Hope you’re staying warm and safe wherever you may be. Iowa lawmakers wrapped up their second week of work on Friday, and a bill banning carbon pipeline constructors from using eminent domain has already passed the house. We dive into the bill as well as the politics on both sides. Dave filled in to host Iowa Press on Iowa PBS this week and majority house leader Mike Klimesh was the guest, so Dave also has a fresh perspective on the republican leadership’s plans. We also discuss how the democrats may vote on an eminent domain bill in the senate.

Property tax reform is the other priority for republican legislators this session. It’s a complicated issue, so we try to unravel what may end up being in the plan.

We close out the show with a quick preview of President Trump’s scheduled visit to Clive on Tuesday afternoon. Thanks for being a part of the Iowa Down Ballot podcast however you consume the show, we’ll see ya next Saturday morning :)

AI generated transcript below:

(00:00:01):

Hi, everyone, and welcome back to the Iowa Down Ballot podcast.

(00:00:05):

I am Dave Price,

(00:00:06):

joined by Kathie Obradovich and Laura Bell and two of my colleagues from the Iowa

(00:00:11):

Riders Collaborative.

(00:00:12):

We are joining you on a Friday where even if we squint super,

(00:00:17):

super hard,

(00:00:18):

we cannot see a temperature of zero because it is unfairly cold outside.

(00:00:25):

It’s ridiculous.

(00:00:26):

I was out, had a meeting this morning and then another errand and my car just went.

(00:00:37):

I did not want to start.

(00:00:40):

That is your car’s way of telling you, hey, dummy, go back in the house.

(00:00:44):

It’s too cold.

(00:00:46):

Go home and go in and put your slippers on.

(00:00:49):

I did,

(00:00:50):

I filled in on Iowa Press today and I wore my winter coat,

(00:00:54):

which my mother-in-law fixed for me because I had popped a button off.

(00:00:58):

So they’re in town and she fixed it for me, which was super nice.

(00:01:01):

As I’m walking from the parking lot out at Iowa Public TV or Iowa PBS now,

(00:01:07):

I’m walking to the building realizing as I reached into my pockets,

(00:01:11):

I did not put in my gloves for the winter because I haven’t worn this coat the

(00:01:15):

whole year.

(00:01:16):

I was thinking,

(00:01:17):

You are really dumb.

(00:01:18):

It’s 10 below zero.

(00:01:20):

And I have a long walk and carrying all my stuff.

(00:01:23):

I can’t even put my hands in my pocket.

(00:01:24):

And I was thinking, man, that is not a good move.

(00:01:29):

And we’re Iowans.

(00:01:30):

We should know better.

(00:01:32):

But we also know that it’s temporary, right?

(00:01:35):

Like I told my mother-in-law, I mentally prepare for this every year.

(00:01:38):

Like,

(00:01:39):

You know,

(00:01:39):

there’s going to be one butt-kicking,

(00:01:43):

obnoxiously cold day that you question all of your life’s choices.

(00:01:50):

And you’re thinking, can I do this from a warm climate just for a little bit?

(00:01:54):

But then, you know, whatever.

(00:01:56):

We get through it.

(00:01:58):

I’m just glad I didn’t have to go up to the Capitol today.

(00:02:03):

So I’m just glad because that long walk uphill from where I parked.

(00:02:08):

up to the capitol building it’s freezing and there’s always ice and you’ve got that

(00:02:14):

howling wind and you’re thinking is this really worth it couldn’t i just watch the

(00:02:19):

live stream of something happening today why must i be there all right enough of

(00:02:24):

the weather report um we had so we just wrapped up week two of the iowa legislative

(00:02:30):

session and there are two biggies that are on my mind and to set the stage i

(00:02:35):

mentioned

(00:02:36):

as I was yakking here early that I filled in on Iowa Press,

(00:02:40):

and this week the guest was the new Senate Majority Leader,

(00:02:44):

Mike Clemish.

(00:02:45):

So truthfully,

(00:02:46):

a few of these topics are right at the top of my mind because I just talked at

(00:02:49):

length with him.

(00:02:50):

But I’d like to start this week our chat with where things are with eminent domain

(00:02:59):

which feels like one of the, sexy is not the right word because we’re talking about politics.

(00:03:04):

What’s the right word?

(00:03:05):

Most intriguing, the juiciest, like the parlor intrigue kind of story, the house of cards stuff.

(00:03:13):

I don’t know what the right thing is.

(00:03:14):

Yeah, it’s buzzy.

(00:03:16):

Yeah, Buzzy.

(00:03:17):

Buzzy.

(00:03:18):

All right, so Kathie, set the stage for us here.

(00:03:20):

So we’ve heard some ideas now.

(00:03:22):

House has actually already passed something remarkably quick.

(00:03:27):

The Senate Republicans have an idea of what they want to do, particularly Klemish.

(00:03:34):

And Klemish,

(00:03:34):

by the way,

(00:03:35):

said that he’s told us today that he will be the floor manager for eminent domain

(00:03:41):

on the Senate side.

(00:03:42):

So he will lead this through.

(00:03:43):

Maybe a little bit unusual as...

(00:03:46):

as the majority leader, but he’s going to kind of take the lead.

(00:03:49):

So kind of set us up here, Kathie, where do things stay?

(00:03:52):

So I am not clear yet whether the House and Senate have even a conversation about

(00:04:00):

being on the same page.

(00:04:01):

So the House moved away from the bill that the governor vetoed last year.

(00:04:08):

And this this strikes me as being kind of an in your face to her.

(00:04:13):

It’s like, well, you didn’t like

(00:04:15):

our sort of complicated look at restricting or dialing back eminent domain.

(00:04:21):

So we’re just going to give you a flat ban on eminent domain for carbon pipelines.

(00:04:30):

And that is what they passed.

(00:04:31):

I mean, already raced through the House and they pass it on the floor this week.

(00:04:39):

And I sent it to the Senate where it will die.

(00:04:43):

I’m fairly confident in predicting that.

(00:04:45):

And as you said, Senator Clemish has actually proposed two bills.

(00:04:51):

He is the only sponsor of those bills,

(00:04:53):

at least as of the last time I looked,

(00:04:55):

and he was not saying how many of his colleagues are willing to vote with him on

(00:05:01):

these bills,

(00:05:03):

one of which I think we may have talked about a little bit.

(00:05:06):

It’s basically a version of an amendment that was offered last year in the Senate

(00:05:12):

that would let the carbon pipelines,

(00:05:14):

and we’re talking about summit here at this point,

(00:05:17):

Summit Carbon Solutions to take the route that the utilities,

(00:05:22):

Iowa Utilities Commission approved for them and,

(00:05:25):

you know,

(00:05:26):

sort of color outside the lines a little bit to try to go around,

(00:05:32):

you know,

(00:05:32):

never,

(00:05:33):

you know,

(00:05:33):

the the never,

(00:05:36):

never,

(00:05:36):

never property owners who are never,

(00:05:39):

ever going to sign.

(00:05:41):

no matter how much money they offer.

(00:05:43):

So to color out the sidelines a little bit and try to go around some of those

(00:05:47):

property owners and to limit to what extent you have to use eminent domain to force

(00:05:53):

easements on unwilling property owners.

(00:05:55):

So that’s the one idea, which he talked about before the legislative session.

(00:05:59):

The second one,

(00:06:00):

which is really interesting,

(00:06:02):

and it’ll be really interesting to see how many of his colleagues support him on

(00:06:05):

this,

(00:06:06):

is actually taxing the carbon that is running through this pipeline.

(00:06:11):

Um,

(00:06:12):

and,

(00:06:13):

uh,

(00:06:13):

so,

(00:06:14):

um,

(00:06:15):

so a new tax,

(00:06:17):

um,

(00:06:17):

first of all,

(00:06:17):

um,

(00:06:19):

something that the summit people,

(00:06:20):

I can’t imagine that they would want,

(00:06:23):

um,

(00:06:23):

this,

(00:06:24):

uh,

(00:06:24):

although maybe he’s,

(00:06:25):

he’s,

(00:06:26):

um,

(00:06:26):

framing it as we’ll take this,

(00:06:29):

you know,

(00:06:29):

if you want,

(00:06:30):

if you want any sort of wiggle room on eminent domain,

(00:06:32):

take this,

(00:06:33):

I don’t know.

(00:06:34):

So a tax on carbon.

(00:06:37):

And so, like I said, neither of these bills have been in subcommittee yet.

(00:06:42):

We don’t know how many Republicans would actually support this legislation and the

(00:06:49):

pressure on them from even Republican groups.

(00:06:56):

in very Republican counties, Republican, you know, are putting pressure on this issue.

(00:07:02):

So I think it’s, as you said, there’s a lot of intrigue.

(00:07:07):

There’s a lot of inner party drama here.

(00:07:12):

That didn’t end last year when 12 senators said,

(00:07:16):

we’re not voting for budget bills until you deal with this.

(00:07:18):

So...

(00:07:20):

Well,

(00:07:21):

at the press conference where Senator Klemish laid out this plan,

(00:07:25):

I asked,

(00:07:28):

do you have 26 votes for this proposal?

(00:07:31):

And he said he wasn’t going to comment on internal politics of the Senate Republicans.

(00:07:37):

i think it’s a pretty safe bet that he doesn’t have 26 republican votes for that

(00:07:40):

because a dozen republicans i think it ended up actually being 13.

(00:07:44):

there was a dozen who promised not to support any budget bills until there was this

(00:07:49):

eminent a vote on eminent domain but i think in the end 13 republicans voted for

(00:07:54):

that house bill last year so i think the senate democrats actually hold a lot of

(00:07:59):

cards here because

(00:08:01):

There are quite a few Democrats who support the pipeline in principle because it’s

(00:08:06):

something that labor unions want,

(00:08:09):

but they also want to say that they’re protecting property rights.

(00:08:13):

So I think Klemish may have to make some kind of a deal with

(00:08:17):

the senate democrats and i don’t know what they would want in exchange but i think

(00:08:21):

that we’re headed toward another stalemate because there’s no way the house

(00:08:24):

republicans are going to take this klemish proposal assuming it does get through

(00:08:29):

the senate i just can’t see it getting anywhere in the house and the last thing i

(00:08:33):

wanted to say about that the severance tax i think that he was calling it the fee

(00:08:37):

on the co2

(00:08:39):

uh senator klemish framed that as a as something that would help iowa eventually

(00:08:45):

get to zero income tax just like other states like alaska and wyoming that are

(00:08:51):

resource rich states and texas have no state income tax well it’s just completely

(00:08:55):

unrealistic that iowa would ever be able to get to zero income tax i don’t think

(00:09:01):

that this market for carbon

(00:09:03):

would ever be remotely big enough to collect the kind of revenue that they’re

(00:09:07):

talking about compared to these natural resource extraction states that have no

(00:09:13):

income tax.

(00:09:13):

But in any case, that’s how he’s framing this severance tax proposal.

(00:09:18):

And I think,

(00:09:18):

I don’t want to put words in his mouth,

(00:09:20):

but I think he is viewing this as one piece of that effort to further lower income

(00:09:27):

taxes.

(00:09:28):

He’s also...

(00:09:30):

We talked at length about this after we quit recording at Iowa Press,

(00:09:34):

but it’s something I totally want to talk about him later.

(00:09:37):

And I’m forgetting the name of the technology.

(00:09:39):

It starts with GEO, but it is the process of, I think, extracting hydrogen.

(00:09:47):

out of the soil which we have a lot of it gets into mineral rights all kinds of

(00:09:52):

stuff that I clearly need to do far more research into but I think he looks at this

(00:09:58):

severance tax as one piece and then this other exploration of energy which he

(00:10:05):

thinks could be done in the next couple of years and I’m talking way out of my

(00:10:09):

knowledge base here because I can’t even hardly verbalize what the heck he said he

(00:10:13):

clearly has done a lot of this but

(00:10:17):

he did he did he did acknowledge that it’s challenging talking about this severance

(00:10:22):

tax in his caucus for people who are not thrilled about talking about raising taxes

(00:10:30):

on anything but if it’s this sort of offset thing although and we’ll get to

(00:10:33):

property taxes I mean raising sales tax is part of the discussion they’ve talked

(00:10:38):

about that you could do locally to offset some of the revenue you’re losing on

(00:10:43):

property taxes and we can kind of we can get into that but

(00:10:48):

I don’t understand what the compromise on this issue is.

(00:10:54):

If you’re going to,

(00:10:55):

to Kathie point,

(00:10:56):

the House Republicans are like,

(00:10:58):

all right,

(00:10:59):

last year there was some

(00:11:01):

some murkiness, some muddiness, whatever you want to say of what exactly the language meant.

(00:11:08):

And, you know, Reynolds vetoed it and said that it can impact other energy projects, whatever.

(00:11:12):

This was about as cut and dry as you can go, right?

(00:11:15):

This is about pipelines.

(00:11:16):

No eminent domain for pipelines.

(00:11:18):

Bang.

(00:11:19):

And it’s always fascinating to watch how laborious the process can often be in that

(00:11:26):

place,

(00:11:27):

except when it’s not.

(00:11:29):

And when they decide they’re going to bang something through quickly,

(00:11:32):

it was remarkable to me how they just decided,

(00:11:34):

all right,

(00:11:35):

folks,

(00:11:36):

let’s line up,

(00:11:37):

let’s get going.

(00:11:38):

Yeah,

(00:11:39):

I mean,

(00:11:39):

I think that they have the right idea in wanting to try to deal with this at the

(00:11:43):

beginning of the legislative session so that it doesn’t mess up the budget process

(00:11:47):

at the end in a year when,

(00:11:49):

you know,

(00:11:50):

some of these lawmakers who have primaries really need to get out on the campaign

(00:11:53):

trail.

(00:11:54):

They don’t need to be here in Des Moines messing around with this particular powder keg.

(00:12:00):

So they do need to, you know, to try to get something going early.

(00:12:05):

But I wanted to circle back to something Laura said,

(00:12:08):

you know,

(00:12:09):

the role of Democrats is going to be really interesting here.

(00:12:11):

There were 20 Democrats who voted against the imminent domain ban.

(00:12:17):

And Laura, you had a good piece about that.

(00:12:20):

I think that now that also puts some pressure on Senate Democrats to see whether

(00:12:31):

they might support something less than an eminent domain ban or if they are going

(00:12:37):

to let the Republicans try to deal with it.

(00:12:44):

Even if they might agree or might vote for the bill,

(00:12:46):

they might vote no just to make the Republicans come up with the votes.

(00:12:51):

So we’ll see how that goes.

(00:12:52):

I think Laura tried to get some...

(00:12:56):

some clarity right as we’re standing in the room with the house leader brian meyer

(00:13:03):

and and janice weiner on the senate side i think you tried to push for like there

(00:13:09):

is no like official caucus position and i don’t want to put words in your mouth but

(00:13:15):

doesn’t it feel like what their answers are if you kind of decipher what the

(00:13:19):

answers are especially from on the house side is basically we’re going to step on

(00:13:25):

the side

(00:13:26):

and watch this internal family fight on the Republican side,

(00:13:31):

let them shoot each other and yell at each other and all that stuff,

(00:13:34):

then we’ll see where we want to fall on this.

(00:13:36):

Yeah, I think the House, my impression is that the House Democrats are split on this issue.

(00:13:41):

That’s why we saw the very split vote.

(00:13:43):

And that’s why I was trying to pin the minority leader, Brian Meyer, down on it.

(00:13:47):

And you’ll notice that the Senate minority leader,

(00:13:49):

Janice Weiner,

(00:13:50):

just didn’t answer that question at all.

(00:13:52):

Now,

(00:13:52):

last year,

(00:13:53):

almost all of the Senate Democrats,

(00:13:55):

except for Tom Townsend of Dubuque,

(00:13:57):

a Labor Democrat,

(00:13:58):

almost all of them voted for that House eminent domain bill.

(00:14:01):

But that’s not to say that there aren’t

(00:14:05):

some significant number of Senate Democrats who would like to see the pipeline built.

(00:14:09):

So I don’t really know where the caucus is.

(00:14:12):

I mean,

(00:14:12):

I feel that politically it’s better for Democrats to kind of sit back and let

(00:14:17):

Republicans come up with the votes on it.

(00:14:19):

But I don’t know.

(00:14:20):

There may be something that they feel is worth exchanging for their votes on this

(00:14:25):

bill,

(00:14:25):

especially since some people in their caucus,

(00:14:28):

genuinely,

(00:14:28):

they view this as a pro-Labor vote that they want to help the pipeline get built.

(00:14:34):

Well,

(00:14:34):

this is going to be an issue in the midterms,

(00:14:36):

especially in districts that are directly affected by this pipeline.

(00:14:41):

So, I mean, I think there’s a lot of calculations that go into that.

(00:14:47):

And yeah,

(00:14:48):

I mean,

(00:14:49):

you look at,

(00:14:51):

I think,

(00:14:52):

Dave,

(00:14:52):

did you mention last week that there were county Republican districts

(00:15:01):

county Republican parties that were censoring Clemish for pulling one of the

(00:15:08):

anti-pipeline lawmakers off of his committees.

(00:15:11):

So, I mean, I think that there is, you know, very much...

(00:15:20):

that whatever they do, this session is going to play out again in the midterm elections.

(00:15:26):

And Democrats are going to want to maybe make a calculation on what’s the right

(00:15:33):

side to be on in any given district,

(00:15:36):

not just have a caucus position.

(00:15:39):

I think we’re up to six or seven county Republican parties that have voted to

(00:15:43):

censure Klemish for pulling some senators off of their committee assignments.

(00:15:49):

I’m curious if the position is basically that let the members at the end of the day

(00:15:56):

chooses they may and there will never be a true caucus position on this.

(00:16:03):

Yeah, I it’s in something that’s high stakes like this.

(00:16:08):

I it probably would be a bad idea to have a caucus position.

(00:16:12):

Yeah, I think so.

(00:16:13):

I mean, even last year’s vote was split.

(00:16:15):

But this year there were more Democrats voting or,

(00:16:19):

you know,

(00:16:19):

taking the pro pipeline position,

(00:16:22):

for lack of a better word.

(00:16:24):

Okay,

(00:16:25):

so the other big one,

(00:16:27):

we’re seeing kind of more discussions on property taxes,

(00:16:31):

and I almost feel like you have to have like a whiteboard next to you.

