It is probably still an inconvenient or touchy time to be talking about this with all of the truly disastrous flooding coming to an end in Iowa and the cleanup just beginning.  But it has to be said: we weren’t truly prepared for this kind of disaster and we have to take steps to prevent it from happening in the future.

Brad Johnson, a research associate at the Center for American Progress and a blogger at their Wonk Room policy blog, brought my attention to a couple of his posts on the terrible flooding and storms in the Midwest this summer, particularly in Iowa.  And in those posts he makes a couple of fascinating points.

First, he notes Sen. Chuck Grassley’s hypocrisy in calling attention to the complacency over severe weather (speaking on the Senate floor about the deadly Parkersburg tornado) yet voted to filibuster the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act.

Second, he notes an unfortunate quote from Gov. Chet Culver about our inability to “anticipate or prepare for” these types of events.  The facts are that reports since at least 2000 have been forecasting the types of weather patterns Iowa has been experiencing over the last couple of years.  See the link above for more information at Johnson’s post.

It seems clear that leadership on both sides of the political spectrum in Iowa have failed us.  They are not considering the big picture when it comes to environmental concerns in the state of Iowa.  And statewide environmental groups aren’t putting the pressure on local and state officials to keep them accountable either.

We need better and bolder leadership on the broad issues of global climate change and environmental issues in Iowa.  Whether or not you want to attribute the cause of these terrible weather patterns to global climate change, call them a natural aberration, or simply just call them normal, our leaders should be considering some important things when moving forward with reconstruction.  Bill Becker at Climate Progress offers more details, but here is his list which he deems lessons from an angry planet:

1. We need to put unprecedented pressure on our national leaders to get serious about mitigation and adaptation.
2. It’s past time to rethink national flood control and water management strategy.
3. When we repair and rebuild disaster-damaged buildings and infrastructure, we should do so with cutting-edge mitigation and adaptation in mind.

Groups like the Iowa Global Warming Campaign, the Iowa Chapter of the Sierra Club, the Iowa Environmental Council, and any other group committed to protecting and defending Iowa’s environment should be tackling issues like this.  Granted, there are concerns about hog lots, Iowa’s waterways, and coal power plants to be concerned about as well.  Heck, even 1000 Friends of Iowa should be concerned about future development that not only is environmentally-friendly but that protects families and businesses on or near flood plains.

The state needs leadership on these pressing issues.  We call events like these “100 year floods” and “500 year floods” for a reason.  The frequency with which they occur is not what is implied, but the the likelihood that they will.  In just a 15 year period of time, we’ve experienced drastic periods of extreme drought and extreme precipitation.  You can even go back to periods in the 1980s (particularly around 1984) and see the same type of patterns, but with less severity.  We are certainly experiencing more severity with more frequency.  This is a result of global climate change.  We aren’t taking the threats seriously and we aren’t preparing ourselves for the future–either by accommodating the tragic effects that are likely or by acting to stop these events from happening in the first place.

The big debate in Iowa that is now emerging as the flood waters head downstream and leave the state is how to pay for all of the destruction and prepare for the reconstruction.  Some want to use the state’s rainy-day fund and others are looking at incurring state debt as an option.  In the end, the debate will be politically charged about fiscal issues and not the bigger picture.  Democrats and Progressives in Iowa have to think big picture or our meager political gains (and the state itself) will be washed away, no pun intended.

The non-profit organization 1000 Friends of Iowa gives out Best Development Awards every year to recognize “quality development and redevelopment projects in Iowa and leadership that upholds our mission.”

Here is the organization’s mission statement:

1000 Friends of Iowa promotes responsible development that

   *  Conserves and protects our agricultural and natural resources

   *  Revitalizes our neighborhoods, towns, and cities; and

   *  Improves the quality of life for future generations

The awards are given in six categories:

   * New Residential

   * Renovated Residential

   * Renovated Commercial/Civic

   * New Commercial/Civic

   * Mixed Use

   * Leadership

After the jump you can find more information about how to nominate a project, as well as the criteria used to judge nominees. That information can also be found here.

To see photos and read about the 2007 award-winners, click here.

The 2006 winners of the Best Development Awards can be seen on this page.

Click here to see which projects won in 2005.

