Excerpt:

Iowa Independent had a story last week about Civic Skinny reporting that House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy might not run for reelection in 2010.

A leader in the Iowa legislature tells Des Moines’ resident gossip columnist, Civic Skinny, that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has been making none-too-subtle moves indicating he isn’t interested in running for re-election in 2010.

McCarthy, who was first elected in 2003, has discussed new careers with Gov. Chet Culver and others in the private sector, sources tell Skinny. The Des Moines Democrat serves as the second in command to House Speaker Pat Murphy, D-Dubuque. His district is considered one of the safest Democratic districts in Iowa, encompassing a large swath of Des Moines’ southeast side. So while McCarthy’s departure won’t mean a net loss for the Democrats, it could have impact on the workings of the House caucus.

Civic Skinny says McCarthy has talked with Gov. Culver about a job in his administration. When I first heard about this, I thought McCarthy might be eyeing a run for Congress in Iowa’s 3rd district that is currently held by Leonard Boswell. This is all pure speculation, but maybe McCarthy knows Boswell is going to retire. McCarthy would be the logical choice of party insiders to be the nominee.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

A story heard on the campaign last fall was how Joe Biden took Amtrak home to Delaware from Washington DC each night. That commitment to passenger rail has made it into the budget proposals.

From the Washington Post…

High-speed rail has emerged as the cornerstone of Obama’s ambitious attempt to remake the nation’s transportation agenda, which for half a century has focused primarily on building highways and roads. Nearly half of the $48 billion in stimulus money for transportation projects will go toward rail, buses and other non-highway projects, including $1.3 billion for Amtrak and its successful rapid rail service, Acela. The Transportation Department also would receive $2 billion more under Obama’s proposed 2010 budget, most of it for rail and aviation improvements.

Projects to build a nationwide passenger rail network are being discussed in North Carolina, Virginia, Minnesota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Nevada, California, and even in Iowa.

I have to give props to Congressman Braley and Boswell for working to get passenger rail in Iowa. Braley has worked to get Amtrack to Davenport and Dubuque, while Boswell wants Amtrack to continue through the state through Iowa City, Des Moines, and to Omaha.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Rep. Leonard Boswell is pushing for a feasibility study of Amtrak service from Chicago through Iowa to Omaha.

Iowa’s Third District Congressman Leonard Boswell has asked that AMTRAK study the feasibility of extending a proposed Chicago to the Quad Cities passenger train not only to Iowa City and Des Moines, but also on west to Council Bluffs and Omaha. This is the first time that AMTRAK has been asked by a government official to consider extending service beyond Des Moines. AMTRAK, at the request of the Iowa Department of Transportation, is looking at the feasibility of a Des Moines to the Quad Cities and Chicago train. […]

If passenger train services returns in Iowa between the Quad Cities and Council Bluffs-Omaha, it would use the former Rock Island line. Cities along the route from the Mississippi River to the Missouri River include Davenport, Iowa City, Grinnell, Newton, Des Moines, and Atlantic.

I am definitely on board with this idea.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Over the past week, the Des Moines Register has released their endorsements for the upcoming election.

I was eager to see who they’d endorse in the 4th District and their “endorsement” of Leonard…



[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

On Monday, Congressman Boswell returned to Congress after a brief stint in the hospital.

Here’s a video message that he recorded recently…

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

A compromise has been reached in Congress on the FISA bill. The so-called compromise bascially allows immunity to Telecom Companies for illegally spying on Americans.

The agreement would also pave the way for companies such as AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. to shed the nearly 40 lawsuits they face for allegedly participating in a prior version of the NSA program, which have cast a shadow over their reputation on Wall Street and Main Street. To win immunity, they would have to pass review from a U.S. District Court.

It faces hurdles to becoming law, namely whether it will have enough support from other lawmakers in both parties in the House. Telecommunications companies, which have lobbied lawmakers aggressively in recent weeks, support the compromise as does the White House.

Critical to sealing the deal was a compromise that would grant conditional immunity to telecommunications companies for assistance they provided from September 2001 through January 2007. If the companies can show a federal district court judge “substantial evidence” they received a written request from the attorney general or head of an intelligence agency stating the president authorized the surveillance and determined it to be lawful, the cases against them will be dismissed.

Yesterday the New York Times had an editorial saying this agreement is unnecessary and a threat to the Bill of Rights.

This week, the White House and Democratic and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill hope to announce a “compromise” on a domestic spying bill. If they do, it will be presented as an indispensable tool for protecting the nation’s security that still safeguards our civil liberties. The White House will paint opponents as weak-kneed liberals who do not understand and cannot stand up to the threat of terrorism.

