Iowa Public Television

NARRATOR: FUNDING FOR "IOWA PRESS" HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY FRIENDS OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION...FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS; BY THE ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY... THE VOICE OF IOWA BUSINESS, REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF OVER 1,500 IOWA BUSINESSES EMPLOYING 300,000 IOWANS; AND BY THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF IOWA... THE PUBLIC'S PARTNER IN BUILDING IOWA'S HIGHWAY, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS IS THE SUNDAY, MAY 20 EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS." HERE IS DEAN BORG.

Borg: IN WASHINGTON D.C., THE SCENE-SETTER FOR THIS YEAR'S CENTER-STAGE BUDGET DRAMA IS PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH'S CAMPAIGN PROMISE TO DELIVER A MASSIVE TAX CUT. THAT PROPOSAL IS NOW IN THE CONGRESSIONAL PIPELINE. THE BUDGET DETAILS ARE IMPORTANT FOR MANY REASONS, NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH IS THAT THE DEBATE IS BEING CONDUCTED IN THE SHADOW OF 2002 ELECTION CYCLE. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2002, MAY SEEM LIKE A LONG WAY OFF, BUT THE BUDGET DETAILS CURRENTLY BEING DEBATED WILL PROVIDE THE CAMPAIGN GRIST BETWEEN NOW AND ELECTION DAY. AND THAT CAMPAIGN CYCLE FINDS TODAY'S GUEST, CONGRESSMAN GREG GANSKE, AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE U.S. SENATE. HE'S SEEKING THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION TO CHALLENGE SENATOR TOM HARKIN IN THE ELECTION OF 2002. CONGRESSMAN GANSKE, WELCOME BACK TO "IOWA PRESS."

Ganske: THANKS, DEAN. IT'S GOOD TO BE HERE.

Borg: AND ACROSS THE TABLE... POLITICAL REPORTERS DAVID YEPSEN OF "THE DES MOINES REGISTER" AND KAY HENDERSON OF "RADIO IOWA."

Henderson: CONGRESSMAN, WHY DO YOU WANT TO BE A SENATOR?

Ganske: WELL, KAY, I'VE BEEN IN WASHINGTON NOW GOING ON MY SEVENTH YEAR, AND I'VE SEEN AN AWFUL LOT OF PARTISAN BICKERING. I JUST THINK THAT THE TIRED OLD PARTISAN BICKERING IS NOT GETTING THINGS DONE. WE NEED NEW LEADERSHIP. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE THAT JUST HAPPENED, REALLY. THE PRESIDENT CAME TO IOWA, HAD VERY NICE THINGS TO SAY ABOUT IOWANS BEING KIND AND FRIENDLY, AND HAD SAID SOME VERY NICE THINGS ABOUT ETHANOL AS WELL, SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT TO THIS STATE. I WAS REALLY GLAD THE PRESIDENT CAME. HE INVITED ALL OF THE IOWA DELEGATION TO COME, "ALL" OF THE IOWA DELEGATION. AND SO I CAME AND SAT ALONGSIDE THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, MARY KRAMER, AND GOVERNOR VILSACK IN A BIPARTISAN MANNER. AND AT THE SAME TIME WE HAD, OUT IN WASHINGTON, SENATOR TOM HARKIN LOBBYING GRENADES AT THE PRESIDENT'S VISIT HERE TO IOWA SAYING THAT THIS WAS JUST A POLITICAL TRIP. YOU KNOW, I WELCOME THE PRESIDENT TO COME. WHEN AL GORE CAME OUT TO IOWA TO TALK ABOUT METHAMPHETAMINE, I WAS INVITED ALONG AND I CAME. AND I STOOD ON THE STAGE WITH PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON TO TRY TO GET THINGS DONE IN A BIPARTISAN FASHION, TOO. SO I THINK THAT THIS ELECTION SHOULD NOT BE ABOUT WHO CONTROLS POWER IN WASHINGTON. IT'S NOT BETWEEN JUST ABOUT WHETHER THE REPUBLICANS CAN CONTROL THE SENATE OR THE DEMOCRATS CONTROL THE SENATE. IT REALLY SHOULD BE ABOUT HOW WE REFORM GOVERNMENT AND HOW WE GET THINGS DONE AND SOLVE PROBLEMS, AND I THINK I CAN BE EFFECTIVE ON THAT.

Henderson: IF YOU WIN THE PRIMARY, YOU WILL BE RUNNING AGAINST SENATOR TOM HARKIN, AN INCUMBENT. WHY SHOULD IOWANS ESSENTIALLY FIRE HIM AND HIRE YOU?