The deadline for nominations is coming right up on June 25, so spread the word and act quickly if you know of a worthy project.

More details about the Best Development Awards are after the jump.

The House of Representatives may vote very soon on a bad compromise that would in effect grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies in the new version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

If you live in Iowa’s third district, please call Congressman Leonard Boswell TODAY at 202-225-3806 to tell him to stand up for civil liberties and oppose the Senate version of the FISA bill.

His staff will notice if they get a lot of calls on this issue.

Background: Boswell was one of the “Blue Dogs” who supported the Republican position on this bill in February.

He changed his position a month later and stood with the majority of House Democrats.

The New York Times blog has more on the FISA compromise here.

I don’t spend a lot of time reading conservative blogs, but my brief tour around Iowa’s Republican blogosphere yesterday revealed acute concern about the prospect of a special legislative session to address the recent historic flooding in much of the state.

We have thousands of Iowans needing assistance with housing, as well as huge clean-up and reconstruction tasks.

But the Flyover Country blog is convinced that the nasty Democrats are talking about a special session solely to reap political benefits. That blogger sees Democratic efforts to “politicize the floods” everywhere he looks. He names June 11 as the first day of this nefarious strategy, citing this story about Governor Chet Culver mobilizing National Guard units and talking about a possible special session of the legislature.

Side note: it seems like a distant memory, but back before George W. Bush was president, National Guard units were mostly used to deal with this kind of situation, rather than to fight foreign wars.

But I digress.

Why wouldn’t our elected officials convene to address such a huge catastrophe? The Iowa flooding has been dominating national news. I’ve gotten phone calls and e-mails from all over the country and even abroad, asking if we are ok and how bad the damage is.

Members of Iowa’s Congressional delegation (Republicans as well as Democrats) are working fast to get federal money to assist with cleanup and reconstruction efforts in flood-ravaged areas.

I expect representatives from other states to expedite this process, because the damage to Iowa’s infrastructure could have far-reaching economic effects. For more on that, read SlyDi’s piece, “How A Midwest Flood Can Drag Down A Nation.”

A different conservative blog, Battleground Iowa, thinks state officials and legislators should wait and see how much damage there is, how many people are insured, and what the federal government will do before getting the state involved.

In other words, “Don’t just do something–stand there!”

Do you think the public expects our elected officials to just wait and see who else will step in to deal with a historic natural disaster affecting tens of thousands of Iowans?

I would love to see Iowa Republicans come out against a special legislative session to focus on state flood relief and reconstruction efforts. Let them make the case for state government doing nothing.

The Real Sporer had a slightly different angle, taking offense mainly at the idea that Iowa might go into debt to pay for flood relief and reconstruction:

Democrat Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal’s knee jerk reaction saw only the opportunity to outspend the State’s emergency fund and incur debt to finance the difference.

Here’s a thought; if the emergency fund isn’t adequate to cover the socialist’s blue sky list of flood relief start cutting other items. Start with a deep Dave Vaudt audit over at the Departments of Education and Human Services. At a time when Iowa will have thousands of real victims of tragic circumstance on our hands when would be a better time to ask why the cost of education is five times faster than the general rate of inflation in Iowa’s larger economy?

Please, Republicans, please tell Iowans that we should cut education spending if our state’s “rainy day fund” is not sufficient to cover the cost of flood relief.

Seriously, when even the notorious tax-hating deficit hawk David Yepsen says we need to “Borrow to bankroll massive rebuilding,” it’s time for Republicans to question their automatic distrust of every government effort to help people.

Just to show that I don’t automatically distrust every comment by every Republican, State 29 raises some valid questions about government support for economic development in flood zones (even if I don’t share all of his conclusions).

Also, I agree with Krusty Konservative that it was inappropriate for Senator Wally Horn (who represents much of the Cedar Rapids area) to say, “These are good loyal Democrats, and they need our help.”

Residents of flood-ravaged areas deserve equal attention from the government, no matter what their voting patterns.

I was offended when the Bush administration was quicker to get post-Katrina aid to Mississippi than to the most devastated areas of New Orleans, and I would be offended if officials in Iowa seemed to favor certain towns or neighborhoods because of how their residents vote.

If you’ve ever attended a typical town hall meeting featuring a member of Congress in his or her district, you know that turnout tends to be low.

