Members of Congress are in Washington today trying to make last-minute deals to avoid supposedly dire consequences on January 1. So far it appears likely that some kind of one-year extension of current farm policies will pass in order to avoid a huge price spike for milk and problems for agricultural producers. UPDATE: A nine-month farm bill extension was added to the fiscal cliff bill.

Lots of plans are floating around to deal with the so-called “fiscal cliff”: Bush income tax cuts (last extended for two years in December 2010) are set to expire, along with lower payroll tax and estate tax rates. Meanwhile, various budget cuts are due to go into effect in January, including a “sequester” of federal spending on defense and other programs but also lower Medicare payments to doctors. At this point, I would be surprised if we don’t go over the cliff, and I agree with Senator Tom Harkin that no deal is better than a bad deal.

I will update this post throughout the day and evening with news on Congressional voting. After the jump I’ve enclosed some links on the latest proposals floating around the Capitol. Tremendous hypocrisy is on display. If deficit hawks believed their own propaganda, they would embrace higher taxes and lower spending to solve this supposedly dire threat to the U.S. economy. UPDATE: More news is below.

Last week Iowa Governor Terry Branstad confirmed that Iowa will pursue a “partnership” health insurance exchange next year, rather than setting up its own insurance exchange for implementing the 2010 health care reform law, or letting the federal government set up an exchange for Iowa.

In addition, the governor again signaled that he is against the now-optional Medicaid expansion for states, because he believes it would become too expensive for Iowa in the future.

Links and recent news about health care reform in Iowa are after the jump.

Senator Tom Harkin and several other Congressional Democrats spoke out today against cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits as part of any broad deficit-reduction agreement.

The campaign in Iowa’s fourth Congressional district set records for fundraising by a U.S. House incumbent and challenger in Iowa and attracted nearly $5 million in spending by outside groups. For weeks, television stations around the district have been saturated with ads for and against five-term Representative Steve King and Democratic challenger Christie Vilsack.

A final news roundup on IA-04 is after the jump, including Vilsack’s key campaign themes and King’s closing message to voters.  

I planned to write several posts this fall about the third Congressional district race between Representatives Tom Latham and Leonard Boswell. Instead, every time I sat down to write about the campaign, I found myself turning to other topics. Central Iowa radio and television stations have been so over-saturated with cookie-cutter attack ads against both candidates. If a political junkie like me finds it off-putting, I can’t imagine how disengaged other people feel when they hear the beginning of yet another negative commercial.

Neither Latham nor Boswell has offered a compelling case for re-election, but after the jump I review the main messages from both campaigns and from various outside groups that have been advertising in Des Moines and Omaha.

Going into election day two years ago, Representative Dave Loebsack appeared to be in real danger of losing his seat in Congress. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee was running attack ads against Republican challenger Mariannette Miller-Meeks, who had loaned her campaign about a half-million dollars in the absence of major financial support from the National Republican Congressional Committee. The American Future Fund was bashing Loebsack on television. Loebsack ended up winning re-election by only about 11,500 votes in what should have been a safe Democratic district. If not for the Iowa Democrats’ early voting program, Loebsack might have been swept up by the wave.

This year’s campaign in Iowa’s second Congressional district is winding up without the suspense of 2010. A final review of Loebsack’s race against Republican John Archer is after the jump.

Democratic candidates for the state Senate haven’t fared well in western Iowa lately, so the new Senate district 6 hasn’t been on my radar, even though it’s an open seat. However, campaign finance reports indicate that Democrats are not conceding this district, so I decided to post a profile of the race. Background on both candidates is below, along with a district map and some of the campaign rhetoric voters have been hearing.

Shortly before election day 2010, Representative Bruce Braley and his staff were sweating it. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent significant funds to help Braley fend off a ton of attack ads funded by conservative groups. Braley defeated Ben Lange by just 4,209 votes. If not for Iowa Democrats’ early vote program and the presence of two minor-party candidates on the ballot, Lange might be in Congress today.

