appreciate his support for requiring paper ballots to be used in all Iowa counties. We had several statehouse races decided by fewer than 100 votes in 2008. Imagine what an uproar we’d have seen if touchscreen voting machines had been used in those races.

Mauro’s campaign website recounts other achievements:

In 2009, Mauro worked closely with the Cerro Gordo County Auditor to make electronic poll books available for use in counties across the state. The electronic poll books will enhance Iowa precinct officials’ ability to process voters effectively and consistently on election day. In addition, the poll books add an extra layer of security to the voting process.

During the 2008 General Election, Iowa saw the fifth highest percentage turnout in the nation i and had the highest rate of young voter participation (18- to 24-year-olds) ii. Secretary Mauro’s office also took the honor of having the top elections website in the country during the 2008 election season according to a leading national election research group iii. In the fall of 2009, Iowa’s election laws and procedures implemented by Secretary Mauro gained national attention when the state ranked first in a study focusing on the ease of voting for members of the military and U.S. citizens living overseas iv. […]

Since Mauro took office, much progress has been made in the business services division. In 2009, the development of a new corporations database is paving the way for online corporate filings beyond the biennial report. Currently, the majority of business filings are done electronically and advancements for additional filings will continue.

The online business center allows business to be conducted 24-hours a day, seven days a week and currently provides access to over three million filed documents and a complete array of forms, applications, and searchable databases for businesses, lending institutions and interested citizens.

I wouldn’t care to run against that record, but some Republicans seem to think they can beat Mauro. GOP establishment figures have been trying to recruit Paul Pate for this race. Pate was elected Iowa secretary of state in the 1994 landslide. He didn’t seek re-election in 1998, running unsuccessfully for governor instead.  

Pate said in December that he was considering a run against Mauro. I thought Republican recruiters had succeeded when the Iowa Republican blog hyped a bogus poll claiming that Pate already leads the incumbent. This week Jason Hancock reported that Pate had filed papers forming a committee for a secretary of state campaign. However, Pate announced on Facebook this morning that he won’t run for secretary of state, citing “family and business demands.” (UPDATE: Apparently Pate’s parents have been having health problems.)

That leaves two declared GOP candidates for this office. George Eichhorn lost his Iowa House seat to McKinley Bailey in 2006 and finished a close second in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in 2008. He then co-founded an organization opposing Iowa’s public smoking ban, which never got off the ground, and unsuccessfully represented some restaurant and bar owners trying to get that smoking ban thrown out. Eichhorn announced his bid for secretary of state last month. Kathie Obradovich exposed some false and misleading statements in Eichhorn’s opening salvo, and the Iowa Progress blog also looked at his candidacy. Last week Eichhorn released a list of prominent endorsers, including Bill “wingnuttier than Steve King” Salier.

The other Republican candidate in this race is Matt Schultz, who serves on the Council Bluffs City Council. On the issues page of his website, he says he wants to streamline corporate filings, require all voters to show photo ID at polling places, and force all citizens who register to vote on election day to cast provisional ballots. Photo ID laws are generally considered to be voter suppression techniques, and there is no evidence of any problem with voter fraud by impersonating someone at a polling place.

Mauro hasn’t hit the campaign trail yet, but today he released a statement urging Iowans to participate in the Democratic and Republican caucuses this Saturday, January 23, at 1 pm. (Find your Democratic caucus site here.)

VERY LATE UPDATE, March 9, 2010: Republican Chris Sanger is also running for secretary of state.

I’m tired of thinking about the Massachusetts Senate race. Here’s some good news from last week that drew little media coverage.

It confirmed my view that Transportation Secetary Ray LaHood will turn out to be one of President Obama’s outstanding appointments.  

The People’s Republic of Johnson County will come through for Democrat Janelle Rettig in today’s special election for county supervisor, if the early vote figures are any guide. John Deeth posted more turnout data today.

I wish I had a better feeling about the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The impressive GOTV effort of the past few days probably won’t be enough to save Democrat Martha Coakley, unless almost every pollster was working from a very flawed turnout model. Coakley apparently only held 19 campaign events in the 40 days since the primary. You can’t take anything for granted in politics, especially when unemployment is above 10 percent.

Some “senior Democrats” didn’t have the decency to wait until polls closed before giving journalists blind quotes on who’s to blame for the debacle.

On the optimistic side, former aide to Senator Ted Kennedy thinks Coakley will pull through and explains why using numbers from past Massachusetts elections.