Congressman Bruce Braley held a telephone town hall meeting Tuesday evening to discuss high gas prices with interested constituents. Nearly 5,000 first-district residents who received an automated phone call inviting them to the meeting opted to listen.

That is a huge number. Obviously, the convenience of the telephone format helped, because people didn’t need to drive to a different town or county (which would burn gas and cost money).

Still, people have so many competing demands on their time that I am shocked by how many people spent part of a summer evening listening to a member of Congress talk about energy policy.

A lot of people hang up the second they realize the voice on the other end is a robocall.

In case it wasn’t already obvious, the high price of gas is of great concern to large numbers of Iowans. The overwhelming majority of us live in car-dependent neighborhoods.

A statement released tonight by Braley’s Congressional office is after the jump.  

There seem to be two distinct ideas emerging for financing the massive reconstruction project Iowa will have to enact to deal with the tragic and disastrous floods we’ve experienced this spring (on a quick side note, I sure hope that summer fares us better).  The first is to tap into the state’s so-called “rainy day” fund (no pun was intended, I’m sure) and the other is to borrow money and essentially create debt.  Both are the logical responses to a natural disaster of this magnitude.  I think it was a Johnson County emergency management official who said this was “our own Katrina.”  Whether he meant that in terms of sheer destruction or bad planning or reactions to the event, I’m not sure.  But the statement still leaves an impact.

Once we get beyond the human and emotional costs of the flooding, we will ultimately have to deal with the political ramifications of financing the reconstruction.  Governor Culver seems to prefer using the state’s rainy day fund.  Senate Majority Leader Gronstal says he’s open to incurring debt.  So what are we to do?

At first glance, Gov. Culver’s idea would seem to the most politically feasible and publicly attractive option on the table.  The state and taxpayers won’t have to incur debt or use their taxes to pay off the bills because they’ll just use the extra money they have right now to reconstruct Iowa.  But I think there should be serious consideration of incurring debt to finance the reconstruction.

To me, the root of the problem is whether we want to rebuild or reconstruct what has been destroyed.  Those mean different things.  Rebuilding implies we’ll bring things back to the status quo, maybe with some minor improvements.  Reconstruction implies a step forward and desire to plan and implement improvements and to change the way we do things.  Iowa needs the investment in the future and needs to show that the state has the ability and capability to plan effectively, plan efficiently, and act with speed to solve problems and fix what has broken.

Incurring debt isn’t such a bad thing, as David Yepsen told us yesterday.  There are reasons to consider it.  Tapping into the rainy day fund isn’t a bad idea either.  But will either one be enough?

The special legislative session to deal with this issue is going to happen; it has to.  But the debate will be a lengthy one.  And it will result in tough decisions.  Contrary to what others argue, waiting to see what the federal government will pay for is not an option.  If this truly is “our Katrina” then we all know that federal disaster response is horrid.  The state must act soon.

According to Hotline, AFSCME and MoveOn.org Political Action are spending $543,000 to run this ad in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and on CNN and MSNBC for a week, beginning on Wednesday:

What do you think?

McCain’s campaign will claim that he’s been taken out of context, and that he doesn’t want us to be at war in Iraq for 100 years. The bottom line, though, is that most Americans don’t want our troops bogged down in Iraq forever, staffing permanent bases, even if casualty rates declined considerably.

UPDATE: An e-mail I received from Moveon.Org says this ad is “the most effective TV ad we’ve ever created.” It says Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research surveyed viewers of this ad and found that a “61 percent majority describe the ad as convincing.”

The full text of the Moveon.Org e-mail is after the jump.

As always, please send me an e-mail or put up a comment if I have left out any significant event.

In many communities, this week will be dominated by flood clean-up activities. Stay safe if you are volunteering for any of those.

Note that First Lady Mari Culver’s Poverty Conference in Des Moines, which was originally scheduled for June 19, has been rescheduled for September 16. John Edwards was to be the keynote speaker for that event. It is not yet clear whether he will deliver the keynote in September.

