Iowa Public Television

Borg: PRIORITIES HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED AND STATED, AND THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION OF 2001 IS UNDERWAY. THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH OF IOWA GOVERNMENT, BOTH THE IOWA HOUSE AND THE IOWA SENATE, HAVE PROFILED THEIR RESPECTIVE AGENDAS FOR THE IOWA GENERAL ASSEMBLY. GOVERNOR TOM VILSACK HAS SPOKEN FOR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH. NOW THE HEAVY LIFTING BEGINS. SPEAKER OF THE IOWA HOUSE, BRENT SIEGRIST OF COUNCIL BLUFFS, GAVELLED THAT SESSION OPEN IN THE IOWA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON MONDAY MORNING OF THIS PAST WEEK. AND A DAY LATER IN THE SAME CHAMBER, GOVERNOR VILSACK OUTLINED HIS PRIORITIES IN HIS ANNUAL "CONDITION OF THE STATE" MESSAGE. ALREADY, THE FIRST WEEK OF THE SCHEDULED 110-DAY LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS BEHIND US. HERE NOW TO PROVIDE PERSPECTIVE FROM THE IOWA SENATEARE LEADERS OF THE MAJORITY REPUBLICANS AND THE MINORITY DEMOCRATS. SENATOR STEWART IVERSON OF DOWS IS THE MAJORITY LEADER, AND THE MINORITY DEMOCRATS ARE LED BY SENATOR MIKE GRONSTAL OF COUNCIL BLUFFS. GENTLEMEN, WELCOME BACK TO IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION.

Borg: ACROSS THE TABLE, STATEHOUSE REPORTERS DAVID YEPSEN OF THE DES MOINES REGISTER AND MIKE GLOVER OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS.

Glover: SENATOR IVERSON, AS DEAN MENTIONED, THE CARDS ARE NOW ALL ON THE TABLE. THE GOVERNOR HAS DELIVERED HIS "CONDITION OF THE STATE." THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS DELIVERED THEIR PRIORITY LISTS. WHAT DO YOU SEE AS THE MAIN FLASHPOINTS IN THIS SESSION, THE MAIN DISPUTES BETWEEN THE REPUBLICAN-RUN LEGISLATURE AND THE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR?

Iverson: I THINK, FIRST OF ALL, THERE WILL BE A LOT OF AGREEMENT ON CERTAIN ISSUES. BUT I THINK THE BIGGEST FLASHPOINT IS GOING TO BE THE WAY THAT GOVERNOR VILSACK PUT HIS BUDGET TOGETHER. HE'S SHIFTED A LOT OF FUNDS FROM THE ROAD FUND, FROM THE INFRASTRUCTURE FUND. I TRULY FEEL THAT IF WE JUST FOLLOWED GOVERNOR VILSACK'S APPROACH,IT WOULD LEAD TO A TAX INCREASE TO THE PEOPLE IN THE STATEOF IOWA. I'VE SAID MANY TIMES THAT I THINK THE ONLY THING STANDING BETWEEN GOVERNOR VILSACK AND IOWANS' WALLETSIS THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE, BECAUSE WE WILL NOT INCREASE TAXES.

Glover: SO WHAT YOU SEE AS THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS NOT THE PRIORITY LISTING THAN HE'S SPELLED OUT BUT THE WAY THAT HE'S PAYING FOR IT?

Iverson: EXACTLY.

Glover: SENATOR GRONSTAL, CAN WE ASSUME THAT THE DEMOCRATIC AGENDA IN THE LEGISLATURE IS THE SAME AS THE GOVERNOR'S AGENDA, OR ARE THERE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN LEGISLATIVE DEMOCRATS AND THE GOVERNOR?

Gronstal: I DON'T SEE A LOT OF DIFFERENCES. I THINK HE DOES SHARE OUR TOP PRIORITIES: DEALING WITH STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, MAKING SURE WE HAVE THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST TEACHERS IF OUR SCHOOLS, DOING SOMETHING ABOUT ABUSE AND VIOLENCE IN THIS STATE. I THINK OUR TOP PRIORITIES ARE VERY SIMILAR. I THINK WE MAY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDS. I THINK SENATE DEMOCRATS,IN PARTICULAR, WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT FOR SENIOR CITIZENS. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WORKING ON THAT. LAST SESSION WE HAD 22 VOTES FOR IT. HOPEFULLY SOME MORE OF SENATOR IVERSON'S COLLEAGUES WILL SUPPORT THAT EFFORT.

Glover: WHAT DO YOU SAY TO REPUBLICAN CHARGES ABOUT THE WAY THE GOVERNOR FUNDS HIS BUDGET?

Gronstal: LOOK, I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO PUT THIS WHOLE THING IN CONTEXT. EIGHT YEARS AGO THE STATE HAD A $400-MILLION DEFICIT AND WAS PUTTING THINGS ON ITS CREDIT CARD. WE QUIT DOING THAT. THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET HAS A $144-MILLION ENDING BALANCE. WE HAVE A HALF BILLION DOLLARS IN A SAVINGS ACCOUNT. THE WORLD IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT IT WAS EIGHT YEARS AGO. WE'VE MANAGED THIS BUDGET PRETTY WELL. I WAS ON THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE THAT WROTE THE BUDGET REFORM ACT. WE'VE GOT -- WE'RE REALLY IN GREAT FINANCIAL SHAPE. IS THIS STATE'S BUDGET TIGHT THIS YEAR? YES, IT IS. THAT WILL CAUSE SOME PROBLEMS WITH SETTING PRIORITIES. IT WON'T BE AN EASY BUDGET YEAR, BUT YOU'VE GOT TO PUT IT IN CONTEXT: A HALF BILLION IN THE BANK AND $144-MILLION ENDING BALANCE IN THE GOVERNOR'S NEXT BUDGET.

Yepsen: SENATOR IVERSON, IS THAT THE CONTEXT YOU'VE PUT IT IN?

