Sheldon Tea Party Patriots » Iowa State Legislators

I-JOBS

debvm — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:29:50 +0000

The signature item of Governor Culver’s four years in office is his $1.7 billion dollar temporary work program known as I-JOBS. From the very beginning it has been a controversial debt laden program that has almost universally failed in it’s intended purposes with ever evolving temporary job creation numbers attached to it.

Given all the news about I-JOBS lately, here’s the latest inside story on Culver’s I-JOBS as it transpired:

When Governor Culver delivered the annual Condition of the State Address in January of 2009, he outlined his initial proposal to put Iowa into debt for $700 million. There were 86,900 unemployed Iowans.
A week later his Democratic legislative counterparts, not to be outspent by Governor Culver, rolled out their own proposal by adding an additional $50 million to the figure pitched by the governor bringing the grand total to $750 million.
Not long after, The Des Moines Register unveiled a new “Iowa Poll” showing that 71 percent of Iowans against the idea.
In the final hours of the session during closed door negotiations in the middle of the night, the governor and legislative Democrats came to an agreement that they would spend bond for $830 million dollars – a number significantly higher than either original proposal. With interest and fees factored in, the total bill would come to $1.7 billion to be paid off over nearly 30 years. There were 92,300 unemployed Iowans.
Not a single Republican voted for it.
Culver was quoted in The Des Moines Register as saying, “I’d be a lot more concerned about next year if we didn’t do this huge stimulus package.”
Governor Culver said his proposal would create 30,000 “shovel ready” positions, yet when respected independent economists took a look at his ideas, they found that the governor had substantially inflated and embellished his claims. Instead, these experts said the governor’s plans would likely yield closer to 4,000 temporary positions. In some cases, the governor double and triple counted particular jobs.
In early January of 2010, Governor Culver told reporters that he hoped I-JOBS would create, “hopefully hundreds if not thousands of jobs” and that “I don’t think people should expect huge job numbers.” There were 110,700 unemployed Iowans.
By March, House and Senate Democrats, at the urging of Governor Culver, passed a significant expansion authorizing another $150 million dollars in spending. There were 114,200 unemployed Iowans.
Earlier this month, the Iowa Democratic Party issued a statement back-tracking on Culver’s revised predictions from January of 2010 and made it clear that I-JOBS “will create 30,000 jobs and secure Iowa’s economic future.”
WHO-TV in Des Moines produced a series of news segments highlighting the constantly evolving job creation numbers and the lack of transparency and evidence to support them.
A day later, Governor Culver issued a statement saying 7,000 to 9,000 Iowans worked on I-JOBS projects in June and that 23,000 would work on projects throughout the whole duration of the temporary work program.
Earlier this week, just days after his latest statement, Governor Culver offered yet another round of numbers and issued a 109 page report suggesting that 7,029 Iowans worked on I-JOBS projects in June. Culver’s formula showed that approximately 36,764 temporary positions could be created in total.
Minutes later, highly respected Iowa State University economist Dave Swenson was quoted by The Des Moines Register as saying Culver’s latest attempt to spin his failed program “is probably a significant overstatement of the jobs.”
Though most of these dollars are going towards construction projects, according to Iowa Workforce Development, Iowa has the lowest level of construction workers in months.
Additionally, according to Recovery.org, the website started by the Obama Administration to track job creation as part of their $787 billion dollar ‘stimulus’ known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), Iowa received $1.8 billion dollars. The Obama administration claims 8,827.59 have been created.
Even though the ARRA dollars is over double the amount of actual spendable money that is part of I-JOBS, Culver is claiming job creation numbers that could be four times as much.
Therefore, are we to believe Culver, the Obama administration or are they both likely inaccurate?
The Des Moines Register political columnist Kathie Obradovich wrote in a blog post, “Culver, however, has framed the program all along as an engine for job creation. This report suggests he’s boxed himself into a pretty complicated discussion with voters about how jobs are estimated. The last thing Culver needs on the campaign trail right now is more complications.
Today’s joblessness remains unacceptably high at 113,600 unemployed Iowans with many others who are underemployed or have stopped looking completely.
Nearly 30,000 Iowans have lost their jobs since Culver announced his plan and nearly 20,000 since it was signed into law. Simply put, it has failed to produce the jobs that were promised.