This year, Iowa’s first Congressional district looks far less competitive. A final review of Braley’s rematch against Lange is after the jump, including some fireworks from the candidates’ Iowa Public Television debate last week.  

Four new Iowa polls were released during the past 24 hours, and both Barack Obama’s and Mitt Romney’s campaigns have scheduled multiple rallies in Iowa this week. Follow me after the jump for clips on those stories and related news.

Any comments about the presidential race are welcome in this thread.

UPDATE: Added another poll below and excerpts from a new Romney campaign memo on Iowa.

Medicare and alleged “job-killing” policies are the focus of the latest television commercials from Representative Dave Loebsack and his GOP challenger John Archer. Meanwhile, the National Republican Congressional Committee is taking cheap shots over a committee hearing Loebsack attended three and a half years ago.

Videos and transcripts of the latest television commercials in Iowa’s second Congressional district are after the jump. Bleeding Heartland covered previous ads from this race here, here, and here.

It’s time to catch up on news from the first Congressional district campaign between three-term Democratic Representative Bruce Braley and his two-time Republican challenger Ben Lange. After the jump I’ve posted my take on yesterday’s debate on Iowa Public Radio, along with videos and transcripts of the latest television commercials by the campaigns and outside groups. (Bleeding Heartland covered earlier tv ads in the IA-01 race here, here, and here.)  

Fewer than 30 days remain until the presidential election. Any comments about the race in Iowa or nationally are welcome in this thread. I’ve compiled recent news, analysis, and advertising after the jump. I will update as needed, especially if any new Iowa poll comes out today. Gallup’s national tracking poll shows Mitt Romney gaining ground since last Wednesday’s presidential debate.

UPDATE: Rasmussen Reports has President Barack Obama leading Romney in Iowa by 49 percent to 47 percent, based on a survey of 500 likely voters conducted on October 7 (margin of error plus or minus 4.5 percent). Rasmussen’s previous Iowa poll had Romney leading 47 percent to 44 percent.

SECOND UPDATE: Added latest national polling data at the end of this post.

I haven’t been an optimist about Christie Vilsack’s chances of taking down Representative Steve King, to put it mildly. But over the past month I have become convinced that King and Washington Republicans are genuinely concerned about holding Iowa’s new fourth Congressional district.

Follow me after the jump for a closer look at King’s campaign strategy, along with polling data and some other news from the IA-04 race. Later this week I will post a similar piece about the Vilsack campaign, and a separate review of outside groups’ advertising in this district.

Although the Harkin Steak Fry took place last weekend, the Jewish new year interfered with my plans to write a post immediately after the event, and the rest of the week flew by. I’ve posted some notes from the steak fry after the jump, along with other links about the featured speaker, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley. That won’t be his last speech in front of a crowd of Iowa Democratic activists.

This is an open thread: all topics welcome.

A few weeks after reserving television advertising time in Iowa’s second Congressional district, the National Republican Congressional Committee started running a spot against three-term Democratic incumbent Dave Loebsack late last week. Loebsack’s campaign launched its first television commercial of the year today.

The air war in Iowa’s first Congressional district is fully engaged, with four new television commercials in the last week alone. Three-term Democratic incumbent Bruce Braley started running a spot about veterans last week and went up on the air yesterday with a response to a new ad about Medicare, paid for by the National Republican Congressional Committee. Last week Republican challenger Ben Lange launched his second tv spot, which depicts the national debt as unfair to the next generation.

More details on the new commercials, including videos and transcripts, are after the jump. Bleeding Heartland covered Braley’s opening tv spot here and Lange’s here.  

For the past ten days, GOP strategists have worried anonymously that Representative Paul Ryan’s presence on the national ticket will hurt Mitt Romney’s campaign, especially in the must-win state of Florida. One of the top Democratic talking points of the last year and a half has been Ryan’s plan to “end Medicare as we know it” by forcing future retirees to purchase government-subsidized private health insurance.