If you already registered for this conference but won’t be able to attend in September, go here to update your registration:

http://www.iowaworkforce.org/p…

Tuesday, June 17:

Rob Hubler, Democratic candidate for Congress in Iowa’s fifth district, will be at a picnic with the Schaben family at Pleasant View Park in Dunlap 6:30pm. BBQ and an auction, including a signed copy of Obama’s book! Call (712) 352-2077 for details.

Congressman Bruce Braley will hold a first-ever telephone town hall meeting at 7 pm “to discuss gas prices and the need for a new direction in our energy policies.” Iowans who wish to call in to the town hall themselves should contact one of Rep. Braley’s district offices for a call-in number and passcode.

Thursday, June 19:

Johnston’s Green Days weekend begins on Thursday evening and runs through Sunday with a long list of events and activities:

http://johnstongreendays.org/s…

Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa is holding its annual event from 5:30 to 9:00 pm at the Marriott Hotel in West Des Moines. The special guest will be the “Shoe Lady,” Miss Meghan Cleary. Miss Meghan, author of The Perfect Fit: What Your Shoes Say About You, can tell your personality just by looking at your shoes. How fun! Plan on kicking up your heels at Celebrate Shoes! Tickets cost $125/person or $75/person for 35 years old and under. To reserve your seat at the event, call 515-235-0406 or e-mail JGood AT ppgi.org.

Friday, June 20:

Ankeny Area Democrats annual Garage and Bake Sale will be held at the home of Arvid and Mary Oliver 1709 NE Lowell Court, on June 20 and 21. Start gathering the items you would like to donate to the sale. These items can be delivered the any time during the week of the sale. Your help is invaluable to a successful sale. We will be setting up and pricing on Thursday the 19h.  For further information either email Ankenyareadems@msn.com or, call Arvid or Mary at 964-1227.

Johnston Green Days events begin on Friday at 5 pm. More details are here:

http://johnstongreendays.org/s…

Saturday, June 21:

Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa and the Healthy Families project will be at the Des Moines Farmer’s Market this Saturday, June 21st. Volunteers will represent the Planned Parenthood mission, and help educate people about the need to reduce unintended pregnancies in Iowa.  Of course we’ll be handing out lots of goodies as well! Past Farmer’s market volunteers have had a lot of fun, and say it’s one of the best volunteer opportunities available. Help educate the public and have fun too. Any time you can give is much appreciated: work for a couple of hours, or the whole time. Shifts are available from 8am – Noon. Click here to e-mail Chelsea Hammond to volunteer or call (515) 235-0415

Congressional candidate Rob Hubler, Council Bluffs Mayor Hanafan, Senator Gronstal, Representative Shomshor, Kurt Hubler (house district 99 challenger), other local candidates, and the Pottawattamie county democrats will be at the grand opening party of the county office at 722 Creek Top in Council Bluffs. Rob Hubler will be speaking and answering questions from 5-7pm. Details 712-352-1192.

As part of the Juneteenth celebration in Des Moines, Neighbors Day will run from noon to 7:00 pm on Saturday at Evelyn Davis Park, 14th and Forest Avenue in Des Moines. Come out, enjoy some tasty food and listen to some great performances from the Ambassadors of Praise Choir of Cornerstone Family Church(directed by Rev. Tina Williams), Big Bang!, Comfort Zone, Des Moines Boyz, Sumpin’ Doo and more.

Johnston Green Days event schedule:

http://johnstongreendays.org/s…

Sunday, June 22:

Last day for carnival at Johnston Green Days event from 1 pm to 5 pm at the Johnston Commons.

Steve King likes nothing better than to stake out a conservative position on a hot-button social issue. I learned yesterday from the One Iowa advocacy group that this week Congressman King “has introduced a Federal Constitutional Amendment to codify discrimination and ban same sex marriages nationwide.”

Please consider donating to Democrat Rob Hubler’s Congressional campaign. Even though Iowa’s fifth district has a partisan index of R+8, turnout among hard-line conservatives may be depressed this November. John McCain has little organization in Iowa, and he is not popular with the anti-immigration wingnuts. Many moderate Republicans are embarrassed by King, so perhaps they would be open to ticket-splitting.

It’s not as if King has been effective in bringing money home to his district, which would give people a reason to vote for him even if they disagreed with some of his antics.

Need more reasons to support a good Democrat taking on this horrible Republican?

King received a perfect 100 rating from the American Conservative Union in 2007, and has a near-perfect 98 rating from that organization during his three terms in Congress.

King wrote Iowa’s English-only law when he was in the legislature and successfully filed suit to prevent the Secretary of State’s office from providing voter information in languages other than English.

He thinks it’s fine for pharmacists to refuse to prescribe the morning-after pill.

He has sponsored a constitutional amendment to ban the federal income tax and has warned against creating a “condom culture” in Africa.

And of course, he said a few months ago that terrorists would be dancing in the streets if Obama were elected president.

Click that last link for more of King’s “greatest hits,” including his defense of Senator Joseph McCarthy and his characterization of torture at Abu Ghraib as “hazing.”

Hubler deserves our support for taking on this challenge. I’ll be writing more about this race in the coming months. Click here to get involved in his campaign.

The full text of the e-mail I received from One Iowa about the newly proposed federal constitutional amendment is after the jump. You can donate to that organization’s Fairness Fund PAC at this ActBlue page. They have a matching gift pledge that runs through July 14.

The only thing that surprises me about Al Gore's endorsement of Barack Obama today is that it took him so long. Obama supporters were hinting that this was in the works way back in November and December. I figured he would come out in February or March (Gore and Hillary Clinton famously did not get along).

I can only assume that either Gore was determined to avoid political controversy after winning the Nobel Prize, or Gore had serious concerns about Obama (such as his openness to expanding our use of coal and nuclear power).

Gore and Obama will appear at a joint rally in Detriot tonight. Obama and John Edwards also did their first joint event in Michigan. Obama wasn't smart enough to get behind a re-vote plan for Michigan this spring, but he is apparently smart enough to realize he goes into the general election in a weak position in that state.

UPDATE: For the video and the liveblog of this event, go here:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008…

I was very pleased to read that Obama “called out the crowd for booing Clinton during Granholm’s introduction. And he’s now praising her effusively.” Good for him.

Seeing Gore in the news makes me think about what might have been different if he had run for president. I believe Obama would have stayed out if Gore had jumped in. Perhaps Edwards would have been forced to withdraw before the early states voted.

But would Gore have beaten Hillary Clinton? I could argue that one either way. What do you think?

SECOND UPDATE: The e-mail Gore sent out on Monday endorsing Obama is after the jump.

The video of Gore endorsing Obama in Detroit on Monday night can be viewed here:

http://my.BarackObama.com/Gore…

I recently received a fundraising letter from Senator Staci Appel (Senate district 37), and it contains the following paragraph:

As a freshman legislator, I also had the great opportunity to manage House File 2212 (The Healthy Indoor Clean Air Act) when it came before the Iowa Senate. I was happy to work in a bipartisan effort to pass this important piece of legislation. This legislation will protect workers and individuals all across Iowa.

I’ve been writing posts supporting the smoking ban all year, but I never thought to refer to it only as “The Healthy Indoor Clean Air Act.” Many people might not even realize Appel is talking about the smoking ban. Who’s against healthy, indoor clean air?

This kind of thing is what separates the pros from the amateurs.

Ed Kilgore: “The case for an Obama-Clinton ticket, also known as, you got any better ideas?”

Thomas Schaller: “He would lose his claim to being the candidate of change — and probably wouldn’t get any swing states in return.”

Read, then discuss.

I don’t know what the best choice for Obama is. I think Hillary clearly would help him in some swing states, but would she hurt him in others? He is presumably doing the state polling now to figure that out.

UPDATE: In what doesn’t look like a smart move to me, the Obama campaign has hired Patti Solis Doyle, who was responsible for many of the Clinton campaign’s enormous strategic errors, to be chief of staff for Obama’s future running mate.

Insiders are interpreting this as a signal that Obama is not even considering Hillary for VP. Clinton and Solis Doyle have apparently been estranged since Solis Doyle was fired right after Super Tuesday.

If I were Obama, I would not be going out of my way to insult the Clinton camp right now.

SECOND UPDATE: Matt Stoller is still advocating for Wes Clark as VP, and I find it hard to disagree after watching this video:

The VP candidate needs to help build the case against John McCain. Without coming across as strident, Clark makes a very effective case against McCain on national security (supposedly McCain’s strength). Clark’s longtime ties to the Clintons would help unite the party as well.

Over at Iowa Independent, Jason Hancock published this story about a handful of college activists for Hillary Clinton who have either endorsed John McCain or are considering voting for him.

As regular readers of this blog know, I am the last person to sing Barack Obama’s praises. I have deep concerns about him as a candidate and as a potential president.

I am also very familiar with the feeling that the Democrats nominated the “wrong” person. I have been politically aware for eight presidential cycles, and the candidate of my choice has won the nomination exactly once.

I would encourage any Democrat who strongly opposes Obama not to box yourself in by declaring now that you’ll never vote for him.

I also hope that Obama supporters will back off and give their fellow Democrats some space. This passage in Hancock’s article seemed particularly important to me:

Jordan Levine, who served as co-president of the Grinnell College Students for Hillary, said he, too, may support McCain in the fall, but has not made up his mind. In addition to not liking where Obama stands on the issues, he also said the actions of his fellow Democrats are turning him off to their nominee.

“They are being belligerent and trying to push me into supporting Obama,” he said. “That should be a serious concern. I have every right to vote how I want.”

Many of us have heard alienating and counterproductive comments from Obama supporters, but don’t give them more power over your decisions than they deserve.

Levine said his indecision on Obama has nothing to do with emotion and everything to do with issues.

“I just don’t like where he stands,” he said. “One of my main issues is health care, and Obama’s plan has some very big differences with Clinton’s.”

Take it from Elizabeth Edwards, who also preferred Clinton’s health care plan to Obama’s: McCain’s health care proposal would be an expensive disaster. Spend a few minutes browsing the writings of nyceve at Daily Kos for more specifics on why McCain is very wrong on health care.

If nothing else, I hope you will keep the Supreme Court in mind when you vote for president. Making the case for John McCain earlier this year, former Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer noted that six of the nine Supreme Court justices will be at least 70 years old on Inauguration Day 2009. If that’s not a reason to be a yellow dog Democrat this year, I don’t know what is.

I received a fundraising letter from Congressman Leonard Boswell’s campaign recently. It contained a healthy dose of the misleading spin I have come to expect from Boswell’s mailings this year.

I’m not going to retype the whole text, but this passage made me laugh (emphasis is in the original):

My republican opponent has had four months to raise money and plan for the general election; an election that I am only able to focus my attention on now. While I was competing against an opponent for the Democratic nomination, the republicans were getting ready to once again challenge us in this competitive district. This time they have the advantage of a large head start.

Get real. Iowa’s third Congressional district is not on the National Republican Congressional Committee’s list of 2008 targets.

CQ Politics has rated IA-03 “safe Democrat”, in part because the Republicans are not targeting the seat.

The latest Cook Political Report of competitive U.S. House races makes no mention of IA-03, which means that seat is considered safe for the incumbent.

Similarly, IA-03 is nowhere to be found on Swing State Project’s list of competitive U.S. House races.

What about that big “head start” the Republicans supposedly got while Boswell was facing a primary challenge? The most recent Federal Election Commission reporting, based on the May 14, 2008 filings, show that Boswell had raised about $1.16 million this election cycle and had about $709,000 cash on hand.

Republican candidate Kim Schmett had raised about $54,500 so far this year and had just under $33,300 cash on hand.

Let Red Brannan and the others who funded the smear campaign against Ed Fallon replenish Boswell’s campaign coffers.

Democrats in the third district should vote for Boswell in November, but don’t be a sucker–plenty of other Democratic candidates need and deserve your donations more.

Speaking of which, I have given Becky Greenwald $100. Go here if you would like to contribute to her campaign. A strong fundraising number at the end of the second quarter would give her a boost against Tom Latham.

UPDATE: Another worthy candidate is Iowa native Heather Ryan, who is running against a horrible incumbent Republican in Kentucky’s first district. RDemocrat’s latest post on that race is here.

Earlier this month the Iowa Department of Public Health released draft regulations for implementing the smoking ban that will go into effect on July 1. You can view the draft regulations here.

The Des Moines Register reported a few days ago that the people who have always opposed the smoking ban are furious about the IDPH’s draft rules:

“In my mind and in the minds of just about every single legislator I’ve talked with in the past week – and that’s about 20 or so – this is an absolute perversion of the legislative intent. Period,” said Rep. McKinley Bailey, a Webster City Democrat who voted against the bill in April.

The state’s administrative rules are intended to help clarify and implement laws and spell out details of enforcement. The Legislature’s Administrative Rules Review Committee discussed the proposed rules for the smoking ban Wednesday.

The Legislature this year approved a ban on smoking, effective July 1, in almost all indoor public places, including bars and restaurants. One provision in the law allows bar owners to permit smoking in their outdoor patio areas but prohibits restaurants from allowing outdoor smoking.

The rules, also effective July 1, say that bar food is limited to ice, pre-packaged snacks, popcorn, peanuts and the reheating of commercially prepared foods that do not require assembly, such as frozen pizza.

Under that definition, bars that have a grill and serve a burger, for example, would be considered a restaurant.

McKinley Bailey is a good Democrat, but I think he’s wrong on this issue. A restaurant is commonly understood to mean “a place where meals are served to the public.” I looked that up in several dictionaries.

If you look up definitions of “bar,” you will find that it refers to a counter or an establishment where beverages, especially alcoholic beverages, are served. Some of the definitions mention that food may be served at bars as well. The IDPH draft regulations account for this, by explaining the types of food that a bar may serve.

If you allowed every establishment that serves drinks to evade the smoking ban, you’d have hundreds of restaurant owners placing a few tables outside and declaring themselves to be “bars.”

It seems reasonable to say that if a business is serving the public food cooked to order, that establishment is a restaurant subject to the smoking ban.

I want to address this part of the Register article as well:

“This is a clear case where a state agency is going beyond the scope of the intended legislation,” said Tom Baldwin, owner of Drink, a Clive bar.

Roughly 3 percent of Drink’s sales are from food. But because of the proposed rules, the facility would be considered a restaurant for the purposes of enforcement of the statewide smoking ban, he told the rules committee Wednesday.

Baldwin has a simple choice to make. If he thinks that his business depends on letting patrons smoke, he can stop serving meals cooked to order and serve pre-packaged food instead. By his own admission, food accounts for only about 3 percent of his business’s sales.

Or, if he feels that cooking food for customers is vital for his business, he can go smoke-free.

Either way, I don’t think his argument about legislative intent holds water.

As I’ve written before, the research on smoking bans suggests that they do not hurt the bottom line. This report is worth reading in full, but here is the main conclusion:

A significant body of scientific research has been accumulated on the economic impact of smoking bans on hospitality business, particularly bars and restaurants. The only research that shows any long-term negative effect on bar or restaurant sales is unscientific research that has been sponsored by the tobacco companies.

All independent published studies conducted in the US and Canada that used tax data in the analysis concluded that “smoking restrictions do not impact negatively on hospitality sales, employment, or tourism activity in the long run.”

The current economic climate, with rising costs for food and transportation hitting restaurants and forcing many consumers to reduce their discretionary spending, is a genuine threat to the hospitality industry. In contrast, restaurant and bar owners’ anger over the new smoking ban is misplaced.  

George Eichhorn conceded the GOP Senate primary on Friday, clearing the way for little-known Christopher Reed of Marion to get walloped by Tom Harkin this November.

It had to hurt for Eichhorn. Not only did Reed win by less than 1 percent of the vote, he only barely crossed the 35 percent threshold. If no candidate had won 35 percent of the vote, the Iowa Republican Party’s state convention would have selected the nominee. With his background in the state legislature, Eichhorn would have been the favorite to win among the GOP’s state delegates.

I’m guessing Harkin will spend a lot of time this fall campaigning on behalf of other Iowa Democrats.

We don’t make a huge deal out of “Hallmark holidays” in our family, but I still want to congratulate Mr. desmoinesdem. This man can wear a baby in a sling as well as building impressive structures with Legos and wooden blocks.

I’m also thinking of Nate Willems, Democratic candidate in Iowa House district 29. He and his wife welcomed their first child into the world a few weeks ago. I hope they are staying dry in Linn County.

Congratulations also to Iowa City blogger John Deeth, who became a first-time grandfather this spring. He must be exhausted from sandbagging his home and helping out in other parts of town.

Use this as an open thread for discussing any father you’re thinking of today.

A John Edwards supporter who is a delegate to the Iowa Democratic Party’s state convention received this letter from Edwards and posted it on a bloggers’ e-mail loop. She said the letter arrived on Barack Obama letterhead:

June 10, 2008

Dear State Convention Delegates and Alternates:

I want to thank you for all that you have done to support Elizabeth and me over the years. It has been an honor to have your support.

We are now at a critical time in this nominating process. And I know that Barack Obama is a good man who will stand up for what matters for the future of this country. I know he carries the same hope in his heart that you and I do. The hope to make this country better, to end 8 long years of division, and to build one America instead of two.

I am asking you today to join with me in publicly supporting Barack Obama. We need you in this cause and in this movement. I always said that our campaign was not about me — it was about a vision for true change in American and the strength to fight for it.

In their search for a candidate to fulfill this vision, the Democratic voters in America have made their choice — and so have I. Barack Obama is the leader we need, and it’s up to each one of us to make sure we elect him President. I hope that I can count on you to join me in this cause.

Again, many thanks for all your past and continued support.

Sincerely,

John Edwards

The Iowa Democratic Party’s state convention was to have been held today, but it was postponed because of the catastrophic flooding in many parts of the state. Party leaders have rescheduled the event for June 28 in Des Moines.

Edwards delegates were able to form viable groups at four of the five district conventions held in Iowa two months ago, but that was before Edwards endorsed Obama.

David Redlawsk, an Edwards supporter from Iowa City who is also a delegate to the Democratic National Convention, had previously said he would encourage Edwards delegates to stay together at the state convention. Redlawsk explained that although he will vote for Obama at the DNC in Denver, he wants to help get more Edwards supporters chosen as Iowa delegates to the convention.

An e-mail from Senator Tom Harkin reminded Iowans that there is an “Iowa Concern” hotline for those in need.

If you have been affected by the recent severe weather and flooding, you can call 1-800-447-1985.

More information is here on the ISU extension’s website:

http://www.extension.iastate.e…

Back in 1992 my family had just moved to Ankeny from Charlotte, North Carolina and we arrived in town and spent the next week living in the Best Western hotel on the corner of 1st and Deleware. Like every other child I would wake up in the morning on Sundays and watch whatever cartoons and kids shows were on.  However that week was different because we were all in one room and with only one television I watched what my parents wanted to watch and that was Meet the Press with Tim Russert and I was hooked.  We moved into our house on SE Peterson, but our moving truck had still not arrived so my family slept on the floor of our living room and while the rest of the week was filled with working to get our house in order we still watched Meet the Press with Tim Russert on Sunday and I had watched it nearly every week since.  Throughout the years my family moved to different houses in Ankeny, we watched T.V. in different rooms and our tastes in other shows grew and faded, but Meet the Press remained constant.

This was before the internet, 24 hour news stations, and before I knew the difference between a Republican and a Democrat.  I learned the language of politics from watching Tim Russert and the became a critical thinker by learning to question what I was being told and to be able to seperate what was someone giving their facts or their opinion.  It was not flashy and it didn't need to be.  There was nothing to distract us from issues that really mattered and questions that we ourselves asked.  We learned about the person being interviewed but we also learned about ourselves.  While every other part of the news media has changed,  Meet the Press had remained the same.  I learned about politics from the good to the bad and everything inbetween.

 I had the honor of meeting Tim Russert at last year's  Jefferson Jackson Dinner in Des Moines.  He had been talking with a few people and I was standing by waiting for them to finish their conversation and Tim saw me waiting patiently and after he finished he approached me and we chatted.  Other than introducing myself and thanking him for talking to me, I can't remember one thing I said, but I remembered that he acted more excited to talk to me than I was to talk to him.  He asked me questions about where I was from and who I was supporting and why I was supporting them and would wear an expression on his face as if what I said really mattered to him.  I remember thinking that my opinion really mattered to him and that he held on to every word I said.  He thanked me for getting involved in politics and said I would be watching a part of history that night. 

This Sunday Meet the Press won't be on and Tim Russert has passed on but I will always remember how he has touched my life.  The biggest thing I have taken away from Meet the Press with Tim Russert is that politicans have to follow the facts, the facts can't follow the politican.