Iowa Public Television

Borg: FOR THE NEW MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, THE DEMOCRATS' BALANCE OF POWER HAS CHANGED THE AGENDA. COMMENTS FROM IOWA SENATOR TOM HARKIN ON THIS EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS."

Narrator: FUNDING FOR "IOWA PRESS" WAS 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.

THIS IS THE SUNDAY, JULY 1 EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS." HERE IS DEAN BORG.

Borg: THE 107TH UNITED STATES CONGRESS IS NOW IN A JULY 4 HOLIDAY RECESS. THAT BREAK COMING JUST AFTER FRIDAY'S MOMENTOUS SENATE VOTE ON THE PATIENT PROTECTION ACT OF 2001, BETTER KNOWN AS THE "PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS". THIS WAS THE FIRST MAJOR LEGISLATION FRAMED UNDER THE NEW DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY IN THE SENATE, ALTERING THE DYNAMICS OF THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE AGENDA. ON THE HORIZON ARE OTHER ISSUES AND INITIATIVES THAT WILL REFLECT THAT NEW TILT IN POWER, INCLUDING A NEW FARM BILL TO REPLACE THE 1996 FREEDOM TO FARM ACT. OUR GUEST TODAY FINDS HIMSELF AT THE VERY CENTER OF FARM POLICY DEBATE ONCE AGAIN, BUT MOVING FROM THE RANKING DEMOCRATIC MINORITY MEMBER ON THAT COMMITTEE TO CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE'S AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE. SENATOR HARKIN, WELCOME BACK TO "IOWA PRESS."

Harkin: DEAN, IT'S GOOD TO BE BACK.

Borg: ACROSS THE TABLE, TWO REPORTERS YOU KNOW WELL: JENEANE BECK OF "KUNI PUBLIC RADIO" AND MIKE GLOVER OF "THE ASSOCIATED PRESS."

Glover: SENATOR, AS DEAN MENTIONED, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS TO EMERGE IN THE POST-JEFFERDS-SWITCH SENATE WAS A PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS. WE KNOW WHAT THE SENATE'S PASSED. WHAT'S GOING TO FINALLY BE APPROVED BY THIS CONGRESS AND SENT TO THE PRESIDENT? THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID HE'LL VETO THIS PARTICULAR VERSION.

Harkin: WELL, FIRST, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ONCE THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER THE SENATE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO BRING THE PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS OUT. AND BEFORE THAT, THE REPUBLICAN LEADER WOULDN'T EVEN LET IT ON THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE, SO I THINK THAT'S SIGNIFICANT TO NOTE WHAT'S HAPPENED. WE BROUGHT IT OUT ON THE FLOOR. OUR LEADER, SENATOR DASCHLE FROM SOUTH DAKOTA, SAID THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO HOME FOR THE FOURTH OF JULY UNTIL WE FINISH IT. AND WE FINISHED IT AT, I THINK, ABOUT 8 P.M. ON FRIDAY, BEFORE THE FOURTH OF JULY BREAK. IT'S A GREAT BILL. IT REALLY DOES PROTECT PATIENTS. IT GIVES A PERSON A LITTLE BIT MORE POWER IN GOING UP AGAINST THE BIG HMOs. IT PROVIDES FOR CONTINUITY OF CARE, LIKE IF A WOMAN IS PREGNANT AND HAS A DOCTOR THAT SHE'S SEEING, THE HMO CANNOT THEN CHANGE. SHE CAN KEEP THAT SAME DOCTOR THROUGH HER PREGNANCY. THE HMO CAN'T JUST SAY, "WELL, WE'RE SWITCHING DOCTORS NOW." IT ALLOWS FOR SPECIALIST CARE, ESPECIALLY FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION. NOW, THE HOUSE HAS TO PASS IT, AS YOU SAID, MIKE. IF THEY DO WHAT THEY DID BEFORE A COUPLE YEARS AGO, THEY'LL PASS A GOOD BILL. BUT NOW IT SEEMS THAT THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP ON THE HOUSE, BECAUSE NOW THERE'S A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WHO SAYS HE'LL VETO IT, THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO EITHER HOLD IT UP AND SLOW IT DOWN OR THEY'RE GOING TO PASS A MEASURE THAT'S NOT QUITE AS GOOD AS THE ONE THAT WE PASSED. I'M HOPEFUL IN THE END THAT WE'LL HAVE A BILL VERY CLOSE TO WHAT WE HAVE IN THE SENATE AND SEND IT TO THE PRESIDENT, AND I HOPE HE DOESN'T VETO IT.

Glover: WHAT ARE THE POLITICS OF THIS BILL? ARE YOU TRYING TO SEND HIM SOMETHING THAT HE'S GOING TO VETO TO SET IT UP AS A CAMPAIGN ISSUE? ARE DEMOCRATS PUSHING THIS BECAUSE IT'S POPULAR? WHAT ARE THE POLITICS OF THIS?