Romney’s strategists seem to have decided that the best defense on Medicare is a good offense. A television commercial launched last week attacked President Barack Obama’s record on Medicare, and a brand-new spot echoes that charge. Both videos are after the jump, along with transcripts and one of the Obama campaign’s response ads.

One of the top international news stories of this week was the criminal conviction of three Russian feminist punk rockers from the group Pussy Riot. Maria Alyokhina, Yekaterina Samutsevich, and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova face two years in prison on trumped-up charges of “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred.” Read the closing statements they delivered at their trial and tell me these women aren’t more brave than anyone you know. They must be missing their families and hating their crummy prison conditions, but the defendants denounced the show trial instead of apologizing and asking for mercy from the court.

Meanwhile, Iowa politics-watchers once again debated whether it’s appropriate to heckle speakers at the Iowa State Fair soapbox.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney announced his running mate this morning: Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the chair of the U.S. House Budget Committee. The two men are launching a four-day bus tour today. I don’t know what surprises me more: Romney not choosing Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, or Ryan’s willingness to give up his committee chairmanship for a shot at the vice presidency.

Democratic House incumbents and challengers have already been running against the Ryan budget. Iowa’s representatives split on party lines when the House approved this plan in April 2011, and Representative Leonard Boswell was eager to draw this contrast between himself and IA-03 opponent Representative Tom Latham. Having Ryan on the Republican ticket ensures that tax and budget issues will be at the center of the presidential campaign discourse this fall. Ryan’s approach to solving the long-term deficit problem asks virtually nothing of wealthy people but would devastate Medicaid, not to mention the Medicare program for future retirees. After the jump I’ve posted excerpts from a new report on the Ryan plan’s impact on state budgets, along the Iowa Policy Project’s comment on how the Ryan budget would affect Iowa in particular.

Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread. I will update this post with Iowa reaction and more news and links after the jump. Representative Steve King was enthusiastic about the pick.

President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign launched two new television commercials this week in Iowa and six other swing states. That makes seven different television ads the president’s team has aired in Iowa during the past two months. The extent of the advertising here, along with yet another presidential visit to Iowa yesterday, signal that Obama campaign managers do not believe their boss has a comfortable lead on Mitt Romney in this state.

The latest Obama commercials focus on Medicare and policies to help veterans. Videos and transcripts are after the jump.

Speaking in Des Moines this afternoon, Mitt Romney promised to lead the country “out of this debt and spending inferno” by reducing federal government spending from 24.3 percent of the country’s gross domestic product to 20 percent of GDP within four years. Romney would address what he called a “prairie fire of debt” by moving some federal programs to the state level or the private sector, repealing “Obamacare,” reforming Medicare and Social Security, and reducing “redundancy and waste” in government programs.

I’ve posted the full prepared text of Romney’s remarks after the jump, along with a few comments.

Republican candidate John Archer has launched his second television commercial across Iowa’s new Congressional district. Follow me after the jump for the video and transcript.

Archer’s first television commercial ran for one night only on January 3. Last month his campaign ran a radio ad district-wide with a focus on gasoline prices and energy policy. Dan Dolan, the other Republican candidate in IA-02, has not placed any radio or television commercials but has spent a considerable amount on direct mail.

While many Americans dread tax day, April 15 holds a silver lining for political junkies: the chance to read the latest federal campaign finance reports. Follow me after the jump for details on the money raised and spent by Iowa’s five U.S. House incumbents and five challengers between January 1 and March 31. Note: at this writing, Dave Loebsack’s primary challenger Joe Seng had not filed a quarterly report with the Federal Election Commission. I will update this post if one appears. He may not have raised enough money yet to trigger reporting requirements.

Click here for the latest voter registration numbers in Iowa’s four new Congressional districts.