Iverson: WELL, I THINK MIKE IS EXACTLY RIGHT WHEN HE TALKED ABOUT THE CREDIT CARD APPROACH. WE HAVE FOR SEVERAL YEARS BEEN PAYING CASH FOR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS. THE GOVERNOR WANTS TO PUT ALL THAT BACK TO BONDING, AND HE'S TAKING MONEY FROM THE ROAD FUND THAT THOSE DOLLARS SHOULD BE USED TO FIX ROADS. IT SHIFTS OVER TO THE GENERAL FUND. I THINK THOSE ARE THE VERY THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. I DON'T WANT TO SEE US HEADED BACK TO WHERE WE WERE EIGHT, TEN YEARS AGO.

Yepsen: SENATOR, ONE ISSUE THAT ALL IOWANS CARE ABOUT IS HIGH ENERGY PRICES. THAT HEATING BILL IS AWFULLY HIGH FOR AN AWFUL LOT OF PEOPLE. WHAT, IF ANYTHING, WILL THIS LEGISLATURE DO TO LOWER IOWANS' HEATING BILLS.

Iverson: WE ACTUALLYHAVE A TEAM OF SOME SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES WORKING ON THIS VERY THING. I THINK BY NEXT WEEK, WE WILL HAVE A PLAN PUT TOGETHER. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS REDUCING THE SALES TAX OR ELIMINATING THE SALES TAX FOR ONE, TWO, OR THREE MONTHS TO HELP WITH THAT. THERE'S NOT A LOT THAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THE ACTUAL COST OF NATURAL GAS OR PROPANE OR THE FUEL OIL, BUT WE CAN HELP WITH SOME OF THOSE OTHER THINGS LIKE THE TAX ON THAT, AND WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT VERY SERIOUSLY. HOPEFULLY, BY NEXT WEEK WE HAVE SOMETHING PUT TOGETHER.

Yepsen: SENATOR GRONSTAL, SAME QUESTION.

Gronstal: WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE WORKING ON THIS ISSUE AS WELL, BUT LET'S BE FRANK. THEIR LITTLE BUDGET GIMMICK ON THE SALES TAX ON UTILITY, $7 MILLION. LAST SUMMER THEY MADE FUN OF THE GOVERNOR'S EFFORT ON HIGH GAS PRICES FOR HISETHANOL COUPON FOR $10. WELL, THEY SAID THAT WAS JUST A TINY RESPONSE TO THE PROBLEM. WELL, FRANKLY, $7 MILLION-- THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THIS UTILITY TAX --THAT'S $7 A FAMILY IN IOWA. THAT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING TO HELP FAMILIES THAT HAVE HAD BILLS DOUBLE AND TRIPLE AND QUADRUPLE THIS YEAR.

Yepsen: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT THE PROBLEM? FORGET ABOUT THE STATEHOUSE GAME OVERBUDGETS AND TAXES. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT HEATING BILLS?

Gronstal: I THINK WE'VE GOT TO TAKE A GOOD HARD LOOK AT THE UTILITY COMPANIES IN IOWA AND SEE IF THEY'RE OVEREARNING.

Yepsen: AND HOW WOULD YOU DO THAT?

Gronstal: I THINK THROUGH -- I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS WE NEED TO DO, BUT I THINK THE FIRST PART OF THIS PROCESS IS TO GATHER INFORMATION.

Glover: SENATOR IVERSON, IS THERE ANY MOMENTUM AMONG REPUBLICANS TO LOOK AT THE WAY UTILITIES ARE STRUCTURED IN THIS STATE?

Iverson: WELL, I THINK WE HAVE. SOME OF US HAVE TAKEN A LOOK AT THAT. THE ONE THING THAT WE HAVE TO REMEMBER WITH A LOT OF THE UTILITY COMPANIES, THEY PASS ON, ESPECIALLY THE NATURAL GAS, THEY DON'T CHARGE AN INCREASE IN THE NATURAL GAS PRICE. THEY CAN --

Glover: THE STATE GUARANTEES --

Iverson: THEY GET CHARGED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION. NO, THE STATE GUARANTEES THE TRANSPORTATION COSTS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE UTILITY ITSELF CANNOT RAISE THE PRICE OF THE GASOLINE IN ORDER TO GET PAID, SO THAT IS CONTROLLED BY STATE LAW. THE OTHERTHING WE ARE LOOKING AT, BESIDES FOR THE SHORT TERM DOINGSOMETHING, EVENTUALLY IN THE LONG TERM DOING SOMETHING WITHSALES TAX WHERE I KNOW LIKE MINNESOTA DOES NOT CHARGE SALESTAX ON UTILITY BILLS DURING THE WINTER MONTHS. THIS IS SOMETHING MORE LONG TERM THAT WE'RE ALSO TAKING A LOOK AT.

Yepsen: SENATOR, LAST WEEK ON THIS PROGRAM, SPEAKERSIEGRIST SAID THAT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO HELP POWER PLANTS --- TO HELP UTILITIES SITE POWER PLANTS IN IOWA. WE NEED MORE GENERATING CAPACITY, THAT THIS WHOLE PROBLEM INCALIFORNIA ILLUSTRATES THAT ELECTRICITY JUST DOESN'T COMEOUT OF A SOCKET. WILL THE SENATE GO ALONG? ARE WE GOING TO SEE SOMETHING TO MAKE IT EASIER TO BUILD MORE POWER PLANTS IN IOWA?

Iverson: ABSOLUTELY. WE WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DOING AWAYWITH REGULATIONS BY STREAMLINING THE PROCESS, BECAUSE WE AREGOING TO NEED NEW GENERATING FACILITIES. CALIFORNIA IS APRIME EXAMPLE. A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE BLAMED THAT ONTODEREGULATION, WHERE DEREGULATION IN CALIFORNIA HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, BECAUSE THEY HAD NOT BUILT A NEW POWER PLANTIN CALIFORNIA FOR TWENTY YEARS. THEY DEREGULATED THEWHOLESALE SIDE BUT THEY ALSO KEPT THE LIMITS ON THE RETAILSIDE OF SELLING IT, AND THERE'S TWO POWER COMPANIES OUTTHERE THAT ARE POSSIBLY GOING INTO BANKRUPTCY BECAUSE OFTHAT. SO WE DEFINITELY NEED MORE POWER PLANTS IN IOWA.

Yepsen: HAVE DEMOCRATS GOT A PROBLEM WITH THE POWERPLANT SITING?

Gronstal: WE'RE CERTAINLY WILLING TOLOOK AT SITING LEGISLATION, BUT I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU THATDOESN'T MEAN WE'RE GOING TO GIVE AWAY THE BANK TO THEUTILITY COMPANIES IN IOWA. I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO BE VERYCAREFUL ABOUT IT. NEW-PLANT CONSTRUCTION IS WHAT DRIVESINCREASES IN PRICES UNDER OUR CURRENT SYSTEM. SO I THINKYOU ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT THINGS LIKE WIND ENERGY. THEEQUATION FOR WIND ENERGY LAST YEAR WITH LOW NATURAL GASPRICES DIDN'T LOOK SO GOOD. THE EQUATION THIS YEAR LOOKSMUCH, MUCH BETTER.

Borg: SENATOR IVERSON, SENATORGRONSTAL HAS SAID WE DON'T HAVE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS IN THISSTATE, ACKNOWLEDGING, HOWEVER, THIS MAY BE A TIGHT BUDGETYEAR. ARE YOU AT ALL, THOUGH, CONCERNED BY ENERGY PRICES ANDOTHER FACTORS DEPRESSING THE ECONOMY AND LIMITING NOW STATE REVENUES?

Iverson: ABSOLUTELY. WHEN PEOPLE AREHAVING TO SPEND MORE ON ENERGY COSTS, IT LEAVES LESSDISPOSABLE MONEY FOR OTHER THINGS, AND THAT WILL IMPACT THEBUDGET. THE REVENUE RIGHT NOW IS A LITTLE BIT SOFT,REVENUE ESTIMATES. WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT THEY PICK UP AGAINLIKE THEY DID A YEAR AGO, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE VERYCOGNIZANT OF THAT. AND ON THE SPENDING SIDE, WE HAVE TOBE CONSCIOUS OF THAT BECAUSE THE LITTLE THINGS YOU DO TODAY,IF YOU SPEND A LITTLE TOO MUCH, IT MUSHROOMS INTO THEFUTURE. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO WATCH VERY, VERYCAREFULLY.

Borg: WHAT ABOUT THAT, SENATOR GRONSTAL? YOU'VE ACKNOWLEDGED IT'S ALREADY A TIGHT YEAR. AREYOU AT ALL CONCERNED ABOUT REVENUE CONCERNS?

Gronstal: I THINK WE'RECONCERNED ABOUT ENERGY PRICES. WE THINK WE REALLY DONEED TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THE UTILITY COMPANIES AND WHETHER THEY'RE OVEREARNING.

Borg: BUT THE EFFECT ONTHE BUDGET?

Gronstal: IT HAS A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ONTHE BUDGET. IT'S GOING TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ONFARMERS THIS SPRING. THE HIGHER COST OF ANHYDROUSAMMONIA, THAT'S GOING TO BE A REAL PROBLEM. SO, YEAH,WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE AWORKING GROUP OF SENATORS LOOKING AT ISSUES ABOUT ENERGY.

Glover: SENATOR IVERSON, YOU'VE SPELLED OUT A FAIRLYAGGRESSIVE AGENDA THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ACCOMPLISH IN THISLEGISLATIVE SESSION. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET THAT DONE,GIVEN THE POLITICS OF THIS YEAR? YOU SAID YOU'REINTERESTED IN RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR. THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE HAS SAID HE'S INTERESTED IN RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR. SO YOU'VE GOT THE CAMPAIGN OF 2002 ALREADY STARTED. AREN'T WE LOOKING AT TWO YEARS OF POLITICAL GRIDLOCK?

Iverson: NO, I DON'T THINK SO. FIRST OF ALL, THE SPEAKER AND I HAVE EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN LOOKING AT THAT, BUT OURMAIN RESPONSIBILITY IS IN THE LEGISLATURE AND DOING WHAT WENEED TO DO. THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE OUR FOCUS IS. BRENTAND I GET ALONG VERY, VERY WELL, AND WE ARE NOT HOLDING UPANYTHING. WE ARE GOING TO DO THE THINGS THAT WECAMPAIGNED ON, THE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE FOR IOWANS. I DON'T SEE POLITICAL GRIDLOCK AT ALL. I THINK THATLAST YEAR WE HAD MORE POLITICAL GRIDLOCK, BUT I THINK THISYEAR WE ARE ALL FOCUSED ON THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEENOUTLINED, AND WE'RE GOING TO SOLVE THOSE ISSUES.

Glover: BUT ISN'T THE POLITICAL REALITY FAIRLY CLEAR? IN ORDER TO RUN AGAINST A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR, ANY REPUBLICANIS GOING TO HAVE TO CLEAVE SOME DIFFERENCES WITH HIM, SODON'T YOU HAVE TO SPEND THE NEXT TWO YEARS CARVING OUTDIFFERENCES?

Iverson: NO, I THINK THERE AREDIFFERENCES BETWEEN GOVERNOR VILSACK AND US. WE'VETALKED ABOUT THOSE IN THE PAST. WE'LL CONTINUE TO TALKABOUT THOSE IN THE FUTURE. BUT I SEE THIS LEGISLATIVESESSION GOING ON AS IT HAS EVERY OTHER YEAR.

Yepsen: SENATOR GRONSTAL, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT RUNNING FOR? ANY OTHER HIGHER OFFICE?

Gronstal: I'M HAPPYSERVING MY CONSTITUENTS IN COUNCIL BLUFFS RIGHT NOW.

Yepsen: WOULD YOU CONSIDER A RUN FOR CONGRESS IF THATCONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT IN WESTERN IOWA LOOKS A LITTLE BETTERAFTER REAPPORTIONMENT?

Gronstal: LOOK, I WON'T RULEANYTHING OUT BUT I'M VERY HAPPY DOING WHAT I'M DOING. ITHINK YOU'RE RIGHT. I THINK THERE IS PROBLEMS THISSESSION WITH PLAYING POLITICS. THE REPUBLICANS, BOTHBRENT AND STEW, HAVE BEEN VERY CRITICAL OF THE GOVERNOR'SBUDGET. STEW, WHERE'S YOUR PRIORITIES? WHERE'S YOURBUDGET? WE HAVEN'T SEEN A BUDGET FROM YOU YET. ITHINK THAT'S GOING TO CREATE A PROBLEM. THEY'LL GET TOPASS SOME BILLS AND SEE IF THEY CAN GET THE GOVERNOR TO VETOTHEM, BUT THEY'LL NEVER SHOW THEIR OWN HAND. THEY'LLNEVER SHOW THEIR OWN BUDGET.

Yepsen: ARE WE SHOCKEDTHAT THERE'S POLITICS AT THE STATEHOUSE? AFTER ALL, THEDEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR DID GO AT THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATUREPRETTY HARD IN THE CAMPAIGN. WHY WOULDN'T THEY PLAYPOLITICS?

Gronstal: WELL, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IREMEMBER FORMER GOVERNOR BRANSTAD IN MY DISTRICT A FEW TIMESOVER THE LAST SIXTEEN YEARS, DOING SOME POLITICAL THINGSWITH MY OPPONENT. THAT IS PART OF POLITICS. BUT LETME TELL YOU, I'VE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT ODD NUMBERED YEARSARE THE YEARS TO GOVERN AND EVEN NUMBERED YEARS ARE THEYEARS TO DEFINE DIFFERENCES. I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE. I THINK THIS YEAR IT'S MOVED UP A YEAR. WE STARTEDOUT WITH ALL OF THIS, BUT LAST YEAR THEY WERE TALKING ABOUTTHE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET BEING ILLEGAL. WELL, YESTERDAY ITHINK THEY GRUDGINGLY ADMITTED, EVEN AUDITOR JOHNSON,GRUDGINGLY ADMITTED THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET LAST YEAR WASLEGAL AND HIS BUDGET THIS YEAR IS LEGAL.

Iverson: IWOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT. LAST YEAR THE GOVERNOR'SBUDGET WAS ILLEGAL. THIS YEAR WE SAID THE GOVERNOR'SBUDGET IS LEGAL. THE ONE THING THAT THE GOVERNOR COULDNOT PUT IN, BECAUSE HE'S IN NEGOTIATION WITH STATEEMPLOYEES, IS THE SALARY PACKAGE, AND WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT SALARY PACKAGE IS GOING TO BE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT. BUT ITHINK THAT SENATOR GRONSTAL IS TRYING TO PUT A LOT MORE HYPEINTO THIS THAN THERE SHOULD BE, BECAUSE WE'RE ALLRESPONSIBLE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOINGTO DO IS WORK ON THE PROBLEMS THAT -- IT'S ALWAYS VERYEASY TO SIT HERE AND SAY, WELL, THERE'S GOING TO BE POLITICSINVOLVED. I HAVE BEEN IN THE STATEHOUSE NOW FOR ELEVENYEARS. I'VE BEEN IN THE MINORITY; I'VE BEEN IN THEMAJORITY. THE MINORITY'S ROLE IS TO MAKE LIFE MISERABLEAND TO THROW HOT WATER ON -- OR COLD WATER ON EVERYTHINGTHAT THE MAJORITY WANTS TO DO. WE HAD DIFFERENCES WITH GOVERNOR BRANSTAD. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S UNUSUAL.

Glover: ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE SAID YOU'REGOING TO DO THIS YEAR IS A TEACHER PAY INCREASE PROPOSALTHAT THE GOVERNOR HAS PROPOSED. WHAT'S THAT GOING TOLOOK LIKE?

Iverson: THE BIG THING THAT WE'RE LOOKINGAT, IN NOT ONLY DOLLARS AND CENTS, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURETHAT FIRST OF ALL GOOD TEACHERS GET PAID MORE. WE'RE VERY FOCUSED ONSTUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY. THOSE ARE THEMOST IMPORTANT FACTORS, PROBABLY AS MUCH OR MORE SO THAN THEDOLLARS. YOU NEED AN INCENTIVE THERE TO REWARD GOODTEACHERS BUT, BY THE SAME TOKEN, IF WE HAVE SOME OF US DOING A BAD JOB, THESE INDIVIDUALS NEED TO BE REMOVED FROM THECLASSROOM. WE NEED GREAT TEACHERS. FORTY-EIGHTPERCENT OF A CHILD'S ABILITY TO LEARN COMES FROM THEPARENTS, AND THE NEXT MOST SIGNIFICANT PART IS THE TEACHER.

Yepsen: HOW MUCH MONEY WILL YOU PUT INTO THIS PLAN?

Iverson: WE HAVE NOT NAILED DOWN THE EXACT DOLLARAMOUNT. I KNOW THE GOVERNOR LAID OUT $42 MILLION. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MAY BE VERY ACCEPTABLE.

Yepsen:EXCUSE ME, SENATOR. HOW LONG IS IT GOING TO TAKE AFTERALL IS SAID AND DONE AND THE SMOKE CLEARS, HOW LONG BEFOREWE GET IOWA TEACHERS TO THE NATIONAL AVERAGE?

Iverson: I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE US TO GETTEACHERS TO THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. BUT WE HAVE TO ALSO TAKEINTO ACCOUNT, FIRST OF ALL, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE NATIONALAVERAGE, PHASE THREE IS NOT IN THERE. THE PEOPLE IN IOWARANK ABOUT 35TH IN WAGES OVERALL, SO WHEN YOU COMPARE APPLESAND APPLES, WE'RE CLOSE. BUT DO I THINK WE NEED TO PAYGOOD TEACHERS MORE? ABSOLUTELY. BUT THE STUDENTACCOUNTABILITY AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IS VERY IMPORTANTALSO.

Glover: SENATOR GRONSTAL, I HEAR RURAL SCHOOLOFFICIALS COMPLAINING ABOUT HAVING MINIMUM STANDARDS IMPOSEDUPON THEM THAT THEY'RE UNABLE TO AFFORD. I HEAR URBANSCHOOL OFFICIALS COMPLAIN ABOUT THE STATE SPENDING A LOT OFMONEY TO PROP UP RURAL SCHOOLS THAT SHOULDN'T BE THERE. ARE WE SEEING THE AGGRAVATION OF A RURAL/URBAN SPLIT IF WEDEBATE THIS WHOLE TEACHER PAY THING?

Gronstal: IDON'T THINK SO. I THINK THE LEGISLATURE CAN DEAL WITHTHOSE PROBLEMS PRETTY EASILY. THEY'RE TOUGH ISSUES ANDTHEY'LL INVOLVE SOME BATTLE, BUT ALL OF THOSE THINGS CAN BECOMPROMISED AND WE CAN COME UP WITH REASONABLE FUNDS THATSPEAK TO BOTH SIDES OF THE RURAL/URBAN EQUATION. I THINKWE CAN DO THAT. THE FIRST STEP IS LET'S COMMIT THERESOURCES TO DOING THIS. ONCE WE TAKE THAT FIRST STEP,THAT'S THE TOUGHEST. COMMIT THE RESOURCES. ONCE WETAKE THAT STUFF, WE CAN DEAL WITH ALL THE LITTLE PIECES AFTERWARDS.

Glover: LET'S GET TO THE BASICS OF THEQUESTION THAT DAVE ASKED SENATOR IVERSON. HOW MUCH AREYOU GOING TO SPEND ON INCREASING TEACHER PAY, AND HOW LONGARE YOU GOING TO PHASE IT IN?

Gronstal: I THINK ITWILL TAKE PROBABLY FOUR YEARS. FOUR YEARS WE CAN GET TOTHE NATIONAL AVERAGE ON TEACHER SALARIES.

Glover: HOWMUCH FOR SALARIES?

Gronstal: I THINK THE FIRST YEAR,$42 MILLION IS A GOOD START.

Glover: WHAT'S THE TAB?

Gronstal: THE TAB? SOMEWHERE BETWEEN $200 AND$250 MILLION.

Glover: SOUND REASONABLE TO YOU,SENATOR IVERSON? FOUR YEARS AND $250 MILLION?

Iverson: THATSOUNDS REASONABLE. WILL IT BE FOUR YEARS? A LOT OFIT IS GOING TO DEPEND ON THE REVENUE TOO.

Borg:SENATOR GRONSTAL, REPUBLICANS HAVE SAID THEY WANT TO DO SOMETAX TINKERING, AND ONE OF THOSE THINGS IS SOCIAL SECURITY. WOULD YOU SUPPORT THAT?

Gronstal: I THINK WE'VEGOT TO TAKE THIS IN STEPS. AND, YEAH, I THINK THERE'S ACERTAINLY WILLINGNESS IN OUR CAUCUS TO LOOK AT THOSE TAXISSUES BUT, AGAIN, NUMBER ONE IS TO SET ASIDE THIS MONEY FORTEACHER SALARIES. THAT'S THE FIRST STEP. PUT KIDSFIRST; THAT'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO. THAT'S WHY WE'VEGOT TO LOOK AT THIS WHOLE BUDGET. THE GOVERNOR HAS GOT ABUDGET HE'S LAID OUT THERE. WHAT'S YOUR BUDGET, STEW? WHAT ARE THE REPUBLICANS GOING TO SET DOWN FOR THEIRBUDGET, AND HOW MUCH ARE THEY GOING TO ALLOCATE FOR TAXCUTS. AND WE'LL CERTAINLY BE WILLING TO TAKE A LOOK ATTHAT.

Borg: SENATOR IVERSON, IF YOU DO SUCCEED INTAKING OR YOU WANT TO SUCCEED IN TAKING TAX OFF OF SOCIALSECURITY AND SOME OTHER TAX ADJUSTMENTS, WHAT ARE YOU GOINGTO DO TO MAKE THAT ATTRACTIVE TO DEMOCRATS?

Iverson:WELL, I THINK THE BIG THING THAT -- I GUESS, WHEN WE LOOKAT SOME TAX REDUCTIONS, WHETHER IT'S ATTRACTIVE TOREPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS, WHAT DOES IT DO FOR THE PEOPLE OFTHE STATE OF IOWA. SENIOR CITIZENS ARE A GREAT EXAMPLE. IOWA IS ONE OF A NUMBER OF STATES -- A FEW STATES THATTAX SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS. WHAT HAPPENS, WE HAVETHESE PEOPLE LEAVING THE STATE BECAUSE WE'RE TAXING SOCIALSECURITY BENEFITS. THESE ARE THE VERY PEOPLE THAT, FIRSTOF ALL, THEY'RE A GREAT VOLUNTEER BASE FOR A NUMBER OFTHINGS THAT HAPPEN IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. IF THEY WOULDMOVE FROM THE STATE OF IOWA, THEY ALSO TAKE THEIR SPENDINGDOLLARS AND ALSO THEIR INVESTMENT DOLLARS. WE NEED THESEPEOPLE TO INVEST DOLLARS INTO VARIOUS COMPANIES AND TO PRODUCE JOBS. SO IT'S KIND OF A LOSE/LOSE, BUT I THINKIT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN WORK OUT. WE'RE CERTAINLY -- YOU KNOW, I SAY THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRAT/REPUBLICAN ISSUE THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT FACES ALL OF IOWA.

Yepsen:SENATOR GRONSTAL, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, THERE'S REALLY NOWAY DEMOCRATS AND A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR ARE GOING TO GOALONG WITH REDUCING TAX REVENUES BY THIS MUCH, ARE THEY?

Gronstal: WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH.

Yepsen: WHEN YOUTAKE THE SALES TAX OFF UTILITY BILLS, LOWER INCOME TAXES ONSOCIAL SECURITY RECIPIENTS, HOW DO YOU PAY FOR ALL THEPROGRAMS?

Gronstal: WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY'REPROPOSING RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE BUDGET. DOES THISMEAN WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING ON TEACHER SALARIES? DOES IT MEAN WE'RE NOT GOING TO WORRY ABOUT STUDENTACHIEVEMENT? STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN THIS STATE IS FIRSTOR SECOND IN THE COUNTRY ON ALMOST ANY MEASURE, AND TEACHERSALARIES ARE AT 35TH.

Yepsen: WHY SHOULD TEACHERSALARIES BE AT THE NATIONAL AVERAGE WHEN IOWA INCOME IS NOTAT THE NATIONAL AVERAGE?

Gronstal: BECAUSE OURGREATEST SELLING POINT TO THE REST OF THIS COUNTRY IS OURWELL-EDUCATED WORK FORCE. WHEN OUR KIDS GRADUATE FROMHIGH SCHOOL, THEY CAN READ AND WRITE. THEY CAN'T SAYTHAT IN EVERY STATE IN THE UNION. WE HAVE A GREATEDUCATION ETHIC.

Yepsen: SO YOU THINK IOWA TAXPAYERSCAN AFFORD TO PAY THEM MORE, EVEN THEIR INCOMES AREN'T GOINGUP.

Gronstal: I THINK WE HAVE TO OR ELSE WE TELL OURKIDS TO LEAVE. WE TELL OUR KIDS TO GO TO OTHER STATESTHAT VALUE EDUCATION, THAT VALUE TEACHERS MORE THAN WE DO. I THINK WE HAVE TO DO THAT.

Yepsen: SENATORIVERSON, SOME RURAL LAWMAKERS ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THISLOCAL OPTION SALES TAX. MANY URBAN AREAS IN THE STATEARE PASSING THIS. THE RURAL PEOPLE OBJECT TO COMING TOTHE CITY AND PAYING THAT TAX THAT GOES TO URBAN SCHOOLS. WILL THE SENATE DO ANYTHING TO CHANGE THAT? HOUSELEADERS ARE SAYING THEY DON'T WANT TO FOOL WITH IT. WILLTHE SENATE?

Iverson: THIS IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TALKEDABOUT. ARE THERE INEQUITIES? ABSOLUTELY, AND SOME OFUS SAW THAT WHEN WE ACTUALLY DEBATED THE BILL AND RAISEDSOME CONCERNS ABOUT IT, BUT THE MOMENTUM WAS GOING AND ITPASSED. SO BE IT. IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO GOBACK -- IF YOU PASS A LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX FOR SCHOOLTHAT'S GOOD FOR TEN YEARS, IT IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT FORUS TO COME IN NOW AND SAY, ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO SCOOPHALF THE MONEY THAT YOU PASSED AND REALLOCATE THAT. THATIS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN A HANDLE ON. CAN WE-- WE HAVE TALKED A LOT ABOUT DOING SOMETHING AT THE ENDOF THE TEN-YEAR PERIOD. IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT,AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE LEGAL TO GO IN AND SCOOPTHAT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT PERIOD. THAT'S ONE OF THECHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE.

Glover: ONE OF THE ISSUESTHE LEGISLATURE IS LOOKING AT IS CHILD ABUSE. THEGOVERNOR HAS ASKED FOR $8 MILLION TO ADD NEW CASEWORKERSFOR LOOKING AT TROUBLED IOWA FAMILIES. WHAT IS THELEGISLATURE GOING TO DO TO RESPOND TO THIS ISSUE? AREYOU GOING TO GIVE HIM $8 MILLION? ARE YOU GOING TO HIRESOME MORE CASEWORKERS, AND WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO SEETHAT THE SYSTEM WORKS?

Iverson: WELL, MIKE, IT'S MUCHMORE THAN JUST $8 MILLION TO ADD SOME MORE CASEWORKERS. IT'STHE VERY SAME IN EDUCATION. IF WE DON'T CHANGE THEPROCESS OR WE DON'T CHANGE THE TRAINING, BUT WE JUST PUT $8MILLION MORE IN THERE AND NOT MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGES,WE'VE GAINED NOTHING OTHER THAN SPEND MORE MONEY.

Glover: WHAT ARE THE NECESSARY CHANGES?

Iverson: THENECESSARY CHANGES I THINK IS GOING TO BE SOME RETRAINING FORWORKERS TO LOOK AT THESE SYMPTOMS OR GET A BETTER KNOWLEDGEON THAT. I THINK A LOT OF THAT IS TRAINING. THEBIGGEST THING IS -- I HAVE TO ADMIT I DON'T KNOWEVERYTHING ABOUT THE HUMAN SERVICE AREA. I'VE NEVERWORKED IN THERE, SO I'M VERY RELUCTANT TO START NAMING OFF ANUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO DO, OTHER THAN THE TRAININGAND LOOKING AT THOSE THINGS, BECAUSE I'M VERY DEPENDENT UPONSOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THAT AREA THAT WILL COME UPWITH SOME SUGGESTIONS.

Glover: SENATOR GRONSTAL,WHAT'S THE DEMOCRATIC VIEW ON THIS? ARE YOU GOING TOSPEND $8 MILLION MORE, AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THEDEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES?

Gronstal: WE'RE GOINGTO ADD CASEWORKERS. WE NEED TO ADD CASEWORKERS. CASEWORKERS IN IOWA HAVE SOME OF THE HIGHEST WORKLOADS INTHE COUNTRY.

Yepsen: SUPERVISORS?

Gronstal: WENEED MORE SUPERVISORS, AS WELL. I AGREE WITH SENATORIVERSON, WE NEED BETTER TRAINING OUT THERE. BUT IF WE'REGOING TO TAKE THIS CRISIS OF SHELBY DUIS, IF WE'RE GOING TOTAKE THIS HORRIBLE TRAGEDY AND DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, WE'REGOING TO HAVE TO REDUCE CASELOADS OUT THERE SO THAT WE CANDO A BETTER JOB OF STOPPING VIOLENCE IN THIS STATE, BUTWE'VE GOT TO GO FURTHER. WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUTMENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT IN THIS STATE. BUSINESS DOESN'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT. GOVERNMENT CAN'TAFFORD TO PAY FOR IT. INSURANCE COMPANIES DON'T WANT ITMANDATED. WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT MENTAL HEALTHAND SUBSTANCE ABUSE. I THINK WE OUGHT TO PASS THAT PARITY BILL. IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT ALL FORMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTHIS STATE, WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING. THE BIGGEST TIETO THAT IS SUBSTANCE ABUSE. THAT'S THE BIGGEST PREDICTOR OF WHETHER THERE'S GOING TO BE ABUSE.

Yepsen:GENTLEMEN, WE'VE GOT WAY TOO MANY ISSUES AND NOT ENOUGHTIME, SO I WANT TO MOVE ALONG. SENATOR IVERSON, THEBOTTLE BILL... WILL THIS LEGISLATURE CHANGE THE BOTTLEBILL LEGISLATION IN IOWA?

Iverson: WELL, I THINK IT'SSOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A VERY HARD LOOK AT. I THINK THE BOTTLE BILL HAS WORKED VERY WELL IN THE STATE OFIOWA. I THINK THAT WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT HOW CAN WE IMPROVE UPON THAT. I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY, WELL,LET'S JUST EXPAND IT AND DO THOSE THINGS. ONE OF THEGREATEST THINGS THAT I HAVE HEARD FROM VARIOUS CONVENIENCESTORE OWNERS IS TAKING THE BOTTLES BACK INTO THOSEFACILITIES, THEY COME IN WITH BUGS AND OTHER THINGS IN IT. IT'S A HEALTH HAZARD. THAT IS ONE OF THE CONCERNS ITHINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT. I THINK THE RECYCLING IS VERYIMPORTANT. WILL WE DO SOMETHING THERE? IT'S POSSIBLEBUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND MORE TIME TRYING TOWORK ON A CONSENSUS ON WHERE WE WANT TO GO, BECAUSE I DOTHINK WE NEED TO IMPROVE THE BOTTLE BILL AND THE RECYCLINGSIDE. AND THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE TIME.

Yepsen: SENATOR GRONSTAL, WHAT'S YOUR GUESS ON THAT? WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT LEGISLATION?

Gronstal: IFYOU'RE ASKING FOR MY GUESS, MY GUESS IS I'M A BIT SKEPTICALTHAT WE CAN GET SOMETHING DONE, BUT THE PRINCIPLES OUGHT TOBE PRETTY CLEAR. IF WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING, ITBETTER RESULT IN MORE RECYCLING, LESS GOING INTO LANDFILLS. SO I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER OF US -- THAT'S THE NUMBERONE GOAL OF THIS BILL. ITS ORIGINAL PURPOSE WAS MORELITTER CONTROL. I LEARNED OUR FOCUS TODAY SHOULD BE ONEXPANDING THE AMOUNT OF RECYCLING.

Glover: SENATORIVERSON, WILL THERE BE A DEBATE ON THE STATE'S GAMBLINGINDUSTRY THIS YEAR?

Iverson: I WOULD SAY PROBABLYNOT. A NUMBER OF THE REFERENDUMS ARE COMING UP IN ACOUPLE YEARS. THE BIGGEST THING THAT I HAVE HEARD, THETRACKS ARE SAYING WITH THE RATCHETING UP OF THEIR TAX RATESAND THE BOATS ARE AT THIS LEVEL, THE TRACKS ARE AT THISLEVEL, THERE MAY BE SOME PROBLEM. IS THERE SOMETHINGTHAT WE COULD WORK OUT THERE? I DON'T KNOW. I'M ALITTLE SKEPTICAL THAT WE COULD GET SOMETHING WORKING. SOI AM NOT ANTICIPATING MUCH OF A DEBATE ON THE GAMBLINGISSUE.

Glover: SENATOR GRONSTAL, WILL IT BE ANOFFICIAL SESSION IF WE DON'T HAVE A GAMBLING DEBATE? [LAUGHTER]

Gronstal: PERHAPS IT WILL BE A RELIEF FORTHOSE OF US IN THE SENATE THAT HAVE ALWAYS ATTEMPTED TOREACH SOME COMPROMISE ON THESE ISSUES. GENERALLYSPEAKING, THEY'VE DIED IN THE HOUSE. IF IT DOESN'T MOVEIN THE HOUSE, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF POINT IN THE SENATEMOVING ON THIS SIDE.

Iverson: IT IS POINTED OUT HERE, ANUMBER OF THE ISSUES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, SENATOR GRONSTALAND I ARE IN AGREEMENT ON.

Gronstal: THAT'S OURBIGGEST POLITICAL PROBLEM. WE KINDA LIKE EACH OTHER.

Iverson: SO WE HAVE WORKED TOGETHER.

Yepsen:HERE'S ONE THAT'S DIFFICULT TO COMPROMISE, SENATORGRONSTAL... DOVE HUNTING. THERE'S TALK IN THE HOUSEOF MAKING IT LEGAL TO HUNT DOVES. IT'S VERYCONTROVERSIAL. WILL THE SENATE GO ALONG WITH THAT IDEA?

Gronstal: ONCE AGAIN, THE SENATE PASSED IT ONCE. IF THE HOUSE TAKES IT UP, IT'S SOMETHING THE SENATE WILLLOOK AT.

Yepsen: IS THAT RIGHT, SENATOR IVERSON?

Gronstal: AND IT'S A MIXED BAG, BOTH PARTIES.

Iverson: IT IS. THERE'S REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ONBOTH SIDES OF THAT ISSUE. WE ACTUALLY PASSED THAT BILLBEFORE WE SENT IT TO THE HOUSE. THEY DID NOT TAKE IT UP. IF IT COMES OVER FROM THE HOUSE, THEN WE WILL DEAL WITHIT LIKE WE DEAL WITH EVERY OTHER BILL.

Glover:SENATOR IVERSON, IN HIS "CONDITION OF THE STATE" SPEECH THEGOVERNOR MENTIONED ONCE AGAIN ASKING FOR LOCAL CONTROL OFSITING OF HOG FACILITIES. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S GOINGTO BE DEBATED IN THE LEGISLATURE?

Iverson: WE HAVE ANUMBER OF ISSUES PERTAINING TO THAT. IT'S A VERYEMOTIONAL ISSUE. THE BIGGEST THING IS, I AM FIRMLYAGAINST 99 SETS OF RULES, JUST TURNING IT ALL OVER TO THESUPERVISORS. ARE THERE SOME THINGS WE CAN DO? IOWAACTUALLY HAVE SOME OF THE STRICTEST LAWS ON ENVIRONMENTALAND WATER POLLUTION, THINGS LIKE THAT. ARE THERE THINGSWE CAN DO TO IMPROVE ON SOME OF THAT? YES, AND SOME TIMEAGO --

Glover: SUCH AS?

Iverson: WELL, I'VEACTUALLY -- I'VE TALKED TO THE DNR AND THE GOVERNOR'SOFFICE AND THE A.G.'s OFFICE: HOW DO WE GO ABOUT GIVINGTHE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES A LITTLE MORE LEEWAY INWHETHER THEY GRANT PERMITS OR NOT? I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE DONE BY THESE INDIVIDUALS THATUNDERSTAND IT. AS FAR AS TURNING IT COMPLETELY OVER TOTHE SUPERVISORS, I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT MOVE.

Yepsen: WILL THE IOWA SENATE GO ALONG WITH RAISINGSPEED LIMITS?

Iverson: THAT'S ANOTHER MIXED BAG. WE HAVE REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT. IF THERE ARE ENOUGH VOTES THERE, IT COMES OUT OF COMMITTEE,AND THERE APPEARS TO BE ENOUGH VOTES TO THE FLOOR, YES, WE CAN DEBATE THAT. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S AT. IN THE PAST, TRADITIONALLY THE SENATE HAS NOT GONE ALONGWITH IT. I THINK THREE YEARS AGO IS THE LAST TIME WE HADA DEBATE ON THAT, AND IT REALLY WASN'T EVEN CLOSE.

Borg: MOST PEOPLE ARE TRAVELING AT THE INCREASED SPEEDANYWAY. WOULD YOU SUPPORT IT, SENATOR GRONSTAL?

Gronstal: YES, I'D SUPPORT INCREASING THE SPEED LIMIT.

Iverson: I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH WHERE IT IS.

Borg: SENATOR IVERSON, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU TOO, WHENGOVERNOR VILSACK PROPOSED RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE IN HIS"CONDITION OF THE STATE" ADDRESS, I NOTICED THE DEMOCRATSAPPLAUDED, THE REPUBLICANS BY AND LARGE DIDN'T. WHY?

Iverson: WELL, I THINK THE BIGGEST THING TO REMEMBER WITHTHE MINIMUM WAGE, THAT IS A STARTING WAGE. THERE'S A LOTOF STUDENTS THAT WORK FOR THAT, A LOT OF LOWER-END JOBS. THERE ARE VERY FEW PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY START AT THAT. IF THEY DO, THEY MOVE UP TO SOMETHING ELSE. WE HAVE VERYFEW EMPLOYERS IN THE STATE OF IOWA THAT ARE HIRING PEOPLE AT MINIMUM WAGE. I MEAN, I SEE SIGNS IN THE FAST-FOODRESTAURANTS: $7, $8, $9 AN HOUR. MOST PEOPLE ARE NOTWORKING FOR MINIMUM WAGE.

Gronstal: THERE ARE AHUNDRED THOUSAND IOWANS THAT MAKE THE MINIMUM WAGE, AND 60PERCENT OF THEM ARE WOMEN. MANY OF THEM SINGLE WOMEN. THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD DO IN THIS STATE. UNLESSTHE REPUBLICAN PARTY -- UNLESS ALL OF THEIR MESSAGES ABOUTLOW-WAGE JOBS, WHICH I THINK IS THE WRONG STRATEGY FOR OURSTATE TO TAKE, THEY OUGHT TO STEP FORWARD AND DO SOMETHINGON THIS. A WHOLE HOST OF STATES HAVE HIGHER MINIMUMWAGES THAN THE FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE. THIS IS SOMETHINGABOUT BASIC ECONOMIC DIGNITY FOR FAMILIES AND THE VALUE OF WORK. WE OUGHT TO DO THIS.

Borg: WELL, THANK YOUVERY MUCH. THAT SETS THE STAGE, I THINK, FOR THE... CONTENTIOUS SESSION?

Gronstal: HOPEFULLY NOT BUTIT SOUNDS LIKE IT.

Iverson: ONLY CONTENTIOUS IF MIKEWANTS IT TO BE.

Borg: THANKS FOR BEING OUR GUESTSTODAY. THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF IOWA PRESS. WE'LL BE BACK NEXT WEEK AT THE SAME TIME. UNTIL THEN, I'M DEAN BORG. THANKS FOR JOINING US HERETODAY ON STATEWIDE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION. FUNDINGFOR IOWA PRESS HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY FRIENDS OF IOWA PUBLICTELEVISION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKSHELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS; BY THEASSOCIATION OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY... THE VOICE OF IOWABUSINESS, REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF OVER 1,500 IOWABUSINESSES EMPLOYING 300,000 IOWANS; AND BY THEASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF IOWA... THE PUBLIC'SPARTNER IN BUILDING IOWA'S HIGHWAY, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPALUTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE.