Chuck Grassley provoked the wrath of New Yorkers with these comments about why Rudy Giuliani failed to do well in Iowa:

“Lifestyle,” Grassley replied. “Things you do in Las Vegas stay in Las Vegas. Things you do in New York don’t stay in New York. I think a New York personality … hasn’t gone over in some places.”[…]

Continued Grassley: “It seemed to me like when he was campaigning in Iowa, he did not have the one-on-one relationship. He didn’t take time to have the one-on-one relationship with people, even with the few events he was at. He tended to be in and out.

Some New York columnists and public figures have been piling on Grassley, calling him a “hick,” a “moron” and worse, leading the Register to publish a follow-up on this story today.

I think Grassley’s only half-right, by the way. Giuliani failed in Iowa because he didn’t do the slightest bit of outreach, even to many moderates who were inclined to support him.

I know of prominent Iowa Republicans who had considered endorsing Giuliani publicly, but ended up on the sidelines because he just wasn’t making the effort. I also remember overhearing a man in a restaurant telling his friends, “I thought I was gonna be for Rudy, but I am just loving Romney now.”

You can’t win if you don’t play, and Rudy wasn’t playing.

I think he could have finished a strong third or perhaps even second if he’d run a better campaign in Iowa.

On the other hand, he spent more time campaigning in New Hampshire and failed to move in the polls there. Maybe people really did like Rudy less the more they saw of him.

For me, the only disappointing thing about the Giuliani campaign’s slow-motion implosion is that Steve Gilliard wasn’t around to write about it.

I read on the front page of Wednesday’s Des Moines Register that this week, Representative Leonard Boswell introduced legislation directing the U.S. Postal Service to create a unique zip code for my suburb of Windsor Heights.

As we’ve discussed here at Bleeding Heartland, a recent survey of Windsor Heights residents showed that 99 percent are satisfied with the quality of life in Windsor Heights, and 89 percent described the city services and quality of life as “above average.”

Apparently the most frequent complaint city officials hear from residents is the lack of a unique zip code. Windsor Heights has three different zip codes; two mostly cover neighborhoods in Des Moines, and one mostly covers parts of Urbandale.

According to the Register on Wednesday,

Confusion between the ZIP codes and city boundaries has caused mail to be undelivered or returned to senders, has caused difficulty in tracking sex offenders, and has created problems for businesses.

Despite pleas from Windsor Heights city officials, U.S. postal officials have remained adamant that the suburb will not get its own ZIP code. Postal officials say the town has too few residents and doesn’t have a stand-alone post office. The city receives its mail from three post offices in Des Moines and Urbandale.

The article goes on to note that more than 100 Iowa cities and towns with smaller populations than Windsor Heights have unique zip codes, but that’s not the point of this post.

I personally know Windsor Heights residents who asked Boswell’s office years ago to help us get a zip code.

He just introduced a bill on the subject this week.

It’s too early to know whether Boswell’s proposed legislation has any chance of passing, or even getting out of the House Government Oversight and Reform subcommittee.

“We hope it will go forward, and the congressman will work hard with his colleagues in the House to get it moving,” Boswell spokeswoman McAvoy said.

Looks to me like this is another reason to thank Ed Fallon for challenging Boswell in the primary to represent Iowa’s third Congressional district.  

I am not watching and may not even bother with the rerun later.

If you watched, what did you think?

Are you interested in technology and politics?  Do you want to work in a swing state to help elect Democrats?  Do your friends come to you with their computer problems?  If this sounds familiar, the Iowa Democratic Party wants you.

We are looking for a highly-motivated individual to serve as IT assistant for our coordinated campaign.  While there will be the usual rigmarole of fixing computers and printers, it will  also be a chance to gain experience in micro-targeting, web and cell-based organizing, and more.  If you're interested in innovating at the intersection of politics and technology, you're probably the right person for the job.

We have one position starting mid-February, and another in early May. If you are interested in either, please contact Drew Miller at dmiller@iowademocrats.org.  You may also call the Iowa Democratic Party t (515) 244-7292.

We are also hiring right now for regional field directors (that's what I did last cycle), and Senate and House campaign managers.  At some point in the future we will be hiring for field organizers and summer canvassers, but you're more than welcome to send your resume now.  Email me any questions, or just leave them in the comments!

As Simon Stevenson noted here last week, the Iowa Republican Party’s fundraising lags well behind what Iowa Democrats have raised for the upcoming elections.

Now the Des Moines Register reports that Tom Harkin has $3.4 million in the bank going into his re-election campaign. Prominent Republicans are taking a pass on this race, and Harkin’s only declared opponent

is Steve Rathje, a Cedar Rapids businessman. Rathje as of Sept. 30 had raised about $49,000 for his campaign and had $259 cash on hand.

Finally, Harkin gets to take it easy. He had to fight hard against Greg Ganske in 2002, although he ended up winning by a comfortable margin.

Meanwhile, Ray Hoffman stepped down as chairman of the Iowa Republican Party halfway through his term and has been replaced by Stewart Iverson, who used to be the top Republican in the Iowa Senate but was blamed by some for the erosion of the GOP’s majority in that body.

Hoffman has said he is stepping down to focus more time on his growing restaurant business in Sioux City, but I suspect that the GOP’s woeful election prospects weighed on his mind as well.

As the Des Moines Register reported on Sunday, Iowa Republicans are taking a pass on the big races this year. So far Congressman Leonard Boswell (IA-03) does not even have a declared Republican opponent. This passage from that article was revealing:

Iowa Republicans’ apparent hesitation to mount strong challenges in these two races [against Harkin and Boswell] represents what top GOP activists and strategists say is a low point for the party that might not begin to rebound until after legislative and congressional districts are redrawn in 2012.

“We’ll be lucky with anything we get this year,” said Steve Roberts, a Republican National Committee member from Des Moines. “I don’t think there are a lot of people with high expectations this year. It’s a long road back for us this time.”

Danny Carroll, a former state legislator from Grinnell, considered running against Boswell, but told the Register,

Boswell has won against credible GOP candidates in more competitive political environments and 2008 does not look good.

“I’ve watched the pendulum swing for us,” said Carroll, who went from second in command of the Iowa House majority to one of his party’s highest-ranking casualties in 2006. “I think it’s a time of re-evaluation and reorganizing. I think we’re all just trying to figure it out for ourselves.”

Carroll’s decision was based in part on his belief that the district’s most Democrat-leaning counties, where Republican candidates have done well without winning in recent elections, had become less competitive.

Now, some people in the Democratic establishment are going to warn us that we better not support Ed Fallon in the primary against Boswell, because if we do, we might lose the seat.

But let’s be realistic. Boswell has no Republican opponent. If he wins a tough primary, it’s not going to matter.

If Fallon wins the primary, will some Republican come out of the woodwork to challenge him? If so, that candidate will be starting to build a fundraising and outreach effort six months after Fallon started working the district hard:

Craig Robinson, political director of the Republican Party of Iowa, said a Fallon victory might convince an established candidate to enter the race. He also cautioned against such a strategy, which would keep a Republican from getting organized until after the June 3 primary.

“If the Democrats are going to have a contested primary, my advice is to get out there now and start raising money and building a campaign organization,” said Robinson.

In any event, the Register’s article from Sunday makes clear that Iowa’s third Congressional district leans even more Democratic following the presidential caucuses:

For instance, more than 8,600 Polk County voters changed their registration to Democrat in January, the vast majority to participate in the Jan. 3 presidential caucuses, according to a preliminary monthly report by the Polk County auditor. The changes represented an increase in Democratic membership of 8.7 percent compared to December 2007.

By contrast, roughly 3,100 Polk County voters changed their registration to Republican, an increase of 4.2 percent.

In Jasper County, 707 voters changed their registration to Democrat, an increase of 7.5 percent, compared to 284 who changed to Republican, an increase of 4.3 percent.

Some of those new Democrats may change their registration back to independent or Republican, but count on many to remain in the Democratic fold. Fallon already had a strong base in Polk County, where he got about 40 percent of the vote in the 2006 gubernatorial primary, and Polk County contributes at least 75 percent of the votes in the third Congressional district.

Democratic turnout for the general election is usually higher in presidential election years as well, which further improves our prospects of holding the district.

Republicans’ pessimism is great news for Iowa Democrats, and makes this an ideal year for us to build on our state legislative majorities while getting a stronger progressive to represent central Iowans in Congress.

The one good piece of news for Iowa Republicans is that Congressman Tom Latham (IA-04)

has been named the top Republican on a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee.

Latham, of Ames, is the only member of the U.S. House from Iowa on the influential committee, which controls government spending.

Latham’s district was always going to be an uphill battle for Democrats, and this will make it that much tougher.

But overall, it doesn’t look like Iowa Republicans will have much to celebrate this November.

I don't have the stomach for it, but if you watched the four remaining Republican candidates debate this evening, let us know what you thought.

As I’ve written, the so-called “economic stimulus” bill is a charade that won’t really help the economy.

However, I give full credit to Chuck Grassley for working hard to get good provisions on renewable energy incentives and green jobs into the version that passed the Senate Finance Committee today. A Sierra Club press release notes:

The $5.5 billion package includes short-term extensions of key renewable energy tax incentives due to expire at the end of 2008–including the Production Tax Credit (PTC), Investment Tax Credit (ITC) for solar, clean energy bonds, and other measures designed to promote energy efficiency.

I’m putting the full text of the Sierra Club’s statement after the jump. It includes examples of how “green jobs” have improved local economies.

Grassley has disappointed environmentalists many times, but today he came through and significantly improved the bill that’s going to the Senate floor.

To our state’s shame, Iowa and other corn belt states are still the largest contributors to the “dead zone” in the Gulf of Mexico, according to a new study.

The logical thing would be to impose more regulations on the use of fertilizers and other farming practices that contribute to the problem. But don’t hold your breath for any movement on those issues at the statehouse. After all, Iowa is an agricultural state and anyone who doesn’t like it can leave in any of four directions.  

Just last week I wrote a front-page post for MyDD called Ten arguments for sticking with John Edwards. I was getting ready to post the revised version on Daily Kos today or tomorrow, when I saw the news this morning that Edwards had decided to leave the race.

I was hoping Edwards would stay in to keep his message out there. I hope that he decided to quit for political reasons, or because he ran out of money, rather than because of a change in Elizabeth’s condition.

I feel lucky to have caucused for Edwards already. I have no idea how I would vote now. For most of the past year I strongly preferred Obama to Clinton, but in the past few months I’ve grown disenchanted with Obama’s campaign and skeptical about his ability to win. Maybe I would write in Edwards or Al Gore rather than vote for either of the candidates left in the race–I don’t know.

As for how this affects the race, I also have no idea. In some states, Clinton clearly benefits, while in others, Obama may benefit. My own siblings who supported Edwards are split, with my brothers breaking for Obama and my sister strongly leaning to Clinton.

Since most Bleeding Heartland readers seem to be Obama supporters, I recommend this diary by the wonderful JedReport called Some tips for Obama supporters, from an Edwards partisan.

UPDATE: Here is a link to the text and video of Edwards’ farewell address:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…

Sigh. McCain pulled this one out and is the clear front-runner, especially since Rudy Giuliani is going to endorse him. I was hoping Rudy wouldn’t finish in the top three in a single state.

On the bright side, Romney has more money, and conservative groups are starting to target McCain, with ads such as this one comparing McCain to Hillary Clinton:

http://link.brightcove.com/ser…

Results with 77 percent of precincts reporting:

McCain 615,203 (36%)

Romney 531,139 (31%)

Giuliani 252,925 (15%)

Huckabee 228,687 (14%)

Paul 55,070 (3%)

Thompson 20,231 (1%)

—

Clinton 753,543 (50%)

Obama 497,341 (33%)

Edwards 218,899 (14%)

You might want to head to Cedar Rapids for the Iowa Network for Community Agriculture’s 13th annual local foods conference on Friday and Saturday. Click the link for more details about the event.

Alternatively, if you like being out in the freezing cold, you could ride your bike from Perry to Rippey on Saturday. Click the link for info on events planned in both communities, or check out the websites for Bike Iowa and the Iowa Bicycle Coalition.

Put your guesses in this thread. Remember, you can't win if you don't play!

My best guess for the Democratic side:

Clinton 52
Obama 40
Edwards 8

For the Republicans:

McCain 37
Romney 32
Huckabee 15
Giuliani 12
Paul 4 

Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement (ICCI) is holding its lobby day at the State Capitol on Tuesday, January 29.

The main issues on the agenda are local control over siting of confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and the Voter-Owned Iowa Clean Elections bill, which would create a voluntary public-financing option for state elections.

Here is the agenda for the day:

10:30-11:15 – Rally and Legislators addressing crowd

11:15-12:30 – Lunch and individual lobbying

12:30-1 – Head over to Wallace Building

1-1:30 – Meeting w/ DNR Director Rich Leopold

1:30-2:30 – Other meetings/events

2:230-3 – Meeting w/ Gov. Culver’s Chief Policy Adviser, Jim Larew

“People Matter More, Money Matters Less”

If you attend this event, please put up a diary afterwards to let us know how it went.

I won't be tuning in, but if you watch the address, document the atrocities here (as Atrios would say).

Lucky break for Obama, as Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius will give the Democrats' response, raising her national profile just after she announced that she will back Obama's presidential bid. 

UPDATE: Todd Beeton, the MyDD front-pager who supports Obama, didn’t think much of the response by Sebelius:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008…

I wasn’t watching, but I am surprised if she did not do well. When I saw her speak in person a couple of years ago, she was fabulous. Of course, she wasn’t reading a script of someone else’s talking points on that occasion.

As DrinksGreenTea wrote in the diaries, Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy is the latest big name to get behind Barack Obama’s presidential bid.

Clearly a significant chunk of the Democratic establishment does not want to see the Clintons back in charge. Also, Obama now has the backing of Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick as well as both U.S. senators from the state.

Rumors continue to circulate about Al Gore endorsing Obama, but I’ve seen no confirmation of that.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton secured the backing of Florida Senator Bill Nelson shortly before that state’s primary. Her campaign is already calling on the DNC to seat Florida’s delegates despite the state’s flagrant violation of the rules.

Perhaps more significantly for Hillary, the American Nurses’ Association just endorsed her. That group represents the 2.9 million registered nurses across the country, and the endorsement will bolster Clinton’s argument that she has the superior health care plan.

My money is still on Clinton to win the nomination, but Obama’s convincing victory in South Carolina suggests that he is not out of the running either.

The latest research suggests that exposure to lead may diminish the functioning of the aging brain decades later.

The good news is that Americans’ exposure to lead has decreased markedly since lead was removed from paint and gasoline, beginning in the 1970s.

The bad news is that too many children who live in older buildings are still exposed to lead. We already know that lead poisoning can cause mental retardation. Now it appears that even children who appear to be unaffected could suffer adverse consequences from the exposure as they age.

Republicans, remember that next time you feel like mocking a Democratic proposal to test children for lead exposure.  

Tom Vilsack wrote an op-ed in the Des Moines Register on Sunday about global warming. For him, the answer is conserve energy, invest in biofuels and renewable energy, and develop better technology for coal-fired and nuclear power plants.

Everyone interested in a comprehensive solution to global warming should read the report Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change.

How we design our communities can dramatically increase or decrease our country’s carbon footprint. If we don’t consider these factors, sprawling development could wipe out any reduction in greenhouse gases we get from energy-efficiency and cleaner energy sources.

I highly recommend this report to Vilsack and other smart people who like to delve into policy details.

Great letter in the Des Moines Register on Sunday:

Thank goodness for Christopher Rants. As I drive down the highway smelling the stench from the hog lots, watching the filthy water roll under the bridge, worrying if my kids will fall behind as their schools fall apart, wondering if my elderly mother is receiving quality care and planning how to survive if I lose my job in this recession, Rants is leading the charge against gay marriage. Talk about a profile in courage.

Keep up the great work, Christopher!

David Yepsen has a pretty good column in Sunday’s Des Moines Register: Stimulus deal might do harm. A one-time tax rebate didn’t fix the economy when Gerald Ford was president, and it won’t fix the economy now.

Yepsen doesn’t mention some of the other things wrong with this package–namely, that the Republicans got the “business incentives” they were looking for, while Democrats “dropped calls for increases in food stamps and an extension of unemployment compensation”.

To his credit, John Edwards denounced this charade: “This is another example of Washington deserting working people and the middle class.”

I am not aware of any statement from Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama criticizing the bogus “stimulus package.”

The job creation plan Edwards announced last month would actually stimulate the economy.

Clinton and Obama have also released economic stimulus packages, and my impression is that Clinton’s is a little better than Obama’s. But neither of them seems willing to call out their fellow members of he Congressional club for agreeing to George Bush’s sham.

Although Edwards is not going to win the Democratic nomination, I want him to stay in the race as long as he is speaking truths that Obama and Clinton avoid.

I don’t think anyone predicted the magnitude of Obama’s win in South Carolina, with 55 percent of the vote to 27 percent for Clinton and 18 percent for Edwards. Not only did Obama nearly double Clinton’s percentage of the total vote, the youth turnout tripled, and two-thirds of young voters chose Obama.

The total turnout exceeded 500,000, and Obama alone got more votes than the total turnout in the 2004 Democratic primary in South Carolina.

An estimated 155,000 more black voters turned out yesterday than in the 2004 primary.

Also, someone pointed out in the comments at MyDD that Obama got more votes yesterday in South Carolina than John McCain and Mike Huckabee’s combined total in the GOP primary last weekend.

I am shocked that the total turnout in the Democratic primary exceeded the turnout in the GOP primary in a state as conservative as South Carolina.