Senate Republicans offered real plans to stimulate long-term private sector job creation in Iowa instead of spending $1.7 billion to create temporary make work. Iowans have endured Culver’s legacy of failed leadership, enormous generational debt and unacceptably high unemployment and they are looking for new leadership that provides straightforward answers instead of constant political spin.

Iowans are asking ‘where are the long-term private sector jobs?’ and unfortunately Governor Culver still has no answer. Senate Republicans will continue to fight to bring long-term jobs to Iowa because our families and our children and grandchildren’s futures depend on it.

McKinley’s Memo 7/30/2010

Use Tax Audits Increase

debvm — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 07:10:47 +0000

As Iowa faces nearly a $1 billion budget deficit, the state is searching for every tax dollar it can find. Reports from federal and state tax experts earlier this year confirmed that when times get tough, it’s more likely that governments will look to raise revenue by increasing audits rather than looking for ways to reduce spending. “In times when more revenue is needed and the tax gap widens, absolutely the Internal Revenue Service is going to step up audits” proclaimed one tax analyst with H&R Block’s Tax Institute. “You’re not going to find a document that says this, but it’s very clear that in a budget deficit, increased tax collection is another source of revenue” a tax expert and university professor stated.

Recently, several of my colleagues in the Legislature have been contacted by their constituents with questions about audits conducted by the Iowa Department of Revenue. The Department of Revenue has initiated an audit program focusing on unpaid consumer use tax. Specifically, the Department of Revenue is analyzing United States Customs records to identify purchases individuals have made outside of Iowa.

Iowa’s use tax provision complements the state sales tax. When a transaction is subject to sales tax but occurs outside of Iowa for use in Iowa and Iowa tax is not collected, it is subject to use tax. Taxpayers are responsible for registering with the Department of Revenue when they purchase taxable goods or services outside of Iowa and send the use tax to Iowa. The problem is not many Iowans know this.

One western Iowan, received a notice last week stating she owed tax, penalty and interest on purchases she made in the United Kingdom in the year 2000. Understandingly, she was shocked to learn she owed back taxes on her transactions made 10 years ago and frustrated that the penalty and interest was being assessed, especially because it had taken so long for the Department of Revenue to notify her. Similar reports of similar audits have surfaced throughout the state this year.

Nearly all Iowans understand they must pay their taxes and willingly do so. But many are expressing frustration about the lack of effort that goes into educating taxpayers about their obligations. The majority of Iowans are unaware they are required to pay use tax to the state when a retailer fails to collect it. Moreover, Iowans don’t understand why it takes the Department of Revenue 10 years to issue notification of taxes owed. It is not unreasonable to require the state government to issue notice of unpaid tax liabilities in a timelier manner.

Because such little outreach occurs, most taxpayers rely on certified public accountants to handle their tax matters. Even so, it is rare for an accountant to ask an individual if they purchased anything across state lines and paid sales or use tax. For this reason, it is important for taxpayers to educate themselves on the requirements outlined in the federal and state tax code. Individuals can learn more about federal tax law at www.irs.gov and state tax law at www.iowa.gov/tax. Additionally, if an individual is being audited it’s important everyone knows their rights. The following website is also helpful: www.iowa.gov/tax/educate/78619.html

(From Representative Dwayne Alons Capitol Comments June 29, 2010)

Medicaid Budget Problems

debvm — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 04:09:36 +0000

When the Legislature took its final action on the FY 2011 Health and Human Services budget in March, a major assumption was built into that bill. It was expected that Congress would pass legislation extending the enhanced federal matching funds for Medicaid so that the additional money would run throughout the whole year. Things have changed since adjournment and the prospect of a Medicaid shortfall in the new year has increased dramatically.

