THE END OF A TERM
Sunday, March 7, 2010
I will not seek reelection to the State Central Committee.
Several years ago, I was quite frustrated with the Republican Party. President Bush did not prove to be fiscally responsible. Iowa Republicans lost to Chet Culver. We continued to lose seats at both the state and federal levels. We had the chance to lead and we failed. Republicans lost their way.
My initial response was to give up. The frustration was so great that I didn't care if I ever attended a county central committee meeting again. I disengaged.
Then Chet Culver won the 2006 gubernatorial election. He came on the stage to give his victory speech with sweaty pits, a dripping forehead, and babbled his way through a terrible speech. This guy was now my governor, and it finally broke me. I could no longer remain disengaged. It was quite late into the night, but I remember waking up my wife and saying, "Hunny, I'm back. I can't take it anymore."
It was time to be part of the solution- not part of the problem.
In 2008, I was elected to the State Central Committee (SCC) of the Republican Party of Iowa. During my two year term, I have traveled across the district to county meetings, annual fund raisers, and candidate events. It has been a good journey, and I have met so many genuinely passionate people. However, all has not been easy. We took a beating during the last election cycle, and I have received my share of the wrath from party activists- and I have agreed with them.
That said, we are in better shape now as a party. Chairman Strawn has proven to be an effective leader. Most of our counties have new energy and lots of optimism for the fall elections. Good candidates are stepping forward. Republicans are positioned to do well.
District convention delegates will convene on April 24th to elect new members to the State Central Committee. I will not be seeking a second term. There are many ways to help the cause, and it is time to focus my energy on those efforts. I will miss serving in this capacity, and I will definitely miss the people I have worked so closely with.
If you are considering running for the position, I would be happy to discuss it with you and answer any questions you might have.
COUNTY CONVENTION DAY
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Candidates worked it in Louisa County.
All across the state today, Republicans gathered within their individual counties to elect district/state convention delegates, debate and pass a platform, and listen to candidates for office make a pitch. Most counties began conventions in the morning while a few started in the afternoon. Louisa County, however, called its delegation to order at 7:00 PM. That seems late, but it was actually a good move.
Statewide candidates try to get around as much as possible, but with 99 counties, even the most aggressive campaigns can only make it to a few. Since Louisa is so small, we rarely attract the candidates. This year was a bit different. Most candidates flocked to Eastern Iowa, and with the late start time, Louisa was a final stop for many of them.
Louisa County delegates were able to hear the following this evening:
George Eichhorn, Candidate for Secretary of State
Steve Rathje, Candidate for Congress
Matt Strawn, Chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa
Rod Roberts, Candidate for Governor
Christopher Reed, Candidate for Congress
Marianette Miller-Meeks, Candidate for Congress
State Representative Tom Sands
That's not bad for a small county. It was a good evening.
THE ROTH IRA AND THE GOVERNMENT'S PROMISE
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Pay the taxes now and the money will be yours- pinky swear.
Last week a financial advisor stopped by my home and talked to me about investing in a ROTH IRA. Here are the basics:
-A traditional IRA,which works similar to your 401(k), allows you to deduct the contributions made today from your income. When you retire, taxes would be due on all of the distributions.
-With a ROTH IRA, contributions made today are fully taxable as income. However, when you retire, all distributions are supposed to come out tax free. It sounds like a pretty good deal. Over a lifetime, that money could double multiple times and all of the gains would be non-taxable.
That is the promise our government has made. Pay the taxes now and you won't have to pay in the future. Do you buy it? If I was in my fifties, the ROTH would be a good deal. However, as a 20-something, I think I'll take my chances with a traditional IRA. Here's why...
I have approximately 40 working years left. If I opened a ROTH today and saved $300/month, I would likely have an account worth more than $1 million upon retirement. Now, imagine this. Imagine a country trillions of dollars in debt with millions of retirees with millions of dollars in tax-free accounts. Medicare will be bankrupt, Social Security will be paying pennies on the dollar, and China will be recalling the debt we owe it. Something will have to give. Somehow, the feds will need more revenue.
Bingo! The millions of ROTH accounts across the country will have ballooned to unimaginable amounts by that time. Congress will not be able to resist. They'll begin to tax the accounts.
