The gang starts out this week with the mother/daughter lobbyist group Bitches Get Stuff Done (Yes, that’s their real name) claiming state representative Samantha Fett was a former stripper (an allegation Fett denies) and the ethics committee meeting concerning this controversy. Then, we move on to the anti-SLAPP law that has been sent to the governor’s desk that would help the freedom of speech and press in the state. Thirdly, infighting amongst republican legislators on the eminent domain debate. Is the carbon pipeline/eminent domain bill debate really coming to the senate floor? Will Summit Carbon Solutions have to just give up and go back to the drawing board? A bunch of good questions there. We wrap up the show WHERE’S THE BUDGET? The 2025 legislative session should be winding down in the next week or two but we haven’t seen a budget yet. When can we expect to see it? Is the governor gonna make her presence more felt in negotiations? Then, we’re out of here and Dave heads to the airport. Have a nice weekend!
If you’re reading this on the Notes app, you can find the transcript below:
(00:00:01):
Hi,
(00:00:01):
everyone,
(00:00:02):
and welcome to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast,
(00:00:05):
a production of the Iowa Riders Collaborative,
(00:00:08):
where we gather every week to talk all things Iowa.
(00:00:12):
Sometimes it's stuff outside our state, but it impacts us in our state.
(00:00:17):
I am Dave Price with us this week.
(00:00:20):
As always, almost always, Kathy Obradovich, Laura Bellin.
(00:00:24):
Hello, ladies.
(00:00:24):
Good afternoon.
(00:00:26):
afternoon i shouldn't say good afternoon because you know by the time when people
(00:00:30):
listen this could be morning afternoon so good morning good afternoon good evening
(00:00:34):
good night all those things to you happy happy happy to all those things hey let's
(00:00:40):
lead off with
(00:00:42):
a committee meeting hearing.
(00:00:44):
Laura and I were both in the room for this.
(00:00:46):
This one was,
(00:00:47):
I need to keep like a book at home of like all the unusual things so that I can
(00:00:53):
figure out where they really rate on the list of how unusual something is.
(00:00:58):
But so to set this up,
(00:01:00):
we have a state representative,
(00:01:02):
Samantha Fett,
(00:01:03):
a Republican from Carlisle.
(00:01:06):
And so she filed an ethics complaint against this mother-daughter lawyer
(00:01:12):
lobbyist team.
(00:01:14):
Now, here's where I'm struggling, ladies.
(00:01:17):
This is a podcast.
(00:01:18):
This is not broadcast television, which I'm used to.
(00:01:22):
Do I say the name of this lobbying group in a podcast?
(00:01:29):
If you don't want to say it, I can say it, Dave, if you're worried.
(00:01:35):
It has a word in it that refers to a female dog, it could be, right?
(00:01:42):
And apparently this...
(00:01:44):
This group, Get Stuff Done, is the name of this group.
(00:01:48):
How did I do?
(00:01:49):
Get Stuff Done.
(00:01:50):
There we go.
(00:01:50):
There we go.
(00:01:53):
I got permission to use that word in my publication because it's the official name
(00:01:58):
of this group.
(00:01:59):
OK, fair enough.
(00:02:00):
Okay,
(00:02:01):
so this mother-daughter group,
(00:02:04):
and it's Heather Ryan and her daughter,
(00:02:07):
Heaven Chamberlain.
(00:02:08):
And they're involved in a lot of protests and different stuff.
(00:02:11):
But on their website, they do kind of a bio breakdown of the legislators.
(00:02:18):
And in it, under Samantha Fett, they allege that she's a former stripper.
(00:02:24):
So Representative Fett.
(00:02:26):
Fet files this complaint with the ethics committee.
(00:02:30):
They have this hearing this week.
(00:02:33):
Laura, you want to take it from there about the uniqueness of what we witnessed?
(00:02:37):
Yeah, I think this was unusual on several levels.
(00:02:40):
First of all,
(00:02:40):
when I saw the agenda for the committee meeting,
(00:02:42):
it said consideration of Fett complaints.
(00:02:44):
So I assumed it was a complaint against Samantha Fett because the only ethics
(00:02:49):
committee meetings I've ever seen in the Iowa House or Senate were complaints that
(00:02:53):
members of the public filed against state legislators.
(00:02:57):
So then the chair of the ethics committee,
(00:03:00):
Republican Representative Bill Gustoff,
(00:03:02):
sent me a copy of the complaint,
(00:03:03):
and I realized,
(00:03:03):
oh,
(00:03:04):
Oh, Samantha Fett filed the complaint.
(00:03:06):
So I had never seen a complaint filed by a legislator.
(00:03:09):
I had never seen a complaint filed against a lobbyist or lobbying group.
(00:03:13):
I knew that the lobbyists had to adhere to a code of ethics.
(00:03:17):
But I think that Bill Gustav said after the meeting that their staff had not,
(00:03:22):
at least in the last 20 years,
(00:03:24):
nobody could recall something like this happening.
(00:03:26):
And it was also unusual because
(00:03:28):
People spoke during the meeting,
(00:03:30):
the respondents,
(00:03:32):
both Heather Ryan and Heaven Chamberlain spoke,
(00:03:34):
and then Samantha said a few words.
(00:03:37):
And I've only ever seen at the ethics committee,
(00:03:39):
literally,
(00:03:40):
I remember going to one of these,
(00:03:41):
and it was over in about two and a half minutes.
(00:03:43):
They just...
(00:03:44):
You know, they didn't even discuss the complaint.
(00:03:46):
They just said,
(00:03:47):
you know,
(00:03:47):
I'll entertain a motion to dismiss and they dismissed it with no discussion.
(00:03:51):
So I thought this was unusual.
(00:03:53):
Also,
(00:03:53):
the Democrats on the ethics committee went and took a break to caucus and discuss
(00:03:59):
among themselves before they came back.
(00:04:00):
So it was an unusually lengthy meeting.
(00:04:02):
And we should also add that the ethics committee is unique,
(00:04:05):
that it has an equal number of both the Democrats and Republicans by statute.
(00:04:10):
Kathy,
(00:04:10):
this was kind of a made-for-TV moment where,
(00:04:14):
you know,
(00:04:14):
it's allegations of somebody being a stripper,
(00:04:17):
a group with bitches in its name,
(00:04:20):
a word we had to dance around on TV because I didn't really want to say that on TV.
(00:04:25):
So all of that stuff aside,
(00:04:27):
and then also at the end of it,
(00:04:29):
you know,
(00:04:29):
we're doing our live shots for my TV station group.
(00:04:33):
and i have you know in the back of my mind i still have a manager's voice that has
(00:04:39):
stuck with me for years that with every story for tv we have to keep in mind this
(00:04:44):
so what factor right how does this thing relate to people's lives and in the tag
(00:04:49):
which is the kind of end part of the story i couldn't help but think that in my
(00:04:54):
mind that there's no real punishment
(00:04:56):
So the mother-daughter said, yeah, we did it.
(00:05:00):
They weren't required to take it down.
(00:05:03):
They got a public reprimand.
(00:05:04):
There's no fine.
(00:05:06):
It's not like if they get X number of these public reprimands,
(00:05:10):
they're going to lose their ability to lobby.
(00:05:14):
It was just sort of a public,
(00:05:16):
hey,
(00:05:16):
maybe you shouldn't do this,
(00:05:17):
but we're not going to tell you to take it down,
(00:05:20):
right?
(00:05:21):
So...
(00:05:22):
What was the point of this?
(00:05:24):
I would say that ethics hearing was actually a reward for this group because
(00:05:29):
whoever would have looked at their website before this complaint was filed,
(00:05:34):
this complaint got the group in front of TV cameras.
(00:05:39):
It got headlines raising this question about Samantha Fett's past,
(00:05:47):
which,
(00:05:47):
of course,
(00:05:48):
she did deny that she said it was untrue.
(00:05:52):
that she was a former stripper.
(00:05:53):
And it gave them an opportunity to kind of make fun of her because she did not
(00:05:57):
complain about the fact that that website also called her a Moms for Liberty
(00:06:02):
fanatic and the devil in disguise.
(00:06:05):
So I think that despite the public reprimand that these people who are the
(00:06:17):
lobbyists came out with the win on this one.
(00:06:21):
Well, I'm not, I wondered about the reasoning.
(00:06:24):
I mean,
(00:06:25):
it was an odd ethics complaint in that very few people would have ever heard about
(00:06:29):
this rumor,
(00:06:30):
if not for this complaint in this hearing.
(00:06:33):
And so now a lot of people have heard about the rumor, which Samantha Fett denies.
(00:06:37):
And of course,
(00:06:38):
you know,
(00:06:38):
it's as Heather Ryan said during hearing,
(00:06:41):
they would have taken down the post if she had requested that they take it down,
(00:06:45):
but she said that they didn't.
(00:06:47):
So I don't know whether
(00:06:50):
Maybe there was a goal to get them on record acknowledging that they didn't have
(00:06:55):
any evidence behind this claim,
(00:06:57):
that this was just a rumor that they heard from what they called a reliable source,
(00:07:01):
but who even knows what that is?
(00:07:03):
And I don't know whether there's plans for some kind of defamation action.
(00:07:07):
I mean,
(00:07:07):
it's very difficult usually for public figures to file a defamation claim,
(00:07:12):
but I don't really see what was accomplished from the hearing.
(00:07:16):
Although Representative Fett said that
(00:07:18):
She just wanted to make she wanted there to be consequences for saying something.
(00:07:23):
And she wanted people put on notice that there could be consequences.
(00:07:26):
I'm curious to see whether any other legislators file any complaints against
(00:07:31):
something that a group that lobbies at the Capitol says.
(00:07:34):
And she's, you know, her outside of the Capitol job is to work in marketing.
(00:07:40):
And she said this would not be good for her to be accused of this.
(00:07:43):
And she wanted to kind of clear a name, I guess.
(00:07:47):
comments from the, I don't remember if it was Ms.
(00:07:53):
Chamberlain or Ms.
(00:07:54):
Ryan who said this, but they said there's no shame in being a sex worker.
(00:07:57):
They didn't consider it.
(00:07:58):
Heather Ryan said that.
(00:08:02):
It had it all, but in the end, it really didn't have much of a punishment.
(00:08:07):
Kathy,
(00:08:07):
I know that there is something that you've been following for quite some time,
(00:08:12):
this anti-slap,
(00:08:14):
with two Ps,
(00:08:16):
legislation.
(00:08:17):
And what's the significance of it, do you think?
(00:08:21):
Yeah,
(00:08:21):
so what this bill does,
(00:08:23):
and they did,
(00:08:25):
the legislature did send it to the governor's desk this week after,
(00:08:28):
I want to say seven years,
(00:08:30):
seven or eight years of trying on the part of,
(00:08:34):
in particular,
(00:08:34):
the House.
(00:08:35):
And Representative Steve Holt said he has been working on this since 2018.
(00:08:42):
This bill directly affects media and newspapers,
(00:08:48):
others who run afoul of somebody by exercising their right for free speech.
(00:08:58):
It says that if you file a lawsuit against someone, just basically trying to shut them up.
(00:09:03):
So keep the media from reporting something that is in fact true or keep somebody
(00:09:10):
from saying something about you,
(00:09:11):
which is in fact true.
(00:09:14):
and basically trying to get them to spend a bunch of money on a lawsuit that you
(00:09:19):
know was a loser.
(00:09:21):
So what this bill does is says that if somebody like that sues you,
(00:09:25):
you have a right of,
(00:09:26):
you can have an expedited relief from the court.
(00:09:31):
So you don't have to spend,
(00:09:33):
you know,
(00:09:33):
in the case of one of our colleagues with a writer's collaborative,
(00:09:38):
Douglas Burns,
(00:09:38):
his newspaper,
(00:09:39):
the Carroll Times Herald,
(00:09:40):
had to spend
(00:09:42):
$140,000 on what was essentially a frivolous lawsuit filed by a police officer.
(00:09:49):
Their reporter said that the police officer had had sex with teenagers.
(00:09:57):
The police officer actually had admitted that fact, but continued to sue them.
(00:10:03):
and rack up the legal bills to the point where Doug Burns has said,
(00:10:07):
you know,
(00:10:07):
they they it almost it almost took them under and almost,
(00:10:11):
you know,
(00:10:11):
killed the newspaper.
(00:10:13):
And, you know, so this is this is really an important bill for free speech.
(00:10:19):
You know, I really hope that the governor is going to sign it.
(00:10:23):
And,
(00:10:24):
you know,
(00:10:24):
I'm just really happy for Doug Burns that that horrible ordeal that he had with his
(00:10:29):
newspaper hopefully will end up
(00:10:32):
being a positive for other newspapers in Iowa.
(00:10:36):
And Representative Holt stuck with this.
(00:10:38):
I think you mentioned somewhere around 2018,
(00:10:41):
whatever it was,
(00:10:41):
but the perseverance to keep pushing,
(00:10:43):
pushing,
(00:10:44):
pushing,
(00:10:44):
pushing to finally get this through.
(00:10:46):
To his credit, you know, he really did.
(00:10:48):
The Senate had no interest in this.
(00:10:51):
He brought it up every almost every year.
(00:10:53):
And I did text him yesterday and, you know, actually thanked him for sticking with that bill.
(00:11:00):
And he texted back that maybe that's an argument against term limits.
(00:11:06):
Well, it may have helped out many people by him sticking with it.
(00:11:10):
I wanted to add,
(00:11:11):
because I've done some reporting on this anti-SLAPP bill,
(00:11:14):
I think this is a good example of how one person in the legislature can hold up a
(00:11:19):
bill that has really broad support.
(00:11:21):
Because according to my reporting and other people's reporting,
(00:11:24):
I think the Des Moines Register covered this in the past,
(00:11:26):
State Senator Julian Garrett was the main person who always blocked this bill.
(00:11:30):
The House passed it repeatedly.
(00:11:32):
It would go to the Senate Judiciary Committee,
(00:11:34):
where Julian Garrett was the vice chair,
(00:11:36):
and it just would never get through the funnel in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
(00:11:41):
And one thing that changed this year is that State Senator Brad Zahn,
(00:11:44):
who was the chair of the Judiciary Committee,
(00:11:46):
lost his reelection bid.
(00:11:48):
So there was a new Senate Judiciary chair,
(00:11:51):
Jason Schultz,
(00:11:52):
and his district includes the Carroll area.
(00:11:55):
So I think he was very familiar with the situation with the Carroll newspaper.
(00:11:59):
Also,
(00:11:59):
Stephen Holt's legislative district,
(00:12:01):
the House district,
(00:12:02):
makes up one half of Jason Schultz's Senate district.
(00:12:06):
So I think that that helped get that through the committee level.
(00:12:11):
in the iowa senate which is where it had always stumbled in the past and i also
(00:12:14):
heard speculation although i don't have this on the record but i think it's it's
(00:12:18):
reasonable speculation that last year when summit carbon solutions sent cease and
(00:12:23):
desist letters to at least six people that we know about who had criticized the co2
(00:12:28):
pipeline and said you've got to stop making defamatory statements about the
(00:12:32):
pipeline and that and steve king the former member of congress was one of the
(00:12:35):
people who got these letters
(00:12:37):
That made people very angry,
(00:12:39):
the people who had advocated against the pipeline,
(00:12:41):
the idea that a billion dollar company is going around threatening members of the
(00:12:45):
public who speak against the pipeline they want to build.
(00:12:49):
And I think that that helped in the Senate Republican caucus.
(00:12:53):
People think, realize that this is something that needs to happen.
(00:12:58):
And again,
(00:12:58):
it's no guarantee that the expedited relief that Kathy mentioned,
(00:13:01):
you could go to a court and a judge could say,
(00:13:03):
no,
(00:13:03):
you know,
(00:13:04):
this looks like a reasonable claim.
(00:13:05):
We're going to let a jury consider this claim.
(00:13:07):
But if it's an obvious, frivolous lawsuit, the judge could say, no, this is not going forward.
(00:13:16):
There was when I talked about the unusual lawsuit.
(00:13:21):
thing we witnessed in the ethics committee meeting with the Samantha Fed situation.
(00:13:27):
You had another unusual one,
(00:13:28):
although I guess you could argue it happened back-to-back days on the Iowa Senate
(00:13:34):
floor where you had,
(00:13:36):
speaking of the pipeline,
(00:13:38):
where you had a Republican senator
(00:13:41):
And as everyone knows, Republicans have super majorities in both chambers.
(00:13:46):
So you have a member of the majority party frustrated with his party's leadership
(00:13:52):
in the Senate for not allowing a vote when it comes to eminent domain,
(00:13:57):
which big picture,
(00:13:57):
of course,
(00:13:58):
is about the carbon pipeline.
(00:14:00):
And they have talked about this for a couple of years.
(00:14:03):
The House gets together, passes something.
(00:14:06):
There have been families impacted by this up at the statehouse virtually every single day.
(00:14:12):
And they have been for months that they travel up there.
(00:14:15):
So they get it through the House and it gets stuck in the Senate and it does not go
(00:14:19):
forward for a vote.
(00:14:20):
And so you had back to back days where you had a Republican senator stand up and kind of go off.
(00:14:29):
which led to some pretty interesting exchanges.
(00:14:33):
And Laura,
(00:14:33):
I forgot to ask you if you were in the Senate for either one of these or watching
(00:14:39):
if you're watching it online as it was unfolding.
(00:14:42):
And,
(00:14:42):
you know,
(00:14:43):
it is unusual for a member of the majority party in the Senate to give a point of
(00:14:47):
personal privilege.
(00:14:48):
Usually it's a frustrated Democrat standing up to highlight
(00:14:52):
something they consider outrageous that happened that day in the Senate.
(00:14:55):
So I was already intrigued when Senator Lynn Evans stood up on Wednesday and
(00:15:01):
started talking about it.
(00:15:02):
And just sorry to interrupt you,
(00:15:03):
but for those who don't follow it,
(00:15:05):
this is generally the end before they go home for the day.
(00:15:08):
Yes,
(00:15:09):
for the last several years,
(00:15:10):
actually for many years,
(00:15:11):
they used to do points of privilege at the beginning of the day.
(00:15:13):
But the Republican majority, they changed it.
(00:15:15):
So the points of privilege are basically the last thing that happens before they adjourn.
(00:15:19):
So sometimes when people have pent up frustration following a debate in the Iowa Senate,
(00:15:24):
it comes out in the points of personal privilege,
(00:15:26):
or it could be planned and it could be about something different,
(00:15:29):
but that's just when I've seen it.
(00:15:30):
I haven't,
(00:15:31):
I mean,
(00:15:31):
I didn't go back and look,
(00:15:32):
but I just don't often recall members of the majority party standing up to give a
(00:15:37):
point of personal privilege,
(00:15:39):
unless it's like a tribute to acknowledge someone who recently passed away or
(00:15:42):
something like that.
(00:15:44):
This was very odd for a member,
(00:15:46):
a Republican senator,
(00:15:47):
Lynn Evans,
(00:15:48):
to stand up and say,
(00:15:50):
hey,
(00:15:50):
get everybody go talk to Senator Klemish,
(00:15:53):
the whip,
(00:15:54):
and tell him you really want this bill to come to the floor.
(00:15:59):
Kathy, how many times in your career have you seen this?
(00:16:04):
You know, it is not unheard of, but yeah, I mean, I think that it's a sign of
(00:16:14):
You have this issue coming to a boil.
(00:16:16):
You know,
(00:16:17):
we are now a week from the scheduled,
(00:16:20):
but probably not actual end of the legislative session.
(00:16:24):
And the gallery was full of pipeline opponents who have been going up to the
(00:16:29):
Capitol pretty much every week to lobby on these bills and push for some kind of
(00:16:36):
action in the Senate.
(00:16:38):
The other thing,
(00:16:38):
too,
(00:16:39):
is,
(00:16:39):
you know,
(00:16:40):
I think that there is a concern about some political heat over this.
(00:16:45):
All they have to do is look to our neighbor to the northwest,
(00:16:49):
South Dakota,
(00:16:50):
where a bunch of Republicans lost their seats over the opposition to legislation
(00:16:56):
against eminent domain or against aspects of the same.
(00:17:01):
This is the same carbon pipeline that goes up through Iowa,
(00:17:05):
through South Dakota and ultimately to North Dakota to have this carbon dioxide
(00:17:11):
sequestered underground.
(00:17:13):
So a bunch of people lost their seats.
(00:17:16):
The legislature passed a ban on eminent domain for these carbon pipelines.
(00:17:22):
And now that project, the Summit Carbon Solutions Project, is in trouble up in South Dakota.
(00:17:28):
They just this week were denied a permit a second time.
(00:17:34):
And, you know, they are possibly going to have to go back to the drawing board
(00:17:39):
at the cost of a lot of time,
(00:17:41):
a lot of money,
(00:17:43):
and potentially the possibility that the Trump administration and Republicans in
(00:17:48):
Congress are going to yank these tax credits that,
(00:17:51):
you know,
(00:17:52):
is the end goal of this pipeline project because it's,
(00:17:57):
you know,
(00:17:57):
it was part of the Biden administration clean energy push.
(00:18:03):
So I think it's entirely possible, yeah, that those credits are going to go away at some point.
(00:18:09):
And to remind everybody,
(00:18:11):
this company is owned by a prominent Republican donor,
(00:18:17):
Bruce Rastetter,
(00:18:18):
who is running into these issues essentially with some Republicans,
(00:18:23):
right?
(00:18:23):
I mean, Republicans obviously dominant in South Dakota.
(00:18:26):
You have Republicans in D.C.
(00:18:28):
controlling everything right now.
(00:18:30):
But there are a lot of roadblocks he's running into as he's trying to get this thing through.
(00:18:35):
And Dave, I can't remember whether we talked about it on this show.
(00:18:38):
I know I talked about it on KHI's Capitol Week,
(00:18:40):
but in March,
(00:18:42):
when the Senate was debating a rules package,
(00:18:45):
Democratic Senator Tony Bisignano offered an amendment that would have allowed for
(00:18:50):
basically a discharge petition,
(00:18:52):
where if 26 senators signed on to any legislation,
(00:18:55):
they could force a vote on it on the floor.
(00:18:58):
Regardless of party.
(00:18:59):
Regardless of party.
(00:19:00):
And the whole point was,
(00:19:02):
as he was advocating for that,
(00:19:04):
let's have this debate on private property and eminent domain.
(00:19:08):
And four Republicans did vote for that rules change.
(00:19:12):
But most of the Republicans,
(00:19:14):
including most of the Republicans who say they're against the pipeline,
(00:19:17):
including Lynn Evans,
(00:19:18):
who gave this point of personal privilege,
(00:19:20):
they did not vote for that rules change.
(00:19:23):
that would have allowed this to happen.
(00:19:25):
And so that's what led to the interesting exchange when the Democratic Senator Zach
(00:19:29):
Wall stood up and said,
(00:19:30):
you know,
(00:19:31):
Senator Evans,
(00:19:31):
did you vote with us on that?
(00:19:33):
And it just it led to a back and forth with with Senator,
(00:19:36):
another Republican who's against the pipeline,
(00:19:38):
Jesse Green,
(00:19:39):
accusing Democrats of not having a statement,
(00:19:42):
a unified position on the issue.
(00:19:43):
And it's like, as you mentioned, Dave, who has the supermajority, right?
(00:19:47):
The Democrats in the Senate aren't controlling what comes to the floor.
(00:19:50):
And I think that is something that Senator Bisignano reminded them of the math.
(00:19:55):
Yeah.
(00:19:55):
And we did talk about that discharge petition that,
(00:19:58):
you know,
(00:19:58):
I do think that members of the majority party,
(00:20:02):
you know,
(00:20:03):
regardless of what issue is,
(00:20:06):
you know,
(00:20:06):
regardless of their size side on the issue,
(00:20:09):
might not want to give that much power to the minority party because it would.
(00:20:16):
you know,
(00:20:16):
essentially give the minority party the ability to force votes on bills that they
(00:20:20):
do not want to vote on.
(00:20:22):
So I do think that there was a reason for people,
(00:20:26):
regardless of their side on this pipeline bill,
(00:20:28):
to vote against that.
(00:20:33):
Allowing that to come up and having a vote on it did give the minority party an
(00:20:39):
opportunity to keep coming back to pipeline opponents and saying,
(00:20:44):
hey,
(00:20:44):
you know,
(00:20:44):
you had an opportunity to fix this and you pass on it.
(00:20:50):
Two things with that,
(00:20:51):
about a couple of the points you made,
(00:20:53):
Kathy,
(00:20:54):
that I'm personally curious about,
(00:20:57):
and that let's just assume that Senate Republican leadership
(00:21:01):
whether that's along with the governor behind the scenes or not,
(00:21:05):
continues to block this and they end this session and they do not pass the House
(00:21:10):
bill or any other combination of bills.
(00:21:12):
Two things to watch on this as we head then into an election year next year.
(00:21:17):
Will we see any kind of orchestrated effort by Democrats to try to capitalize on this?
(00:21:24):
You know, they have not had kind of a unified stance.
(00:21:27):
Are they for it?
(00:21:29):
Are they for the pipeline?
(00:21:30):
Are they against it?
(00:21:31):
Do they want to take a big stance, again, eminent domain or not?
(00:21:34):
They've sort of left it up to the individual members.
(00:21:36):
But will we see in these affected areas Democratic candidates coming out using this
(00:21:43):
as some kind of rallying cry to pull over people who maybe traditionally vote R
(00:21:48):
instead of D to try to get some of these seats?
(00:21:51):
But maybe more so to your point about what happened in South Dakota.
(00:21:55):
We've already seen where...
(00:21:57):
Iowa's governor got involved with primaries to purge out some people who are not
(00:22:02):
part of some of the things she wanted to do on her agenda when it came to education.
(00:22:06):
So will we see some kind of, you know, sort of a Kevin Virgil-like effort?
(00:22:12):
He's the one who ran that shoestring campaign against Randy Feenster in the
(00:22:17):
Republican congressional campaign.
(00:22:19):
But, you know, I wonder if we're going to see
(00:22:22):
For some of these members, more of the issue is on the primary side.
(00:22:26):
Are they going to get primaried by some Republicans who want to,
(00:22:30):
you know,
(00:22:30):
go all in on the side of landowners?
(00:22:34):
That's what happened in South Dakota.
(00:22:36):
And I would not be surprised.
(00:22:37):
I mean,
(00:22:37):
given the level of success that a pretty much no-name candidate had in the primary
(00:22:46):
against Randy Feenstra,
(00:22:48):
you know,
(00:22:49):
getting a fairly decent sized share of the,
(00:22:53):
you know,
(00:22:54):
without having spent a bunch of money,
(00:22:56):
a pretty decent sized share of the primary vote.
(00:23:00):
So I do think that that experience encourages other candidates to take that tag for sure.
(00:23:05):
I don't know whether Democrats will have a unified position on this.
(00:23:11):
I think we will see
(00:23:14):
you know,
(00:23:14):
a fight over an eminent domain in some of these districts,
(00:23:17):
maybe not,
(00:23:18):
maybe not as a unified position.
(00:23:21):
You know,
(00:23:21):
it's not just Bruce Rastetter,
(00:23:23):
it's Tom Vilsack's son,
(00:23:24):
who was involved in systemic carbon solutions.
(00:23:28):
So there is there is some bipartisan
(00:23:33):
folks behind this project,
(00:23:35):
which might and,
(00:23:37):
you know,
(00:23:37):
Democrats also,
(00:23:38):
you know,
(00:23:39):
they're in favor of carbon sequestration.
(00:23:43):
They're in favor of green energy.
(00:23:46):
And ultimately, that is supposed to be the goal of this project.
(00:23:49):
So, you know, you put that up against property rights.
(00:23:54):
Sometimes, you know, there are some folks who possibly might think that, you know, this this
(00:24:01):
project goes in the right direction.
(00:24:02):
I don't know.
(00:24:03):
This project is definitely not about greenhouse gas emissions,
(00:24:06):
especially since we don't even know the CO2 might be used for enhanced oil recovery
(00:24:10):
in North Dakota if this pipeline ever gets built.
(00:24:13):
But I wanted to say something about the other candidates using it in the election.
(00:24:17):
I do expect we're going to see Republican primary challengers on this issue.
(00:24:21):
Absolutely.
(00:24:22):
No question.
(00:24:22):
But as for Democrats,
(00:24:24):
Ryan Melton,
(00:24:25):
who was the Democratic challenger in the fourth district to Randy Feetstra,
(00:24:29):
He really did make the pipeline a big issue of his campaign.
(00:24:33):
And a political science professor,
(00:24:35):
Matthew Thornburg,
(00:24:36):
wrote something from my website after the election in November that was really interesting.
(00:24:40):
He analyzed pipeline precincts in the fourth congressional districts with precincts
(00:24:45):
that weren't on the route of the Summit Carbon Solutions Pipeline.
(00:24:49):
And it was a very, very slight difference.
(00:24:52):
I mean, Randy Feenstra underperformed very slightly in those pipeline precincts.
(00:24:57):
So even in the areas that are most directly affected,
(00:25:00):
it just didn't have a big impact in terms of getting people not to vote for the
(00:25:04):
Republican candidate.
(00:25:05):
But I think in a Republican primary, it's a totally different story.
(00:25:08):
All right.
(00:25:10):
One more thing that fortunately, Kathy reminded me of in an email before we started recording.
(00:25:17):
Where's the budget?
(00:25:19):
we remember back in the day it was clara barton where's the beef for wendy's well
(00:25:25):
where's the budget kathy uh we're coming up on the scheduled end of this 2025
(00:25:31):
legislative session we've yet to see budget targets perhaps we are not going to see
(00:25:36):
them in target form and they're just going to do individual budget bills however
(00:25:41):
this is going to shake out but what does this signify that uh we have not seen them
(00:25:47):
yet
(00:25:48):
The former dean of the Iowa State House Press Corps,
(00:25:52):
Mike Glover,
(00:25:53):
used to always tell me,
(00:25:55):
and it was a lesson I learned early on when I started covering the Capitol,
(00:25:58):
which is the average Iowan couldn't care less whether the legislature is in session
(00:26:04):
or not,
(00:26:04):
right?
(00:26:05):
Exactly.
(00:26:07):
members of the press corps care a lot.
(00:26:09):
You know,
(00:26:10):
we want them gone so we can go out and have a life and,
(00:26:15):
you know,
(00:26:15):
not have to be sitting there at all hours of the day and night.
(00:26:18):
Although I have to say they have not had a lot of late debates so far this session.
(00:26:22):
You know, that's probably coming at some point.
(00:26:25):
But the Senate...
(00:26:28):
Republicans had their budget targets out, what, a month ago?
(00:26:33):
I mean, it was right after the second funnel, which was early March, so six weeks ago, maybe.
(00:26:40):
No, it was early.
(00:26:40):
It was after the second funnel.
(00:26:43):
Oh, yeah, that's early April.
(00:26:44):
About three weeks.
(00:26:45):
Yeah, three weeks.
(00:26:45):
It's been three weeks.
(00:26:47):
And typically,
(00:26:48):
you know,
(00:26:50):
both majority parties,
(00:26:51):
when they're of the same party,
(00:26:53):
you know,
(00:26:54):
are fairly coordinated in the budget process.
(00:26:58):
Under this leadership,
(00:26:59):
this House and this Senate,
(00:27:01):
they have not been coordinated for the past several years.
(00:27:04):
They have not had joint budget appropriate budget subcommittee meetings,
(00:27:11):
which it used to be that the House and Senate would always have joint committee
(00:27:16):
meetings about the budget so that they could be on the same page and hear the same
(00:27:20):
thing from executive branch agencies and others.
(00:27:24):
And you know that they would
(00:27:26):
fairly quickly come up with their budget targets and then work toward the center
(00:27:31):
the house has not released any targets i heard you know last week that budget sub
(00:27:36):
chair people did not have numbers at all to work off and i also heard and this is
(00:27:43):
this is just unsubstantiated rumor but i also heard that the house and senate are
(00:27:47):
really far apart um in terms of their targets or you know or written or unwritten
(00:27:52):
targets so um
(00:27:55):
So I hate to be the one to tell you this because I know you guys care about it.
(00:28:02):
People of Iowa probably don't.
(00:28:04):
We are not going to adjourn next Friday.
(00:28:06):
We're not going to be sitting here talking about what the legislature did and did
(00:28:09):
not do next Friday.
(00:28:10):
And I appreciate the point that Mike made, too, because without a doubt, people at home are not.
(00:28:17):
are not thinking about this other than unless there's some kind of additional cost
(00:28:21):
of some sort.
(00:28:22):
But it does sort of underscore when you have a when you have one party with such
(00:28:28):
dominant control of the legislature and is not able to get it through in an
(00:28:32):
efficient
(00:28:34):
process,
(00:28:34):
especially when the Senate is not exactly cranking out bill after bill after bill
(00:28:41):
in any sort.
(00:28:42):
But it does make you wonder the relationship between leadership in both chambers
(00:28:48):
and just almost why the two sides could be so far apart when it comes to budget priorities.
(00:28:58):
Is the House concerned about some things here?
(00:29:00):
Is it
(00:29:02):
There's got to be a reason for this big gap between the two.
(00:29:06):
Well, remember, we talked about this.
(00:29:08):
The school funding,
(00:29:10):
which the legislature is supposed to approve in mid-February,
(00:29:13):
wasn't done until like April 14th or something.
(00:29:16):
And April 15th is when the schools have to certify their budgets.
(00:29:19):
And the Senate Republicans basically just waited the House out.
(00:29:24):
I mean, they just...
(00:29:24):
They've got to the point where it was almost at the deadline and then the House
(00:29:29):
Republicans agreed to most of the Senate Republicans term.
(00:29:32):
So maybe that's part of the reason why they're having trouble reaching an agreement,
(00:29:36):
because maybe the Senate Republicans feel that if they hold out long enough,
(00:29:41):
then the House will agree to their lower number or something close to it.
(00:29:45):
I don't know.
(00:29:45):
That's just speculation.
(00:29:46):
But they definitely aren't on the same page.
(00:29:49):
I mean, in the in the long ago days of the Democratic Party,
(00:29:52):
trifecta, the budget targets were out much sooner.
(00:29:55):
I'm sure that House and Senate Democrats probably disagreed on some things.
(00:29:59):
But as Kathy mentioned,
(00:30:00):
when the budget subcommittees were still meeting jointly,
(00:30:03):
which happened up until about the pandemic,
(00:30:05):
is when the Senate Republicans decided to stop participating in these budget subcommittees.
(00:30:11):
I think that a lot of things about the process broke down.
(00:30:15):
First of all, there's a third party in these negotiations, the governor.
(00:30:21):
Her budget was presented in January,
(00:30:26):
and typically the role of the governor would be to broker a deal between the House
(00:30:34):
and Senate.
(00:30:35):
I do think that the governor is probably closer to one chamber than the other with
(00:30:40):
her budget target,
(00:30:41):
but also
(00:30:44):
you know perhaps um not in the middle not she's probably not in the middle at the
(00:30:51):
moment but she's you know she's now a lame duck um you know i i raised the question
(00:30:58):
about what kind of broker she will be um for you know and how useful she'll be in
(00:31:04):
trying to broker a deal between the house and senate
(00:31:07):
And, you know, she does have she's going to serve out the rest of her term.
(00:31:13):
So she does have an interest in having a budget that she can work with next year
(00:31:19):
because she's she's got to get to the end of her term as well.
(00:31:23):
She doesn't want to have a big budget mess or snarl.
(00:31:27):
So I do think that that, you know, where is the governor in this?
(00:31:31):
Not just where's the beef and where's the budget, but where's the governor?
(00:31:35):
in this.
(00:31:37):
And also,
(00:31:37):
I do also wonder how many other types of bills are tied up in this maybe dispute
(00:31:47):
between the chambers.
(00:31:49):
We know the House sent over a bunch of higher ed bills and also eminent domain for
(00:31:55):
that matter that the Senate has not moved on.
(00:31:58):
Maybe there's some bills that the Senate has moved over that the House wants.
(00:32:02):
So
(00:32:03):
It's possible that there are other issues that are getting involved in this debate.
(00:32:08):
Indeed.
(00:32:09):
All right.
(00:32:10):
We'll talk about the calendar.
(00:32:11):
We're thinking of the clock here.
(00:32:13):
So let's take us home.
(00:32:14):
What are you both working on this weekend?
(00:32:16):
What should we expect?
(00:32:18):
I've got something coming, a deep dive.
(00:32:20):
My first take on Kevin Tecau's chances against Ashley Hinson.
(00:32:24):
We talked about this on last week's show that he announced,
(00:32:26):
but I've really dug into the county numbers and other things about the district.
(00:32:30):
Kathy, what's going on with the capital dispatch?
(00:32:34):
Just trying to get through the rest of the end of the legislative session,
(00:32:37):
but we're,
(00:32:38):
you know,
(00:32:39):
the job one after that is to kind of catch up to where we are with all of the
(00:32:45):
election stuff.
(00:32:47):
Also just nationally,
(00:32:49):
all of our outlets are launching a new look at the effect of,
(00:32:55):
but we're calling it federal fallout,
(00:32:57):
the effect of the Trump administration
(00:33:00):
on state government.
(00:33:02):
And one story that I just put up today is about the Trump administration
(00:33:07):
essentially denying disaster requests,
(00:33:10):
not just for blue states,
(00:33:12):
but also for red states like Arkansas and North Carolina.
(00:33:16):
So I think that one is an interesting one and something to watch going forward.
(00:33:21):
I have two conversations I was part of,
(00:33:23):
one with State Senator Mike Busselow that I did on my show for TV.
(00:33:29):
So we're going to talk about that a little bit.
(00:33:31):
But also I filled in for Kay Henderson on Iowa Press,
(00:33:35):
on Iowa PBS,
(00:33:36):
where the guest this week was the Iowa Secretary of Agriculture.
(00:33:40):
Mike Nagg and obviously coming coming up early in that show.
(00:33:45):
I don't want to ruin it if you haven't watched it yet.
(00:33:48):
But the topic of him running for governor potentially did come up.
(00:33:53):
And so it's interesting to me how both men are talking about this.
(00:33:58):
And then the fact that Brenda Byrd,
(00:33:59):
the attorney general,
(00:34:00):
could play in this hand in hand potentially with with President Donald Trump.
(00:34:04):
So I'll probably be looking at those this weekend.
(00:34:07):
Thank you both.
(00:34:09):
Thank you, Dave.
(00:34:10):
Thank you all for joining us for the Iowa Down Ballot
(00:34:15):
podcast, a production of the Iowa Writers Collaborative.
(00:34:19):
We have to give some thanks to our producers,
(00:34:21):
Spencer Dirks,
(00:34:22):
and for the music by D'Artagnan Brown.
(00:34:26):
Thank you as always for watching.
(00:34:28):
Thanks for supporting the Iowa Writers Collaborative.
(00:34:32):
We hope you will check out as many of the writers as you can,
(00:34:35):
share their work to all your family and friends to help this unique enterprise grow.
(00:34:41):
And we'll talk to you next week.
Share this post