Lukan's Education Welfare for the Wealthy

State Representative Steven Lukan from New Vienna

For most Iowans, having the ability to send our children to private schools is a dream. It's the type of thing that we might do if we won the lottery. Since we recognize that we can't all be so fortunate, we work to make public education the best that it can be...for everyone. You might think that if you were fortunate enough to have the means to provide a top notch private education for your kids that you would be content in knowing how fortunate you are. Unfortunately, this usually isn't the case. Instead of counting themselves among the fortunate, privileged few, men like businessman and insurance executive turned State Representative, Steven Lukan, are always looking for ways to make their good luck even better...at the expense of the rest of us.

In this case, it comes in the form of Lukan's House File 2324. Under Lukan's bill, students receiving non-public school education or "competent private instruction" would be eligible to receive education savings grants from the state. That doesn't sound so bad, does it? Now anyone who can afford to send their kids to private school, or decide to keep them at home and teach them some radical brands of religious fundamentalism, can receive state moneys to do so. There are only a couple of troubling things about the bill.

First, who gets the money? Well, families who meet certain income guidelines are eligible for the aid money. Did I say aid money? Ooops. That sounds an awful lot like welfare doesn't it? But since we all know that guys like Lukan despise any form of welfare, we'll call it...mmmm...a grant. Anyhow...who gets the "grant" money? Well, Lukan has written HF2324 so that the "grant" money is distributed in accordance with free and reduced lunch money financial requirements. That sounds good. That way, only families who really need the money can get it, right? Wrong, because Lukan has decided that while it may be difficult for some families to get reduced meals in public schools, that almost everyone in private schools deserve to get a little something. Under Lukan's bill, families earning as much as 250% of the reduced lunch requirements are eligible to receive a little financial love form the State of Iowa. That means that a family could earn as much as $175,000 and still get their share of the new state welfare (I mean grant money) for the well to do.

The other really troubling thing with this bill is where the money comes from. Because under the Lukan's Welfare for the Wealthy plan, the amount of cash appropriated for each student comes right out of the coffers of the community school district where the student resides. So not only do families who don't need the economic boost get one anyways, the amount of cash they ultimately receive will be deducted right from the school district budgets that are already struggling to provide quality education for all of the rest of our children.

Lukan's plan is yet another example of modern conservatives' socialism for the rich, where wealth is redistributed to those who need it least and taken directly from the pockets of those who need it most. It does not create any new wealth or save the taxpayers anything as they purport. Rather, it strips the public of desperately needed resources and delivers them directly to the pocketbooks of the upper classes. Much like Governor Branstad's tax plans seek to shift the tax burden from the corporate tax payers down to private homeowners. And with all of the talk of the need for cuts and downsizing, here we are, once again staring at a bill that accomplishes nothing, hurts the common good, and aids only a fraction of the populace who could get along fine without the additional help.

Funny thing is...if you talked about raising the bar to qualify for reduced lunches by 50% or even 10% so that working class families who could genuinely use the help could get it, guys like Lukan would be jumping out of their suits and screaming at the top of their collective white-collar lungs about welfare! But here, he wants to use the same formula to benefit those earning as much as 250% of the current requirements to get a check from the state. But it isn't 'welfare' when you give it to people who don't really need it, is it?

And what will happen when the unscrupulous among us discover that they can keep their kids at home by providing them with "competent private instruction" and collect a check? Maybe they could even combine that with recent House Republican efforts to reform child labor laws and put the little ones to work too! What a windfall that could be. Or maybe, just perhaps, if you are lucky enough, or as is sometimes the case with home-schoolers, radical (or crazy) enough, not to have your children enrolled in public institutions, maybe you should simply count your blessings and allow the rest of us to keep doing our best to make do with what little resources we are able to provide to educate all of the rest of our children.