Harkin: WELL, MIKE, WE'RE PUSHING IT BECAUSE IT'S NEEDED. IT'S DRASTICALLY NEEDED. TOO MANY PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY ARE GOING -- I JUST RAN INTO ONE YESTERDAY IN DAVENPORT LAST NIGHT WHO HAD BEEN IN A PLAN THAT THE DOCTOR HAD PRESCRIBED A CERTAIN COURSE OF TREATMENT AND THE PLAN SAID NO. AND IN ORDER TO GET THAT TREATMENT, THEY HAD TO GO OUTSIDE OF THE PLAN AND SPEND MONEY OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS TO GET IT. THAT SHOULDN'T BE. A DOCTOR SHOULD MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. ONE OF THE THINGS I SAID DURING THE DEBATE, DEAN, I SAID, YOU KNOW, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON'T WANT DOCTORS DOING THEIR TAXES AND THEY DON'T WANT ACCOUNTANTS DECIDING THEIR HEALTH CARE. AND THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING IN MANY OF THESE HMOs. SO IT'S GOOD POLICY THAT WE GIVE PATIENTS MORE RIGHTS, THAT THE PATIENT/DOCTOR RELATIONSHIP IS THE ONE THAT REALLY GUIDES, NOT JUST WHAT THE HMO PLAN ITSELF SAYS. KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE BECAUSE WE TRIED GETTING THIS THROUGH WHEN CLINTON WAS PRESIDENT. IN THAT CASE THE HOUSE PASSED A GOOD BILL, THE SENATE PASSED A BILL THAT WAS NOT SO GOOD. I WAS A CONFRERE ON THAT BILL FOR TWO STRAIGHT YEARS ALMOST, AND THEY WOULDN'T BRING IT OUT OF CONFERENCE. SO AGAIN, WE TRIED TO GET IT THROUGH, TRIED TO GET SOMETHING THROUGH TO GET IT EVEN TO PRESIDENT CLINTON. SO THIS HAS BEEN A LONG BATTLE. WE'VE BEEN FIGHTING THIS BATTLE NOW FOR ALMOST FIVE YEARS.

Borg: YOU PASSED WHAT YOU WANT NOW, BUT WHAT LEVERAGE -- NOW THAT IT'S OUT OF THE SENATE, WHAT LEVERAGE DO YOU HAVE ANYMORE?

Harkin: WELL, I HOPE THE LEVERAGE OF PUBLIC OPINION. I HOPE THAT PEOPLE IN IOWA AND PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY WILL NOW PUT PRESSURE ON THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO ACT EXPEDITIOUSLY TO MOVE A PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS THROUGH THE HOUSE, HOPEFULLY IN JULY. IF WE CAN GET THAT DONE, THEN WE CAN GO TO CONFERENCE. I WILL BE A CONFRERE AGAIN ON THE PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS, AND MAYBE WE CAN GET SOMETHING TO THE PRESIDENT BY SEPTEMBER. AND HOPEFULLY -- HOPEFULLY PRESIDENT BUSH WILL GET BETTER COUNSEL AND SEE THE NECESSITY OF ENACTING THIS INTO LAW.

Beck: SENATOR, THE CHANGE OF POWER IN THE SENATE ALSO GRANTED YOU A NEW CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE, AND YOU'LL BE A BUSY MAN BECAUSE A NEW FARM BILL WILL NEED TO BE CRAFTED IN THE NEXT YEAR. WHAT WILL THAT LOOK LIKE? WHAT DOES IT NEED TO BE?

Harkin: WELL, JENEANE, I AM VERY PROUD AND HONORED TO BE THE FIRST IOWAN TO CHAIR THE SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE SINCE 1910, SO IT'S A GREAT HONOR FOR ME, AND THERE'S A GREAT RESPONSIBILITY AND GREAT OPPORTUNITIES. WE HAVE A NEW FARM BILL TO CRAFT. I THINK IT'S UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED THAT THE FREEDOM TO FARM BILL HAS NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL. THERE WERE SOME GOOD PARTS OF IT. THE PLANTING FLEXIBILITY PART THAT GAVE FARMERS THE FREEDOM TO PLANT WHATEVER THEY WANTED TO PLANT IS A GOOD PART, AND WE WILL KEEP THAT PART OF THE FREEDOM TO FARM BILL. BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AHEAD. I JUST HELD THE FIRST HEARING THIS WEEK ON -- A SERIES OF HEARINGS THAT I'LL BE HOLDING IN JULY AND PROBABLY GOING INTO SEPTEMBER ON THE NEW FARM BILL. I LAID OUT, SORT OF, MY VISION FOR WHERE THIS NEW FARM BILL OUGHT TO GO. I THINK, FIRST OF ALL, THE CENTRAL PART OF THIS NEW FARM BILL HAS TO BE CONSERVATION. BASED ON A BILL THAT I HAVE INTRODUCED WITH SENATOR SMITH OF OREGON, A REPUBLICAN, AND I -- AND IT'S BIPARTISAN IN THE HOUSE ALSO; IT'S MY CONSERVATION SECURITY ACT -- TO BEGIN TO REIMBURSE FARMERS NOT JUST FOR TAKING LAND OUT OF PRODUCTION BUT FOR ACTUALLY BEING GOOD STEWARDS AND TAKING CARE OF THE LAND AND ENACTING CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES ON THINGS THAT THEY PRODUCE. SO I HOPE THAT CONSERVATION WILL BE THE CENTRAL THEME OF THE NEW FARM BILL. BUT THERE'S ONE OTHER THING I WANT TO POINT OUT, JENEANE, THAT I SAID IN MY OPENING STATEMENT LAST WEEK, THAT I'M GOING TO PUT IN THE CHAIRMAN'S MARK WHEN I PUT THE BILL TOGETHER, A NEW TITLE IN THE FARM BILL THAT'S NEVER BEEN THERE BEFORE: AN ENERGY TITLE, TO LOOK AHEAD, TO SAY THAT IN THE FUTURE, NOT ONLY ARE WE GOING TO LOOK ON OUR FARMS AS PRODUCERS OF FOOD AND FIBER BUT ALSO OF ENERGY. WE'RE GOING TO START GETTING OUR FARMS INVOLVED IN ETHANOL AND BIO-DIESEL AND BIO-MASS AND METHANE AND WIND AND HYDROGEN. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF LAND OUT THERE THAT WE CAN USE FOR THE PRODUCTION OF ENERGY, AND I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION.