Ganske: WELL, SENATOR HARKIN HAS BEEN IN CONGRESS SINCE 1976, I BELIEVE. AND I THINK THAT IT IS TIME FOR A LEADERSHIP CHANGE. IF WE'RE LOOKING ONLY AT, FOR INSTANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PRESIDENT BUSH IN THE WHITE HOUSE FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, PROBABLY EIGHT YEARS. I WORKED VERY HARD WITH PRESIDENT BUSH TO GET HIM ELECTED, AND I HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM. AND I THINK THAT WILL HELP IOWA IN TERMS OF THINGS LIKE FUNDING FAIRNESS FOR MEDICARE. BUT I THINK THAT THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT, AND I BRING SOMETHING TO THE TABLE ON THAT. AND THAT IS, FOR INSTANCE, PRIOR TO BECOMING A CONGRESSMAN, I WAS A PHYSICIAN. I HELPED WOMEN WITH CANCER, KIDS WITH BIRTH DEFECTS. BUT THERE'S A WAY TO SOLVE PROBLEMS. YOU LISTEN, YOU LEARN, YOU PROPOSE SOLUTIONS, AND YOU WORK ACROSS THE AISLE TO GET THINGS DONE. I'VE DEMONSTRATED THAT I CAN DO THAT, AND I THINK THAT THERE IS PRETTY WIDESPREAD RECOGNITION THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SENATOR HARKIN AND MYSELF ON THAT.

Yepsen: CONGRESSMAN, WHY DO YOU WANT TO GET RID OF TOM HARKIN'S SENIORITY? IT'S MY RECOLLECTION SENATOR HARKIN HAS BEEN IN WASHINGTON SINCE HE WAS FIRST ELECTED IN 1974, SO WE'LL HAVE TO CHECK THE BOOK ON THAT. BUT HE'S BEEN THERE A LONG TIME. HE HAS A LOT OF SENIORITY. HE'S THE RANKING DEMOCRAT ON THE SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE. IF THE DEMOCRATS TAKE THE SENATE, HE BECOMES CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE. WHY SHOULD IOWA GET RID OF THAT?

Ganske: WELL, DAVE, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, BACK IN 1994, I WAS AT -- YOU PROBABLY ASKED ME THE SAME QUESTION WHEN I RAN AGAINST NEAL SMITH, WHO WAS A 36-YEAR INCUMBENT, WAS CHAIRMAN OF LABOR HHS APPROPRIATIONS. AND MY POINT TODAY IS THE SAME AS IT WAS THEN. YOU KNOW, YOU CAN BE AN EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE STATE IN TERMS OF GETTING NEEDED PROJECTS DONE. I'VE DONE THAT. I'VE DONE THAT, PROJECTS HERE IN DES MOINES, ELSEWHERE, AND AROUND THE STATE AS WELL. AT THE SAME TIME, THOUGH, THERE ARE LARGER PROBLEMS FACING THE STATE AND THE NATION THAT YOU NEED TO ADDRESS. ONE OF THEM, DEAN MENTIONED IN HIS OPENING REMARKS, AND THAT IS THE NEED FOR TAX RELIEF. WHEN I RAN IN '94, WE HAD A BUDGET THAT WAS OUT OF BALANCE. TODAY WE HAVE A SURPLUS. THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS I RAN IN '94. WE HAD A WELFARE SYSTEM THAT WASN'T WORKING IN '94. I WORKED TO REFORM THAT AND WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN GETTING THOSE REFORMS DONE. TODAY WE'RE LOOKING AT ENERGY PROBLEMS. I'M ON THE ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE. I HAVE SOME BACKGROUND IN THAT. WE HAVE HEALTH CARE PROBLEMS. FOR INSTANCE, PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES THAT ARE OUT OF SIGHT. SO, IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THE CLOUT ISSUES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THERE ARE ALSO OTHER VERY, VERY BIG ISSUES FACING IOWA AS PART OF THE UNITED STATES. AND I THINK THAT THE ABILITY TO ADHERE TO PRINCIPLES BUT, AT THE SAME TIME, TO GET THINGS DONE IS IMPORTANT. A YEAR OR SO AGO "CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY" NAMED ME AS ONE OF THE FIFTY MOST EFFECTIVE CONGRESSMEN. I APPRECIATE THAT AND I THINK IT REFLECTS THE ABILITY TO LISTEN TO PEOPLE, TO DEVISE A SOLUTION, AND TO WORK ACROSS PARTY AISLES TO GET THINGS DONE.

Yepsen: SPEAKING OF RANKINGS, DEMOCRATS ARE NOW FOND OF CHARGING YOU WITH BEING ONE OF THE RICHEST MEN IN CONGRESS. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT CHARGE? THE IMPLICATION IS THAT YOU'RE OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE AVERAGE IOWAN.

Ganske: WELL, DAVE, IT'S TRUE. I DIDN'T GO TO CONGRESS FOR FINANCIAL REASONS. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE FINANCIAL RECORDS, YOU'LL SEE THAT SENATOR TOM HARKIN IS PROBABLY PRETTY DARN CLOSE TO MY NET WORTH, AND I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S THE IMPORTANT ISSUE. THE IMPORTANT ISSUE IS: DO YOU ACT IN AN INDEPENDENT FASHION FOR THE BEST INTERESTS OF ALL OF THE PEOPLE OF IOWA. AND I THINK MY RECORD WILL SHOW THAT.

Henderson: HOW ARE YOU DIFFERENT FROM REPUBLICANS LIKE BILL SHIRLEY AND ROGER JEPSEN AND TOM TAUKE AND JIM LIGHTFOOT WHO RAN AGAINST TOM HARKIN AND LOST IN THE PAST?

Ganske: WELL, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I THINK THAT SENATOR HARKIN CAN BE BEAT IS THIS. HE WAS ELECTED FIRST WITH 56 PERCENT; THEN HE WENT TO 54 PERCENT. THE LAST ELECTION WAS 52 PERCENT. THAT'S NOT A GOOD TREND FOR SENATOR HARKIN. I THINK THAT I CAN STAND ON MY RECORD OF SOLID ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN AREAS LIKE HEALTH CARE, FOOD QUALITY PROTECTION ACT, THE ANIMAL DRUG AVAILABILITY ACT, CLEAN AIR ACT, SERIOUS INPUTS INTO THE WELFARE REFORM BILL. I THINK THAT PEOPLE WILL SEE THAT I AM MORE INTERESTED IN GETTING THINGS DONE THAN IN TAKING CREDIT FOR IT, AND I THINK THAT HELPS YOU GET THINGS DONE IN WASHINGTON. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. I WROTE PATIENT THE PATIENT BILL OF RIGHTS, ALONG WITH CHARLIE NORWOOD AND CONGRESSMAN JOHN DINGELL FROM MICHIGAN. IT CAME UP AS TO WHO WOULD PUT THEIR NAME FIRST ON THE BILL. I COULD HAVE LAID CLAIM TO THAT, BUT I THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD HELP US ADVANCE THAT LEGISLATION IF WE PUT CHARLIE'S NAME FIRST, AND THAT'S FINE. AND, LIKE I SAID, I'M MORE INTERESTED IN THE POLICY THAN THE POLITICS SAYS, AND I'M MORE INTERESTED IN GETTING THINGS DONE THAN TAKING CREDIT FOR IT.

Yepsen: THE LAST FEW RACES THAT TOM HARKIN HAS BEEN IN HAVE ALWAYS COME DOWN AT THE END TO AN ARGUMENT ABOUT ABORTION. WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON ABORTION?

Ganske: I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TOM HARKIN AND ME ON ABORTION. TOM HARKIN HAS VOTED SEVERAL TIMES NOT TO BAN PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION. I'M A PHYSICIAN. I'VE LOOKED AT THIS ISSUE. I TEND TO AGREE WITH THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, AND THAT IS THAT THIS IS A LATE-TERM ABORTION. IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A REAL NEED TO DO SOMETHING, THEN YOU CAN DO A C-SECTION AND SAVE THE LIFE OF THE BABY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO AN ABORTION. IT'S LIKE THE MOTHER IS IN AN ACCIDENT AND THE MOTHER IS SEVERELY INJURED. SO WE DIFFER ON THAT. TOM HARKIN HAS VOTED AGAINST PARENTAL NOTIFICATION. WHEN I WAS IN MEDICAL PRACTICE, I WOULD HAVE TO GET A PARENT'S PERMISSION TO TAKE A MOLE OFF A MINOR. I THINK THAT IT'S REASONABLE FOR STATES TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. I THINK THAT I DO FAVOR FUNDING FOR FAMILY PLANNING, AND I BELIEVE -- BUT I BELIEVE THAT, FOR INSTANCE, WE SHOULD NOT BE SENDING GOVERNMENT FUNDS OVERSEAS TO GROUPS THAT PROMOTE ABORTION OR LOBBY ABORTION FOR OTHER GOVERNMENTS. THOSE ARE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MYSELF AND TOM HARKIN ON THAT ISSUE.

Borg: A FRONT-LINE ISSUE RIGHT NOW IS BOTH POCKETBOOK AND SOMEWHAT EMOTIONAL, AND THAT IS ENERGY. YOU MENTIONED YOU WERE IN NEVADA, AT THE PRESIDENT'S SIDE, AS HE TALKED ENERGY THIS PAST THURSDAY. YOU ALSO MENTIONED YOU'RE ON THE ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE. I WONDER, AS A MEMBER OF THAT COMMITTEE, WHAT PART OF THAT ENERGY PROPOSAL BY PRESIDENT BUSH CONCERNS YOU THE MOST?