I know, I know. The country would be so outraged. Would Congress really get by with such a thing? (Ummmm, healthcare?)
Here's what will happen (according to Jason). Since class warfare will be even worse in 40 years, Congress will enact an asset test. Anyone with a net worth greater than X would be subject to a tax on retirement savings. The tax would be small at first, but then it would grow. You see, by enacting the asset test, it would only be the rich (or those that saved $300/month for 40 years) that would be subject to the tax. By only taxing the rich, Congress would appease the masses and those that did not save a penny during their lifetime. Our government does not have a very good history rewarding those that think ahead.
I'll take my tax deduction today, thanks. At least that is a sure thing.
BANNED: TEXTING WHILE DRIVING
Monday, March 1, 2010
However, driving while being an idiot is still legal.
I know that the topic is hot right now. After all, it is even Oprah's cause of the day. Texting while driving is the new evil.
Yes, I am guilty. I write e-mails while driving. I read e-mails while driving. I surf the web while driving. And yes, I even dial while driving. It distracts me, and I should not do it. But I do. Some day, I may cause an accident.
Luckily, the Iowa Legislature plans on ending my suicidal mission. Thank you. The new law will surely change my ways. In fact, I will no longer eat, daydream, change the radio station, read billboards, talk to my passengers or even chew gum while driving. Oh- that's right, the legislature doesn't plan on banning those things. They must be okay. After all, if the government doesn't protect me from those things they must be a big deal. Right?
My heart goes out to those that have been killed because drivers weren't paying attention. The motive is genuine. However, we can't legislate against everything. We must take responsibility for ourselves. We must.
THE VAUDITOR
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Taxpayer Watchdog? Check.
Iowa Auditor, David Vaudt, released a statement this week calling into question the legality of Culver's super-sized budget. The report shed light on Culver's 'bucket switching' and over exaggerated budget savings.
Iowa law prohibits the governor from proposing a state budget that exceeds 99% of anticipated revenues. Culver, in his budget, boasted a $60 million cushion. However, the Auditor's report states that, at a minimum, Culver's proposed budget is $25 million over anticipated revenues. Therefore, it is likely illegal. As you can imagine, the governor's office isn't very happy.
As many of you know, I am pretty critical of people. It takes a lot to impress me, and I tend to overuse the term 'worthless' quite a bit. David Vaudt, however, is the man. State budgets are so complicated. There are a variety of different funds and funding streams, and most legislators don't even understand it all. As taxpayers, how do we know if the budget is what the governor says it is. Fortunately, David Vaudt is on our side.
As the state auditor last year, Mr. Vaudt made just over $100,000. He could fetch much more than that in the private world. Vaudt is a true American patriot and hero. If it weren't for him, who would watch our backs?
Help for Haiti
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Where should your money go?
If you are like me, you want to help the people of Haiti. When you see the images on television, you would have to be quite callused not to feel for the children wandering the streets without a home.
But how can you help? Where should you send your money? I want my money to go directly to relief and not to administrative overhead, fundraising expenses, or other ancillary purposes.
I choose to give to Food for the Hungry. First of all, the organization has a history working in Haiti, so I'm confident that my support can help the people quickly. In addition, the organization only spends 7% of its funds on administration and fundraising, so nearly 93 cents of every dollar goes directly to programming. It belongs to the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability and is audited annually.
Regardless of which organization you choose to support, take some time to give. Haiti will need our compassion for years to come.
Political Lesson Learned #3: Most Conservative Doesn't Necessarily Mean Best Candidate
Saturday, January 23, 2010
There is much more to consider in the quest for purity.
So we all should agree by now that there is no perfect candidate for office. I have yet find someone with an identical ideological match.
When I choose a candidate during the primary process, sure, the issues are quite important. I spend a lot of time reviewing websites, reading newspapers, and when possible, questioning the candidate personally. If we disagree on the basic fundamentals, the candidate loses my vote. However, just because we agree on the basic fundamentals doesn't mean automatic support.
Yes, I'm pretty conservative on both fiscal and social issues, and I often mingle with those on my end of the political spectrum.. Many a conversation and debate has occurred where good Republican activists will argue over the conservative credentials on a candidate. Often, our party's grassroots activists will decide to back the most conservative candidate in the primary race. Many are sick of our party leaders compromising on critical issues, and by backing the most conservative candidate, they feel they are doing their part to advance the causes we believe in.
(And here it comes...) BUT, electability is important. The ability of a candidate to win in a general election is not the only reason they should win a primary, but is should be part of the reason.
It takes a lot to win an election. You must raise money, organize an effective campaign, command an audience, and tell a story with broad appeal. The most conservative candidate in a primary doesn't always have the rest of the package.
The skeptics out there will claim that I think we should embrace RINO's (Republicans In Name Only) and wishy-washy moderates. That's not the case. I want a politician that I can count on when it matters. But I don't want to lose elections simply because a terrible campaigner appeared more conservative than a rising star.
Political Lesson Learned #2: The Law of Men is Not Supreme
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
If the spotlight was on us, what would we say?
I have only had conversations with my Great Uncle Richard perhaps a dozen times as an adult. He is quite a bit older than me, lives several hours away, and is more of a distant relative than an immediate one. But he is wise.
Shortly after W was elected President, he nominated John Ashcroft to the post of Attorney General. I remember this quite well as Ashcroft was a solid conservative and many in my camp were excited about his appointment. My Uncle Richard should have been excited as well, but he wasn't. In fact, he was quite disappointed with the confirmation hearings.
On the first day of the Senate confirmation hearings, there was quite a bit of debate and discussion regarding Ashcroft's personal convictions and whether or not Mr. Ashcroft could separate his personal views from actual laws on the books.
It was the response to this question during testimony of January 16, 2001, that truly saddened my Uncle Richard:
Senator Orrin Hatch: The special interest groups who have sharply attacked you, seem to ignore these instances where you have interpreted the laws as written, despite your personal beliefs. Now, if confirmed as attorney general of the United States, will you enforce the laws of this land irrespective of your personal beliefs?
Ashcroft: I will. And I think I should clarify that just a little bit. My primary personal belief is that the law is supreme; that I don't place myself above the law, and I shouldn't place myself above the law. So it would violate my beliefs to do it.
Some points in Ashcroft's simple response were very true. No individual is above the law and we should treat folks the same regardless of socioeconomic class. We, as a society, even have to cooperate with laws (like full body scans at airports) that we may not agree with. However, my uncle went on to explain to me that the big issues was that Ashcroft conceded supreme authority to the law of the United States (even that law interpreted by activist judges). My uncle Richard was truly saddened that Ashcroft did not use that moment, when all of America was watching, to concede supreme authority to God.
"But Uncle Richard," I cried. "Had Ashcroft done what you would have liked, he would not have been confirmed as our Attorney General. The Democrats would have gotten their way, and conservatives would have lost ground."
My uncle, in his great wisdom, simply responded, "I know." He didn't go on to explain, elaborate, or lecture me. He was willing to concede political ground in this county to acknowledge God on one of the largest public platforms available. I hope I never forget that very important lesson.
If you would like to read the entire testimony of the first day of Ashcroft's confirmation hearing, you may view it here.
Political Lesson Learned #1: Even The Good Guys Will Let You Down
Monday, January 11, 2010
Men (and women for you PC folks) are destined to be fallible.
Yes, the good guys will let you down. It happens over, and over, and over, and over.
Newbies to the political system are both fun and fascinating. Certain candidates will attract a following- they will pull people out of the woodwork. Average citizens who have never even voted before will somehow get introduced to a candidate that sets them on fire. They engage, log hours volunteering, and inspire others to be part of a movement. These folks really believe in their candidate. Election day hits, the the candidate wins, and we send him to either Des Moines or Washington.
We feel good. The newly elected official is going to go to the Capitol and change the world. For a while, he bucks the system. We really feel good. But then Mr. Politician decides he wants a certain committee post- well, that's going to cost a vote on Bill X. Bill X isn't necessarily harmful, so okay. But then Bill Y comes along. Mr. Politician isn't going to get his Bill Z to the floor unless Bill Y comes to pass. Bill Y is not a good bill, but it will help get Bill Z to the floor, so okay.
Get the picture?
I was pretty excited about W. He campaigned in 2000 as a good fiscal conservative. I was proud to support him. Unfortunately, my fiscally conservative President grew the national debt by 85.6% during his 8 year tenure. Wow- that's not what I bargained for. I didn't put sweat equity into his campaign for that. I was truly disappointed.
Men are designed to be imperfect. The power plays, insider games, backroom deals, and compromising pressures that are commonplace in Washington and Des Moines corrupt even the best of us. It's too bad- our country deserves better.
Happy New Year!
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Time for a new series on political lessons learned.
This is the time of year when 'Best of' lists begin circulating: Best movies of the decade, Best moments in sports, Top pop culture events of the year, etc.
Although I went to the Iowa Straw Poll in 1999, I really didn't get actively engaged in politics until early in the Year 2000. Today marks the official end of my first decade in politics. The journey has been quite interesting, and there are thousands of things I've learned along the way.
Over the next few weeks, I'll be sharing my 'Best Lessons Learned' list that I have been compiling over the last 10 years. I'll also be sharing my favorite political moments of the decade.
These are my personal lessons and stories, but I sincerely hope you'll enjoy them, too.
National Debt Continues to Soar
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
We are spending our country into bankruptcy.
Last year at this time, I reported that our national debt reached $10,554,113,905,232.03. President Bush grew the national debt 13.88% during 2008. Our debt at the end of this year stands at $12,144,893,016,570.46. President Obama has grown the debt by 15.06% during 2009.
That is not the hope and change I want to believe in.
We, the people, should be mad as hell.
Do Tax Credits Really Cost the State Money? Part 2.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
"Refundable" tax credits seem more like a subsidy.
I wanted to spend some time further exploring the question of whether or not tax credits actually cost the state money. Some legislators are calling for the end of business-based tax credits because they 'are costing the state millions of dollars of tax revenue.' In the previous blog entry, I explained that most business-based tax credits don't actually cost the state money, but rather, they simply delay new tax revenues that might not have existed otherwise.
The other issue worthy of consideration would be refundability of certain tax credits. Most tax credits are non-refundable. Basically, that means that you only get the tax credit if you have a tax liability. If you pay no taxes, you get no credit. However, some tax credits are completely refundable. If you pay no taxes, you still get a credit (a.k.a. tax refund check).
As an example, let's look at the Enterprise Zone Investment Tax Credit again. A company approved for this program essentially receives a 10% tax credit for all of the qualifying investment it makes in an economically distressed area. The credit is earned when the investment is made. If the company doesn't have any profitability in the first couple years, it can carry forward the earned credits to years when it does have a tax liability- up to 7 years in this case. If the company doesn't turn a profit in those first seven years, it loses the ability to redeem the credits.
Refundable credits work a bit differently. Take the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit for example. Working parents can receive a tax credit for approved child care expenses- up to 35% of the cost in some cases. However, this credit is fully refundable, which means even if you do not have tax liability, you can claim a refund on the credit. In fact, one publication on the tax even says the following: "If you do not have sufficient income to file an Iowa return or do not owe Iowa tax, you may wish to file a return in order to claim a refund for this credit."
This piece is not intended to devalue the dependent care tax credit. After all, the credit was designed to assist low-income, working parents, with the substantial costs of providing daycare. That is certainly a nobel cause. However, the examples above clearly point out the difference between refundable and non-refundable tax credits. In 2008, the state issued approximately $20 million in Enterprise Zone Investment Tax Credits that encouraged over $363 million in capital investment in Iowa communities. The state spent over $8 million in the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit during the same year.
Which program "costs" the state more?
Do Tax Credits Really Cost the State Money? Part 1.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Consumer-based v. Business-based.
The State of Iowa is doing some serious review of all tax credits. To be sure, our tax system is quite complex and difficult to understand. I was a finance major in college and now have an MBA. I pride myself on doing my own taxes. If a finance major can't do his own taxes, then there is a serious problem. That said, doing my own taxes is not easy.
In my day job, I work with economic development tax incentives. When I file my own taxes, I investigate many others. All of this is to say that I have researched tax credits more than the average Iowan.
The state just released a report regarding the tax credit review from department heads. Each tax credit was given a brief explanation, the historical cost was outline, and future costs were estimated. You may view the entire report here. Already, members of the legislature are calling for either a reduction or an end to certain tax credits because they 'cost the state money.'