Glover: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON WHERE THE FARM ECONOMY IS? WHAT DOES THIS FARM BILL NEED TO ACCOMPLISH? THAT STARTS WITH YOUR TAKE ON THE FARM ECONOMY. WHERE DO YOU THINK THE FARM ECONOMY LIES?

Harkin: WELL, THE FARM ECONOMY RIGHT NOW, MIKE, IS PROPPED UP BY GOVERNMENT PAYMENTS. IN FACT, IF IT HAD NOT BEEN FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS MONEY THAT CAME OUT LAST YEAR, WE WOULD HAVE HAD A NEGATIVE NET INCOME IN AGRICULTURE IN IOWA LAST YEAR. THAT IS NOT HEALTHY. THAT CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN THE NEW TIGHT BUDGETS THAT WE HAVE COMING DOWN. SO WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE SHIFT THE EMPHASIS. HOW DO WE GET MORE MONEY TO THE FARMERS FROM THE MARKETPLACE? RIGHT NOW THE FARMER'S SHARE OF THE DOLLAR, THE CONSUMER DOLLAR, IS AT THE LOWEST POINT EVER. EVER! TWENTY CENTS ON THE DOLLAR GOES TO THE FARMER. WE CAN'T MAKE THAT UP BY GOVERNMENT PAYMENTS, AND WE SHOULDN'T. WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS WE NEED TO FIND WAYS OF GETTING MORE OF THAT CONSUMER DOLLAR TO THE FARMER, AND I JUST MENTIONED IT, ENERGY PRODUCTION. COOPERATIVES, USING COOPERATIVES AND PUTTING FARMERS IN COOPERATIVES TO HELP NOT ONLY GET THE INPUT COST DOWN BUT TO GET A BETTER SHARE OF THE CONSUMER DOLLAR THROUGH PROCESSING AND MARKETING THE VALUE-ADDED PRODUCTS THAT GO TO THE MARKET... ALSO LOOKING AT RURAL DEVELOPMENT. LET'S BE REALISTS RIGHT NOW. MORE AND MORE FARM FAMILIES ARE GETTING INCOME FROM OFF THE FARM. NOW, I MAY NOT LIKE THAT. I WISH THEY COULD GET ALL THEIR INCOME FROM THE FARM, BUT THAT IS A REALITY THAT WE'RE LIVING WITH. THEREFORE, WE'VE GOT TO PUT MORE INTO RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, MORE INTO HELPING OUR SMALL TOWNS AND COMMUNITIES BUILD AND GROW THE KIND OF BUSINESSES THAT WILL ALLOW FARM FAMILIES TO HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL OFF-FARM INCOME.

Borg: I WANT TO GO BACK TO WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT ADDING THE PRODUCTION OF ENERGY INTO THE CONCEPT OF FARMING. IOWA WAS JUBILANT OVER THE DENIAL OF THE WAIVER IN CALIFORNIA FOR OXYGENATED FUEL, BUT YOU'VE SUGGESTED THAT MAY BE SHORT LIVED IN THAT THE EPA MAY DO AWAY WITH ENTIRELY. IS THERE ANY POWER THAT YOU CAN EXERT TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING, OR IS IT STILL MINORITY DEMOCRAT VOICE IN THE WILDERNESS?

Harkin: WELL, DEAN, YOU'RE RIGHT, WHAT ONE HAND GIVES THE OTHER HAND CAN TAKE AWAY. I APPLAUDED PRESIDENT BUSH'S DENIAL OF THE WAIVER, THE CALIFORNIA WAIVER. THAT IS GOING TO OPEN UP ABOUT 500 MILLION GALLONS MORE PER YEAR OF ETHANOL. WE'VE ALREADY SEEN SOME ETHANOL PLANTS. ALREADY NOW THE FUNDING HAS GONE THROUGH AND THEY'RE STARTING TO LAY THE GROUNDWORK BECAUSE OF THAT CALIFORNIA WAIVER DENIAL BY PRESIDENT BUSH. NOW THE HEAD OF THE EPA, UNDER PRESIDENT BUSH, HAS SAID THAT THEY MAY -- SHE SORT OF THREW IT OUT THERE. THEY "MAY" DO AWAY WITH THE WHOLE OXYGENATE STANDARD. THAT WOULD BE DEVASTATING. WE JUST CAN'T AFFORD TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN. WITH WHAT POWER WE HAVE, I THINK WE NEED TO ALERT THE PUBLIC TO THIS, ALERT THE FARM SECTOR TO THIS THAT THIS WOULD JUST BE DEVASTATING IF WE DID AWAY WITH THE OXYGENATE STANDARD. I WORKED VERY HARD IN 1990 TO GET THAT OXYGENATE STANDARD IN THE CLEAN AIR ACT. IT'S DOING WELL FOR OUR SOCIETY. IT'S HELPING BUILD MORE ALTERNATIVE FUELS. I THINK IT'S HELPING IN TERMS OF NO NET CO2 INTO THE ATMOSPHERE. IT CUTS DOWN ON CARBON MONOXIDE AND, THEREFORE, I THINK WE OUGHT TO MOVE AHEAD WITH IT.

Borg: WELL, IF THAT IS A REAL THREAT, IT CERTAINLY IS GOING TO SLOW DOWN INVESTMENT IN NEW ETHANOL PLANTS.