Ganske: WELL, I SIT ON THE ENERGY COMMITTEE THAT WILL BE WRITING THE ENERGY BILL, AND SO I APPRECIATE THE PRESIDENT PUTTING OUT HIS PLAN. I THINK OVERALL IT IS A BALANCED PLAN, BECAUSE WE DO NEED MORE SUPPLIES. WE HAVEN'T HAD VERY MANY NEW PLANTS COME ON BOARD EITHER FOR REFINERY OF GASOLINE OR FOR ELECTRIC PRODUCTION. WE NEED A LOT MORE. WE NEED MORE TRANSMISSION LINES. WE NEED MORE PIPELINES. THAT'S A GIVEN. OUR ECONOMY IS GROWING. WE HAVE TO KEEP UP WITH THAT. ON THE OTHER HAND, I'M REALLY GLAD THAT I SIT ON THAT COMMITTEE, BECAUSE I FIRMLY BELIEVE IN RENEWABLE FUELS, LIKE BIODIESEL AND ETHANOL. I THINK THAT THOSE SHOULD HAVE A MAJOR PART IN THE PLAN, AND I PLAN ON PROMOTING THOSE. I THINK THAT CONSERVATION IS ALSO AN IMPORTANT PART. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HERE IN IOWA ONE OF THE LEADING APPLIANCE MANUFACTURERS IN THE WORLD, MAYTAG. THEY ARE DOING REALLY WELL RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEY HAVE ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCES THAT THEY ARE MAKING, AND SO I WANT TO PUSH THOSE AREAS AS WELL.

Borg: WHAT CONCERNS YOU THE MOST ABOUT THAT PLAN?

Ganske: CONCERNS ME ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S PLAN?

Borg: YES.

Ganske: THE PRESIDENT'S PLAN IS NOT A DRAFT OF LEGISLATION, AND SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE APPROPRIATE EMPHASIS AND, FOR THAT MATTER, FUNDING ON, FOR INSTANCE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY. THE PRESIDENT WAS AT THIS PLANT IN NEVADA THAT IS DOING RESEARCH ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND USING BIOMASS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES DEVOTED TO PROJECTS LIKE THAT.

Yepsen: ONE OF THE CRITICISMS THAT'S BEEN MADE OF THE PRESIDENT'S PLAN IS THAT IT'S OF BIG OIL, BY BIG OIL, FOR BIG OIL, THE TEXACO TWINS, THE FOSSIL FOOLS. YOU'VE HEARD ALL THAT. WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE TO THE DEMOCRATIC CRITICISM OF THE PRESIDENT'S ENERGY PLAN?

Ganske: MY RESPONSE IS THAT WE NEED MORE NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION ESPECIALLY. WE ARE BUTTING UP AGAINST NATURAL GAS LIMITS, AND THAT'S CREATING PRICE SPIKES. THE ANSWER IS NOT, AS THE DEMOCRATS PROPOSE, PRICE CAPS. EVERY TIME YOU DO PRICE CAPS, YOU SEND THE MESSAGE TO THE MARKET, DON'T BUILD ANY NEW PLANTS, DON'T GET ANY NEW SUPPLY. YOU END UP WITH LONG LINES. THAT'S, IN FACT, PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH CALIFORNIA AND THE ROLLING BLACKOUTS RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T WANT TO EXPORT THAT PROBLEM TO THE REST OF THE COUNTRY BY IMPOSING FEDERAL PRICE CONTROLS. SO, I BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT IS RIGHT ON THAT, AND I SUPPORT HIM ON THAT. I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT INCREASING SUPPLY OF NATURAL GAS. NATURAL GAS IS THE CLEANEST FUEL. THE SIERRA CLUB, ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS ALSO AGREE WITH THAT. IT RELEASES LESS CO2 INTO THE ATMOSPHERE. WE HAVE AT PRUDHOE BAY, AS THEY'VE BEEN EXTRACTING OIL, THEY'VE BEEN REINJECTING NATURAL GAS. THE SIERRA CLUB HAS EVEN SAID "LET'S BUILD A PIPELINE AND GET THAT NATURAL GAS DOWN TO THE LOWER 48." WE OUGHT TO LOOK AT THAT FOR THE AREA AROUND ANWAR, TOO.

Yepsen: DO YOU SUPPORT DRILLING IN THE ARCTIC NATURAL WILDLIFE PRESERVE?

Ganske: I BELIEVE THAT THE TECHNOLOGY IS NOW THERE, THAT FROM SMALL PLATFORMS, MAYBE AT THE MOST, A COUPLE THOUSAND ACRES. YOU COULD THEN SEND OFF MULTIPLE DRILLINGS FROM ONE SMALL PLATFORM, 40 OR 50 WELLS OFF ONE PLATFORM. YOU CAN DIRECTIONALLY MANIPULATE THOSE WELLS, AND WE CAN DO THAT IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY-SOUND WAY. THE MAIN THING IN ANWAR IS NOT THE OIL, IN MY OPINION. IT'S THE FACT THAT THERE'S ABOUT A HUNDRED TRILLION CUBIC FEET OF NATURAL GAS THERE. IN MY OPINION, WE OUGHT TO BUILD A GAS PIPELINE FROM THERE, AND THAT WOULD PROVIDE US WITH A NATURAL GAS CUSHION FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS.

Henderson: ONE FUEL YOU HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT IS GASOLINE. AND ONE OF THE CRITICISMS OF THE PRESIDENT'S ENERGY PLAN IS THAT IT'S A LONG-TERM LOOK, AND THERE'S NOTHING FOR THE SHORT-TERM PRICE SPIKES THAT IOWANS ARE SEEING AT THE GAS PUMP. WHAT SHOULD BE DONE? SHOULD CONGRESS INVESTIGATE THE OIL INDUSTRY TO ENSURE THAT THEY AREN'T WITHHOLDING SUPPLY, WHICH IS THE CHARGE THAT'S BEING LEVELED?

Ganske: I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE FACT THAT THE REFINERIES NOW HAVE TO MAKE ALMOST 50 DIFFERENT TYPES OF GASOLINE AND THAT WE HAVE POCKETS WHERE ONLY CERTAIN TYPES OF GASOLINE ARE ALLOWED BECAUSE OF AIR-QUALITY REGULATIONS. AND SO, IF THERE IS A BRIEF SHUTDOWN IN A PLANT THAT MAKES THAT, IN SPOT MARKETS YOU CAN HAVE REAL SHORTAGES, ENDING UP WITH REALLY HIGH GASOLINE PRICE SPIKES LIKE HAPPENED IN CHICAGO LAST SUMMER. THERE ISN'T AN ABILITY THEN, FOR INSTANCE, TO SHIP GASOLINE FROM DES MOINES TO ST. LOUIS, BECAUSE THEY USE DIFFERENT FORMULATIONS. SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE OUGHT TO LOOK AT IS SIMPLIFYING THOSE FORMULATIONS, AND I THINK THAT WOULD HELP.

Henderson: BUT WHAT ABOUT THE ALLEGATION THAT THE OIL INDUSTRY IS WITHHOLDING SUPPLIES SO THAT THE PRICE SPIKES GO HIGHER WHEN SUPPLY IS LOW?

Ganske: I HAVEN'T SEEN EVIDENCE FOR THAT. ONE THING THAT IS CERTAIN, THOUGH, IS THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANY NEW REFINERY CAPACITY COME ON BOARD FOR ABOUT A DECADE. AND WE DO NEED THAT. AND THIS IS AN AREA LIKE THE AREA OF PIPELINE OR ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINES THAT CONGRESS IS PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO GET INVOLVED WITH IN TERMS OF SITING OF THOSE LINES. NOBODY WANTS A GAS PIPELINE IN THEIR BACKYARD. NOBODY WANTS A HIGH-POWER LINE GOING THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY. AT THE SAME TIME, THOUGH, EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THAT WE NEED MORE CAPACITY FOR TRANSFERRING THAT ENERGY. PROBABLY THE SOLUTION WILL BE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT CONGRESS DID WHEN WE SITED THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM IN TERMS OF EMINENT DOMAIN. WE SET UP RULES. WE FACILITATED THE PROCESS, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAD A WAY TO RESOLVE THOSE DISPUTES. IT DIDN'T HAVE TO BE DONE VERY OFTEN, BUT WE'LL PROBABLY LOOK AT THAT.

Yepsen: CONGRESSMAN, ANOTHER ISSUE MAKING ITS WAY THROUGH CONGRESS IS THE TAX CUT. IT'S UP FOR VOTE IN THE SENATE NEXT WEEK. WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THAT LEGISLATION WHEN IT GETS TO THE HOUSE AND WHEN IT GETS TO CONGRESS? WHAT'S YOUR GUESS ON WHAT IT'S FINALLY GOING TO LOOK LIKE?