The bill is not a compromise. The final details are being worked out, but all indications are that many of its provisions are both unnecessary and a threat to the Bill of Rights. The White House and the Congressional Republicans who support the bill have two real aims. They want to undermine the power of the courts to review the legality of domestic spying programs. And they want to give a legal shield to the telecommunications companies that broke the law by helping Mr. Bush carry out his warrantless wiretapping operation.

Democrats in the House have caved on this bill because a handful of Blue Dog Democrats, including Iowa’s Leonard Boswell.

A potential revolt by a group of Democrats pressed party leaders into compromising on a rewrite of electronic surveillance rules that could come to a House vote by week’s end, a top Democrat said Wednesday.

The House will vote on this tomorrow. If you live in Iowa’s 3rd district, call Leonard Boswell and tell Telecom companies should not get immunity for breaking the law and ask him to vote against this bill.

Rep. Leonard L. Boswell, D-Iowa — Phone: (202) 225-3806

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

More than a week after the primary, it’s time to put Leonard Boswell’s victory over Ed Fallon into perspective. While the Fallon campaign is claiming “a partial victory,” the facts don’t bear out the silver lining that Fallon is trying to discern from his defeat. (Although after such a devastating loss, one certainly can understand […]

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Dave Price at WHO is reporting that turnout is much higher than expected in Polk Co. and in Des Moines, where 70% of the excepted vote will come from.

Looks like the 3rd District is stirred up a bit about this Leonard Boswell-Ed Fallon race. Polk Co Auditor Jamie Fitzgerald says turnout may approach 2006’s level. Big deal, you might say? Well, it kind of is. In 2006 you’ll remember we had the 3-way Democratic primary between Fallon, Chet Culver and Mike Blouin.

Fallon won that primary in Polk Co. against 2 well funded candidates that had the support from party insiders.

Price says that where turnout is high at will tell which candidate is helped out. However, I don’t think people turnout in high numbers to support an incumbent with a big lead in the polls. People turnout in high numbers to vote for change and to vote against something, something like a congress with a crappy approval rating.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

If you want to boil the Democratic primary race in the 3rd District down to one issue, it would be the Iraq War.

Ed Fallon has opposed the Iraq invasion from the start and has strongly opposed the war at every chance. When serving in the Iowa House, Rep. Fallon co-sponsored HR 17, along with 20 other Democrats, which called the President to not make a preemptive, unilateral attack against Iraq. Fallon had the judgement to know that invading Iraq would destablize the Middle East, hamper our efforts of bringing Osama bin Laden to justice, and would cost trillions of dollars and cause further federal budget deficits. Fallon has since signed on to the Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq.

Leonard Boswell, on the other hand, voted in favor of the war in Iraq and was a strong supporter of the Bush administration’s failed policy up until he learned that Fallon was going to run against him. Boswell began to support an end to the war in Iraq in December, after it was becoming clear that Fallon was preparing to challenge him.

In an interview with the Des Moines Register, Boswell still uses Bush’s untruthful arguments for going to war in Iraq.

On Tuesday, Democrats in Iowa’s 3rd District have a choice. They can vote for someone to represent them who has the judgement to make the tough decisions and wants to bring new energy to Congress or they can vote for someone who clings to the past and only changes when they are forced to do so.

Related Posts:

Excerpt:

Leonard Boswell is airing TV ads in the Des Moines market where he highlights his opposition to Bush on funding cuts to the college loan program and says he is a loyal Democrat.

That is commendable, but where was Boswell on the issues that really matter to Iowans?

Boswell voted against the majority of Democrats and supported Bush’s failed Iraq policy.

Boswell voted against the majority of Democrats to approve torture in the Military Commissions Act.

Boswell voted against the majority of Democrats to repeal the estate tax.

Boswell voted against the majority of Democrats to make it harder for people (and easier for corporations) to declare bankruptcy.

Boswell voted against the majority of Democrats and supported No Child Left Behind.

Boswell voted against the majority of Democrats and pushed to give Telecom companies immunity for illegal wiretapping Americans.

Boswell continues to support NAFTA-like free trade agreements.

Boswell voted against the majority of Democrats to give oil and gas companies $14 billion in tax breaks.

Sorry Rep. Boswell, but voting against the majority of Democrats in Congress on the issues that matter most to Iowans does not make you a loyal Democrat.

Support Ed Fallon in the 3rd District primary.

Related Posts: