Iowa Down Ballot

In the governor’s debate, Rob Sand and Zach Lahn shared a stage for the first time. With no time limits, we felt the moderators lost control early, and Lahn ended up talking roughly seven minutes longer. Republicans loved his aggressive style, while Democrats thought the interrupting came across badly. We don’t see a clear winner, and three more debates are still ahead.

In the U.S. Senate race, Josh Turek held his own against the more TV-seasoned Ashley Hinson. She kept hitting him on missed votes, and we explained why a missed vote doesn’t always mean a missed day at work. Turek got her on the record about Iran and Medicaid cuts, and her comments about millennials and savings drew plenty of social media reaction.

In the 2nd District, Joe Mitchell and Lindsay James had a more orderly second debate. We also talked through the steel plant incentives and whether tariffs are really behind the project.

On the horse race, Cook moved the 1st and 3rd Districts from toss-up to lean Democrat, and the 2nd District from lean Republican to toss-up.

The polls disagree. Suffolk had Sand up 55 to 43 and Turek up 48 to 44, while Emerson had Sand up just 49 to 45 and Hinson ahead 47 to 45. We caution against trusting any single poll, since each makes different assumptions about who will turn out in a midterm.

Dave Price is quite busy with his day jobs. We hope to have him back at some point, but we are committed to continuing informing our listeners, viewers, and readers. Kathie and Laura are two of the best political reporters in the state (if not the country). If you would like to support our work financially please become a paid subscriber by clicking the button above. To make a one-time donation of any size please click the button below.

Thanks for listening, and if you can, please like and share.

Auto-generated transcript below:

Kathie: Hello and welcome to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. It’s debate season and we have a lot to talk about, with candidates for governor, U.S. Senate, Congress, and more sharing the stage, some for the first time. There’s also new polling in the top races and some shifts in the political forecast for Iowa’s races. I’m Kathie Obradovich, and with me today is Laura Belin. Hi, Laura.

Laura: Good to see you, Kathie.

Kathie: We’re a smaller crew today. Dave is working on other projects and our conservative friends were otherwise engaged, but we can carry it, right?

Laura: Yeah, absolutely.

Kathie: I still sort of have the crud. If you heard me last week, you’ll know I’m a lot better, but I’ll apologize right now for any Marco Rubio-esque water swigging or cough drop crunching as we go. And I know you’ve been a little under the weather too, Laura.

Laura: I’m feeling a lot better.

Kathie: Just the walking wounded here.

The governor’s debate: Rob Sand vs. Zach Lahn

Kathie: Let’s start with the governor’s debate, which was all the way back on Monday. We’re recording this on Friday. It was in Davenport, hosted by KWQC-TV on the campus of St. Ambrose University. It was the first time on the debate stage for Rob Sand and Zach Lahn. What do you think?

Laura: They didn’t have time limits, and honestly I feel like that debate was a case for having them. I didn’t total up the minutes myself, but I saw some analysis that Zach Lahn ended up speaking about seven minutes longer than Rob Sand. That seems pretty out of balance. I felt the moderators lost control of the debate early and never really got it back.

Kathie: I’ve done both kinds of debates, timed and super formal, and the untimed kind that’s supposed to be more of a conversation. I agree with you, they probably should have timed the answers for this one. If you’re not going to time the answers, the moderators need to step in really early and make it very clear that they won’t let one candidate talk over another, and that they’ll cut in if you abuse the time. They really didn’t start trying to do that until way too late.

It was interesting how Rob Sand responded. You could tell he was kind of annoyed, but he did not reciprocate. You didn’t see him heat up to match Zach Lahn and start talking over him, which not all candidates would do. And I think there was a risk for Lahn in talking over Sand like that.

Laura: The Republican comments I saw online said Lahn absolutely dominated the discussion and got in a lot of zingers. On the Democratic side, people felt it came across very badly, all the interrupting and going on for a long time.

It was interesting to me that near the end, when the moderator was trying to get things back on track, Zach Lahn said something like, “I can go if it’s four on one, I can take on...” He was almost implying the moderators were on Rob Sand’s side, when I felt they had been kind of lenient toward the Republicans.

We’ll see. They have three more debates coming up, and that may be partly why Rob Sand was able to just hang back and wait. I’m curious to see whether the moderators are a little more active in next week’s clash.

Kathie: A couple of things about the content. This is the first time we’ve seen these candidates together, so we saw some rehash of the attack ads we’re seeing incessantly on TV. One that stood out for me was Zach Lahn claiming that Sand’s campaign rhetoric about his time in Kansas was an attack on his kids. That’s the claim that he didn’t move to Iowa until two years before he ran for governor, and that he frequently returns to Kansas. Lahn portrayed it as an attack on his kids because he’s going to Kansas to visit his kids in a blended family. I think it’s a stretch to call it an attack on his kids, but I’m not sure where else he was going to go in trying to defend that.

Laura: Rob Sand said the reason you’re in Kansas doesn’t matter, what matters is that you’re not in Iowa all the time. Lahn’s campaign has never really explained how this is going to work. He said that’s private, they have a blended family, and they’ll work it out like blended families do. But if his kids are being raised and going to school primarily in another state, it does seem like something he’ll need to contend with.

Kathie: Lahn also pressed attacks on Rob Sand’s family wealth. He has repeatedly called Sand a billionaire in his ads. I didn’t think Sand engaged with that very much or tried to rebut it. He talked about family and mansions in other states and spending time there, but I didn’t think he rebutted much.

Laura: The main thing he pushed back on was the nitrate fertilizer claim. He said his wife’s third-generation family company doesn’t produce nitrate fertilizer, that they produce other things from byproducts.

Kathie: Maybe that was the most important thing, considering water quality is a big concern to voters. At the bottom line, unless there are giant gaps or big things that turn into campaign commercials and rhetoric through the rest of the campaign, I usually don’t see debates moving the needle much. They reinforce what people already think about the candidates. But did you think there was a winner here?

Laura: I don’t think so. It depends on whether you care a lot about demeanor. But I think it fired up Zach Lahn’s supporters. In that sense he can feel it was successful, because he showed he was being very aggressive. I don’t know who was watching, or whether swing voters are watching these debates. And it’s different since this is the first of four rather than the only debate they’re having, so I want to reserve judgment until after they’re all over. But the Republicans seemed extremely pleased with the performance.

Kathie: It’s a good point about who’s watching. A lot of times the effect of a debate isn’t the night of, it’s the media, and especially the social media, that rolls out afterward. We see that over and over. With this debate I didn’t see anything like that, but time will tell.

Laura: What I saw from Rob Sand and other Democratic accounts was that they were sharing clips of things Sand said. They weren’t sharing anything Lahn said as a gaffe, but more like Sand’s line that you’re not going to be a stronger advocate for public schools than the guy who lives here and sends his kids to public schools.

U.S. Senate debate: Ashley Hinson vs. Josh Turek

Kathie: Exactly. This week was also the first time sharing the stage for Ashley Hinson and Josh Turek. That debate was on Iowa Press, so no time limits, but they weren’t at a table, and I thought it was a lot more orderly than the governor’s debate. What were your first impressions?

Laura: I thought Turek really held his own. With Hinson having so much more experience on television, as a TV reporter and anchor and then in public life for a long time, I felt this format would really favor her. It struck me as kind of a draw. Turek looked more comfortable than he did in the primary debates against Zach Wahls.

Kathie: For sure. He was a lot better than in the primary debates, and more prepared for the attacks he was expecting. Hinson was absolutely polished and on message. She continued to skewer Turek on his missed votes, and I thought mostly successfully.

Turek did try to make the case that the work he did behind the scenes at the Capitol was significant, that he worked across the aisle and had an impact on legislation. But he still hasn’t scratched the fallacy the Hinson campaign is perpetuating with this line of criticism, that every vote missed somehow represents a missed day on the Hill. She’s talking about him wasting his per diem, taking money out of taxpayers’ pockets. The reality is that multiple votes happen on a single day, and you can be at the Hill without taking a vote except maybe for adjournment. So every missed vote does not represent a missed day in the Capitol. Maybe Turek doesn’t want to go too far down the road of defending that, but it seems to me he could at least correct that misconception.

Laura: Sorry, my dog is weighing in. I actually researched the per diem question in the past, because of Zach Nunn. I think it was 2021, there was a year when he missed the entire session because he was deployed out of state, and I got a tip that he collected his per diem. What I learned is that under the law they just get the per diem. It’s not like the mileage reimbursement where you can claim it or not. It’s paid to them by law even if they’re absent.

I also remember some of those days, because some of the missed votes they’re talking about, like the vote on the veterans budget, and a few other things, happened right at the end. There was one day before that long marathon weekend where Josh Turek was there for most of the day, through these long caucuses, and then he left to go to an evening event. They came back on the floor and debated a bunch of bills after he had left. But he had been there expecting to debate that day, and things were delayed. So it goes to your point that a missed vote doesn’t necessarily mean he didn’t show up for work.

Kathie: Right. And like I said, he may not want to spend a lot of time on it. He knows it’s a bad look, that he probably should have been there for some of those votes. But on Turek’s side, he did succeed in getting Hinson to say that, despite her recent statements about wrapping up the war in Iran, she still wouldn’t support a resolution forcing the president to come to Congress to keep pursuing it. He also had her defending the One Big Beautiful Bill and its cuts to Medicaid, which have been costly to rural hospitals in Iowa. So I think he did get in some of his shots.

Laura: One moment I’ve seen a lot of people commenting on on social media was Hinson’s comment that millennials aren’t saving enough and are the worst group for savings. She also said something about when she was in sixth grade and her dad taught her about compounding and saving for retirement. Not that there’s anything wrong with teaching your kid about compounding, but that’s something that only happens in a well-off family. A family living paycheck to paycheck isn’t teaching their sixth grader about compounding. I think a lot of people, particularly millennials, felt that was very insensitive. I’m Gen X myself. But wages have been stagnant and the costs of everything, housing especially, have gone way up. That’s why they’re not saving as much as earlier generations.

Kathie: Turek probably could have done more to exploit that moment on the screen rather than waiting until after the debate. But again, I didn’t really see this debate moving the needle. The fact that Turek held his own against, like you said, a very experienced opponent matters, but if you were leaning toward either Hinson or Turek, you probably didn’t hear anything in that whole debate that changed your opinion.

2nd District debate: Joe Mitchell vs. Lindsay James

Kathie: Next, the Joe Mitchell and Lindsay James debate in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District. That was Thursday night on Iowa Press. Again, no time limits on answers. This was the second debate for these candidates. Did you see significant differences between the two?

Laura: I did. The previous week’s debate, on KGAN, I felt the moderators lost control, or you could say the candidates kind of walked all over the moderators. The candidates weren’t always answering the question or doing what the moderators wanted. This one was a little more orderly in the Iowa PBS studio. Maybe the format lends itself to that.

Kathie: I don’t know. If I was a candidate, would I want to cross Kay Henderson? I don’t think so. She has control of the venue there.

There was an interesting contrast in demeanor, since we’ve been talking about that. Lindsay James comes off as very warm. She smiled and seemed to project caring. I lost count of how many times she said she was a mom. At one point she even said she was a mom to children, in case we thought she was talking about being a pet mom. And Mitchell I thought might have been a little tense. He was a lot more serious and didn’t smile as much.

They did get into it toward the end. They started calling each other liars, especially when Mitchell accused James of never seeing a tax increase she didn’t like, and of not supporting tax cuts. Her argument, I think, was that she supported tax cuts, just not the ones the Republicans were proposing.

For people who haven’t seen these candidates, at a time when the political forecasters are suggesting this race is tightening, you could get a pretty good sense of where they stand.

Laura: In the first debate there was much more of them calling each other liars. I felt they were both pretty on message, with a lot of repetition. I don’t know who is watching, but anyone who has been following these races probably didn’t hear any surprises, because it was very consistent with what I’ve heard them say before.

James had Mitchell defending the war and defending the tariffs, and he was able to explain why he supports those things. I didn’t think she was entirely prepared to discuss AI. That question came up and she was a little fuzzy about her own plan, let alone a broader statement about AI. Mitchell pretty smoothly defused the attacks on his family wealth.

Kathie: One thing, though. The first debate happened right before the special session on the steel plant and up to $1.4 billion in incentives for it, which Lindsay James voted for. I thought it was interesting that Mitchell accused her of... [transcript is garbled here] ...when you talk about a steel plant that’s not going to be operational until 2030, you have to question whether a project that size would really depend on something that could be so easily changed as a tariff scheme. And he didn’t really explain why he thinks this project wouldn’t even be happening if it weren’t for Trump’s tariffs on steel.

Laura: I don’t know about the tariffs, but doesn’t the project depend on support from the U.S. Export-Import Bank? A lot of people have asked me why they would build this plant in Iowa instead of Minnesota, next to where they’re mining the ore. I think part of the answer is that the Trump administration would never give federal support to a project like this in a Democratic-controlled state. At the White House event the previous week, they were saying things like, if there weren’t a Republican governor or Republicans running the state of Iowa... So I do think it’s possible it wouldn’t be happening without some kind of Trump policies. But I’m not sure it’s the tariffs specifically that it depends on.

Kathie: Good points. Anything else you want to mention about the debates before we go on to some pure horse race?

Laura: Yeah, we can go on.

Horse race: Cook Political Report shifts

Kathie: All right, horse race. This week the Cook Political Report moved Iowa’s 1st Congressional District, Mariannette Miller-Meeks versus Christina Bohannon, from toss-up to lean Democrat. It also moved the 3rd District, Zach Nunn versus Sarah Trone Garriott, from toss-up to lean Democrat. And the Joe Mitchell and Lindsay James race in the 2nd District moved from lean Republican to toss-up. It’s pretty shocking in Iowa to see congressional races anywhere in the state rated as lean Democrat. What did you think?

Laura: I’ve been saying, particularly about the 3rd District, that it’s been leaning Democratic. I was saying that six months ago. I’m sorry, my dog is weighing in here.

Kathie: We always welcome pets. My dog is joining the podcast now.

Laura: One thing to remember about the 1st District is that Miller-Meeks is one of the worst-performing House Republicans in the country relative to how Donald Trump did in her district. Trump carried her district by about eight and a half points, and she won by 0.2. So in any kind of more favorable environment for Democrats, and with the turnout operation they have, it makes sense to see Miller-Meeks as slightly favored to lose. There’s also an independent candidate, Michael Bridgeford, and it’s not clear what impact he’ll have. His campaign released an internal poll by a pollster I’ve never heard of, so I can’t vouch for it, but it showed Christina Bohannon with a fairly significant lead.

I think Zach Nunn’s problem is that Trump only carried the 3rd District by four points, about the same as Nunn’s margin of victory. Trump has to be very unpopular right now in that district, where 75% of the vote is going to be Polk County and Dallas County. I think the Democrats have a stronger turnout operation than they did two years ago. And for a Republican in a district like this to survive a year like this, they would need a history of over-performing the top of the ticket. Ashley Hinson was an over-performer in her district, but Zach Nunn is not. So I agree with those ratings.

As for the 2nd District, it’s an open seat. Joe Mitchell is fairly new to Northeast Iowa, so he’s not deeply rooted there. It’s a district Ashley Hinson won comfortably, but now it’s open, and Trump’s approval is probably underwater in Northeast Iowa even though the district voted for him by a 10-point margin. So I think it’s very reasonable to look at it as a toss-up. I think Republican internal polling even suggests that.

Kathie: Thank you for talking while I’m having a coffee.

Laura: Sorry, I’ve been there.

New polls

Kathie: In addition to the shifts in the forecasting, we’ve seen some new polling this week in the governor’s race and the U.S. Senate race. What have you seen?

Laura: There were a couple of new polls this week. Suffolk had very favorable numbers for Democrats: Turek ahead by four points, 48 to 44, and Rob Sand ahead by 12, 55 to 43. Then just today, as we’re recording on Friday, there was an Emerson poll with a more Republican-favorable sample. It had Ashley Hinson ahead 47 to 45, with 2% for Thomas Lahn, the Libertarian, and Rob Sand leading, but only by four points, 49 to 45. That’s giving Republicans a lot of encouragement, because it’s the smallest lead for Rob Sand we’ve seen in an Iowa poll against Zach Lahn. We still haven’t seen Zach Lahn leading in any poll since the primary, though.

Kathie: These polls have been going back and forth. You’re right that we haven’t seen Lahn leading, but the margins have shifted. To me it underscores, especially this close to the election, that the polls can’t tell you who will win. Terry Branstad always liked to say the only poll that counts is the one taken on Election Day. We worry sometimes about people jumping on the bandwagon and wanting to vote for whoever is ahead. In this case I don’t think you can really trust the polls to tell you who’s going to win. All of these races are very close, and it’s about who goes out and votes.

Laura: I flat out don’t believe that Rob Sand is leading by 10 or 12 points. That seems highly implausible to me. I think he is leading, since all the polls show him leading, but we don’t know what the electorate is going to look like. All of these polls make different assumptions about how many Democrats, independents, and Republicans there will be.

The Emerson poll, I noticed, weighted its results to what the Iowa registered voter list looks like. I would argue they probably have too many independents in the sample and not enough Democrats, because we know that in midterm elections turnout for Republicans and Democrats is a lot higher than turnout for no-party voters. There are hundreds of thousands of no-party voters who participate in a presidential year and not in a midterm. There are Democrats and Republicans like that too, but the relative turnout rate is just not going to look like the registration list.

We also know some of these polls weight to recall of the 2024 presidential vote. Emerson has Trump plus 10 over Kamala Harris. You could say Trump carried Iowa by 13, so it should be Trump plus 13. But there’s no guarantee that this November’s electorate will be Trump plus 10 or plus 13. It could be, but we don’t know. The 2014 electorate was very different from the electorate that had Barack Obama defeating Mitt Romney two years earlier.

Kathie: And you just don’t know what the electorate is going to look like. I know we all like to know who’s ahead, and that’s part of the news. I don’t criticize news organizations for publishing polls. Mine does it on occasion. But when that becomes the sole focus, I think you’ve lost track.

Sign-off

Kathie: Well, we’ve made it to the end of our time here. I just barely made it, but I’m surviving. Thanks to everyone tuning in, and thanks to those who like, share, and subscribe. That’s how we keep growing week after week. And to those who have become new or continuing financial supporters, you’re the ones helping to cover our production costs, so thank you. If you’ve been thinking about supporting the show, that’s how you keep us coming back week after week. Have a great week ahead, and we’ll talk to you next week.

Laura: Good to see you.

This week we recorded on Saturday, a day late, to cover Friday’s special legislative session on the proposed $15 billion steel plant in Lee County. Lawmakers approved roughly $1.5 billion in incentives, about 10% of the project’s estimated cost and the largest commitment Iowa taxpayers have ever made.

Here’s what we dug into:

* A done deal that wasn’t. Monday’s Oval Office announcement was billed as finished, with talk of no state incentives needed. We heard from Economic Development Authority director Debi Durham that the contract, utility work, and board approval are all still ahead. There’s also been no land purchase yet.

* The Senate was the hard part. Republican Senator Dan Dawson, who chairs Ways and Means, voted against the bill and used his floor speech to question the rushed process and the governor’s negotiating. The bill still passed 28 to 19, and we talked about how those cushion votes get lined up.

* Democrats were split. About half of House Democrats voted yes, with labor ties and union jobs pulling some members toward support, and we wondered whether the party made the most of the moment.

* Politics over policy? We floated the theory that the rush was driven by the election calendar, and whether a presidential visit might follow.

We also talked about the 4th District debate in Sioux City, where Chris McGowan walked a careful line on tariffs and Dave Dawson kept pressing on the war in Iran. We closed with the news that the 3rd District debate between Zach Nunn and Sarah Trone Garriott appears to be dead, and why TV debates are getting harder to schedule.

If you are a free subscriber and are able to become a paid subscriber to help us cover costs of production you can click the link above. To make a one-time donation please click the link below. Any donation is welcome and we appreciate all of you that do. Thanks for listening we’ll see ya next week!

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Hi, everyone. Welcome back to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast coming to you on Saturday. Usually we record on Friday. This week we have to go on Saturday because of that special legislative session that took place Friday. So much to talk about. From that, I want to bring in our panel this week. Eric Woolson, longtime journalist, longtime Republican strategist, catnip farmer. Welcome.

Eric Woolson: Great to be here as always. This is sunset on Lucky Badger Farms, but it looks like sunrise.

Dave Price: Yes. For those of you watching on video, you can see Eric’s incredible background. And then the two true stars of this week’s conversation who are rallying. Bad hamstrings. Shoulder cramps, whatever it is, they are out here. They’re both fighting through some stuff this week. Laura Belin and Kathy Obradovich, thank you both for powering through. We’ll see if your voices hold out.

Laura Belin: It’s good to be here.

Dave Price: In game time, the whistle goes and these two are right there. And Kathy, for those of you watching on video, proudly showing off her Iowa State shirt.

Kathie Obradovich: Where are you, Ed Taylor, when I’m wearing my cyclone outfit?

Laura Belin: Exactly.

Dave Price: All right, everybody. So let’s turn back the clock, shall we? On Monday, there’s this press conference in the Oval Office with President Donald Trump, some of his administration. Attorney General Brennenburg, still not sure why she was there. She was right on his left side, I think. Standing there about this huge economic development deal, we had Ashley Hinson, we had Governor Reynolds, we had Senator Ernst, I think that’s all the Iowa folks, right? Marianne Miller-Meeks, sorry, Congresswoman, she was there as well. All right, so there… for the first time, releasing some of the details of this proposed $15 billion steel plant that would go somewhere in Lee County. We still actually don’t know exactly where this would be.

So they lay this thing out. This would be the biggest, potentially, in our country, one of the biggest in the world. 6,000 construction jobs, 1,750 or so permanent jobs. In this location, and it partners, essentially, with the Esser Group. This would be the big company here. They have a Minnesota operation, so they have the iron ore there. Mine it there, bring it down through rail down to Lee County. You make the steel, and then you send it on down the Mississippi River, or so. Alright, so that comes out on Monday.

On Friday, Governor Reynolds had called everybody back for this special legislative session. There are so many developments, it’s difficult to know where to start with this. How about we jump ball this at the beginning about the thing that stood out to you most about how this week… and for those of you who haven’t followed what happened this weekend, the legislature, to no surprise. Past incentives on this, it’s about a billion and a half. Which is roughly 10% of the… of the estimated price of this project. So the biggest commitment by the state of Iowa taxpayers that they have ever made before, there was a lot of ins and outs and drama and… meetings and all kinds of stuff that we’re going to get through this week, but Laura, the headline… what’s, like, the thing that stands out from you? Because there’s so much to dig into this, I couldn’t actually wait until we all assembled to talk about this, but what sticks out to you most about what happened?

Laura Belin: The biggest thing for me yesterday is we had this role reversal for the last maybe five, six years. The Iowa Senate Republicans are usually lockstep in with the governor. And if she has trouble getting anything through the legislature, her problem is with the House Republicans. And yesterday, it was the Senate Republicans who almost… I mean, they had to make changes at the last minute to the Ways and Means Committee members to even get this bill through the committee. You had the Ways and Means chair vote against it in committee, speak against it on the floor, and so they barely had the votes to get this through the Iowa Senate. I did not expect that.

Dave Price: Okay, I’m not trying to make fun of you, but speak against it on the Senate floor is not nearly a strong enough way to describe what happened. But let’s put a pin in that part. We’ll get to, we’ll come back to that. Don’t let me forget. Kathie, what, like, what’s the thing that stuck out more to most of you about what we just went through?

Kathie Obradovich: What else is we? Yeah, I mean, what Laura said, for sure. But, earlier in the day, I mean, we’re going into the special session, after the… at this presidential news conference, it was called a done deal. No local, my gosh, I’m sounding really bad, sorry. No local or state incentives required. And so, it’s like, what are we talking about? Why are we doing… and it was Howard Lutnick, the Commerce Secretary, who said that. So what are we doing here? You know, why are we, you know, apparently throwing these… massive incentives at a deal that’s already done. And, Debbie Durham was questioned about that during the Ways and Means subcommittee meeting. And she basically said, yeah, I don’t know what he was talking about, it’s not a done deal. Even after the legislative session goes, there’s gonna be more process. The Economic Development Board has to do a contract. There’s gotta be, you know, even more process here with all of the utilities, all of that kind of stuff. So, far from being a done deal. And it did turn out to be, you know, they were portraying Iowa as still being in competition with Arkansas, which is one of the balloons that Dan Dawson poked on the Senate floor. I’m going to keep my remarks even shorter than this in the future. Sorry about this. I thought I sounded…

Dave Price: Oh, not at all. Thanks for trying to power through here. Eric, what stood out to you about the way this week played out?

Eric Woolson: You know, I’m gonna come at it from the perspective I think you guys have me on for anyway, which is a historical perspective, and in that sense, I’m gonna put on my former reporter hat rather than my consultant hat. And that is that deals like this don’t come together in a week. This, the whole thing seems so, so odd to me, and I think back years ago when Iowa was in competition for a Saturn plant, the Saturn carmaker. I don’t even know if they make Saturns anymore.

Dave Price: I don’t believe they do. I had one back in the day.

Eric Woolson: But, but the fact was when, when somebody wants something, when there’s competition for it, and I mean all of the states, Tennessee, Alabama, Iowa, Illinois, all these states were going after this Saturn plant, and now out of the sky like manna falls this massive steel plant that, as, as Kathie noted, it was either us or Arkansas, and I, I think Senator Dawson had… he had a terrific point about, you know, questioning why this thing was coming together so quickly, and what the rush was, but, you know, another thing I would always say as a business owner myself, I can tell you that every forward projection of revenues is, is overly optimistic.

Dave Price: Yeah.

Eric Woolson: And, and so I know we have this, the, the governor’s office was saying this is a set up where, you know, they’re not going to get the incentives until they actually comes forward with, with, finish the work. But, I’m just telling you that, I think there are a lot of reasons to look at this deal and say, why so fast? And is it going to live up to expectations?

Dave Price: I think just hearing Eric, for… if we have anybody listening or watching, and you don’t really know a lot about Eric’s background, the reason it’s easier for us as journalists to work with Eric in the past, regardless of whether it’s his clients with the firm or on the political side is because he was a reporter. So you understand what we’re thinking. Now, of course, that could mean that you know how to outsmart us, too, but…

Eric Woolson: I…

Dave Price: That’s a whole show for…

Eric Woolson: I never thought about that. I need to be more cunning, I guess.

Dave Price: Yeah. To Kathy’s point. That was one of the weirdest things to me. There were so many moments Monday. Where, and I made this joke a bunch of times yesterday, that I wish I had, as I was watching that news conference on Monday with everybody in the room, and for a variety of reasons, I wish I had a live thought bubble. You know, that, like, pot, like, you know, those old cartoons that, like, popped up next to the people in the room as the president, as Howard Lutnick, the Commerce Secretary, was talking? Because it was just so weird. For them to say the deal was done, and my company’s TV affiliate, KWQC, in Davenport, did a story a couple of days ago on this premise of the deal’s done, which I believe those were Lutnick’s words, rather than the president, but the president said something about they were already building there in Lee County.

Laura Belin: Right.

Dave Price: And so, as you may guess, you know, for folks in Lee County, they’re like, what the…

Laura Belin: What?

Dave Price: And so, our… our affiliate there in Davenport did a story on this, that there’s been no land purchase, so of course there’s… there have been no shovels in the ground digging dirt and stuff, so that part was weird. When Howard Lutnick responded to the reporter about whether state incentives were necessary for this, he said no, which I would love to know what Governor Reynolds thought, who’s standing, you know, 10 feet or whatever the heck away from him, going, dude, what are you doing? I’m calling all these people back, you know, in the special session, and the urgency at which this whole thing goes down. I talked… I don’t know how many legislators I talked to on Friday. And I said, I don’t envy anything you’re trying to figure out here. How on earth, and you just got the bill. Most of them had no concept of this before this past week, and they have to rush in on a day on Friday, or maybe they came in Thursday night, depending on where they live in the state. You have to go through… they want to go start to finish through this project on Friday. Voted through, and then you have to go back home and explain to people why you either supported it or turned it down based on less than 24 hours of knowledge, basically, right? Like, how on earth… I don’t understand how a person can… it’s a leap of faith that this is all put together, and on top of all of this, sorry to monopolize the floor here, the governor’s office is… was… the negotiating team, at least early on here, and this has been in the works since last year, apparently, but… rather than Debbie Durham’s team at the Economic Development Authority to do the entire process, you had the governor’s office put this together. Obviously, Debbie Durham’s team became part of it, and she was the one who did… at the Ways and Means Subcommittee on both sides on the House and Senate, she sat there and asked ques… and answered questions and everything from the legislators, but that was… that was also unusual, and I had numerous people stop me to talk about the process was just so… unusual.

Kathie Obradovich: So, Dave, can I just take your seat for a second and throw out another question?

Dave Price: Sure.

Kathie Obradovich: I’m curious what people think about whether Democrats made their point during this. I expected that one of the reasons I thought it might be risky for Republicans to come back into session before the legislative session, I mean, right before the election, would be that this would give Democrats a chance to really make all of their points again about affordability, etc., and extract a bunch of pain before this thing ultimately passed. I personally didn’t see that. And I don’t know, Laura, what you thought or Eric, what you thought, but I don’t think Democrats, yeah, I mean, some of them voted for it, sure.

Dave Price: In the House.

Kathie Obradovich: Expected. I would have expected that. But I would have expected them to make a stronger point ahead of the election. Because you talk about the timing. I mean… what was the rush with this? I think the rush was to get it out of there before the election.