At Swing State Project, Crisitunity posted a very helpful map with “town benchmarks,” indicating how many votes Coakley needs in various towns to win a plurality statewide.

At the Blue Mass Group blog, Hoyapaul posted “town by town bellwethers and what to watch for on Tuesday.”

I’ll update this post later as results come in.

UPDATE: Things are looking grim for Coakley with about half the votes counted. She is underperforming in most towns that have reported and not winning the Boston precincts by large enough margins.

Turnout was higher than expected, which in some ways is even more depressing. When Scott Brown got close in the polls, I assumed Coakley would win easily once Democrats became aware that this was a real race. Instead, Brown surged into the lead despite an onslaught of ads and direct mail from Democrats. There is plenty of blame to go around. Coakley ran a horrendous campaign, but the Obama administration hasn’t handled economic and health care policy well these past several months. The DSCC ads don’t seem to have helped either–stale negative attacks.

SECOND UPDATE: Coakley has conceded. Many post-mortems to come, and Peter Daou’s is worth a read.

FINAL UPDATE: Rettig won big in Johnson County; read Deeth for details. Republican Lori Cardella won’t have a supervisor’s seat to distract her from helping Chris Reed’s campaign in Iowa’s second Congressional district.

Bob Vander Plaats had a little more than $200,000 on hand for his gubernatorial campaign at the end of 2009, according to a campaign press release Kathie Obradovich posted at the Des Moines Register’s blog today. Excerpt:

“By all accounts, we had a great year,” Vander Plaats said.  “The fact is, we received the strongest financial support after Terry Branstad said in September that he was likely to get into the race. The financial backing this campaign has received is a clear indication that people see the GOP primary as a two-man contest and that a solid number of Iowans want a new face to lead the Republican Party forward.”

The campaign reported cash contributions of $595,740.13 and in-kind contributions of $61,999.87 for a total of $657,740.00 in contributions. It reported expenditures totaling $392,630.67 during 12 months in operation. Its cash on hand was $203,109.46 at year’s end.

Vander Plaats said the campaign report shows more than 1,200 individual contributions, indicating a broad and solid supporter base as the primary campaign enters its most active phase.

Raising more than $650,000 is not bad at all, but that burn rate seems high. Going into the final five months of the campaign, Terry Branstad had nearly seven times as much cash on hand as Vander Plaats.

Vander Plaats was by far the most active campaigner in the Republican field during 2009, holding numerous events around the state. Still, I wonder what he spent nearly $400,000 on last year. It’s possible that he has pre-paid some media or consulting expenses, and we’ll see the results from that later. I remember that Congressman Steve King’s campaign seemed to have little cash on hand during 2008, but it turned out that he had paid in advance for lots of television and radio ads which ran during the final two months.

By the same token, if Vander Plaats spent most of his money on things like staff salaries or fundraising, he could find it difficult to compete with Branstad down the stretch. If I were running his campaign, I’d try to figure out a way to become the next darling for national conservatives, like the activists who have propelled Marco Rubio to a likely victory over Florida Governor Charlie Crist in that state’s Senate primary. Right now Vander Plaats isn’t that far ahead of Rod Roberts in terms of cash on hand.

Speaking of Roberts, he’s launching statewide radio ads this week. No word yet on Chris Rants’ fundraising numbers.

UPDATE: In the comments, thisweekiniowapolitics posted more details from the Vander Plaats filing. The bulk of the expenditures were payroll related. If he wants to run any paid media before June, he’ll need to cut back on staffing or raise a lot more money. The conservative netroots helped Scott Brown raise a ton of money in Massachusetts; if they decide to get involved in this race, they can help Vander Plaats.

Terry Branstad is kicking off his “official” candidacy for governor today, launching a tour around the state. His campaign announced fairly strong fundraising numbers last week and just leaked an internal Republican primary poll showing Branstad leading Bob Vander Plaats by 63 percent to 18 percent.

It’s conceivable that Vander Plaats’ campaign could take off in the coming months. Right-winger Marco Rubio is now considered likely to defeat Florida Governor Charlie Crist in that state’s U.S. Senate primary, despite commanding leads Crist had in polls a few months ago. However, I assume Branstad will lock up the Republican nomination with little trouble.

Branstad will undoubtedly be a tough general-election opponent for Governor Chet Culver. The biggest hurdles for a challenger are usually name recognition, fundraising, and getting voters to imagine the challenger doing the job he’s seeking. Branstad is well-known, has done the job before, and has wealthy donors behind him. Frankly, I’d rather not have him in this race.

But my mother taught me not to focus too much on the negative. After the jump I offer some silver linings of a Branstad candidacy.  

Iowa's waters are dangerously polluted. The problem is caused by big industries (e.g. coal plants, meat processing facilities) which dump straight into our waterways toxic chemicals that cause cancer and reproductive and developmental disorders (see our 10/2009 report). Large-scale farming operations are also implicated.

The results are devastating for the health of human and natural communities across the state. The Iowa River, an important recreational resource and supplier of the Iowa City area's drinking water, has been listed as “endangered.” In Des Moines, the water works had to stop drawing drinking water from the Raccoon River in September because of the growth of pollution-fed algae.

Whether in Iowa City or Des Moines, we all are near some body of water and these waters are where we smim, fish, canoe, and indeed where many of us get our drinking water. It is imperative that we protect them.

Many Iowans know that the DNR has recently nominated certain waters in the state as “outstanding waters,” sparing them from further pollution. This process, known as the “anti-degradation” rule-making process, is required by federal law under the Clean Water Act (CWA).

Yet what many Iowans may not know is that, like the Iowa River, the CWA is itself fast becoming endangered.

State Representative Rod Roberts has about $102,000 on hand for his gubernatorial campaign, Tom Beaumont reported at the Des Moines Register today, citing the campaign’s Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board filing. (His post contains a pdf link to the summary page.)

Roberts raised just over $100,000 last year and loaned his campaign $13,000 while spending only about $22,000. More than half of all the money he raised came from his kick-off fundraiser in Carroll, the town Roberts has represented in the Iowa House for the last decade.

I have been expecting Roberts to drop out of the governor’s race so that he can run for re-election in Iowa House district 51, but his low burn rate indicates that he has enough money to go all the way to the June primary. He won’t be able to match the front-runners’ spending; Terry Branstad has 13 times Roberts’ cash on hand. But he can position himself as a unifying figure in the GOP, which may bear fruit if Branstad and Vander Plaats stumble or drive each other’s negatives way up.

Carroll-based journalist Douglas Burns makes the case here for Roberts as a successful dark horse candidate. I don’t see it, but stranger things have happened.

UPDATE: Roberts is going up with statewide radio ads this week. You can listen to them at his campaign website.

Commenting on the Iowa Family Policy Center’s recent endorsement of Bob Vander Plaats, Kathie Obradovich wonders whether

Vander Plaats might run as an independent, or third-party candidate if he loses the GOP primary. His spokesman, Eric Woolson, did not pledge that Vander Plaats would support the GOP nominee: “Our focus has been entirely on winning the GOP primary and the general election.”

My hunch is that Vander Plaats won’t embark on a third-party candidacy if he loses the Republican primary. In fact, he will probably need to rule out that option soon or risk losing support from party activists this spring. Everyone knows that Vander Plaats would be helping Governor Chet Culver if he continued to campaign against the Republican nominee.

By the same token, the Iowa Family Policy Center stands to lose too many of their regular donors and supporters if they back an independent candidate for governor. If Terry Branstad wins the Republican primary, the smart play for the IFPC would be to focus on the statehouse races.

Jonathan Narcisse is a far more likely independent candidate for governor this year. Follow me after the jump for more on his political niche.

President Barack Obama gave a great speech yesterday at the Vermont Avenue Baptist Church on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s legacy:

Marc Hansen’s latest column for the Des Moines Register profiles Robert A. Wright, who died last week. Wright

fought in World War II as a first lieutenant, helped integrate the dorms at the University of Iowa, played football for the Hawkeyes, worked as a Des Moines cop, graduated from Drake Law School, become head of the NAACP Iowa-Nebraska Conference and earned the nickname “Mr. Civil Rights.”

So much accomplished, but so much still to be done. Democratic Senate candidate Bob Krause is right to call attention to the shameful disparity in Iowa’s incarceration rates, although solving that problem seems more like a task for state officials than for a U.S. senator. UPDATE: Krause contacted me to point out that “that there is a federal issue in incarcerations. Our neighbors in Minnesota have the same problem at a rate approximate with ours. Disproportionate incarceration falls under the ‘equal protection’ clause of the Constitution.” Point taken.

Speaking of civil rights, it looks like the Obama administration may not push for repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell this year after all. Given likely Republican gains in Congress in 2010, I think prospects for repeal will be dead for a long time if it doesn’t happen soon.

Any comments about today’s holiday or any issues relating to equality are welcome in this thread.

The Iowa caucuses take place this Saturday, January 23, beginning at 1 pm. Democrats can click here and enter your zip code to find your caucus location. If you’ve never attended an off-year caucus, I recommend the experience as a way to meet some of the most committed activists in your precinct and have input on the party platform and party machinery. Polk County Democratic Party executive director Tamyra Harrison explained the benefits of attending an off-year caucus in more detail here. The level of energy and excitement won’t match the 2008 caucus, but on the plus side, you won’t be packed like sardines into a stuffy room.

Some non-profit advocacy organizations have drafted resolutions for supporters to offer at their precinct caucuses. If adopted, these resolutions will be forwarded to the county platform committee. For example, 1000 Friends of Iowa is encouraging supporters to offer this resolution on responsible land use.

This thread is for discussing anything on your mind this weekend.

There are Martin Luther King Jr. remembrances going on in many Iowa cities today and tomorrow; check your local news outlet for details. To mark King’s birthday, Democratic Senate candidate Bob Krause pledged to develop “a comprehensive strategy for alleviating the Iowa incarceration disparity,” in light of the fact that “Iowa has a per capita incarceration rate for blacks that is fourteen times the incarceration rate for whites.”

I appreciated this letter to the editor by Frank McCammond of Redfield, which the Des Moines Register published on January 15:

Marian Riggs Gelb’s Jan. 3 guest column (“Protect Iowa’s Liquid Gems”) calls for thank-you notes to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources for designating a few streams in northeast Iowa for protection as “outstanding waters.”

It was a nice suggestion. However, where do I write the note about letting the rest of the state’s river systems be turned into open sewers by the farm and livestock interests and by towns that won’t fix their sewage systems?

(Gelb’s guest column is here, and the Iowa Environmental Council has more information on the “outstanding Iowa waters” designation here.)

After the jump I’ve posted more about events coming up this week. Roxanne Conlin began her 99-county tour last week, but I couldn’t find any event details or calendar on her campaign website.

UPDATE: Duh! Forgot Johnson County’s special election on Tuesday. Go vote for Janelle Rettig for county supervisor. John Deeth has been providing great coverage of the race at his blog. Lori Cardella is like school in the summertime–no class.

Davenport business owner Roby Smith formally announced yesterday his plans to challenge State Senator David Hartsuch in the Senate district 41 Republican primary, Ed Tibbetts reported in the Quad-City Times. Smith will not run as a moderate like former Senator Maggie Tinsman, whom Hartsuch defeated in the 2006 primary. He said he shares Hartsuch’s views on abortion and same-sex marriage but will emphasize a “pro-business” and “pro-education” stance. Smith will campaign as a more electable Republican; he said yesterday that “Democrats smell blood in the water.”

Two Democrats, Rich Clewell and Dave Thede, have already announced plans to run in this Scott County district, which is evenly divided politically. A takeover would be fantastic for long-term Democratic prospects of holding the Iowa Senate, as Republicans only have a handful of strong pickup opportunities this year in my opinion. Democrats currently hold 32 of the 50 Senate seats.

Speaking of competitive Iowa Senate races, does anyone know whether Republicans have declared candidates against Rich Olive in Senate district 5 or Becky Schmitz in Senate district 45? If so, please post a comment in this thread or e-mail me: desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com.

And to Representative Steve King, everything looks like a reason to deport undocumented immigrants.

ABC News reports today that the U.S. will grant “temporary protective status” to Hatians who entered this country illegally, in light of the recent devastating earthquake there:

“This is a disaster of historic proportions and this designation will allow eligible Haitian nationals in the United States to continue living and working in our country for the next 18 months,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced late today on a conference call. “Providing a temporary refuge for Haitian nationals who are currently in the United States and whose personal safety would be endangered by returning to Haiti is part of this Administration’s continuing efforts to support Haiti’s recovery.”

Napolitano estimated that there are 100,000 to 200,000 Haitian nationals currently in the country illegally.

“TPS gives them sort of an intermediate immigration status,” said the secretary. “It allows them — only for a period of 18 months, while Haiti gets back on its feet — to remain in the United States and authorizes them to work during that period, among other things.” […]

By law, the secretary of Homeland Security can offer temporary protected status to illegal immigrants of a particular nationality if calamities such as natural disasters or war make it too burdensome for their home countries to receive them.  

Many politicians in both parties have expressed support for granting TPS to Haitians, Andrea Nill noted at the Think Progress blog. But Steve King put a wingnutty spin on the humanitarian crisis:

“This sounds to me like open borders advocates exercising the Rahm Emanuel axiom: ‘Never let a crisis go to waste,’” Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said in an e-mail message to ABCNews. “Illegal immigrants from Haiti have no reason to fear deportation, but if they are deported, Haiti is in great need of relief workers, and many of them could be a big help to their fellow Haitians.”

How very compassionate of him.

UPDATE: The Iowa House passed this bill on a party-line vote on Friday, and Culver signed it the same day.

Democratic state legislators are rushing to pass a bill that will allow Iowa to apply for a federal education grant of up to $175 million. The application is due on Tuesday, and Monday is Martin Luther King Jr. day, so Governor Chet Culver needs to be able to sign the bill this weekend.

The Iowa Senate approved Senate File 2033 on Wednesday. Senate Education Committee Chair Becky Schmitz summarized key provisions relating to the “Race to the Top” grant:

Specifically, the legislation before you today will:

   *     Remove the cap and repeal date for charter schools in Iowa.  Currently, Iowa Code has a 20 charter school cap and a repeal date for all charter schools on July 1, 2011.  […]

   *     Allow schools to develop Innovation Zone Schools and Consortiums -This legislation adds innovation zone schools and consortiums to the ways that schools districts can foster innovation in more schools.

Senate Republicans voted against this bill, and House Republicans will do the same when it’s considered today. They want to see Iowa relax current restrictions on who can operate a charter school. Additionally, they argue that it’s unwise to apply for one-time federal funds to support ongoing education expenses. The GOP talking point of choice is to call this bill “Race for the Cash.”

Republicans also claim the bill would shift authority toward “union bosses” because of provisions that are not directly linked to the federal grant application. More on that story is after the jump.

Yesterday Terry Branstad’s campaign released some information about its fundraising during the last three months of 2009. As I’d feared, they reported big numbers: nearly $1.55 million raised, with $1.36 million cash on hand left at the end of 2009. You can make a lot of contacts in four terms as governor, and Branstad’s campaign had 3,044 individual contributors, representing all of Iowa’s 99 counties. The campaign also noted that 94 percent of the money raised came from Iowans, and 96 percent came from individuals.

Governor Chet Culver’s campaign responded by announcing that it has $2.59 million on hand:

That total is over $1 million more than any incumbent governor has had at a similar point in their reelection cycle. […]

Over the past 12 months, the campaign received contributions from well over 1,000 donors, 85% of which are Iowa residents.  Additionally, more than half the contributions made to the campaign were for $250 or less.

Culver campaign manager Abby Curran told me that the total amount raised during 2009 was $2.145 million. She declined to tell me how much the campaign spent during the year, but it’s not hard to arrive at a ballpark figure. Last January, Culver’s campaign reported having about $1.5 million on hand. Adding $2.145 million to that and subtracting the $2.59 million the campaign has on hand now suggests that the governor’s campaign spent a little more than $1 million during the past year.

I’ve been concerned about the Culver campaign’s burn rate for a while. It appears that as in 2008, the campaign spent roughly half of what it took in during 2009. Presumably a lot of that money went toward running this statewide television ad in October and this one in November. I liked the ads, especially the second one, and I understand why they wanted to spread a positive message when the governor was going through a rough political stretch. But Culver and Jim Nussle raised about $15 million combined during the 2006 campaign, and this year’s race will be more expensive. The Democratic and Republican governors’ associations are likely to spend substantial money here (both organizations have a lot of money in the bank). Even so, Culver needs to raise a lot more money.

Another point of concern is that Branstad has more individual donors. If half of Culver’s donations were for $250 or less, then the overwhelming majority of his money came from donors giving several thousand dollars. Iowa has no campaign contribution limits, so there’s no reason these people couldn’t give again, but Culver has a smaller pool of past donors to tap. In my opinion this reflects the governor’s failure to build strong coalitions and deliver on various issues of importance to Democratic activists who supported Ed Fallon or Mike Blouin in the 2006 primary. The friction between him and organized labor hasn’t helped either.

The good news for Culver is that he can continue to build his war chest while Branstad is forced to spend a lot of money during the Republican primary.

Speaking of which, the other Republican candidates for governor haven’t released their fundraising numbers yet. They must file reports with the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board by January 19, so we’ll know more next week. I assume State Representatives Chris Rants and Rod Roberts will have very little cash on hand, and Bob Vander Plaats won’t have nearly as much as Branstad reported. But Vander Plaats should be able to announce a credible number. At this point in the 2006 election cycle he had raised nearly a million dollars. Thanks to the Iowa Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage, Vander Plaats received much more publicity among social conservatives nationwide last year than he had in 2005.

Any thoughts about the Iowa governor’s race are welcome in this thread.

Todd Dorman’s column on the Iowa Family Policy Center’s endorsement of Bob Vander Plaats included this observation:

Vander Plaats is being touted as the next Mike Huckabee, a religious conservative who won Iowa’s 2008 presidential caucuses.

But Huckabee took just over 40,000 votes on caucus night. It will take more than 500,000 to become governor.

In the 2006 general election, about 1.05 million Iowans cast votes for governor, but the primary electorate is much smaller. Only about 148,000 Iowans voted in the hard-fought Democratic gubernatorial primary of 2006 (pdf file). Approximately 199,000 Iowans voted in the three-way GOP primary of 2002.

The number of registered Republicans in Iowa has declined since then, but a lot of independents and even some Democrats might cross over to vote in this year’s GOP primary for governor. I’m going to assume that with the Republican base as energized as they are, turnout will exceed 200,000 this June. Contested Republican primaries in the second and third Congressional districts should drive up turnout in central and eastern Iowa as well.  

So, how many votes would Vander Plaats or Terry Branstad need to win the primary? That depends in part on whether State Representatives Chris Rants and Rod Roberts can get any traction in the race. Rants says he is in the governor’s race for the duration, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see Roberts run for his Iowa House seat instead of for governor. We haven’t seen any public polls of the Republican primary since the summer. I am going to assume that even if Rants and Roberts remain on the ballot for governor, lack of money and institutional support will hold their combined vote to at most 10 percent.

It’s worth noting that many people were surprised the under-funded Ed Fallon managed 26 percent in the 2006 Democratic primary, but in that race Fallon appealed to a distinct niche in the party. I don’t see Rants or Roberts exceeding expectations unless they have some standout performances in debates, and/or one of the front-runners stumbles.

I’m going to assume that the winner of the Republican primary will need at least 100,000 votes statewide on June 5. Branstad has an edge because so many Iowa Republicans in every county have voted for him before. Vander Plaats received about 63,000 votes in the 2002 primary, when he finished a close third behind Doug Gross and Steve Sukup. As you can see from this map, he did best in northwest Iowa. Rants can hurt Vander Plaats here because he is also from Sioux City. Then again, Vander Plaats campaigned statewide as the lieutenant governor nominee in 2006 and has been the most active campaigner this cycle.

What do you think, Bleeding Heartland readers? How many votes will it take to win the chance to face Governor Chet Culver in the general?

Iowa Supreme Court Chief Justice Marsha Ternus had bad news about the condition of the judiciary when she addressed the Iowa legislature yesterday.

Since the 2002 fiscal year, she noted, staffing levels have been reduce[d] by 17 percent. In just the last year, staff was cut by 11 percent. In fact, the state’s courts now operate with a smaller workforce than it had in 1987, the year the state assumed full funding for the court system. The number of serious and time-consuming cases before the court, however, have increased by 66 percent.

Ternus also argued that budget shortfalls have adversely impacted the Judicial Branch more than any other aspect or agency in government.

“Unlike many state agencies and the regents, the judicial branch has no pass-through funds, no programs to cut and no reserves to tap. Nearly all our operating costs are for people – employees and judges who are the life blood of the court system – so when we cut our budget, we must cut our workforce.”

Ternus warned of “assembly line justice” and “de facto consolidation” of courts if state legislators do not at least maintain current levels of funding. (Click here for a pdf file containing the full text of Ternus’ speech.)

While the judiciary has faced several rounds of budget cuts, demand for court services has increased because of the recession. For example, during the past two years mortgage foreclosures have increased by 34 percent in Iowa, cases relating to domestic violence protection have increased 15 percent, and “juvenile commitments for drug or mental-health issues” have risen by 76 percent.

Current state law requires courts to operate in all of Iowa’s 99 counties. That made sense when it could take the better part of a day for people to travel to their county courthouse, but it’s not an efficient use of resources now. I am with the Des Moines Register’s editorial board: state legislators need to either allocate enough funding for the judicial system we have, or amend the law to allow some consolidation of courthouses. The latter would run up against stiff resistance in the Iowa House and Senate because of the likely impact on some small county-seat towns. But it’s wrong to let civil and criminal court services degrade across the state. If budget constraints demand efficiency measures in other branches of government, let the judiciary make the best use of available funds by consolidating where necessary.

UPDATE: Governor Chet Culver told the Iowa Independent that he shares the concerns Ternus raised and does not support any further funding cuts for the judiciary.