| Home |  |
| Senate President Jeff Lamberti and Democratic Minority Leader Mike Gronstal
IOWA PRESS #3140>> Borg: AT THE IOWA STATEHOUSE, GOVERNOR TOM VILSACK'S VETOES FUELED NEW POLITICAL ACRIMONY WITH THE REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED LEGISLATURE. COMMENTS ON THE PRACTICAL AND POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS FROM SENATE PRESIDENT JEFF LAMBERTI AND DEMOCRATIC MINORITY LEADER MIKE GRONSTAL ON THIS EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS."
FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS PROVIDED BY "FRIENDS," THE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION... GENERATIONS OF FAMILIES AND FRIENDS WHO FEEL PASSIONATE ABOUT THE PROGRAMS THEY WATCH ON IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS. ON STATEWIDE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION, THIS IS THE FRIDAY, MAY 28 EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS." HERE IS DEAN BORG. Borg: SINCE IOWA'S 80TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADJOURNED IN MID APRIL, GOVERNOR TOM VILSACK EXTENSIVELY USED LINE-ITEM VETO POWERS TO CARVE UP THE LEGISLATURE'S WORK. PHILOSOPHICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DEMOCRAT VILSACK AND REPUBLICAN LEGISLATIVE LEADERS DOMINATED THE ENTIRE SESSION. BUT VETO POWER ESSENTIALLY GIVES THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH THE LAST WORD, AND THAT HAS INTENSIFIED POLARIZATION BETWEEN THE TWO BRANCHES OF STATE GOVERNMENT. WE'VE INVITED TWO LEGISLATIVE LEADERS TO THE "IOWA PRESS" TABLE FOR SOME PERSPECTIVE. ANKENY REPUBLICAN JEFF LAMBERTI IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE IOWA SENATE, AND THE SENATE'S DEMOCRATIC MINORITY IS LED BY MIKE GRONSTAL OF COUNCIL BLUFFS. GENTLEMEN, WELCOME BACK TO "IOWA PRESS." Gronstal: THANKS FOR HAVING US. Lamberti: THANKS. Borg: AND ALSO WITH US HERE AT THE IOWA PRESS TABLE: "DES MOINES REGISTER" POLITICAL COLUMNIST DAVID YEPSEN; AND "RADIO IOWA" NEWS DIRECTOR KAY HENDERSON. Henderson: GENTLEMEN, IT'S AN ELECTION YEAR. YOU'RE GOING TO GO OUT AND MAKE SOME PROMISES TO VOTERS. SENATOR LAMBERTI, LET'S START WITH YOU. WHAT PROMISES WILL REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS BE MAKING VOTERS THIS SEASON? Lamberti: I THINK THE PLACE WHERE WE'LL START IS: WE'LL GO OUT TO THE VOTERS AND WE'LL TELL THEM THAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO WHAT WE'VE DONE IN TERMS OF BALANCING THE BUDGET; MAKING SURE WE USE PRUDENT FISCAL POLICY; WE WON'T RAISE YOUR TAXES, DESPITE A CALL THIS YEAR FROM THE GOVERNOR TO RAISE TAXES BY ABOUT $300 MILLION; AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE A GOOD COUNTERBALANCE TO THE GOVERNOR; AND THAT AT THE SAME TIME WE CAN BALANCE OUR BUDGET, NOT RAISE TAXES, WE CAN FUND OUR PRIORITIES. WE'VE SHOWN THAT WE CAN DO IT IN THE PAST, AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT. THE OTHER THEME I THINK WE'RE GOING TO TAKE -- AND SOME OF THIS DOES COME FROM THE VETOES THAT THE GOVERNOR HAD -- WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HEALTH CARE, WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HEALTH CARE NOT JUST FOR THE ELDERLY BUT FOR ALL IOWA FAMILIES. AND WE THOUGHT WE HAD SOME PRETTY GOOD LEGISLATION THIS YEAR TO GET AT THE COST OF HEALTH INSURANCE AND PROVIDE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE SOUNDING THAT THEME ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL AS WELL. Henderson: SENATOR GRONSTAL, WHAT MESSAGE -- PROMISES WILL DEMOCRATS BE MAKING VOTERS? Gronstal: WELL, WE'LL KEEP THE SAME PROMISES WE'VE BEEN KEEPING, AND THAT'S THE ONES TO MAKE EDUCATION NUMBER ONE, TO REINVEST IN OUR ECONOMY BY CONTINUING EFFORTS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THIS STATE. AND WE WON'T JUST SAY THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO RAISE TAXES. THE REPUBLICANS -- IN FACT, THAT'S GREAT CAMPAIGN RHETORIC, HE SAYS $300 MILLION FROM THE GOVERNOR. WELL, IN FACT, THE IOWA FARM BUREAU SAYS THE REPUBLICANS HAVE RAISED PROPERTY TAXES $275 MILLION IN THE LAST THREE YEARS DIRECT BECAUSE OF LEGISLATIVE ACTION, A TOTAL PROPERTY TAX INCREASE OF ABOUT $475 MILLION. THAT IS GREAT CAMPAIGN RHETORIC THE REPUBLICANS TROTTED OUT EVERY TIME, BUT LAST YEAR THEY DIDN'T BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET. IT