The ability to balance the state’s FY 2011 budget hinged on the federal government providing more Medicaid funding. The Democrats’ Medicaid budget reduced the General Fund appropriation from $606 million in FY 10 to just $394 million in FY 11. Believing they would receive a full year of an additional 6.2 percent of federal Medicaid funds from Washington enabled legislative Democrats’ to divert money to other departments. Instead of putting $119 million towards Medicaid, it was spent on numerous other items throughout the budget. Kind of a “rob Peter to pay Paul” scheme.

Extension of the federal Medicaid enhanced match was considered for inclusion in the federal health care reform bill, but was not added due to the cost – $24 billion. After health care reform passed, it was assumed that this could be attached to the emergency appropriation bill to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Republicans, who are needed to pass that bill, refused to vote for any domestic spending included in the bill.

Next, congressional leadership decided to add it to this year’s stimulus bill. Instead of being honest with the American public on what the money was to do, they claimed it was a “jobs” provision. The money would go to save public employee jobs. That didn’t work either, as Blue Dog Democrats in the House refused to vote for the bill until the money was stripped out.

Once the House voted before Memorial Day on the bill, the experts in Washington believed the Senate would add the funding to the bill and jam it down the House members’ throats. That has yet to happen since Senate Republicans refuse to go along with the plan. Early last week, Senate leadership offered up a sliding scale where states would instead get 5.3 percent bump for January through March and then 3.2 percent bump from April to June. That idea would have lowered Iowa’s allotment from $119 million to $80 million. That didn’t work either.

Then last Wednesday night, Senator Reid announced that the plan had been changed to 3.2 percent for January through March, and 2.1 percent for April, May, and June. Estimates on Iowa’s share under this plan are not available yet, but it is likely to be significantly less than the previous estimate of $80 million. He also said he didn’t know if he had the 60 votes needed to pass the bill and that he had no backup plan. And, he had no assurance that the House would accept the Senate’s new plan. So, Iowa’s Medicaid budget for FY 2011 looks like it might be short at the start of the new fiscal year, July 1.

(From Representative Dwayne Alons Capitol Comments June 30, 2010)

Final Comments on Iowa 2010 Session

debvm — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 12:35:34 +0000

March 29th, 2010

Well, the final gavel is ready to fall on the 2010 session. It was a quick 80-days that saw a lot of policy being past. The session created significant policy that will affect each Iowan this coming year. (both good and bad) I have noted several of these policy issues below.

Property taxes will increase – In July, each homeowner and business will receive their property tax bill. The bill will show an increase in all school levy rates. This increase is because the State didn’t do their job and cut approximately $167 million in state funding to schools. Schools will fill this cut by increasing the property tax levy.

Increase in Fines – I urge each of you to obey traffic laws. As of July 1^st, nearly every traffic fine will go up by 2 to 3 times its current rate. (example, a seatbelt violation will go from $94 to $170) Very poor policy!

Lost Tax Credits – Many of you have already filed your income tax for the state. You might have realized that there were several tax credits that were not allowed this year. The Iowa legislature would not allow Iowans to couple with the Federal income tax credits. This, in essence, is a tax increase for many Iowans.

Banning Cell Phones or Texting while Driving – All drivers that are, ages 18 and below, will NOT be allowed to use their cell phone or text while driving. This law goes into effect as of July 1^st. This is a positive bill.

Nuclear Energy Study – A study will be completed over the next three years to look at the viability of creating a Nuclear plant in Iowa. This is a positive bill.

Government Reorganization – The legislature tried to create some government reform. This is always a good idea. However, it was not taken far enough this year. The legislature must look at the public sector in creating substantial changes to government next year.