Ganske: WELL, I THINK PRESIDENT BUSH IS GOING TO GET A BIG VICTORY OUT OF THIS. BUT MORE IMPORTANT THAN PRESIDENT BUSH IS THE FACT THAT I THINK THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER IS GOING TO GET A BIG VICTORY OUT OF THIS. CLEARLY, WE HAVE A SURPLUS OF TAXES. AND WE ARE LOOKING AT VARIOUS PARAMETERS SUCH AS THINGS THAT ARE NECESSARY IN EDUCATION FOR FUNDING AND THINGS THAT ARE NECESSARY IN HEALTH CARE FOR FUNDING, BUT PART OF THE SOLUTION -- AND REDUCING THE DEBT. BUT PART OF IT SHOULD BE TAX CUTS. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE SOMETHING PRETTY SIMILAR TO WHAT PASSED THE HOUSE. I HAVE VOTED, AND I'M HAPPY TO HAVE VOTED, TO REDUCE THE RATES. I'M HAPPY TO HAVE VOTED TO FIX THE MARRIAGE PENALTY AND, QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK WE OUGHT TO KILL THE DEATH TAX AS WELL.

Yepsen: A COUPLE CRITICISMS THAT ARE MADE OF THE TAX BILL. ONE IS THAT THIS IS REALLY TOO MUCH AND WE RISK GOING BACK INTO DEFICITS AND, SECONDLY, THAT IT FAVORS THE WEALTHY. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT?

Ganske: I THINK WE WILL SOON BE GETTING SOME NEW ESTIMATES FOR WHAT THE SURPLUS WILL BE, AND WE MAY FIND THAT WE HAVE EVEN MORE SURPLUS TO DEAL WITH, SO THAT THIS AMOUNT WILL LOOK PRETTY REASONABLE.

Yepsen: WHAT ABOUT THE WEALTHY?

Ganske: DAVID, THE CURRENT TAX CODE HAS THE UPPER BRACKET AT 39.6 PERCENT AND THE LOWER BRACKET AT 15 PERCENT. THE RATIO BETWEEN THE LOWEST BRACKET AND THE TOP BRACKET IS 2.64. SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE WEALTHIEST ARE PAYING 2.64 TIMES THE LOWER RATE. I VOTED FOR A BILL THAT WOULD REDUCE THE TOP BRACKET FROM 39.6 TO 33, BUT ALSO TO REDUCE THE LOWEST BRACKET FROM 15 TO 10. NOW, WHAT'S THE RATIO UNDER THE NEW PLAN? THE RATIO IS 10 TO 33. THAT MEANS THAT UNDER THE NEW PLAN THAT WE VOTED FOR, THE WEALTHIEST WOULD PAY 3.3 TIMES AS MUCH AS THE LOWEST.

Yepsen: SO THEY'RE GOING TO BEAR A GREATER SHARE OF THE BURDEN?

Ganske: SO THAT, CONVERSELY, THE LOWER INCOME GROUPS ARE GETTING A HIGHER PERCENT REDUCTION IN THEIR TAXES THAN THE UPPER.

Henderson: THE FBI HAS BEEN UNDER FIRE, RHETORICALLY, FOR PROBLEMS IT CREATED IN THE TIMOTHY MCVEIGH EXECUTION, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T TURN OVER DOCUMENTS IN THE CASE TO MCVEIGH'S LAWYERS. WHAT SHOULD CONGRESS DO TO STEP UP OVERSIGHT OF THE FBI?

Ganske: THAT'S GOING TO BE A BIG TOPIC OF DEBATE WHEN THE NEW FBI DIRECTOR GOES THROUGH HIS CONFIRMATION HEARINGS FOR SURE, BECAUSE WE HAD A WHOLE SERIES OF FBI MISCUES WITH THE LAST ADMINISTRATION, WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WACO OR RUBY RIDGE OR THIS MCVEIGH DEBACLE, REALLY. BUT, LET'S BE CLEAR ABOUT ONE THING: MR. MCVEIGH HAS SAID THAT HE DID IT, AND HE'S GUILTY BY HIS OWN ADMISSION. WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHETHER THESE DOCUMENTS REALLY AMOUNT TO VERY MUCH OR NOT. BUT, THERE'S NO EXCUSE. AND I THINK THAT ASHCROFT WAS RIGHT IN DELAYING THE EXECUTION UNTIL THIS IS LOOKED AT. BUT, CLEARLY, THEY HAVE TO FIX THEIR PROCEDURES.

Borg: HAS THE FBI HAD TOO MUCH AUTONOMY? DOES IT NEED MORE OVERSIGHT?

Ganske: OVERSIGHT IS ALWAYS A PROBLEM IN CONGRESS. MY COMMITTEE HAS JURISDICTION OVER A WHOLE SERIES OF AGENCIES, LIKE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. THE MEDICARE. MY COMMITTEE IS NOW DOING A TOTAL OVERSIGHT ON HOW THE MEDICARE PROGRAM IS ADMINISTERED. I BELIEVE THAT THE COMMITTEE OF JURISDICTION IS GOING TO NEED TO DO SOME REAL OVERSIGHT ON THE FBI, JUST LIKE WE'RE DOING AN OVERSIGHT ON THE HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADMINISTRATION.

Borg: WHAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE NEW FARM BILL, THE PRINCIPAL ITEM FOR WHICH YOU WILL FIGHT?

Ganske: WELL, NUMBER ONE, LET ME GIVE REAL CREDIT TO CONGRESSMAN JIM NUSSLE, AND TO SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY. BECAUSE WE HAVE, IN THE BUDGET, SOME I THINK VERY FAIR BUT ALSO SIGNIFICANT FUNDING FOR THE NEXT FIVE FOR SIX YEARS FOR AGRICULTURE. AND WE'RE GIVING THE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE THE NUMBER TO WORK WITH TO SET UP A NEW FARM BILL SO THAT THEY CAN WORK IN THEIR VARIOUS PROGRAMS. WE NEED, IN MY OPINION, AN INCREASE EMPHASIS ON CONSERVATION AND SOMETHING TO ALLOW FARMERS TO GET BENEFIT FOR BEST FARMING PRACTICES. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AN ADEQUATE SAFETY NET FOR COMMODITY PRICES. BUT ONE THING WE SHOULD NOT GO BACK TO, AND THAT IS THE GOVERNMENT TELLING FARMERS TO SET ASIDE LAND. THOSE OLD GOVERNMENT SET-ASIDES OF THE OLD DEMOCRATIC FARM PROGRAMS, ALL THEY EVER DID WAS THEY CUT OUR PRODUCTION AND THEY MOVED THAT PRODUCTION OVERSEAS. AND THAT WOULD BE A BIG MISTAKE.

Yepsen: CONGRESSMAN, HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO SOMETHING DEMOCRATS ARE SAYING THESE DAYS ABOUT YOU AND TOM HARKIN, AND THAT IS THAT SENATOR HARKIN REALLY KNOWS A LOT MORE ABOUT AGRICULTURE THAN A DES MOINES PHYSICIAN? HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT?

Ganske: WELL, DAVE, NUMBER ONE, I GREW UP IN A SMALL TOWN IN NORTHEAST IOWA, MANCHESTER. MY DAD RAN A GROCERY STORE THERE, AND I GOT TO KNOW EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY. THEN I WENT TO MEDICAL SCHOOL IN IOWA CITY, LIVED HERE IN DES MOINES AND PRACTICED, BUT I'VE ALSO REPRESENTED A LARGE RURAL AREA, ALL OF SOUTHWEST IOWA. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, I HAVE A FARM OF MY OWN. SO I CAN TELL YOU I'M PRETTY WELL AWARE OF WHAT GOES ON ON THE FARM FROM LOOKING AT MY OWN SITUATION, AND I WISH THAT I'D MADE A FEW BETTER DECISIONS ON SELLING SOME CROPS, BELIEVE ME.

Yepsen: WELL, GO TO DEAN'S QUESTION, THOUGH, ABOUT WHAT SHOULD BE IN THE FARM BILL. IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND SENATOR HARKIN ON ISSUES OF AGRICULTURE POLICY THAT YOU CAN SEE?

Ganske: YES! SENATOR HARKIN WANTS TO RETURN TO THE OLD FAILED POLICIES OF THE PAST, WHICH ARE SET-ASIDES, PRODUCTION LIMITS AND ALSO TO A COUNTERCYCLICAL TYPE OF FUNDING. REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED WHEN WE HAD THE FLOODS HERE IN '93? EVERYONE'S FLOODED OUT. NOBODY HAS A CROP. BUT BECAUSE OF THAT, THE PRICES WERE HIGHER. OKAY, UNDER THE OLD FARM PROGRAM, THEN YOU DON'T GET ANYTHING BECAUSE THE PRICES ARE UP THERE. SO IT'S CLEAR, WE HAVE TO GET -- WE HAVE TO PROVIDE SOME SECURITY, SOME PREDICTABILITY, AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE A BASIC LINE OF SUPPORT. CROP INSURANCE -- INCREASED CROP INSURANCE, I THINK, WOULD BE - SUPPORTS - WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE SIGNING UP, MOST OF THE PEOPLE SIGNING UP. THAT WOULD REQUIRE SOME SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIES, FOR INSTANCE.

Henderson: NEW TOPIC: PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS. YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT FOR YEARS. WHEN WILL AMERICANS GET SOME PROTECTION FROM HMO ABUSES?