Dave Price: Oh, without it, it had to have been right, because they have 60 days from what Debbie Durham was saying to get this through, so they clearly have a number of weeks ahead. And there’s skepticism, and we keep teasing Dan Dawson, and we’ll get… we’ll talk a little more at length here coming up, but as he was skeptical that Arkansas was really a true player for this, and that’s really hard to know for us from the outside, but there did not seem to be any necessary reason that this had to get through Friday. May I throw out one conspiracy theory to this? I am curious if we are going to see President Trump in Iowa in the coming week. So that they can have this thing done already. And the governor did the bill signing, like, right afterwards, Friday night. The president’s going to be in Nebraska anyway, I think he’s doing Oklahoma and Alabama, if I remember my…

Eric Woolson: Alabama was Friday night. Yes.

Dave Price: Yeah. And then Nebraska… I think Nebraska’s Lincoln, although I’m… I can’t remember where in Nebraska it is, but I am wondering if we’re going to see him in the state on Tuesday.

Eric Woolson: So is your… is your conspiracy theory that the rush wasn’t legislative, but political? Because that would be a conspiracy theory that I would buy into.

Dave Price: That would be 100%, and I’m sorry to yammer so much here. Laura, you were trying to say something.

Laura Belin: I kind of shared Kathy’s surprise that I felt like Democrats would maybe do more to seize the moment. I did think in the Senate Democrats, I thought were much more effective in the committee at making a lot of points about problems with this. Most of the Senate Democrats voted against it, and then during the Senate floor debate, the Democrats offered a couple of pro-labor amendments, so they got Republicans on the record voting those down. I don’t know why, I was told that there was some procedural reason that the House Democrats couldn’t offer amendments, so that… that may be the case, but I felt like during the House debate, J.D. Scholten was able to get the floor manager on the record, kind of trying to… he was trying to make the point that a foreign-owned company is probably going to be incentivized to buy farmland in Lee County for this, which Carter Nordman didn’t concede, but I thought he was able to make that point. J.D. Scholten, who ended up voting… Jennifer Confers was able to get the Republican nominee for Lieutenant Governor Derek Wolf on the record trying to get him to say, so you support tax incentives for out of state and foreign companies as a matter of policy because of course Zach Lane has said, and his campaign website says that he wants to end tax incentives for out of state and foreign corporations. But on the whole, it was kind of a muddled message from the governor. The Democrats, about half of the House Democrats voted for it, half voted against it. In the House, you had Josh Turek and Lindsey James voting for it. Then in the Senate, you had Sarah Trone-Garriott voting against it. So, the Democrats were definitely not on the same page on how to handle this yesterday.

Dave Price: There was no question that Turek and James were gonna physically be there in person after they both have been beat up again and again for missing so many votes. That was a foregone conclusion. I’m with you on this. I thought… now, Representative Zabner tried to… do something in the House. I looked at it. Now, full disclosure, I went over to Senate, so I wasn’t in the House when that went down. But it was sort of a… it was kind of more of an affordability resolution that he was behind, I thought that they would maybe, like, push the gas tax suspension or something, something very tangible, even if it all got thrown out for not being germane. I thought they would probably lean into their moment, maybe not as much during the committee and subcommittee work, which would be… to me, I would think you’d want as much kind of publicity and attention as you could, and maybe you don’t want to drag out the debate or whatever, but I thought we’d see more in both, both full debates from their caucus, using this as a moment to hammer Republicans on how many people are suffering, and even if you don’t really… I mean, this project is hard to come after, right? It’s a ton of money, so you can come after it like that, but it would be a lot of jobs, potentially a lot of union jobs, maybe, in that part of the state, so they’re kind of torn on maybe, but maybe don’t focus on the steel plant, but more… bigger picture on this kind of late play to get some kind of good news out there for Republicans and how people are struggling?

Laura Belin: Thank you for mentioning the unions. Yeah, that might be the several unions were on board for this project.

Dave Price: Mmm.

Eric Woolson: Yeah. And that was a point I was thinking about, too, Laura, that, you know, times change, obviously, in 45 years. I was the editor at the Keokuk newspaper 45 years ago, and, you know, it was obviously a strong manufacturing county. But it’s also a strong union county. And I was wondering whether we’re actually talking about union jobs here or whether a company from India is gonna say, well, we don’t want a union here. What the perspective is from the governor, and, you know, it sounds like they, the governor’s office would have had to have brought the unions in early, but I think had that happened, we’d have heard about this story weeks ago, months ago. So, curious about the role that you see the unions playing in this, and you said they’re supportive of it, but do you know any more about that?

Dave Price: No, I know some of them were there in support during the committee meetings. Kathy, I know you’re trying to… you’re trying to get a word in here if your voice cooperates.

Kathie Obradovich: No, I don’t… well, let’s play out the union thing. I was just gonna throw in about the management of the state budget. You know, this is a billion and a half dollars. The state has been running deficits of over a billion dollars the last two years, and again, that point was made a couple times, but, you know, where… where is the money coming from this? The long story about economic development projects is, you know, that once they get going, that the state will be repaid for all of its money. That almost never works and never materializes. You never see that. Yeah, the spinoff money. And they had people there from Lee County who are developers, who are real estate folks, who are salivating at the idea of being able to build houses for all of these workers, etc. And, you know, I hope that happens for Lee County, I really do. But that doesn’t… that’s not the way it usually works, so…

Dave Price: And the… and I know Debbie Durham, when she… when she was talking on the Senate side at Ways and Means Committee, was talking about how they’ve worked these benchmarks and thresholds in there, and it’s not… it sounds like the… the interest by Arkansas, and Kentucky had also been a player in this, apparently, but Arkansas was looking at putting a bunch of money up front to help this company finance the deal, might have been, like, a billion dollars or so, that they would use by bonding through their teacher’s pension or something, I don’t understand how the math worked there, but Debbie Durham was making the case that we’re not throwing a bunch of money at this company up front so that it can help finance this. This will be 10 payments, and they have to reach these different thresholds to actually get it, and there will be, like, a 5 to 1, 5.5 to 1 return on this once this kind of ripples through, and all the additional tax revenue that comes through. Okay, can we… can we get to Dan Dawson? So he’s the Republican senator. As Laura already pointed out, I believe, he’s the chair of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, which… makes this, at least to me, makes it even more interesting, right? So he’s leading the committee of a bill that he wants to set on fire, because he does not like this. And a couple more specifics with this. This is that mega legislation that they passed. Was that 2 years ago, or 1 year?

Laura Belin: It was, I checked, it was 2024.

Dave Price: Okay, and they talked about it for two years, right? 23, they talked…

Laura Belin: Yes. Initially, they talked about it in 23. Yep.

Dave Price: I love your memory.

Laura Belin: No, I looked it up yesterday.

Dave Price: Oh, nice. I love it. Okay, so originally when they passed this thing, so this is supposed to be so the state can go after big companies, right? And part of it would be the state taxpayers would be in for about 5% of the cost of a project and you could do two of these things. So they had to go in and change how this all works. This was the, this is why they needed the special session. So this one, you’re just going to have one project instead of two, and it’s going to be 10%. I’ve glossed over a bunch of the specifics on this, but that’s sort of the headline part of this. So, you’re basically, as Dan Dawson would say, kind of putting all your eggs in one basket here with this ginormous project in Lee County. Okay, so this all goes back and forth throughout the day. I was told numerous times during the day, the Senate’s the chamber to watch. And there may or may not be enough votes there. And people were laying out, isn’t this going to be interesting? It gets through the House, and then they’ve put it out on the Senate floor, and you get to the 25 votes. And then what? You know, and do Democrats just sit there and… you know, watch the whole show play out and be like, hey, we’re not jumping on this until we see 26 go up on the board, right? And it sounded like there was one senator, at least, who was kind of waving back… wavering back and forth about which way to go on this. Now, in the end, I believe it ended up 28? So they had enough of a cushion here, but that, you know, definitely went back and forth, and as Laura pointed out, you had two members of Ways and Means who went off the committee, one by choice, one not by choice.

Okay, so… this all plays out, and it goes through the House with 75 votes, right? As Kathy pointed out, House Democrats, some of them jumped on in support of this. So you get to the Senate, they realize they have enough votes. Dan Dawson decides to just let it all out. So the stuff people had been hearing and whispering about and talking in the halls throughout the day, he’s like, screw it. I’m ripping the Band-Aid off. I’m gonna let everybody know what’s going on. So he lays out that how weird this was, that the governor’s office is the one that put this thing together, and I believe LS2 is the firm that was part of this whole thing, and he’s like, you’ve got this firm working with this foreign company, going around economic development, going right to the governor’s office. They work on this whole deal, and it’s gotta be done right now. This is not the way this is gonna work. He said he reached out on his own to folks in Arkansas to try to see a… hey, is this were they legit competitors? Blah, blah, blah. He’s very skeptical. And so he’s standing there on the floor during his remarks saying that Governor Reynolds, in the end, was negotiating against herself. And in the end, did not negotiate a good deal for Iowa taxpayers.

Laura Belin: And the lobbying firm LS2 as one of the lead partners is Jeff Boyk, who’s a former chief of staff to Governor Terry Branstad. When Kim Reynolds in the early years when she was lieutenant governor, he was the chief of staff in the office. So he is a very influential lobbyist. And I thought that was interesting. I was not there because I’ve been unwell this week. I was not at the Capitol, so I wasn’t hearing all those hallway conversations, I was hearing about some of them thirdhand, but it was great to see Senator Dawson lay it out. It did put some things in context for me.

Dave Price: Kathy, if you think you can do it, and I’m not trying to put you on the spot, if your voice will work with you here, you’ve got a, as I like to say on this show, you’ve got a few years of experience with you. Can you think of a moment? I don’t want to overplay what Dawson did, but it’s like, it seemed pretty unique for my time working here. Did it strike you as a… as a unique moment, or am I delirious after a long week?

Kathie Obradovich: It’s not unique, but it’s unusual. I mean, we’ve seen times in the past when legislators have gotten up and stood up against their own party, and voted against a bill that their leadership and etc. that wanted. But I will point out that as chairman of the committee, of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, first of all, Dan Dawson is one of the most powerful senators in Iowa. Secondly, he could have stopped that bill. You know, he could have stopped the bill from going through subcommittee. He could have stopped it from going through committee. He would have made… he could have made Senator Klimish replace him as committee chair, if he wanted to, in order to make a point about this bill. He didn’t do any of that. Didn’t speak against it in committee, just voted against it. So… so, clearly… he was, of the mind that he was gonna let this bill go through, regardless of his own personal thought about it. So, as I was listening to his remarks on the floor, which were powerful, I was listening to it in that context. Well, it’s like, yeah, Dan, but you could have stopped the bill, or you could have at least delayed it while they had found somebody else to be the Ways and Means Committee Chair. But yeah, I mean, it does mean something when one of the most powerful members of the Senate stands up against a bill that his party wants.

Eric Woolson: I suppose.

Dave Price: Once you get replaced, you’re replaced.

Eric Woolson: Yeah, Dave, I don’t…

Dave Price: I want to…

Eric Woolson: …play off a little bit of what Kathy said about, you know, what goes on behind the scenes. A lot of times, I don’t think any of us really appreciate the intrigue that happens behind the scenes. I remember a story years back from Lowell Junkins, who was a Senate majority leader. And whenever there are close votes, he says, you don’t know what goes on in the chamber. You have to look around because he said, I’ll go to somebody and say, will you be the 24th vote? And they’ll say, I won’t be the 25th vote, but I’ll be the 24th. And then he’ll go to someone else and say, well, if I get 24, which you don’t think I can get, would you be the 25th? And then it’s like, okay, well, if I get 25, will you be 26? So that cushion of 28, ultimately what happens, you know, if seasoned people will look around the chamber and they’ll see who’s sitting back and waiting to vote. And they’ll be looking to see if that 24th vote comes. And then all of a sudden, when 26 happens, 28, it’s a moot point at that moment. And so, you know, we look at the 28 to 19 vote. And it doesn’t necessarily mean that there were people thrilled about voting for that thing, to Kathy’s point exactly with Dan Dawson. He may not have been thrilled to do it, but he may have given his word. I will make sure this bill moves, sir.

Laura Belin: Well, the two Democrats who voted for it, I believe I was watching the board. I believe that they waited until Republicans had 26 Republican votes before they put their votes on the board. That was Mike Zimmer and, sorry, Tom Townsend, both Eastern Mississippi River Democrats with strong labor ties.

Dave Price: And Townsend, a union guy himself in his career. And Zimmer in a tough, tough re-election there. I think Kathy brought this up already, if I remember right, but the Economic Development Authority Board still has to approve this. And so, it’s not done yet, and another thing that stood out to me, and this is my… I have not run multi-billion dollar companies, so perhaps this is… I don’t want to overstate whether this is a big deal or not, but in light of Masabi Metallics issues, and it may have been called a different company then, I can’t remember, but whatever it was, when he was in Minnesota, they had a… this entity, in its previous form, had a bunch of financial difficulties there, right? As it was trying to go through there. And supposedly has things figured out as they’re moving forward, but Janet Peterson, the state senator from Des Moines, the Democrat, had questioned the CEO about the finances. And during his presentation, I believe he had said the ownership group was kicking in $2 billion for this 15, and I… 15 is the Iowa share, and the Minnesota plan is, like, $3 billion, too, I think, so you’re looking at 18 plus or whatever. But it’d be $2 billion from the… this family ownership family, and then there’s federal financing that’s part of this, but they were still working on part of this. I don’t know if that’s a thing or not a thing. But there are, like, I think Kathy also mentioned, like, the contract’s not done yet. To my knowledge, at least, as we talk, there’s been no land purchase in Lee County, and Dawson even made… I don’t know if this matters or not, but Dawson had made a comment about it going in Lee County, or wherever it ends up. And I don’t know if he knows something there, but it’s not… it doesn’t feel like the deal’s done there, too, and the financing’s not done, so… just because they raced this through on Friday, it’s… like, there’s still clearly more… a lot, potentially, more work to do.

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, you know, if I had a prime piece of real estate for sale in Lee County right now, I’d be a realtor.

Dave Price: Ancestor.

Kathie Obradovich: Amen. I’d be raising the price, so it’ll be interesting to see how this goes forward.

Dave Price: You just gotta make sure you pick the right part of Lee County. It’s gotta be near the river, right? Like, that’s gotta be a hint for us. It’s gotta be close to that, and the rail line, so I guess I need to just look on Google Maps and figure out the railroad and close enough to the river, and that’s the spot. And it’s got to, I mean, like, how big does this sucker have to be? It’s four different complexes, I think. So that’s got to be a huge chunk of land. I think it’s… I don’t know if this is right, but I wonder if it’s farmland. I was led to believe that with one conversation, it’s a farmland chunk.

Laura Belin: That’s what JD Scholten suggested in…

Dave Price: Is that right?

Laura Belin: During the Iowa House debate, that’s what he suggested. Well, Carter Nordman, the floor manager, did not concede that, but…

Kathie Obradovich: That would be cheaper.

Laura Belin: Farmland, yeah.

Kathie Obradovich: Cheaper than reclaiming industrial property.

Dave Price: And eminent domain also came up in discussions. Perhaps not a lot during the legislative discussions that I can recall, at least, but whether that would be a necessary piece of this because of the… the scale of this project, but I… I mean, who knows, right? Like, there are a lot of pieces that still have to be figured out if this thing’s going to be a thing, so if they’re trying to get a political bang out of this, I don’t know that I mean you’re gonna get some headlines out of this. That’s why I keep wondering if we’re gonna see the president in the coming week to come and do sort of a victory lap. Kathie, we know you have to, you are hitting the road. I can’t wait to hear your voice after the Cyclone game today.

Kathie Obradovich: I don’t think I’m gonna be yelling much in the game.

Dave Price: All right, we’re gonna… how about we say, have a great day to Kathy, and then there are a couple other things I want to talk about. Is that cool? Alright, Kathy, hope you feel better.

Eric Woolson: Take care.

Dave Price: All right, Eric and Laura, nothing like producing on the fly here, right? And sorry I talked so much this week, but I’m… this guy… I’m, like, fixated on documentaries, I think, and the potential of these things, but this feels like yet another week where you could totally watch, like, an hour documentary on how this week played out, right? There were so many… so many fascinating dynamics.

A self-serving point I wanted to bring up, I moderated a 4th Congressional District debate on Wednesday night in Sioux City at my TV-affiliated KTIV there, so you have the Republican Chris McGowan, who has been the Chamber of Commerce president in the Siouxland region, and then… Dan Dawson. Dave Dawson, sorry, I even did that during the day, too, and I… I’m like, gosh dang it, I hope I don’t do that during the debate. I think during the debate, I did not screw up in calling the wrong first name, but you would think I would remember my own first name to call another guy, but… this had to be… so he was a former state representative back in the day, but hour-long live debate. Had to be one of the most civil debates that I’ve done in a long time, the cynic in me would be like, well, it’d be interesting to do a civil debate in a really competitive race, right? No offense to Dave Dawson, but if he… if he wins here, he will really…

Eric Woolson: If he wins, it’s because Democrats pick up 200 seats.

Laura Belin: Yeah.

Dave Price: Yeah, that may be the, it will be more than a blue wave for sure.

Eric Woolson: No knock on him, and God bless him for even stepping in and running that race. Somebody, you know, has to do it, and you gotta give the guy respect for doing that, but that’s just one of those districts that’s very, very, very, very difficult for Democrats, and, you know, so it’s great that they were able to have that sort of debate, I think.

Dave Price: And we’re not gonna do a super long discussion here. I’m gonna put the link in my column this weekend, although as Laura proved last weekend, you can’t make promises. Because sometimes illness or other things or travel or requirements get in the way. But so I may be confessing up next week like you may have to this weekend. But the one thing that stood out to me, Eric, especially you, because you understand, Laura, you understand this too. Laura understands too.

Eric Woolson: Come on.

Dave Price: Eric has done this professionally, but the messaging behind this, there was one thing McGowan said during the debate when we were talking to them about tariffs. That seemed like a pretty spot-on way to answer the question, where you can acknowledge the challenge of tariffs and how difficult it is. So his point, you know, obviously Dawson is saying, hey, Congress needs to end the tariffs, right? He’s the Democrat in this race. So McGowan, who did so much work early in the primary to lock up the president, and to basically force the other Republicans out of the primary race, which was kind of this masterstroke of how he pulled all of this off, right? He… he essentially criticized the way the tariffs are working without really pounding the president over the head on this, and is just saying that what he would like to see, because the tariffs are, you know, go back and forth all the time, is that they can’t be retroactive because that’s too hard for businesses. And maybe that’s a little nuanced, or even in the weeds or whatever, and you have to kind of be in the business community to understand it, but I thought it was an interesting way to address how difficult tariffs are without ticking off the president. And Eric, I’d love to know how, as a message guy, what you thought of a response like that.

Eric Woolson: Well, she talked about nuance, and a lot of times nuance gets missed in debates. We’ve gotten to this point in political discussion where you have to hit people over the head, it seems like, with a hammer, or at least people think that voters don’t understand nuance, which obviously isn’t true, but, you know, McGowan, and I don’t know him, but he comes from an economic development background, so he, you know, as having headed the Siouxland Chamber up there. And so, you know, as you said, that’s a hard needle to thread because anytime anyone says anything remotely contrasting President Trump’s views, you know, he can turn on them in a moment. That really sounds like a thoughtful sort of answer, but the fact is, you know, we know that tariffs have been hurting sectors of the economy, especially agricultural economy, and I think it’d be, you know, any candidate that I’d be advising, it’d be just foolish to deny that. Now, I know a lot of candidates these days will go out and deny everything, but I mean, if I’m working with a candidate, you’ve got to have some credibility on this issue. And clearly, I think that that raises McGowan’s stock. Again, perhaps it’s one of those things he knows he can say safely, because he’s in that district. Somebody Miller-Meeks or none, in a more competitive district, for instance, might be a little more reluctant to say that. Don’t want to upset the president’s base. But, you know, I guess the cynic in me could say McGowan has that luxury, but I’m not that cynical, and I would give him credit for stepping forward and being able to say, hey, look, this isn’t working out the way that the president says it is.

Laura Belin: I thought that Dave Dawson was extremely effective during the debate in repeatedly bringing the conversation back to the war in Iran, even when that wasn’t the direct way the question was asked and talking about the tariffs also. In a debate like this, look, this is a district with more than twice as many Republicans as Democrats, so Dave Dawson is not in a position to win this district, but can he overperform? Can he help discourage Republicans or remind Republicans or Republican-leaning independents that things really aren’t going well, that Donald Trump’s war of choice in Iran, that Donald Trump’s illegal and unconstitutional tariffs are to blame. I think that he did a really good job of doing that, and Chris McGowan, as you say, he has to be a worry a little bit about upsetting the president, but I think he’s trying to walk this line where he needs that very strong Republican turnout, not to win his race, but for Republicans to win any of these statewide races. So he needs the MAGA part of the base to be inspired and I just think that’s a very difficult needle to thread right now.

Dave Price: Hey, I already threw out a conspiracy theory about if the president will be coming to Iowa in the coming week. Eric, does it make… so I made a smart-aleck comment about the thought bubbles, right? Because I would love to know, like, deep down, how hard Ashley Hinson is going to work to appear with the president, even though he basically said at this event last Monday that he’s going to appear with Hinson. Congresswoman Miller-Meeks as well, like, is it a help or a hindrance to her to appear with him? Like, is that going to help her in that tough first district race? Does it… the early travels here in these Republican, heavily Republican areas seem to be in pretty safe spots, and it might just be juicing the overall turnout? Eric, am I… I’m all about conspiracy theories today, so I’m gonna throw another one out. Would it make the most sense for him to go in the 4th, if he does end up coming this week, to try to boost turnout there in a safe area? And then that also leaves the possibility that the folks who are in really competitive races may already be booked. You know, like Tuesday, for example, I believe Hinson has a Senate debate. So, it would be virtually impossible for her to be in Northwest Iowa, and I’m really… kind of playing…

Eric Woolson: No, I think I know where you’re going. And, you know, Hinson avoided the vice president when he was in Omaha. And so, yeah, the question that, in fact, I think you and I have talked about before is, would Hinson decide to avoid the president? Does it make more sense for him not to come into the state? I mean, it’s a reminder of gas prices. It’s a reminder of grocery prices. You know, I always hate the fact that we talk about inflation minus food and fuel.

Dave Price: Yeah.

Eric Woolson: What do most of us spend our money on? Food and fuel. And so those inflation numbers, you know, when people hear them, they have a… they don’t believe them anyway, because they know that their lives are… they are paying more. And I think it would, in a lot of respect, make more sense for the president to come into the 4th to boost turnout. He’s still going to have a great reception there, boost turnout, and that’ll help with the governor’s race, that’ll help with the Senate race. Obviously we talked about McGowan not needing that help, but even to Laura’s point earlier, that would even help with some of those legislative races. We know that the Iowa legislature is not going to, you know, flip from R to D, but we also know that it’s likely that the Republicans are going to lose some seats in the Iowa legislature too. And so, you know, it might make more sense and you talked about commitments also. This would… would he… should he go to the 4th District and do Sioux City, and of course, you can make all the logistical arguments that it’s a lot easier to fly into Sioux City than it is to fly into Keokuk. Sure. But, you know, this gives people an opportunity. They don’t have to come up with an excuse for why they don’t want to appear on the same stage with him.

Dave Price: Yeah, if since we’re doing all kinds of forecasting here, may I put Laura on the spot to end the show this week. All right, Laura, we have addressed this on the show before, but this sort of played out a little more publicly over the past week in the 3rd Congressional District. So, what strikes me as unusual about this cycle is I just saw this social media video of the Republican Congressman Zach Nunn on his phone, like, calling the Democrat Sarah Trone Garriott, I believe James Talarico in Texas, running in that Senate race against Ken Paxton, I think he did a similar thing. But they have not, as of yet, figured out a debate in this super, super competitive race, right? And so, and maybe they still will. It seems it seems hard to…

Laura Belin: No, I think it’s done. I think Wednesday, September 30th was kind of the last day of negotiations and they couldn’t agree on a date. So there will be no debate.

Dave Price: And you feel pretty strong about that, that it’s done?

Laura Belin: I believe so, that was what I was told. That the final offer, KCCI-TV, offered October 27th, which Sarah Trone Garriott’s campaign says that they accepted, but Zach Nunn’s people wanted the debate to be earlier, because early voting starts on October 14th.

Dave Price: And if I may, just for folks who maybe aren’t super familiar with TV, it is a beast for a television station to schedule a debate in the month of October. And obviously you want it in October, higher interest, you know, before a November election. But the networks these days for the most part release their new shows in October. I think it used to be earlier than that back in the day when they produced more new shows every year and remember you used to watch reruns. Before we could record them and all that kind of stuff. They don’t really do reruns anymore. And I remember my folks used to complain when it hit rerun. Oh, there’s nothing on but reruns. But anyway, you know what?

Eric Woolson: You had three choices anyway, you only had three channels.

Dave Price: That’s right.

Eric Woolson: When there were only reruns, there were only reruns.

Dave Price: Anybody under 30 right now is like, what are these old people talking about? But it is really hard. So I know KCCI is doing a million different things to try to figure out where in prime time, for example, because you have to get permission from the network to preempt a show. So like when we just did the fourth district debate in Sioux City, so that’s NBC, my station there in Sioux City, we preempted the Major League Playoff game between the Yankees and the Red Sox, and so for an hour, because they also have the CW affiliate, they were able to move the game over to there, so it’s still free broadcast channel, which not everybody has that luxury. You know, it’s an inconvenience, if you will, if you were trying to watch it on the NBC station, but they told people about what was happening, so you moved it over, then when we got done, they moved it back. KCCI doesn’t have another station in the market. You can do on one of your sub-channels or something like that, but it’s pretty limited, so… I know, I’ve heard some people kind of beaten up, like you can’t beat up the media entity, because they are… it’s really, really hard to find a time that’ll work if you’re trying to put it on television where everybody can watch. You can do off-peak time, you can just stream it on your app, you can do it at 2 in the afternoon or something like that, whatever, but if you’re trying to get a time where a bunch of people can watch, it can be tough, but it is hard to believe, right? You would think you could get both teams in a room. And there would have to be a time somewhere, someday, to do it, but if they have different… different priorities about Nunn wants it early, Trone Garriott wants it late. There may be no way to solve it.

Eric Woolson: But for a variety of reasons, we’re seeing across the country, there’s a trend across the country where fewer candidates are debating. We saw Congressman Feenstra during the Republican primary avoid all the debates. Now, that was to his detriment, certainly, but I mean, that’s a trend nationally, and as all three of us know, debates on TV are not really debates. I mean, debates kind of hit their peak at Lincoln-Douglas and maybe Kennedy-Nixon, and they have been resting on their laurels for quite a while since then. But, you know, are they informative to the public? Yeah, sure. Does the public tune into them anymore? The public sees so many commercials on each of these candidates, you know, you question how much people want to tune in and actually watch debates these days because they’re just bombarded with news anyway, but I think it’s a trend that has started and I think it’s going to, again, for a variety of reasons, one candidate or the other or both candidates don’t want to do debates. The network or the local affiliates have difficulty getting, you know, getting jumping through all those hoops that you mentioned, or people just don’t want to tune in.

Laura Belin: I mean, I would always advise a candidate to debate. Usually, the candidate who’s the head doesn’t want to debate. I, when I put this to Sarah Trone Garriott’s campaign, because Zach Nunn has been out there every day on social media saying, my opponent’s afraid to debate. I want to debate. My opponent’s scared. My opponent’s scared to show up for a debate and defend a record. And I’ve said, you know, what are you, can you tell me anything about this? And they dispute that, but they said that initially, you know, that Zach Nunn was late to agree to KCCI, and by the time he agreed, the initial dates weren’t available. And then Sarah Trone Garriott was booked for the first three weeks of October. And the only date that worked was this October 27th. I mean, I don’t know if I were scheduling a candidate, like I would probably try to rearrange the schedule to make time for a TV debate. But I do think that Zach Nunn is the one who needs the debate more. I believe that he’s probably behind, he’s acting like he’s behind. And I’ve been saying for all year that I think that that’s a race that tilts to the Democrats. So, I think it’s regrettable that there’s no debate, though. I always like watching them.

Dave Price: And I’m offended that Eric said that not everyone tunes into debates. Literally everyone was watching Channel 4 in Sioux City on Wednesday night or streaming on the app for our hour-long debate.

Eric Woolson: That was the exception. The numbers were through the roof, I’ve heard.

Dave Price: It broke the internet.

Eric Woolson: People, you know, did not want to… they didn’t want to see that Yankees game. They really wanted to see the debate.

Dave Price: More people watch this than the final episode of the RNC convention. I think he said there were like 120 million.

Eric Woolson: Yeah.

Dave Price: He somehow found, which would be, you know, one out of every three Americans apparently watched the RNC deal in Texas, according to the president. If you look into those numbers, I think we beat that. I really do. I have no idea.

Laura Belin: Dave, seriously, though, I think you and Matt Breen, thank you for asking just good, straightforward questions about real issues. I always hate it in debates when people try to ask very complicated questions or two-part questions that are easier to evade. Anyway, you hit on good topics that we needed to hear the candidates on.