Friday marked the second anniversary of President Barack Obama signing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, more commonly known as health care reform or “Obamacare.” After the jump I enclose lots of news related to the milestone, including comments from Iowa elected officials and statistics on how certain provisions affect Iowans.

This morning the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to start hearing oral arguments regarding the constitutionality of the health care reform law. Governor Terry Branstad signed Iowa on to one of the lawsuits challenging the Affordable Care Act last year. Near the end of this post I’ve included some speculation about how the justices may rule (or punt).

Nine-term Republican Representative Tom Latham started running a new television commercial in Iowa’s new third Congressional district last week. The spot is a response to a negative commercial that the House Majority PAC is running against Latham. Within days, that Democratic super-PAC responded with yet another ad about Latham. Follow me after the jump for videos and transcripts.

President Barack Obama released his draft budget for the 2013 fiscal year yesterday. Details on the president’s proposed spending and tax rates are after the jump, along with reaction from the Iowans in Congress and some of their challengers.  

Yesterday the U.S. House approved a bill to require additional Congressional Budget Office analysis on legislation with a large price tag. The concept is intended to reduce the apparent cost of tax cuts to the federal budget. Iowa’s representatives split on party lines over this bill and proposed amendments, including one offered by Democrat Leonard Boswell (IA-03).

The payroll tax cut, extended unemployment benefits, and a “doc fix” affecting Medicare reimbursements look more likely to expire on December 31 after today’s votes in the U.S. House. Republicans voted to go to conference to resolve differences between their approach to extending the payroll tax cut and the bill the U.S. Senate approved on Saturday.  However, Democrats don’t plan to appoint anyone to the conference committee.

Details on today’s votes and reaction from members of Iowa’s House delegation are after the jump.

Both Republican Chuck Grassley and Democrat Tom Harkin voted Saturday morning for a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits.

Seven Republican candidates take the stage tonight as Fox News and the Iowa GOP co-host a presidential debate in Sioux City. I’ll be live-blogging after the jump, where I’ve also posted some recent news about the race in Iowa.

UPDATE: Scroll down for the live-blog.

Only ten Democrats in the U.S. House supported a bill approved last night to extend the payroll tax cut and some unemployment benefits. All three Iowa Democrats crossed party lines to vote for this legislation, which has drawn a rare veto threat from the White House.

UPDATE: Scroll down for Representative Dave Loebsack’s statement on this vote.

SECOND UPDATE: I’ve added a statement from Representative Steve King.

While former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney campaigned in Des Moines last week, Representative Leonard Boswell publicly criticized the Republican presidential front-runner for the second time this month. The eight-term Democrat authored a guest column in the November 16 Des Moines Register criticizing Romney’s position on health care for veterans. His latest attack focused more broadly on Romney’s position on taxes and entitlement programs.

Eight Republican presidential candidates will debate for the second time in less than a week tonight at 7 pm central time. I expect former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Representative Ron Paul to have a go at Texas Governor Rick Perry, like they did during last week’s debate. Representative Michele Bachmann has been trying to distinguish herself from Perry too lately. I see the other four candidates mainly fighting not to be ignored by the moderators.

I’ll update this post later, but meanwhile here’s a thread to talk about the debate or the presidential race in general.

UPDATE: First thoughts on the debate and excerpts from the transcript are after the jump.

I’ve seen a lot of hippie-punching by professional Democrats, but the Iowa Democratic Party’s attack on Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement yesterday was a particularly cynical example.  

Last week’s deal to raise the U.S. debt ceiling in exchange for long-term deficit reduction wasn’t what the doctor ordered to reassure investors. Stock markets around the world dropped sharply today, reflecting fears about lousy economic prospects in the U.S. and abroad.  

The House of Representatives passed the bill on raising the debt ceiling today by a surprisingly large margin of 269 to 161 (roll call). About three quarters of the Republicans recognized what a great deal they wrangled out of a weak president. However, Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05) were among the 66 House Republicans who voted no.

Vice President Joe Biden spent part of Monday selling this raw deal to Democrats on the hill, and half the Democratic caucus ended up voting yes, including Gabrielle Giffords, making her first return to the capitol since she was shot in January. Bruce Braley (IA-01), Dave Loebsack (IA-02) and Leonard Boswell (IA-03) were all among the 95 Democrats who voted no.

Memo to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and all other stupid Democrats who voted for today’s deal: This is why no one powerful ever cares what House Democrats say. Republicans got President Barack Obama to meet almost 100 percent of their demands. They should have been forced to provide 100 percent of the votes to approve this bill. Pelosi claimed the deal protected Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security from cuts, but the “super-Congress” deficit-cutting commission will have other ideas. Some other Democrats pointed to large potential cuts in defense spending over the next decade. I have a bridge in Windsor Heights to sell anyone who believes those cuts will materialize.

After the jump I’ve posted statements on today’s vote from Braley, Loebsack, Boswell and Latham. I will add King’s when it appears. I have requested a comment from King’s Democratic challenger, Christie Vilsack, and if I receive a reply I will post it below. Click here for details about how Iowans voted on the debt ceiling bills that reached the House floor Friday and Saturday.

UPDATE: Added King’s statement slamming the debt limit deal below. Like Latham, he said the agreement didn’t do enough to limit future government spending. In their comments, Braley, Loebsack and Boswell all emphasized that the deal puts too much of the deficit-cutting burden on the middle class while protecting wealthy individuals and special interests.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is paying for robocalls attacking 60 House Republicans, including Iowa’s Tom Latham, for their intransigence in debt ceiling negotiations. Latham currently represents the fourth district but will run against Democrat Leonard Boswell in the new third district in 2012. Boswell can use the help, because Latham is building up a much bigger campaign war chest. I’ve posted the DCCC call script after the jump. Excerpt:

“Congressman Tom Latham and Speaker Boehner would rather our economy default just to protect tax breaks for Big Oil companies and billionaire jet-owners. Republicans quit negotiating with President Obama on raising the debt ceiling.

“This is serious. Latham’s billionaire buddies will be ok. But we will pay the price if government can’t pay its bills. Our Social Security and Medicare benefits are at risk. Interest rates would spike for our credit cards, car loans, and mortgages. Our 401(k) retirement accounts would drop. And, gas and food prices would skyrocket.”

That message might be persuasive if Obama weren’t begging Republicans to join him in cutting Americans’ Social Security and Medicare benefits. On a related note, Senate Democratic leaders just spent the weekend working on a deal to massively cut government spending without increasing tax revenues at all–not even from (gasp) “Big Oil companies and billionaire jet-owners.” No matter how the debt ceiling drama ends, the Democrats’ incompetence this summer will cause problems for the party’s Congressional candidates in 2012.

Meanwhile, Latham is pushing a plan B in case no deal comes through by August 2:

Under [Latham’s] bill, H.R. 2605, the federal government would prioritize payments to seniors, veterans, military personnel and “core public-safety functions” if the debt ceiling is reached and federal spending must be curtailed.

Latham said his bill is partly a response to what he called “scare tactics” that these critical payments would not be made.

“The White House and irresponsible special-interest groups have begun employing scare tactics as a means of achieving their political ends in the debt-limit debate,” he said Friday. “My legislation removes the use of these priority groups as political pawns and shields them from these contentious debates.”

No one knows exactly what would happen if Congress failed to raise the debt ceiling in the next week, but even if Latham’s bill became law, financial markets would see the federal government unable to pay all its bills. That would likely result in a downgrade of all U.S. debt.

After the jump I’ve posted Latham’s press release on what he called “safety net legislation.” It’s notable that he acknowledges the need to raise the debt ceiling, provided a “long-term plan” is in place to reduce government spending. Some House Republicans, like Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann, oppose increasing the debt limit under any circumstances.