Harkin: ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. IF THAT THREAT IS HANGING OUT THERE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE OXYGENATE STANDARD -- NOW, AS YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME TALK THAT WE MAY COME UP WITH A FORMULA, A PERCENTAGE OF ALL OF THE FUELS SOLD IN AMERICA HAVE TO BE REFORMULATED, HAVE TO BE OXYGENATED REFORMULATED FUELS, RENEWABLE FUELS. I'M ALL FOR THAT. THAT'S FINE. BUT I DON'T WANT TO DO AWAY WITH THE OXYGENATE STANDARD IN HOPES THAT SOMEDAY WE'RE GOING TO GET A PERCENTAGE OF RENEWABLES. NO WAY. I'M GOING TO HOLD TO THAT OXYGENATE STANDARD AND, BELIEVE ME, WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO KEEP IT THERE. IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A RENEWABLE STANDARD SOMETIME, THAT'S FINE. BUT WE'LL GET THAT FIRST BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE OXYGENATE STANDARD.

Beck: ANOTHER ISSUE THAT MAY COME UP, THAT YOU MAY WANT TO COME UP, AS THE CHAIR OF THE SENATE AG COMMITTEE, IS LIVESTOCK CONTROL. YOU HAVE BEEN THE PAST PUSHER OF FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS. USUALLY IT'S BEEN A STATE ISSUE. DO THERE NEED TO BE FEDERAL CONTROLS ON LARGE ANIMAL CONFINEMENT OPERATIONS?

Harkin: WELL, RIGHT NOW I'M LOOKING AT THE ROLE THAT WE CAN PLAY IN FARM BILL ON WHAT WE CALL CAFOs, CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS -- THAT'S THE ACRONYM WE USE -- AND WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN HELP SOME OF THESE FARMERS IN MEETING ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS. I THINK WE CAN AND I BELIEVE WE SHOULD.

Beck: HELP AS IN PAYMENTS?

Harkin: YES, YES. THIS WOULD BE IN PAYMENTS AND IN SUPPORT. KEEP IN MIND OUR LIVESTOCK FARMERS IN PAST FARM BILLS HAVE REALLY NOT GOTTEN MUCH OUT OF OUR FARM BILLS. THEY'VE BEEN GEARED TOWARDS OUR GRAINS: COTTON, RICE, SUGAR, THAT TYPE OF THING, COMMODITIES. BUT OUR LIVESTOCK PEOPLE HAVE GOTTEN PRECIOUS LITTLE OUT OF IT, AND I INTEND TO ENSURE THAT OUR LIVESTOCK PRODUCERS HAVE EQUAL FOOTING, ALONG WITH OTHER COMMODITIES, IN GOVERNMENT SUPPORTS AND HELP THAT THEY NEED TO MEET ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS.

Glover: WELL, IN ADDITION TO SOME FUNDING TO HELP FARMERS MEET ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS, DO THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS NEED TO BE TOUGHENED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL AND ENFORCED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL AS WELL?

Harkin: I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK OUR ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS ARE FINE THE WAY THEY ARE. I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE LIVESTOCK PRODUCERS WHO AREN'T MAKING A BUNDLE OF MONEY RIGHT NOW, THAT THEY GET SOME HELP IN MEETING THESE ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS. ALL OF SOCIETY BENEFITS WHEN WE DO THAT, MIKE. SO I THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO BE FORTHCOMING IN HELPING THEM MEET THOSE OBLIGATIONS.

Beck: WOULD THERE BE CAPS ON WHO GETS THOSE BENEFITS, ON HOW LARGE THE PRODUCER WOULD BE?

Harkin: WELL, THAT'S THE POINT. RIGHT NOW, JENEANE, AS YOU KNOW, UNDER THE CAFO RULES, I MENTIONED THAT IF YOU HAVE OVER, LET'S SAY, A THOUSAND HEAD, I THINK THAT'S THE CUTOFF RIGHT NOW, A THOUSAND HEAD OF LIVESTOCK, CATTLE, THAT YOU'RE NOT ELIGIBLE. WELL, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN OKAY TWENTY YEARS AGO BUT THAT'S NOT SUFFICIENT TODAY. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO RAISE THAT LEVEL FROM 1,000 TO MAYBE 3,000, 2,500 I'M NOT CERTAIN. I DON'T HAVE THE CUTOFF BUT IT HAS TO BE RAISED. THESE PEOPLE NEED SOME HELP IN MEETING THESE ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS.

Glover: LET'S LOOK AT LARGER FOOD PRODUCTION ISSUES. THERE ARE INCREASING CRITICISMS THAT FOOD PRODUCTION SYSTEM IN AMERICA IS INCREASINGLY CONTROLLED BY A FEW VERY LARGE CORPORATIONS. DOES THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NEED TO BEGIN LOOKING INTO THE CONTROL OF THE FOOD PRODUCTION INDUSTRY IN AMERICA?

Harkin: ONE OF THE THINGS I DID IN THE LAST CONGRESS, MIKE, WAS TO GET THE LEGISLATION ENACTED TO GET THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION TO PUT IN PLACE A COUNCIL, A SEPARATE ATTORNEY IN A DIVISION IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, JUST TO FOCUS ON AGRICULTURAL CONCENTRATION AND MONOPOLY PRACTICES IN AGRICULTURE. NOW, THAT OFFICE HAS ONLY BEEN THERE, I THINK, MAYBE, TWO YEARS AT THE MOST, MAYBE THREE. BUT THEY'RE ALREADY BEGINNING TO TAKE THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND LOOK AT SOME OF THESE CONCENTRATED OPERATIONS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO TAKE SOME ACTION AGAINST THEM. SO I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT ALSO IN THE FARM BILL. THAT'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER TITLE OF THE FARM BILL, AND THAT'S AG CONCENTRATION AND WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT. THAT'S WHY I FEEL SO STRONGLY THAT WE HAVE TO PROVIDE THE KIND OF EQUITY CAPITAL. AND SENATOR CRAIG, A REPUBLICAN OF IDAHO, AND I HAVE A BILL IN TOGETHER TO HELP SET UP AN EQUITY CAPITAL FUND THAT WOULD THEN BE MATCHED BY PRIVATE MONIES, MAYBE YOU'D SAY FROM THE FARM CREDIT SERVICE SYSTEM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WOULD BEGIN TO HELP FARMERS FORM THE KIND OF COOPERATIVES THEY NEED TO ADD VALUE AND TO MARKET THEIR PRODUCTS TO GET A BETTER PART OF THAT CONSUMER DOLLAR. I THINK THAT IS ONE WAY IN WHICH WE CAN HELP GIVE FARMERS A BETTER FOOTHOLD AGAINST THE BIG OPERATIONS.

Beck: WE TALK ABOUT CAPITAL AND FARM PAYMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WILL THERE BE ENOUGH MONEY -- RECENTLY THE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT SIGNED A $1.3-TRILLION TAX CUT. YOU DID NOT VOTE FOR THAT. YOU WERE AGAINST IT. DOES IT LEAVE MONEY FOR OTHER THINGS?

Harkin: WELL, I'M CONCERNED THAT, BECAUSE OF THE BUDGET AND THE TAX BILL WE PASSED, THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE FACING SIGNIFICANT BUDGET CONSTRAINTS, ESPECIALLY IN AGRICULTURE IN THE FUTURE. THIS TAX BILL IS GOING TO COME BACK TO HAUNT US. ALREADY THERE ARE INDICATIONS FROM THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET THAT WE COULD BE FACING DEFICITS AS EARLY AS A YEAR AFTER NEXT. WHAT HAPPENED TO THIS WONDERFUL SURPLUS WE HAD?! ALL OF A SUDDEN IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GONE AND, YET, WE'RE FACING SOME PRETTY TOUGH TIMES IN AGRICULTURE. WE NEED TO MEET OUR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS. WE NEED TO PUT MONEY INTO CONSERVATION. WE NEED TO HELP FARMERS PRODUCE ENERGY AND SET UP THE SYSTEMS THAT WILL HELP US PRODUCE RENEWABLE ENERGIES IN THIS COUNTRY. WE NEED TO HELP REBUILD OUR RURAL COMMUNITIES WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS. THESE ARE THE THINGS I'M COMMITTED TO, AND I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS TAX BILL MAY MAKE IT PRETTY TOUGH TO DO THAT.

Borg: WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAY BE AFFECTING THAT OUTLOOK FOR BUDGET SURPLUSES IS THE HEALTH OF THE ECONOMY. YOU'D HAVE TO SAY IT'S STILL GUARDED RIGHT NOW, WITH COMPANIES ANNOUNCING LAYOFFS. ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH WHAT ALAN GREENSPAN AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE HAVE BEEN DOING?

Harkin: WELL, I WISH THEY HAD STARTED SOONER. OF COURSE, I'M A LOW-INTEREST-RATE GUY, DEAN. I ALWAYS HAVE BEEN AND I'VE FELT FOR A LONG TIME THAT THE FED -- AND MY RECORD SHOWS I'VE SPOKE OUT ON THE FLOOR A NUMBER OF TIMES ABOUT THIS -- THAT THE FED KEPT THE INTEREST RATES ARTIFICIALLY HIGH FOR TOO LONG.

Borg: LONG-TERM INTEREST RATES ARE RISING, IN FACT.

Harkin: AS A MATTER OF FACT, YES. THAT IS BECAUSE THE BOND MARKETS ARE SMART. THE BOND MARKETS HAVE SEEN WHAT WE'VE DONE WITH THE TAX BILL. THEY CAN LOOK AHEAD AND THEY KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN SEVERAL YEARS FROM NOW. AND THE BOND MARKETS, THAT'S THE LONG-TERM INTEREST RATES. THEY'RE GOING UP. THEY'RE NOT COMING DOWN. WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LESS INVESTMENT IN HOUSING, FEWER AND FEWER FAMILIES ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH THE DOWN PAYMENT THEY NEED TO OWN THEIR OWN HOME. IT'S GOING TO SLOW DOWN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. WHEN YOU SLOW THAT DOWN, THAT SLOWS DOWN EVERYTHING IN OUR SOCIETY. I THINK THAT'S JUST THE WRONG WAY TO GO. I HAVE TO ADD THIS. AMERICANS -- IT'S ALWAYS BEEN SAID THAT WE HAVE A LOW SAVINGS RATE, ONE OF THE LOWEST IN THE WORLD. WELL, THAT'S TRUE IF YOU DON'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT HOME OWNERSHIP. IF YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT HOME OWNERSHIP, WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD SAVINGS RATE. MOST MIDDLE-CLASS AMERICANS HAVE THEIR SAVINGS IN THEIR HOME, THEIR EQUITY IN THEIR HOUSE. TO ME, THAT'S WHERE WE OUGHT TO BE GOING IN THIS COUNTRY, PROVIDE MORE HOME OWNERSHIP. IT HELPS COMMUNITIES, IT HELPS FAMILIES, IT HELP OUR ECONOMY. YET, WITH THIS TAX BILL THAT WAS PASSED, WITH THE HITS IT'S GOING TO TAKE ON THE ECONOMY IN THE FUTURE -- AS YOU POINTED OUT, THE BOND MARKETS ARE NOT COMING DOWN, LONG-TERM MORTGAGE RATES WILL NOT COME DOWN, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO SLOW DOWN THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING IN THIS COUNTRY.

Glover: ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT A LOT IN THE CAMPAIGN WAS APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT. WE'VE ENTERED THE SUPREME COURT TERM. APPARENTLY THERE ARE GOING TO BE NO RESIGNATIONS FROM THE COURT AT THIS POINT. WHAT APPROACH WILL THE SENATE TAKE, NOW THAT IT'S IN DEMOCRATIC CONTROL, TO JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS FROM THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, PARTICULARLY SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENTS?

Harkin: I THINK ONE WORD WOULD SUM IT UP, MIKE, "BALANCE." BALANCE ON THE SUPREME COURT. WHOEVER THAT NEXT NOMINEE IS IN THE SUPREME COURT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE SCRUTINIZED VERY CAREFULLY. I'M NOT SO CONCERNED ABOUT THE IDEOLOGY ITSELF, BUT IS THIS PERSON REALLY JUDICIOUS: CAN IT BE SHOWN THAT THIS IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WILL TAKE ALL SIDES INTO ACCOUNT AND MAYBE EVEN GO AGAINST HIS OR HER OWN PHILOSOPHY ONCE IN A WHILE; YOU KNOW, TO PROVIDE THAT KIND OF BALANCE. I DON'T WANT A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WHO JUST MARCHES DOWN ONE WAY AND THAT'S THE END OF IT. I WANT SOMEONE WHO CAN BALANCE EVERYTHING. I THINK THAT'S THE KEY WORD.

Glover: ANOTHER QUESTION COMING OUT OF THE NATION'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. ATTORNEY GENERAL ASHCROFT IS IN IOWA TODAY. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME SUGGESTIONS THAT HE'S BACKING AWAY FROM THE TOBACCO SETTLEMENT; HE'S BACKING AWAY FROM MICROSOFT, PURSUING THAT ANTITRUST CASE. ARE YOU CONFIDENT THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS NOT BEING POLITICIZED?

Harkin: WELL, IT'S A LITTLE TOO EARLY TO TELL YET. AS YOU KNOW, I HAD MY RESERVATIONS ABOUT JOHN ASHCROFT BEING ATTORNEY GENERAL AND DID NOT SUPPORT THAT NOMINATION. BUT AGAIN, IT'S STILL TOO EARLY TO TELL.

Glover: ARE YOU TROUBLED BY THE TOBACCO SETTLEMENT?

Harkin: I AM. I JUST WISH THE PRESIDENT WOULD LISTEN TO SECRETARY TOMMY THOMPSON OF WISCONSIN, WHO HAS BASICALLY SAID THE FDA SHOULD HAVE JURISDICTION OVER REGULATING TOBACCO. LISTEN, I'VE GOTTEN TO KNOW GOVERNOR THOMPSON -- OR SECRETARY THOMPSON, AND I WISH THEY'D LISTEN TO HIM.

Beck: THE CHANGE IN CONTROL WILL MEAN THAT DEMOCRATS GET TO SET THE AGENDA IN THE SENATE, WHICH MAY CHANGE PRESIDENT BUSH'S AGENDA BECAUSE HE HAS TO WORK WITH BOTH PARTIES NOW. WHAT WILL WE SEE OUT OF THE SENATE, AND HOW MUCH POWER DO YOU HAVE TO GET THOSE THINGS, ONCE THEY'RE OUT OF THE SENATE, PASSED?

Harkin: WELL, I THINK, JENEANE, WE BROUGHT UP THE PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS FIRST, AND WE MOVED IT THROUGH. IT TOOK A LONG TIME. WE HAD LONG DAYS, BUT WE GOT IT THROUGH. WHEN WE GET BACK AFTER THE FOURTH OF JULY BREAK, WE HAVE ALL OR APPROPRIATION BILLS -- IN FACT, I HAVE MY APPROPRIATION BILL TO BRING UP ON EDUCATION. BUT SENATOR DASCHLE SAID WE'RE GOING TO BRING OUT A MINIMUM WAGE. IT'S TIME TO PUT THE MINIMUM WAGE BILL OUT THERE AND GET AN INCREASE IN THE MINIMUM WAGE. IT'S LONG, LONG OVERDUE. AND THE THIRD THING WE'RE GOING TO BRING UP THIS YEAR -- WE MAY NOT GET TO IT BEFORE AUGUST. I HOPE WE DO BUT, CERTAINLY, WE WILL IN SEPTEMBER -- AND THAT IS THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT FOR THE ELDERLY UNDER MEDICARE. THAT'S ANOTHER KEY PART OF THIS PACKAGE THAT WE WANT TO GET THROUGH THIS YEAR.

Glover: PRESIDENT BUSH HAS HAD ABOUT SIX MONTHS IN OFFICE. GIVE HIM A RATING. HOW HAS HE DONE SO FAR? WHERE HAS HE FAILED? WHERE HAS HE SURPRISED YOU BY DOING WELL?

Harkin: WELL, I THINK THAT PRESIDENT BUSH CAME IN -- EVERYONE THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO BE THE GREAT CONCILIATOR, THAT HE WAS GOING TO BE VERY MODERATE. BUT I'VE BEEN SADLY DISAPPOINTED IN THAT. IN FACT, HIS AGENDA HAS EVEN BEEN MORE AGGRESSIVELY CONSERVATIVE THAN RONALD REAGAN'S WAS: THE WHOLE DRILLING IN THE ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, THE ARSENIC STANDARDS, THE CLEAN AIR STANDARDS, HOW HE'S JUST PUTTING DOWN THE WHOLE KYOTO TREATY AGREEMENT, HIS MOVES ON COURT APPOINTMENTS. EVERY ONE OF THE -- HE JUST ROLLED OUT A BUNCH OF PROPOSED APPOINTMENTS TO THE BENCH, EVERY ONE OF THEM FAIRLY RIGID CONSERVATIVES. ALL OF THEM ANTICHOICE. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM ANTICHOICE. SO I THINK HE MOVED VERY FAR TO THE RIGHT FOR SOME REASON. I DON'T KNOW WHY. AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME FOR HIM TO COME BACK. AND NOW HE'S PUT THAT THREAT OUT THERE ON THE PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS THAT HE WANTS TO VETO THAT. THAT'S NOT THE MARK OF A CONCILIATOR.

Glover: HOW MUCH OF THIS IS PURE FOUR-YEAR CYCLE POLITICS: THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF HIS PRESIDENCY, HE DIVES TO THE RIGHT TO APPEASE CONSERVATIVES; THE SECOND TWO YEARS HE DIVES TO THE CENTER TO APPEAL TO MODERATES?

Harkin: ESPECIALLY WITH THE LAST ELECTION, THERE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ANY DIVE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I THINK THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY WANTED US TO WORK TOGETHER. THEY WANTED MODERATION. THEY WANTED US NOT TO VEER SHARPLY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I THINK THAT WAS THE LESSON OF THE LAST ELECTION. AND BEING PRESIDENT, HE HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO SORT OF SET THAT TONE IN WASHINGTON, AND HE DIDN'T DO IT.

Beck: DESPITE YOUR CRITICISMS, ARE THERE CANDIDATES ALREADY COMING FORWARD THAT YOU BELIEVE COULD BEAT PRESIDENT BUSH IN FOUR YEARS?

Harkin: OH, GOSH, I DON'T KNOW. IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL.

Beck: YOU CAN'T NAME NAMES FOR US YET?

Harkin: I DON'T KNOW. IT'S WAY TOO EARLY TO GET INTO THAT. MY GOSH, HE'S ONLY BEEN THERE SIX MONTHS. I WOULDN'T EVEN WANT TO SPECULATE AT THIS POINT.

Glover: IT WOULDN'T BE AN OFFICIAL "IOWA PRESS" SHOW IF WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT JUST PURE POLITICS FOR A BIT. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT. IT IS ONLY FOUR YEARS FROM NOW UNTIL WE HAVE AN ELECTION COMING. THERE ARE PEOPLE ALREADY COMING OUT. THE CHAIR OF THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE HAS BEEN HERE AND SAID THAT IOWA WILL INDEED BE THE FIRST TEST THE NEXT TIME AROUND.

Harkin: THAT'S RIGHT.

Glover: WHAT WILL YOUR ROLE BE IN THAT? YOU'RE ONE OF THE LEADING DEMOCRATS IN THIS STATE. WILL YOUR ROLE BE TO BE A NEUTRAL FORCE, TO STAY OUT OF IT, TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GET IN, TO ENDORSE SOMEBODY, TO TRY TO HELP SOMEBODY? WHAT WILL YOU ROLE BE?

Harkin: WELL, RIGHT NOW, MIKE, MY ROLE IS AT DEMOCRATIC MEETINGS, I HAND OUT MAPS OF IOWA JUST SO THEY CAN FIND THEIR WAY --

Glover: IS THERE A DEMAND FOR THOSE MAPS?

Harkin: OH, YOU BET. THEY GO LIKE HOTCAKES. YOU KNOW, WE WELCOME EVERYONE HERE. I KNOW SENATOR EDWARDS, SENATOR DASCHLE, SENATOR KERREY, BILL BRADLEY, A LOT OF DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN HERE, AND WE'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF THEM OVER THE NEXT COUPLE, THREE YEARS. WE WELCOME THEM ALL. WE WELCOME THEM TO COME, BRING MONEY, SPEND A LOT WHEN YOU'RE HERE TO HELP OUR ECONOMY, AND WE'LL GIVE EVERYONE A FAIR SHOT AT IT. THAT'S SORT OF MY ROLE; WE'LL GIVE EVERYONE A FAIR SHOT.

Glover: PREVIEW WHAT YOU HAVE COMING OVER THE NEXT YEAR OR SO. CONGRESSMAN GANSKE HAS ANNOUNCED HE'S GOING TO RUN AGAINST YOU. GIVE US A PREVIEW OF THAT ELECTION.

Harkin: WELL, AGAIN, JUST AS I THINK FOUR YEARS IS TOO FAR AHEAD TO BE THINKING ABOUT CAMPAIGNS, I STILL THINK IT'S A LITTLE TOO EARLY FOR THE NEXT 2002 CAMPAIGN. AS YOU POINTED OUT, BECAUSE I NOW CHAIR THE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE AND I NOW -- FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE 1910 AN IOWAN CHAIRING IT. AND NOW THAT I CHAIRED THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE FOR EDUCATION AND HEALTH, I HAVE A LOT OF NEW RESPONSIBILITIES. WHAT I INTEND TO DO THE REMAINDER OF THIS YEAR IS TO GET AS MUCH INPUT AS I CAN FROM MY FELLOW IOWANS. BECAUSE OF MY POSITION NOW, I NEED INPUT MORE THAN EVER FROM MY FELLOW IOWANS ABOUT AGRICULTURE AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN RURAL AMERICA, WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN HEALTH, IN EDUCATION. TO ME, THIS IS MY ROLE RIGHT NOW IS TO SEEK INPUT FROM IOWANS. THE CAMPAIGN, IT WILL START NEXT YEAR.

Beck: CAN YOU ALREADY DRAW DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN YOURSELF AND HIM? ODDLY ENOUGH, ON THE PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS, YOU'RE MUCH CLOSER TOGETHER THAN ONE WOULD EXPECT A REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT TO BE. BUT ARE THERE ISSUES WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO BE VERY FAR APART?

Harkin: WELL, I'M SURE THERE ARE. HIS RECORD AND MINE ARE NOT THE SAME. I WILL RUN ON MY RECORD OF SUPPORT FOR FARMS AND FOR RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, FOR MY HELP FOR THE ELDERLY. I JUST NOTICED THAT WHEN HE CAME INTO CONGRESS, HE VOTED TO CUT MEDICARE BY A LOT; I THINK BY ABOUT $270 BILLION. EVEN MY LAST OPPONENT, CONGRESSMAN LIGHTFOOT, NEVER VOTED TO CUT MEDICARE. SO THERE'S THOSE KINDS OF ISSUES, I THINK, THAT WILL COME OUT THAT WILL SHOW THE DIFFERENCE CLEARLY.

Glover: ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S HAPPENED IN POLITICS IN IOWA RECENTLY IS THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR HAVE APPROVED NEW CONGRESSIONAL AND LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS. HOW DO DEMOCRATS DEAL WITH THOSE NEW CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS? WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THEM? I KNOW THEY DON'T AFFECT YOU PERSONALLY.

Harkin: NO, THEY DON'T AFFECT ME PERSONALLY.

Glover: YOUR DISTRICT DIDN'T CHANGE.

Harkin: THAT'S RIGHT. I STILL HAVE THE BORDERS. I THINK DEMOCRATS, QUITE FRANKLY, CAME OUT, OVERALL, A LITTLE BIT BETTER, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEMOGRAPHICS AND THE VOTING PATTERNS OF THOSE NEW DISTRICTS. I THINK WE HAVE GREAT CHANCES NOW IN THE FIRST, THE SECOND, THE THIRD, AND FOURTH DISTRICTS, ALL OF THOSE, EVERY ONE OF THOSE. NOW, THE FIFTH DISTRICT IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT TOUGH -- LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT IT -- ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF IOWA. THAT WOULD BE PRETTY TOUGH FOR A DEMOCRAT, BUT NOT TOTALLY UNWINNABLE. I'M SURE THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE SAID THAT I COULD NEVER WIN THE OLD FIFTH DISTRICT WHEN I RAN THERE BECAUSE IT WAS HEAVILY REPUBLICAN, BUT I DID AND WE WON IT FOR TEN YEARS. SO I THINK, ALL IN ALL, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE REALLY GOOD CANDIDATES ON OUR SIDE IN THESE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS BECAUSE THE MAKEUP IS SUCH THAT A DEMOCRAT WILL HAVE A GOOD CHANCE AT EVERY ONE OF THOSE.

Glover: ONE OF YOUR COLLEAGUES, CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, HAS DECIDED TO MOVE INTO THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT THAT INCLUDES DES MOINES. THERE'S BEEN SOME CONTROVERSY ABOUT THAT. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT MOVE?

Harkin: WELL, LOOK, LEONARD BOSWELL AND I HAVE BEEN FRIENDS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. HE IS A GREAT CONGRESSMAN. MY BIGGEST DISAPPOINTMENT IS I LOSE HIM. HE'S BEEN MY CONGRESSMAN, BECAUSE I LIVE IN WARREN COUNTY. HE'S BEEN MY CONGRESSMAN FOR THE LAST TEN YEARS. BUT THIS WAS JUST A TERRIBLE DECISION THAT HE HAD TO MAKE. HIS DISTRICT WAS SPLIT UP, I THINK, IN THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT PARTS. ONE DISTRICT HE HAD A NUMBER OF COUNTIES, I THINK, IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH HE HAS MOVED DOWN INTO, WHICH COMPRISES POLK COUNTY IN CENTRAL IOWA, I THINK HE HAS SEVEN OF THOSE TWELVE COUNTIES THAT HE ALREADY REPRESENTS. SO IT WAS A TOUGH DECISION FOR HIM... NOT AN EASY DECISION, I'M SURE, BUT ONE THAT HE HAD TO MAKE VERY PAINFULLY.

Borg: IT'S NOT EASY FOR ME BUT I HAVE TO CUT US OFF HERE BECAUSE WE'RE OUT TIME. THANK YOU FOR SPENDING TIME WITH US ON THINK SUNDAY.

Harkin: YOU BET. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DEAN.

Borg: ON OUR NEXT EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS," OUR FOCUS SHIFTS BACK TO IOWA'S CAPITAL, REVIEWING THE WORK OF THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. JOINING US, THE DNR'S NEW DIRECTOR, JEFF VONK, WILL DISCUSS THE AGENCY'S MISSION AND HOW THAT MISSION IS CHALLENGED BY STATE BUDGET CUTS. THAT'S NEXT SUNDAY AT NOON AND 7:00 HERE ON STATEWIDE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION. THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS." I'M DEAN BORG. THANKS FOR JOINING US TODAY.

Narrator: FUNDING FOR "IOWA PRESS" WAS 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.