Ganske: WELL, KAY, WE'RE GETTING CLOSER AND CLOSER. WE PASSED THE NORWOOD, DINGELL, GANSKE BILL IN THE HOUSE IN 1999, AND THEN IT GOT HUNG UP IN A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE. BUT THIS YEAR, WE WORKED TOGETHER WITH THE SENATE. WE'VE INTRODUCED A COMPANION BILL IN THE SENATE, THE MCCAIN-EDWARDS BILL. WE THINK WE HAVE THE VOTES IN THE SENATE THIS TIME TO GET A PRETTY STRONG PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS THROUGH THE SENATE. THAT'S WHERE THE ROADBLOCK WAS LAST TIME. AND WHO KNOWS, WE MAY SEE THAT COME UP FOR A VOTE ON AN AMENDMENT MAYBE THROUGH THE EDUCATION BILL IN THE SENATE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

Yepsen: CONGRESSMAN, WE'VE GOT JUST A COUPLE MINUTES LEFT. EDUCATION. IOWANS CARE A LOT ABOUT IT. TWO-PART QUESTION: WHAT SHOULD THE FEDERAL ROLE IN EDUCATION BE, AND WHAT DIFFERENCES DO YOU HAVE WITH SENATOR HARKIN ON ISSUES OF EDUCATION POLICY?

Ganske: SENATOR HARKIN WANTS TO GET THE GOVERNMENT INVOLVED IN SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION, AND I WORRY ABOUT THAT. IT WOULD BRING IN A WHOLE NEW SET OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS THAT COULD END UP WITH BUILDINGS THEN BEING MORE COSTLY. WE COULD END UP REWARDING SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT HAVE IGNORED THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEMS AND THEREBY NOT PROVIDING -- PUNISHING THOSE WHO HAVE ACTED IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY. I THINK THAT WE WILL PASS A LOT OF ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR EDUCATION FOR WASHINGTON -- FROM WASHINGTON THIS YEAR. I SUPPORT THAT. BUT WHAT I WANT TO DO IS I WANT TO HANDLE AN UNFUNDED MANDATE THAT WASHINGTON PASSED A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO THAT THE DEMOCRATS, WHEN THEY WERE IN CONTROL OF CONGRESS NEVER ADDRESSED. AND THAT WAS THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITY EDUCATION ACT, WHICH SAID THAT ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAD TO PROVIDE AN EDUCATION FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITY. AND THAT IS GREAT. WE NEED THAT, BUT THAT IS EXPENSIVE. WHEN THAT BILL PASSED CONGRESS, CONGRESS PROMISED THE STATES THAT IT WOULD PAY 40 PERCENT OF THE BILL. BUT WHEN I GOT TO CONGRESS, THE FEDS WERE ONLY PAYING 10 PERCENT. SO THAT MEANT THAT ALL OF YOUR PROPERTY TAXES, WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN GOING TO FIX UP THE SCHOOLS TO PAY THE TEACHERS, WAS GOING OVER TO PAY THIS UNFUNDED FEDERAL MANDATE. SINCE I'VE BEEN THERE, WE'VE DOUBLED THE FUNDING FOR THAT, AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO GET UP TO THE LEVEL WHERE WE SHOULD BE.

Henderson: A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MILITARY. WHAT SHOULD THE U.S. ROLE BE IN THE WORLD IN REGARD TO BOSNIA? SHOULD WE PULL THE TROOPS BACK AND, SECONDARILY, SHOULD THERE BE A MISSILE DEFENSE SHIELD AROUND THE GLOBE?

Ganske: LET ME HIT MISSILE DEFENSE FIRST. I HAVE SUPPORTED FUNDING FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ON A MISSILE DEFENSE.

Henderson: AND SHOULD THE TROOPS COME BACK FROM BOSNIA?

Ganske: AND I BELIEVE THAT -- BUT PRIOR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT A SYSTEM REALLY WORKS.

Borg: I'M GOING TO HAVE TO INTERRUPT THERE. WE'VE COVERED A LOT OF ISSUES. WE HAVE A LOT MORE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE YOU BACK AT A FUTURE TIME TO CONTINUE THAT QUESTIONING. THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS." WE'LL BE BACK NEXT WEEK AT NOON AND 7:00 ON STATEWIDE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION. I HOPE YOU'LL WATCH AT THAT TIME. UNTIL THEN, I'M DEAN BORG. THANKS FOR JOINING US TODAY.

NARRATOR: FUNDING FOR "IOWA PRESS" HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY FRIENDS OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS; BY THE ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY... THE VOICE OF IOWA BUSINESS, REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF OVER 1,500 IOWA BUSINESSES EMPLOYING 300,000 IOWANS; AND BY THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF IOWA... THE PUBLIC'S PARTNER IN BUILDING IOWA'S HIGHWAY, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE.