Iowa Politics has this press release from Representative Tom Latham’s campaign about

a statewide radio ad highlighting Latham’s work to lower gas and energy prices for Iowa families.

The sixty second ad reinforces Latham’s continued commitment to renewable energy but also discusses the need for Congress to work immediately to increase domestic energy supplies that America controls.

“$4.00 a gallon gas hurts Iowa families,” notes Latham in the ad. “And they’re frustrated with leaders in Congress for not doing more about it – and they have every right to be.”

“I have always been, and will continue to be, a strong supporter of alternative energy research and production, but we need to work for solutions that get Iowans from point A to point B without busting their family budget.”

Latham has been working in Congress on legislation aimed at increasing our domestic supply of affordable that will lower gas and energy prices through the increased use of our current resources, to include off-shore drilling and drilling in ANWR.

Latham recently told Iowa Independent that Republicans can ride high gas prices to victory this November. It’s not clear to me why this is a big selling point for the GOP–shouldn’t they have been doing something to reduce our dependence on foreign oil during the years Republicans controlled Congress as well as the presidency?

Anyway, some Republicans clearly believe that this issue will save them from an otherwise hostile political environment. Last week John McCain started running a television ad blaming Barack Obama for high gas prices because Obama opposes more offshore oil drilling.

The rapid response from Becky Greenwald’s campaign points out the various misleading aspects of Latham’s radio ad:

For Immediate Release                                                                      Contact: Erin Seidler

July 29, 2008                                                                                                         515-537-4465

Latham Runs Misleading Ad on Drilling To Divert From Votes Against Immediate Gas Price Relief

Waukee, IA – This week, Tom Latham’s campaign released a radio ad misleading voters about offshore drilling. Experts agree that offshore drilling will do nothing to lower gas prices for seven to ten years, and its clear that this ad is a diversion from Latham’s votes against opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on existing leases. (McClatchy, 6/18/08)

“I’m running for Congress because of these sort of shenanigans. Latham is trying to get Iowans to think about leasing 2,000 more acres when 68 million acres already leased are open, untapped and will lower prices. Latham is trying to divert attention from his failure to support immediate relief through opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on existing leases,” said Becky Greenwald, Candidate for Congress in Iowa’s 4th District. “Is it too much to ask for leaders to be honest with us?”

Unfortunately, Latham, like George Bush decided to play politics with gas prices. Last week, he voted against a bill that would release 70 million barrels of oil from the strategic oil reserve to bring relief from high gas prices. This bill would bring almost immediate relief to high gas prices. (H. Res. 6578)

And two weeks ago, Latham voted against a bill to force oil companies to drill on existing leases. There are 68 million acres of federal land already leased by oil companies. That is two times the size of the state of Iowa available for energy production that is now sitting idle. (H.R. 615)

Instead, Democrats in Congress and Becky Greenwald are fighting for a comprehensive energy policy that includes in the short term, opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on almost 68 million acres of existing leases.

In the long term, Becky will fight to invest in a green energy industry here in Iowa by investing in ethanol, wind energy, biodiesel, and other homegrown, alternative forms of energy.

“I know that investing in renewable fuels will reduce our reliance on foreign oil and bring down gas prices and create thousands if not hundreds of thousands of jobs in rural America, including Iowa’s 4th District,” Greenwald continued. “It’s time for a solution, not diversion tactics.”

The bolded passages were bold in the original, by the way.

Latham’s advocacy of more oil drilling will do nothing to solve our energy problems. Even the president of the Teamsters Union, which has long supported increased oil drilling in the U.S., declared last week that

“We must find a long-term approach that breaks our dependence on foreign oil by investing in the development of alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal power.”

Furthermore, public opinion on this matter may not be where Latham thinks it is. The polling firm Rasmussen says the public is divided on whether more drilling is the answer:

A new Rasmussen Reports national survey, taken last night (Monday), finds that 45% think placing more restrictions on energy speculators is more important , while 42% take the opposite view that allowing offshore oil drilling is more important.

A major partisan divide on the issue, like the split in Congress, is evident, however. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Republicans say lifting the ban is the highest priority, while 59% of Democrats – and 48% of unaffiliated voters — say controlling speculators is more important. Only 29% of unaffiliateds say lift the ban first.

Unaffiliated or “no-party” voters have a slim plurality among registered voters in Iowa’s fourth district, and there are about 8,000 more Democrats than Republicans in the district.

If Rasmussen’s findings are accurate, it seems that Latham is out of step with his district.

If you reject Latham’s misleading spin on energy policy, please donate to Greenwald’s campaign to help her respond on the air. This race will be very competitive if she can raise enough money to get her message out. Remember, the fourth district has a partisan index of D+0, meaning that its vote in 2004 closely matched the nationwide partisan split.

Final note: Latham’s press release says the radio ad is running statewide. That’s a lot more expensive than just running the ad in fourth district markets.

Is he trying to raise his profile outside his district to pave the way for a gubernatorial bid in 2010? If he loses to Greenwald, he could start campaigning for governor immediately. But even if he wins re-election, serving in Congress isn’t much fun when you’re in the minority party.  

This article by Joseph Romm for Salon explains “Why we never need to build another polluting power plant.”

That’s right, conservation and efficiency measures can help us save money, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet our energy needs without building any new coal-fired power plants or nuclear reactors.

The whole article is worth reading, but here’s a small excerpt:

America is the Saudi Arabia of energy waste. A 2007 report from the international consulting firm McKinsey and Co. found that improving energy efficiency in buildings, appliances and factories could offset almost all of the projected demand for electricity in 2030 and largely negate the need for new coal-fired power plants. McKinsey estimates that one-third of the U.S. greenhouse gas reductions by 2030 could come from electricity efficiency and be achieved at negative marginal costs. In short, the cost of the efficient equipment would quickly pay for itself in energy savings.

While a few states have energy-efficiency strategies, none matches what California has done. In the past three decades, electricity consumption per capita grew 60 percent in the rest of the nation, while it stayed flat in high-tech, fast-growing California. If all Americans had the same per capita electricity demand as Californians currently do, we would cut electricity consumption 40 percent. If the entire nation had California’s much cleaner electric grid, we would cut total U.S. global-warming pollution by more than a quarter without raising American electric bills. And if all of America adopted the same energy-efficiency policies that California is now putting in place, the country would never have to build another polluting power plant.

How did California do it? In part, a smart California Energy Commission has promoted strong building standards and the aggressive deployment of energy-efficient technologies and strategies — and has done so with support of both Democratic and Republican leadership over three decades.

There’s no good reason why the Iowa legislature and Governor Chet Culver could not cooperate to implement some of the successful regulations from California. Then we could convince the members of the Iowa Utilities Board that conservation would go a long way toward meeting our baseload needs.

Too many people believe in the false choice of “clean coal” or nuclear power.  

Douglas Burns has the story at Iowa Independent: Joe Trippi’s consulting firm will be raising money and crafting media messages for Rob Hubler, the Democratic candidate running against Congressman Steve King.

The fifth district is the most Republican in Iowa, but by no means is it out of reach for Hubler.

Big upsets happen in big landslide years, and that’s what this year is shaping up to be.

Hiring Trippi will help Hubler put this race on the map for Washington, D.C.-based groups that could help defeat King, who is reviled by many progressives.

UPDATE: Don’t miss 2laneIA’s diary on this development at Daily Kos.

I’ve added a press release from the Hubler campaign after the jump.

Driving while talking on a cell phone may be as dangerous as driving drunk, according to an article in Salon today:

For years, psychologists who study driving and attention have argued that switching to “hands free” is not a real solution to the hazards caused by yakking on the mobile in the car. “The impairments aren’t because your hands aren’t on the wheel. It’s because your mind isn’t the road,” says David Strayer, professor of psychology at the University of Utah, whose research has found driving while talking on a cellphone to be as dangerous as driving drunk.

Now neuroscience is showing your mind literally isn’t on the road. The overtaxed driver’s poor brain doesn’t distinguish between a conversation that takes place on an iPhone or a Bluetooth headset. In both cases, the chatting driver is distracted, putting herself, her passengers, other drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians at risk.

Say there’s an 18-wheeler to your right, an R.V. to your left, and suddenly a call comes in from that motormouth client in Kansas City. As the client’s voice starts buzzing in your ear, the activity in the parts of your brain keeping your car in your lane declines.

“Forty percent of your attention is drawn away when you’re on the phone,” says Marcel Just, a psychologist who directs Carnegie Mellon’s Center for Cognitive Brain Imaging. That goes for you too, Mr. Multitasker.

In one experiment at the Center for Cognitive Brain Imaging, a test subject lies down inside a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machine, and uses a simulator to drive a car along a winding road, like playing a video game. While steering, the driver hears a voice in his earphones making statements, and has to decide whether they’re true or false, while continuing to pilot the car. Listening and driving make demands on different parts of the brain. Yet, apparently, there are finite resources to go around. “You have two moderately automatic tasks, executing concurrently and drawing on the same resource pool,” explains Just.

When the voice in the headphones starts talking, researchers can see the parts of the brain devoted to driving get distracted. One part of the brain that’s important for driving is the parietal lobe, which, for instance, helps a driver make the car’s trajectory fit the curvature of the road. “There is much less activity if someone is talking to you, so you take the curve less precisely and less well,” says Just. A similar reduction in activity occurs in the visual cortex, which helps a driver analyze how fast things are going by and see what’s coming up ahead. When that voice chimes in on the headphones, “your analysis of the visual scene is less thorough. You’d be more likely to miss a sign, or not as quick to read a complex sign,” says Just.

A bill proposed by Swati Dandekar to ban the use of cell phones while driving went nowhere in the Iowa House this year, but I would like to see it revived in the legislature next session. I see a lot of dangerous driving by people who are talking on their cell phones.

I got noticed by Markos on the front page of Daily Kos!

Unfortunately, it was to attack and take out of context what I wrote in this post at MyDD yesterday.

Markos didn’t like my opinion that it would be a political mistake for Barack Obama to choose a woman running mate other than Hillary Clinton.

Actually, “didn’t like” is a bit of an understatement:

This is such a crock of shit. After all the talk of Clinton breaking glass barriers, are her supporters still so hung up on her loss that they’re willing to create a new glass ceiling for women candidates, one that excludes anyone not named Hillary Clinton?

Fact is, the party is united behind Obama. In the latest Research 2000 national poll shows that Obama wins Democrats 82-9 percent, which is little different than McCain’s 83-10. In 2004, Kerry won Democrats 89-11, and Obama will be up in that range when all’s said and done. There are no more “party unity” concerns.

Throw in the fact that Obama has locked down the Latino vote, is winning women handily, has shown surprising strength in the Mountain West, the midwest, and even parts of the South. He has locked down the Democratic strongholds. It’s clear that Obama doesn’t need Clinton on the ticket.

I never said Obama needed to choose Hillary or that he is having problems uniting the party.

And of course I was not a Clinton supporter at any time and have not been advocating for her selection as VP (though Obama could do a lot worse).

Markos goes on to say,

I’ve got several people on my list of veep possibilities that would certainly reinforce Obama’s core message of change, and several are women (mainly Sebelius and McCaskill). I don’t have any inkling where Obama is going with this thing, but I do know that being forced to take women off his shortlist lest he offend some Hillary supporters is asinine. I doubt Clinton fought to shatter one glass ceiling to replace it with another.

Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius makes sense in that she is a two-term governor. I also like that she stepped in to block coal-fired power plants from being built.

Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill would be a terrible choice in my opinion. She has less relevant experience than Obama and is on the right wing of the Missouri Democratic Party. She has a much less progressive voting record than Hillary Clinton in the Senate.

My comment in this thread at Daily Kos:

for the record, here is what I said

and did not say.

I did not say Obama needs to pick a woman. In fact, at the end of that very post I said I’d offer it to Wesley Clark if I were Obama.

I did not say Obama has a problem with women voters.

I did not say Hillary is the only woman qualified to be on the ticket.

However, she is the only woman who was the preferred presidential candidate of 17 million plus voters.

I do think that in light of this year’s extraordinary primary battle, it would be a political mistake for Obama to choose a woman running mate other than Hillary.

If Hillary were the nominee, I would also advise her against choosing a black man for VP other than Obama (though many would be qualified, such as John Conyers or Charlie Rangel).

To do so would be viewed as a slap in the face to Obama.

Also, Hillary wasn’t my first, second or third, choice, so I appreciate not being referred to as one of her supporters.

This comment got buried under an avalanche of comments agreeing with Markos and misrepresenting what I believe, but I wanted to set the record straight here.

Use this as a thread for more idle speculation about whom Obama should and should not choose as a running mate.

Several commenters at MyDD made the case for Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, who was an early Obama supporter. I don’t think we have a very deep bench in Virginia. It’s not worth giving up a governor to put Kaine on the ticket.

I still think that if Obama does not want to choose Hillary (and it looks like he doesn’t), he should choose someone close to the Clintons–and not Florida Senator Bill Nelson or Indiana Senator Evan Bayh. Not only are they both too conservative for my liking, we would lose a Senate seat if either of them became vice president.

UPDATE: Yet another report indicates that Hillary Clinton is not on Obama’s short list for VP. As I’ve said, I don’t think he would choose her unless he felt he couldn’t win without her, and he probably can win without her.

Stay tuned:

Senator Barack Obama’s postponed trip to Cedar Rapids has been rescheduled for Thursday, July 31st, 2008. Senator Obama’s visit to Cedar Rapids was originally scheduled for June, but was postponed due to the floods.

On Thursday, Senator Obama will host a town hall meeting on the economy in Cedar Rapids. He will also meet with Cedar Rapids residents affected by the floods. Further details of Senator Obama’s visit will follow in the coming days.

As always, post a comment or send me an e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com) if I’ve left out any important events coming up this week.

Monday, July 28:

Representative Bruce Braley will hold a series of public meetings:

8:00am                      Bettendorf Congress on Your Corner

                                   Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency

                                    729 21st Street

                                    Bettendorf , Iowa

10:45am                  De Witt Congress on Your Corner

                                   Frances Banta Waggoner Community Library

                                    505 10th Street

                                    De Witt , Iowa

12:45pm                  Maquoketa Congress on Your Corner

                                   Maquoketa Area Family YMCA

                                    500 E. Summit Street

                                    Maquoketa , Iowa

From the Center on Sustainable Communities:

Join COSC at our Site Preparation and Construction & Demolition Source Separation Workshop on Monday, July 28th, 2008 from 4:00 to 7:00 pm at the WDM affordable green demonstration home site – 927 Maple Street in Historic Valley Junction. This will be the first in our series of workshops at the affordable green demonstration homes in the Des Moines metro area.

To RSVP, contact Emily at 515-277-6222 or Emily@icosc.com.

Visit www.icosc.com for details.

Tuesday, July 29:

There is an open house/fundraising reception for Bill McCarthy, Democrat and candidate for Polk County Sheriff, from 4:30 to 6:30 pm at the home of Jim & Roxanne Conlin, 2900 Southern Hills Circle in Des Moines. (Just head west on Park Ave. about a mile and a half west of Fleur Drive; turn north off of Park Ave. on Southern Hills Drive; drive north until you reach Southern Hills Circle.)

Contributions Appreciated:  Checks may be made payable to: McCarthy for Sheriff

Or mail contribution to:

Bill McCarthy for Sheriff,

5201 SE 32nd St., Des Moines, IA 50320

* For questions or to RSVP, contact Linda at 205-4351 *

From the DNR:

BLACK HAWK COUNTY RESIDENTS ASKED TO SHARE IDEAS ON IMPROVING GEORGE WYTH LAKE

MEDIA CONTACT: Jeff Berckes at (515) 281-4791 or jeff.berckes@dnr.iowa.gov or Charles Ikenberry at (515) 281-8753 or charles.ikenberry@dnr.iowa.gov.

CEDAR FALLS – Iowans interested in improving George Wyth Lake in Black Hawk County can attend a meeting July 29 to discuss and review a recent water quality study and its suggestions for improving the lake.

George Wyth Lake is on the state’s impaired waters list because of excess E. coli in the water, which may indicate the presence of disease-causing pathogens. Geese that reside in the park appear to be the primary contributor to this problem.

The study, or DNR water quality improvement plan, looks at the problems and potential solutions for the problems in George Wyth Lake. It is designed as a guide for improving the lake for local resource agencies, partners, stakeholders and residents.

“We are excited to inform people about the study and discuss how the DNR and George Wyth patrons can work together to improve the lake,” said Jeff Berckes with the DNR’s Watershed Improvement program. “This meeting is the first step forward in revitalizing a great Iowa natural resource and we look forward to working with local community members to incorporate their ideas on how to put an effective plan into action.”

The DNR will ask Iowans for their input at a July 29 meeting in Cedar Falls. The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. at the Hartman Reserve Nature Center, 657 Reserve Dr.

Staff from the DNR’s Lake Restoration program, Watershed Improvement program and Fisheries and Wildlife bureaus will also be on hand to answer questions.

Those not able to attend the public meeting can receive more information at www.iowadnr.gov/water/watershed/tmdl/publicnotice.html and submit comments on the plan by Aug. 19 via the following ways:

E-mail: jeff.berckes@dnr.iowa.gov

Telephone:        Jeff Berckes at (515) 281-4791

Mail:                 Jeff Berckes, care of Iowa DNR, Wallace State Office Building,

502 E. Ninth St.,Des Moines, Iowa 50319

After gathering Iowans’ comments, the DNR will forward the final plan, also called by its technical name of Total Maximum Daily Load, to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for approval. Local groups interested in helping George Wyth Lake can then use the plan to assist their improvement efforts.

Wednesday, July 30:

From the Center on Sustainable Communities:

Richard Louv Lecture

Hoyt Sherman Place

1501 Woodland Ave.

Des Moines, IA 50309

Wed, July 30

7:00 pm

Richard Louv is an author and journalist focused on nature, family and community. His most recent book, Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children From Nature-Deficit Disorder, has stimulated an international conversation about the future relationship between children and nature, and has helped spawn a movement that is now moving into the international sphere. He serves as chairman of the Children and Nature Network, an organization helping to build the international movement to connect children with nature.

Visit http://iowagogreen.com/eventti… for tickets.

Tickets are free but seating is limited and may not be available at the door.

Thursday, July 31:

Barack Obama will hold a town-hall meeting in Cedar Rapids. I’ll post more details about this event when they become available.

One Iowa and Green Drinks are co-hosting a Happy Hour from 5 to 7 pm at the Hillside Condo Penthouse, 1902 Woodland Ave in Des Moines, suite 300 (the building next to the Gateway Market). Suggested donation $20, but no one is turned away. Please RSVP at oneiowa.org.

From Polk County Democrats:

You are cordially invited to attend a wine and cheese reception for John Scarpino, Democratic Candidate for Polk County Supervisor, at the home of Ray and Karen Blase, 913 NE 34th Street, Ankeny

Thursday, July 31 from 5:30 to 7:30 P.M.

Come and hear why John is a candidate for office

and enjoy a glass of wine with old friends.

Saturday, August 2:

From the Sierra Club e-mail loop:

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge – A Priceless Gift

A Presentation and Storytelling

about a very Special Place

When:      Saturday August 2nd, 2008, at 10:00 am

Where:     Urbandale Public Library, Meeting Room A/B

               3520 86th Street Urbandale, Iowa  50322

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is one of America’s premier wilderness

areas.  The coastal plain of the Refuge has been threatened by oil drilling

many times in its 50 year history. Today, threats from Big Oil are greater

than they have been for over two decades.  Come learn about the history,

it’s values, and how you can help protect this national treasure.

This is a story, as well, of indigenous concerns, and about raising the

voices of those urging our government to recognize the rights of indigenous

peoples.

For more information contact: Lois Norrgard 952-881-7282 lois@alaskawild.org

Presented by:

Sarah James, a Neetsaii Gwich’in Athabascan Indian from Arctic Village,

Alaska, raised in the traditional nomadic way. Sarah was one of the first

recipients of the Ford Foundation Leadership for a Changing World Award and

a co-recipient of the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize for her work

with the Gwich’in Steering Committee to protect the calving and nursery

grounds of the Porcupine River Caribou Herd. The Porcupine Caribou Herd has

sustained the Gwich’in for over twenty thousand years.

Lois Norrgard, the Upper Midwest Field staff for the Alaska Wilderness

League. She has worked for the League and Alaska Coalition for the past

three years, continuing to raise awareness about the values and threats

facing our beautiful wild lands in Alaska.

Some places are just too special to destroy for a short term gain – the

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is one of these places

Representative Bruce Braley, who has been working hard to promote passenger rail service to Iowa, has been named to the conference committee on the 2008 Amtrak Reauthorization Bill. A press release quotes Braley as saying, “I’m excited by the opportunity to continue working on the Amtrak bill and to support Iowa’s passenger rail needs.” The full text of that release is after the jump.

That committee will resolve differences between the Senate and House versions of the Amtrak bill. The House approved a bill last month with language likely to help bring Amtrak service to Dubuque and the Quad Cities.

Speaking of passenger rail, this post from the DCist blog lays out the contrast between Barack Obama and John McCain on transit issues. The whole post is worth reading, but one key point is that McCain says closing down Amtrak would be “a non-negotiable issue” if he became president.  

On the one hand, pollster.com’s electoral vote projection, along with Karl Rove’s latest electoral vote projection, show Barack Obama with a huge advantage over John McCain.

Chris Bowers also sees Obama heavily favored to win the presidency, since McCain would need to win every single tossup state to get to 270 electoral votes.

On the other hand, Obama supporter poblano/Nate Silver’s electoral vote projection is much less favorable than pollster.com’s and shows McCain gaining some ground in recent weeks.

Matt Stoller wonders why national polls are basically static even though journalists covering both campaigns agree that “McCain’s campaign is widely considered to be a disaster and Obama’s is considered to be excellent if a bit cold.”

Stoller is also concerned about low funding levels for outside progressive groups, which means that “There is no cavalry in case Obama stumbles and there are no groups that can go negative against McCain.”

Paul Rosenberg notes that “the overall Obama vs. McCain numbers are far behind the generic Dem vs. Rep numbers, which means that overall Obama is not leading the charge, he’s surfing the wave.”

But Open Left commenter NR is sick of hearing complaints that Obama should be further ahead:

Obama is a black man with a funny name who just got out of the most bruising primary we’ve seen in decades, running against a popular war hero who’s worshiped by the media. Frankly, it’s a miracle that he has even a slim lead at this point.

If you’re one of those people who thinks everything happening now is irrelevant, because voters won’t start paying attention until after Labor Day, I encourage you to read this piece by fladem on how polling numbers from July related to presidential election outcomes in past years. He concludes, “most Presidential races are decided in the summer, not the fall.”

How do you see the race shaping up? I am cautiously optimistic, in that I see several plausible scenarios for Obama getting to 270 electoral votes without Ohio or Florida.

Also, a Pew Research Center poll shows Obama leading McCain among Latinos by an impressive margin.

UPDATE: Jonathan Singer notes that the Pew poll is not an outlier; other polling this summer also indicates that Obama crushes McCain among Latinos.

Anyone go on RAGBRAI? What were the highlights and low points?

Other than one rainy day and two rainy nights, it seems like the weather was better than average. Last year I think it was in the 90s almost every day.

Share your stories here.

I’ve written before that I think it would be a huge mistake for Barack Obama to select any Republican for a running mate. The next president will appoint at least two and perhaps four Supreme Court justices. Obama is a longtime smoker with a family history of cancer. I don’t want any Republican in line to inherit the presidency.

And I’ve written that I think it would backfire for him to choose a woman other than Hillary Clinton for vice president. Not that I have anything against Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius (I would give her serious consideration if she ran for president someday). But I agree with a MyDD commenter who wrote that for Obama to pick Sebelius or Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill would be like Hillary picking Harold Ford as a running mate if she had won the nomination.

I’ve also said I would hate to see Obama choose a corporate-friendly vice president. I already worry that as president he would do too little to rein in the excesses of corporate power in Washington.

Now Politico reports that Obama’s vetting team is floating the name of Ann Veneman, who was Agriculture Secretary during George W. Bush’s first term, with members of Congress. That would be the worst kind of trifecta in my mind.

I can’t understand what Veneman could possibly have going for her. She’s executive director of UNICEF, but who cares? When she was in the cabinet, she didn’t promote sustainable agriculture or sensible health protections.

As the Organic Consumers Association reported when Bush appointed her, Veneman had a long history of standing with corporate interests. When she left Bush’s cabinet, her “vision and commitment” won praise from the American Meat Institute. Politico notes:

The low-profile Republican was close to food and agriculture industries but clashed with farm-state Democrats and environmentalists during her tenure, which lasted from 2001 to 2004.

Maybe Veneman is being mentioned to throw journalists off the scent, or to trick progressives into feeling relieved if Obama chooses a corporate Democrat who’s not “that bad.”

It bothers me that Obama would even allow his team to consider someone like Veneman, even as a diversion. I want the next administration to make CAFOs pay for the harm they cause.

UPDATE: The Nation explains why Veneman would be “a uniquely awful choice” for Obama.

Last weekend I attended the Iowa CCI convention where John Nichols was the keynote speaker. Nichols gave a great speech that made all of the Iowans in attendance proud.

His theme was that citizenship requires action, that it is more than just voting a couple times each year. It is Iowan's responsibility to pursue progressive goals that move the nation forward because Iowans has always been on the frontline of progressive change in the country.

Nichols outlined how Iowa has been leading the nation on the big issues ever since it became a state in 1846 and declared that it was not going to be a slave state. Wisconsin and Minnesota followed suit and this was the beginning of the end of slavery.

He then told the story of Smith Wildman Brookhart (Yes, Wildman was really his middle name.), who ran ran for the United States Senate in 1922 as a Republican with a populist message, saying…

Wall St. is a greater threat to America than any foreign enemy.

Brookhart won a close election and was seated in the Senate until he pissed off party leaders and the election was overturned. He is the only person ever to have the election results overturned after already being seated as a US Senator. Broookhart didn't give up though. He ran in 1926 against longtime Senator Albert B. Cummins, who was the chair of the Judiciary committee. Brookhart went on to beat Cummins in the Republican primary and went on to win in the general election.

Nichols then talked about Henry Wallace and I shot this video of him talking about Henry Wallace. I used my cell phone to take the video, so the quality isn't the best, but here it is anyway.

Nichols quoted George McGovern, who had this to say about Henry Wallace…

The only thing Henry Wallace did wrong was believe that America could be as good as Americans were.

Nichols then told how Harold Hughes spoke to end the war in Vietnam and against the strong-armed tatics being used by the Chicago police.

That led up to the 2008 Iowa caucuses. Nichols said that Iowans did what only Iowans can do. We asked the tough questions at the small town cafes and in the end, showed the rest of the nation Barack Obama could win.

Nichols stressed that our duties don't stop there. We must continue to push ahead on the issues of clean elections, local control of hog confinements, clean water, and worker's rights. If Iowans do that then the rest of the country will follow.

When I suggested yesterday that Steve King is not an effective representative of his constituents in the fifth district, I failed to consider that from time to time he holds telephone town-hall meetings.

SW Iowa Guy suffered through one of those on Tuesday and provides a humorous account of the experience. Callers were screened so that King was able to field only friendly questions during an hour or so on the line.

One passage in Iowa Guy’s post jumped out at me:

Health Care: King stated that he opposes universal access to health care. He advocates Health Savings Accounts and said that families can deposit over $5,000.00 per year to such an account and by the time they are ready to retire they will have over one million dollars. This is all well and good, but most working families can ill afford the necessities, let alone save for health care. This also fails to address the unemployed and under-employed and uninsured.

Do Republicans expect Americans to buy into this Health Savings Account concept? If my husband and I had donated the maximum amount to those accounts for several years, we would still be in the hole without our health insurance (and we are reasonably healthy people).

A typical, complication-free pregnancy with no medical interventions in the hospital cost us around $3,500 each time for prenatal care and delivery, plus about $5,000 each time for the normal hospital stay of less than 48 hours. If I had given birth to either of my children by cesarean section, the hospital bills would have been in the $10,000 to $20,000 range, even without any complications such as baby spending time in the neonatal intensive care unit.

I had a flukey infection this winter that sent me to the hospital for a week and ended up costing somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000 (considering not just the hospital stay, but also the various tests and procedures). That would wipe out years of deposits in a Health Savings Account if we had to rely on one of those instead of health insurance.

If anyone in our family ever got a really expensive illness to treat, such as cancer, you can forget about any private savings account covering the cost.

It’s not realistic to think that families will be able to build up Health Savings Accounts worth a million dollars by the time they retire. Only a small fraction of Americans could afford to do that, and even then they’d have to be lucky and stay healthy in the meantime.

As Iowa Guy notes, a single-payer system modeled on Medicare makes a lot more sense.

Calling all volunteers: if you’ve got a few hours to spare this weekend, the Obama campaign would love to have you participate in one of the 26 neighborhood canvasses they have planned.

Go here to RSVP.

Most of the door-knocking will be on Sunday afternoon, but a few places will do it on Saturday morning or afternoon.

Here are the places and times where canvassing will happen. I have added the county name next to the city or town:

Ames Canvass (Story County)

Sunday 1 pm

Fort Dodge Canvass (Webster County)

Sunday 12 pm

New Hampton Canvass (Chickasaw County)

Sunday 1 pm

Anamosa Canvass (Jones County)

Sunday 2 pm

Fort Madison Canvass (Lee County)

Sunday 1 pm

Newton Canvass (Jasper County)

Sunday 10 am

Cedar Rapids Canvass (Linn County)

Sunday 12 pm

Guttenberg Canvass (Clayton County)

Sunday 1 pm

Ottumwa Canvass (Wapello County)

Sunday 12 pm

Clinton Canvass (Clinton County)

Sunday 2 pm

Indianola Canvass (Warren County)

Sunday 10 am (I haven’t heard of a Sunday morning canvass in Iowa–maybe you should double-check the time when you RSVP)

Sioux City Canvass (Woodbury County)

Sunday 12 pm

Council Bluffs Canvass (Pottawattamie County)

Sunday 12 pm

Iowa City Canvass (Johnson County)

Saturday 10 am

Waterloo Canvass (Black Hawk County)

Sunday 1 pm

Davenport Canvass (Scott County)

Sunday 12 pm

Iowa City Canvass (Johnson County)

Sunday 12 pm

Waukee Canvass (Dallas County)

Sunday 1 pm

Des Moines Canvass (Polk County)

Sunday 1 pm

Knoxville Canvass (Marion County)

Sunday 1 pm

Waverly Canvass (Bremer County)

Saturday 12 pm

Dubuque Canvass (Dubuque County)

Sunday 1 pm

Mason City Canvass (Cerro Gordo County)

Sunday 1 pm

West Des Moines Canvass (Polk County)

Sunday 1 pm

Winterset Canvass (Madison County)

Sunday 12 pm

Des Moines Canvass # 2 (Polk County)

Sunday 1 pm

If you click the link above to RSVP, you will get more details about where and when to meet up.

Please consider posting a diary here afterwards about your experience. Those are fun to read. You don’t have to include photos–you can just tell the story, like icebergslim did here and clarkent did here.

By the way, John McCain’s campaign website now lists contact information for five field offices in Iowa. It’s not clear from that page whether a sixth office will open in southeast Iowa at some point, or whether field operations for southeast Iowa will continue to be run out of the state headquarters in Urbandale, as they appear to be now.

I reported recently that the Obama campaign has 15 field offices open in Iowa, with two more planned in Cedar Rapids and Iowa Falls. I have since heard that there will also be an office opening in West Des Moines, so the total number of offices in this state will be at least 18.  

Campaigns against incumbents are never easy, but Iowa’s fourth Congressional district is very winnable for Becky Greenwald.

When you run for office, certain things are out of your control, like the nationwide political climate or the partisan makeup of the electorate.

Greenwald is fortunate to be challenging Representative Tom Latham this year, when Democrats have their first registration edge in the fourth district since it was redrawn. According to the June 2008 numbers released by the Secretary of State’s office, the fourth district has 128,482 registered Democrats, 120,694 registered Republicans, and 145,223 voters registered with no party affiliation. Also, the national political climate is favorable to Democrats. IA-04 has a partisan index of D+0, meaning that its vote in 2004 closely matched the nationwide partisan split.

Latham told Iowa Independent that Republicans can win this year’s elections by focusing on high gas prices and the Iraq War. However, the National Republican Congressional Committee, which exists to elect Republicans to the U.S. House, has given GOP incumbents very different advice: run on personal and local issues. An NRCC strategy document notes that Republican candidates who lost special Congressional elections this year did not establish “themselves and their local brand in contrast to the negative perception of the national GOP.”

If fourth district residents let national issues guide their votes down-ticket, Greenwald will do well to keep tying Latham to the Iraq War and leadership of the Republican Party.

So what’s standing in her way? The biggest advantage of incumbency is often money, and this race is no exception.

Charlotte Eby, a commentator for the Mason City Globe-Gazette, assessed this race in a recent column:

After the record-breaking turnout at the Iowa caucuses, the Democratic Party has amassed a voter registration advantage that has grown to more than 90,000 in Iowa.

Democrats also will have presidential candidate Barack Obama and U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin at the top of the ticket to help drive turnout. […]

Latham’s had strong Democratic challengers in the past that he’s been able to fend off. But his district, which includes Mason City, Ames and suburban counties surrounding Des Moines, has become more of a swing district as Democratic registration has swelled. Democrats now outnumber Republicans in the district for the first time ever.

Watch for Greenwald’s campaign to paint Latham as a Republican in lockstep with Bush administration policies, a record that might not be popular with the changing electorate.

First though, Greenwald will have to raise enough money to compete with Latham’s war chest, which sat at more than $700,000 as of the last filing period.

If Greenwald is competitive in raising money, the 4th District race could be the race to watch this fall.

David Yepsen’s latest column in the Des Moines Register reaches the same conclusion:

The key for Democrat Greenwald, a 55-year-old former Garst and Pioneer marketing executive from Perry, is money. Will national Democratic money sources – especially Emily’s List – pour dollars into her contest with Latham?

To get them to make that investment, Greenwald must first convince them she’s viable and has got a credible financial base of her own.

So far, it’s been an uphill task. According to the latest campaign-finance disclosure reports, Greenwald had only $81,800 in the bank on June 30. Latham had 10 times that amount: $832,388. Greenwald had to get through a four-way primary in June, then had to suspend fundraising in Iowa during the floods. Donors in the Democratic money centers of Des Moines, Iowa City and Cedar Rapids were preoccupied.

Raising money isn’t the easiest task in the world, but candidates have more control over fundraising than they do over massive shifts toward the other party on various issues and among many different demographic groups.

Rarely can a challenger raise enough cash to match the incumbent’s spending dollar for dollar. But when the wind is at your back, that often isn’t necessary.

Upsets happen in big landslide years. Just look at what happened to Neal Smith, who had represented Iowa’s fourth district since 1958 until Greg Ganske brought him down in the 1994 Republican landslide. Smith had more seniority and clout in 1994 than Latham has now. I couldn’t find information about the candidates’ spending in that race, because the Open Secrets database doesn’t go back that far. But I’ll bet that Ganske did not win by raising more money than Smith. Ganske was boosted by a national Republican wave and partisan shifts following the 1990 census and redistricting.

Greenwald has a big cash-on-hand disadvantage now, but her campaign has been working hard to raise money in July. I’ve received e-mails from personal friends asking me to donate, as well as two letters from the campaign (one signed by Tom Harkin, Leonard Boswell and Bruce Braley, the other signed by Tom and Christie Vilsack).

I’ve already given to her campaign, but my husband and I are digging deeper to donate again this month.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has not reserved any air time in Iowa yet, but they are watching this race, as is EMILY’s list, which seeks to elect pro-choice, Democratic women at all levels of government.

I expect one or both of those groups to get involved in the IA-04 race, assuming Greenwald produces strong numbers this month. The Des Moines and Mason City media markets are not that expensive, compared to districts where many other challengers need to purchase paid media.

The infrastructure will be there to support heavy Democratic turnout in this district. Barack Obama’s campaign has already opened four field offices in IA-04, with a fifth office planned.

Also, the fourth district has been receptive to strong Democratic candidates in recent years. Speaking to Iowa Independent two weeks ago, Greenwald made this point:

“This is not a campaign that was launched on a whim,” she said. “This is not just a campaign that’s based on hope that I’ll do well. Sen. Harkin won 28 of the 28 counties in the 4th District in 2002. The 4th District is the only district in Iowa in which he carried every single county. Gov. Culver, when he ran in 2006, carried 22 of the 28 counties in the 4th District.”

Please donate to Greenwald’s campaign before the end of July.

UPDATE: I didn’t realize Karl Rove was coming to Des Moines today to raise money for Latham. A press release from Greenwald’s campaign is after the jump. Also, you can view this YouTube she taped in response to Rove’s visit:

I love how Greenwald referred to Rove in this clip: “Today, Karl Rove, the man who is too busy to even testify before Congress, is going to be in Iowa raising money for Tom Latham.”

I got a press release yesterday from Representative Bruce Braley’s office about the National Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act, which the U.S. House approved by a vote of 367-55. This bill includes language authored by Braley “to establish a pilot program to monitor structural flaws in highway bridges.”

The full text of the press release is after the jump. Braley was working on creating this pilot program before this summer’s flooding damaged even more Iowa bridges. That’s an example of how a forward-thinking representative can serve constituents, and not only Iowans living in the first district.

Compare this to Representative Steve King’s record. When the Sioux City Journal tried to answer the question “How effective is Steve King?”, they learned that

Of the 44 bills King has sponsored according to www.GovTrack.us, three have made it out of committee and only one has been acted. The piece of legislation? House Resolution 847: Recognizing the importance of Christmas [in] the Christian faith.

Keep in mind that Republicans controlled the U.S. House during King’s first two terms in Congress. What’s his excuse for not getting more accomplished? He points to helping expand a tax credit for small ethanol and biodiesel producers as well as securing some funding for widening Highway 20. But even King admits that in a Democratic-controlled chamber, he is mainly hoping to block Democratic bills:

“That very well may be the best contribution that I have made in this 110th Congress, is slowing down, sometimes stopping” Democratic-sponsored bills,” he said.

King said the extended 2007 funding debate for reauthorization of the federal State Children’s Health Insurance Program was a key moment. The measure was initially written for an increase of $35 billion, but was scaled back before being signed by President Bush in December.

King took to the House floor last fall with a sign that said the SCHIP acronym should instead stand for “Socialized Clinton-style Hillarycare for Illegals and their Parents.”

“I do believe if you took me out of the equation, there would have been a different (funding) result,” King said.

With the Democratic Party leading the GOP by nine points on the generic Congressional ballot, and the Republicans defending more than two dozen open House seats, it’s clear that the Democrats are poised to expand their majority.

Do Iowans in the fifth district want their representative to set his sights on blocking bills, disrupting the legislative branch’s oversight of the executive and being the loudest anti-immigration voice in the room?

Rob Hubler has a solid grasp of the issues and would be able to get things done for Iowans as a member of the majority party. Click here to get involved with Hubler’s campaign, or head out to meet him in person at a county fair this weekend.

Haven’t had a chance to watch the speech, but I hear it was a great one. Meteor Blades says, “By This Foreign Policy Speech Will Future Ones Be Measured”:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…

Todd Beeton had the bizarre experience of listening to the speech with Rush Limbaugh adding snide remarks from time to time:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008…

What did you think?

There’s big news today for those who have been working toward “blue-green alliances” between organized labor and environmental groups.

Thanks to this Daily Kos diary by TomP, I learned that Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa has pulled the union out of an alliance supporting more oil drilling in environmentally sensitive areas:

“We are not going to drill our way out of the energy problems we are facing-not here and not in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge,” Hoffa told labor and environmental activists at an Oakland, Calif., summit on good jobs and clean air. “We must find a long-term approach that breaks our dependence on foreign oil by investing in the development of alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal power.”

Hoffa then announced the union’s withdrawal from the ANWR coalition, citing the need to build a green economy that fosters the development of alternative energy sources and creates good union jobs-instead of lining the pockets of big oil tycoons.

Hoffa also said that by investing in green energy solutions, the nation will reap the benefits of curbing its dependence on oil through a revitalized economy with the creation of millions of new jobs in a rapidly growing industry.

The Sierra Club and United Steelworkers forged a “Blue-Green Alliance” in 2006 and jointly endorsed Barack Obama for president at an event in Ohio last month.

But the Teamsters have been strong supporters of expanding oil drilling in the past. I never thought I’d see the day when Jim Hoffa pulled out of the ANWR coalition.

The battle over proposed coal-fired power plants has strained relations between labor unions and environmental advocates in Iowa this year. Today’s news gives me hope that in the future we will see more cooperation between those groups in promoting a forward-looking energy policy.

Tim Hoy, Democratic candidate in House District 44, responded to my post earlier this month about Iowa's brain drain. Hoy says reversing Iowa's brain drain is critical for rural Iowa.

Iowa has a long and proud history of providing education to our youth; education at its highest standards. But, in recent decades, those young, accomplished people of Iowa have left this great state to pursue financial rewards elsewhere, often never returning.

The brain drain effect is more disproportionally felt in rural communities. This is reflected on main streets in rural Iowa; communities that are dramatically losing population.

State government has numerous tools at its disposal to foster economic incentives to make this possible. This must take place at both private levels as well as governmental levels. We must also re-evaluate our tax code and take a look at a decentralization of government employees.

For Iowa’s future, we must stem and reverse this “brain drain,” if we truly want to have the future of Iowa as bright as its past. This bright future must be provided not only in our major cities, but our rural communities as well.

Hoy is running to replace the retiring Polly Granzow in Hardin and rural Marshall County. In 2006, he was 260 votes short of winning the district.

Please help expand the majority in the Iowa House by donating to Tim Hoy or these other great candidates we have featured in the past few months: Elesha Gayman, Eric Palmer, and Jerry Sullivan.

William Meyers is obviously passionate about politics and willing to spend lots of time volunteering for political causes, which is commendable.

But I am hard-pressed to think of any activist who has applied himself in a more self-defeating and counter-productive way than Meyers. First he declared himself an independent candidate for Congress after losing the fourth district primary–a move I still think he will regret someday.

Now I learn from Iowa Independent that Meyers has launched a new website against Iowa’s smoking ban. I spent a little time on repealthesmokingban.org. The “leaders” page lists Meyers as the founder and online coordinator of Repealthesmokingban.org and former Republican State Senator George Eichhorn as the attorney representing bar and restaurant owners who are fighting the ban. (I don’t give that lawsuit much chance of succeeding.)

Not surprisingly, Meyers’ website disputes evidence of the harm caused by secondhand smoke. It also contains a page listing bars and restaurants all over the country that have closed, allegedly because of local smoking bans.

Guess what? Lots of restaurants and bars go out of business, whether or not they permit smoking. If I’m not mistaken, 50 percent of restaurants fail during their first year of operation. Competition is fierce, and food and transportation costs are rising while the public’s disposable income is dropping.

But there is simply no credible evidence that smoking bans are bad for business. On the contrary, research supports the opposite conclusion.

Meyers’ new website has a page seeking to recruit volunteers in every Iowa county. Repealthesmokingban.org has also grouped counties into 11 clusters and is seeking a district coordinator in each.

If people want to lobby legislators to repeal the smoking ban, it’s a free country. I don’t object to people organizing toward that end, even if I think Meyers is wrong on this issue.

What really bothers me about the website is the page listing the “nannies” (Chet Culver and all the legislators who supported the smoking ban):

CONTACT THEM AND DEMAND REPEAL! – REMEMBER THEM ON VOTING DAY!

The Nannies….anyone who thinks they should be able to tell other adults how to live. The militantly anti-anything-else-they-see-someone-else-enjoying.

Never mind the nonsensical spin about people being “militantly anti-anything-else-they-see-someone-else-enjoying.” No one is trying to deprive Meyers or anyone else the pleasure of smoking in the privacy of his own home. But your right to enjoy a cigarette doesn’t give you the right to jeopardize someone else’e health.

This website goes way beyond lobbying legislators to repeal the smoking ban. By asking voters to “remember” the “nannies” on election day, Meyers is in effect urging Iowans to vote Democrats out of their legislative majority.

Here’s a link to the roll call votes in the Iowa House and Senate on the final version of the smoking ban bill.

In the House, 45 Democrats and nine Republicans voted yes.

In the Senate, 25 Democrats and one Republican voted yes.

As if Meyers hasn’t done enough damage to his political future by refusing to accept the outcome of the fourth district primary, he is now mobilizing angry smokers to cast their votes based on that one issue.

I find it interesting that Meyers supported Barack Obama’s campaign in Iowa. I wonder if he heard what Obama said at a presidential debate last September when asked whether he would support a national law to ban smoking in public places:

I think that local communities are making enormous strides, and I think they’re doing the right thing on this. If it turns out that we’re not seeing enough progress at the local level, then I would favor a national law. I don’t think we’ve seen the local laws play themselves out entirely, because I think you’re seeing an enormous amount of progress in Chicago, in New York, in other major cities around the country. And because I think we have been treating this as a public health problem and educating the public on the dangers of secondhand smoke, that that pressure will continue. As I said, if we can’t provide these kinds of protections at the local level, which would be my preference, I would be supportive of a national law.

Oh, no! Obama thinks that communities are “doing the right thing” to ban smoking in public, but he would support a federal law on the issue if the local ordinances are not adequately protecting Americans against secondhand smoke.

Attention, field organizers for Obama: don’t give William Meyers any numbers to call or doors to knock this fall. For all we know, he’ll go around telling people not to vote for the “nanny.”

MoveOn Political Action is giving away Vote Obama 2008 buttons:

Dear MoveOn member,

We’re giving away new Obama buttons for free, as part of a massive national visibility campaign. Want one? Click here:

http://pol.moveon.org/obamabut…

After you’ve gotten yours, forward this email on to everyone you know so that they can get free Obama buttons too.

If hundreds of thousands of us wear these wherever we go, we’ll send a strong message that Barack Obama is the candidate with the buzz, momentum, excitement-and sincere support of regular folks across the country.

Thanks for all you do.

-Peter, Patrick S., Laura, Matt and the rest of the team

Want to support our work? We’re entirely funded by our 3.2 million members-no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.

I have to admit that I don’t plan to wear an Obama button, but I am happy to help other Democrats obtain them.

Use this as an open thread to discuss your favorite campaign buttons or bumper stickers. A friend of mine has been wearing a very cool button that says Barack Obama in Hebrew.