(00:16:36):

I know when we were sitting out on the set, I did the Iowa Press with Aaron Murphy,

(00:16:41):

from the Gazette and I was joking with him that man in the heat of the moment with

(00:16:45):

the cameras going and all this stuff when you’re having to try to remember okay now

(00:16:51):

which plan was it that the first 25,000 of assessed value on your home is exempt

(00:16:57):

from property taxes which is the house house Republican plan but there are so many

(00:17:01):

moving parts right and in and in some cases it was seniors who have their homes

(00:17:08):

paid off

(00:17:10):

won’t pay any and the governor is it’s it’s a freeze and and some people apparently

(00:17:17):

consider seniors people over 60 which I didn’t know that’s when you became a senior

(00:17:23):

and I don’t really like that seniors should be like a word for when you’re 85 or

(00:17:29):

something you’re against getting discounts Dave I’m not against getting discounts

(00:17:36):

it’s sort of like

(00:17:38):

When, you know, I got my AERP card...

(00:17:43):

First of all,

(00:17:45):

a side note,

(00:17:45):

they started mailing me that long before I turned 50,

(00:17:49):

which is bull crap.

(00:17:51):

You already know what’s coming.

(00:17:53):

They don’t need to taunt you with it.

(00:17:55):

And when Brad Anderson used to be the state director, I’m like, dude, what’s going on here?

(00:17:59):

Like, I know what’s around the corner.

(00:18:02):

Don’t start mailing me stuff early.

(00:18:04):

My mother has tried to tell me just embrace the discounts.

(00:18:09):

on your birthday, go to Denny’s or something.

(00:18:11):

I think we have a Denny’s in an area,

(00:18:13):

like just take your discount or your hotel discount or whatever.

(00:18:16):

Where the heck was I going with this?

(00:18:17):

Anyway, 60 is not a senior citizen, okay?

(00:18:22):

Regardless.

(00:18:23):

But that is about the age a lot of people pay off their houses, right?

(00:18:29):

And so now you’ve got,

(00:18:30):

you know,

(00:18:31):

and you know,

(00:18:32):

people are starting to plan for retirement,

(00:18:33):

starting to save for retirement.

(00:18:36):

So it does,

(00:18:37):

you know,

(00:18:38):

it does make sense to think about that,

(00:18:42):

you know,

(00:18:44):

and people who are 80,

(00:18:45):

how many of those folks are living in their house still?

(00:18:51):

So you have to, I mean, you do have kind of a window there, I think.

(00:18:55):

But it is interesting to me when you start looking at the different plans,

(00:18:59):

how they are treating people.

(00:19:01):

seniors differently and you know which ones are looking at sort of caps and laura i

(00:19:07):

was standing next to you i think when we brought this up with one of the republican

(00:19:11):

leaders about with in the senate version there is senate republican version there

(00:19:15):

is no cap so if you’ve got a you know 10 million dollar place i know we don’t have

(00:19:20):

tons of those in iowa but you know we still have we have a good amount of

(00:19:23):

multi-million dollar houses so

(00:19:27):

In theory,

(00:19:27):

under at least one of the plans under the Senate Republican plan,

(00:19:30):

you’d pay no property taxes.

(00:19:32):

Yeah,

(00:19:33):

I think and I haven’t seen,

(00:19:35):

of course,

(00:19:35):

the Republicans say that they don’t have the hard and fast numbers on how much on

(00:19:40):

average different types of people would save.

(00:19:42):

But I feel like just politically looking at the broad outlines of the plan,

(00:19:47):

I think that the House Republican plan is more of a political winner because this,

(00:19:52):

you know,

(00:19:52):

everybody,

(00:19:53):

if you have a home,

(00:19:54):

whether it’s the main home you live in or an investment property or no matter how

(00:19:58):

old you are,

(00:19:58):

$25,000,

(00:20:01):

you don’t have to pay property tax on that.

(00:20:03):

Because it is true that,

(00:20:04):

I mean,

(00:20:05):

yes,

(00:20:05):

a lot of seniors are on fixed incomes and struggling,

(00:20:07):

but a lot of seniors are very well off.

(00:20:09):

So why should they be getting a big property tax break or in the case of Senate

(00:20:13):

Republicans,

(00:20:15):

just having their home taken off the rolls,

(00:20:17):

which would create all kinds of perverse incentives compared to a young family or

(00:20:22):

people really struggling

(00:20:24):

somebody who just lost a job.

(00:20:26):

You know,

(00:20:26):

so I think that the House Republican plan,

(00:20:29):

like if I were a legislator going out and having to sell one of these plans to my

(00:20:34):

constituents,

(00:20:34):

the one that I would want to be taking out there would be the House Republican

(00:20:37):

plan.

(00:20:39):

I would be curious how the math works.

(00:20:41):

I wish I were smart enough to know this or I knew how to plug it into a spreadsheet.

(00:20:46):

But I’m thinking of smaller communities where maybe the housing stock is older and

(00:20:52):

it has a higher percentage of older folks living there.

(00:20:55):

If you exempt the first 25 and if you end up either freezing or eliminating for

(00:21:02):

older folks who have their houses paid off and you don’t have much growth in your

(00:21:06):

town,

(00:21:06):

I’m trying to wrap my head around what that means for your revenues.

(00:21:10):

like are you you know what i mean and i think that that’s where the senate plan

(00:21:15):

where it treats your primary residence the home you live in would be taxed

(00:21:19):

differently from homes that you own and just as an investment and rent out i was

(00:21:24):

talking with somebody in my neighborhood i happen we happen to have a lot of empty

(00:21:28):

nesters

(00:21:29):

and older people who I’m sure they own their homes free and clear in my neighborhood.

(00:21:33):

And it would be a real disaster probably for Windsor Heights revenues.

(00:21:36):

But somebody, one of my neighbors grew up in a much smaller town in Northwest Iowa.

(00:21:42):

And he said that the town he grew up in

(00:21:44):

Like almost half of the properties are owned by one person who rents out a lot of houses.

(00:21:50):

So think about if and the House Republican plan,

(00:21:52):

you know,

(00:21:52):

you get the twenty five thousand dollar tax exempt on every house,

(00:21:57):

even if it’s just so somebody like that would have a huge windfall.

(00:22:01):

As somebody who owns a lot of rental properties,

(00:22:03):

whereas the Senate Republican plan,

(00:22:06):

you would just get your primary residence would be the one that comes off the roll.

(00:22:09):

So I think all of those things could be negotiated as this stuff moves forward.

(00:22:14):

I’m sure that none of this is even close to the final form of these bills.

(00:22:18):

Sure.

(00:22:18):

I think that there’s a big difference,

(00:22:20):

too,

(00:22:20):

in just how punitive these bills are toward local governments.

(00:22:25):

So,

(00:22:26):

I mean,

(00:22:26):

you’ve got,

(00:22:27):

for example,

(00:22:27):

both the governor and the House Republicans came out with a 2% cap on revenue

(00:22:33):

increases,

(00:22:33):

which,

(00:22:35):

you know,

(00:22:36):

some of these small towns that have flat growth do not have

(00:22:43):

flat growth when it comes to their costs,

(00:22:45):

you know,

(00:22:45):

they’re,

(00:22:46):

they are bound by inflation,

(00:22:49):

like everybody else,

(00:22:50):

there’s their employees,

(00:22:52):

you know,

(00:22:52):

get raises,

(00:22:54):

you know,

(00:22:54):

you’ve got,

(00:22:56):

you’ve got materials,

(00:22:57):

you know,

(00:22:57):

you just to patch the concrete,

(00:23:00):

we patch the potholes,

(00:23:01):

you’ve got all of that stuff goes up.

(00:23:04):

And, you know, in a year when inflation is so high, you know, if there’s not a

(00:23:09):

break for inflation,

(00:23:12):

then you’re going to have,

(00:23:13):

you know,

(00:23:13):

definitely some pinch there in these local governments.

(00:23:18):

And,

(00:23:18):

you know,

(00:23:19):

the governor then,

(00:23:20):

you know,

(00:23:21):

said to,

(00:23:21):

you know,

(00:23:21):

to help these local governments find efficiencies,

(00:23:24):

we’ll have a $10 million pool of money that might,

(00:23:27):

you know,

(00:23:28):

you know,

(00:23:28):

help them,

(00:23:29):

you know,

(00:23:29):

build infrastructure for shared services,

(00:23:33):

etc.,

(00:23:35):

But the House bill does not have that.

(00:23:37):

So it does not have that $10 million pool.

(00:23:39):

And they want to rely on existing councils.

(00:23:46):

Yeah,

(00:23:46):

councils of government,

(00:23:48):

COGS,

(00:23:48):

as they say,

(00:23:50):

to facilitate these sharing agreements,

(00:23:53):

et cetera.

(00:23:54):

So that’s a big difference as well.

(00:23:57):

And then the Senate Republicans remind me,

(00:24:01):

at least the version that I’m remembering,

(00:24:04):

their version has shifted the most probably,

(00:24:06):

but their version didn’t really have a hard cap.

(00:24:10):

I think it was more like it would slow the growth,

(00:24:13):

but not necessarily have a hard cap on revenue.

(00:24:16):

I thought one was four, right?

(00:24:19):

I thought,

(00:24:19):

wasn’t there something in the Senate one where if a certain thing happens,

(00:24:23):

then they have to lower the levy.

(00:24:25):

I’m trying to remember if it goes up by a certain amount,

(00:24:28):

then they would have to lower the levy.

(00:24:29):

I’m going to have to look that up because it is very,

(00:24:33):

I hate to look things up during the show,

(00:24:35):

but it’s very confusing.

(00:24:38):

How about I buy you some time by giving Kathie a hard question?

(00:24:43):

Oh God.

(00:24:44):

Okay.

(00:24:44):

I’m glad I brought it up.

(00:24:46):

Okay.

(00:24:46):

Kathie, you are very good at,

(00:24:50):

at seeing things from multiple sides.

(00:24:55):

So I wanna throw something out to you here.

(00:24:59):

And this has come up in one of the news conferences about what House Democrats are doing.

(00:25:03):

So they have built in this immediate rebate from everything that I have read and heard

(00:25:09):

about the House and Senate Republican plans, nothing is immediate, right?

(00:25:13):

And the governor’s too.

(00:25:14):

I don’t know of anything that if I’m a homeowner right now listening to us,

(00:25:19):

watching the legislature,

(00:25:20):

whatever,

(00:25:21):

nothing in any of these discussions,

(00:25:23):

I don’t think would make me in 2027 have lower property taxes than what I have

(00:25:29):

right now.

(00:25:30):

It’s just lowering the rate of increase and all that kind of stuff.

(00:25:33):

So,

(00:25:33):

Kathie,

(00:25:34):

would it be a wise move for the majority party to steal the House Democrats’ rebate

(00:25:43):

proposal where they are saying to help folks right away,

(00:25:47):

if you own a house,

(00:25:48):

you get $1,000.

(00:25:49):

If you’re a renter, you get $500.

(00:25:52):

Would that be that kind of good populist kind of,

(00:25:56):

hey,

(00:25:56):

we’re helping you with affordability,

(00:25:58):

regardless of whether Trump wants you to say affordability?

(00:26:01):

We’re going to do something right away and help you.

(00:26:02):

Would that be a wise political move?

(00:26:05):

Politically, I would say yes.

(00:26:07):

In terms of being good stewards of the budget and,

(00:26:12):

you know,

(00:26:12):

having a balanced budget in the state of Iowa,

(00:26:14):

as we’re supposed to be constitutionally required to have,

(00:26:18):

I would say no.

(00:26:19):

You know, that that is not sustainable.

(00:26:23):

Right.

(00:26:25):

And yeah, you know, it might be, it would look really good on a political postcard.

(00:26:31):

And I think we talked about this when the Democrats offered that.

(00:26:33):

They don’t have to balance the budget.

(00:26:35):

They can offer, you know, a really expensive, yeah, a really expensive plan.

(00:26:42):

One thing that I do like about that plan, though, is the specific plan.

(00:26:50):

recognition that renters also share in the cost of property taxes.

(00:26:56):

It’s not just the homeowner, you know, property taxes go up, the rent goes up.

(00:27:01):

So I think that that was a smart, very smart part of the Democrats plan.

(00:27:08):

But yeah, I mean, I,

(00:27:10):

I think that the 25% or 25,000 off the top comes closest to that to say, okay.

(00:27:18):

Yeah, that’s a good point.

(00:27:19):

You’ve got an immediate impact regardless of

(00:27:24):

you know,

(00:27:25):

how much,

(00:27:25):

I mean,

(00:27:25):

because everybody’s house is,

(00:27:28):

almost everybody’s house is going to be worth more than $25,000.

(00:27:33):

But there’s a lot of variation after that.

(00:27:36):

So I do think that that probably comes the closest in the Republican plan.

(00:27:42):

And yeah, just while we were talking, the Senate Republican bill caps levy rates.

(00:27:49):

So it’s a little bit different than...

(00:27:53):

saying you can’t have more than a 2% growth in revenue totally.

(00:27:58):

But that’s a more expensive, or it’s a more complicated way of doing it.

(00:28:03):

So you have to be, it’s harder to see where that impact is gonna be.

(00:28:10):

And by the way, local governments are telling us that they’re not even

(00:28:14):

really crunching the numbers yet on the impact of these various plans.

(00:28:18):

I think a lot of them are just waiting for this to shake out in the legislature

(00:28:23):

before they start worrying about how much,

(00:28:25):

you know,

(00:28:26):

what the impact is going to be on their bottom line.

(00:28:29):

so i i’m looking at the weekly legislative newsletter of republican state senator

(00:28:34):

mike busolo and he has kind of a side-by-side senate republican governor house

(00:28:39):

republican on this but yes just like Kathie said the senate republican proposal

(00:28:43):

instead of having a cap on local government revenue growth which is what the

(00:28:47):

governor and house republicans are doing the senate proposal imposes a four percent

(00:28:52):

cap on increases to city and county general levies excluding debt service and

(00:28:57):

schools and there is

(00:28:58):

an automatic rate reduction mechanism.

(00:29:01):

If property valuations rise more than 2% due to inflation,

(00:29:05):

tax rates would decrease accordingly to offset the increase.

(00:29:11):

I’m not sure how that would work.

(00:29:13):

I’m not even sure what that meant.

(00:29:15):

I think that it would force,

(00:29:17):

I think what they’re trying to do is instead of some,

(00:29:22):

I think that I’m trying to remember the way Klemish,

(00:29:24):

Senator Klemish phrased it at his,

(00:29:28):

or Senator Dawson maybe is the one who said this when they had that press

(00:29:31):

conference on the first day of the session,

(00:29:33):

where he described it as dishonest,

(00:29:35):

where some local governments will say,

(00:29:37):

we’ve kept the levy the same,

(00:29:38):

we haven’t raised the levy,

(00:29:39):

and yet the property valuations,

(00:29:41):

the assessments have gone up by so much,

(00:29:43):

they’re collecting so much more.

(00:29:44):

So I think what they’re trying to do is not allow local governments to have

(00:29:48):

backdoor revenue increases just by having the assessments go up by a significant

(00:29:53):

amount.

(00:29:53):

So if the assessment, if property valuations rise by more than a certain amount,

(00:29:59):

they automatically would have to lower the levy.

(00:30:01):

I think that is the concept of the Senate Republican plan,

(00:30:05):

but I’m not sure how that would work in practice.

(00:30:10):

Most of the time,

(00:30:12):

and I’ve been watching these property tax legislation year after year after year,

(00:30:18):

and I

(00:30:19):

Ultimately,

(00:30:21):

when somebody tells you that this has made a difference to you,

(00:30:25):

what they mean is that your property taxes didn’t go up as fast as they would have

(00:30:29):

if we had done nothing.

(00:30:31):

And that is really hard to prove.

(00:30:37):

And it means really very, very little to the taxpayer.

(00:30:42):

When you see the amount of money you’re paying out of your bank account,

(00:30:50):

is the number that you understand, right?

(00:30:54):

How they got there and what it means.

(00:30:57):

Ultimately, the amount of money you pay out is what you understand.

(00:31:01):

And I have a hard time looking at any of these plans and seeing where the amount of

(00:31:07):

money I’m paying out will be less.

(00:31:10):

It’ll be more.

(00:31:12):

Anyway, because, you know, they’re exempting schools.

(00:31:14):

It’s going to be more,

(00:31:16):

but they’re going to come in and say,

(00:31:17):

well,

(00:31:17):

it’s not as much more as it would have been if we hadn’t done this.

(00:31:21):

And that is, you know, not very satisfying, ultimately.

(00:31:27):

Like going on a diet.

(00:31:29):

The doctor says, well, you would have gained 10 pounds, but you only gained four.

(00:31:34):

Congratulations.

(00:31:37):

I wanted one other random point just to add in.

(00:31:39):

We don’t have a prediction segment on this show,

(00:31:41):

but just after talking to people,

(00:31:44):

call me skeptical that the House and Senate will give the GOV the 10 million for

(00:31:49):

the shared services.

(00:31:51):

I feel like they will instead look at any particular language,

(00:31:56):

if language is needed to change,

(00:31:58):

regulation-wise,

(00:31:59):

whatever,

(00:32:00):

to just push this shared services stuff,

(00:32:03):

but with money tight the way it is.

(00:32:06):

I just feel skeptical that they’re going to come up with with agree to give her 10

(00:32:11):

million bucks for this.

(00:32:14):

I know we’re getting close on time,

(00:32:15):

so let’s I’m going to pause the other things we’re going to talk about this week.

(00:32:19):

But as we talk,

(00:32:20):

we are we are learning some of the details that President Trump will be coming to

(00:32:24):

the Des Moines metro to the suburb of Clive on Tuesday afternoon.

(00:32:30):

My daughter actually was supposed to have soccer practice there that night.

(00:32:33):

And we got a we got a message from the coach that said, hey, unexpected change.

(00:32:37):

We’re going to find somewhere else to have indoor practice.

(00:32:40):

I didn’t know at the time.

(00:32:41):

That’s because the president of the United States will be there and they’re going

(00:32:44):

to have to clear everybody out of there in a different part of the building.

(00:32:46):

But anyway, so we know he’s going to be here Tuesday afternoon.

(00:32:50):

And I’m curious what you both thought.

(00:32:53):

when you heard this.

(00:32:54):

Obviously, this will be third congressional district.

(00:32:57):

Zach Nunn is the current Republican congressman from this district.

(00:33:00):

And this will be one of those districts that Democrats will salivate most in their

(00:33:06):

hopes to try to win back the majority in the U.S.

(00:33:09):

House.

(00:33:10):

Kathie,

(00:33:11):

I’m assuming you were not surprised that they chose presidential stop in the third

(00:33:17):

district.