Dave Price: And I know we’re going really long this week. The other thing that I would… I should put a poll up on the column this week, but we did this thing that I did back when I worked toward the end of my last several years when I worked in Des Moines. I am not personally a huge fan of, like, time limits. And I totally get the idea that you can lose control of the debate, but if it’s, you know, Mr. Woolson, you have 60 seconds, how will you end the war in Iran? You know, and then, so, for 55 seconds, you talk about how much Laura sucks. And then you say Iran, and then the timer goes off, and then it forces me to ask up, okay, dummy, you just talked about your cat, you know, whatever, whatever. This was more open-ended, and I don’t know… I think it worked without having a timer. We did do 60 seconds limits for, like, opening and closing statements or whatever. Now, it was also really, really civil, though. So, I don’t know if, like, you didn’t have them yammering on, and they weren’t going after each other. I like the format. I would be really curious for those who did tune in and watch it, or watched it later, I’d be curious what people thought of it. And I think we are using the same… I shouldn’t even say this out loud, because I’m gonna probably regret this, but I believe when we do our debate, and my company has 3 different gubernatorial debates, I’m only doing… I’m only moderating one of them. Because people… you don’t want too much Dave on TV. I believe we don’t have time limits for our one in Sioux City. So, but when it’s Rob Sand and Zach Lane out there, I’m going to be curious, I’m going to be skeptical that the civility meter will be as high as it was for Chris and Dave.

Laura Belin: I agree. But I think that, well, Rob Sand tends to try to keep his answers short though. It might work.

Dave Price: Yeah, we’ll find out. Hey, thanks for doing a little extra this week. Wanted to make sure we gave it its due time for what we just witnessed over this past week. And we’ll reassemble in 2030, and see if we’re talking about this new steel plant in Lee County, or if it was a distant memory by then, and everyone has moved on. Let’s hope that… let’s hope that whatever happens by that point benefits the people of Lee County. Our thanks to Kathy and hopefully her voice comes back. Laura didn’t really make a big deal out of this, but you are really fighting through something and I know you’re cheating with a throat lozenge. Seems like it worked your voice.

Laura Belin: Which…

Dave Price: Your voice powered through. Eric, good to see you as always, and I know you got to see the circus last night, right?

Eric Woolson: Got to see the circus last night with our grandchildren. So yeah, I’m the only one not on the injured reserve list here.

Dave Price: Yeah, but you had yours a couple weeks ago.

Eric Woolson: And that is true.

Dave Price: Thank you all for checking us out this week and thanks for sticking with us. I know we went a little long, so if you’re out for a walk when you were listening to us this week, you are going to be in that much better shape because we went twice as long for this week. I also know we have some new subscribers too. We very much appreciate you and thanks to those of you who have recently become paid subscribers. That helps pay for the production costs of this every week. Hey, we’re down to about 4 weeks until this November midterm election, so, the next month or so should be quite fascinating as we watch and try to understand everything that’s happening. Have a great weekend, have a great week ahead, and we’ll talk to you next week.

We dug into the sudden Republican pivots happening six weeks out from the election. Ashley Hinson, Zach Nunn, and Mariannette Miller-Meeks are all pushing back on the war and rising fuel costs after months of standing firmly with the president, including Nunn, who was on stage with Secretary Hegseth at the Iowa State Fair just a month ago. We talked about whether this is a real break or just safe talk now that the House is out of session until after the election.

We also covered Nunn’s Beef Act co-sponsorship pushing back on the administration’s cheaper beef imports, and debated how much weight these largely symbolic moves should really carry in our reporting.

On the campaign trail: we don’t expect Trump to visit Iowa before November, though nobody’s ruling it out completely. We flagged Wednesday’s Sioux City debate between Chris McGowan and Dave Dawson in the 4th District, and noted debates are still uncertain in the 1st and 3rd.

Finally, we broke down Judge Scott Beattie’s 60-plus-page ruling dismissing Trump’s lawsuit against Ann Selzer. First Amendment protections and a lack of any actual damages both did the case in. We expect an appeal, but we’re skeptical it goes anywhere.

Like, share, and subscribe! A huge thanks to our new paid supporters for helping keep this going. We’re just a little over a month away from election day, and we can’t wait to keep you updated as we get closer and closer. If you’d like to become a paid subscriber, please click the button above. You can make a one-time donation by clicking the button below. See ya next week.

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Welcome back, everybody, to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. I’m Dave Price. We have some new polls out — do we have some Republican pivots in position? Is there a strategy, a “strategery” happening in the final six weeks of this campaign with some Republicans in really competitive races? That’s one of the things we’re going to be talking about this week. With us this week is Republican contributor Ed Failor Jr. Hello, Ed.

Ed: Hello.

Dave Price: Proudly — for those of you watching on video — wearing his Iowa Hawkeye merch. I’m pretty sure he’s an influencer for them and getting paid under the table. But for those listening and not watching, you’re really missing out, because Kathie Obradovich will not allow Ed to take over with complete Hawkeye fervor, so she’s brought a prop this week since she neglected to bring one last week — Herky has shown up.

Kathie Obradovich: What? No, no, wrong team, sorry.

Dave Price: Sorry — size?

Kathie Obradovich: That’s a turkey.

Dave Price: Sigh, sigh, sigh, sigh. Sorry — proud alum, I’m sorry. And Laura Belin, playing Switzerland, staying neutral — hello to you as well.

Alright, Ed — well, I’ve offended Kathie because I mixed up my mascot, sorry about that. So I’m curious for you, since we talk about strategery — you’re familiar with the public polls, and some of the campaigns are getting internal polls back. It does seem like we’ve been seeing a shift, with some of our Republican members of Congress on the ballot this November, to push back a bit on some of what’s going on with their party leadership, including the president in D.C. Is that fair?

Ed: Yes, but clearly it’s not on everything — they’re not just pushing away from the president, they’re pushing back on this one topic, right? So they’re obviously seeing information — I’ve seen information too — that the war itself, and the effects of it... or “police action,” whatever we call it now, I don’t know...

Dave Price: Depends on the day — the president’s called it many different things. War, conflict, whatever.

Ed: Right, right. But anyway, they’re obviously seeing that, and quite honestly, in my view, I think they’re making a solid call. Just interesting how it progresses and when it happens — but yeah, they’re clearly seeing polling data saying, “wow, we’ve got to be for ending this thing.” So good for them for taking a stand, I guess, but that’s what they’re clearly seeing.

Dave Price: Kathie, you’ve written a couple hundred thousand gazillion stories in your career — you saw Ashley Hinson’s move this week. She’s voted against the War Powers Resolution seven times in the past — unlike Zach Nunn and Mariannette Miller-Meeks, who supported it this time before the Senate killed it Thursday. Hinson voted against it the whole time, but early this week said the war’s got to be over, Iowans shouldn’t be paying higher prices because of it. So how do you pick your words as you’re looking at your reporters’ stories on things like this? You don’t want to overplay it — it’s not like Hinson’s bailing on Trump — but is it nuanced, is it a pivot? How do you choose how to describe what’s happening?

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, speaking out against the war is a lot easier than voting against it. Zach Nunn and Miller-Meeks took a pretty obvious step away from the president by actually taking that vote. Hinson — it’s safe talk, since the House is now gone until after the election. There won’t be any more votes, so she can say what she wants without having to put a vote down on it. But still, for her — someone who’s been four-square behind Trump — to say “no, this is wrong, it’s gone on too long,” that shouldn’t be discounted. I think it’s a sign that candidates facing competitive elections are seeing how unpopular this war is getting. We’ve got diesel prices at record highs just as harvest is starting, so it shouldn’t be underplayed how much this hurts farmers right now. I think she had to say something, but I’d have respected it more if she’d actually voted for the War Powers Act.

Dave Price: Laura, what do you think? How have you followed what they’ve all been saying and doing this past week?

Laura Belin: I think it’s very performative. The Senate just had a vote yesterday that went 50–49 — literally, Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst were each the decisive vote. I didn’t hear Ashley Hinson, Zach Nunn, or Mariannette Miller-Meeks say they think Iowa’s senators should hold out and not vote to continue this war unless we get concessions. Chuck Grassley is out there posting on X that we should have a diesel export embargo to help farmers, but if he was talking to the White House about getting something in exchange for his vote against the war powers resolution, I didn’t hear anything about it.

Dave Price: And I should mention, Nunn also co-sponsored, with a member of Congress from New Mexico, the Beef Act — going back to the president’s decision to bring in lower-quality, cheaper beef filler from Argentina and Brazil to get more cheap meat into the market. Early reporting says this will have minimal impact on price, but it does provide another option for consumers. Ed, are they just selectively picking their spots here — is this more performative, in that none of it’s really going to matter?

Ed: Well, Laura’s right, and Kathie’s right — until you’re laying down votes and we see a bill on the president’s desk... part of politics and the legislative process is performative as you go through it. Until there are votes on the board and bills moving, it can’t really be described as much else, I suppose. But I believe, clearly, that Miller-Meeks and Nunn at least took a vote.

Laura Belin: I’m not a believer in doing stories about so-and-so introducing a bill that has very little chance of going anywhere — especially this one, when the House isn’t even back in session until after the election. My editorial policy is I will very rarely, if ever, write a story about someone announcing they co-sponsored a bill unless it’s actually going somewhere.

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, I think with this one, though, it was reinforcing that Nunn is trying to distance himself from the president at a time when he’s facing a rough election. This is directly calling out Trump’s order on beef imports — going directly against a Trump order. Even though the bill has no chance of passing, certainly not before the election, it does make a statement about where Nunn is trying to position himself ahead of this election. I generally agree that it’s useful to know what bills lawmakers are introducing, because they’re making a statement even if the bills have no chance of passing — but the context matters, and people should know the House is gone, so this bill is going to fall into a hole, at least until after the election.

Dave Price: What’s interesting to me with Nunn is that in August we covered his event at the Iowa State Fair featuring the Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth — a very unusual situation, having a defense secretary do a campaign event, after postponing it earlier in the year supposedly because we were at war (and we’re still at war). Hegseth said at the start of that event he was there as Pete Hegseth, not as the secretary. But the difference between Nunn standing with him in August and then, a month later, pushing back on both the beef imports and the fuel costs and the war powers vote — that’s perhaps the biggest shift of the bunch, right?

Kathie Obradovich: I’d say yeah — less than a month after standing next to the Secretary of Defense, as we still call him, not Secretary of War. The photo my D.C. bureau used with that story about the flipped vote was Hegseth and Nunn standing there in matching aviator sunglasses, acting like they were practically brothers. So it is a bigger shift. Both Nunn and Miller-Meeks are military veterans, and they made kind of nuanced arguments about why now and not earlier — which was interesting. I don’t know that it reads as anything but “this is an unpopular war and they’re facing a tough re-election.” Miller-Meeks talked about not being able to get behind a forever war without an end game in sight — though I don’t know how that’s different from the last six votes. But the Hegseth appearance really raised my eyebrows when I saw Nunn flip on it right after Hegseth was here.

Dave Price: Ed, do you expect any of our delegation on the ballot in November will appear with the president in Iowa before the election?

Ed: Wow, this is a Sophie’s choice for me. No, I would guess not — but possibly. With these sort of turns, it makes you really wonder. If I had to bet, I’d bet not, but it could certainly happen — particularly if they’re seeing numbers where a specific place would be particularly good for them. Northwest Iowa’s a great place to go do it. It wouldn’t shock me, given these turns, if they took that position.

Dave Price: A friend and I were speculating yesterday, just for fun, about where the president might go. I’d wondered — do you play it safe and go to northwest Iowa? You wouldn’t expect Chris McGowan, the 4th District candidate, to need a lot of help there, barring some really unforeseen situation, but that’d be a safe place to go if you’re just trying to juice turnout statewide.

Ed: It’s always the case in a statewide race — you’ve got to get the low-hanging fruit of the 4th District for Republicans, get turnout there, because on election night as a Republican in a statewide race you’re thinking, “okay, we’ve got Davenport, we’ve got everything — did we survive Polk County?” You know your turnout matrix — if they turn out like we think, we’ll be good. That would make the most sense, because you fish where there’s the most fish in the pond.

Kathie Obradovich: The president is currently headed to Oklahoma and Alabama, so he’s not really looking for high-risk locations right now. I thought it made perfect sense that J.D. Vance appeared in Council Bluffs — you’ve got a bi-state audience there, Iowa Republicans from southwest Iowa plus a big audience just across the river from Omaha. If Vance hadn’t just been there, that would’ve been an obvious place for Trump to go. But I don’t think he’s looking for high-risk environments right now if he wants a happy, adoring crowd.

Dave Price: If I may, a program note — selfishly. On Wednesday night, my affiliate in Sioux City, KTIV, will host the 4th District candidate debate between Chris McGowan (Republican) and Dave Dawson (Democrat). I believe that’ll be the only debate these two have this cycle. Randy Feenstra, the current congressman there who ran for governor in the primary and lost and isn’t running for anything, wasn’t a big fan of debates — I did one with him years ago, against J.D. Scholten.

Laura Belin: 2020.

Dave Price: I love how you don’t even have to think — it’s like a live Google over there.

Laura Belin: I looked it up a few months ago for a piece I wrote about Feenstra, that’s how.

Dave Price: I just remember being in the TV studio, watching Feenstra walk in, then Scholten — like you’re the Chicago Bulls announcer calling out the players, because both those guys are just tall. Though now my son is that height too, so he could hang with them. It was a standing debate, so I felt like the small point guard in the room at barely 6’1”. Anyway — that’s Wednesday night, if I may make that push. It’ll be televised in the Sioux City area and Omaha, and streamed online for anyone who wants to check it out.

Laura Belin: Well, I’ll do that dangerous thing of committing to publishing something this weekend — the piece I’ve been working on is called “Why Iowa’s 4th District Matters More Than You Think.” I would’ve finished it already, except the judge came out with the ruling in the Trump v. Selzer suit, so I had to pivot to that first.

Dave Price: Brilliant, brilliant, unplanned transition to our next subject — the lawsuit the judge dismissed this week. Since you’re our resident legal nerd who reads through all these briefings verbatim — Kathie probably does too — when this was filed there was a lot of cynicism and skepticism that it would survive all the court challenges. I suppose technically it’s not done-done, the Trump team could keep pursuing it, but can you give us the cliff notes on the judge’s ruling this week against Ann Selzer?

Laura Belin: Judge Scott Beattie wrote a really comprehensive ruling. The hearing was about two and a half months ago, so the longer it stretched out, I figured this was going to be a lengthy, substantive ruling — and it was, more than 60 pages. He went on two tracks: the first half explained the constitutional issues, saying the First Amendment bars these claims — the poll, and any reporting on the poll, is classic protected political speech. You can’t make a pollster or a newspaper liable for reporting on a poll; it’s not commercial speech. The second half walked through — even setting the First Amendment aside — how this fails as a matter of state law. They brought the suit under the Iowa Consumer Fraud Statute, and he went through, very granularly, all the elements of that statute that weren’t met here: there’s no consumer transaction (a newspaper article about a poll isn’t a consumer transaction), and there was no evidence that Trump or the other plaintiffs — Miller-Meeks and Brad Sherman — relied on the poll to make any decisions, or spent any money because of it. In fact, it was the opposite — Trump immediately called it fake and said everyone knew it couldn’t be true. The Trump legal team has told other media they plan to appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court, but I’d be surprised if they have any luck there — the judge laid out two very strong cases for dismissal.

Dave Price: Kathie, you worked with Ann when you were at the Des Moines Register — you know her longer than I do. As a reporter, this always seemed hard from the beginning, because you almost had to entertain the idea that Ann had some kind of malicious intent to run a false poll — which was hard to picture, based on those of us who know Ann. It also seemed like a crazy thing for a professional pollster to do, someone who makes most of her business from corporate clients — if she torpedoed one on purpose, she’d torpedo her whole business. How did you process this — the idea it could be an intentional act to sabotage the president?

Kathie Obradovich: I wasn’t personally writing these stories, so I didn’t have to straddle that bar the way reporters writing it did, giving appropriate weight to each side. But I emailed Ann when the suit was filed, and again after the ruling came down, and basically said I never believed this was going anywhere, but I felt bad she had to go through the ordeal. She’s one of the most principled people I know — anyone who’s worked with her on polling would never believe she’d falsify results for any reason. She never cared who was winning a poll; what she cared about was making it as accurate as possible. The tide of polling being harder to do accurately, especially political polling, caught up with her at exactly the wrong time — I think it was circumstance more than anything. The fact that we have a president willing to go to court over something like this — nobody could have predicted that, even knowing Trump, before Trump. I think it was interesting this ruling came down the same week a judge enjoined the White House from kicking out CNN, Politico, and MSNOW — a couple of favorable rulings for freedom of the press to cover the presidency. I fully expect that’s being appealed too, if it hasn’t been already. So there’s still fight to go. Iowa has an anti-SLAPP law, which basically means you can’t file a frivolous lawsuit over First Amendment speech just to punish the speaker or news organization — but that law came into play a little too late here, and because it was filed under the Consumer Protection Act, there was some question about whether it would even apply.

Dave Price: Ed, that poll right before the election had Kamala Harris up by a lot, and we know Trump won by a lot. What was your take on how this all went down?

Ed: When I first saw it come out, I thought, okay, she’s one of the consistently best pollsters, but for whatever reason the doors came off this one. I mean, that happens — I’ve seen thousands of polls, and some that look good on the face but seem a little skewed once you break them down, like a disproportionate share of conservatives or liberals in the sample. Those things just happen. From the get-go I looked at it and kind of dismissed it — it never struck me as deliberate, just that one of the very best got one wrong. And — I think it was Laura who said it — the nature of how polling happens, the bad timing, people have changed drastically the last couple of years in how they’re reached and how they respond. It’s not a perfect science — it’s a snapshot in time. That was my thought when it came out, and I was surprised to see a lawsuit.

Laura Belin: I realize, Dave, I should explain — this judge wasn’t deciding whether the poll was fabricated or whether there was any merit to what Trump said about it. At this stage, a motion to dismiss, the judge has to look at all the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. So even under the assumption — as he wrote it — that they didn’t follow the stated methodology, that they made up the numbers, that the newspaper deliberately published something they knew to be false — even under that scenario, it still doesn’t qualify as consumer fraud, and it’s still precluded under the First Amendment.

Kathie Obradovich: It’s worth pointing out they didn’t offer a shred of evidence that there was any effort to fabricate anything with the poll — they weren’t required to at this stage, and that would’ve come later if the case continued. But it’d be very hard for them to prove anything like that. And from the beginning, I thought — how is Trump going to show any damages? He won, he won handily, by 13 points in Iowa. How did this poll damage him? There was zero evidence of that.

Laura Belin: Right, that’s another part of it — even if the poll had been fabricated, there were no damages to any of the plaintiffs. During the July hearing, the judge asked Ellen Ostergaard, the attorney representing Trump, what they wanted to uncover in discovery if the case proceeded. She said they wanted to know whether a poll was even conducted at all — whether the numbers were just made up. So they basically admitted they had no evidence — that was the evidence they’d be fishing for if they got into discovery and the internal communications of Gannett, the Des Moines Register, Selzer, and her employees. The chilling effect on the media would’ve been huge.

Dave Price: Alright, as we wrap up — any other random things? Final thoughts — Laura’s already on record about what she’ll post this weekend, so we’ll play that back next week if she doesn’t come through. I’m prepping for my debate Wednesday, looking forward to seeing McGowan and Dawson. As one of you mentioned before we started recording, there are so many debates in October — four for governor, two for Senate. At this point I don’t know how many congressional debates there are — just the one in the 4th that I know of. As we record Friday morning, I don’t believe Sarah Corkery has agreed to debate Zach Nunn in the 3rd yet. Has Christina Bohannan agreed to any debates in the 1st?

Laura Belin: There is one — not the Iowa Press debate — I think it’s KWQC. There is going to be one, I just can’t remember which day.

Dave Price: My station. And I think there’s one in the 2nd too — I believe KCRG is doing that one. I’ll just point out my Gray TV stations are kicking butt getting these debates — though we don’t have one in Des Moines, otherwise we’d probably have one there too. Just saying. But holy cow, there will be so many debates this month, it could be overwhelming.

Laura Belin: If Sarah Corkery doesn’t agree to debate, I think that’s a strong indication their polling shows her ahead — and we could infer the same from Zach Nunn flipping his position on the war. I’d always advise candidates to agree to a debate, but usually the candidate who thinks they’re ahead is the one more reluctant to debate.

Kathie Obradovich: Except Chris McGowan, maybe.

Dave Price: Yeah — we’ll see how many cycles he agrees to if he ends up winning. But props to them in the 4th for agreeing to do this. All right, everybody—

Ed: Whoa, whoa, whoa — I didn’t get my parting thing!

Dave Price: Oh, I’m sorry?

Ed: Michigan 15, Iowa 10 — it’s gonna be a safety.

Dave Price: Really?

Kathie Obradovich: Okay.

Dave Price: That’s fair. Kathie, response?

Kathie Obradovich: Hey, just go Cyclones.

Ed: Well, we’re not playing Iowa State — no problem there.

Kathie Obradovich: I’m going to the homecoming game, so I won’t be there this weekend — I’m going to the homecoming game.

Dave Price: Nice. Alright, everybody, have a great weekend. Thanks for your thoughts, thank you all for joining us this week — we appreciate your support. Please like, share, subscribe, forward — all the things you can do to help this grow. We appreciate you doing that week after week. Thanks to those of you who’ve become new paid subscribers to help pay the bills — we appreciate you too. Have a great week, we’ll talk to you next week in October.

Chuck Grassley turns 93, soon becoming the second longest-serving senator in U.S. history — though Eric argues the milestone doesn’t sidestep the harder question of age and capacity. Laura notes he still won’t rule out running again in 2028, when he’d be 95.

The panel also digs into November’s ballot amendment requiring a supermajority to raise income and corporate taxes. Kathie lays out the opposition’s case: it won’t stop tax hikes, just push lawmakers toward more regressive options like a sales tax hike. Laura shares her repeated, unsuccessful attempts to pin down Rob Sand’s position, despite his own warnings about a looming state budget shortfall.

Candidate visibility comes up too — Rob Sand’s near-daily public events versus Zach Lahn’s more private appearances, and Ashley Hinson skipping JD Vance’s Council Bluffs stop this week. Iowa’s 2nd District also gets a look back, as Laura’s early call that it would be a genuine toss-up, given the district’s dramatic Obama-to-Trump swing, has now been borne out.

The episode wraps with congratulations to Iowa Capital Dispatch’s Clark Kauffman, whose reporting on nursing home abuse and neglect earned the outlet its first-ever Media Impact Award from the Iowa Developmental Disabilities Council.

This weekly podcast continues to grow. In downloads, views, followers, subscriptions, you name it. As we get closer to the November election we’ll have news and info that you won’t find anywhere else (like normal.) If you’d like to become a paid subscriber to help cover costs of production please click the button above. You can also make a one-time donation using the button below. Thanks to all of you that have already contributed. This isn’t possible without you!

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Hello, everybody. Welcome back to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. I am Dave Price. This week, grab your you-know-what — Chuck Grassley celebrates another birthday. The crystal ball makes another move, and it involves another Iowa congressional district. Plus, we’re going to talk about that constitutional amendment, which could make it more difficult to raise taxes in the future. With us this week, Kathie Obradovich — I was there when she received yet another award, we’ll talk about that this week — and Laura Belin.

Laura Belin: Good morning.

Dave Price: And back by popular demand, longtime Republican strategist, former journalist, former Democratic strategist, Eric Woolson. Hello, sir.

Eric Woolson: Great to be back.

Dave Price: Back from his world travels as well. He will have a Netflix documentary on his world travels coming up — if it’s not, it should be. For those of you watching on video, Eric, can you tell us what’s in the visual behind you?

Eric Woolson: I didn’t like the blurred background last week, so that’s an aerial of my farm down in Wayne County.

Dave Price: And on that farm you grow?

Eric Woolson: Catnip.

Dave Price: Catnip, of course you do.

Eric Woolson: My tenant’s a traditional farmer, so he grows corn and soybeans — we’re not that far off.

Dave Price: Alright, now how’d you get into catnip?

Eric Woolson: My son and I wanted a cat, and my wife wouldn’t let us have one, so we said, well, we’re going to be growing catnip on the farm, and we need an official spokescat. In 20 years, I don’t think that cat has ever sold any catnip, but —

Dave Price: That ploy worked.

Eric Woolson: He really is the most interesting man alive, is he not?

Kathie Obradovich: He is, and my cat approves, by the way.

Eric Woolson: Excellent — we’ll be looking for those campaign ads!

Kathie Obradovich: Outstanding.

Dave Price: Alright, so grab your you-know-what, as Chuck Grassley — the Dairy Queen aficionado — would say. Eric, you wrote a book about the senator back in the day. He is 93 years old. I’m guessing you’re not surprised he’s lived to see 93?

Eric Woolson: That’s what clean living does for you. I was looking up some numbers last night — sixth longest-serving senator, but third oldest. Obviously Strom Thurmond, at 99, has the record, but Theodore Green, a Rhode Island Democrat, was 93 when he retired, so Grassley will become the second longest-serving senator on December 20th. I think you can hold two truths about Grassley at once — his longevity and public service are extraordinary, but at the same time, we’re entitled to a serious conversation about age and capacity and the transfer of political power. Those aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s not really “is 93 too old, or 90, or 85, or 80” — it’s whether this individual is demonstrably capable of performing every important task of the job. That’s the conversation that should always be there.

Dave Price: Laura, didn’t you ask Rob Sand at a news conference about his idea for age limits?

Laura Belin: I don’t know if I asked him specifically about that. He’s talked about age limits but hasn’t said exactly what age is too old — he says he’d be open to different ideas. It’s interesting — you may have seen a reporter ask Senator Grassley recently, similar to what he was asked about a year or so ago. He’s not ruling out running for another term in 2028, when he’d be 95. I think he will retire in 2028, but it’s interesting that he won’t just say that. To me it seems pretty clear that at 95, you shouldn’t be running for another six-year term.

Dave Price: Kathie, you were like 11 when you started covering Chuck Grassley, right?

Kathie Obradovich: Yes, let’s go with that. A couple things — one, I hope Senator Grassley has a freezer in his office, because judging from social media, the amount of Dairy Queen treats coming his way on his birthday... if he had to actually sit down and eat all of that, even with help from staff — and I hope he hasn’t become lactose intolerant in his old age, because even one Dairy Queen blizzard would cause havoc for me, I can tell you.

Laura Belin: My neighborhood Dairy Queen, in Windsor Heights, is actually the one that inspired the viral tweet.

Kathie Obradovich: I do love a blizzard. Second thing — the Board of Regents this week gave UNI official permission to open essentially the Chuck and Barbara Grassley Center, where the senator’s papers will be donated. They approved it on his birthday, which was nice. Interestingly, they’re withholding the naming of the center until he leaves office. I don’t know if any of you remember, but that became an issue with the Regents when Tom Harkin was originally going to put his center at Iowa State — some Regents voted against naming it after a sitting senator, since he could be raising money for the center while still in office, and they thought that was an ethics issue. So it’s interesting they’re withholding the Grassley Center’s naming until he retires. Harkin did eventually pull out of Iowa State, but that was over an ag-research dispute, unrelated to the naming — just a bit of history I thought was interesting.

Dave Price: On the totally non-political side, I was also thinking — how cool is it that Barbara is also with us. She’s slightly younger, I think, right, Eric?

Eric Woolson: I think so — actually, I think she might be even slightly older. She had a previous marriage and a son from it when she met Grassley. But they’ve been together since the early ‘50s — going on over 70 years now.

Dave Price: And I believe they still go to the same restaurant they went to when they were dating.

Eric Woolson: Creatures of habit.

Dave Price: Which is cool in its own right, that the place still exists.

Let’s talk about an event we’ve teed up a few times on the show and never quite gotten to. This past week, the Republican Party of Iowa held an event — billed largely as another “Josh Turek is too liberal” event — but they also talked about the constitutional amendment going before voters in November, which would make it harder for the legislature to raise taxes. It reminds me of the old “when you have the majority, be bold, kick down the door” mentality. Republicans are pushing this through even amid some uncertainty about where they’ll stand with voters after November — getting it locked in now, just in case.

Laura Belin: Only income and corporate taxes, though, Dave — not all taxes.

Dave Price: Good point.

Eric Woolson: Exactly.

Dave Price: There hasn’t been a ton of coverage of this, so I have a feeling it’ll sneak up on some voters when they see it on the ballot.

Eric Woolson: Yeah, a lot of people forget to turn the ballot over — I suspect it’s on the back. It hasn’t gotten much coverage, and speaking as an average voter, I don’t know that much about it myself. One thing I found interesting: the House vote to put the amendment up was 57 Republicans, no Democrats — it didn’t reach the two-thirds threshold you’d actually need to raise taxes under the new rule. That’s one of the hurdles right there. I can see the appeal — “we need a supermajority to raise taxes” sounds great on its face — but from a policy standpoint, having worked for the governor, I’d say there are just too many flaws in this one.

Kathie Obradovich: It does tie your hands. And as Laura mentioned, this only constrains votes on personal and corporate income taxes. There’s now organized opposition, and there’s also a campaign by Iowans for Tax Relief in favor — so we have organized campaigns on both sides now, which should raise awareness, especially with more media coverage of events like this week’s. Opponents argue this won’t actually stop tax increases — it’ll just push lawmakers toward other revenue sources, most likely the sales tax. And our tax system has already become more regressive: the legislature flattened income tax rates to 3.8% flat, so everyone pays the same rate regardless of income — a less progressive system than before. Iowans for Tax Relief will significantly outspend the opposition, though opponents are raising enough to run at least a digital campaign and maybe some yard signs. There was also a Suffolk University poll last month showing the electorate is very close on this — only a 3-4 point gap between support and opposition — but also a very large share of undecided or unaware voters.

Laura Belin: I’ve tried repeatedly to get an answer from Rob Sand on this, since he’s been talking about the “fiscal time bomb” coming — the budget surplus they’ve used to pad spending is likely to run out by 2028, maybe 2029 or 2030 at the latest. I’ve told him: if this amendment passes, you’re basically locking in regressive tax increases, like a sales tax hike. The first time I asked him, before a town hall, he said he hadn’t read it. Weeks later I brought a printed copy to another town hall, and he said he wasn’t going to make a snap decision five minutes before an event. I find it striking that he won’t take a public position, because if this passes, it could really cripple his administration when the budget crunch hits.

Dave Price: Laura, what’s your sense of how vocal other Democratic candidates will be on this?

Laura Belin: I think people don’t want to alienate Republican-leaning voters — the standard GOP line is that Democrats always want to raise your taxes, so Democrats don’t want to walk into that by opposing a measure that “makes it harder to raise taxes.” It’s also a little complicated to explain: this only limits taxes that would make wealthier people pay their fair share, not the taxes that hit working people harder. There’s a way it could be framed, but I understand the reluctance. Sand in particular has been emphasizing his Republican support, so he’s probably especially reluctant to take a strong position — but I think it would be very damaging to the next governor if this passes.

Kathie Obradovich: It’s also pragmatic on Sand’s part — he knows he’ll likely have a Republican legislature if he wins, at least for two years, maybe longer, so he won’t be able to raise taxes anyway. In a way this ties his hands further, but his hands are already tied by the legislative majority.

Dave Price: Related but unrelated — we’re recording Friday morning, about six-plus weeks out from the election. Does it matter that Rob Sand seems to have at least one public event a day, with advance media notice, while Zach Lahn has been doing far fewer for several weeks — more private appearances, like the Clay County Fair or shooting at Brownells, with social videos but not traditional campaign-style events? Am I overthinking that?

Eric Woolson: No, I think it does matter. If you let the Creston radio station or the Spencer radio station know you’re going to be somewhere, maybe people don’t turn out, but at least they know you’re working hard and campaigning, and local media covers you. I think back to a 1988 congressional race I covered in Waterloo, where a candidate would call me every night and say, “I was in Decorah today, but you can’t write about it — I don’t want my opponent to know my strategy.” And I’d say — guess what, no one else will know your strategy either. Granted, traditional media carried more weight back then. But the bottom line is you’ve got to tell people what you’re doing and get out there. I know private events have become more common because there always seem to be protesters looking to disrupt things, but you still have to be in public. If I were running that campaign, I’d be saying, “here’s where we’ll be today, and we want everybody to show up.” That strategy has clearly worked for Sand — I know a number of Republicans around the state who’ve shown up at his events, and you don’t win someone over if you’re not talking to them.

Dave Price: Speaking of events — Lahn will be at the JD Vance event in Council Bluffs on Friday. Ashley Hinson, according to other reporting, already has events planned and won’t be attending. I’m curious whether we’ll see her appear alongside the president or VP over the next six weeks, or whether any of them come specifically to help her.

Eric Woolson: We’ve seen a number of stories around the country of Republicans saying “I’m running my own campaign” — which is always code for “stay away.”

Dave Price: It’d be especially interesting in a state where Trump has dominated three straight general elections. If he’s not visible here, that would be notable.

Eric Woolson: You look at her old district — Trump won Iowa by 10, but she won her district by 14 that same year. Maybe her philosophy is, “I can do this on my own, because I already have.”

Dave Price: Speaking of her old district — Laura, how far back were you first flagging Iowa’s 2nd District as one to watch?

Laura Belin: I’ve been saying it all year — as soon as Shannon Lundgren dropped out and it was clear Joe Mitchell would be the nominee. I think I first said it around last December, after a Tennessee special election showed a massive shift even though the Democrat didn’t win. I said if we saw anything like a 10-15 point shift, keep an eye on the 2nd — it’s an open seat with some of the largest Obama-to-Trump swings in the entire country in northeast Iowa, and the GOP nominee isn’t deeply rooted in the district. I’ve been saying it’s very much in play, and now several ratings outlets have moved it from “lean Republican” to “toss-up.”

Dave Price: Eric, does that shift matter? There’s no incumbent running, since Hinson’s running for Senate instead of reelection.

Eric Woolson: Adding to what Laura said — Trump was plus-10 statewide, and Hinson won in 2024 by 15, but she was a well-known former TV anchor. The district itself is only plus-4 Republican, closer than people think. Mitchell moved into the district, to its edge in Clear Lake, and isn’t well known to voters. Fundraising and polling have both been close. I’d call it a toss-up, and if I were managing that campaign with a plus-4 environment, I wouldn’t be sleeping well over these next seven weeks.

Laura Belin: Joe Mitchell himself said in July, at the Family Leadership Summit, that the problem is Ashley Hinson made people think this wasn’t a competitive district when it actually is. When she first ran for Senate, ratings outlets called it “safe” or “likely Republican” — it took a while for them to even recognize it as “lean Republican.”

Kathie Obradovich: I’m not seeing much from the Mitchell campaign either — not a lot of releases about public appearances, though maybe they’re just not sending them to us. I do see him at multi-candidate events — Mariannette Miller-Meeks’ tailgate, the state fair soapbox — but I’ve been wondering what his day-to-day campaign looks like, since we’re not getting notices about him traveling the district, and I’m not seeing much news coverage of it either.

Dave Price: Same with the 1st District — we hear more from Lindsey James, but not much from Christina Bohannon’s campaign in terms of advance media notices, even though this is her third run.

Laura Belin: I asked her campaign a while back to let me know about events in my corner of the district, and then saw last weekend she’d done meet-and-greets in Norwalk and Newton — I only found out afterward, from photos on social media.

Dave Price: Makes me wonder if some campaigns have moved past traditional media entirely, toward more direct organizing. It seems like going through media would amplify your message to more people, but Eric, am I outdated in that thinking?

Eric Woolson: I’m a dinosaur too, honestly — that’s part of why I got out of the business. I still value traditional media and always left the social media side to people decades younger than me. I understand its value, but there are still a lot of voters like me who aren’t heavily dependent on social media and rely on traditional media day in, day out.

Dave Price: I don’t even know what category we’re in anymore — is this podcast traditional or new media?

Laura Belin: Podcasts are new media.

Dave Price: So we do both. Way to go. And I’d like to thank Eric for reminding us how incredibly popular TV anchors are, which is apparently why Ashley’s done so well in the 2nd District.

Eric Woolson: It’s not just Ashley — male anchors are just as popular as female anchors.

Dave Price: Only in their own minds.

Eric Woolson: You probably can’t go to the grocery store for milk without signing autographs.

Dave Price: That is definitely the case. I’ll leave everyone with that thought — may not be accurate, but it is indeed a thought. Thank you, Eric. Thank you, Kathie. Thank you, Laura. Have a great weekend.

Laura Belin: You too.

Dave Price: Wait — we can’t let Kathie go. I was standing a foot away from her watching her pull in another award for her organization, and I have to ask about it. That was pretty cool and emotional, right?

Kathie Obradovich: It was a cool event — the Iowa Developmental Disabilities Council gave Iowa Capital Dispatch their first-ever Media Impact Award. The award was really based on reporting by Clark Kaufman — detailed coverage, since our launch, of abuse and neglect in long-term care facilities and nursing homes. They said, essentially, we wouldn’t know about this without Iowa Capital Dispatch’s reporting, so all credit goes to Clark. I was there because Clark was on a well-deserved vacation, wandering Yellowstone and Grand Teton and apparently dodging bears, judging from his Facebook feed — every time he leaves on vacation I tell him not to get eaten by a bear. Congratulations to Clark — that honor is really on the basis of his reporting. It was also a great event — Dave moderated a really interesting panel on a legislative initiative the council spearheaded last year, and I liked the approach behind how that campaign succeeded. I may write about it at some point. It was a fun group to be around.

Laura Belin: Well-deserved — there are stories we simply wouldn’t know about without Clark.

Dave Price: For Clark, for sure. I’ve been part of that Make Your Mark event for about 10 years now, and that legislative panel was so cool. The advocates were primarily people with visual impairments, and they walked through what it took from the start to identify a problem — like getting help reading prescriptions at pharmacies, since they can’t read a traditional pill bottle — and then the whole process of organizing, building a message, and getting up to the Capitol to personally meet with legislators. Brett Barker from Nevada led it on the House side, handing off to Carol Warby from Ames on the Senate side — the two already knew each other. It was a great setup: advocates explaining what it took, legislators explaining how to actually get their attention amid being bombarded with requests, and it helped that both legislators had grandparents who’d dealt with sight challenges, so there was a personal connection on top of their prior relationship. The event is always incredibly inspiring — people overcoming real hardship, and it gets emotional every year I’ve been there, myself included. It’s such an inspiring day to be part of.

Kathie Obradovich: It was very cool.

Dave Price: Alright, I’ve got to wrap this up before I start bawling — ten years of meeting people like that puts everything in perspective, especially on the days you’re tempted to complain about something small. Thank you all, great to see you this week, thanks for your contributions as always.

And thanks to everyone tuning in — thanks to those who like, share, and subscribe, which is how we keep growing week after week, and to those who’ve become new or continuing financial supporters covering our production costs. If you’ve been thinking about supporting the show, that’s how you keep us coming back week after week. Have a great week ahead, and we’ll talk to you next week.

This week, we paused to remember September 11th, 25 years later. Kathie, Laura, and Ed each shared where they were that day. Kathie watched the towers fall live on TV, Laura was in London and saw the shock ripple through Britain (which lost 67 citizens that day), and Ed watched fighter jets and Air Force One crisscross an eerily empty sky over Iowa. It’s a reminder of how much the world shifted that morning, and how differently a new generation experiences that history.

On the political side, we dug into the GOP’s midterm convention in Dallas and Trump’s surprise pitch to send every American adult $5,000. Ed broke down why he sees it as inflationary deficit spending rather than a “revenue hit,” and Laura pointed out this is just the latest in a string of promised dividends (DOGE checks, tariff dividends) that haven’t materialized. Ashley Hinson, for her part, stayed carefully noncommittal when asked about it back home in Iowa.

We also talked Cy-Hawk weekend politics. Tailgate stops are now basically mandatory campaign stops, from Zach Wahls to Mariannette Miller-Meeks’ star-studded tailgate. We closed with Martin O’Malley’s visit to stump for Social Security solvency alongside Josh Turek, plus the news that Iowa’s caucuses are now officially locked in as first-in-the-nation for 2028.

Thanks for listening as always. If you would like to become a paid subscriber to help cover the costs of production please click the ‘Subscribe now’ button above. If you’d could spare a few dollars for a one-time donation please click the button below. We appreciate you!

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Hi everyone, and welcome back to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. If you’re watching the video version of this, you can tell it’s a Cy-Hawk weekend — one of our contributors this week wants you to know what he’s proudly wearing. We’ll get to him in a moment.

We also have a somber remembrance this week: 25 years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. We’ll talk about that a little. A former presidential candidate came to Iowa — that seems to happen every week now — in this case it was Martin O’Malley, talking about Social Security. We’ll talk about whether we agree that Social Security will be a big issue for voters this November. Plus, President Trump wants to give you $5,000 — but there’s a big catch. We’ll cover that and more.

Let’s bring on our panelists. Mr. Iowa Hawkeye, demonstrating his pride — Ed Failor Jr., longtime Republican advisor and staffer. Hello, sir.

Ed Failor: Hello, how are you today?

Dave Price: We’re good. Laura Belin, our regular. Kathie Obradovich, our regular — not that you’re “regular,” you know what I mean.

Kathie Obradovich: Well, I have to say, I wasn’t prepared for the rivalry.

Dave Price: Oh.

Kathie Obradovich: Because I am, I think, the only Cyclone on the panel here. But Ed, hat tip to you.

Laura Belin: I’m neutral — I’m Switzerland on the Iowa/Iowa State game, because I’m a Michigan fan.

Dave Price: We pledge civility on this show, but Cy-Hawk may bring some other emotion out this week. We’ll see how Ed and Kathie coexist.

Ed Failor: I’m an elephant.

Kathie Obradovich: Cyclone.

Ed Failor: I’m always nice to the younger sibling who just can’t get by.

Dave Price: And for those watching the video version — Ed’s on the mend here. You good? You’ve got a big bandage on your forehead.

Ed Failor: Yeah, just a little skin issue — sun damage and all that. Had a small thing taken care of yesterday, and I’ve got to leave this on for a day and a half or two days. So yeah, I’m golden.

Dave Price: All good, good to hear.

Remembering September 11th

Dave Price: I thought this week we should address — we’re recording on September 11th. I know this drops on the weekend, but there were a lot of moments throughout Friday looking back 25 years. It’s one of those things where you realize your age a bit — neither of my kids was alive when the 9/11 attacks happened. I have a coworker in television who’s only 24, and when we were talking about story ideas for 9/11, I figured she wouldn’t know much about it firsthand. Kathie, do you remember what was happening in your life on September 11, 2001?

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, I was still working for the Lee Enterprises papers. I remember the day vividly — I was getting ready for work with the TV on, half-watching while I got dressed, and when I turned it on, the first tower had already been hit. So then I’m glued to the TV, assuming at that point it was a terrible accident. I was still watching when the second plane hit the tower.

Honestly, it makes me tear up right now — I literally burst into tears when I saw it. The weeks afterward were just a blur. We were wondering whether the state capitol would be a target — Tom Vilsack was governor at the time — and there was a lot of discussion about Homeland Security and what could be at risk in Iowa: the water supply, the food supply. There was a lot of talk about securing Iowa’s food supply because of the sudden insecurity everyone felt. But yeah, I’ll never forget that morning, watching that plane hit the second tower.

Dave Price: I had a similar experience. I slept in that day and missed the first one — a friend called me, I flipped on the TV, and then saw the second one. Laura, what do you remember of that day?

Laura Belin: I was in graduate school, living in London, so my morning was completely normal. I watched the BBC noontime news and nothing was happening yet — the first plane hit a little before 2 p.m. in Britain. Somebody called me, and I turned on the TV a little after 2.

A lot of people don’t realize the 9/11 attacks were the deadliest terror attack in British history — at least 67 UK citizens were killed, mostly in the World Trade Center: some on the observation deck, some working at Cantor Fitzgerald, some passengers on the planes. No IRA attack in the UK ever killed nearly as many people. It was a massive story — for weeks afterward, if people heard my American accent, they’d say, “We’re so sorry for what happened to your country.” British media coverage focused a lot on the British victims too, but it was an unbelievable, devastating experience — people in Europe really felt the scale of the calamity.

Dave Price: Ed, where were you back then?

Ed Failor: I was at Iowans for Tax Relief in Muscatine when it happened. What stands out to me — the actual events were awful, obviously — but I remember going out into the yard just to catch my breath and look around. There was no air traffic. It was eerie. Then I saw jets, probably F-16s, come screaming west to east. I’m an Air Force veteran, I worked in ops, so I thought, “The president’s probably in the air right now.” Then they came screaming back. And then, at a much slower pace, another big plane came through — that had to be Air Force One, making its way from Omaha back to DC.

I remember thinking: the only things in the sky right now are our president and some fighter jets. That felt almost as profound, in some ways, as the tragedy itself — like, wow, the world’s changed forever. Nothing’s going to be the same. That’s what I remember feeling, watching those planes go back and forth.

Dave Price: I remember our television newsroom — everybody scrambling, rushing in without even being called, but not really knowing what to do. Like Kathie said — is the state capitol safe? The airport had shut down, so we had crews out there talking to grounded, confused passengers walking off planes. As a reporter, you’re processing what’s happening as an American, while also trying to figure out what the story should even be.

The technology was so different back then — today it’d all be social media and digital, but this was the early days of that. We interviewed all kinds of people and shot stories that never aired, because the networks were on 24/7 for days and there wasn’t room. Local TV was kind of stuck, still transitioned to the old world, rushing from place to place trying to figure out what to do — but feeling kind of useless.

Laura Belin: The BBC also preempted all other coverage — wall to wall, that day and the next.

Dave Price: Yeah, it was...

Kathie Obradovich: There were 13 people with Iowa ties killed that day, either at the towers or on United Flight 93, which people remember crash-landed in Pennsylvania after passengers realized they were being hijacked and brought the plane down. And here’s how small a world it is — two of the people who passed away that day had siblings still in Iowa whom I personally know. I grew up with one family in Ames, the Haviland family — one of the younger brothers of the man who passed away was a classmate of mine. It tells you what a small community Iowa really is.

Laura Belin: It really changed a lot of people’s lives. I remember soapbox speeches — Lindsey James said she decided to become a chaplain after 9/11 because she knew someone on Flight 93. And Nicholas Gluba, the Libertarian who ran for governor, decided to join the Marines after 9/11. A lot of people made huge, life-changing decisions because of what happened.

Kathie Obradovich: One of our current statehouse newsroom editors, Tim Lambert — he’s now editor of the Pennsylvania Capital-Star — Flight 93 actually crash-landed on family land of his in Pennsylvania. It sounded like the crash field spread over a multiple-mile area. We picked up an interesting story from Stateline where he talked about that experience. It’s still, I think, reverberating today in how it touched people all over.

Dave Price: For sure.

RNC Midterm Convention & the $5,000 Idea

Dave Price: Far different subject — this week in Dallas, the Republican National Committee held a midterm convention. We’re used to seeing these every four years in presidential cycles, but this was a mid-cycle one. We’ve had a lot of unusual things happen this midterm cycle — redistricting, and now a midterm convention, and only on one side; Democrats didn’t do their own version.

Ed, when you heard this was happening — with your strategist brain — what was your first thought? Was this a Trump-the-showman move, or what?

Ed Failor: My first thought was: I hope it’s not tying up too much candidate time, because they need to be raising money and talking to constituents — that was my very first thought. On the other hand, as a group cheerleading exercise to get people fired up and get attention, I can understand it. But honestly, my first reaction was hoping everybody was still out there raising money and doing their thing. A week in Dallas is cool, and if it gets attention, good for them — but that was my honest first thought.

Dave Price: And that’s because of how many years you’ve spent as a campaign staffer, right? You know how important that time is.

Ed Failor: Well before 9/11, yeah.

Dave Price: Laura, is it a problem that Democrats didn’t do one too? Do Republicans get all the attention, or is this overhyped?

Laura Belin: Sort of. My initial reaction was: wow, Republicans are really worried about GOP base turnout. I can’t think of another reason to do an event like this other than being worried about firing up loyal Republicans. Historically, as long as I’ve been following things, Republicans have had higher turnout than Democrats in Iowa midterms — but it does seem like this concern about an enthusiasm gap is real.

I don’t know how many Iowa candidates went down there. I know Zach Mitchell went, and Ashley Hinson did too, though not for the whole week. There are pros and cons to Republicans tying themselves more closely to Trump — with his approval underwater, that might not help broadly, but it should help with base turnout.

Dave Price: Kathie, you had a staffer talk to Ashley Hinson when she got back — she was only in Dallas on Wednesday, then flew back for events on Thursday, including one at a childcare facility in Carlisle (I think the same place Governor Reynolds visited a couple years ago). Your writer asked her about Dallas, and specifically about Trump’s idea during his speech of giving every American adult $5,000 — contingent on Republicans holding the House and Senate, with a requirement to spend it in the U.S.

Kathie Obradovich: Right, no going to Canada to spend it.

Dave Price: Hopefully not. Good point. But you had a story about how Hinson responded — pretty noncommittal, really.

Kathie Obradovich: I’d say very committed to being noncommittal. She said she doesn’t support anything without taking a good look at it, but didn’t rule it out either. She rolled it into being willing to look at anything that helps affordability for middle-class, hardworking families — her reason for being at the childcare center was to talk about childcare costs. She classified Trump’s idea as something worth considering if it helps families feeling the pinch, and left it there. She was also fairly noncommittal about whether Trump should come campaign for her — said sure, she’d welcome it, but had no plans for anything imminent.

Dave Price: Ed, you led Iowans for Tax Relief back in the day. Hearing the president’s comments, and later analysis suggesting this could be a $1.2–$1.3 trillion hit to the Treasury — as someone who I assume still believes in fiscal conservatism, is this fiscally responsible?

Ed Failor: I’ll start with this — it was just words. I haven’t seen a bill written. So who knows. But putting on my economics degree hat: it’s not really a “revenue hit,” it’s an expenditure of money we don’t have. We’re $40 trillion in debt, and this would add $1.2–$1.4 trillion. Either they’re putting it on the credit card, or they’re giving people their own money back — those are really the two ways to look at it.

My concerns: first, the redistribution-of-wealth aspect — never a fan of that. But the bigger concern is how inflationary it would be, pumping $1.2–$1.4 trillion into the economy. That should be a real concern. And it compounds the $40 trillion debt — we’ve gotten to a point where we don’t even comprehend what these numbers mean anymore. It should worry people both that the money’s coming at all, and how inflationary it could be.

Dave Price: It was interesting — in some Republican reaction, if Biden’s spending caused inflation, this seems similar: pumping out a ton of money all at once, in theory, if this is even real. There’d have to be implications.

Ed Failor: Yeah, there’d certainly be implications — the inflationary nature is the worst part. It’s not pumping out money we have, it’s creating new money and adding it into an environment where inflation’s already an issue. We don’t want to make that worse. Show me a way to do it that’s not incredibly inflationary, and I’m on board.

Kathie Obradovich: It’s kind of funny that we’re taking this seriously — he’s made similar suggestions before that never materialized. I, for one, am not sitting by my mailbox waiting for a $5,000 check even if Republicans keep control of Congress.

Dave Price: It was $5,000 from DOGE that he talked about giving everybody. There was also a $2,000 thing.

Laura Belin: Right — I don’t think Ed needs to worry, because the chance of this happening is zero. Catherine Rampell, who writes about the economy, totaled these up: the $5,000 DOGE dividend, the $2,000 tariff dividend, the $1,000 in “savings” from ending ACA premium subsidies, and now this new $5,000 dividend if Republicans win the midterms. None of it is happening, whether Republicans win or not.

Dave Price: I was also paying attention to see whether our members of Congress would respond on their own — since Iowa’s delegation is single-party, that sometimes makes it easier to track. Kathie had a reporter talk to Hinson, but social media seemed pretty empty of responses from our delegation on this. If it were something they were excited about, you’d expect them tweeting, Truth Social-ing, Facebooking, sending news releases — I might have missed something, but I didn’t see a single response.

Ed Failor: I think Laura’s right — the odds of it happening are about the same as Iowa State’s chances of winning this weekend.

Dave Price: There it is, folks!

Politics and Tailgates

Dave Price: Since you brought that up, I’m moving this up my list. Remember Michele Bachmann’s split Cyclone/Hawkeye jersey?

Laura Belin: 2012.

Dave Price: Right, thank you. She got ripped for it, and for a while there was this idea that you shouldn’t mix politics and game day. But now it feels like every prominent politician is going to the game. I saw a release from Rob Sand, Josh Turek will be there, and Mariannette Miller-Meeks has a tailgate that basically every Republican in the state seems to be attending — she’s bringing in Markwayne Mullin, and I think Rick Scott too, if I remember right.

Ed, is it fine to do these things, or do people not want politics at their tailgate?

Ed Failor: They’ve been happening forever, in my experience. When I lived in eastern Iowa, I went to every game, and around election season these were always a thing. I don’t see the harm — you’re out there talking to constituents, showing you care about normal things. No downside that I can see.

Dave Price: You shotgun a beer, right?

Kathie Obradovich: I heard —

Dave Price: Turek said at an event this week that he hadn’t done that in maybe 20 years, so I’m not expecting him to shotgun one in Iowa City Saturday.

Ed Failor: Who knows, though, if he does?

Kathie Obradovich: For candidates to visibly take sides — like the split jersey — I think that’s more of a political risk. But actually being out there among tailgaters, some people are going to boo you. You’ve got a lot of potentially drunk people in a parking lot with lowered inhibitions, so a comment caught on camera is pretty likely. That’s a bit of a risk. Some events, like Miller-Meeks’, will probably be more controlled. But wandering through a parking lot — there have been some interesting photos over the years of presidential candidates interacting with tailgaters in various states of dress, holding up various things.

Dave Price: You can guarantee the drinks have been flowing for hours for some folks.

Laura Belin: It’s on my list to check in with the Iowa Democrats’ coordinated campaign — they call it Iowa Forward — since they have more than two dozen field offices. It used to be a rule not to send canvassers out knocking doors during Iowa or Iowa State football games, so you don’t disturb people. But I know they’re sending people out statewide every weekend, and I’m curious how they’re handling that now that football season’s underway.

Martin O’Malley and Social Security

Dave Price: I mentioned Turek — Martin O’Malley, the former Maryland governor and former presidential candidate, was in Iowa this week. Like with Michele Bachmann, I had to rely on Laura’s memory for the year he ran — 2016. Some of these campaigns are starting to blend together for me. O’Malley also headed the Social Security Administration under Biden for a while, and he was back in Iowa for a Social Security event with Turek, along with Shauna’s John Bauer — sorry, John Bowser Bauman — who’s come to Iowa on behalf of Social Security advocates so many times over the years. He did his flag-waving thing — I think originally from the ‘70s.

O’Malley’s point was that because of staffing cuts at the Social Security Administration under the Trump administration, Social Security will become more of an issue. Plus, the solvency date is now moving in the wrong direction — 2032 is looking like the year the fund would only have enough to pay out about 80% of benefits. You all talk to a lot of voters — is this like the national debt, where people say it’s a problem but it doesn’t really motivate them to vote, or is it a real factor?

Kathie Obradovich: I don’t hear people talking about Social Security much, except when the solvency date comes up in the news and sparks brief attention. The solutions haven’t changed — raise the retirement age, raise taxes, or uncap the payroll tax on income. Not much else. Josh Turek, unsurprisingly, favors lifting the cap so higher earners pay in on their full income instead of just the first roughly $180,000 or so.

So no, I don’t hear people talking about it much — I’d put it under the broader affordability conversation. I also think it’s interesting that people are conflating cuts to Social Security Administration staffing with cuts to Social Security itself. People’s checks haven’t changed, though they may be having more trouble getting through on the phone or resolving issues. But it’s a stretch to say benefits are being cut when what’s being cut is the agency that administers them — I wish people would be more precise about that.

Dave Price: Ed, back during George W. Bush’s presidency, some Republicans pushed investing a portion of Social Security funds in the markets to grow it faster and extend solvency. That idea faded — Democrats built public opposition, and Republicans dropped it. If you were advising candidates today, how would you approach this? Something’s got to give eventually, right?

Ed Failor: There’s a difference between advising a candidate and advising a sitting legislator who actually has to deal with the problem. I think Kathie’s right that it’s such a theoretical, non-concrete issue for most people that campaign-wise, I wouldn’t spend much time on it, because I don’t think many people are talking about it. If people start talking about it, then sure. As a sitting legislator, that’s a completely different question of how you actually tackle it. As a candidate, you address the issues that are actually moving people, and from the polling I’ve seen, Social Security isn’t in the top three to five issues.

Dave Price: Laura, final thought?

Laura Belin: I don’t think it’s a big voting issue for most people, but it fits well for Josh Turek — this was a stance Tom Harkin held back in the day, and Turek is running for Harkin’s old Senate seat with Harkin’s support. It’s also just an easy message for Democrats: millionaires and billionaires aren’t paying their fair share. It fits into that broader constellation of issues.

Dave Price: Alright, let’s bring it to a close. This weekend — Iowa State — Ed and Kathie largely kept it civil, so thanks for preserving the integrity of the show.

Kathie Obradovich: We’ll do our best. Now I’m annoyed I wasn’t prepared — I could’ve held up some kind of sign, and Ed’s way ahead of me.

Dave Price: Spencer can somehow edit this into the final product before it drops.

Kathie Obradovich: Hey, before we go — one quick thing. The Republican midterm convention also ratified Iowa’s first-in-the-nation status for the 2028 caucuses, so we should acknowledge that before we go. We knew this was coming — their committee had already recommended it — but it’s now official that the Iowa caucuses will be first in the nation in 2028.

Dave Price: Thank you for mentioning that. Alright, that’s a wrap for this week. Thanks to all of you for joining us. We appreciate you subscribing — please like, share, and subscribe to help us grow, and if you’re able to financially contribute to the show, that helps too. Have a great week ahead.

This week we dug into two big stories. First, the Des Moines Register’s new reporting on Derek Wulf’s farm finances: an active criminal investigation, a court-appointed receiver, and creditors who settled for less than they were owed. We talked about what real campaign due diligence looks like, and why this story hasn’t gotten the attention it probably deserves.

We also broke down a new Emerson College poll. Rob Sand leads Zach Lahn by 3 points in the governor’s race, with independents breaking hard his way. In the Senate race, Ashley Hinson leads Josh Turek 50-45, and we tried to make sense of Turek’s ad touting cooperation with Trump on immigration.

Plus, we’re pleased to welcome first-time guest Eric Woolson who has an extensive background in journalism and campaigns, closed things out with the Chuck Grassley vacuum cleaner bobblehead saga, and pondered whether Grassley might run again in 2028 at age 95.

Want to sharpen your writing and get the inside scoop on Iowa politics at the same time? Join us September 27-30 at the Okoboji Writers’ & Songwriters’ Retreat on beautiful West Lake Okoboji, featuring Iowa Down Ballot analysts Laura Belin and Kathie Obradovich. They’ll walk you through finding public information, getting your opinion pieces published, and plenty more. Spots are limited, so scan the QR code at the beginning and end of the video or head to okobojiwritersretreat.com to sign up. If you’d like to make a donation to help the Iowa Writer’s Collaborative which supports this show please click the button below. Thanks!

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Hi everyone, and welcome back to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. We have another new statewide poll, and it shows that, at least for some people, split-ticket voting is still a thing. We’ll talk about that. Plus, there’s new reporting on Republican lieutenant governor candidate Derek Wulf and his farm operations, legal situation, and finances. The Des Moines Register had a story out Friday that we want to discuss.

I’m Dave Price. This week we’re joined by Iowa Down Ballot regulars Kathie Obradovich and Laura Belin. Hello, ladies.

Kathie Obradovich: Hello! Good to be here.

Laura Belin: Good to be here.

Dave Price: And making his debut on the podcast, I was going to say “best known snake charmer” — that’s not really why he’s here, but he might be the most interesting man in the room if you really know his background. Eric Woolson, way back in the day, was a newspaper reporter. He may be the only person I know who’s worked for both a Democratic and a Republican presidential candidate. Is that true?

Eric Woolson: Well, that’s where the snake charming comes in handy, I suppose. I used to say I was one of the few people who’d worked for seven presidential campaigns. But I’m absolutely positive I’m the only person who’s been a spokesperson for both Joe Biden and Michele Bachmann.

Laura Belin: Narrow that down.

Eric Woolson: I’ll throw that down.

Dave Price: Well done — we strive for uniqueness on this show. Welcome, Eric, thanks for joining us.

Derek Wulf’s Financial and Legal Troubles

Dave Price: Let’s talk about this Des Moines Register story. Tyler Jett posted it Friday — and we’re recording this on Friday, so we may be talking about it as the news is still unfolding. This won’t drop until the weekend, so there could be twists and turns. Laura, I believe you were the first to report on Derek Wulf’s agricultural operations and financial challenges. Tyler Jett has picked up from there, and it shows there are still serious financial challenges for Representative Wulf, along with some strong allegations from people who’ve worked with him. What do you make of it?

Laura Belin: It was a really good piece by Tyler Jett — he clarified some things I wasn’t able to nail down back in June and July. First, WCF Financial, his bank, filed a foreclosure petition in May. As of this summer they were negotiating some kind of refinancing. Derek Wulf said at the Westside Conservative Club in July that they’d been able to refinance, but that clearly wasn’t complete, because last week the bank filed a motion to have a receiver appointed, which the court approved two days ago.

The bank’s filing said Wulf never presented a commitment letter — essentially proof that financing or additional collateral was lined up to support the refinancing. So we know negotiations broke down somewhere along the way.

Also important: Tyler Jett confirmed with the Black Hawk County Sheriff’s Office that there is still an active criminal investigation into Wulf’s operations. That was hinted at in the May foreclosure filing, and seems related to livestock collateral belonging to the bank that may have been sold to third parties. There were also fraud allegations in an earlier filing from a separate case brought by Heartland Co-op, but I was never able to confirm an actual criminal investigation — Tyler Jett did. The Lahn campaign’s spokesperson denied any fraud occurred, but also apparently confirmed to the Register that Zach Lahn didn’t know about the criminal investigation when he picked Wulf as his running mate.

Dave Price: Eric, you’re the only one of us who’s worked on campaigns — what’s traditional due diligence like when choosing a running mate?

Eric Woolson: Going back to my reporting days in the ‘70s, ‘80s, and ‘90s, my first thought was: how did this happen? Clearly a due diligence question — somebody didn’t do their homework. Normally that process runs a couple of weeks: you dig into personal background, financial background, talk to people they’ve done business with, talk to the neighbors. A lot of times you’ve got a professional firm doing opposition research — including on your own candidate, so you know what the other side will say about you. Clearly none of that happened here.

The landscape’s changed too. Laura’s done terrific work, the Register has a news story, but for the most part it feels like a tree falling in the forest that nobody hears. There’s not as much media in this state as there used to be, reporters are shorthanded, there’s only so many hours in the day. Regardless of party, this isn’t as big a story as it should be — and that goes back to the central question of where the due diligence was. Obviously there wasn’t any.

Kathie Obradovich: To give the Lahn campaign a little grace — it’s possible that when Wulf first addressed these questions with Laura, he genuinely believed refinancing was in progress, and that kind of deal can fall apart at any point. That does happen. But this raises real questions: if this is how the Lahn campaign does due diligence on someone as important as a running mate, how can Iowa voters trust he’ll pick the right people if he becomes governor? The governor doesn’t do everything alone — you have to pick the right people for the job.

Even if this is damaging to Wulf, it doesn’t mean he can’t do a good job as lieutenant governor. It’s possible the campaign knew all this and decided his financial experience actually makes him a stronger advocate for farmers. Some of this comes down to how much voters really care about who the running mate is.

Laura Belin: Tyler Jett interviewed some of the creditors who sued Wulf — I’d reached out but never heard back. One of them, Chad Zoske, described something that goes well beyond normal farmer financial distress. The Lahn campaign had said all creditors were being repaid in full, but according to the Register story, Zoske ended up settling for less than he was owed because he figured something was better than nothing.

Eric Woolson: Part of this may be that Lahn really came out of nowhere as a surprise candidate, so he may have lacked connections within the party infrastructure. In years past you’d have five or six names floated — someone from eastern Iowa, someone from northwest Iowa, maybe a business person — generating buzz. This pick came out of left field. The question is how much internal discussion there really was among Senate, House, and party leadership before landing on him. Normally you’d have several names floated, and I don’t recall any being out there. Lahn was surprised to be the nominee, and so was everyone else.

Dave Price: He and Governor Kim Reynolds had never even met before the primary, so there wasn’t much happening behind the scenes there either. I should also note — I double-checked with the Secretary of State’s office — it’s too late to get Derek Wulf’s name off the ballot even if this became a bigger controversy.

I’m curious, Eric: how does a campaign decide how much to talk about something like this? Zach Lahn already has a complicated personal story — the Kansas connection, an ex-wife, his wife’s ex-husband, kids who live there, the farmhouse in Belle Plaine — and Rob Sanders has tried to capitalize on the “Kansas guy, not an Iowa guy” angle. Now there’s Wulf’s farm finances too. How does a campaign decide whether to get out in front of something like this — a press conference, addressing it directly — versus staying quiet or responding only in writing?

Eric Woolson: That’s always an internal calculation, and campaigns typically have people on both sides of it. Talk about it more and you risk drawing more attention; don’t talk about it and you risk looking like you’re hiding something. It depends on the circumstances — and as Laura’s and Tyler Jett’s reporting shows, this is out of the ordinary. You can talk about farmers facing financial difficulty in general, but this has been going on a long time and hasn’t been handled well. My guess is the campaign sticks with something like “this shows he understands what farmers are going through.” I’d have pushed hard for getting out in front of it. But first and foremost: don’t have the issue in the first place, and you won’t have to explain it.

Dave Price: We’ll see how the campaign handles this over the weekend and into next week.

New Statewide Poll — Governor’s Race

Dave Price: We have a new statewide poll from Emerson College. Starting with governor: Democrat Rob Sand is up three points over Zach Lahn , 49 to 46, with 6% undecided. Among independents, Sand leads 51 to 39. Kathie, this tracks with what we’ve been seeing, right?

Kathie Obradovich: I think so. Bottom line, it’s a close race — three points is within the margin of error. It’s good news for Sand that independents are breaking his way; there simply aren’t enough Democrats in Iowa to win statewide without a substantial number of independents, and probably some Republicans too. That explains Sand’s approach of framing this as a campaign about bipartisan problem-solving rather than partisanship — and right now that message seems to be resonating with a majority of independents.

Dave Price: Laura, I’ve talked to some Republicans who point out Sand’s been campaigning nonstop for eight years, touring every county, while people still don’t know Zach Lahn — and Lahn has a huge registered-voter advantage to lean on. What do you make of that?

Laura Belin: That’s a fair reading. I’d note that Sabato’s Crystal Ball just moved the governor’s race from toss-up to lean Democrat, following the Cook Political Report. Forecasters sometimes see internal polling beyond what’s public. Two things stand out to me: we haven’t seen a single poll showing Lahn ahead, and this particular sample actually leans more Republican than Democrat — it recalls a Trump plus-10 electorate from 2024. So if Sand is ahead in a sample that red, that says something.

On the other hand, some Republicans complained the sample skewed too young or too college-educated. It’s genuinely hard to know what the electorate will look like — this is why Ann Selzer historically avoided heavy weighting. We have some evidence college-educated voters turn out more in off-year elections than presidential years. I wouldn’t tell Democrats to get overconfident, but it’s fair to say the race leans toward Sand right now.

Dave Price: Eric, your take on the top lines?

Eric Woolson: It reminds me of Vilsack versus Jim Ross Lightfoot in 1998. It really comes down to how well voters already know a candidate. Lightfoot had just run against Harkin, so almost everyone knew him. Vilsack was on his fourth campaign manager — I remember running into John Kachator at the State House and asking why he’d take the job that late. He said everyone already knows Lightfoot, but nobody knows Vilsack yet — once people get to know him, they’ll like him. Vilsack ended up a two-term governor.

Could that happen with Lahn ? I’m not so sure — with the flood of ads from every direction these days, it’s harder to cut through. How well do voters already know Rob Sand, like him, dislike him — and how much time does Lahn have left to become known? Will he be the next Vilsack, or just a footnote? We don’t know yet.

Dave Price: We asked months ago whether Lahn had enough time in the primary — it felt like he had momentum even before the polling existed. He proved he did, helped along by Randy Feenstra’s presence in the race too. Now: which matters more heading into November — Republicans’ voter registration advantage, or the fact that Sand has been everywhere for years while Lahn hasn’t?

Eric Woolson: Sand’s been to all 99 counties, presenting himself as a small-town guy from Decorah who hunts, fishes, and puts his toes in the river mud. That’s made real connections — I’ve heard from Republicans for whom the fact that he’s a deer hunter is enough: a Democrat who understands guns. The question is whether Lahn has time to catch up. You can’t meet all 3.3 million Iowans, so it comes down to whether you win via TV ads or via organization. Right now Sand has the organizational edge, which puts pressure on county GOP organizations to make up ground — and on Lahn to energize the grassroots.

Kathie Obradovich: Part of Lahn’s challenge is that he’s not operating in a vacuum. His TV ads are all him talking straight to camera — unlike a lot of candidates who use surrogates. That’s probably meant to build basic recognition: what he looks like, sounds like, what he actually says. Not a bad strategy at this stage. But he’s also being defined by the other side as a “carpetbagger from Kansas.” It cuts both ways — Sand is being cast as an out-of-touch rich guy (not billionaire, that hasn’t been supported, but rich and out-of-touch). Lahn starts from a deficit of name recognition and has to fight that framing at the same time.

Senate Race — Hinson vs. Turek

Dave Price: The poll also covered the U.S. Senate race, and there’s a split-ticket wrinkle: 6% would back Republican Ashley Hinson for Senate while also backing Rob Sand for governor. Hinson leads Josh Turek 50 to 45, with Libertarian Thomas Laehn at 1% and 5% undecided. Independents split much tighter here — Turek up 46 to 44. That gap of five points is outside the margin of error, but it tracks with what I’ve been hearing anecdotally.

Kathie Obradovich: I think Thomas Laehn will end up with more than 1% — he polled around 3 to 4% before, though comparing polls is always risky. He probably pulls a bit more from Republicans than Democrats. As for the 6% ticket-splitting — that feels low to me. I still remember the Grassley/Harkin era, when plenty of Iowans voted for both at different points, and some may remember that fondly.

Oh, and before we go — there’s now a bobblehead of Chuck Grassley and his beloved, retired vacuum cleaner, Beth. I may need one for my shelf.

Dave Price: Kathie, that was supposed to be the end of the show!

Kathie Obradovich: Oh, sorry!

Dave Price: Eric wrote a book about Grassley — that would’ve been the perfect way to close it out. Laura, your read on the Senate race?

Laura Belin: We’ve seen this pattern in other red states — voters more willing to back a Democrat for governor than for Senate, and vice versa for Republicans in blue states like Maryland and Massachusetts. So it’s not surprising Hinson runs ahead of where Lahn is. Turek is less well-known than Hinson, which is the optimistic read for his side — he still has time to build recognition. Looking back at Hinson’s record, she was the only Iowa House Republican to win in 2018 in a district that also went for Hillary Clinton and Fred Hubbell, so she’s shown she can pull some crossover support. Encouraging poll for her — though again, this sample leans more Republican than Democrat, so Turek’s campaign needs the ground game to shift those numbers.

Dave Price: Eric, what do you make of Turek’s ad where he says he’d work with President Trump on immigration and the border? I’ve been trying to figure out who that’s aimed at.

Eric Woolson: Nothing to add on the polling — Laura covered that well. On the immigration ad: if anyone figures out the strategy, let me know. I’d have picked the economy, agriculture, almost anything else. Saying he’ll work with Trump on immigration specifically isn’t going to move Trump voters, and it’s not going to win over Democrats either — they’re likely sticking with him regardless, maybe with a little crossover. I genuinely don’t know the rationale, and I wouldn’t have chosen that issue.

Laura Belin: I share the puzzlement. I’ve heard from grassroots Democrats who didn’t like the ad. Recent polling shows Trump’s approval underwater, so it’s not obviously an asset to tout working with him. I understand the goal — countering Republican messaging that paints Turek as a radical liberal, the same playbook used against a lot of Democrats — but I’m not sure how effective it’ll be.

Closing — The Grassley Bobblehead

Dave Price: Did you hear there’s a bobblehead of Chuck Grassley and Beth, his 49-year-old, now-retired Hoover vacuum? Eric, is he really getting a replacement vacuum from a friend in northwest Iowa?

Eric Woolson: Only 17 years old, the replacement.

Dave Price: Why not just buy a new one?

Eric Woolson: Exactly. I wrote a book with him back in 1995 — 31 years ago — and I actually saw him vacuuming without realizing how attached he was to Beth. This is the same guy who, to save time mowing his lawn, rigged three mowers together on one riding mower so he could run them all at once. He’s got an affinity for machinery that just keeps running — long live Beth. But apparently it’s time for a new one, and I hope Kathie gets a bobblehead, because it’s going to be popular.

Kathie Obradovich: Even vacuum cleaners have term limits, apparently.

Laura Belin: The replacement’s pretty old too — it came from Representative Jack Bosman and it’s around 17 or 18 years old itself. Grassley said he had it lying around because his wife got a new vacuum. So this is Beth 2.0.

Eric Woolson: Keep in mind Grassley was first elected in 1958, the year I was born — Beth was pretty young at 49 by comparison. Term limits don’t always apply, I guess.

Kathie Obradovich: I’m expecting an announcement any day that Beth is running for office.

Laura Belin: There was actually a flurry of stories about this — I wrote about it last year after Steve Woodhouse asked Grassley if he’d run again in 2028, and he didn’t rule it out. Someone asked him again recently, and he said to ask him later — right now he’s focused on getting Ashley Hinson and others elected. So officially, he hasn’t ruled out running again at age 95.

Dave Price: That seems like a good question to close on, Eric.

Eric Woolson: Strom Thurmond was 99 when he passed away in the Senate, and Grassley served with him a long time — maybe he’s chasing that record.

Dave Price: And we just saw Ed Markey win his primary at what, 80?

Eric Woolson: Yeah, choice of young voters everywhere.

Dave Price: Right — Seth Moulton found that out the hard way. Thank you all, this was fun. Eric, thanks for joining us — hope to have you back on the show often. And Kathie, all prayers for your air conditioner.

Kathie Obradovich: Yes, please.

Dave Price: Thank you all for joining us on the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. Please like, subscribe, and share — send it to a gazillion of your closest friends and family. We appreciate watching the numbers grow week after week, and thanks to everyone who’s become a new paid subscriber to help pay the bills. Have a great week.

We welcomed Ed Failor Jr. to the show for the first time — longtime Iowa Republican operative, former head of Iowans for Tax Relief — and put him through the paces alongside Kathie Obradovich and Laura Belin.

We dug into the new Suffolk poll. Ashley Hinson is up 45-41 on Josh Turek, Rob Sand is up 48-44 on Zach Lahn.

The Libertarians lost in court again. A judge ruled they can’t replace their disqualified candidates, so their LG and 3rd District picks are off the ballot pending a possible appeal.

We talked beef! The president’s move to allow cheaper foreign beef imports has ranchers fuming, with timing that couldn’t be worse for Iowa’s cattle counties.

And we closed on whether Hinson’s time in Congress is a liability in a statewide race. Ed says no. It’s the candidate, not the office.

Want to sharpen your writing and get the inside scoop on Iowa politics at the same time? Join us September 27-30 at the Okoboji Writers’ & Songwriters’ Retreat on beautiful West Lake Okoboji, featuring Iowa Down Ballot analysts Laura Belin and Kathie Obradovich. They’ll walk you through finding public information, getting your opinion pieces published, and plenty more. Spots are limited, so scan the QR code at the beginning and end of the video or head to okobojiwritersretreat.com to sign up. If you’d like to make a donation to help the Iowa Writer’s Collaborative which supports this show please click the button below. Thanks!

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Welcome back, everybody, to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. I’m Dave Price. This week, we are going to talk about a new statewide poll that shows, yet again — in case you didn’t know this — that we have some really competitive races in this state. We’re also going to talk about beef. The president has made a move that has ticked off some cattle ranchers, and we’re going to dig into that a little bit. And we have a tradition, it seems, on this weekly podcast: we must cover the latest twists and turns of the Libertarian candidates, so we’ll do that too.

With us this week are regulars Kathie Obradovich and Laura Belin. Hello, ladies.

Kathie Obradovich: Oh!

Laura Belin: Good to see ya!

Dave Price: But this week we’ve added a fourth. This is something we’ve been talking about for quite a while, and it is now a thing: Ed Failor Jr. joins us this week. He’s a longtime Republican who has had a bunch of different jobs — he’s worked at the Statehouse, he’s worked on campaigns, he led an organization, Iowans for Tax Relief, and he’s done other stuff too. We’ll maybe get into some of that. Regardless, welcome, Ed. Thanks for doing this.

Ed Failor: Well, happy to be here. I just — people talking is a good thing.

Dave Price: It is a good thing. You and I, over the years, have had many lengthy conversations, and now we can do it here. And as you promised, you’ll work in at least one dad joke — in case any of your kids are listening to this podcast. True?

Ed Failor: I’m going to ignore the ageism of that and go with it. Yeah.

Dave Price: I’m apparently with you, because I’m accused of that all the time. I wear it as a badge of honor. All right, all right — trio.

The Suffolk University Poll

Dave Price: Let’s set things up with this new Suffolk University poll. Two of the big races we’ve talked about all year: the governor’s race and the U.S. Senate race. Quick numbers — in the Senate race, Republican Ashley Hinson leads 45–41 over Democrat Josh Turek, with Libertarian Thomas Lane at 4%. The governor’s race is flipped: Democrat Rob Sand is at 48%, Republican Zach Lahn at 44%, no Libertarian in that race. That’s our tease — we’ll get to the Libertarians, but not yet.

Kathie, we’ve said again and again that it’s a competitive race — when you see these numbers, what’s the “why” of it?

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, I think one thing I liked about this poll is they asked a lot of issue questions that help explain where people are coming from, and it won’t surprise anyone — it’s the economy, it’s gas prices, it’s household expenses, grocery prices. Poll respondents were asked what they’re spending more money on, and gas and groceries topped the list. President Trump’s approval rating is down, as we’ve seen in other polls and nationally.

There’s also still a healthy number of undecided voters. I was glad to see Thomas Lane included in this poll — we hadn’t seen a poll name the Libertarian candidate before, for reasons we’ll get into. But he’s on the ballot, and he pulled about 3 points that look like they came from Republicans and 1 point from Democrats. So if we speculate about who the Libertarian hurts more in this race, it’s probably Ashley Hinson.

Dave Price: Laura, what’s your takeaway?

Laura Belin: I like to look at the composition of the electorate. I could look at this poll and say it’s encouraging for Republicans — Zach Lahn isn’t that far behind, he’s much less well-known than Rob Sand, and he has room to grow, while Hinson still has a lead. But I looked at the sample: 38% Republican, 33% Independent, 28% Democrat. That’s a decent reflection of Iowa’s registered voters as a whole, but a poor reflection of who’s likely to vote in a midterm — there’s no way independents will outnumber Democrats at the ballot box in November. Democratic turnout will be higher than independent turnout, even accounting for a stronger-than-usual independent showing.

So if I’m a Democrat, I’m looking at this poll and thinking Rob Sand’s lead could actually be understated. Also worth noting: the recalled 2024 presidential vote in this sample was Trump +11, close to Trump’s actual 13-point win in the state — but there’s no guarantee the November electorate mirrors 2024. We’ve talked about this before: if you’d polled in 2014 assuming the electorate would look like 2012’s, you’d have been way off. So — I have no idea. I do feel Hinson is slightly favored in the Senate race, but this poll doesn’t look like what the November electorate is likely to be.

Dave Price: Ed, you’ve watched how the sausage is made for years — what did you think of the headline numbers, and of the internals?

Ed Failor: Laura stole one of my two points, so it must have been a good one — the composition of who they polled isn’t what the electorate is actually going to look like. That was my biggest takeaway, and Laura’s right.

The other thing: the numbers are all within the margin of error, so who really knows. Polls are a snapshot of a group of people at a given time. They brought in a good sample from Muscatine County, which is a real bellwether — that was smart. But the thing that struck me most was why people said they’re voting. Forty percent of likely voters said it’s their civic duty — for people willing to answer a poll in August, that doesn’t surprise me; I’d almost have expected that number to be higher. But 30% said they’re voting because of the political climate, and that’s interesting. Without the crosstabs, you can’t see the “why” behind that — as a Republican, I’m not happy with the climate either, and I know plenty of Democrats who aren’t public about their views, so that number cuts both ways.

Without an incumbent on the ballot, Sand and Hinson are each the closest thing to one, and having them up by a bit this early is normal — the late deciders will make the difference. I’d be concerned, as a Republican, that those numbers aren’t better given the state we’re in.

The Cabinet Visits

Dave Price: Ed, can you zoom out and look at the last couple of weeks? About the only people who haven’t visited Iowa lately are Donald Trump and J.D. Vance — I exaggerate only slightly. They sent a plane full of administration officials who did various things; a bunch went to the State Fair. Is this a protective move, making sure they don’t take chances because so much is at stake — or are they seeing the numbers, feeling the environment, and thinking “we need to reinforce en masse”?

Ed Failor: Probably a little of both, but more the latter. It’s real early for them to be doing this, so I’d assume — mathematically, as a Republican, I’m not thrilled — that the latter is more likely. It’s a way for them to plug in and help, and putting people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or Pete Hegseth in front of voters gives some gravitas without it being the president himself, which is a double-edged sword at best.

Dave Price: Sure. Laura, what do you have?

Laura Belin: I’d like Ed’s take on something. I’ve watched all the soapbox speeches, and at this stage of a campaign you often see candidates pivot toward the middle — Zach Nunn and Ashley Hinson both talked about their bipartisan work. But I was struck that Nunn brought in Pete Hegseth, and Hinson is bringing back Ted Cruz, who just campaigned with her. I’d have thought those were fairly polarizing figures they might not want to elevate. What does Ed make of that?

Ed Failor: I think Hegseth’s appearance is interesting, and probably less polarizing than we’d assume — most voters don’t have strong feelings about him one way or the other, even though people like us in the political world do. I think the mistake people in our world and in the press make is assuming the average Iowan is paying close attention yet. So bringing in Hegseth is partly about just getting people to pay attention.

Ted Cruz, I find more interesting — is that about shoring up the “I’m a real conservative” credential? If you went to church this weekend and asked people whether they know who Pete Hegseth is, you’d mostly get “I’ve heard the name” — but he’s from the administration, and that adds some weight. Years ago, when Tom Vilsack was governor, there was a name-ID poll — something like 70% of Iowans knew who Vilsack was, but when the same group was asked who the governor of Iowa was, the number dropped well below two-thirds. People often want to sound informed more than they want to give the honest answer.

Dave Price: Well, our seniors will be better educated now — they have that new civics requirement kicking in for the first graduating class this year, right?

Ed Failor: Oh, I thought you meant senior citizens — that was a jab.

Dave Price: No, no — no ageism on this show, it hits too close to home.

The Libertarian Update

Dave Price: Ed, I know this is your first time on, but we have a running joke: almost every week we have to update the latest twist with the Libertarian candidates — virtually every week for the last month and a half, save maybe one when I was on vacation. Laura, run us through the newest twist.

Laura Belin: Last time we covered this, the Libertarians were trying to use the legal process to replace candidates after some got disqualified — nominating new candidates for lieutenant governor and in the 3rd Congressional District. That went through Polk County District Court on an accelerated timetable, with briefs but no hearing. Judge Joseph Seidlin ruled yesterday that the Libertarians hadn’t followed the correct process under Iowa law: they could have used this replacement process, but it required filing paperwork with the Secretary of State by June 2 listing their central committee members and their vacancy-filling procedure — and they hadn’t done that. Because they’d skipped that earlier step, their state central committee couldn’t nominate replacements in August. I checked with the Libertarian Party chair yesterday, and she said they aren’t sure yet whether they’ll appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court.

Kathie Obradovich: So we may not be done with this — we might get at least one more show out of it. The joke isn’t really that we’re talking about the Libertarians, it’s that we’re probably covering them more consistently than any other political podcast in the country, given this long-running battle to get on the ballot. Credit to Thomas Lane for actually getting on — he’s shown up in a poll now, so people evidently think he’s staying on the ballot. In the 3rd District, the Nunn campaign is probably relieved not to be facing a Libertarian, though Marco Battaglia could have pulled votes from both sides. Their intended replacement candidate was Jacob Heard. So there was real potential for the Libertarians to matter in that race, but they keep struggling to actually get on the ballot — partly because of the scrutiny they’re under.

Dave Price: There’s no cushion for them the way there is for someone like Lane — you collect signatures, fill out the paperwork right, and you build in a buffer because you know people are going to scrutinize everything.

Kathie Obradovich: And apparently you have to use your real name.

Dave Price: We now know that. And Rick Stewart stays on as the Libertarian candidate in the 2nd Congressional District — that one’s set. There are a couple more I want to ask Ed about, but first —

Beef and Tariffs

Dave Price: — a development I find fascinating, especially after doing more ag-focused work these last few years: the president’s decision to allow more foreign beef, likely ground beef, into the country, with a suggestion that it be priced 25% below market value. There’s a lot we don’t know, like which countries it’ll come from.

Ed Failor: It’s not mandatory that it be sold 25% below market — it’s suggested, not required, at least from everything I’ve read so far.

Dave Price: Right, so a lot of open questions about how this plays out. But if you’re a U.S. cattle rancher, you’re ticked off — the national herd is the smallest it’s been in about 75 years, and beef prices are at or near record highs; ground beef is around $7 a pound, the highest ever. Ed, you were at the State Fair talking to ag folks — how are they feeling about this? They understand beef is expensive, but they don’t see how this counts as “America First,” and it’s supposed to be temporary — 90 days. A couple months ago the president was mocking Democrats for using the word “affordability,” and now this looks aimed at finding cheaper meat for people struggling with grocery bills. What’s going on?

Ed Failor: I think the intention is good, hopefully — but in practice I don’t see how it works well. This is roughly 660 million pounds of ground beef trimmings. Just in grocery stores, U.S. ground beef sales run about 720 million pounds a year — and that doesn’t even count restaurants, which account for a huge share of beef consumption. So it’s a real adjustment, even over just three months. Here’s a concern I heard from a rancher friend: this is right about when spring calves go to market. That timing issue is one of the bigger impacts I haven’t seen written about much — if I were an Iowa rancher, that would concern me. I think the intention was good, but I’m not sure it plays out well for ranchers, and in the end it may not play out that well for consumers either, since it affects the growth of herds already here.

Dave Price: And total U.S. beef production is something like 20-something billion pounds a year, so relative to that, 660 million pounds is a small slice — big in dollar terms, but probably a minimal impact on price overall.

Ed Failor: Well, except ground beef is the largest single category of beef sold in the U.S. — about 30% of all beef sold. So on the big picture it’s small, but that number you cited includes restaurant volume too. It’s still a big enough impact that, if I’m a rancher bringing cattle to market this fall while this is happening, I’m not thrilled about it.

Dave Price: Your future dinner, basically.

Ed Failor: My future dinner, and I love beef. So those are the things I see as potential missteps or unintended consequences here.

Laura Belin: Ed, we’re even now, because you stole my point — that this 90-day window is clearly timed to get through the election with lower prices, but it lands exactly when a lot of cattle ranchers are bringing beef to market, so the timing is bad for them. Separately, Natalie Furtig, who writes a state-focused newsletter, published something based on the 2022 USDA Census of Agriculture: Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District ranks 14th nationally for beef cattle sales, and the 1st and 3rd Districts are both in the top 30 — 27th and 29th. So three of Iowa’s four congressional districts are in the national top 30 for beef cattle sales. That’s going to be felt in the competitive congressional races.

Kathie Obradovich: It’ll be interesting to see how many voters actually connect what they see at the supermarket to tariff and trade policy. In Maine, for example, there was a lot of anxiety over Canadian tariffs, but Canada exempted lobster and seafood from its retaliatory tariffs, and that’s credited with saving Maine’s lobster industry — so in some parts of the country, people clearly do connect trade policy to prices at the register. But I doubt that’s true for most voters; most of us just react to whatever our grocery total is. And to be clear, we’re mostly talking about wholesale pricing here — a lower import price doesn’t mean the price you and I pay at checkout drops nearly as much. I wouldn’t expect a fast-food hamburger to get 25% cheaper because of these imports. How much of that wholesale drop actually reaches the register is a big open question.

Statewide Office From Congress

Dave Price: We’re coming up on our self-imposed time limit, so one more for Ed. This came up in another conversation — Randy Feenstra’s struggles in the primary, and someone raised the broader challenge of members of Congress running for statewide office, where there’s a recent track record of people struggling with that. Does Hinson have anything to worry about there, or does her TV background — which makes us all naturally brilliant communicators, I’m kidding — give her something different working in her favor? She’s clearly a different kind of candidate than Feenstra or Bruce Braley.

Ed Failor: Right — and I think that’s really it. I love Randy Feenstra, but just as a candidate, Hinson is a more dynamic one, and I think that’s what tends to matter more than the “only governors get elected president” framing, which isn’t even really true — we get hung up on things that aren’t always accurate. I think it’s mostly coincidence that Bruce Braley’s campaign was what it was and Feenstra’s campaign was what it was — more a function of the individual candidates. Ashley’s someone who’s been putting herself out there, works a crowd well, and relates to people well, and that’s probably why she has a better opportunity than some others have had.

Oh, and — do you know what a fish says when it swims into a cement wall?

Dave Price: No.

Ed Failor: Dam.

Kathie Obradovich: (laughing) Thank you — I love it.

Dave Price: Goodness. Well, you said you’d come through with one.

Ed Failor: I had to. Man of my word.

What’s Next

Dave Price: Kathie, anything to tee up for the Iowa Capital Dispatch this weekend?

Kathie Obradovich: We’ve got dueling political events Saturday — Ashley Hinson’s event and the Polk County Democrats’ Steak Fry are both happening, so we’ll have reporters at both. Also, earlier this week we had an interesting story on how the constitutional amendment requiring a supermajority to raise income and corporate tax rates is shaping up — that race looks close too. The party breakdown was interesting: more Republicans than Democrats support it, but there’s Democratic support as well. Most people don’t know much about it yet, so there’s a lot of undecided sentiment.

Dave Price: In the interest of efficiency, wouldn’t it have been nice if the Hinson barbecue and the Polk County Steak Fry were at the same venue? They could’ve split the meat cost and made it easier on the media to bounce from one to the other. Come on, people. Laura, what do you have working?

Laura Belin: I’ll be at the Steak Fry tomorrow too. Earlier this week I published a deep dive on the U.S. Senate race, and my next piece is likely going to be a deep dive on the Attorney General’s race — there are already TV ads out on both sides, which I don’t think we’ve seen this early in an AG race before. It’s shaping up to be highly competitive.

Dave Price: Outstanding. Mr. Failor — thanks for being with us, we appreciate your time.

Ed Failor: Happy to be here, thanks for doing it. You all are great, and brilliant — because, you know, when you’re in the media, you’re brilliant.

Dave Price: Thank you — we need to hear that, it counters some of the online trolling we deal with.

Ed Failor: As a conservative endorsement: if I didn’t find you all very intelligent, I wouldn’t be doing this.

Kathie Obradovich: That’s sweet.

Dave Price: We’re all about civility here. Appreciate your perspective, and thanks for doing this — I hope you’ll come back.

Ed Failor: I will, absolutely.

Dave Price: Laura, Kathie, you too — have a great weekend. We’ll reconvene next week. Thanks to all of you for sitting in on this expanded episode of the Iowa Down Ballot podcast, and thanks to our new subscribers and new paid subscribers. If you’re willing, take the link when you get it and share it with a few hundred of your friends — we appreciate the help spreading the word, especially now that we’re about two and a half months out from the 2026 election. Have a great week ahead, and we’ll see you next week.

We started with the Cook Political Report’s new ratings: the U.S. Senate race moved from Leans Republican to Toss-Up, and the governor’s race moved from Toss-Up to Leans Democrat. We talked about why. Tight polling, a president underwater in approval, gas prices topping four bucks, and Iowa’s history of electing Democratic governors in red states even when it won’t send them to the Senate. We also noted how many Republican candidates went negative on their opponents at the soapbox this year, which we read as a sign of real nervousness in the party.

Then we got into the sheer number of Trump administration officials who came through Iowa this week. We counted at least nine cabinet secretaries, including Pete Hegseth, Scott Bessent, RFK Jr., and Brooke Rollins. Hegseth’s visit stood out most: no public schedule, a rare appearance for him, and a campaign fundraiser for Zach Nunn that Pentagon guidelines normally wouldn’t allow for a Senate-confirmed official. We debated who ends up paying for that kind of travel and what message it sends about how worried the administration is about Iowa’s races.

We closed out with our soapbox moments: the Libertarians’ ongoing ballot fight and court hearing, and Turning Point USA activists trailing Rob Sand, Josh Turek, and Mark Kelly around the fairgrounds, something none of us had seen at the fair before.

We’ll be back next week to see how the final 48 hours of the fair played out.

Want to sharpen your writing and get the inside scoop on Iowa politics at the same time? Join us September 27-30 at the Okoboji Writers’ & Songwriters’ Retreat on beautiful West Lake Okoboji, featuring Iowa Down Ballot analysts Laura Belin and Kathie Obradovich. They’ll walk you through finding public information, getting your opinion pieces published, and plenty more. Spots are limited, so scan the QR code at the beginning and end of the video or head to okobojiwritersretreat.com to sign up. If you’d like to make a donation to help the Iowa Writer’s Collaborative which supports this show please click the button below. Thanks!

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Hi, everybody, and welcome back to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. We are talking to you on the final Friday morning of the Iowa State Fair. I’m Dave Price, joined by Laura Belin and Kathie Obradovich. Hello, ladies, how are you?

Kathie Obradovich: Hello, happy Friday!

Dave Price: Happy Friday — and happy Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, to all of you, whenever you’re listening to this podcast, the final Friday of the Iowa State Fair. Much to talk about.

I wonder if we can talk first about the Cook Political Report. I was talking to somebody — this would’ve been Thursday, I think — at the fair about this. Cook Political Report looks at all these races across the country, obviously, and it shifted both the governor’s race and the U.S. Senate race toward Democrats.

As we know, Republicans have been the dominant party in our state for more than a decade. We’ve also talked early in this podcast about the new wildcards in 2026 — for the first time since ‘68, I believe, both of those races are open seats. So in theory, anything goes, although I feel like I’ve brought this up a half dozen times: Laura’s post six months ago now, showing the registration numbers — the difference between Republicans and Democrats — while it’s narrowed, you’re still looking at, what, 180-some thousand?

What’s the difference?

Laura Belin: I think it’s closer to 170,000 now. Pretty big Republican advantage.

Dave Price: That’s a big ol’ gap. Okay, let’s talk about this shift. Kathie, why don’t you lead us off? And appreciate — this is just a forecast, and we tread carefully on polls and speculation. But as Cook is looking at this, they’re clearly looking at the atmosphere and what’s going on. So how potentially significant is this, for a party that still has sizable advantages like Republicans do, to now almost be at a disadvantage in a couple of these prominent races?

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, so first of all, I think this reflects what we’ve been seeing here — these races are tight. These forecasts are based largely on polling, I’d argue, although there are certainly other factors that go into it. The U.S. Senate race moved from Leans Republican to Toss-Up. And again, we talked about the Emerson poll a couple weeks ago — it was a two-point race between Ashley Hinson and Josh Turek. By most definitions, I’d call that a toss-up.

And then the governor’s race moved from Toss-Up to Leans Democrat, which again I think is reflective of that same Emerson poll — Rob Sand had a five-point lead, so it seemed weird that we were still calling it a toss-up and not Leans Democrat. You guys may disagree, but I think this is reflective of the national climate — we continue to see dissatisfaction with the Trump administration. He’s underwater in polls in Iowa and around the country. We continue to see economic angst among the population. All of that, piled on top of the fact that the president’s party typically does poorly in the midterms — I think that builds a case, separate from anything going on in Iowa specifically.

Having said that, it’s August.

Dave Price: Yes.

Kathie Obradovich: A lot, a lot can happen.

Laura Belin: I think one thing it underscores — and we’ve talked about this before — is that in a red state, voters are more likely to elect a Democrat as governor than to the U.S. Senate. That’s why we have Democratic governors in Kansas, Kentucky, and recently had one in Louisiana. So I think what everyone agrees on is that Rob Sand has a better chance than Josh Turek, regardless of the climate.

But I was struck by Ashley Hinson’s speech on the soapbox Monday — she went hard negative on Turek before she even talked about her own record. Sometimes candidates talk about their own record first and then criticize the opponent, but she did the negative part first, which normally you wouldn’t do when you’re feeling comfortable about the race. Brenna Bird also went negative on her opponent in her soapbox speech. And I saw that Sabato’s Crystal Ball just moved the Iowa Attorney General race from Likely Republican to Lean Republican, and Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig also went negative on his opponent. So it does seem that Iowa Republicans are feeling pretty concerned about this election cycle.

Dave Price: Kathie, you said maybe we disagree — I don’t. I think all the things you pointed out... and, I love a bunch of things about the Iowa State Fair, but not how you feel afterward, when you’re like, “dang, it’s gonna take me three months to walk off this weight.” That aside — it’s such a good place. For years, when I was at my old TV station, we had our Cast Your Colonel booth, where people could drop a kernel of corn in whichever candidate’s jar they supported. Not a scientific measure, but the benefit for me was more the one-on-one conversations — who do you like, what’s going on in your life. We’d get 60,000 people stop by. I don’t have the corn anymore, but I’ve been at the fair a bunch of times already this year, and this is only anecdotal, so asterisk everything I’m about to say:

I can’t think of one person I saw wearing a Trump hat. “Trump ‘28,” Trump-Vance shirts, whatever. I’m not saying he doesn’t have supporters there — of course he does — but I do wonder if people are starting to tire of some of this. I felt this in ‘16 — he beat Hillary Clinton, and toward the end you saw people, including some Republicans, get tired of the chaos. Maybe it’s magnified this time, and then there’s the economic piece — we were driving to the fair the other day when gas by our house topped four bucks. We’re six months into this, and forget the politics — people notice that. Four bucks is a mental threshold.

And for people paying attention: the president originally said this wouldn’t even last a couple of weeks. Well, we’re six months in, so you’ve been paying higher prices for six months. I really think that wears on people.

Kathie Obradovich: And it’s interesting, Dave — the State Fair isn’t cheap entertainment. You’ve got to pay for tickets, the food’s expensive. So if people who can afford to go to the fair are feeling the economic hit, that tells you something about the rest of the population. People who can afford the fair typically have money to pay $13 for a beer at an Asleep at the Wheel concert, which is what I paid on Wednesday night. And that was at the free stage, country night — I didn’t see any MAGA hats there either, and I was looking for them. So, interesting.

Laura Belin: I typically park on Grand Avenue and walk in through the Grand Concourse entrance, and there’s a guy who sometimes sets up near the shuttle drop-off on Grand, near 30th, selling MAGA-type gear. I noticed the hats he’s pushing this year say things like “USA,” maybe “45” and “47” on the side — but he’s not really pushing Trump 2028 or Trump-Vance merchandise. One day as I was walking out, I asked him how business was, and compared to last year. He said about the same. But I noticed he wasn’t really presenting a lot of Trump-branded stuff.

Dave Price: Speaking of the fair — sorry to sidetrack — Kathie already plugged her concert. My wife’s best friend came to Iowa with her little girl last week to go to Rod Stewart —

Laura Belin: Oh...

Dave Price: I appreciate the guy’s in his 80s, so we’re not dogging him — he’d had to cancel a heart procedure to be there. My beef is with Richard Marx. What the heck, man — he was supposed to be the opener, and he bailed. He could’ve had the grandstand to himself. The fair is always super accommodating about this stuff. One thing that’s pretty cool: when the headliner cancels, they refund your ticket and you get to see a free show. So they got John Waite to jump in last minute and do a free show for whoever showed up. Come on, Richard Marx! You were a guy back in the ‘80s or ‘90s — I wanted to see if he still had all that hair, since I’ve never seen him in concert. That was good date music back in the day.

Laura Belin: He probably doesn’t have a 90-minute set ready to go if he’s used to just being the opening act.

Dave Price: Oh, I hadn’t thought about that — maybe that’s it. I don’t want to give the impression that fair people were dogging Richard Marx — nobody was — I was just thinking, come on, man, step up, this is your chance to be the hero. Rant aside — let’s get to it. We’ve laid the foundation here: one thing we’ve noticed, both at the fair and near it, is Trump administration people coming through.

I grew up in a family where money was tight, and I don’t know why these folks couldn’t have come on the same plane and saved us a bunch of tax dollars. They came one by one by one. I can’t imagine what this costs in security and travel. Here’s a short list — I don’t even know if it’s complete, but I jotted a few down:

* Pete Hegseth, Secretary of War/Defense — technically a campaign fundraiser for Zach Nunn

* Scott Bessent, Treasury Secretary — we talked about that funky, limited-media event last week

* RFK Jr.

* The Veterans Affairs Secretary

* Trade Rep Jamieson Greer, who did something with Ashley Hinson, and I think Zach Nunn too

* Small Business Administration Administrator Kelly Loeffler

* Brooke Rollins, Secretary of Agriculture, supposed to do something Friday evening (we’re recording Friday morning)

* Attorney General Todd Blanche, here Thursday

* The Deputy Attorney General, here Wednesday and Thursday

I’m probably forgetting a few.

Kathie Obradovich: I think there was a Deputy Energy Secretary too, in eastern Iowa.

Dave Price: Right, eastern Iowa. I didn’t do the mental math while rambling through all that, but it’s a lot.

Laura Belin: I think it’s nine — nine cabinet secretaries.

Dave Price: And almost all of them tied to some campaign event. RFK Jr. did stuff with Zach Lahn — a private event Tuesday night, and then an official event Wednesday with Mariannette Miller-Meeks. Lahn shot what looked like a campaign-style video where he took RFK Jr. to Zach Shields on Tuesday night, and then Wednesday morning they went fishing — I don’t know if it was on the Lahn farm, but with Lahn’s little boy. So clearly they were trying to maximize their time with him.

I can’t remember a time — and I get that the fair is cool and we’re used to seeing politicians — but can you remember an administration sending this many people to one state at once?

Kathie Obradovich: It’s more than I remember, but I can’t vouch for my memory.

Dave Price: Same — that’s why I’m always nervous bringing this stuff up, someone’s gonna correct me.

Kathie Obradovich: I was taught you’re always in trouble if you say “it’s the most” or “the biggest,” because someone will always prove you wrong. But it’s been a long time since I’ve seen this many administration officials. The one that really shocked me was Hegseth. He came in without any notice — I had colleagues in D.C. look up his official schedule, and there was nothing on it, no events at all. He doesn’t do many appearances like this. We were initially told there’d be a media availability, which sort of happened, but he didn’t really take questions. That one surprised me more than any of the others. I wasn’t surprised RFK Jr. was doing stuff with Zach Lahn, who I’d call more MAHA-Republican than MAGA. But I don’t know what other message there is besides: the Trump administration is worried about Iowa.

Laura Belin: We’re used to this administration going against long-standing norms, but the Secretary of Defense doing any kind of campaign event at all — I can’t think of a precedent for that. That would’ve been considered way out of bounds under any other administration.

Dave Price: I was thinking back — he was supposed to do Zach Nunn’s fundraiser back in March and canceled, right after we’d gone to war with Iran. The storyline then was that they’d postpone because of the war, and to their credit, that was true — it wasn’t just spin from the Nunn campaign. They rescheduled rather than canceled. But we’re still at war, five or six months later. If the narrative back then was that his focus should be on the war, well — we’re still there. Regardless of whether he flew in and out in one day, it was not the norm.

I’m not sure Kathie gave the appropriate caveat here about relying on memory, but — when have you ever covered a sitting Secretary of Defense in Iowa? I’d have to really sit and think about who’s held that office. I’m not sure I ever have.

Kathie Obradovich: I don’t recall it either. And it gave Sarah Trone Garriott an opening to say this is totally inappropriate, disgusting that he’s here during wartime, which — as we’ve discussed — is hitting Iowans in the pocketbook. So it gave her an opening, though she was actually a little restrained about it, honestly — she put out a statement in a press release, and that was about it.

Laura Belin: Zachary Oren Smith reported for Iowa Starting Line that the Department of Defense’s own guidelines say Senate-confirmed officials — and Hegseth is one — are prohibited from speaking at a political fundraiser. So I think we’re fairly safe saying this was unprecedented. You just don’t see secretaries of defense campaigning for people.

Kathie Obradovich: And they made a point of saying he was there on his own time, so presumably he flew out not on the taxpayer’s dime.

Laura Belin: I wouldn’t assume that, Kathie — now I have to go look at what was reported. Give me a second...

Dave Price: Well, I’m with Kathie on this — I was checking with somebody, and in theory they should have paid for it, since he was here on his personal behalf. They didn’t introduce him as Secretary, just as Pete Hegseth. This wasn’t an official visit, to my knowledge, in any part of the trip.

Kathie Obradovich: Because usually, right —

Laura Belin: Here it is — it was the Washington Post: Hegseth would take a U.S.-funded military aircraft to Iowa, per the Pentagon, because he’s designated a “required-use traveler” and mandated to use military aircraft for all travel, official and unofficial.

Dave Price: Yeah, that makes sense — you want him safe if there’s any security risk. But as we’ve just hit $40 trillion in national debt, is there any reason taxpayers can’t be reimbursed for that?

Kathie Obradovich: That’s the thing — people classified that way for security usually aren’t traveling for political events. So it adds to the narrative if he’s here on the taxpayer’s dime to campaign.

Dave Price: This is a little risky, since we’re recording Friday morning and folks will hear this Saturday at the earliest, maybe later. We’ve had a running joke among reporter friends this week, because of the way these visits keep getting announced — each day you find out about the next day’s visitor. Some of that’s probably security-related, but it’s also clearly spread out to maximize media coverage and attendance. We keep waiting to see if the vice president or the president will show up — we haven’t had Linda McMahon yet, though she’s been here before. It’s the America 250 celebration, so in some ways I expected the president to do an event at the fair long ago. I get the security nightmare of doing that with a gazillion people there — I’m sure it was hard enough with Hegseth — but America 250, USA-USA-USA, seems like a slam dunk for the president. I’ll be surprised if the fair wraps up with no presidential visit at all.

Kathie Obradovich: I remember the first fair when he was running for president — I thought he “won” the fair that year, honestly, because he skipped the soapbox that a bunch of his competitors did — I’m pretty sure Bernie Sanders was speaking on the soapbox — and here comes Trump’s helicopter flying overhead. Everybody looks up: oh, there’s Trump. He’d parked his helicopter in a lot near the fairgrounds and was giving rides to kids.

Dave Price: Iowa kids, yeah.

Kathie Obradovich: Circling over the fair while Bernie Sanders is mid-speech on the soapbox...

Dave Price: I wrote about that in my second book — interviewed one of the families. Imagine what that means to those kids once they’re older, thinking back, “I was in that helicopter.” And can you imagine what Bernie Sanders thought, flying home after getting almost no coverage that day? Though wait — I need to get my cycles right, that might’ve actually been 2020, I’m conflating two of them. Regardless — good reminder that Trump does things his way, and it’s theater.

Kathie Obradovich: He’s a showman, and the fair’s a perfect environment for it.

Laura Belin: Dave, did you all get a heads-up about these visits? Ashley Hinson’s campaign never tells me anything about what they’re doing — I heard another reporter complaining that when Kelly Loeffler came through the fair walking with Hinson, reporters weren’t given a heads-up.

Dave Price: This’ll give some insight into how the sausage is made — it’s a mixed bag for me. You’re gonna hit a sensitive spot, Laura: in my TV job, I worked for nine different TV stations that broadcast in Iowa, none of them based in Des Moines. So most people in Iowa who know me know how to reach me now, but outside the state, sometimes these offices don’t realize I’m actually based in Des Moines these days — part of my midlife-crisis reinvention. So I found out about Loeffler by accident, because a friend told me Hinson was at a farm-influencer tent setup. I didn’t see that, but I saw Brad Zaun there — one of the regional SBA administrators, covers about 10 states, and Loeffler would be his boss. I didn’t know beforehand Loeffler was coming. Bessent’s visit had limited media too, like we mentioned last week — my understanding is some of that’s coming from D.C. because of security concerns about crowd control. It’s a bit of a hodgepodge, honestly — I’m a little confused how it’s all worked out.

Kathie Obradovich: I have a little inside info at the fair, which is how I found out about Hegseth. We got a regular press release about RFK from HHS, and I actually communicated with one of those folks. But for some of the others, we never got any heads-up at all — nothing about Todd Blanche, for example. Mixed bag. Sometimes you find out from the pork producers who’s coming by to flip pork.

Dave Price: Speaking of which, I’ve gotta get out there. Let’s close out the week — can each of you give us a soapbox moment you witnessed? We’re not all the way through the speeches yet, since Friday and Saturday are still ahead. But is there a moment, or a storyline, from the fair that’s sticking with you heading into the next two and a half months?

Kathie Obradovich: Not a fair storyline exactly, but it wouldn’t be this show without the Libertarians —

Dave Price: They get more coverage on this podcast than any other media outlet.

Kathie Obradovich: Well — Rick Stewart spoke at the soapbox, but he hasn’t actually been allowed back onto the ballot.

Dave Price: And he’s running for governor, not to interrupt.

Kathie Obradovich: Right, for governor. Secretary of State Paul Pate has apparently said that now that the convention nomination — which came after the petition nomination failed — isn’t being accepted either. Stewart, his running mate, and another candidate running for a congressional seat are all still not allowed on the ballot. They’re all speaking at the soapbox regardless, a couple of them again on Saturday. There’s a hearing this afternoon — we’re recording Friday — in Polk County District Court, so we’re still in court over the Libertarians’ ballot status even as they get the spotlight at the fair without technically being on the ballot.

Dave Price: Gotcha. Alright, and way to keep our streak going — thank you for that, Kathie.

Kathie Obradovich: Yes, had to keep it alive.

Dave Price: Alright, Laura, what do you have?

Laura Belin: I mentioned mine already — I’ve been struck by how many Republican candidates specifically went negative on their Democratic opponents at the soapbox. Joe Mitchell in the 2nd District did it too, and Zach Nunn. But my biggest impression was the Turning Point USA people stalking and following Rob Sand, Josh Turek, and Mark Kelly around — and then they seemed to stop. I don’t know if fair staff told them to knock it off, but I’d never seen that at the fair before. It’s one thing for someone to shout something as politicians walk by — it’s another to have posters and sustained heckling. That felt like new behavior for the Iowa State Fair, in my experience.

Dave Price: I’m not sure Zach Lahn’s a big fan of that either, which may have helped tamp it down. Alright, thank you both — we’ll see what the final weekend brings, and how much of what we said today holds up over the last 48 hours of the fair. Saturday’s Vice President Vance, Sunday’s supposedly President Trump, and then everything I said today will look foolish. But you never know with this administration — it’s not impossible they show up. We’ll see. Thanks, both of you — have a great weekend.

Laura Belin: Alright, thanks.

Dave Price: Thank you all for joining us on the Iowa Down Ballot podcast. Thanks to everyone who helps us grow by sharing this and forwarding it along, and to those of you who sustain us week after week as paid subscribers — we appreciate you. Have a great week.

We split up this week: Laura hit the Wing Ding in Clear Lake, Dave went to the Field of Dreams game. Both nights ran long.

Wing Ding drew its best crowd since 2019, about 750 people, with Mark Kelly headlining and fueling more 2028 speculation. Over in Newton, RNC Chair Jeff Kaufmann made the case that Republicans only need to flip a handful of seats nationally, two of them right here in Iowa. Laura’s not so sure the math holds, she counts at least three competitive Iowa districts.

We also flagged the odd, limited-media visit from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, campaigning for Miller-Meeks and Nunn under the guise of official business.

And the Libertarian ballot saga rolls on. New candidates, a likely court fight ahead.

Plus a preview of what we’re watching for at the Register Soapbox at the state fair this week.

Want to sharpen your writing and get the inside scoop on Iowa politics at the same time? Join us September 27-30 at the Okoboji Writers’ & Songwriters’ Retreat on beautiful West Lake Okoboji, featuring Iowa Down Ballot analysts Laura Belin and Kathie Obradovich. They’ll walk you through finding public information, getting your opinion pieces published, and plenty more. Spots are limited, so scan the QR code at the beginning and end of the video or head to okobojiwritersretreat.com to sign up. If you’d like to make a donation to help the Iowa Writer’s Collaborative which supports this show please click the button below. Thanks!

Auto-generated transcript below:

Dave Price: Hi, everyone, and welcome back to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast, our weekly confab of all things politics in Iowa, and some other things that impact Iowa politics — the people, the places, the issues, the events, this big campaign, all that kind of stuff. We talk about it here on the podcast. I’m Dave Price, joined by my Iowa Writers’ Collaborative colleagues, Kathie Obradovich, the czar, the queen of the Iowa Capital Dispatch...

Kathie Obradovich: And...

Dave Price: ...Laura Belin, the founder, the creator, the editor, the writer...

Dave Price: The bookkeeper. Did I get them all? At Bleeding Heartland

Laura Belin: Most of them, yes.

Dave Price: Most of them, yes. It just depends on me. How are you both? And I love your peach, Kathie.

Kathie Obradovich: Oh, well, thank you. Yeah, happy Friday. It doesn’t feel like Friday, because I think we’re going to be going all weekend, right? At least with the Saturday State Fair.

Dave Price: Indeed. I feel like I need to pre-apologize just in case for how this podcast goes. We were recording on Friday morning. Laura went to the Wing Ding, which we’re going to talk about, at Clear Lake — that ain’t close to Des Moines. I went to Dyersville for the Field of Dreams game with my son — that is not close to Des Moines either. So not to whine, but we both had very short nights and took a good extended nap, separately. Do you drink caffeine, Laura?

Laura Belin: I do not. I get all the caffeine I need from chocolate.

Dave Price: Okay.

Laura Belin: But I got home at about 11:30 last night, and then I was just wired, so I couldn’t go to sleep right away, because it was a highly stimulating environment up there at the historic Surf Ballroom in Clear Lake.

Dave Price: Oh, man, I’m jealous — you beat us by an hour and a half. We walked in just a couple minutes before... before wine. My 16-year-old, he’s like the Energizer bunny — he slept almost the entire three-hour drive back. Now, he did drive us there so I could work while we drove, but I guess 10:30 was his knockout point, so it was just me and a silent car for three hours on Highway 20. But here we are. All right, how about we leave...

Kathie Obradovich: And I didn’t do anything.

Dave Price: Not bragging.

Laura Belin: So you edited a bunch of stories, I did — late.

Kathie Obradovich: I watched Field of Dreams on Netflix — not to give it a plug or anything. And yeah, I did edit the Wing Ding story when it came in, and I drank some wine, so today I have my baseball mug for my caffeine.

Dave Price: May I just say it’s good to be the boss working at home when you can drink? I’m not going to allege that you drank your wine while you edited Robin’s story from the Wing Ding — that’s for everyone else to figure out, and this is not a confessional here — but regardless of the order, that’s the way to make that night work.

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, I think so. I haven’t been doing this for almost 40 years for nothing, babe.

Dave Price: Amen. All right, Laura — since you were the one of the three of us physically present at the Wing Ding, give us a little intro, because you’ve gone to a bunch of these things. Talk about what happens there first, and then, as they usually do, they had a high-profile guest — in this case, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly. What’s the atmosphere like when you get into the Surf Ballroom?

Laura Belin: The Iowa Democratic Wing Ding is a fundraiser put on by a bunch of county Democratic Party organizations across northern and western Iowa, but it draws people from well outside that region too — I saw people from Scott County, Polk County, and lots of places. They said last night there were about 750 people there, and it certainly looked it — the room was very full. They said it was the best-attended Wing Ding since 2019, when they had more than a dozen presidential candidates there. I was at that one too, and it was kind of wild with the presidential-candidate sign wars.

This time, since it’s after the primary, there’s no Democratic competition, so they had most of the statewide nominees speaking — except not Rob Sand or Dave Muhlbauer, but all the other nominees for statewide office: Chris Jones, Taylor Wedick, John Norwood, Nathan Willems and Ryan Peterman running for Secretary of State. Then they always have two congressional candidates — Lindsey James, the nominee in the 2nd District, and Dave Dawson in the 4th. And, as you mentioned, Mark Kelly, the keynote, gave kind of a rally-the-troops speech. Last year’s keynote was Harry Dunn, the Capitol Police officer who was there on January 6th, and he gave a more introspective speech than Kelly did. Oh, and I forgot to mention — Josh Turek, the Senate candidate, was there too, speaking. The crowd was very into the speeches. Afterward, talking to activists, there’s a lot going on the ground — coordinated campaign offices open in several counties across the 2nd and 4th Districts. People seem pretty fired up.

Dave Price: The one thing I thought was interesting about what Kelly was talking about — this is where I feel like Democrats are a little split, at the DC level. Kelly talked about the importance of Democrats getting back into the majority so they could investigate the alleged corruption of the Trump administration. Some Democrats don’t really want to talk about that — they may not want to talk about Trump at all, or about possible impeachment, corruption, and all that. What was your take on how that played with the crowd?

Laura Belin: He didn’t talk about impeachment. But if you’re Mark Kelly, and you were threatened with prosecution over that video he and other members of Congress recorded telling service members they don’t have to follow illegal orders, I think you almost can’t avoid talking about the Trump administration a little bit. But it definitely wasn’t the focus of his remarks. He was really trying to say we’ve got to get things under control. He told a story I’ve heard him tell before, about going with his daughter — who’s about 30 now — to visit the house where he and his wife lived when she was born. It was a four-bedroom house in a nice neighborhood that he could afford to buy as a young Navy officer, which nobody in his daughter’s generation can afford at her age in a neighborhood like that. So I’d say he emphasized economic issues more, though he did touch on the investigations and what Pete Hegseth is doing. Later, after his speech, he did a segment on MS NOW where he talked more about allegations involving the Abraham Lincoln in the Gulf — he didn’t dwell on that during his speech. But I think a crowd like that does want to hear about investigating the Trump administration. Though that’s definitely not something — I don’t think I’ve ever heard Josh Turek say “send me to the Senate so I can investigate Trump corruption.”

Kathie Obradovich: Dave, you said exactly what I was thinking — it was an interesting choice, given that I think there’s a definite thought among at least some of the party that you don’t want to focus on Trump. But I also agree with Laura that from Kelly’s perspective, given that he’s been investigated, people would think it was weird if he didn’t mention it. So you’ve got two things there. It may not have been the focus of his speech, but it was probably the focus of a lot of the media coverage. The second thing I’d point out: he hasn’t ruled out running for president — he’s actually said he’s thinking about it. So having him headline the Wing Ding takes on added significance, since we’re always looking ahead to the next presidential race, even though we’re not over the hump of the midterms yet. These kinds of events are kind of the unofficial start of the 2028 cycle. A colleague of mine in Arizona asked, “Do you think Mark Kelly’s going to run?” I said, “Well, he’s making the moves.”

Laura Belin: Yeah, well, he... I’m sure he was booked before the DNC made the calendar decision that left Iowa out of the early window — he probably committed to the Wing Ding before that. But he did do the obligatory “I have an Iowa connection” — it turns out his wife’s brother was a Cyclone, a kicker for the football team, and actually held the record for the longest field goal for 45 years. He said that record was just broken last year.

Kathie Obradovich: But it’s a good Iowa connection — coming from a Cyclone and an Ames native.

Dave Price: The search for any potential presidential candidate to find some kind of real or obscure Iowa connection is kind of like what people are doing now with Quincy, Illinois, where they sold that billion-dollar-plus Powerball ticket — “man, I need to have a great-aunt who lives there, I need to go through my family lineage, because somebody in Quincy — I hope I’m related to them.”

No Wing Ding for me, but earlier this week I went to Newton, where the RNC chair — Jeff Kaufmann for the Republican Party of Iowa — was there, along with Marianne Miller-Meeks, Derek Wolf (the lieutenant governor candidate), and a few local state house candidates. It was kind of a coordinated effort.

I need to interrupt myself for a second, because the Scott Bessent visit was odd to me — the Treasury Secretary. He did a couple of events, one with Miller-Meeks and one with Congressman Zach Nunn, but it was limited media. Apparently a few outlets did preview stories and then were able to cover it — I don’t really know how it all went down. I was trying to play catch-up. It’s rather embarrassing not to know the Treasury Secretary is coming — I didn’t find out until the evening before, or something like that. Generally you get a heads-up for that. I don’t know what you two thought of it — I appreciate that the Trump administration’s probably not calling...

Laura Belin: Welcome to my world, Dave. I absolutely didn’t know either. I also didn’t know about the event in Newton, otherwise I would’ve gone.

Dave Price: I work for nine television stations that broadcast in Iowa, so I assumed we’d be part of that coverage — but it was limited, and some things got built as exclusives. I mean, this is semantics, I suppose, but as we’ve seen, sometimes a White House uses a cabinet official technically for an “official visit,” but let’s be honest — it’s campaign season, and you’re here for two competitive seats. I don’t want to get us too far into a side tangent, but I found it odd. I had six hours in the car going to Dyersville and back, so I was ruminating on it. I can’t remember a time when a cabinet official was here and you weren’t really able to cover it as a traditional member of the media. Kathie, can you go through your mental Rolodex — did you find that unusual?

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, there have been times — and yeah, we didn’t get notice either. It’s not just Laura, so you’re not alone on this one. But yeah, I think it’s unusual. Why not get the most bang for the buck if you’re going to fly somebody out here? It was a busy day, who knows if we’d have had time to cover it anyway. There have been occasions with the Trump administration where they’ve restricted media — like when Trump himself went to the Westside Conservative Club in Urbandale. You can understand you may not be able to pack as much media into the Iowa Machine Shed restaurant as you’d want. But yeah, during campaign season, when you’re really trying to promote a candidate, it just seems like an odd choice.

Dave Price: Anyway, I essentially interrupted my own story, but that was on my mind. So, back to that Newton event — the speech by the RNC chair was interesting to me, and honestly, I thought it was very effective. Jeff Kaufmann gave kind of his traditional speech, portraying Democrats as “crazies” and those kinds of things — he gives these fired-up speeches. The RNC chair — that’s not his style, I think he’s from Florida — his speech was all about unity: the election’s over, the primary’s over, let’s all get together. It went over well with the crowd, several dozen people there.

The RNC chair was doing math — talking about how in the House you have 435 members, and there are only about 18 truly competitive seats. When you look at Cook Political Report’s forecasting, he made the pitch that Republicans really just need about six of those 18. Standing in the back of the room watching it, I thought that seemed like a pretty effective way to communicate to the crowd — essentially saying, “it’s a tough environment” — he acknowledged midterms don’t usually go well for the party in power — “but here’s what we really only need to focus on.”

He mentioned two competitive seats here in Iowa — I think he said two, not three; I don’t think he counted Hinson’s congressional seat. I’m curious if you’ve heard any other prominent Republican use that kind of pitch. Marianne Miller-Meeks isn’t a screamer or a rah-rah type — she largely did her biographical speech, mixed in some patriotism, got emotional a couple times. She joked she was hopped up on Diet Coke before the event — she walked in with this huge Diet Coke, confessed it wasn’t her first of the day — but her speech was effective with this group too. Going back to the RNC chair’s pitch about “here’s the atmosphere, here’s really all we need to focus on” — have you heard that kind of message from other prominent Republicans?

Kathie Obradovich: It seems a little bit like a perverse message, in the sense of — “we really only need to focus on 6 of 18 of these seats” — to me, not having heard it, it’s like, “relax, people, we’re really in great shape, we only have to get less than half of these.”

Dave Price: Let me interrupt — sorry — I should have underscored: he immediately followed up by saying two of the six are right here in this state, and this is the most important state. Sorry to interrupt.

Kathie Obradovich: No, that helps. I think there are probably folks that kind of framing appeals to — presumably party insiders. I’d be curious whether he goes to some other state and says “two of the six are right here” there too. But yeah, it’s a different way of talking about the race, for sure.

Laura Belin: I think 18 is very low. Even with all the gerrymandering that’s reduced the number of competitive districts, if it turns out to be a wave election, I think there are a lot more than 18 seats truly in play. While you were talking, Dave, I went back to double-check my memory — the National Republican Congressional Committee, the main campaign arm for U.S. House Republicans, added Iowa’s 2nd District to their target list in March. They put Joe Mitchell on what they call their “Maga Majority” program. So they’ve officially acknowledged Iowa has three competitive districts. And Joe Mitchell, last month at the Family Leadership Summit, made a comment along the lines of — “Ashley Hinson’s been great, but the only problem is she made a lot of people think this district isn’t really competitive, but it is.” So I’d say there are definitely three competitive districts in Iowa, and I wouldn’t go along with only 18 being competitive nationwide.

Dave Price: Speaking of Nunn — he’s been touting that he’s one of the most bipartisan members in the U.S. House, which reminded me of when he was running in his first primary. I talked to a Republican strategist type back then — and, as we all know, I had that debate moment with Nunn during his congressional primary, where I’d asked, spur of the moment, who wants to ban all abortions, and Nunn kind of looked around at the other candidates and eventually raised his hand. That became a campaign commercial that probably still runs today — I wish it would go away, my kids joke about it, and it’s about a very serious topic. But I remember a Republican strategist telling me at the time: “Nunn’s doing what he’s got to do to get through this primary, but he’s going to pivot — he understands the district, he knows it’s a purple district and will stay purple, and he’s really going to push bipartisanship.” Now, he’s still a Republican, of course — he’ll do videos supporting President Trump and so on — but it can’t hurt to have a list come out ranking him the third-most-bipartisan member of the U.S. House, in a very competitive seat, in a very competitive year.

Kathie Obradovich: I wonder what their criteria were for bipartisanship, because whenever I look at voting records, the Iowa Republican delegation votes with the majority — I’d say probably more than 90% of the time. It’s got to be something other than voting records.

Dave Price: What they’ve sponsored, probably.

Laura Belin: Part of it is co-sponsoring bills — I think he co-sponsors a bunch of bipartisan bills that don’t go anywhere, but then he gets credit for being a bipartisan member of Congress. I don’t know the specific criteria, but I’ve seen that pattern on lists like this before. And speaking of the cabinet official coming here for an ostensibly “official” event that’s really connected to the campaign — Zach Nunn has been doing a lot of ribbon-cutting ceremonies for earmarks that were actually finalized back in January or March, but the ribbon-cuttings are happening now. Those are all official events, not campaign events, but he’s getting a ton of media coverage from them, which can only help his campaign.

Dave Price: Yeah, and he’s definitely taking advantage of the recess while Congress isn’t meeting. It feels like he’s had two or three of these a week the last couple of weeks — I was going to tally them up for a story I haven’t done yet.

Okay, so — related to campaigns — how many weeks in a row have we talked about the Libertarians? But seriously, every show we’ve had some new development. We need, like, a soap-opera theme song — “As the Libertarian Turns” or something.

Kathie Obradovich: Who would have thought that getting kicked off the ballot would be the most free media the Libertarian Party gets? For anyone who hasn’t followed this saga: two of the Libertarian tickets got kicked off the ballot by the state objection panel. One was lieutenant governor candidate Jules Cutler, which put the whole ticket in jeopardy. The second was 3rd District candidate Marco Battaglia, who got kicked off because his actual legal name is Mark Anderson — who knew? The party has been fighting this in court. Battaglia then announced a medical emergency and dropped out of the race. So the Libertarians held a convention and nominated Charles Aldrich — a name well known to Libertarians and political followers — as the lieutenant governor candidate; he most recently ran in the 4th Congressional District. And Jacob Heard, who’s served as the Libertarian Party’s lawyer and has run for the state house, is going to run in the 3rd Congressional District. Part of why we follow this so closely is that, with so many competitive races, any third-party candidate — including the Libertarians — can actually make a mark.

Laura Belin: Charles Aldrich — both candidates on their governor ticket, Nicholas Gluba and now Aldrich as the lieutenant governor replacement, attempted to run for Congress in 2024 and were part of the case that went to the Iowa Supreme Court, which upheld the decision disqualifying the Libertarian candidates from the ballot on the grounds the party hadn’t done the convention process correctly. I also learned that Aldrich used to live in Minnesota and ran for U.S. Senate there as a Libertarian in the 2008 election — the one that went to a months-long recount and contest between Al Franken and Norm Coleman. He got almost 14,000 votes in an election where the final margin between Franken and Coleman was like 200-something votes.

Dave Price: I mean, seriously — what other podcast gives you that kind of nugget?

Kathie Obradovich: The Libertarians could really be a force in Iowa if they’d just learn the rules and stop making themselves vulnerable to being kicked off the ballot.

Laura Belin: I didn’t even know this process existed — that you could replace a candidate. I’m sure Republicans will file some kind of legal challenge — how can you replace a candidate who didn’t actually qualify for the ballot in the first place? So we’ll probably end up with a court case anyway. I wasn’t aware of this avenue; I thought if you didn’t do it through petition, you’d have to hold a special convention, and that’s very difficult now for third parties, since the requirements for how many people need to attend a convention to nominate someone were raised.

Dave Price: Hey Kathie, let’s put a cherry on top of what we talked about earlier — Mark Kelly and the presidential race. Laura already mentioned the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee — we’re recording Friday morning, and Saturday they could finalize the decision on what the calendar will look like.

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, the full DNC is meeting Saturday and is expected to ratify the calendar the Rules and Bylaws Committee already proposed. Iowa was left out of that — there are five early states, starting with South Carolina, also including Nevada, New Hampshire (third in the lineup, if I remember right), Michigan, and Virginia.

When the Rules and Bylaws Committee made that decision, Iowa Democratic Party leadership was a little coy about whether the party will actually follow the DNC’s rules and go after Super Tuesday, or jump the line and hold a rogue early caucus. There are two schools of thought — even people who like the caucuses may not want the state to defy the DNC, while others are sick of the caucuses and say we should let them go. It really rubbed Iowa Democrats the wrong way that New Hampshire was left out of the early cycle in 2024, went early anyway, and suffered no consequences, while Iowa followed the rules and got stripped of its Rules and Bylaws Committee member — left out in the cold again. Some feel they were punished for following the rules while New Hampshire was rewarded for flouting them. It’ll be interesting to see — party leadership said they probably won’t make any decision until after the midterms. But if Iowa elects more Democrats in the midterms, the party may feel it has more leverage to test the DNC on all of that — stripping delegates and so on, which often gets waived away by the time a presidential candidate is actually nominated.

Dave Price: Hey, Laura and I are going to sprint out of here as soon as we finish recording to head over to the Des Moines Register Soapbox — day two of the fair, but day one of candidates actually appearing at the soapbox. There are about five today, a bunch on Saturday, none on Sunday, then back to a bunch on Monday, carrying through the week. Laura, without getting too specific about individual candidates — what are you going to be watching for? We’ll have Democrats and some Republicans up there, folks gathered around, maybe some hecklers.

Laura Belin: I’m always curious whether they hang around to take questions afterward, but mainly I want to know whether they come with a focused message on some issue, or just give the same introductory biographical speech I’ve probably already heard them give.

Dave Price: All right, Kathie — as you assemble your team to cover all this, and you know how the sausage gets made from your years at the Register — how do you guide your team, and what will they be watching for?

Kathie Obradovich: We’re obviously looking for candidates to make news — similar to what Laura said, if it’s just a biographical speech we’ve heard before, it’s not going to make much news. We like to see them come with a specific issue, something provocative to talk about. We also look at crowd reaction — do they have supporters there, or are they relying on whoever happens to be walking by, which is sort of the ethic of the soapbox? Organized campaigns will seed the crowd with supporters who show up early and take the front chairs, so we look for that kind of evidence of campaign organization. Soapbox is always fun — it’s unpredictable. And I always love watching candidates at the fair — you can really tell who’s comfortable talking to people they don’t know. I’ve got a lot of stories about presidential candidates at the fair; we can talk about that some other time.

Dave Price: I know — we should seriously do an entire episode on that.

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, I want to know what they eat — do they flip a pork chop, drop one on the ground, and put it back?

Dave Price: On the ground. Exactly, exactly.

Kathie Obradovich: Okay, bye.

Dave Price: All right — Kathie and Laura, thank you both. Have a good weekend, let’s hope the rain stays away. Friday morning brought another round of rain, as did Thursday, so we’ll see how that shakes out and whether the heat gives us a break next week as we’re out there listening to these folks. Thanks to everyone who’s dropped in for the podcast this week, thanks to the new subscribers, thanks to those sharing it to help us grow, and a special thanks to our paid subscribers — especially those who’ve re-upped and enhanced their support level, we really appreciate that. And to those thinking about supporting the podcast — we’re going to do something special in the weeks ahead for paid subscribers. We’ll talk more about that in the next couple of weeks. Thanks for joining us, have a great week, and we’ll talk to you next week.

We welcome first-time guest Shane Vander Hart this week. He writes at shanevanderhart.com. Please give him a follow while you’re there.

We dug into school choice first. Rob Sand wants to bring back the ESA income cap and add audits, while Zach Lahn talks expansion without much detail. Shane and Laura sparred over what audits would even target, since tuition dollars aren’t currently subject to oversight once schools receive them.

Then we turned to the new Emerson/Nexstar poll. Sand is up 5.5 points on Lahn, boosted by a 26-point lead with independents. The Senate race is tighter, Hinson over Turek 47.5 to 45, but Turek leads independents by nearly 12 points, a warning sign for Republicans this cycle.

We also covered Brenna Bird’s new Medicaid fraud task force, which drew criticism from two former state officials who say the existing Medicaid Fraud Control Unit just needs more funding. Laura flagged that the task force ignores MCOs illegally denying care.

Looking ahead, Laura’s tracking healthcare messaging in the 1st District, Kathie’s watching Sunday’s Libertarian convention to replace their bounced 3rd District candidate, and Shane has a piece coming Monday on Sand’s ESA means test.

Want to sharpen your writing and get the inside scoop on Iowa politics at the same time? Join us September 27-30 at the Okoboji Writers' & Songwriters' Retreat on beautiful West Lake Okoboji, featuring Iowa Down Ballot analysts Laura Belin and Kathie Obradovich. They'll walk you through finding public information, getting your opinion pieces published, and plenty more. Spots are limited, so scan the QR code at the beginning and end of the video or head to okobojiwritersretreat.com to sign up. If you’d like to make a donation to help the Iowa Writer’s Collaborative which supports this show please click the button below. Thanks!

Auto-generated transcript below:

00:00:30.730 --> 00:00:39.459

Dave Price: Hi, everyone, and welcome to the Iowa Down Ballot Podcast. I am Dave Price, joined by not two.

3

00:00:39.580 --> 00:00:55.030

Dave Price: But 3 media friends this week. Laura Belin, Kathie Obradovich are regulars. They’re here, of course. But we have a newbie, a rookie, Shane Vander Hart. Who the heck is this person? Hi, Shane.

4

00:00:55.030 --> 00:00:55.760

Shane: Hey!

5

00:00:55.890 --> 00:00:57.110

Shane: Hey Dave, how are you?

6

00:00:58.110 --> 00:00:59.459

Dave Price: Who are you?

Shane: Who am I? Well, I’m just a guy, no. I write a substack, shanevanderhart.com, very original.

8

00:01:09.370 --> 00:01:10.190

Shane: So, it’s…

9

00:01:10.190 --> 00:01:11.310

Dave Price: Branding, baby, branding.

10

00:01:11.310 --> 00:01:20.809

Shane: Yeah, yeah, so it’s… it’s a piece of my mind, basically, the subtitle’s Piece of My Mind About Faith, Culture, Politics, Media, and Public Policy, because

11

00:01:21.100 --> 00:01:30.350

Shane: drilling down on one particular thing is boring, and so I can… it just leaves it broad and wide open, so whatever I want to write about, I can just do that.

12

00:01:30.490 --> 00:01:37.780

Dave Price: Outstanding. We have had some private conversations, really, for a number of weeks, and we took last week off.

13

00:01:38.080 --> 00:01:43.669

Dave Price: For a little vacation, rest up as we get ready for the final sprint.

14

00:01:43.930 --> 00:01:53.680

Dave Price: I… one of the biggest… I’m just gonna talk out loud about what has been challenging for me. There is no conservative version of Laura Belin.

15

00:01:54.770 --> 00:02:01.099

Dave Price: That is… that has… because that has always been my dream, right? Laura is this unique…

16

00:02:01.970 --> 00:02:09.669

Dave Price: entity. Nobody does what Laura does. Kathie runs this sprawling enterprise, so she’s her own thing, too.

17

00:02:09.740 --> 00:02:13.819

Dave Price: But… but that… she has a different… a different mission.

18

00:02:13.820 --> 00:02:33.139

Dave Price: There is no conservative version of Laura, and so we have had private conversations about, like, how do we get some conservative voices in here? You know, way back in the day, we had Kevin Hall, Craig Robinson, they were doing some things, and they did it differently than Laura does.

19

00:02:33.170 --> 00:02:47.340

Dave Price: But nobody does the kind of deep dive stuff from the conservative side that Laura does, and that is something that I’ve always thought could probably give our conversations here each week a little more depth.

20

00:02:47.410 --> 00:02:48.580

Dave Price: So…

21

00:02:48.690 --> 00:03:03.760

Dave Price: Shane, who has 43 different jobs, so it makes it very challenging to schedule with this man, but you have been around conservative politics for a while, and I appreciate right now you’re… you’re probably a lost man.

22

00:03:04.000 --> 00:03:21.710

Dave Price: You are not… you are not the Republican guy who I met 20 years ago or whatever, when we met up for coffee at Smokey Row in Des Moines, when you were doing some other… you had caffeinated thoughts and some other things you were doing. You later launched Iowa Torch, you’ve been a youth pastor in your career, all kinds of stuff.

23

00:03:21.790 --> 00:03:23.780

Dave Price: So…

24

00:03:23.860 --> 00:03:43.229

Dave Price: welcome, because it’s nice to add yet another… yet another voice to this. And I wonder, since you’re our guest this week, maybe you lead off, but one thing that we have talked a little bit about on this podcast, but not a lot, would be looking at the idea of school choice.

25

00:03:43.230 --> 00:03:59.199

Dave Price: And how that might play out in the gubernatorial race. Laura has done a lot of reporting, Kathie’s staff has done reporting on this as well. Shane, you are working for a couple of members who clearly have.

26

00:03:59.680 --> 00:04:00.669

Shane: Mistaken it, yeah.

27

00:04:00.670 --> 00:04:13.019

Dave Price: a stake in this and a lot of interest in this expansion. So, talk about what you have seen so far from Rob Sand and Zach Lahn in this area.

28

00:04:13.300 --> 00:04:24.940

Shane: Okay, well, as far as, school choice, it’s hard to say exactly how prominent it’s gonna be in the election. Right now, it seems, obviously, focused more on the economy, and…

29

00:04:25.190 --> 00:04:29.109

Shane: I think Rob Sands,

30

00:04:29.310 --> 00:04:37.129

Shane: his hits on Lahn about where he, you know, where he resides has been landing, especially with independents, but…

31

00:04:37.310 --> 00:04:45.039

Shane: I see two candidates that are pretty far apart on the issue. Of course.

32

00:04:45.300 --> 00:04:57.290

Shane: Rob seems like he has, moderated himself to a point where he’s not… he’s not advocating getting rid of ESAs altogether, but just putting… bringing back the income cap, which I hope I’m…

33

00:04:57.640 --> 00:04:59.719

Shane: I hope I’m,

34

00:05:00.230 --> 00:05:08.220

Shane: talking about his position accurately, but… So I don’t know if that’s what he truly believes, or if that’s what he…

35

00:05:08.900 --> 00:05:20.790

Shane: thinks that’s what… the only thing he’s gonna be able to get accomplished, with… with the current political environment and the likelihood that if he’s elected governor, he’s going to have a Republican legislature to work with, so…

36

00:05:20.860 --> 00:05:30.320

Shane: It’s been interesting. Lahn hasn’t said a lot on the campaign trail that I’ve seen, other than he’s supportive of VSAs.

37

00:05:30.350 --> 00:05:42.859

Shane: I think we’re going to be trying to drill down where he really lands more on specific issues that impact private schools, not just ESAs, but independent accreditation and other things as well.

38

00:05:43.450 --> 00:05:47.089

Dave Price: Laura, what’s your take on where is the base on this?

39

00:05:47.440 --> 00:06:03.939

Laura Belin: Well, the Democratic base is extremely opposed to the school voucher program. I think I agree with Shane’s summary. I would just add a couple of things to what Rob Sands says when he talks about this issue, which he does a lot. He brings it up a lot at his town halls. And…

40

00:06:03.940 --> 00:06:28.209

Laura Belin: he definitely wants to bring back the income caps on it, but also wants to have audits, like, if public money is going to these schools, we should be able to see where the public money is going. There should be more restrictions on what they can do with the money. And finally, he says that these private schools, if they want to take the taxpayer money, they should accept all of the students who want to attend that school. So that is…

41

00:06:28.500 --> 00:06:52.470

Laura Belin: what I’ve heard from him. And I’ve heard impressed by Democratic audiences or voters saying, hey, why aren’t you calling for repealing this program? And he’ll say exactly what Shane just said. If I’m elected, I’m going to be working with a Republican legislature. I was really surprised this week with the Emerson College poll, and I know we’re going to talk about the poll more later, but they asked a question about this issue, not exactly using the phrase school vouchers, but

42

00:06:52.470 --> 00:06:55.570

Laura Belin: State-funded private school tuition assistance.

43

00:06:55.570 --> 00:07:08.680

Laura Belin: And the electorate was really evenly split on it, with just a little more than 40% each way, which I would have expected the electorate to be more against the voucher program, just based on how much I’ve heard Rob Sand talking about it.

44

00:07:08.970 --> 00:07:20.309

Kathie Obradovich: We went up and covered, Zach Lahn up in Britt at the Hancock County Fair, I want to say it was last weekend, so not too long ago. And, he’s…

45

00:07:20.450 --> 00:07:42.180

Kathie Obradovich: careful about how he talks about ESA. So, he said he would like to see expansion of the program, but then he sort of couches that as saying he wants, more innovative schools to be able to, you know, participate. So I’m not sure what he means by innovative schools.

46

00:07:42.180 --> 00:07:44.979

Kathie Obradovich: Secondly, he says,

47

00:07:44.980 --> 00:08:09.629

Kathie Obradovich: that, you know, along with strengthening the ESA program, however he wants to do that, he wants to make public schools more competitive, and he likes to talk about competition. And so it’ll be interesting to see what he means… again, a lot of these are not fully fleshed out, what he means by making public schools more competitive. Does that mean you level the playing field with the rules that public schools and private schools have to

48

00:08:09.630 --> 00:08:13.200

Kathie Obradovich: Follow, or is it… is there something else that he has in mind?

49

00:08:13.650 --> 00:08:14.949

Dave Price: What do you have, Shane?

50

00:08:15.180 --> 00:08:16.980

Dave Price: Your wheels are turning, I can tell.

51

00:08:16.980 --> 00:08:30.590

Shane: Yeah, well, ESAs, not school vouchers. Those are two different types of programs. Vouchers are direct payments to schools. As far as limiting what ESAs go to.

52

00:08:30.590 --> 00:08:43.469

Shane: It is extremely limited what’s eligible under ESAs, so I’m not entirely sure what Sand is thinking as far as how he would like to limit ESAs, but

53

00:08:43.760 --> 00:08:51.550

Shane: Tuition, it goes to tuition first. These schools have to be accredited, either independent accreditation or,

54

00:08:51.660 --> 00:09:09.059

Shane: accreditation through the state of Iowa, which most Catholic schools are usually accredited through the state of Iowa. Most Protestant and other types of private schools are accredited through independent accreditation. So tuition is first, and then there’s a very,

55

00:09:09.290 --> 00:09:20.260

Shane: tight list of eligible expenses that have to be… that are allowed after tuition, that are purchased through the Odyssey Marketplace.

56

00:09:20.540 --> 00:09:33.349

Shane: so it’s not like somebody’s buying amusement park tickets, or, you know, things that we would deem extravagant through this program. So, you know, I guess I would like to hear…

57

00:09:33.870 --> 00:09:35.829

Shane: Rob say exactly

58

00:09:36.060 --> 00:09:43.630

Shane: what kind of expenses he’s talking about, what he thinks is being done that would be extravagant that falls under this program. I don’t see it.

59

00:09:43.630 --> 00:09:50.909

Laura Belin: I think what he’s talking about is not what the families can use the money for. The families have to use the money for tuition first.

60

00:09:50.910 --> 00:09:51.340

Shane: Right.

61

00:09:51.340 --> 00:09:58.980

Laura Belin: It’s what the schools can do with the money that they’re getting from all those ESA accounts, and a phrase that he likes to use is.

62

00:09:58.980 --> 00:09:59.330

Shane: But…

63

00:09:59.330 --> 00:10:10.609

Laura Belin: There’s only one thing on God’s green earth that the schools can’t do, and that’s give families a rebate. Other than that, they could pay for luxury vacations, steak and lobster dinners.

64

00:10:10.880 --> 00:10:11.310

Shane: Yeah.

65

00:10:11.310 --> 00:10:15.399

Laura Belin: anything with the money because it’s not subject to audit, so that… that’s the point.

66

00:10:15.400 --> 00:10:18.519

Shane: because Christian schools are known to do that.

67

00:10:18.650 --> 00:10:20.339

Shane: They… We’re not just talking about.

68

00:10:20.340 --> 00:10:21.560

Kathie Obradovich: at Christian schools here, though.

69

00:10:21.630 --> 00:10:31.329

Shane: Yeah, well, I, you know, basically, ESAs are allowing, finally, a lot of private schools to be able to pay their teachers competitively.

70

00:10:31.460 --> 00:10:38.919

Shane: And that’s… if you want to know where the money’s going, it’s going to that, mainly. So…

71

00:10:39.320 --> 00:10:48.629

Shane: I guess if we’re going to be talking about auditing and private entities, let’s… are we going to do that for any private entity that receives public funds?

72

00:10:49.680 --> 00:11:04.600

Shane: Because there are a lot out there. Do we audit every single college? Does the state auditors, do they audit grocery stores that receive SNAP funding? Do we audit, I mean, doctors’ offices that receive Medicaid? I mean.

73

00:11:04.700 --> 00:11:07.690

Shane: we’re gonna be talking about Medicaid fraud here in a little bit, but…

74

00:11:07.940 --> 00:11:15.860

Shane: You know, we don’t generally do that to a point, even though a lot of these organizations and even private schools actually

75

00:11:16.040 --> 00:11:20.019

Shane: there are… Fiscal and financial,

76

00:11:20.210 --> 00:11:35.250

Shane: responsibilities they have, not only to their donors and to their board, but also to the accrediting agencies that accredit them. A lot of these schools actually are audited on a regular basis, so just not by the state auditor’s office.

77

00:11:35.660 --> 00:11:44.840

Dave Price: Hey, Kathie, will you wrap this topic up? How do we know, as we sit here and talk about this in August, how do we get a feel for…

78

00:11:45.590 --> 00:11:51.450

Dave Price: What kind of driver this issue will be for voters?

79

00:11:52.290 --> 00:11:54.759

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, so, I mean, we’re going to talk about polling.

80

00:11:55.200 --> 00:12:18.049

Kathie Obradovich: And that is one way, right? You do get a sense, at least of where voters feel about issues. Sometimes those are combined with how big of a priority that is. So, I mean, we know that the campaigns do these polling. We don’t always see it, and when we do see it, we don’t always

81

00:12:18.060 --> 00:12:20.759

Kathie Obradovich: You know, we don’t always believe it.

82

00:12:20.760 --> 00:12:21.669

Dave Price: You know?

83

00:12:21.670 --> 00:12:39.279

Kathie Obradovich: And so, so, you know, we don’t necessarily publish all the internal polls that we may have seen, but, you know, some of these reputable polls, at least give you an idea sometimes on these issues of where voters are. The other thing, too, is, you know, if you can get out with the campaigns enough.

84

00:12:39.350 --> 00:12:48.430

Kathie Obradovich: And hear what the questions are that people ask, and how often you’ve seen questions come up. That, that, you know.

85

00:12:48.660 --> 00:12:58.480

Kathie Obradovich: different gatherings may be more or less grassroots, you know, depending on who’s there. But, you know, I think it’ll be interesting, so…

86

00:12:58.570 --> 00:13:02.080

Kathie Obradovich: Just a plug, you know, a…

87

00:13:02.150 --> 00:13:17.040

Kathie Obradovich: separate media entities event, and I’m looking forward to the State Fair soapbox that the Register does, coming up, just to see what, you know, people there are asking candidates about. Those are… that is not necessarily a partisan crowd.

88

00:13:17.040 --> 00:13:23.490

Kathie Obradovich: And some of these people are seeing some of these candidates for the very first time, so I’ll be looking forward to seeing what’s on their minds.

89

00:13:23.490 --> 00:13:37.149

Dave Price: To use an example that Shane did, you know, when you were talking about how SAND is landing some effective messaging against Lahn with, this guy lives in Kansas kind of thing, or doesn’t live here enough, all that kind of stuff.

90

00:13:37.630 --> 00:13:47.680

Dave Price: while we may not see a lot… we’re not gonna have as much polling, perhaps, with the register not doing the Iowa poll, but I feel like we can also tell…

91

00:13:47.680 --> 00:14:12.549

Dave Price: what the campaigns have found out from their own polling based on what messaging they are using, and if these ESAs, if SAN thinks these are going to be a strength for him and a weakness for Lahn, I’m gonna guess organically he’s gonna bring this up a bunch, right? And if his polling shows that, as Laura already teased ahead with this Emerson polling, if it’s more of a mixed bag, perhaps there’s not a

92

00:14:12.550 --> 00:14:15.180

Dave Price: A lot of benefit for him to really hammer on this.

93

00:14:15.390 --> 00:14:32.640

Kathie Obradovich: But you’re also talking about interest groups, right? So, you know, you’re speaking, you know, Rob Sand almost certainly is speaking to, you know, the ISEA, the State Education Association, which is the teachers’ union, and would be a big, you know, an opportunity for support from that group.

94

00:14:32.640 --> 00:14:41.170

Kathie Obradovich: So, I mean, you know, the messaging’s not just speaking to, run-of-the-mill voters, they’re speaking to their interest groups as well.

95

00:14:41.590 --> 00:14:59.209

Dave Price: Laura, you already… sorry that I forgot to silence my phone, excuse me for being rude. You already teased ahead to this Emerson College Nextstar media poll, so this would be my former employer as part of the Nexstar family. And you talked about…

96

00:14:59.210 --> 00:15:20.550

Dave Price: at least it addressed the issue of ESAs, but let’s look at some of the top-line numbers. However, this weekend, you have a post looking beyond the top-line numbers, but in particular, they’re looking at the gubernatorial race and the U.S. Senate race that we have in the state of Iowa in November. I wonder if you can start with the gubernatorial race.

97

00:15:20.550 --> 00:15:23.899

Dave Price: It shows that Rob Sand is up.

98

00:15:23.910 --> 00:15:29.600

Dave Price: in this race, but you’re also looking behind… beyond some of the top-line numbers. What are you finding?

99

00:15:29.600 --> 00:15:36.550

Laura Belin: Overall, it’s a pretty good poll for San. He’s up by about 5.5 points, which is outside the poll’s margin of error.

100

00:15:36.990 --> 00:16:01.000

Laura Belin: And he has a big lead among independents. He’s got a 26-point lead among independents in the sample. And I know that his campaign has really put a lot of muscle into trying to identify and mobilize those voters who aren’t affiliated with either party, and he’s put forward a bunch of proposals to empower no-party voters, including completely overhauling our state primary system.

101

00:16:01.000 --> 00:16:01.880

Laura Belin: So.

102

00:16:01.880 --> 00:16:26.490

Laura Belin: he’s looking strong. Also, they asked… now, this was after they asked about favorability, and the… and the head-to-head matchup against Zach Lahn. They asked, how important is it to you for a candidate for statewide office to have lived in Iowa for most of their adult life? And about three-quarters of the sample said that was either very important or somewhat important. So, I think that that’s probably, as you mentioned, Dave.

103

00:16:26.490 --> 00:16:39.390

Laura Belin: when we hear campaigns emphasizing a message, it may be because their own internal polling is telling them that’s effective. But the other thing this poll showed is that he’s much better known than Zach Lahn. That’s not too surprising because

104

00:16:39.390 --> 00:17:04.389

Laura Belin: Zach Lahn, I mean, before last November, when he announced his gubernatorial bid, I had literally never heard of him in my life, whereas Rob Sand’s been a statewide elected official for the last 8 years, so that, you could say that the optimistic view for Zach Lahn is he has an opportunity, if he can become better known, to try to raise his numbers a little bit, but Sand already has a much… a more… a better split on his favorable

105

00:17:04.390 --> 00:17:05.530

Laura Belin: favorable rating.

106

00:17:05.810 --> 00:17:10.750

Dave Price: Shane, you are in Indy these days, as you stepped aside from the.

107

00:17:10.750 --> 00:17:13.209

Shane: I’ve had Democrats come up to my door.

108

00:17:13.210 --> 00:17:32.089

Dave Price: Is that right? Yeah. They think you’re a free agent. So, to Laura’s point there, when you look at Sands’ strength with independents, and clearly he has really worked, and he knows the math, Laura, as we’ve mentioned on this show a bunch of times, I believe was the first person to really deep-dive the voter registration numbers

109

00:17:32.120 --> 00:17:51.590

Dave Price: a bunch of months ago, and back then, I believe the gap was about 200,000, the registered Republican advantage. It’s narrowed some now. But that was Laura’s reality check to some of these Democrats a while back to say, hey, yeah, you know, things may be feeling good, but let’s look at the big picture numbers. So for Sand to do well, realistically, he has.

110

00:17:51.590 --> 00:17:52.939

Shane: He has to, he has to.

111

00:17:53.320 --> 00:18:08.340

Shane: Yeah, and by a pretty large margin. So… and so he’s smart to take that tactic, and I think, you know, his campaign messaging, for the most part, not redder, not bluer, but better and truer, okay.

112

00:18:08.420 --> 00:18:27.869

Shane: catchy, nice, works perfectly well, especially among indies that are kind of tired of the two-party system. So, you know, I definitely… he’s got some smart messaging, and obviously he’s got a huge campaign war chest to get out messaging on the airwaves, so that’s gonna be of huge benefit to him.

113

00:18:28.290 --> 00:18:39.659

Shane: And I’m sure he remembers his last election, where, you know, he just won by the, you know, skin of his teeth, so he definitely has to make some huge, huge inroads, and…

114

00:18:39.700 --> 00:18:55.339

Shane: On the flip side, Lahn has to recognize that he can’t just reach out to MAGA base and Republican voters, but he needs to also make some inroads into, independents, those that maybe have actually voted for Trump, but are now kind of getting turned off.

115

00:18:55.370 --> 00:19:08.159

Shane: So, I would be worried, if I were him, looking at this polling, especially with the independent numbers. It doesn’t look good. I mean, this is… looks like it’s setting up a scenario for a sandwyn.

116

00:19:08.430 --> 00:19:21.309

Shane: obviously, just a snapshot in time in August, so there’s… there’s a lot of time to go, but he does need to get his name out there more. Because I… like Laura, it’s like, Zach who? I have never heard of this guy before.

117

00:19:21.520 --> 00:19:28.909

Dave Price: So, Kathie, the… one of the fun things for me to talk to you week after week on this, and I appreciate that, you know, you’re the…

118

00:19:28.950 --> 00:19:48.709

Dave Price: you’re the driving force of the Iowa Capital Dispatch, but for a bunch of years, you knew the inner workings of the Iowa poll at the Des Moines Register, so you have more than a passing knowledge of how polling works. We always say on this show, we don’t want to make too big a deal out of polling, and it’s a snapshot in time, blah blah blah.

119

00:19:48.880 --> 00:19:57.920

Dave Price: Having said all of that, what did you think when you looked, just speaking on the gubernatorial race here, what did you think when you looked at this Emerson-Nexstar poll?

120

00:19:58.260 --> 00:20:15.520

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, so first of all, Emerson is a, you know, it is a name in polling. They’ve done, lots of polling over the years, they’re very experienced. Every pollster is different, you know, and the thing that I liked

121

00:20:15.520 --> 00:20:22.970

Kathie Obradovich: most about, about, Ann Selzer’s polling, was that she didn’t bake assumptions in.

122

00:20:23.460 --> 00:20:29.829

Kathie Obradovich: the electorate. In other words, she, didn’t try to project

123

00:20:29.830 --> 00:20:49.840

Kathie Obradovich: you know, what the… what the electorate was gonna look like, you know, how many, you know, so she didn’t, like, cut off people who hadn’t voted in the last two elections, because that… that, you know, gets… gets rid of new voters, for example, and caucus polling was even more complicated as a result. So…

124

00:20:49.840 --> 00:20:53.290

Kathie Obradovich: So, you know, every poll is different. I think Emerson

125

00:20:53.540 --> 00:21:08.989

Kathie Obradovich: you know, Laura, you looked at, you know, whether their samples seem to lean right or left, and I have… I have not dug into that, but I do think that they are, you know, a relatively respected name with any, with any poll.

126

00:21:08.990 --> 00:21:14.959

Kathie Obradovich: you know, I like to look at the number of undecideds, and, you know, so I think…

127

00:21:15.050 --> 00:21:26.079

Kathie Obradovich: You know, both in the Senate race and gubernatorial race, there’s room, you know, there’s wiggle room there. You know, but if I’m… if I’m Zach Lahn looking at this

128

00:21:26.080 --> 00:21:47.820

Kathie Obradovich: Paul, and I kind of agree with Shane, he needs to get out and get his name out more. We’ve been looking… we had a week, I think it was 2 weeks ago, where Rob Sand had 3 events in Central Iowa, or at least, he, you know, he shared a media release with us early, so we had that and 2 events.

129

00:21:47.820 --> 00:21:48.850

Kathie Obradovich: Anyway…

130

00:21:48.850 --> 00:22:05.799

Kathie Obradovich: they were, and we were looking for Zach Lahn events that we could cover, you know, to try to provide some balance, and we couldn’t find one. He finally had a couple up in north central Iowa, and we were able to send a reporter up, but he, you know, not having a lot of public events.

131

00:22:05.800 --> 00:22:23.729

Kathie Obradovich: not doing as many, you know, yeah, he’s putting out news releases saying Rob Sand is a fraud, or whatever, bad guy. But, you know, those are… those are not necessarily the kinds of things that we jump on, so we’re, you know, we’re looking for, we’re looking for opportunities to cover Zach Lahn, and he’s not giving us enough yet.

132

00:22:23.730 --> 00:22:39.929

Shane: Yeah, he’s not going to be able to win the airwave battle right now based on funding, so this is… this is the only way for him to really get his name out there. To answer your question regarding the Emerson polling, it looks like they’re pretty fair. I was looking at the crosstab breakdown, and…

133

00:22:39.930 --> 00:22:47.330

Shane: Let’s see. It looks like, they had about 283 Republicans, 222 Democrats, and about 206

134

00:22:47.590 --> 00:22:53.159

Shane: independence, so I think a pretty accurate weighting as far as registration numbers.

135

00:22:53.160 --> 00:23:06.829

Laura Belin: It was about a 40%… yeah, 40% Republican, 31% Democrat, 29% Independent, but as Kathie pointed out, I mean, there’s a lot of guesswork that goes into that, and if you had gone into the…

136

00:23:07.240 --> 00:23:14.310

Laura Belin: 2014 midterm, polling the electorate, expecting that the turnout was going to match the 2012 presidential election.

137

00:23:14.310 --> 00:23:15.259

Shane: wrong. Yeah.

138

00:23:15.720 --> 00:23:23.290

Laura Belin: So, you know, he… it looks like a reasonable snapshot, but we really don’t know what the electorate’s gonna look like in November.

139

00:23:23.290 --> 00:23:41.100

Dave Price: Okay, let’s look at that U.S. Senate race. So, in this case, now this one’s within the margin of error, and as Laura already pointed out in the gubernatorial race, Rob Sands’ lead was beyond the margin of error, so that… we’ll see if that ends up being significant. But Ashley Hinson in this one, 47.5.

140

00:23:41.100 --> 00:23:45.160

Dave Price: And Josh Turek, 45, with 6.1.

141

00:23:45.160 --> 00:23:49.820

Dave Price: undecided. Laura, as you started digging into the Senate race, what were you noticing?

142

00:23:50.550 --> 00:24:13.700

Laura Belin: Well, Ashley Hinson is much better known than Josh Turek. She’s not as well known as Rob Sand, but they both have similar favorable ratings. She has slightly higher unfavorable than Josh Turek, but Josh Turek just isn’t known to a lot of people. So you could look at that two ways. You could say he has more of an opportunity to grow as he becomes better known, or you could say Republicans have more of an opportunity to define him.

143

00:24:13.700 --> 00:24:34.739

Laura Belin: before he can get his support up. I’m waiting for some pollster to name Thomas Lahn the Libertarian who will be on the ballot in the Senate race. They had an option for other… for the Senate, but I think that they should name the Libertarian Thomas Lahn and see what happens with that, because I feel that he has potential to get more than the 1.5% that this poll

144

00:24:34.740 --> 00:24:36.599

Laura Belin: Found go to other.

145

00:24:36.600 --> 00:24:38.090

Dave Price: Lahn and Lahn.

146

00:24:38.720 --> 00:24:39.530

Laura Belin: No.

147

00:24:39.530 --> 00:24:40.710

Dave Price: Different race, but…

148

00:24:41.600 --> 00:24:51.170

Dave Price: Shane, also in this Senate race, there is a gap with the Indies, and so you have, in this case, Turek with almost

149

00:24:51.170 --> 00:25:08.450

Dave Price: almost 12-point advantage with independents. So, despite down in the polls with you, although it’s very, very close, so essentially a statistical tie, perhaps, but again, this gap with independents. So, we’re in… we’re in August. Is that a concern for the Republican side?

150

00:25:08.450 --> 00:25:25.599

Shane: Oh, it should be. It should always be a concern with midterm elections when your… the… your party’s president is in office. There’s always the… especially when he’s got the unfavorability rating that he has. In Iowa, a state that has voted for him twice… you know, well, three different times.

151

00:25:25.600 --> 00:25:40.960

Shane: And… and he’s underwater with his favorability rating, so that is definitely where you’re gonna… you’re gonna see that with the independent vote. And, you know, I… more independents are aware of Ashley Hinson, so…

152

00:25:41.280 --> 00:25:47.939

Shane: it’s not quite as bad as you see with the gubernatorial race, but yeah, Republicans cannot

153

00:25:48.180 --> 00:25:52.669

Shane: Depend on just their huge voter registration advantage.

154

00:25:54.150 --> 00:26:06.160

Dave Price: Kathie, what do you make of the fact that Rob Sand has a more comfortable lead in the gubernatorial race, but it’s essentially a tie in this Senate race, with Hansen perhaps slightly ahead?

155

00:26:06.160 --> 00:26:15.959

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, I mean, it’s exactly like Laura said. Hinson is better known. She’s not… she’s not universally known, because, you know, she represents

156

00:26:15.960 --> 00:26:33.139

Kathie Obradovich: you know, a specific area of the state in Congress, but the area of the state that she represents right now is a lot bigger than, you know, as a state representative that Josh Turek was representing in Council Bluffs. So… so yeah, he has to,

157

00:26:33.270 --> 00:26:49.970

Kathie Obradovich: you know, remain competitive enough with fundraising, and, you know, of course, with all the downsides of that, which means, you know, there’s gonna be outside money, there’s gonna be, you know, and that’s a… that is controversial with people, but I think both sides are gonna be dealing with that.

158

00:26:49.970 --> 00:27:14.499

Kathie Obradovich: But yeah, he’s gotta, you know, introduce himself to voters all across the state, and make the most of the dissatisfaction that people have with Donald Trump, because Ashley Hinson has been, I think, a pretty reliable vote, for House Republicans and for Trump’s agenda. So, I mean, they have to be able to make the most of that dissatisfaction.

159

00:27:15.470 --> 00:27:20.219

Kathie Obradovich: But… avoid running against Donald Trump, because…

160

00:27:20.470 --> 00:27:22.840

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, that is not… he’s not on the ballot, but…

161

00:27:23.260 --> 00:27:29.870

Kathie Obradovich: That has not been successful in the past. I mean, Democrats focused on Donald Trump to the exclusion of

162

00:27:29.870 --> 00:27:47.889

Kathie Obradovich: offering a better and, you know, more, a more compelling message, and you can’t stop by saying Donald Trump is bad. If that’s, you know, if that’s what you’re gonna try to do for a message, you’ve got to offer something better. And that’s where, you know, I think Josh Turk has got to be…

163

00:27:49.000 --> 00:28:05.110

Kathie Obradovich: you know, very thoughtful, not just, you know, to get his name out there, but to be thoughtful about what it is that he’s offering, especially rural voters who are maybe disenchanted with tariffs and the cost of fertilizer and the Iran war.

164

00:28:05.550 --> 00:28:22.249

Dave Price: you know, just cost of living in general. Kathie, I wonder if you can start us off for our final big topic of the week. Since we took last week off, we did not get to dig into this, but Iowa Capital Dispatch has had reporting on this. Brenna Bird, the Attorney General, is headed up

165

00:28:22.250 --> 00:28:38.639

Dave Price: this task force that will look at cases of suspected Medicaid fraud. So that was… that was the initial launch, but then there was this news conference with two former state directors who both worked under Democrats.

166

00:28:38.640 --> 00:28:46.799

Dave Price: who say that this is kind of a misguided approach, and this is not the way you need to be going after this. What did you make from this so far?

167

00:28:46.800 --> 00:28:57.069

Kathie Obradovich: Yeah, so, this was a task force that was created by the governor, it’s being headed by Brenne Burr, the Attorney General, and it is,

168

00:28:57.070 --> 00:29:13.230

Kathie Obradovich: and I was kind of happy to see this, that it is more focused on law enforcement than it is about prevention. I worry that prevention basically creates a lot of red tape, both recipients and providers, and essentially leads to people

169

00:29:13.230 --> 00:29:21.500

Kathie Obradovich: Dropping out or losing access, because people don’t want to deal with the red tape. So, I was happy to see it focus more on law enforcement.

170

00:29:21.500 --> 00:29:30.830

Kathie Obradovich: But what, Kevin Tekow, who is a former director of the Department of Inspections and Appeals, which is now

171

00:29:30.830 --> 00:29:46.859

Kathie Obradovich: Dial, which is inspections, Appeals, and Licensing, and Dean Lerner, who is also a former director of that agency. And then they’ve also gone on to do, like, Kevin Tekow was a former U.S. attorney, for example, so they’ve also done some law enforcement work.

172

00:29:46.860 --> 00:30:10.329

Kathie Obradovich: Basically, they’re saying, you know, instead of doing this task force, that they should focus on putting more funding into the existing structures of state government that already investigate Medicaid fraud and do a good job of it. So, in the Department of Inspections, Appeals, and Licensing, there is currently a Medicaid fraud control unit

173

00:30:10.440 --> 00:30:25.499

Kathie Obradovich: Which basically exists, obviously, to investigate Medicaid fraud. Both TechOut and Lerner are arguing that the state is underfunding this agency, and that, you know, for every… they’re saying for every dollar spent.

174

00:30:25.750 --> 00:30:36.049

Kathie Obradovich: that it recovers $4 to $5, for taxpayers. So, so that is part of it. They also say you need to, you need to upgrade your data.

175

00:30:36.050 --> 00:30:55.479

Kathie Obradovich: you know, improve your technology, etc. And they had a couple of other recommendations as well. You know, I think these recommendations are worth considering. I don’t see anything wrong with having a task force to talk about this, frankly. There’s, you know, and because Medicaid,

176

00:30:55.480 --> 00:31:09.310

Kathie Obradovich: is facing, cuts and increases in some of the regulation, that looking at fraud is, you know, a good idea, but I do think that some of these recommendations are worth being discussed as well.

177

00:31:09.330 --> 00:31:28.690

Dave Price: Shane, this has been part of a national conversation that’s focused on Medicaid and Medicare, too, but let’s just focus on Medicaid. But with the Trump administration, other Republican governors have talked about Medicaid oversight, and we know that the feds are

178

00:31:28.790 --> 00:31:44.889

Dave Price: zeroing in on the error rate, with Medicaid, and states would have to potentially take over more of the cost if they go above that threshold. Iowa’s below the threshold, the current numbers. But what do you make about both Brenna Bird’s

179

00:31:45.320 --> 00:31:56.409

Dave Price: sort of mission, if you will, under the… under the direction of Governor Kim Reynolds, but then also this, the two former state officials saying this is not the way to go.

180

00:31:56.410 --> 00:32:04.830

Shane: Right, well, I think obviously going after fraud is low-hanging fruit, and everybody’s against it. There’s bipartisan consensus. We don’t want to see the program

181

00:32:04.910 --> 00:32:18.969

Shane: cheated, and if we could recover some taxpayer funding through that, all the better. I agree with Kathie. I don’t see why you can’t, you know, fund… I think, yeah, definitely fund…

182

00:32:19.040 --> 00:32:34.480

Shane: the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit more, because I was looking at… I was looking at the Iowa Capital Dispatch’s article on this, and seeing where Iowa was as far as staffers compared to other states, and it’s like, whoa, yeah, we could definitely do a better job there.

183

00:32:34.630 --> 00:32:50.770

Shane: But as far as the task force itself, it might generate some great ideas. You might have some technology improvements that are advocated for through this. You’ve got the director of Iowa’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit as part of the task force, so…

184

00:32:50.910 --> 00:33:06.259

Shane: you know, I’m ambivalent about task force… task forces as far as how effective they are, but if it gets the conversation rolling, and maybe this be part of that, let’s better fund this unit, I think that’s a win-win. I don’t see a problem with it.

185

00:33:06.260 --> 00:33:07.409

Dave Price: What’s your take, Laura?

186

00:33:07.590 --> 00:33:20.549

Laura Belin: Well, one thing that Rob Sand mentioned when this task force was created, this was not connected to the recent press conference by the former state officials, but that the task force is very skewed toward

187

00:33:20.550 --> 00:33:44.489

Laura Belin: government and these… the private companies that manage the Medicaid program, and they’re… it’s not really patient advocate, and why isn’t this task force looking at the illegal denials of care? I mean, if you’re only looking at fraud, of course, none of us want to see any fraud in the Medicaid program, but there have been a lot of reports, compelling reports, that these MCOs are denying care and services to people

188

00:33:44.490 --> 00:33:58.999

Laura Belin: who are legally entitled to them. And it seems like that is just not of any interest at all to the current administration, so that strikes me as an area where a task force that’s looking more holistically at Medicaid might also want to look at that side.

189

00:34:00.270 --> 00:34:14.959

Dave Price: Alright, let’s make that the final word on that. I wonder if we can close out this week by teasing what you’re working on. Laura, I already sort of heavily teased what you did, because you did a Saturday morning post, but do you want to tee that up?

190

00:34:14.960 --> 00:34:39.179

Laura Belin: Yeah, I… well, I did a post kind of digging into the Emerson poll numbers, and then a couple of days ago, I did a separate post about the role that access to healthcare is playing in the first congressional district campaign after Christina Bahannon launched her first TV ad, and then earlier in the year, Marionette Miller Makes TV ad also was much about healthcare, and that included a little bit of information about some polling in the first district, too.

191

00:34:39.820 --> 00:34:44.539

Dave Price: Kathie, it’s probably difficult for you to zero in on one, but Kenya?

192

00:34:44.980 --> 00:35:01.420

Kathie Obradovich: Well, I’ll give a very little… a very short-term thing. We haven’t talked about the Libertarians today, and they are… they’re going to have their convention, interestingly, on Sunday night, from 8 to 10 p.m. Who has a convention?

193

00:35:01.420 --> 00:35:02.400

Shane: That is weird.

194

00:35:02.400 --> 00:35:03.280

Kathie Obradovich: But…

195

00:35:03.280 --> 00:35:05.350

Dave Price: Yeah, non-traditional folks sometimes.

196

00:35:05.350 --> 00:35:10.210

Kathie Obradovich: They are planning to pick a substitute candidate for Marco Battalia.

197

00:35:10.210 --> 00:35:10.540

Dave Price: Good.

198

00:35:10.540 --> 00:35:21.759

Kathie Obradovich: was kicked off the ballot, and… or if we want to call him Mark Anderson, because he was kicked off for not using his legal name. And, so we’ll see, we’ll certainly have.

199

00:35:21.760 --> 00:35:25.310

Dave Price: And that’s the congressional race, we should say. It’s already interrupted, in the 3rd District.

200

00:35:25.310 --> 00:35:49.280

Kathie Obradovich: 3rd district congressional race, exactly. So, it does, you know, that is a really close race as well. We didn’t have polling on it this time, but I think most people, you know, are looking at that as a potential close race. So having a, third party slash, you know, independent candidate, in that race could very well

201

00:35:49.280 --> 00:35:52.210

Kathie Obradovich: affect the dynamic, so it’s worth watching anyway.

202

00:35:52.480 --> 00:35:55.209

Dave Price: And you, ShaneVanderhart.com?

203

00:35:55.210 --> 00:35:55.599

Shane: Yeah, well.

204

00:35:55.600 --> 00:35:57.339

Dave Price: Is that your legal name?

205

00:35:57.340 --> 00:36:01.950

Shane: Yes, that is my legal name, even though you will not find me on the ballot ever, anywhere.

206

00:36:02.390 --> 00:36:09.279

Shane: So… I… Yeah, I’m putting out an article on Monday about Rob Sands’ means test.

207

00:36:09.450 --> 00:36:12.459

Shane: With ESAs, so addressing that.

208

00:36:12.920 --> 00:36:18.780

Dave Price: Outstanding. Shane, thanks for jumping in with us this week. Thanks for adding to the conversation.

209

00:36:19.420 --> 00:36:20.460

Shane: Very welcome.

210

00:36:20.520 --> 00:36:26.200

Dave Price: Kathie and Laura, thank you, as always. I know I said this privately, but…

211

00:36:26.540 --> 00:36:32.480

Dave Price: These two women are so… Super, super flexible.

212

00:36:33.060 --> 00:36:48.859

Dave Price: so that we can all get on here at the same time. I… my family didn’t get back until Friday. My… my 16-year-old son put this epic road trip together that I’ve never been part of in my life, but we went on this, literally a two-week road trip.

213

00:36:48.860 --> 00:37:02.549

Dave Price: where we went through, and I’m gonna write about this in different pieces the next couple of months, because they’ve reminded me of some things, but we took this trip through Teddy Roosevelt National Park in North Dakota, and then we went to Glacier in Montana, we went to Banff.

214

00:37:02.680 --> 00:37:12.230

Dave Price: West of Calgary, and then we continued on and went through Calgary and a bunch of all these random stops, which was so super fun, and then hit Winnipeg and came back home.

215

00:37:12.230 --> 00:37:33.890

Dave Price: My car is a mess, and it will take countless weeks to clean this thing, but I am so super thankful to… you too, of course, Shane, for joining us, but to Kathie and Laura, there’s no way to say this enough on this podcast. Your flexibility is so super helpful as we try to get together week after week, and we are recording this

216

00:37:33.890 --> 00:37:38.570

Dave Price: at lunchtime on a Saturday, which we usually try to do this show on a Friday, so…

217

00:37:38.870 --> 00:37:41.689

Kathie Obradovich: And thanks to Spencer, too, by the way.

218

00:37:41.690 --> 00:38:06.660

Dave Price: Very, very much so. Spencer Dirks, who produces this sucker, all the post-production and stuff that has to get done, so this means that Spencer has to crank this thing out on Saturday night so that we can drop this on Sunday morning. So, I know this is sort of how the sausage is made, but it’s very, very, very, very, very much appreciate all of you being willing to jump around. And in this case, it was totally due

219

00:38:06.660 --> 00:38:10.049

Dave Price: Accommodate my family’s schedule, so… Very, very thankful.

220

00:38:10.050 --> 00:38:17.939

Dave Price: Thankful to all of you who’ve become new subscribers. Realized we took a week off last week as we get ready for the final push, the final countdown.

221

00:38:17.940 --> 00:38:41.309

Dave Price: Which was also on our family playlist on our road trip, by the way. My son put that on his Apple playlist. But thank you to all of you who’ve become new subscribers, especially thank you to those who’ve become new paid subscribers, who help to pay the production costs of this week after week. We very much appreciate that, and if you are willing to become a new paid subscriber, you can help us keep pushing through this November election.

222

00:38:41.600 --> 00:38:47.080

Dave Price: Thanks for joining us this week, and have a great weekend, have a great week, we will talk to you next weekend.