But do tax credits really cost the state money? Some do and others do not.
Some tax credits, like the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, are consumer-based. Other tax credits, like the Enterprise Zone Investment Tax Credit are business-based. Consumer-based tax credits, I would argue, do cost the state money. Individuals- especially those with children like myself, use tax credits to decrease the amount of state income taxes that we would otherwise pay. I don't have children just to get a tax credit. In other words, I would have the same amount of children regardless of whether or not I receive a child tax credit. Child tax credits cost the state money because, were it not for the tax credits, thousands of Iowans would pay more in taxes to the state.
Business-based tax credits are a different story. Enterprise Zone tax credits, for example, provide companies that invest in economically challenged areas a tax credit equal to 10% of its qualifying investment. If Company A decides to build a $5 million building and stock it with $2 million in equipment, it would receive a tax credit against its Iowa corporate income taxes of $700,000. That is a pretty powerful incentive. Were it not for the Enterprise Zone tax credit, Company A might have decided to locate in another state- all other factors being equal. The company can only exercise the tax credits if it is profitable and pays Iowa income taxes. If Company A was going to locate in another state, Iowa would have never captured that investment. It would never receive those property taxes. It would never receive any income taxes from the company. The new employees of the company would never have paid any Iowa withholding taxes.
In this very simple, yet common, example, it is easy to see why I believe many business-based tax credits to not 'cost' the state any money. What they do is delay NEW future tax revenues that would not have existed without the credits in the first place.
The Iowa DNR: Out of Control
Saturday, December 12, 2009
The agency needs spayed or neutered.
I recently attended a fundraiser for Iowa's Secretary of Agriculture, Bill Northey. When it was question time, nearly all of the focus turned to Iowa's Department of Natural Resources. There was a lot of anger in the room. The DNR's mission is "To conserve and enhance our natural resources in cooperation with individuals and organizations to improve the quality of life for Iowans and ensure a legacy for future generations."
It certainly sounds like a noble cause, and some group should certainly exist to make sure we don't destroy our environment. However, I'm beginning to believe that this department needs to be put in its place. Perhaps they need to reevaluate how they work 'in cooperation with' others. Here are just a few issues that keep coming up almost everywhere I go:
1. The Iowa DNR refuses to support the establishment of a bike trail called the Flint River Trail that will run through Starr's Cave Nature Preserve. Des Moines County is planning a $6.45 million trail that will eventually stretch 20 miles and connect Downtown Burlington to The Big Hollow Recreational Area. Various panels, boards, and commissions are reviewing the matter (i.e. red tape), but so far, the Iowa DNR has refused to support bike usage through the small section of the trail that runs through the preserve.
2. Rumor has it that the DNR is considering an administrative rule change that would prohibit building construction or reconstruction within all 500 year flood plains. It may seem like a no brainer to prevent building in regular flood-prone areas. However, the maps (authorized and approved by FEMA) are not even created for the 500 year flood plain yet. In a sense, we would be restricting growth in areas that aren't even identified. For some areas, thousands of acres could be affected. Should the rule be enacted, land prices would plummet in those affected areas. School districts (who tax that land) bankers (who back loans with that land), and individuals (who own the land) should be quite worried.
3. The Iowa DNR is requiring costly upgrades to landfills that are not economically feasible. While I am not an expert on landfill regulations, essentially, the DNR is requiring waste cells to be lined even though no evidence of groundwater contamination is present. In some cases, it is required closed cells to be reopened and lined. For one landfill in southeast Iowa, those upgrades are going to cost in excess of $7 million dollars. Will the DNR fund this mandate? No. Tipping fees will instead increase dramatically.
These are just three examples- there are many more. In nearly every case, local officials are outraged. Unfortunately, they are powerless against the agency.
We have a very real problem in Iowa with the DNR. This agency requires little legislative oversight as most of its operating procedures come in the form of 'administrative rule changes.' Unlike legislation approved by the legislature and signed by the governor, administrative rules act like department 'interpretations' of the law and are subject to much less scrutiny by both the public and the press before enacted. The administrative rules process is quickly becoming a source of power grabbing by the Iowa DNR.
This spring the governor and the legislature should reign in the DNR. The agency is out of control.
Iowa & Education Reform, Part 3: Qualified Teachers
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Are bad teachers the problem?
As I continue to explore the reasons Iowa's education system is a laggard, surely the topic of qualified teachers must come up. As a society, we are quick to judge teachers and put the blame on them for poor student performance.
I have been a student in the classroom for over 21 years. Even today, I continue to take professional development courses from instructors. Over that time, both good teachers and bad teachers have been abundant. It's fairly easy to separate the good ones from the bad ones, and typically, one can decipher between the two in just a couple of settings.
Currently, we judge teachers based upon several factors:
-Where were they educated and what endorsements did they receive?
-How well did the teacher score on competency exams (Google Iowa PPST Exams)?
-How well do their students score on competency exams?
We pay teachers based upon two factors:
-The educational level of the teacher.
-Years of experience.
Unfortunately, I would argue that none of the factors used to either judge a teacher or pay a teacher are linked to whether or not they a truly a good teacher. In fact, some of the worst instructors I have had would no doubt have received amazing results on competency exams or subject matter exams. Testing well does not mean they can teach.
Based on our current model, the ideal teacher (who would earn the most money) would be one that received a great, master's level education with tons of endorsements, scored well on the PPST exam, has no experience outside the district because the individual has been in the same district for thirty years, and is at the maximum 'step' in the union contract.
Anyone see a problem?
The Iowa Department of Education has actually developed a fairly decent list of Iowa Teaching Standards and Criteria. Unfortunately, I don't see the connection between this document and real world application of the standards.
After exploring a couple more topical areas, we'll soon be discussing better ways to educate our youth and evaluate our educational system.
Happy Thanksgiving
Thursday, November 26, 2009
I have a lot to be thankful for.
This Thanksgiving, my family has a long list of things that we are truly thankful for. Many families are hurting out there, and my wife and I are very fortunate to both have good jobs, a roof over our heads, and plenty to eat. Our two beautiful children add a lot of joy to our lives.
Pause just a moment today to reflect on the many blessings that your family has received, and then thank our Creator.
Iowa & Education Reform, Part 2: Dollars and Cents
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Is funding the problem?
This year will be extremely challenging for school districts all across Iowa. Culver's budget blunder of 2009 will force school districts to make difficult decisions as they deal with a 10% reduction in operating funds from state appropriations. Instead of focusing on student achievement, school boards, superintendents, principals, and teachers will all be preoccupied with how to make the numbers work.
We're going to hear a lot about money. Districts will cry foul about how dealing with a massive budget cut will wreck havoc on the school system. For sure, the budget is a real problem this year. Overall, however, is a lack of financial resources the reason Iowa's schools are under performing? Do we not provide our educational institutions with enough money?
I would argue that we as a state invest quite substantially in the education of our children. In fact, of all the competing programs in state and local government, the truth is that the single biggest user of tax dollars is the school system.
Just like thousands of other Iowans, I paid the first half of my property taxes in September. This year, 40.53% of my total property tax bill went to the school district that I live in. In April, I also paid an additional 7% on my state income taxes for something called an income surtax- yes, just to fund the school.
According to the Iowa Department of Education, the State of Iowa spent $2.58 billion during FY '09 or approximately $5,546 per student on PK-12 education. During the FY '04 school year, state funding was $4,685 per student. In just 5 years, state funding for education increased a whopping 18.4%.
To complete the picture, state funding accounts for only about 55% of the revenue for our public schools.. Local sources (i.e. property tax levies and income surtaxes) account for an additional 41%. Another 4% comes from the feds. These numbers do not include revenue from the statewide School Infrastructure (no longer local) Local Option tax or SILO.
As one can see, we are spending plenty of money on education. Are our kids worth the investment? Perhaps. Are our schools are struggling with this most recent budget blunder? Most definitely.
But the bigger question is this: If money and education quality here truly linked, why is Iowa such a laggard in education?
Iowa & Education Reform, Part 1: The Report Card
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Iowa ranked 47th - Clearly a Laggard
For the next couple of weeks, I have planned a series on education- specifically the K12 public school system. There are a couple reasons why this is timely. First of all, schools will no doubt feel the pinch when the 10% state budget cut actually goes into effect. Schools will be forced (or will at least tell us that they are forced) to draw down reserves, raise property taxes next year, and enter stiff negotiations with the unions next spring. Secondly, the political season here is Iowa is shaping up, and education always plays a major role in the discussions.
There are some who call for an end to the public education system. I am not one of those- yet. My mother is a teacher as is my wife, and I was educated in the public school system and the public university system. I do, however, believe that much change needs to occur. My hope is that the issues I raise of the next few weeks will enter into the debate next year.
Is there a problem?
The motto of the Iowa Department of Education is "Championing excellence for all Iowa students through leadership and service." Sounds pretty good, doesn't it?
The US Chamber recently published a state-by-state report card on educational innovation called Leaders and Laggards. Unfortunately, Iowa was listed as a laggard- placing 47/50 in comparison to other states. Why?
School Management: D
Finance: B
Staffing & Evaluation: D
Data: C
Pipeline to Post secondary: C
Technology: B
Read the Iowa Summary.
You can read the methodology for yourself. I don't agree with all of the methodology, but it still gives you a quick overview of how we actually lack excellence in our schools. We must do better.
Caucus Season Will Be Upon Us Soon
Monday, November 2, 2009
Putting the 'Roots' in Grassroots
The Iowa Caucuses for both the Iowa Republicans and democrats are set for Saturday, January 23rd at 1:00 p.m.
Tonight, I attended a county central committee meeting in Southeastern Iowa that conducted caucus training for its precinct leaders. First of all, kudos to them for getting the training in early. I think their folks feel well prepared for the event.
I ended up staying for the entire training, and I'm glad that I did. First of all, it got me excited about our process again. Forget about Obama and Pelosi for a moment. We really have a pretty neat system, and it all starts at the precinct caucuses. Secondly, it reminded me about my role in my local neighborhood. The training got me thinking about the neighbors I need to talk to about coming to the caucuses. I need to do my part to invite people to become part of the process.
Most of us get a bit apprehensive about going to new events- especially when we aren't sure if we will know anyone or not. That's where you and I can come in. I challenge you (and myself) to visit with your friends, your relatives, and your neighbors about participating in this very fundamental part of our political system. Invite them to participate, and offer to sit next to them at the event. Tell them what to expect, and encourage them to speak up.
If you want to take our county back, this is where it all begins. You and I both have plenty of time (and a duty) to get people excited about January 23rd.
Thurston to Represent HD 33
Friday, October 30, 2009
Interest continues despite tough demographics
Last night, I had the opportunity to credential the voting delegates in the special convention to nominate the Republican candidate in the Iowa House District 33. Due to a resignation, the governor has called for a special election in that district to be held on November 24th.
This district will be tough. Last fall, democrat Dick Taylor received nearly 70% of the vote to the Republican challenger and locally known Linn County Republican activist, Kathy Potts. Fortunately, Republicans aren't conceding anything. There were multiple guests at the special nominating convention. Although three candidates came forward to pitch their case to the delegates, the room seemed pleased with the outcome. We Republicans tend to have loyalty of our favored primary candidates, but I was pleased to see the support for the winner, Josh Thurston.
Josh is 27, has served his country in the armed forces, and is a member of the Teamsters Local 238. Thank you, Josh, for being willing to represent our party in this special election.
Paulsen is Right on the Money
Monday, October 26, 2009
Taxpayers lose when we rob Peter to pay Paul
I hate to keep giving the Des Moines Register credit for articles of real value, but credit must be given where it is do. The Register is all over Iowa’s budget mess, and they should be acknowledged for that. Today, the paper ran a story questioning the state’s practice of perpetually funding open or vacant positions within departments. Kraig Paulsen, Republican Majority Leader in the House, said, “You fund those, and then that gives the director, or the governor through the directors, a slush fund.”
He is exactly right.
It is near impossible to budget for every penny that might possibly be needed by a state department over the course of a year- especially when we’re talking about $6,000,000,000. Department heads need some discretion in adjusting budgets for both overfunded and underfunded categories. However, the commonly accepted practice of padding budgets with these phantom positions is extremely problematic.
One slush fund for our current governor is a problem- let alone one for each 36 department heads.
The recent budget cut has shed some light on this important issue. This spring, the legislature should have an opportunity to fully examine this practice and implement some changes to the budgeting process. Now would be a good time for department heads to justify all line items rather than simply justifying a budgetary increase.
I know that there are a million reasons why budgets must change after they are set. The governor should have some ability to make appropriate adjustments to compensate. Unfortunately, our current incumbent has proven ineffective at managing budgets. Therefore, the legislature must now babysit and micromanage.
Kudos to Kraig Paulsen for calling a spade for what it is. You are exactly the kind of leader we need in the Iowa House.
TouchPlay: Iowa's New Heroin
Friday, October 23, 2009
Must everything be about revenue?
The Des Moines Register ran a story today with Speaker Murphy suggesting that official authorization of the Iowa Lottery's TouchPlay machines could be a 'live round' as the state looks to shore up its tremendous budget shortfall.
The democrats running the show in Des Moines have this insatiable appetite for state revenue- especially of the short-term variety. I guess they like the quick fix. Let's look at some examples:
1. The feds injected $529 million in one-time stimulus funds to help Iowa balance this year's budget.
2. In addition, we bonded $601 million to get some more quick fix in the name of job creation.
3. Believe it or not, we tried to sell off the remaining tobacco settlement money last December to get yet another hit.
Unfortunately, there are several more examples. You see, pattern addictions are difficult cycles to break. Life is pretty good until you start abusing your system. The first time our government borrows money to ease the pain feels pretty good. Everyone is happy. Sure, the underlying causes (in this case, out-of-control spending) still exist, but people are satisfied with the temporary pain relief.
Then, the satisfaction goes away. That darn out-of-control spending comes back again. So we need another quick fix- and then another- and then another. Unfortunately, until we deal with the actual problem, it won't get better. Culver, Gronstal, and Murphy have shown no desire to deal with the spending issue. They continue to paint the picture as a 'revenue' problem.
That's why TouchPlay could be Iowa's new heroin.
Long Time, No Blog
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Real life comes first .
Life has been coming at me pretty fast over the last few weeks. Unfortunately, that has meant more time on other priorities and less time on blogging. Certainly, there has been plenty to say over the course of the last two months.
Consider me back. I'll never spend time each and every day working on this site, but you should enjoy at least a few updates a week until I get bored with it. Enjoy!
Primaries Bring in Newbies
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Competition is usually a good thing.
I spent some time door knocking in the Iowa House District 90 today representing the Stephen Burgmeier campaign. The special election is this Tuesday, and dozens showed up today to help get the word out.
Special elections are a lot of fun. One of the great things is that people from all over the state converge on one isolated district. You see old friends and meet new people. Women from the area bring in cookies and all sorts of food to feed the volunteers. Everyone is there for one purpose- and we have a great time doing it!
As we were eating lunch, I sat at a table with a nice women who said she is fairly new to politics. Of course, I can't let a statement like that stand on its own. I was curious why she had suddenly 'activated' after so many years of no activity. Her response was, "Well, this may not sit well with many of you, but I was a Ron Paul supporter."
For whatever reason, Ron Paul had activated this nice woman. Although he failed to get the GOP nod during the '08 election, this individual was now hooked. Now, more than a year and a half after the Iowa Caucuses, she drove more than two hours on a Saturday morning to help a candidate that she didn't even personally know. She wanted to help the cause.
God bless her!
I believe that primaries are good for the party. No, I don't particularly care for the GOP on GOP mudslinging. But in primaries, we always have a good debate on the issues, and candidates always bring new people to the table. As a good capitalist, I believe competition is good- even in politics.
With so much interest in this cycle's gubernatorial primary, we have a terrific opportunity to bring more people into the party. The challenge for our party will be to not only survive a spirited gubernatorial primary, but thrive with it. Each of our candidates will attract new voters and volunteers to Iowa politics. Somehow, we need to capture these new, enthusiastic, passionate, and eager volunteers when their preferred candidate loses. Let's make these new faces feel welcome!
This blog is the sole opinion of Jason Hutcheson and does not constitute an opinion of the State Central Committee of the Republican Party of Iowa or any other entity. Reasonable judgement is required.