Final overview – The session might be over but the ramifications to our schools, businesses, and homeowners will be felt for a long time. Schools will be cutting programs and shutting doors because of the Iowa legislatures actions. Business and home owners will see increased property taxes. I view this legislative session as policy and budget that were driven by politics rather than what’s best for Iowans

http://newgenerationrepublican.com/blog/

Iowa’s finances

debvm — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 12:19:44 +0000

March 25th, 2010

As the session comes to a close in the next few days, the numbers become clearer about what the States budget will show. Its looks like a pilfered Castle, with nothing left but the structure itself.

2009 spending = $5,959 Billion

2010 spending = $5,300 Billion

2011 spending = $5,296 Billion (Proposed)

When you look at these budgets, you will see no real reductions in spending. This is an actual picture. What’s disappointing is that cuts are made to one program so another program can be created. Don’t be fooled, all these across the board cuts have not actually cut the budget, it simply redistributed the funds.

The problem lies in where the money is coming from this year. No spending reduction, so the money needs to be stolen from somewhere. Below is the pots where the money is coming from for the 2011 budget!

Federal stimulus dollars (one-time money) = $328 million

Emergency State government funds = $258 million

Other one time pots of money = $ 97 million

$683 Million of one time spending

Where do we find the money next year? The Democrats passed a budget that continues to spend without cutting, however, it cuts K-12 education by $167 million, and puts the money in other places in government. This is a clear picture of government priority.

Whoever is in control next session, the one-time money is gone, and the reckless spending will meet reality after the November election.

This is a very sad commentary on government and policy makers!

http://newgenerationrepublican.com/blog/

Language changes

debvm — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 20:14:27 +0000

The Iowa Supreme Court judges unanimously legislated Iowa law to be changed in 2009. From the beginning of time marriage has been between one man and one woman but these judges changed Natural law to something else in Iowa’s law books. One of the many effects is the rewriting of language that refer to a husband and a wife. Copied below is just a part taken from a house study bill concerning taxes showing some of these language changes. You’ll need to overlook the bill’s line numbers as it does not read nicely in this format.

While this is just one bill the Iowa legislators are looking at right now requiring langue changes, do you wonder how many more language changes we will face since the judges legislation on defining marriage? How many more language changes in laws, legal documents, marriage ceremonies, and teacher to parent conferences? Iowa school children have access to many library books about families with one mom and one dad. What about these books our children read in school? Do you think the gay activists have thought about that? You can bet they have — that, and much more. This is not about simple word changes and it’s not about tolerating other’s changed sexual preferences. This is about change in our beliefs. If you believe like I do that God ordained marriage only between one man and one woman, put feet to your convictions. Contact Iowa legislators – any of them / all of them. http://www.luviowa.com/

House Study Bill 705

“29 23 person as an employer, and deferred compensation plans or any 29 24 earnings attributable to the deferred compensation plans, 29 25 up to a maximum of six thousand dollars for a person, other 29 26 than a husband or wife married person, who files a separate 29 27 state income tax return and up to a maximum of twelve thousand 29 28 dollars for a husband and wife married persons who file a 29 29 joint state income tax return. However, a surviving spouse 29 30 who is not disabled or fifty=five years of age or older can 29 31 only exclude the amount of pension or retirement pay received 29 32 as a result of the death of the other spouse. A husband and 29 33 wife Married persons filing separate state income tax returns 29 34 or separately on a combined state return are allowed a combined 29 35 maximum exclusion under this subsection of up to twelve 30 1 thousand dollars. The twelve thousand dollar exclusion for 30 2 married persons shall be allocated to the husband or wife each 30 3 spouse individually in the proportion that each spouse’s 30 4 respective the pension and retirement pay received by that 30 5 spouse bears to the total combined pension and retirement pay 30 6 received by both spouses. 30 7 Sec. 42. Section 422.9, subsection 1, Code Supplement 2009, 30 8 is amended to read as follows: 30 9 1. An optional standard deduction, after deduction of 30 10 federal income tax, equal to one thousand two hundred thirty 30 11 dollars for a married person who files separately or a 30 12 single person or equal to three thousand thirty dollars for 30 13 a husband and wife married persons who file a joint return,…”

http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=BillInfo&Service=Billbook&ga=83&menu=text&hbill=HSB705