WASN'T SOUND FISCAL POLICY. THEY UNBALANCED EVERY CITY AND COUNTY BUDGET IN THE STATE, A THOUSAND JURISDICTIONS. THEY TOOK OUT THEIR BUDGET PROBLEMS ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. Henderson: SENATOR LAMBERTI? Lamberti: WELL, THE INTERESTING THING AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS, WE BALANCED OUR BUDGET BY SPENDING OUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT. AND THAT'S NOT THE THING YOU WANT TO DO, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY PREFERABLE TO RAISING TAXES. AT THE SAME TIME WE TALK ABOUT WE WON'T RAISE TAXES, MIKE AND HIS COLLEAGUES OFFERED AMENDMENTS ON THE BUDGET TO SPEND AN ADDITIONAL $180 MILLION. NOW, YOU EITHER HAVE TO OFFER THE PEOPLE CUTS TO SPEND THAT ADDITIONAL MONEY, OR YOU'VE GOT TO FIND ADDITIONAL REVENUE, YOU'VE GOT TO RAISE TAXES. ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF BEING IN THE MINORITY IS YOU'RE NOT REALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR BALANCING THE STATE BUDGET. BUT I THINK THE PEOPLE CAN SEE THROUGH THAT RHETORIC AND UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND MORE MONEY ON EVERY PROGRAM, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH MONEY, AND THAT MEANS HIGHER TAXES. Yepsen: SENATOR GRONSTAL, I'D LIKE TO LOOK AHEAD, IF WE CAN, TO NEXT SESSION, RATHER THAN JUST REPLAY THE OLD SESSION. WHAT ISSUES DO YOU SEE THAT THE NEXT LEGISLATURE WILL CONFRONT, REGARDLESS OF WHICH PARTY CONTROLS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY? WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT? Gronstal: WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER ISSUE HERE, AND IT IS THE PARTISANSHIP IN THE LEGISLATURE BETWEEN THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, AND I THINK THAT'S UNFORTUNATE. AND, DEAN, AT THE OPENING OF THE PROGRAM, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE GOVERNOR'S VETOES. ADDING TO THAT, I'D CONTEND IT WAS THE REPUBLICANS' UNWILLINGNESS TO LISTEN. THEY PASSED A NUMBER OF BILLS THIS SESSION THAT THEY KNEW THE GOVERNOR WOULD VETO. I GOT UP ON THE FLOOR AND SAID THAT -- Yepsen: OKAY. Gronstal: SO I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THE LEGISLATURE HAS BECOME WAY TOO PARTISAN. WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AND START WORKING WITH EACH OTHER. ON A FEW ISSUES THIS YEAR, WE WORKED TOGETHER WITH REPUBLICANS TO PASS SOMETHING THAT WORKED. WE WORKED TOGETHER ON THE GAMING ISSUE AND CAME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT IS ACTUALLY PRETTY GOOD LEGISLATION AND PROBABLY DEALS WITH ALL OF THE INTERESTS IN THAT. SO I THINK NUMBER ONE NEXT SESSION, REGARDLESS OF WHO'S IN CONTROL, OUGHT TO DROP THE PARTISANSHIP. AND THE VETOES CAME NOT BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR WAS TRYING TO POKE THE REPUBLICANS IN THE EYE; IT WAS BECAUSE THE REPUBLICANS WERE TRYING TO POKE THE GOVERNOR IN THE EYE, PASSING BILLS THAT THEY KNEW FROM THE START HE WOULD VETO. Yepsen: SENATOR LAMBERTI? Lamberti: WELL, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE VETOES. ON A FRIDAY THE GOVERNOR VETOED 18 BILLS, WHICH IS MORE THAN I THINK BRANSTAD EVER VETOED IN SIXTEEN YEARS. BUT LET'S LOOK AT THEM. FOURTEEN OR FIFTEEN OUT OF THE EIGHTEEN PASSED WITH AT LEAST 30 VOTES IN THE SENATE AND AT LEAST 60 VOTES IN THE HOUSE. FOUR OR FIVE OF THEM PASSED WITHOUT A SINGLE DISSENTING VOTE IN EITHER CHAMBER. WE HAD VOTES ON THE 14 AND 15 WERE, YOU KNOW, 100, 125 OF THE 150 MEMBERS VOTED FOR THIS. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT PARTISANSHIP. WE OVERWHELMINGLY PASSED THOSE BILLS WITH BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. THE GOVERNOR STILL CHOSE TO VETO THOSE BILLS. Yepsen: PERHAPS NEITHER OF YOU HEARD MY QUESTION. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN REPLAYING WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST SESSION. I'M INTERESTED IN WHAT ISSUES YOU FEEL ARE COMING AT IOWA IN THE FUTURE. SO LET'S TRY AGAIN. SENATOR GRONSTAL, WHAT ISSUES ARE COMING AT IOWA IN THE FUTURE? Gronstal: YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S A HOST OF ISSUES FACING IOWA. I THINK SOME OF THE IMPORTANT ISSUES ARE IN THE AREA OF EDUCATION. I THINK WE'VE SEEN -- WE'VE SEEN A TURNAROUND IN TEST SCORES, A POSITIVE TURNAROUND IN TEST SCORES IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. BUT NOW WE'RE CROWDING CLASSROOMS AGAIN AND WE'RE INCREASING CLASS SIZE AGAIN BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE RESOURCES FROM THE STATE. SO I THINK K-12 EDUCATION IS IMPORTANT. I THINK CRITICAL TO THE FUTURE OF IOWA IS A STRONGER COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM. AND I THINK THE LEGISLATURE UNDER THIS ADMINISTRATION, THE LAST ADMINISTRATION, UNDER DEMOCRATS IN THE LEGISLATURE, UNDER REPUBLICANS IN THE LEGISLATURE, I THINK COMMUNITY COLLEGES HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY NEGLECTED. THEY ARE THE ENGINES OF ECONOMIC GROWTH. I ALSO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT -- BECAUSE I DO THINK THERE ARE SOME SIGNS OUR ECONOMY IS TURNING AROUND -- I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONTINUE OUR COMMITMENT TO REBUILDING IOWA'S CRUMBLING INFRASTRUCTURE. SO THERE ARE GUBERNATORIAL VETOES THAT I DISAGREE WITH. I'D LIKE TO SEE MORE HAPPEN IN THE WAY OF INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE STATE. AND AT A TIME WHEN THE ECONOMY IS STARTING TO TURN IS THE TIME TO MAKE THAT COMMITMENT AS THE ECONOMY GROWS, AND THEN YOU CAN LIVE WITH IT. Yepsen: SENATOR LAMBERTI, SAME QUESTION TO YOU; WHAT DO YOU SEE COMING AT US? Lamberti: AS WE GO INTO THE FUTURE, I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING -- AND IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE STRUGGLED WITH FOR THE PAST COUPLE YEARS -- IS HOW DO WE GROW OUR ECONOMY. I DON'T CARE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EDUCATION, K-12, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, INFRASTRUCTURE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A STRONG ECONOMY IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE RESOURCES TO PUT INTO THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK NEXT YEAR KIND OF TO WHERE WE WERE A YEAR AGO WHERE OUR FOCUS WAS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. WE PASSED A PACKAGE LAST YEAR THAT WE THOUGHT WAS VERY COMPREHENSIVE. WE CALLED IT OUR THREE-LEGGED STOOL WHERE WE HAD TAX REFORM, REGULATORY REFORM, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS. WITH THE GOVERNOR'S VETOES, WE WERE LEFT WITH ONLY THE POT OF MONEY TO HAND OUT IN FORMS OF GRANTS AND LOANS. WE BELIEVE THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRY TO CREATE AN ECONOMY ONLY ON THE BACKS OF HANDOUTS TO BUSINESSES, IT'S GOING TO FAIL. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE ALL THREE OF THOSE. AND SO WE'LL COME BACK WITH THE SAME KIND OF REGULATORY REFORM APPROACH THAT WE HAD LAST YEAR AND ALSO TAX REFORM, BOTH INCOME AND PROPERTY. Yepsen: ANY IDEA -- REAL QUICKLY, SENATOR, ANY IDEA OF WHEN THAT -- YOU'RE IN COURT BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT RIGHT NOW. OBVIOUSLY SOME OF WHAT YOU DO NEXT YEAR WILL BE DECIDED BY WHAT THE COURT DECIDES. ANY IDEA, SENATOR, WHEN THE COURT IS GOING TO RULE ON YOUR CASE? Lamberti: WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHEN WE'LL GET A DECISION, BUT THE ORAL ARGUMENTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN HELD. SO IT COULD OCCUR NEXT MONTH. IT COULD OCCUR SEVERAL MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD, BUT MY GUESS WOULD BE SOMETIME BEFORE THE ELECTION AND CERTAINLY SOMETIME BEFORE THE END THE YEAR, PLENTY OF TIME FOR US TO KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT WHEN WE GO BACK INTO SESSION IN JANUARY. Borg: SENATOR LAMBERTI, AS YOU LOOK BACK AT THE GOVERNOR'S WORK IN VETOING SOME OF THE LEGISLATION, LOOK AHEAD AND TELL ME IF SOME OF THOSE THINGS YOU FEEL SO STRONGLY ABOUT THAT YOU'D RUN THEM THROUGH THE NEXT SESSION. Lamberti: WELL, THE ONE THAT I THINK TROUBLES ME THE MOST IS RELATED TO SOME OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE AND HEALTH CARE ISSUES. WE PASSED A PRESCRIPTION DRUG HOTLINE. NOW, IT MAY NOT SOUND LIKE MUCH TO CREATE A HOTLINE WHERE PEOPLE CAN CALL IN TO FIND OUT IF THEY'RE GOING TO GET THE LOWEST DISCOUNT ON PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. THERE'S ALL KINDS OF PROGRAM. IT WAS ESTIMATED THAT COULD SAVE IOWANS $6- TO $10 MILLION A YEAR. I THINK THAT'S REAL MONEY TO IOWANS, AND I THINK WE WOULD PASS THAT AGAIN. THE SECOND ONE AND CLEARLY CONTROVERSIAL IS THE ONE ON CAPS ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES AND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CASES. WE'RE GOING TO FACE A SERIOUS ACCESSIBILITY ISSUE FOR MEDICAL CARE, PARTICULARLY IN RURAL IOWA. THERE'S MANY PLACES ALREADY IN IOWA WHERE YOU CAN'T HAVE A BABY. YOU HAVE TO TRAVEL TO DES MOINES OR TO COUNCIL BLUFFS OR TO SOME OTHER LOCATION IN ORDER TO HAVE A BABY. WE THINK ACCESSIBILITY TO DOCTORS, TO HEALTH CARE IN IOWA IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. I WOULD IMAGINE WE'LL TAKE THAT UP AGAIN. Borg: SENATOR GRONSTAL, IT'S BEEN SAID THAT SOME OF THOSE VETOES HAD STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. ARE THERE SOME THAT YOU WOULD SAY LET'S RUN THEM BACK THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE AGAIN BECAUSE DEMOCRATS ALSO FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT IT? Gronstal: SEE, I'D SAY IT'S TIME TO SET ASIDE THE PARTISANSHIP AND SIT DOWN AND TALK WITH EACH OTHER AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET SOME OF THOSE THINGS. THIS GOVERNOR HAS SHOWN A WILLINGNESS TO DEAL WITH REPUBLICANS. HE SHOWED IT LAST YEAR ON SOME ISSUES THAT MANY DEMOCRATS AND MANY OF OUR ALLIES DISLIKED. THE GOVERNOR SHOWED A WILLINGNESS TO DO THAT, BUT THE GOVERNOR MADE IT CLEAR LAST YEAR: INCOME TAX REFORM, FINE; A $300-MILLION HOLE IN THE STATE BUDGET, NOT FINE. THE GOVERNOR WAS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR ABOUT THAT LAST YEAR. THAT'S WHAT THE REPUBLICAN TAX BILL DOES. AND IF IOWANS KNEW THAT ONE HALF OF ALL IOWANS, THE BOTTOM HALF, ACTUALLY HAVE A TAX INCREASE UNDER THE REPUBLICAN INCOME TAX REFORM BILL, I THINK THEY'D BE UP IN ARMS. SO WE CAN'T AFFORD -- AND EVEN THE REPUBLICANS HAVE ADMITTED WE CAN'T AFFORD THAT. REPUBLICANS IN THE SENATE PASSED A BILL THIS SESSION TO DELAY THAT TAX CUT BECAUSE THEY KNEW THEY COULDN'T AFFORD IT. Henderson: WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT TAX POLICY. DAVE HAS BEEN TRYING TO PUSH THE DISCUSSION TO LOOK AHEAD. LET'S LOOK AHEAD. YOU TALKED EXTENSIVELY ABOUT INCOME TAX REFORM AND PROPERTY TAX REFORM OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS. NOTHING REALLY HAPPENED. NOTHING HAS BEEN SET IN STONE. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO IN REGARD TO IOWA'S TAXATION SYSTEM, SENATOR LAMBERTI? IS IT JUST TOO COMPLICATED AND POLITICIANS CAN'T SORT OF PULL ONE THING OUT HERE AND FIX IT, OR IS THERE A PROSPECT FOR MAJOR CHANGE IN THE AREA OF TAXATION? Lamberti: WELL, I THINK WE DID DO SOMETHING. WE PASSED THE INCOME TAX REDUCTION. THE AVERAGE IOWAN WOULD HAVE SEEN A 12- TO 13-PERCENT REDUCTION IN THEIR INCOME TAX BILL. AND AS WE PASSED IT, WE DID PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF IT. AND THIS IS CAUGHT UP IN THE LINE-ITEM LITIGATION, SO WE COULDN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT THIS YEAR. WE'LL COME BACK AND DO IT AGAIN. WE BELIEVE THAT'S RIGHT. IT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO GO. WE'RE SEEING THE BENEFITS OF THE TAX CUTS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL ON OUR ECONOMY NOW. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IOWANS TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THOSE TAX CUTS, AND WE NEED TO LOWER OUR BURDEN HERE IN IOWA. SO WE'LL COME BACK AND DO IT AGAIN. Henderson: BUT AT THE BEGINNING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A BLANK SHEET OF PAPER, WE HEARD FROM THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER STEW IVERSON, AND WE'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING NEW, MAYBE EVEN A POSTCARD. YOU'VE JUST TINKERED WITH THE EXISTING SYSTEM -- CHANGING THE EXISTING SYSTEM, RATHER THAN COMING UP WITH SOMETHING COMPLETELY NEW, MAYBE EVEN EASY TO FILL OUT. Lamberti: WELL, IF YOU REMEMBER IN THAT BILL, THAT DID PROVIDE THAT WE WOULD TAKE IT TO A REFERENDUM TO SEE IF WE WOULD GET RID OF THE ISSUE OF FEDERAL DEDUCTIBILITY, IF THE PEOPLE SUPPORTED THAT IN RETURN FOR LOWER RATES. THAT IS A DRAMATIC CHANGE IN WHAT WE HAVE FOR AN INCOME TAX SYSTEM NOW, SO I THINK THAT IS A SUBSTANTIAL OVERHAUL OF OUR INCOME TAX SYSTEM. PROPERTY TAXES IS PROBABLY THE MORE CHALLENGING. I THINK WE ALL ADMIT WE'VE GOT A SYSTEM THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE IN THE '70S. IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE THERE FOR A COUPLE YEARS, AND HERE WE ARE ALMOST THIRTY YEARS LATER WITH A SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T WORK. BUT WE'RE COMMITTED. WE'RE CONTINUING TO WORK WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE THAT WE ESTABLISHED TO TRY TO FIND A BETTER WAY FOR PROPERTY TAXES. MY GOAL, I THINK, WOULD BE SIMPLIFICATION: PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND IT; IT'S TRANSPARENT; THEY UNDERSTAND WHO'S TAXING THEM; AND HOPEFULLY A LOWERING OF THE PROPERTY TAX BURDEN FOR ALL TAXPAYERS. Henderson: SENATOR GRONSTAL, IS THERE PROSPECTS FOR AGREEMENT AMONG THE PARTIES ON THIS, OR IS THERE GOING TO BE CONTINUED STALEMATE? BECAUSE, REGARDLESS, YOU MAY HAVE, IF REPUBLICANS STILL CONTROL THE LEGISLATURE NEXT TIME AROUND, YOU'LL STILL HAVE A DEMOCRATIC CHIEF EXECUTIVE. Gronstal: AND THAT'S WHY I'M SUGGESTING YOU'RE GOING TO PASS THE SAME THING YOU PASSED THE LAST TIME, DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE SUPREME COURT DECISION. THAT'S WHY -- THAT'S JUST MORE PARTISANSHIP. THAT'S JUST MORE NOT WORKING TOGETHER. REPUBLICANS PASSED, LAST TIME, PROPERTY TAX REFORM EFFORT. THEY REPEALED IT THIS YEAR BECAUSE IT DOESN'T WORK. IF THEY'D WORKED WITH SOME OF THE FOLKS THAT ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND REAL ESTATE TAXES, LIKE PEOPLE IN THE REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY AND BANKERS, YOU COULD SIT DOWN AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING. THEY DIDN'T LAST YEAR AND SO THIS YEAR THEY HAD TO REPEAL THAT. I THINK THERE ARE HUGE OPPORTUNITIES FOR REFORM AND SIMPLIFICATION OF OUR SYSTEM, BUT YOU'VE ALSO GOT TO AGREE ON SOME BASIC PRINCIPLES. AND IF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS SAYING, "I'M NOT GOING TO SIGN A BILL THAT BLOWS A $310-MILLION HOLE IN THE STATE BUDGET," IT MEANS WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO KEEP OUR COMMITMENT TO K-12 SCHOOLS. YOU CAN'T START OUT BY SAYING THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. THAT'S WHAT THEY DID LAST TIME. THEY GOT A VETO. THE GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE SIGNED AN INCOME TAX BILL LAST TIME THAT WAS REFORMED IF IT DIDN'T CREATE A HOLE IN THE BUDGET. Henderson: THE OTHER ISSUE IS CIGARETTE TAXES. MANY OTHER STATES HAVE RAISED CIGARETTE TAXES. THAT'S AN IDEA THAT'S BEEN FLOATED BY MANY PEOPLE AT THE STATEHOUSE. WILL LEGISLATORS IN THE COMING SESSION RAISE CIGARETTE TAXES, SENATOR LAMBERTI? Lamberti: I THINK WE'LL RAISE IT ONLY IF WE NEED IT, AND I THINK THAT'S BEEN PART OF WHAT'S BEEN LOST IN THIS DEBATE. CLEARLY FROM A HEALTH CARE STANDPOINT, YOU COULD MAKE A GOOD ARGUMENT THAT WE OUGHT TO RAISE IT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO STOP SMOKING, NOT TO START. FROM A BUDGETARY STANDPOINT, IT MAKES NO SENSE TO RAISE A TAX, INCLUDING A CIGARETTE TAX, UNLESS YOU NEED IT TO MEET YOUR OBLIGATIONS. WE TALK ABOUT HEALTH CARE. WE TALK ABOUT MEDICAID. THERE'S BEEN TALK THAT WE UNDERFUNDED MEDICAID. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT. WE'VE ALWAYS MET OUR OBLIGATIONS. WE WILL CONTINUE TO MEET OUR OBLIGATIONS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU OUGHT TO HAVE A NEED BEFORE YOU JUST GO OUT AND RAISE A TAX. Yepsen: SENATOR GRONSTAL, AS ONE -- Gronstal: I'VE GOT TO SAY SOMETHING ON MEDICAID. YOU CAN'T FIND ONE EXPERT IN THE STATE OF IOWA -- YOU CAN'T FIND ONE PROVIDER IN THE STATE OF IOWA -- AND BRING THE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION AND BRING THE DOCTORS ASSOCIATION IN AND BRING ANY PROVIDER IN THAT THINKS WE'VE ACTUALLY FULLY FUNDED MEDICAID -- Yepsen: HOW DO YOU PAY FOR THAT? Gronstal: THEY HAVE UNDERFUNDED IT BY $100 MILLION. Yepsen: HOW -- EXCUSE ME, HOW WOULD DEMOCRATS PAY -- COME UP WITH THE MONEY TO INCREASE THESE PROVIDER -- Gronstal: YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS, A NUMBER OF OPTIONS THIS SESSION. ONE OF THEM WOULD BE TO PUT OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORT INSIDE A BONDING PLAN. THAT WOULD SAVE THE STATE SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES THAT THEY'D HAVE TO SPEND UP FRONT. Yepsen: BORROW THE MONEY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -- Gronstal: BORROW THE MONEY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -- Yepsen: AND THEN YOU'D FREE UP CASH -- Gronstal: -- AS THE HOUSE DID LAST YEAR, ESSENTIALLY 80 TO 20 IN THE HOUSE, THEY PASSED A VERSION. THAT WOULD SAVE SOME REVENUE. WE FOUND 53 MILLION NEW DOLLARS THIS YEAR. THE REVENUE ESTIMATING CONFERENCE IDENTIFIED THE NEW MONEY. OUR ECONOMY IS STARTING TO GROW. THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVES BESIDES TAX INCREASES, AND I ACTUALLY THINK THERE'S SOME REAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR REFORM INSIDE THE MEDICAID SYSTEM, AND NOT REFORM THAT'S JUST ABOUT SQUEEZING PROVIDERS BUT REFORM ABOUT REFOCUSING HEALTH CARE SO IT'S ABOUT -- SO IT'S NOT ABOUT TREATING SICK PEOPLE, IT'S ABOUT HELPING PEOPLE STAY WELL. Yepsen: THE AVERAGE -- SENATOR GRONSTAL, TO THE AVERAGE VOTER WATCHING THIS, IF THEY VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS FOR THE LEGISLATURE, ISN'T IT MORE LIKELY THERE WILL BE TAX INCREASES? Gronstal: MORE LIKELY THAN THE $275-MILLION REPUBLICAN PROPERTY TAX INCREASES? I THINK IT'S THE REPUBLICANS THAT ARE THE PARTY OF TAX INCREASES. THAT'S WHAT -- AND THEY CHOOSE TO RAISE THE TAX IOWANS HATE THE MOST, PROPERTY TAXES. Yepsen: THE DRAFT OF YOUR PLATFORM, SENATOR GRONSTAL, CALLS FOR REPEALING THE 2000 TAX CUTS. SO ISN'T THAT A TAX INCREASE? Gronstal: THE FEDERAL TAX CUT? Yepsen: NO, STATE. Gronstal: THE 2000 TAX CUTS -- Yepsen: THERE WERE TAX CUTS MADE THAT YEAR. YOUR PARTY'S PROPOSED PLATFORM IS CALLING FOR DOING -- ROLLING BACK THE TAX CUTS. ISN'T THAT A TAX INCREASE? Gronstal: OF COURSE IT'S A TAX INCREASE TO ROLL BACK AN EXISTING TAX CUT, JUST AS IT WAS A TAX INCREASE FOR IOWANS WHEN REPUBLICANS PAID FOR PART OF THEIR INCOME TAX BY RAISING SALES TAX ON RESIDENTAL UTILITIES. Yepsen: AND, SENATOR, ONE IDEA FLOATING AROUND DES MOINES IS THE IDEA OF RAISING THE CITY'S UTILITY FRANCHISE FEE TO CAPTURE THE MONEY FOR THE CITY THAT YOU FOLKS IN THE LEGISLATURE HAVE GIVEN BACK TO TAXPAYERS. DEMOCRATS GENERALLY LIKED THE IDEA OF GETTING RID OF THE SALES TAX ON RESIDENTIAL UTILITY BILLS. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE IDEA OF DES MOINES RAISING ITS FRANCHISE FEE TO GRAB THAT MONEY FOR ITSELF? Gronstal: I DON'T -- I DON'T PARTICULARLY LIKE IT. I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF TAXING PEOPLE ON THEIR BASIC NECESSITIES. THAT'S WHY DEMOCRATS SUPPORTED AND REPUBLICANS CAME UP WITH A ONE-MONTH PLAN TO SUSPEND THE SALES TAX CUT ON RESIDENTAL UTILITIES. DEMOCRATS PRESSED FOR AND GOT A PHASEOUT OF THE SALES TAX ON RESIDENTIAL UTILITIES. AND THAT CONTINUES TO BE MY CONCERN, USING A NECESSITY FOR FAMILIES AS A VEHICLE FOR INCREASED TAXES. SO I DON'T PARTICULARLY LIKE THAT IDEA, BUT I ALSO HAVE SOME SYMPATHY FOR THE CITY OF DES MOINES HAVING BEEN CUT IN TERMS OF STATE ASSISTANCE. YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR WE CUT $60 MILLION FROM CITIES AND COUNTIES. THEY WERE FORCED TO DEAL WITH THAT. Yepsen: SENATOR -- Gronstal: SO WE HAVE, TO SOME DEGREE, TRAPPED THEM BY UNDERMINING OUR SUPPORT FOR THAT. Yepsen: SENATOR LAMBERTI, WILL THE LEGISLATURE -- WHAT DO YOU THINK OF WHAT THE CITY OF DES MOINES IS DOING? Lamberti: WELL, THE LEGISLATURE WORKED PRETTY HARD OVER THE LAST TWO OR THREE YEARS TO PHASE OUT THE SALES TAX ON UTILITIES. AND AGAIN THIS YEAR, WE WENT BACK IN, CORRECTED A PROBLEM AS A RESULT OF LINE ITEM, AND IT'S SCHEDULED TO CONTINUE THE PHASEOUT. SO TO HAVE THE CITY OF DES MOINES COME BACK IN AND UNDO WHAT WE DID I THINK IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. AND MIKE HIT ON SOME OF THE REASONS WHY IT'S NOT. IT'S A REGRESSIVE TAX. IT HITS LOW-INCOME PEOPLE HARDER. IT HITS PEOPLE ON FIXED INCOME HARDER. AND I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THEM TO COME IN AND SUBSTITUTE A TAX THAT WE WORKED HARD TO GET RID OF. Yepsen: WILL THE LEGISLATURE TRY TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T, WON'T DES MOINES JUST SIGNAL TO EVERY OTHER CITY THAT'S GOT A FRANCHISE TAX FEE AND SAY, HEY, WE CAN GO DO THE SAME THING? Lamberti: SURE. I THINK THE FIRST THING WE'LL DO IS SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN DES MOINES. I THINK IT'S FAR FROM CERTAIN THAT IT'S GOING TO BE ADOPTED IN DES MOINES. IF IT IS, WILL THE LEGISLATURE ACT? I SUSPECT WE WILL. Henderson: DIXIE SHANAHAN, A WOMAN WHO LIVED IN DEFIANCE, IOWA, FOUND GUILTY OF MURDERING AN ABUSIVE HUSBAND. THERE'S BEEN A CALL FOR SENTENCING REFORM BECAUSE UNDER MANDATORY SENTENCING LAW, SHE'S GOING TO SPEND THREE DECADES IN PRISON. SENATOR GRONSTAL, ARE THERE PROSPECTS FOR REDOING THAT MANDATORY SENTENCING LAW, WHICH JUDGES ARGUE HAS TIED THEIR HANDS? Gronstal: I THINK DIXIE -- THE DIXIE SHANAHAN CASE HIGHLIGHTS THAT NEED FOR SENTENCING REFORM. AND I THINK IT'S DIFFICULT TO TALK ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL CASE, BUT THAT INDIVIDUAL CASE DOES HIGHLIGHT WHAT THE ISSUE IS: THAT WE'VE TAKEN THE POWER AWAY FROM JUDGES TO MAKE JUDGMENTS. AND THAT'S WHAT WE APPOINT THEM TO DO, SO I'D LIKE TO SEE US REVISIT OUR WHOLE SENTENCING SCHEME IN THE STATE OF IOWA. I'D LIKE TO SEE JUDGES HAVE A LITTLE MORE AUTHORITY WHEN IT COMES TO SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES TO RECOGNIZE THAT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEGISLATURE HAS CONSISTENTLY, OVER THE LAST DOZEN YEARS, TRIED TO MOVE TO TAKE VIOLENT OFFENDERS AND LENGTHEN THEIR SENTENCES OVERALL AND MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE DANGEROUS PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS AND KEEP THEM OFF THE STREETS FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. SO THERE ARE TWO TENSIONS THERE. THE PENDULUM AT THE END OF THE '80S AND THE EARLY '90S WAS KIND OF SWINGING TOWARDS GETTING TOUGHER ON CRIME. I THINK THERE'S SOME RECOGNITION THAT SOMETIMES THAT RESULTS IN AN UNFAIR OUTCOME. Henderson: SENATOR LAMBERTI, REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS HAVE RESISTED, IN MANY INSTANCES, SENTENCING REFORM OR CHANGES IN THE WAY THAT PAROLES ARE GRANTED. DO YOU THINK THERE IS A PROSPECT AMONG LEGISLATORS IN THE COMING YEARS TO ENGAGE IN SENTENCING REFORM? Lamberti: WELL, I THINK THERE IS AND I THINK WE ACTUALLY HAVE. I SERVED ON THE SENTENCING COMMISSION IN '96 AND '97. AND SINCE THAT TIME WE HAVE MADE CHANGES, INCLUDING THIS YEAR WE MADE SOME CHANGES TO MANDATORY SENTENCES. AT THE SAME TIME, I WOULD CAUTION PEOPLE THAT WE OUGHT NOT ACT ON THE BASIS OF ONE PARTICULAR CASE. AND LET'S REMEMBER THE MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES APPLY TO WHAT WE CALL FORCIBLE FELONIES. BY DEFINITION, THEY ARE CRIMES AGAINST PEOPLE. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PROPERTY CRIMES. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DRUG CRIMES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VIOLENT ACTS AGAINST INDIVIDUALS. FOR EXAMPLE, IN THIS CASE, WE MAY HAVE COMPLAINTS WITH THE CHARGE AND THE CONVICTION, BUT I DON'T THINK MOST PEOPLE WOULD BELIEVE THAT A THIRTY-FIVE YEAR SENTENCE FOR SECOND DEGREE MURDER IS EXCESSIVE IN MOST CASES. SO I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS WHEN WE ENTER INTO SENTENCING REFORM. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU OUGHT TO SHUT THE DOOR. AND I WOULD AGREE THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO ANYTHING, YOU PUT A LITTLE MORE DISCRETION BACK IN THE HANDS OF JUDGES, SOME SAFETY VALVES. Yepsen: SENATOR, WE'VE ONLY GOT A FEW MINUTE LEFT. SENATOR LAMBERTI, TWO ISSUES CONFRONTING IOWA RIGHT NOW IS MONEY FOR THE VALUES FUND AND MONEY FOR THE VISION IOWA PROGRAM. WHAT WILL THE NEXT LEGISLATURE DO ABOUT THIS ISSUE? Lamberti: I THINK WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE VALUES FUND -- AND THAT'S ONE OF THE DIFFICULT THINGS THAT'S CONFRONTING US. WE MADE A COMMITMENT OF OVER $500 MILLION OVER SEVEN YEARS. WE FUNDED TWO YEARS AT $100 MILLION. CLEARLY WE HAVE A CHALLENGE TO FIND THE BALANCE OF THE MONEY. THIS YEAR THE REFERENCE WAS, WELL, LET'S JUST GO OUT AND BORROW IT. WELL, THERE'S -- I'M NOT OPPOSED TO BORROWING, PARTICULARLY IF YOU CAN GET LOW INTEREST RATES. BUT THERE IS ONE LITTLE PESKY LITTLE PROBLEM: YOU HAVE TO IDENTIFY A REPAYMENT SOURCE. AND IN THESE TIGHT BUDGET TIMES, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK. IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT BUT WE'RE COMMITTED TO FINDING THE FUNDS. CONTRAST THAT WITH VISION IOWA WHERE WE DEVELOPED A SECURE REPAYMENT SOURCE. THOSE BONDS ARE SECURE FOR THEIR FULL REPAYMENT. AND WE OBVIOUSLY DID SOME THINGS WITH THE COMMUNITY ATTRACTION PROGRAM TO ADD MONEY OVER THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS, BUT THE VALUES FUND WILL BE OUR CHIEF STRUGGLE FROM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT. Yepsen: SENATOR GRONSTAL, DO DEMOCRATS HAVE ANY DIFFERENT IDEA? I MEAN YOU MENTIONED BORROWING MONEY FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. IS THAT THE WAY YOU -- Gronstal: WELL, THAT WAS THE VERSION THAT THE HOUSE PASSED LAST YEAR, NOT THIS SESSION. THE SESSION BEFORE, THE HOUSE PASSED A BONDING VERSION OF THE IOWA VALUES FUND. WE COULD HAVE DONE THAT IN THE SENATE TOO. THERE WAS RESISTANCE IN THE SENATE, AND WE ENDED UP WITH A DIFFERENT VERSION. I ALSO THINK IT'S CLEAR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A FEW MORE GAMING LICENSES IN THIS STATE, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT REVENUE COMING FROM THOSE. AND THAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL PAYMENT STRING, TO BUILD AND DIVERSIFY IOWA'S ECONOMY. SO I THINK THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES THERE TO COMMIT TO THAT. I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING THIS YEAR. BEFORE THIS STARTED -- BEFORE THIS EFFORT STARTED, WE HAD ABOUT 60 INQUIRIES TO OUR DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. WITHIN A YEAR WE HAD 300. NOW WE'VE GOT NO PROMISE OF ANYTHING AFTER JULY 1 OF '05, AND SOME BUSINESSES LOOKING FOR MULTIYEAR COMMITMENTS ARE GOING TO BACK AWAY FROM IOWA. SO I THINK WE KIND OF KILLED OUR OWN RECOVERY BY NEGLECTING TO FUND THE IOWA VALUES FUND IN THE OUT YEARS. Henderson: SENATOR LAMBERTI, WE HAVE ABOUT TWENTY SECONDS LEFT. THERE'S GOING TO BE A DEBATE AMONG THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE. DO YOU THINK THERE WILL BE ANOTHER DEBATE IN THE IOWA LEGISLATURE NEXT YEAR ABOUT THE ISSUE? Lamberti: IT'S KIND OF HARD TO PREDICT. MY GUESS IS IT'S GOING TO MOVE MUCH MORE TO THE FEDERAL LEVEL. WE HAD THE DEBATE THIS YEAR. I THINK WE'LL SEE WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND THE COUNTRY. I BELIEVE THIS IS GOING TO BECOME A FEDERAL ISSUE. I THINK IT HAS TO. AS YOU LOOK TO FULL FAITH AND CREDIT BETWEEN STATES, NOW THAT WE HAVE STATES AUTHORIZING GAY MARRIAGE, I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED. Borg: GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SPENDING TIME WITH US TODAY. A NOTE ABOUT SOME SPECIAL PROGRAMMING COMING YOUR WAY. THE FIVE-PART "IMAGINE IOWA" SERIES BEGINS ON MONDAY AND CONCLUDES ON FRIDAY WITH A SPECIAL 90-MINUTE LIVE TELECAST ON FRIDAY, FEATURING NOTABLES WHO HAVE AN EYE ON IOWA'S FUTURE. TODD MUNDT IS THE HOST AND MODERATOR FOR THAT "IMAGINE IOWA" FINALE, WITH INNOVATIVE IDEAS, SOME OLD, SOME NEW, AS NINE LEADERS FORM A BLUE RIBBON ROUNDTABLE THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX AND INTO THE FUTURE. THAT "IMAGINE IOWA" FINALE IS LIVE FROM IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION STUDIOS, FRIDAY NIGHT, 6:30 UNTIL 8:00. THAT WILL CONCLUDE A WEEK-LONG "IMAGINE IOWA" SERIES THAT BEGINS ON MONDAY AND CONTINUES THROUGH THURSDAY. THOSE SESSIONS ARE A CONVERSATION WITH DAVID YEPSEN AS DAVID BEGINS AND BRINGS EXPERTS TO THE TABLE WHO HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT'S TO BE DONE ABOUT CHARTING IOWA'S FUTURE AND HOW TO DO IT. STARTING OFF ON MONDAY, DAVID'S GUESTS, CHAIR OF IOWA'S UTILITIES BOARD DIANE MUNNS. TUESDAY'S GUEST IS JOURNALIST AND MEDIA EXECUTIVE MICHAEL GARTNER, WHO NOW HEADS THE VISION IOWA BOARD THAT WE'VE JUST SPOKEN OF. AND ON WEDNESDAY YOU'LL HEAR COMMENTS FROM FRED KIRSCHENMANN OF IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY'S LEOPOLD CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE. AND ON THURSDAY, THE GUEST IS VENTURE CAPITALIST JOHN PAPPAJOHN OF EQUITY DYNAMICS. "IMAGINE IOWA" AS IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION'S WEEK-LONG SERIES DEDICATED TO THINKING ABOUT IOWA'S FUTURE, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY NIGHTS AT 6:30. I HOPE YOU'LL WATCH. WELL, THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEKEND'S EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS." I'M DEAN BORG. THANKS FOR JOINING US TODAY.
FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS PROVIDED BY "FRIENDS," THE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION... GENERATIONS OF FAMILIES AND FRIENDS WHO FEEL PASSIONATE ABOUT THE PROGRAMS THEY WATCH ON IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS. |
|