Latham’s bill is much broader than a fallback plan introduced by Bachmann and Representative Steve King (IA-05) earlier this month. That dead-on-arrival proposal would have “set payment of military salaries and payment of principal and interest on publicly-held debt as the top priorities if the debt limit is reached.” The DCCC immediately accused King of “putting China before Iowa’s seniors,” saying his bill “would require the U.S. government to pay debts to China before ensuring seniors receive the Social Security they count on every month.” Latham may not be the brightest bulb in Congress, but he wasn’t about to walk into that trap.

Yesterday’s heartbreaking attacks in Norway are the big global news story this weekend. This man, Anders Behring Breivik, is suspected of setting off a bomb in downtown Oslo on July 22. The explosion killed seven people and destroyed the prime minister’s office building. The suspect then reportedly dressed in a policeman’s uniform and shot to death at least 85 people at a youth camp run by Norway’s governing Labor Party. Breivik has “confessed to the factual circumstances,” according to his attorney, who said his client planned the crimes long in advance. Police are trying to determine the motive for the attacks. The suspect reportedly had right-wing and anti-Muslim views, but why would anyone attack teenagers at a summer camp?

The big U.S. news story is that House Speaker John Boehner was too stupid to take the deficit reduction deal President Barack Obama offered:

Obama said he had demanded $1.2 trillion in additional revenues over 10 years, in exchange for spending cuts, including cuts to Medicare and Social Security. He said the revenues had been structured in a way that marginal tax rates would not be increased, and no Republicans would be forced to cast a vote that would violate the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, which most Republicans in Congress have signed.

You read that right. While agreeing to cuts in programs that tens of millions of Americans rely on, Obama was ready to guarantee no increases in any tax rates, even at the highest income levels, for the next decade. Not only that, he bent over backwards to give Republicans political cover, so they could accept his offer without facing blowback from Grover Norquist. The same Grover Norquist who now wants Congress to stop playing chicken with the debt ceiling. And Obama was angry Boehner walked out on negotiations, saying he felt “left at the altar”! I don’t see how this so-called Democrat could be handling the budget negotiations any worse. For the first time, I am seriously thinking about writing in a candidate for president in November 2012.

The Iowa Policy Project analyzed the latest state jobs numbers here. Iowa has more than a billion dollars in various state reserves, but Governor Terry Branstad and Iowa House Republicans insisted on an extremely tight budget for fiscal year 2012. The predictable result was a “sharp drop in government jobs” in June, which “fully accounted for the first net drop in Iowa nonfarm jobs in the last six months.” Shrinking government does not help the private economy create more jobs. On the contrary, government job losses contribute to our unemployment problem. Iowa’s unemployment rate is 6 percent, still well below the national average, but that’s no excuse for unwarranted austerity policies.

Here’s one good thing that happened this week: Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Admiral Mike Mullen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff all certified “that the U.S. military is prepared to accept openly gay and lesbian service members, and that doing so will not harm military readiness.” As a result, the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy will officially end 60 days from July 22.

This is an open thread. What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers?

UPDATE: Iowa native Chuck Manatt passed away this week at age 75. He chaired the Democratic National Committee from 1981 to 1985 and co-chair Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1992. The Los Angeles Times published a good obituary of Manatt. He will be buried this week in Audubon, near the farm where he grew up.

The U.S. House passed the so-called “Cut, Cap and Balance Act” yesterday on a mostly party-line 234 to 190 vote (roll call). Robert Greenstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities summarized the key features of the proposal:

The plan would lock in cuts over the next ten years at least as severe as those in the [House Budget Committee Chairman Paul] Ryan budget plan that the House passed in April, by writing spending caps into law at the year-by-year levels of spending (as a share of GDP) the Ryan budget contains.

It also would hold the increase in the debt limit needed by August 2 hostage to approval by two-thirds of the House and the Senate of a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget every year while effectively barring any increases in revenues.  The constitutional amendment would make all revenue-raising measures unconstitutional unless they secured a two-thirds supermajority in both the House and the Senate.

The “Cut, Cap & Balance” measure cites three constitutional balanced-budget amendments (H.J. Res 1, S.J. Res 10, and H.J. Res 56) and states that Congress must approve one of them or a similar measure before the debt limit can be raised.  All three of the cited proposals would require cuts deeper than those in the Ryan budget.  All three measures would establish a constitutional requirement that total federal expenditures may not exceed 18 percent of GDP, and all three would essentially require that the budget be balanced within the coming decade.

The Ryan plan, by contrast, does not reach balance until the 2030s, and its federal spending level is just below or modestly above 20 percent of GDP for most of the next two decades, equaling 20¾ percent of GDP in 2030 for example, according to the Congressional Budget Office.  The only budget that comes close to meeting the requirements of these constitutional amendments is the Republican Study Committee budget, which eliminates 70 percent of non-defense discretionary funding by 2021, contains deeper Medicare cuts than the Ryan budget, cuts Medicaid, food stamps, and Supplemental Security Income for the elderly and disabled poor in half by the end of the decade, and raises the Social Security retirement age to 70.

Iowa’s Republicans Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05) both voted for “cut, cap and balance,” while Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01), Dave Loebsack (IA-02) and Leonard Boswell (IA-03) voted against it. I recommend reading Greenstein’s whole analysis or this piece by Michael Linden and Michael Ettlinger to get a sense of how ludicrous this plan is. Severe spending cuts would not only hurt the most vulnerable Americans, they would drag down the whole economy. I doubt Republicans believe in this fiscal policy. When the U.S. economy was hurting in late 2001 and 2002, the GOP-controlled House passed big deficit spending to stimulate demand, with the support of a Republican president.

But I digress. Yesterday’s House vote was designed to give Republicans cover. Everyone knows “cut, cap and balance” could never clear the Senate. Even if it did, President Barack Obama would veto the bill.

This vote isn’t just about short-term political battles over the debt ceiling. It will be cited by both parties during next year’s campaigns in Iowa’s new third and fourth Congressional districts. As a preview of campaign rhetoric to come, I’ve posted comments from both sides after the jump. First, Latham makes the case for the bill and pledges not to vote for any debt ceiling increase “without passage of the major features outlined in the Cut, Cap and Balance Act.” Latham voted many times for unbalanced budgets and to raise the debt ceiling while Republicans controlled the House during George W. Bush’s presidency. He’s hoping those votes will slip down the memory hole.

Next, I posted a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee press release charging that Latham just voted to “cut, cap and end Medicare.” An almost identical statement went out targeting King.

King didn’t send out a press release on yesterday’s vote, but he has stood with Republicans who demand huge spending cuts and no revenue increases as the price for raising the debt ceiling. After the jump, I posted a DCCC statement highlighting King’s previous votes to increase the debt ceiling. Both King and Latham stopped voting for debt ceiling hikes when Democrats had a House majority from 2007 through 2010.

Final note: two House Republicans who are running for president, Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul, voted against “cut, cap and balance” yesterday. Bachmann “said the bill does not go far enough to fundamentally restructure the way Washington spends money, and in particular does not go after ‘ObamaCare.'” Paul said “this Act cannot balance the budget under any plausible scenario,” because it’s “impossible” to do that without cutting defense spending, Medicare and Social Security.

We already knew Christie Vilsack was running for Congress in the new fourth district, but today she made her candidacy official at events in Ames, Sioux City and Mason City. During her announcement speech and in a video released by her campaign, Vilsack didn’t mention four-term Republican incumbent Steve King by name. However, she drew clear contrasts with his political style, promising to bring the “Iowa values of civility, responsibility and respect” to Washington.

Bleeding Heartland discussed Vilsack’s strong early fundraising here. Follow me after the jump for her announcement video (with transcript) and highlights from her campaign rollout.