Iowa Statehouse Labor Report

Pictured above, Iowa Republicans in the Statehouse Busy themselves Drafting New Legislation

With Iowa's legislative session in full swing there are a number of bills that have been introduced with the potential of having a big impact on Iowa workers if they should pass. With a Republican controlled executive branch and statehouse, many of these bills look to roll back the rights of Iowa's working men and women. Here are the top five that folks should take a closer look at:

House File 2227 Introduced by the House Labor Committee (R)

It's no surprise that the Republican controlled House Labor Committee would be busying themselves with unraveling worker protections in Iowa. But HF2227 goes well beyond the usual labor hating tactics of Iowa House Republicans and seeks to hurt workers when they're most vulnerable...when they're young. This bill seeks to repeal protections provided by child labor laws in Iowa. In particular, removing the sections of the current statute that pertain to child labor protections for migratory labor. In short, the Republican farmers in the Iowa House are sick and tired of paying the children of their immigrant workers to lay around and attend school. If they hire a busload of migrant workers to come and pick their fruits and vegetables, these Republicans expect ALL of them to be picking all of the time. If they get their way and pass HF2227, the children of migrant workers can start putting their little hands to work the old fashioned way; by working them to the bones at an early age to make rich men even richer. 

House File 2040 Introduced by Dan Rasmussen (R)   

This bill seeks to eliminate the State of Iowa Construction Contractor Registration requirement. Under current Iowa law, a construction contractor has to file each year with state and show that they either have workers' compensation insurance OR are a sole proprietorship and thus exempt for requiring workers' compensation insurance under the law. The process takes legitimate contractors about five minutes each year and costs them all of $50. This registration process ensures that contractors hired in construction have the proper insurance. It protects workers, general contractors, and people looking to hire contractors. But more than that, it protects all Iowa taxpayers by making sure that injured workers are covered under their employers' policy and not just dropped off at the hospital for Iowans to pay their medical bills for them. Ending the registration requirement would allow a flood of high-risk, low rent contractors to sweep into the state and leave their injured workers sitting on our doorsteps when they drive out of town with a truck full of our dollars. Rasmussen's bill would make all of that possible for no good reason at all whatsoever...making this bill our GOOFIEST bill of the week. Congratulations Dan!

Senate File 2084 Introduced by A Whole Bunch of Senate Republicans 

I'm not even going to bother listing them all. If they are an Iowa Senate Republican, odds are they are in favor of this bill. SF2084 seeks to eliminate labor union money in state politics. Because, as every good Republican knows...take labor union cash out of the equation and there wouldn't be anything stopping them from repealing ALL of those pesky child labor laws and every other protection that working people have obtained over the last hundred years or so. Ever been to the deep south in states like Alabama or Texas? Yeah, they're nice aren't they? Ever worked there? No, me neither...because workers in those Republican controlled states earn a fraction of what we earn here, they have very few protections under state laws, and are a gazillion times more prone to be hurt at work, mistreated by employers, and robbed of their wages. Why? Because private sector unions are virtually non-existent and there is very little union money in politics. Republicans in the state Senate and the corporate interests who paid to get them elected would love to change our state motto to something like: Iowa: The Other Alabama! But those darned, pesky Democrats, elected with labor union cash, keep getting in their way. If only there was a way to get rid of it, we could all be whistling dixie...oh wait...what about SF2084! Brilliant!

Senate File 2144 Introduced by Mark Chelgrun (R)

This would also be called the "Chelgrun Get the UFCW off of my arse bill." Usually, when legislators write bills, they are really doing at the insistence of their donors. Oh, I'm sorry...did you still think they wrote them because it might be good for the people? Think again folks. That ain't how it works. But anyways, this here bill is all about Chelgrun because he lives in Ottumwa, Iowa. Ottumwa happens to be home to a meat packing industry and a pretty strong and active local chapter of the United Food & Commercial Workers Union. So, to make a long story even longer, Chelgrun is up there trying to do his thing at the statehouse by helping the big businesses and corporations who paid for him to get elected. Meanwhile, he keeps constantly getting pestered by the UFCW. They always seem to be watching what he's doing. Their members are always asking for things that would be good for working families. They even write him letters. All sorts of really annoying stuff that distracts him from his mission of helping big business and major corporations make more money. So comes now SF2144. This bill would make it illegal to collect union dues from undocumented workers because the UFCW represents a lot of hispanics at the packinghouse. And to a guy like Chelgrun, those scary, frightening looking folks who aren't white and dressed just like him must all be illegals, sooo why not shift the burden to find out onto the union, cut off their flow of cash, and finally put an end to a large active constituency of UFCW members who keep calling and bothering him about issues that are relevant to working families? Never mind that the law would be unconstitutional and illegal under current federal statutes.  It's hard (yet not impossible) to be a corporate shill with the UFCW members looking over your shoulder! Isn't it Chelgrun?