(*slash thrus of “husband and wife” did not come through on the posting but is corrected best can do)

A similar bill with language changing is SSB 3200. In the House, the floor manager for HSB 705 is Rep. Sharon Steckman and subcommittee members are Rep. Charles Isenhart and Rep. Erik Helland. In the Senate, the floor manager for SSB 3200 is Sen. Pam Jochum, subcommittee members are Sen. Joe Bolkcom and Sen. Brad Zaun. Instead of taking time to redefine marriage, lawmakers need to take up the Iowa Marriage Amendment and begin the process of letting Iowans vote on the definition of marriage.

The three Iowa Supreme Court Justices up for relection November 2010 — Marsha Ternus, David Baker and Michael Streit

Nine Iowa Tea Party/912Project/Freedom Groups Unite for Des Moines Legislative Breakfast

debvm — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:10:23 +0000

Spencer Tea Party Patriots, along with Sheldon Tea Party Patriots, Storm Lake Tea Party Patriots, Des Moines 912Project, Des Moines Tea Party Patriots, Jones Co. 912 Project, Urbandale SOAR (Suport Our American Republic), Atlantic 912Project,
and Cedar Falls Taking Back America have joined forces to host a Legislative Breakfast in the Des Moines Capitol on Feb. 16th.

The Legislative calendar at the Des Moines Capitol is filled on a daily basis with lobbyist groups hosting breakfasts, lunches and evening receptions. Most notably is the Federation of Labor, an organization representing multiple unions, which hosts a hospitality night bi-weekly while the legislators are in session. Senator
Kibbie’s and Representative Frevert’s endorsement at the January 30th Spencer Eggs & Issues forum, of Collective Bargaining and Fair Share bills (both pro-Union, anti – Right to Work bills) illustrates that lobbying works.

Therefore, Iowa’s freedom groups have decided to band together to host their own breakfast. This is the first time that Tea Party/ 912 Project/Freedom groups from across Iowa have hosted an event together. After the breakfast, the attending representatives from each of the groups will sit down together to network and plan
future strategies. We think working together as a cohesive team will allow us to have more inpact on legislation coming out of the Iowa State capitol. Right now progessive liberals like to dismiss us as radical fringe individuals who do not represent main stream Iowans. Rupublicans like to claim us as a part of their party, but hold us at arms length for fear of us upsetting their moderate agenda

Kris Thiessen
Spencer Tea Party Patriots

Important facts from IFPC on Holding Senator Kibbie Accountable

debvm — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 14:21:15 +0000

In spite of what some lawmakers would have us believe, the failure of the IMA to get out of committee this week is not the end of our hopes for action for this legislative session. It can still be brought to the floor of the Senate during this term – if we can get 26 members to sign on. We have 23 Senators, and we should have had Senator Kibbie’s signature on this resolution as well. He did, in fact, promise he would vote in support of the IMA if it came to a vote.

Newspaper quote from Senator Jack Kibbie:

Kibbie said he would vote to place an amendment before the people during a referendum.

”If it comes up in my presence and the roll call is called for Jack Kibbie’s vote it will be in favor of letting you vote,’‘ he said.

- The Messenger, Nov. 22, 2009

It did come to a vote. He did not support it.

It seems that Senator Kibbie is not a man of his word. It seems that Senator Kibbie refuses to faithfully represent his constituents.

The IFPC folks put it this way:

either Senator Kibbie should sign the pledge to support the IMA with all the power of his office,

or he should resign from his position.

That’s it – either SIGN or RESIGN.

Do the job he was hired to do, or get out of the way.

Iowa and People in power

debvm — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:27:28 +0000

2/11/10 Pleasant Hill, IA – Standing between Iowa citizens and their right to vote on the Iowa Marriage Amendment, Senate Democrats this week obstructed efforts to take action on the amendment ahead of an important legislative deadline. Bills that fail to move out of committee before the end of “funnel week,” are generally no longer considered viable for the remainder of the session. While Senate rules provide options for leadership to take action on items like the Iowa Marriage Amendment after the funnel, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal has publicly offered to risk his majority status, and his next election, to keep Iowans from having an opportunity to vote.

The Republican effort to let Iowans vote on the Iowa Marriage Amendment this week was lead by Senator David Johnson of Ocheyedan. By inviting the other Senators to sign a discharge petition, Johnson attempted to bring the Iowa Marriage Amendment to the floor for a vote over Gronstal’s objection. The petition quickly gained the signatures of all 18 Republican Senators, along with that of Democrat Senator Tom Hanckock. As the week wore on, other Democrats began to respond to calls and e-mails from their constituents. As the funnel closed, Democrat Senators Black, Kreiman, Olive, and Seng had added their names to the list. Ultimately, Johnson fell three Members short of the 26 signatures he needed.

IFPC Action spokesman Bryan English responded to the end of this week’s activity in the Iowa Senate by saying, “Thanks to the hard work of Senator Johnson and his Republican colleagues, we now have a record of who really cares about marriage, and who understands that the Supreme Court is not the lawmaking body of this state. It is blatantly apparent that in the environment created by last April’s Iowa Supreme Court opinion, Senate Democrats are not qualified to remain the majority party.” According to English, “Iowans who support real marriage are not going away, and if Mike Gronstal would like them to focus their energy on removing him from the majority, they will be happy to comply.”

One Member of the Iowa Senate whose signature was glaringly absent from the discharge petition was Senate President Jack Kibbie of Emmetsburg. Senator Kibbie, who has on several occasions publicly declared his support for real marriage, and his willingness to vote for the Iowa Marriage Amendment, refused to take even the smallest action to keep his promises. This week, Senator Kibbie chose to side with Mike Gronstal and the homosexual lobby over the wishes of his constituents, and an opportunity to preserve the only definition of marriage, by refusing to sign the petition.

Commenting on the larger implications of the events of the week, English said, “The battle raging in Iowa over the issue of marriage is a political reflection of a larger spiritual war that began with original sin. Anyone who has read the Bible knows that while individual battles will continue, the ultimate outcome of the spiritual war was settled long ago by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.” He concluded by saying, “When the current political debate over marriage is viewed through the lens of eternity, politicians like Mike Gronstal and Jack Kibbie need to understand that they’ve already lost.”

(from Iowa Family Policy Center – Tom Steen)

What are they thinking?

debvm — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 02:29:31 +0000

(From Sen. Randy Feenstra’s blog http://newgenerationrepublican.com/blog/) 2-8-10 We are Off the Deep End!
I was really trying to stay fairly positive this session but today has gotten the best of me. It may be the winter weather or the white knuckle drive coming to Des Moines last night while missing the Super bowl. In any case, for today, I am done being fair and balanced.
SSB 3119 is a bill from the DNR that was presented in sub-committee today. It does a myriad of different things. Buried deep in the bill is several paragraphs that state; “a penalty will be assessed to anyone who feeds wild animals. A person cannot feed wildlife for view or observation within 50-yards of a residence.” In the bill, wild animals include; birds, mammals, reptiles, and fish.
I don’t think the governors agency thought through this piece of legislation. It would mean you couldn’t fish with live bait, couldn’t feed the ducks, and so much for the bird and squirrel feeders on your property.
Now, I realize that they were trying to get to the idea of not feeding deer; however, a poor thought out bill makes a person wonder who is in charge of our natural resources.
We are spending time on an issue like this rather than coming up with policy that creates more jobs, and balancing the budget. Although other bills are doing the direct opposite, including eliminating federal deductibility and removing Iowa as a right to work state. I can only hope, in the future, the DNR develops some reasonable thought when it comes to well written legislation.