(00:33:17):

But what what does he need to do here?

(00:33:21):

Yeah,

(00:33:21):

so,

(00:33:22):

well,

(00:33:23):

first of all,

(00:33:24):

it will certainly help Zach Nunn if Trump praises him in some way.

(00:33:35):

And I think that that certainly doesn’t hurt him in the rural part of the district.

(00:33:41):

It doesn’t help him probably that much in Polk County,

(00:33:43):

but it certainly doesn’t hurt him in rural parts of the district.

(00:33:47):

I think, though, that Trump

(00:33:50):

ultimately is here for trump you know ultimately he you know he you know i think

(00:33:58):

that he wants he’s going to be supposedly talking about energy and the economy and

(00:34:04):

to me that means uh that he is going to speak directly to farmers who are unhappy

(00:34:12):

about the tariffs um they are unhappy about uh you know the 12 billion dollars that

(00:34:18):

the trump

(00:34:19):

The administration offered for bailouts,

(00:34:21):

which is,

(00:34:22):

you know,

(00:34:23):

not to say that they are going to turn away $12 billion,

(00:34:26):

but they don’t think it’s enough.

(00:34:30):

He could come here and, you know, promise the ethanol oil.

(00:34:37):

uh issues that they want you know especially the year around e15 permanent sounds

(00:34:42):

like it’s in trouble potentially yeah permanent year around e15 some of those um

(00:34:47):

things that he can sort of throw out to farmers and make them feel a little bit

(00:34:50):

better about the economy um but uh but yeah i mean uh it’s a zach nunn’s race is um

(00:35:00):

You know, it’s a it’s a toss up.

(00:35:02):

And so that that’s one that he the president could move the needle on.

(00:35:08):

The other thing is we have an open U.S.

(00:35:10):

Senate race.

(00:35:12):

Right.

(00:35:13):

And Trump has not endorsed anyone, any of the Republicans in that race.

(00:35:19):

He endorsed Hinson.

(00:35:22):

Oh, I’m sorry.

(00:35:23):

That’s right.

(00:35:25):

He hasn’t endorsed a candidate for governor, though.

(00:35:27):

That’s right.

(00:35:28):

That’s what I’m thinking of.

(00:35:28):

I’m sorry.

(00:35:29):

Yeah, he has not endorsed a candidate for governor.

(00:35:33):

And so he so that is one that he could dip his toe into.

(00:35:39):

I would guess he’ll probably wait for a while on that, though.

(00:35:43):

Laura, let me let me praise you first before you jump in, OK?

(00:35:49):

Okay, so to piggyback off Kathie so Trump comes here, maybe that helps none with his base right.

(00:35:56):

One thing you have done with your reporting Laura is repeatedly point out the

(00:36:01):

difference between dynamics in our state.

(00:36:05):

and nationally so sometimes democrats nationally will get all revved up and frothy

(00:36:11):

about big ideas about stuff you have pointed out voter registration differences

(00:36:16):

which are substantial in our state but i’m curious how you are viewing this a trump

(00:36:25):

visit because you can look at national polls right and see that he’s underwater and

(00:36:29):

some democrats will say well it’s going to be a great year for democrats

(00:36:32):

But you have done numerous stories about how this doesn’t necessarily directly

(00:36:40):

translate,

(00:36:41):

right?

(00:36:41):

Like the guy can be really unpopular nationally,

(00:36:44):

but that doesn’t mean that Zach Nunn’s going to lose.

(00:36:46):

Well,

(00:36:47):

let me tell you,

(00:36:47):

though,

(00:36:48):

if I were Zach Nunn,

(00:36:49):

I would not want this visit to be happening.

(00:36:52):

I do not think that this helps him.

(00:36:54):

I mean, it maybe helps him with the Republican base.

(00:36:56):

But as far as I know, Zach Nunn is not going to be facing a Republican primary challenger.

(00:37:01):

So just to recap here, I agree that statewide.

(00:37:06):

Democrats are in a very deep hole in Iowa.

(00:37:09):

And so Trump,

(00:37:10):

I don’t know,

(00:37:11):

since we don’t have the occasional polls that we used to always get from Ann

(00:37:14):

Seltzer,

(00:37:15):

I don’t know whether Trump’s approval is

(00:37:17):

underwater in Iowa statewide or not.

(00:37:20):

But I can almost guarantee that it’s underwater across the third district because

(00:37:25):

Trump only carried the third district by about a four point margin.

(00:37:29):

And Zach Nunn also defeated Lanon Bacom by about a four point margin,

(00:37:32):

which is to say that Zach Nunn did not outperform the top of the ticket.

(00:37:36):

So I think it’s extremely likely,

(00:37:38):

just given what we’ve seen in the polling in many different kinds of states,

(00:37:42):

that Trump’s approval is significantly lower than it was

(00:37:46):

a year ago, and he’s probably underwater in the third district.

(00:37:49):

So if I’m Zach Nunn,

(00:37:50):

I just don’t know that I want this kind of attention to be so closely tied to

(00:37:55):

Trump.

(00:37:56):

Now,

(00:37:56):

I do think if I’m Randy Feenster or somebody else running for governor,

(00:38:00):

absolutely,

(00:38:01):

I want that focus because I think that still helps Republicans on balance in a

(00:38:05):

statewide race.

(00:38:05):

But I think that

(00:38:07):

Zach Nunn is in a world of hurt right now.

(00:38:09):

And by the way,

(00:38:10):

the E15,

(00:38:11):

you mentioned that briefly,

(00:38:13):

that did not get into the government funding bill.

(00:38:15):

It was supposed to be in last year’s government funding bill.

(00:38:17):

It got blown up at the last minute.

(00:38:20):

Additional bailout was not part of that either.

(00:38:23):

I thought the bailout they could do without it in a funding bill.

(00:38:26):

Anyway, the bailout I thought was coming from a different fund, but that might not be correct.

(00:38:31):

But the year on E15 was something that the Iowa delegation was really going to be

(00:38:37):

touting as something they’d accomplished.

(00:38:39):

Now they don’t have that.

(00:38:40):

They might get it later in some other bill.

(00:38:42):

But I just think that Trump,

(00:38:44):

you know,

(00:38:45):

75% of the population of the third congressional district is Polk in Dallas County.

(00:38:49):

And I don’t think a Trump event in Clive helps Republicans.

(00:38:54):

I’ll be curious if multiple things can be true.

(00:38:56):

This is quite a scenario,

(00:38:58):

but maybe it’s because I’ve had too much coffee today,

(00:39:01):

my brain’s going cuckoo.

(00:39:02):

But I’m wondering if he comes early,

(00:39:05):

it’s still January,

(00:39:06):

maybe that gets,

(00:39:08):

Trump’s not on the ballot,

(00:39:09):

gets MAG,

(00:39:10):

if he’s in there,

(00:39:11):

Zach’s great,

(00:39:12):

Zach’s great,

(00:39:12):

Zach’s great,

(00:39:13):

gets MAGA behind none.

(00:39:16):

And then to your point that he could be a drag later,

(00:39:19):

that’s the last we see of him in the third for the rest of the time.

(00:39:23):

because he could potentially be a drag.

(00:39:25):

Clearly he’s a mobilizer for Democrats,

(00:39:27):

but if he’s going to drag independence down and none’s going to need the

(00:39:30):

independence,

(00:39:31):

I wonder if both things can be true the way this plays out.

(00:39:35):

Could be.

(00:39:36):

Could be.

(00:39:37):

Okay, I know we’re going way over and I’m sorry for that.

(00:39:40):

Laura, in your email, I’m going to put you on the spot so you better be ready.

(00:39:44):

We always share an email throughout the week as we set up recording times and all that stuff.

(00:39:49):

So, Laura Bellen,

(00:39:51):

In your email to me,

(00:39:52):

which I don’t have in front of me,

(00:39:54):

I warned you that at the end of this show,

(00:39:57):

I was going to have you each tease something that you or your team is working on.

(00:40:01):

And you said if I did that to you,

(00:40:03):

that would hold your feet to the fire and you would get a post done.

(00:40:07):

So I am doing it right now.

(00:40:08):

So ma’am, what are you working on?

(00:40:11):

I’m working on a post.

(00:40:12):

You know, I always love to know what messages politicians and committees are testing.

(00:40:18):

And one of my sources got a text message poll this week,

(00:40:22):

testing a bunch of,

(00:40:23):

it seems to be some kind of Republican group,

(00:40:26):

either Zach Nunn’s campaign or somebody affiliated with it.

(00:40:29):

testing some negative messages about Sarah Trongariot and a few positive messages

(00:40:33):

about Zach Nunn.

(00:40:34):

So I’m going to be writing about that.

(00:40:36):

And I hope that that post will be out by the time this podcast drops on Saturday morning.

(00:40:41):

You really just put yourself on a bind.

(00:40:44):

You shouldn’t have put a firm deadline, but props to you for doing it.

(00:40:47):

All right, Kathie.

(00:40:49):

Oh,

(00:40:49):

it’s always more complicated for you because you’re watching so much of what your

(00:40:52):

team is doing.

(00:40:53):

But is there one thing in particular you want to tee up?

(00:40:56):

Yeah,

(00:40:57):

I just want to highlight the reporting that Brooklyn Drazey has been doing on the

(00:41:02):

Higher Ed Committee,

(00:41:04):

which is spewing out bills like a fire hose.

(00:41:09):

This is the committee that the House established last year,

(00:41:14):

chaired by Representative Taylor Collins of Minneapolis.

(00:41:18):

And they did quite a few bills last year that the Senate didn’t take up.

(00:41:25):

And this year, so two of the a couple of really controversial bills, one of which would allow

(00:41:35):

community colleges to pursue four-year degrees,

(00:41:40):

essentially making them many state universities,

(00:41:45):

not in every subject,

(00:41:47):

but in areas that they think are lacking,

(00:41:51):

that there’s just not enough capacity at the four-year.

(00:41:55):

But the private colleges that are going to war

(00:41:58):

on this issue.

(00:42:00):

They think they’re the ones who are going to get hurt by it.

(00:42:03):

They argue that there are no higher education deserts in the state.

(00:42:07):

So that one is a super interesting debate.

(00:42:11):

Some of these private colleges are in

(00:42:14):

Ruby red districts here and and those college presidents and people in some of

(00:42:22):

those communities are upset.

(00:42:24):

So so that’s one interesting thing.

(00:42:26):

The second thing on higher education,

(00:42:27):

I just want to mention that this bill just dropped this week and had a subcommittee

(00:42:32):

is that Taylor Collins is going after endowments.

(00:42:36):

And I think,

(00:42:38):

you know,

(00:42:40):

the the big losers here would be the state universities who have endowments in the

(00:42:45):

billions of dollars.

(00:42:47):

I think, yeah, I think the intention, though, was to go after.

(00:42:51):

some of the rich liberal arts schools,

(00:42:55):

in other words,

(00:42:56):

Grinnell,

(00:42:57):

that they weren’t able to pull to heel using the state tuition grants because they

(00:43:06):

want these private colleges,

(00:43:09):

private liberal arts colleges in particular to be essentially community colleges

(00:43:14):

sending out

(00:43:15):

for jobs that are in the state.

(00:43:19):

And Grinnell has basically resisted all of their efforts to do that.

(00:43:24):

And now they’re going after the endowment is probably the last way to try to bring them to heal.

(00:43:32):

All right.

(00:43:33):

Good conversation this week.

(00:43:35):

Thank you both.

(00:43:35):

I hope you do not have to go outside the rest of the day and we can hide until like

(00:43:41):

Monday or Tuesday or whenever the heck we’re supposed to be warmer.

(00:43:45):

I’m surprised my cat didn’t come in seeking a warm spot.

(00:43:50):

Thanks, everybody, for joining us for the Iowa Down Ballot podcast.

(00:43:54):

Our thanks, as always, to producer Spencer Dirks.

(00:43:56):

And thanks to all of you who are contributing to make this thing happen.

(00:44:00):

Please also share what we’re doing here.

(00:44:03):

Let people know about it.

(00:44:05):

Get the links,

(00:44:05):

send that around,

(00:44:06):

and tell as many folks as you can to help us grow this thing and spread the word

(00:44:10):

across our state.

(00:44:11):

We have a great week ahead, and we’ll see you next week.

Get full access to Iowa Down Ballot at iowawriterscollaborative.substack.com/subscribe