Senate File 2040 by Thomas Courtney (D)

By now, you're all no doubt wondering what on earth the Democrats have been up to while all of this is going on. The answer is...not much really. There are a few exceptions of course, but with the Dems only in control of the State Senate and beating back ridiculous proposals like the ones listed above by the House and the Governor, there hasn't been time for much pro-worker push-back. The one really glaring exception is Senate File 2040 as of late, by Thomas Courtney. This bill could also be called the "It doesn't stand a chance because there are too many Republicans up there bill" because it seeks to increase the minimum wage in the state to $8.75 this year and then $10 by 2013. It isn't going to get any traction right now, but it's nice that someone is at least still thinking about us working stiffs up there. 

Synopsis

If you would have told me a few years back that I would by yearning for the days of Culver and Democratic control that didn't accomplish anything I'd have called you crazy. Because with the tre-fecta at the statehouse, organized labor walked away with virtually nothing to show for it except a handful of appointments and a few rounds of golf with "that Big Lug" one-term governor of ours. But it didn't take long for me to begin to pine for the days of them not doing much because these Republicans are always trying to do something to someone, somewhere. Whether it is repealing child labor laws or eliminating protections for workers or attacking unions because they back Democrats more often...they always seem to be busy as bees. For as much as I would like to say to hell with them all, it's hard to get away from. Watching the bills and the legislature so closely for as long as I have makes me realize how close we are to truly nightmarish possibilities in this state. Were it not for Mike Gronstal and tiny number of Democrats in the Senate, a floodgate would be open and a ton of really stupid legislation would have swept through the state from the last session. All of it would have been bad for most Iowans, but none of it would ultimately have had more impact on working families than the labor bills. These idiots really do want to turn back the clock to before 1900. Republicans really do try to get rid of child labor laws and workers' compensation insurance and unemployment and minimum wages. Like I say, it's real hard to get away from, but every legislative session, there it is, bigger and bolder than ever, staring back at you...that with politicians sometimes it is way better to get nothing at all than to get the something that you never wanted. To that end I introduce my new motto:

Vote for Democrats, at Least They Won't DO Anything!

And The Winner Is...

State Representative Matt W. Windschitl

You might remember Windschitl (pronounced just like it is spelled, I guess) from such brilliant legislation as his bill from last session that sought to legalize grenade launchers and ballistic missiles? Well, old Windschitl is at it again, firing off another sortie of great legislating for the folks Iowa House District 56. They must be awful proud of this fella up there in Missouri Valley for all for his efforts, because his name keeps popping back up on my radar screen of really stupid bills. In fact, he won last year's overall competition for having crafted the single dumbest bill. And that was no easy feat in a session filled with freshmen Republican legislators eager to leave their own brands upon the state. 

Well, Windschitl has done it again! This year it is House File 2280. Windshitl thought there was a lot of dead beat dads out there in the world who needed his undivided attention, so he introduced this gem of a bill to paint their wagons. He put it right in their that deadbeat dads who fell behind their child support would be guilty of neglect and abandonment under state law. It sounds awful good to get them deadbeats out there to pay up. And under the Windschitl (sounds just like it's spelled) plan, they'd have to pay up...or else!

Trouble is that under the Windschitl (just like it's spelled) bill, dads who fell behind more than $2000 would be guilty of abandonment and a Class "C" Felony, carrying with it up to ten years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Then, after they were in the clink, the Windschitl bill would give them another 10 years and $10 grand in fines because once you fall $10,000 behind on support, they would hit you with another Class "C" Felony for neglect. 

Still, to some folks like Windschitl (sounds=spelled), it's never a bad idea to push for harsher laws against deadbeat dads and drunk drivers. (Eventually, we'll simply hang them from courthouse lawns and forgo the expense of trials and the like). It's a popular sentiment to expand the laws against them.

The real trouble is that $2000 is a figure that might be reached through no fault of the parent. Imagine, if you will, if support had been set when you had a job earning $80k a year as a store manager and then the store closed and you lost your income. Iowa law says, tough shit, you can't change a support order for two years. That puts the paying parent in the position of coming up with the cash every week, even if it is the bulk of their current earnings on unemployment, or pumping gas at the Quickie Mart. If Windschitl (yeah, just like it's spelled) has his way, many Iowa parents who are struggling to survive themselves, even though making earnest attempts to pay, and having every source of income garnished at the pre-established state rate...when that parent falls behind to the tune of $2000 over however long it takes them to fall behind that far, they then become a Felon and are fined and imprisoned.

Soooo, say your support is set at $900 per month, then you lose your job. Let's also say that your new wage or unemployment is about $400 per month. They will only garnish half of your wage, leaving you about $200 a week to live on. Still...you are falling behind at a rate of about a hundred bucks a month. Under the Windschitl (sounds like its spelled) plan...YOU would be 18 months away from becoming a felon in the State of Iowa and taking your place in prison beside a drunk driver or non-violent drug offender (about 70% of Iowa's prison population) even though you were paying as much as you could all along. 18 months...and the terms of a decree are only allowed to be altered every 24 months. 


Like most Iowans, this one believes that divorced non-custodial parents have a legal and moral obligation to provide support for their children. The current law is strict, functional, and at times, lacks fairness to the paying party, but if that is what it requires to make most of the people pay most of the time, then so be it all. But this nation was founded upon a principle that debt alone was not enough to imprison someone and make them a criminal. In a time of economic turmoil, this bill is wrought with farce and potential for perilous injustices against honest citizens. 


To that end, I am drafting this open letter to State Representative Windschitl...


Dear State Representative Windschitl;


I am writing in regards to your recently introduced HF2280 and HF2045 (calling for anyone seeking family assistance from the state to pay for their own drug screen before receiving any assistance). It has come to my attention that you are fast becoming known for sponsoring some really wacky legislation. I have gathered from your positions that your wits may be called into question at times, and there exists a fair chance, at least, that you may well be an idiot. While I do not appreciate any of the bills that you have drafted and am grateful that there are 99 other people in the statehouse to ensure that none of them ever get anywhere, I do, in weak moments, feel some sympathy with your apparent lack of self-awareness as to the lunacy of your legislation. To that end, let me do my duties as Samaritan and give unto you some advice...

In the future, if you draft a piece of legislation, or get a big idea for a great piece of legislation, run it past some of the other Christian fundamentalists from the Northwest part of the state. If nobody else signs on to it with you...DO NOT introduce it alone. It will probably only make you look like an even bigger idiot than you already do.


Sincerely,


The Jumbler


P.S. On second thought, your bills make terrific blog fodder. Keep up the good work. God bless.

The Rielly Tax Increase Plan Goes Bi-Partisan

According to the Des Moines Register, State Senator Rielly's plan to tax Iowans where it hurts them the most has took a big step toward becoming a reality. The Rielly dream of sticking it to working Iowans via a gas tax increase would raise an estimated $220 million for the state coffers. All that for simply charging every Iowan another ten cents per gallon at the pump. And since everyone in the state legislature already gets their gas a travel expenses paid for by we, the people, the Rielly plan looks like a win, win to both sides of the aisle.

In fact, the only legislator hesitating to support the idea appears to be Kent Sorenson. You may remember that whacky, fun-loving, right-wing, christian fundamentalist who got into hot water recently for supporting one presidential candidate, right up until the moment that he switched to another candidate without saying anything to anyone.

Anyhow, it appears as though the Democrats and Republicans are having a heck of a time agreeing on anything this session. What little has been coming down the pike lacks the excitement of last year and smells like an election year stand-off. But still, through it all, it's nice to see that they can all manage to set aside their differences and figure out at least some small way to stick it to working families this session. After all, unemployment has taken a small dip, and profits are up for the major insurance corporations in Des Moines this quarter. Why not jack up the cost of one of the largest chunks of budgetary pie for commuting Iowa families? What are they going to do about it? Vote for a third party?

The Unemployed Need Not Apply

It's one of the most painfully ironic things that you can experience when you are unemployed. In fact, the only thing worse than being told that they won't hire you because you are "over-qualified" (my personal favorite) is being told that they won't even consider you because you have been unemployed too long.

Even during the best of times, this hiring strategy has caused grief to workers. Some of them left to have a child and raise them out of infancy. Some workers were forced to leave to care for a relative who was terminally ill. Others have been nursing injuries of their own back to good health. And all of that was during the good times. With the recent economic downturn of the last four years however, the policy of leaving workers out in the cold due to lengthy terms of unemployment has grown in leaps and bounds. It is not uncommon to see job postings now stating that people who have been unemployed for more than one year need not apply. It is reminiscent of the turn of the century ads stating "INNA" or the "Irish Need Not Apply" and wreaks of discrimination based upon some irrational, arbitrary, and discriminatory fears on the part of employers.

For those unemployed during the great recession of the past four years, it is revolving door of lunacy that seeks to lock them out of the American dream forever. You lose your job, then you lose your home and your credit. Employers won't hire you because of bad credit of all things...and then after that, they won't hire you because you have been unemployed too long. How can the dispossessed ever get their foot back in the door in that environment?

Recently, the Iowa House has sought to mitigate at least a small part of this nightmare for the unemployed by introducing House File 2140 (introduced by Representatives Gaskill, Kelley, Abdul-Samad, Gaines, Hunter, Kearns, Cohoon, and Willems). HF2140 is an act prohibiting employment discrimination based on unemployment status and would provide penalties to employers who seek to continue the practice. 

With national unemployment numbers that continue to hover at near double digits and the number of Americans among the ranks of the long-term (12 months or longer) unemployed only growing, this is an idea whose time is now. One would think that there would be scant resistance to a bill like this one in this time of continued national crisis, but one would be wrong. A look at the lobbyist declarations for and against HF2140 reveals that major business groups have their lobbyists lined up in opposition to the measure, apparently prepared to fight for their rights to maintain discriminatory hiring practices in a time of a national employment crisis. 

Among those whose lobbyists have registered against the bill are corporations and groups like the Monsanto Company, BNSF Railway Company, CDS Global, Inc, Iowa Automobile Dealers Association, Iowa Broadcasters Association, Iowa Defense Counsel Association, Iowa Grocery Association, Iowa Propane Gas Association, Iowa Society of Certified Public Accountants, Iowa Water Well Association, and my personal favorite, the Iowa Association of Credit and Collection Professionals, Inc. Because why in the hell would an association of credit collection agencies want to keep the unemployed and debt owing Iowans from getting a job?!?! It doesn't make any sense if you think about it.

There must be just as many groups who have registered their lobbyists in favor of such a bill, right? RIGHT?!?! Wrong. Thus far, the bill shows only two lobbyist declaration in favor of giving any assistance to the unemployed. They are AFSCME (The American Federation of State and Municipal Employees), whose own members are among the unemployed thanks in large part to the policies of the new Bumstad administration, and the state AFL-CIO. That's it. Where are all of the community action groups? Where is the support for this bill that seeks to end one of the most sadly ironic, painful injustices that is currently being perpetrated upon Iowa citizens?


These legislators in the Iowa House have done their part and I commend them for it, but if no one else will stand up in support of the thing, it is dead in the water. Contact your legislators and urge them to support HF 2140. It's the right thing to do.

State Senator Rielly's Ingenious Re-Election Strategy

Now that CNN and MSNBC and Fox News and the AP have all packed up their news vans and camera sets and sent their myriad of reporters off to New Hampshire, things can finally get back to normal in the Iowa political landscape. We haven't time to reflect on our place in national politics, because the Iowa legislature has already begin gearing up for another fun filled, action packed session. There looks to be no lack of really inspiring ideas this go around either.

Tucked amongst the caucus headlines of the Des Moines Register yesterday was this little gem from Jason Clayworth, entitled Bipartisan Legislative Group: It Would Be Irresponsible Not To Raise Iowas Gas Tax.

As far as I can tell from the article, the proposal is only "Bi Partisan" in that it includes Senator Tom Rielly from Oskaloosa as the Democrat leading the push for an eight to ten cent per gallon hike on the fuel taxes in Iowa. If you've ever met Tom Rielly, or followed his voting record, or anything...then it is difficult, if not impossible, to figure out exactly why he is affiliated with the Democratic Party at all. It's hard to find any issues where Rielly can be considered a solid Democratic vote and he has oft left me personally perplexed at why he even calls himself a Democrat in a district that might be easier to hold as a Republican.

Some might argue that his push to raise taxes is a Democratic move, but I don't know many liberals who favor taxes that will be most painful to working class pocket books..unless you're talking about the cigarette taxes, or the alcohol taxes, or the...nevermind, I digress. After all, it will be commuters from rural Iowa and mom and pop truckers in the state who will feel the most pain from such a move.
But sticking it to working class commuters and truck drivers isn't the only interesting thing about the Rielly plan. According to the article...

"The group would also like to apply additional fees to annual registration costs for vehicles run by alternative fuels. Advocates say such a few is fair since higher efficiency vehicles continue to use the road but pay far less in taxes since they consume less or no gasoline. Advocates argue that every road user has a responsibility to contribute."

Sooooo, Senator Rielly (self proclaimed Democrat) also wants to penalize everybody who has had the foresight to invest in alternative energy vehicles! That is just awesome. I mean, just think of the irony of it all. You just spent an extra ten grand to get that new smart car because it's good for the environment and saves you a ton of cash on gas in the long run...and then Rielly...A Democrat!...is pushing to tax the shit out of you for it. That, boys and girls, is just classic stuff and quite frankly, ironic and stupid enough to draw me out of blog retirement. Thank you Senator Rielly (D?) Oskaloosa!

Another really goofball thing about the Rielly Tax You Til You Bleed Plan, is his statement that he just wants the out of state users to pay their fair share...because, "35 percent of large truck traffic and 15 percent of passenger cars are from outside of the state." Okay...so Rielly is saying that because 15% of the cars that drive through Iowa are people desperate just to get out of Nebraska on their way to anywhere but Nebraska, that to get back at those freeloaders it's going to be waaaay better if everybody in the State of Iowa pays another ten cents a gallon on EVERY gallon of gas that we use all the time. Brilliant Rielly! That makes perfect sense. Way to stick it to the 15% of out of state drivers Rielly! You're a Jenius.
But here's another really ironic thing to come out of the whole debacle...even though Rielly wants to reach into our pockets to help his buddies who own road construction companies, it will ultimately be Branstad who stops the tax from gaining any traction because he has already rejected the proposal. Which brings me to ask myself what sort of a bizarre, alternate universe I have awoken in.

Before Monday's legislative session begins, I wanted to fire this opening volley and simply say this...STOP IT GUYS! YOU'RE KILLING US! Iowans can't take any more punishment. Everything under the sun is spiraling upwards out of control except for our wages. Want to increase the gas tax...fine...great...then raise the minimum wage to twenty bucks an hour so we can afford to keep driving to work. Want to cut down on out of state drivers ruining our roads? Stop letting out of state contractors do so much of Iowa's road work, Rielly! Pass a statewide prevailing wage on all DOT work so lowball companies out of Nebraska can't come rolling into our towns, pay their guys eight bucks an hour, and then leave again when it's done and I'll support the tax increase. But as it stands, Iowans have precious little to gain economically in passing the tax increase. What's more, that fund has historically been looted by the legislature for every imaginable use under the sun EXCEPT for roads. Why would now be any different? 

Anyhow, thanks for bringing me out of my retirement, Rielly.

P.S. I saw some out of state licenses at the Machine Shed last week. Maybe we should be taxing pork chops too, Rielly?

                                 

Senator Tom Rielly's Iowa Road To Prosperity Plan?