Latest news with #KathieObradovich
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Memorial Day 2025: How Iowans can celebrate
The Iowa Veterans Cemetery in Van Meter on July 23, 2024. (Photo by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capital Dispatch) The United States will celebrate Memorial Day on Monday, May 26, by honoring soldiers who died during service. Originally known as Declaration Day, the tradition can be traced back to May 30, 1868. Gen. John A. Logan, 3rd commander-in-chief of the Grand Army of the Republic, an organization of former Union soldiers, proclaimed it a day to commemorate the soldiers who lost their lives in the Civil War. This year, many organizations across Iowa will keep the tradition alive. Here's where Iowans can participate in Memorial Day 2025 with a variety of local events: Iowa Gold Star Military Museum Memorial Day Celebration – 6 a.m. Camp Dodge, 7105 N.W. 70th Ave., Johnston. This family-friendly event held by the Iowa Gold Star Military Museum features a complementary military-style breakfast from 6 a.m.-9 a.m., a LifeServe blood drive from 7 a.m. to noon, live music vendors, and special exhibits and activities. Iowa Veterans Cemetery Memorial Day Ceremony – 8 a.m. 34024 Veterans Memorial Drive, Adel. The Iowa Veterans Cemetery will be hosting a ceremony to honor all those who served in the U.S. military. The service begins at 8 a.m. and will be streamed on the Iowa Department of Veterans Affairs Youtube channel. Raymon Veteran Park Memorial Day Service – 8 a.m. 307 W. Johnson St., Albion. Live music and a raising of the colors by several local veteran associations will be hosted in Albion by the Marshalltown Chamber of Commerce. Highland Memory Gardens Cemetery Memorial Day Celebration – 8 a.m. 1 N.E. 60th Ave., Des Moines. This celebration held by Highland Memory Garden and American Legion Post 374 will begin with a bagpipe performance and tribute from the Iowa Patriot Guard Riders at 9 a.m. The service will begin with a reading listing the names of all veterans buried in the Garden since Memorial Day 2024, and will conclude with a gun salute and taps. Refreshments will follow the service. Participants are encouraged to bring their own outdoor seating. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Davenport Memorial Park Cemetery Memorial Day Event – 9 a.m. 1022 E. 39th St., Davenport. The Davenport Memorial Park will host a Memorial Day event to allow families to stroll the grounds and pay their respects to the fallen soldiers who rest there. There will be food trucks on site. Memorial Day Murph with REPX – 9 a.m. 5335 Carey Ave., Davenport. REPX is a local Davenport crossfit gym that will be hosting a workout event in honor of Navy Lt. Michael P. Murphy. The traditional Murph challenge begins with a 1-mile run, followed by 100 pull-ups, 200 push-ups, 300 air squats, followed by a second and final 1-mile run. Holy Cross Parish Memorial Day Mass – 9 a.m. 2223 Indian Hills Dr., Sioux City. This service will be held at St. Michael Church by Holy Cross Parish to honor those who served in the U.S. military. Burke Memorial Park Memorial Day Ceremony – 9 a.m. 635 E. University Ave., Des Moines. The Larry Nehring Detachment #103 of the Marine Corps league will be hosting a service near Burke Memorial Park, at the Polk County Gold Star Monument. This service is open to all and will begin at 9 a.m. with a ceremonial firing detail. Waterloo Annual Memorial Day Parade – 10 a.m. Along 6th and Commercial streets, Waterloo. The annual Waterloo Memorial Day Parade begins at 6th Street, then travels down Lafayette Street, finally ending at Commercial Street. Participants should set up along these streets for the best experience. Capitol Complex Memorial Day Ceremony – 10 a.m. East Walnut between Finkbine Drive & East 12th Street, Des Moines. The Larry Nehring Detachment will also be holding a service at 10 a.m. at the memorials on the south side of the State Capitol Complex. Following the service, Amvets Post 2 will host a luncheon at 2818 5th Ave., Des Moines. Rock Island Arsenal Memorial Day Ceremony – 10:45 a.m. Bldg 118, Rodman Ave., Rock Island, Illinois This year's speakers include Dr. Amanda Hale, from the Defense POW/MIA Accounting agency, and Col. Joe Parker, the Rock Island Garrison commander. Visitors should park in Memorial Field where buses will shuttle them to and from the ceremony. Memorial Day Tribute at Cedar Memorial – 11 a.m. 4200 1st Ave. NE, Cedar Rapids. This ceremony will include patriotic music, rifle volley, taps, and a speech from Dustin Peterson, director of Linn County Veteran Services. Participants are encouraged to bring their own outdoor seating. Council Bluffs Memorial Day Service – 11 a.m. 100 Pearl St., Council Bluffs. Join American Legion Post #2 in celebrating their annual Memorial Day service. Rev. Nathan Sherrill, pastor of St. Paul's Lutheran Church, will serve as master of ceremonies. Michele Takin will sing the National Anthem. Mayor Matt Walsh, Post 2 Commander Sharlene Anderson, and Honor Guard Captain Brad Powell will give speeches. This ceremony will also include a special drill presentation by the Abraham Lincoln ROTC Drill Team. Memorial Day Ceremony at Bettendorf Veterans Memorial – 2 p.m. 1645 23rd St., Bettendorf. Bettendorf Veterans Memorial is a monument to those who previously served or are on active duty. A Memorial Day ceremony will be held in the afternoon for all to attend. Fleet Farm Salutes Taps Across America – 3 p.m. 5858 Sunnybrook Drive, Sioux City. At 3 p.m. on Memorial Day, a live bugler will perform Taps at all Fleet Farm stores across America followed by a minute of silence during the National Moment of Remembrance. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court spikes an excuse for hiding public comment
The Iowa Supreme Court chamber in the Iowa Judicial Building on Feb. 22, 2023. (Photo by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capital Dispatch) The Iowa Supreme Court gave citizen engagement and accessibility to public meetings a much-needed boost Friday in an appeal of a lawsuit against the Iowa City Community School District. The district's practice of posting full videos of school board meetings on the internet for on-demand public viewing was at the heart of the case. Government officials, staffs of statewide organizations of cities, counties and school boards, and access advocates like the Iowa Freedom of Information Council had awaited the decision with some trepidation. They worried the court might impose liability for statements expressed during public comment portions of governmental meetings and for their republication via internet posting of meeting recordings on government web sites or YouTube. But the justices unanimously upheld lower court decisions dismissing the claims by Amie Villarini, the former girls' tennis coach at Iowa City West High School. The Supreme Court ruling should curtail a recent practice by an increasing number of public officials who advocated that the risk of defamation lawsuits made it necessary for city councils and school boards to omit or limit public comment periods during their meetings, to warn speakers in advance about what they could and could not say, and even to remove or arrest speakers who made crude or demeaning comments. The court decision takes away any rational basis for a governmental body to claim it should not archive recordings of meetings for later public viewing. The Iowa City case arose because the school district is among the governmental bodies that did not cower to pressure to limit members of the public from speaking their minds, lodging complaints, or heaping praise during meetings. The district also did not give in to pressure to closet away video recordings of meetings that captured those comments. Villarini's lawsuit in effect challenged both practices. She sued over statements by two former West High School tennis players who spoke freely during the public-comment time at a 2022 school board meeting. The students expressed disappointment with the results of an internal school investigation of allegations of mistreatment involving the tennis coach, whom the girls did not identify by name. One girl told the board she believed the investigation protected the coach, not students. The other girl asked the board to change the district's investigation procedures to protect students better. Board members did not respond to the girls' statements. The following day, the district placed Villarini on paid leave for the remainder of her one-year contract. The deputy superintendent said school staff learned after the meeting Villarini had posted comments the administrator described as unprofessional and disrespectful to students. In keeping with its custom, the district posted a complete, unaltered video recording of the school board meeting on its YouTube channel two days after the meeting. The district refused multiple requests from Villarini and her lawyer to take the video down. She sued, alleging the district defamed her by republishing what she called 'slanderous' statements by the two girls. The district defended the case, in part arguing that posting unaltered video of a public meeting of a governmental body constituted privileged speech. The Supreme Court agreed. Chief Justice Susan Christensen wrote in the decision: 'The fair-report privilege protects the publication of defamatory matter concerning another in a report of an official action or proceeding or of a meeting open to the public that deals with a matter of public concern … if the report is accurate and complete or a fair abridgement of the occurrence reported.' The court continued: 'Although we are fully articulating this privilege for the first time, we have recognized a version of it since the early 1900s. At the time, the privilege only covered judicial proceedings and could be defeated by a showing of malice. … Here, we are expanding the privilege and updating it so that it covers the report of more proceedings and is defeated by inaccuracy instead of malice.' The court said it may have reached a different conclusion had the district edited the meeting recording. Yet, the court reiterated the importance of supporting steps that increase public access to governmental meetings. 'The application of the fair-report privilege to this case furthers Iowa's open-meeting laws. … Government entities, including school boards, must prioritize the accessibility of public meetings,' the court wrote. 'ICCSD [Iowa City Community School District] has chosen to comply with these laws with the most transparency possible, and that should not be punished. The fair-report privilege protects those government bodies that provide the public with a full account of their meetings.' Thankfully, the Supreme Court did not mince words when it ratified that comments at a public meeting are privileged communications and that posting recordings of those comments is protected so long as the posted version is unaltered. This common sense support of citizen participation in and access to governments continues Iowa's history of openness and its protection of free speech, while adapting state law to current realities. Letting people watch live-streamed governmental board meetings and archived recordings of past meetings from their homes, offices — or even their tractor cabs — is a positive result from the Covid pandemic, when many people avoided large gatherings. Citizens without transportation, parents with children at home, the elderly, or people away from home learned to use Zoom or YouTube to watch their school boards and city council meetings when they could and from remote locations. By applying the fair-report privilege to meetings live-streamed or archived on the internet, even when they contain untoward comments, our Supreme Court has modernized an important protection for expressive rights of Iowans and articulated how the distribution of full-length recordings of meetings promotes government transparency. With this Supreme Court endorsement, city councils, school boards and county boards of supervisors that persist in opening their meetings only to in-person attendees serve only themselves, not the public. Even more, the court's decision strips away a convenient but now dispelled legal excuse for elected officials to avoid doing the right thing. Randy Evans is a member of the Iowa Writers' Collaborative and his columns may be found on his blog, Stray Thoughts. Editor's note: Please consider subscribing to the collaborative and the authors' blogs to support their work.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Iowa lawmakers debate Medicaid rules, unemployment as they aim to end 2025 session
The Iowa Capitol on Feb. 25, 2025. (Photo by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Lawmakers could wrap up the 2025 session as early as Wednesday – but there are still several spending and final policy measures left on the chambers' calendars before legislators can head home. Before ending the session, lawmakers must approve the state's budget, the collection of bills funding Iowa's state departments, agencies as well as meeting other spending obligations. Several of the appropriations bills for fiscal year 2026 passed Monday and Tuesday, some moving between chambers and others going to Gov. Kim Reynolds. The spending bills sent to the governor reflect the budget agreement reached between the Senate and House Republican majorities earlier in May. Some of the budget items House Republicans had requested – like $14 million for paraeducator pay and $8 million for the public safety equipment fund – have been provided through a one-time allocation from the Sports Wagering Fund, which currently contains $40 million. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved Senate Study Bill 1240 Wednesday, the bill making this appropriation, as well as Senate Study Bill 1241, the standings appropriations bill. In addition to the budget bills being passed, there are several pieces of legislation on policy changes on the list for lawmakers to consider. Here is what the Iowa Legislature has passed so far Wednesday: Judicial branch: Senate File 648, the bill appropriating funding for Iowa's courts, was sent to the governor by the House in a 86-1 vote. It allocates $221.83 for the state's judicial branch and includes a 2.5% increase to judicial officer salaries, totalling $1.27 million. Rep. Ross Wilburn, D-Ames, said he appreciated the raise for judicial pay included in the budget, though he supported further increases so Iowa can enlist and keep qualified judges in the state. He echoed comments made by Sen. Matt Blake, D-Urbandale, Tuesday, pointing to a recent situation where only two candidates applied for a judge opening in Iowa, as a reason why Iowa needs to increase pay. 'I think it's critical in terms of recruitment, retention, retirement, that we stay competitive, that we have access to an adequate pool of talented justices, court officers, available,' Wilburn said. Rep. Brian Lohse, R-Bondurant, the bill's floor manager, said he spoke Thursday morning with former Iowa Rep. Dustin Hite, who was appointed as a district court judge in 2024, who said he believed he was 'a better judge because he had been in private practice.' Increasing pay for judges will help the state recruit more lawyers in private practices to take judgeships, Lohse said, who can offer different expertise than county attorneys and lawyers in the public defender's office or indigent defense – the people who typically take judge positions. 'We have to continue to fight to increase judge pay to a point where it is truly competitive, so that we can get the best applicants available – and from the positions and those areas of the law where we need really good, qualified, well-rounded judges,' Lohse said. He also said the budget includes a change based on issues identified during the judicial branch's review of a coding error that caused the misallocation of court debt funds. Lohse said it was discovered roughly $140,000 each year in fees paid by individuals for a court interpreter were being transferred to the jury and witness fee revolving fund instead of into the general fund as intended. The budget bill includes a policy change to continue transferring this money into the revolving fund, he said. Justice system: Senate File 644, passed 60-27, provides $924.9 million for Iowa's justice system, including funding for the state's law enforcement entities including the departments of justice, corrections and public safety. Of that amount, $703.1 million comes from the general fund. Lohse, who also managed the justice system spending bill, said the measure includes $1.07 million for indigent defense, raising the pay rate by roughly $2 per hour, in addition to transferring $1.95 million from the Indigent Defense Fund to the state Public Defender's Office for the hiring of 13 new staff. Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said though he supported the bill and Lohse's efforts to provide funding for indigent defense, the state is still not meeting its legal or moral obligation to provide adequate funding for the lawyers representing people who cannot afford a lawyer. 'It's pretty simple,' Thomson said. 'It's not that expensive. Yet we are paying so little as a state that we are not able to attract very many competent counsel to do the job while we're making progress in raising that rate, it is still hopelessly too low. … At some point, sooner rather than later, we're going to get sued and be compelled to pay adequate amounts.' Lohse said he agreed with Thomson, saying House lawmakers will come back in 2026 to 'continue to fight for indigent defense to do what we can, both in terms of dollars, but also in other legislation.' The measure also includes $150,000 for the victims assistance grant fund through the Iowa Attorney General's office to provide services for human trafficking victims, and has a transfer of $100,000 from the public defender's office to the College Student Aid Commission, providing funding for the Rural Attorney Recruitment Assistance Program. Rep. Megan Jones, R-Sioux Rapids, proposed but withdrew an amendment to limit the use of 'geofencing,' the ability to obtain information from devices being used within geolocational boundaries, to monitor mobile phone use within the Iowa Capitol. The Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation used 'geofencing' software in the sports wagering probe that resulted in four Iowa State University athletes facing charges. She said filings in a lawsuit on the sports wagering case contained information showing geofencing software had been used at the Capitol, a practice she said violated the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, protecting people from unreasonable searches and seizures from the government. 'The innocent, our constituents, Iowans, our visitors to this very building suffer at the very contemplation that their phones were being geofenced for whatever legal purpose and monitored while they were in this building,' Jones said. 'How sad it is that these words have to even be spoken in this building. Iowans, you deserve to be safe in this building, in these hallowed walls. You deserve to be able to seek redress against your government without being feared of being spied on.' The measure heads to the governor for final approval. Unemployment insurance tax: Senate File 607, a bill making changes to Iowa's unemployment insurance taxes, passed 32-16. The legislation proposed by Reynolds would cut the taxable wage base used to calculate unemployment insurance taxes in half from 66.7% to 33.4%. It includes other changes, like reducing Iowa's unemployment tax tables, and excludes wages paid from employers to employees working in other states from the definition of 'taxable wages' if the other state extends reciprocity to Iowa. The measure was amended by Sen. Adrian Dickey, R-Packwood, to remove a section of the bill collecting surcharges from employers of 10% of contributions made to unemployment insurance, if the employer's average benefit ratio from the past three years was at or more than 1.25. Democrats proposed multiple amendments, including measures to reverse Iowa's cuts to unemployment benefits in recent years, each of which failed. Another amendment would have waived work search requirements for people who have seasonal employment. Senators opposing the legislation and who tried to amend it said this legislation does not help workers but benefits the companies that lay them off. They said it causes residents to find work in another state rather than try to figure out a complicated, burdensome system that won't provide aid for as long as they need. 'Our unemployment system is rigged for the employers, particularly with this bill,' Sen. Molly Donahue, D-Marion, said. 'It is the workers who hold those businesses up, and we need to do better by those workers, not give more breaks to the employers who are laying them off.' Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, said he was 'ashamed' of Senate Republicans for how they're treating workers with the legislation by not allowing more time to take advantage of benefits and helping businesses more than employees. Providing unemployment insurance to Iowans doesn't mean they're just being handed a check, Dotzler said, it means they have the time to better themselves for employment while they seek it and won't have to worry as much about finances in the process. Dickey called concerns brought up by Democrats 'old, tired talking points,' and said the problems they worried about with previous unemployment legislation have not come to fruition. Iowa's population grew between 2023-2024, he said, countering statements that Iowa is losing workers in favor of going to other states with better pay, benefits and unemployment programs. For the lawmakers who said the process to apply for unemployment is too complicated, harming those who need aid, Dickey said they'd be happy to know that Iowa Workforce Development will launch updated websites and materials this summer. Dickey acknowledged there are flaws in the current system, including the state's unemployment fund, and said the Legislature should take time next year to take a hard look at how unemployment works in the state. However, Iowa is third in the nation for average weekly rate of benefits at just over nine weeks. He asked why Iowa would want to be like its neighbors, who have longer averages. 'The Republican Party has been the party to stand up for Iowa workers,' Dickey said. 'We are the party that wants our workers to aspire more than desiring an unemployment check.' The House was debating similar legislation Wednesday afternoon. Expanded Medicaid work requirements: The Iowa House approved an amendment from the Senate on the bill setting work requirements for the Iowa Health and Wellness Plan (IHAWP), sending it to Reynolds for final approval. Senate File 615 requires IHAWP recipients to work at least 80 hours per month in order to remain eligible for health coverage through the expanded Medicaid program that covers able-bodied adults from ages 19 to 64 with incomes 133% or below the federal poverty level. It includes exceptions for people with high-risk pregnancies, those with children under age 6 and those in substance abuse treatment programs for up to six months. The measure also includes 'trigger' language that would end IHAWP if the federal government approves, then later rescinds, approval of work requirements. The Senate amended the bill to remove a provision included in a House amendment to the bill directing Iowa HHS to study and return to lawmakers before the 2026 legislative session with a report on the Medicaid for Employed People with Disabilities (MEPD) program. The House approved this change. Rep. Carter Nordman, R-Adel, said he was still in support of the study, but said the language was not necessary as Iowa HHS director Kelly Garcia has made a 'commitment' to study and discuss the program with lawmakers before the next session. 'I will also commit, while we will be taking this out of the bill, (to) working with Rep. Turek and Director Garcia in the interim to see to it that this still gets done,' Nordman said. Rep. Josh Turek, D-Council Bluffs, said this provision was a step to ensure 'work without worry' efforts – removing the Medicaid asset and income limits for people with disabilities – moves forward. A subcommittee meeting was held on a bill making these changes to Medicaid in 2025, but the measure did not advance. He said he appreciated work Nordman has done on this issue, and said the issue was with the Senate. 'I think that we should send this back to them,' Turek said. 'Let them choke on it.' Turek and other Democrats also took issue with the bill as a whole. Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, D-Ames, called the MEPD study 'the only good piece in the bill.' 'The governor has already requested this waiver unilaterally,' Wessel-Kroeschell said. 'So then the only thing left is to gamble with the lives of over 180,000 Iowans who would lose their health insurance. … That's the gamble. Stop gambling with the lives of Iowans who make less than $17,000 a year.' Reynolds and the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services have submitted a waiver request to the federal government to implement work requirements. The HHS proposal is slightly different from the legislative proposal, requiring Iowans on IHAWP work 100 hours per month or earn the equivalent to working 100 hours per month at $7.25 per hour. People can also retain coverage if they are enrolled in education or job skills programs. The legislation was approved 56-30 and heads to Reynolds' desk. This story will be updated.
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
New Republican tax break won't paper over Iowa's unfair system of raising revenue
(Photo illustration by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Rest assured, Iowa. Republicans in Des Moines have heard your concerns about high prices, and they're doing something about it. Members of the Iowa House took the bold step recently of voting to eliminate the sales tax on toilet paper. This was such a high priority that Speaker Pat Grassley led the charge, along with nearly two dozen other members of the House GOP. The Senate and Gov. Kim Reynolds still must act before it becomes law, but judging by the non-partisan estimates, if all of them get on the same page, this will save every Iowan about $2.65 a year. Go to town, Iowa. Buy a couple of candy bars. To be fair, this isn't the only item Republicans want to shelter from the state sales tax this session. They're talking about adding laundry detergent, too. In all seriousness, I can see why Republicans might be eager to look like they're reducing the sales tax burden on Iowans. Public opinion polls say Americans are worried about high prices. Meanwhile, the tariffs President Trump is imposing have convinced people, correctly, that prices will go up even more. Still, Republicans in Iowa have more to be concerned about than just what their party's leader is doing to shrink American bank accounts. They've created problems of their own. Big shift in Iowa tax collections Over the past few years, the Iowa GOP has slashed personal and corporate income taxes that, historically, have taken a bigger percentage out of the incomes of the rich, even as they have collected more and more sales and use taxes, which exact a higher toll on low- and middle-income Iowans. Here's a good illustration. The March report by the state Revenue Estimating Conference on general fund revenues predicted that in fiscal year 2026, 55% of total tax receipts, or $5.6 billion, will come from personal and corporate income taxes. Meanwhile, 44%, or $4.4 billion, will come from sales and use taxes. (These figures don't include refunds, the vast majority of which are personal income tax refunds.) That's an extraordinary shift. In 2019, almost 63% of total tax receipts came from personal and corporate income taxes, while nearly 34% of the total came from sales and use taxes, a 29-point difference. That gap fell to 24 points in 2023. In 2026, the REC says, it will shrink to about 11 points. Percentage of Iowa's total tax receipts by fiscal year and tax type, not including refunds. (Data source: Revenue Estimating Conference reports on General Fund revenues. Graphic: Ed Tibbetts) This is an easy trend to miss. Republicans have made a big deal out of cutting income tax rates, and they get plenty of news coverage from it, too. Meanwhile, the state's sales and use tax rates have remained the same. But don't think the state isn't collecting more money every year just because those tax rates stayed the same. It clearly is. People are spending more money each year on goods and services, and they're paying more sales tax as a result. In addition, the Legislature expanded the sales tax, beginning in 2019, to include digital goods, subscription services and other online sales. This was no small tax increase. In fiscal year 2024, the state raised about $349 million from the tax on remote sales. Six years earlier, that number was zero. Meanwhile, the money the state is raising from the income tax is steadily declining. Between fiscal years 2023 and 2026, Iowa will collect nearly $1 billion less from personal and corporate income taxes, according to the Revenue Estimating Conference. At the same time, the state will raise almost $500 million more from sales and use taxes, the REC estimates. Again, the state is raising more money from the tax that hits low- and middle-income Iowans the hardest and less from the tax that traditionally has had a bigger impact on higher-income Iowans. Think of it this way: The sales tax on the $50 spent for clothes or dinner at a restaurant takes a bigger chunk out of the income of someone making $30,000 a year than it does from someone who's making $1 million. Last year, a study by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy said the 20% of Iowa households with the lowest incomes in the state paid 6.6% of their family incomes on sales and excise taxes. The top 1% only paid 1.1%. (Source: Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) This should not be a surprise. The same principle is at work with Trump's tariffs. The tariffs, which are a sort of sales tax, will hit low-income families harder than the wealthy. A new study by ITEP said for households making less than $29,000 next year, Trump's tariffs will impose an additional 6.2% tax on them, according to CNBC. Households making more than $915,000 a year will also see an increase, but it will be much smaller—only 1.7% of their incomes. Meanwhile, those tariff revenues will undoubtedly backfill some—but certainly not all—of the revenue lost to the federal treasury by extending the Trump tax cuts, which favor the wealthy. Hedging their bets In Iowa, Republican lawmakers support their president. And they are working to permanently freeze the shift they've implemented in state tax collections. They've pressed forward with a proposed amendment to the Iowa Constitution that would require supermajorities in the state Legislature to raise the personal or corporate income tax. But not the sales tax. They purposely excluded this tax from their proposal. Why? I think it's because they're hedging their bets. Iowa Republicans already see that their income tax cuts have yielded a $900 million deficit for fiscal year 2026. They have suggested they'll use one-time reserve funds to close the deficit this year. But what about down the road? What happens if Iowa's economy hits the skids? Or if lawmakers find they can't squeeze public education budgets more than they have already? Or if the economy doesn't grow as much as they promised and state reserves drain faster than expected? If this constitutional amendment is approved by voters, it will be practically impossible to raise personal or corporate income taxes, even on the wealthy who have benefitted the most from the Republicans' new flat income tax. Which may leave them no alternative but to raise sales and use taxes. The trend here isn't hard to figure out. The state of Iowa is relying more on the taxes that hit low- and middle-income Iowans the hardest, even as they lean less on the tax that has traditionally taken more money from the wealthy. This is a big shift, and saving $2.65 on a year's supply of toilet paper does nothing to change that fact. This column was originally published by Ed Tibbetts' Along the Mississippi newsletter on Substack. It is republished here through the Iowa Writers' Collaborative. Editor's note: Please consider subscribing to the collaborative and the authors' blogs to support their work.
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Iowa Senate committee moves budget bills as negotiations continue
The sky above the Iowa Capitol was crossed by contrails on March 11, 2025. (Photo by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capitol Dispatch) Though an agreement is yet to be reached on state spending for the upcoming fiscal year, the Senate Appropriations Committee moved four bills forward in a Tuesday meeting. Senators passed four budget bills through the appropriations committee Tuesday, making them available for floor debate in the chamber. This does not mean the issues causing budget bills to stall – disagreements in spending between the two chambers and calls by some senators to pass legislation related to eminent domain – have been resolved. The four bills all passed 13-9, with all Democrats and two Republicans, Sens. Sandy Salmon and David Sires, voted against. Other GOP members of the appropriations committee, including Sens. Dave Rowley and Dennis Guth, had signed onto the letter sent to Senate leadership saying they would oppose the passage of budget bills unless pipeline legislation was brought to the floor for debate, but they did not oppose the measures in the committee meeting. Though the bills did not receive full support from the majority party, the Senate spending bills on the state's education, health and human services, judicial, and Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund (RIIF) budgets all passed the committee. The education and HHS appropriations bills — Senate Study Bill 1231 and Senate Study Bill 1237 respectively — are both measures where House Republicans have put forward a different budget target than Senate Republicans. Much of the focus in budget disagreements has been centered on House Republicans' ask for $14 million to continue pay supplements for education support staff, primarily paraeducators, a provision in the House standings bill. Neither the House nor Senate appropriations committees have moved on the standings appropriations bill yet. But there are other areas of disagreement. The House education appropriations bill, House Study Bill 337, includes an $8 million increase for community colleges that is not in the Senate bill. The committee advanced the Senate version of this bill without comments on the funding difference between the two chambers. However, Democrats did criticize the overall lack of funding increases going to the state's higher education system — including community colleges — in the budget bill, saying the spending proposal will lead to cost increases for Iowa families sending students to Iowa colleges and universities. Sen. Cindy Winckler, D-Davenport, said she 'can't think of a time in the history of funding education' that no new funding has gone to the state's regent universities, community colleges and Iowa tuition grants. She said she found the proposal to keep funding for higher education at the same level as the current fiscal year 'disturbing,' as the state's higher education system is critical for meeting the state's workforce needs and improving personal income growth. 'At a time when we have, by your definition, 'plenty of money,' it disturbs me that this particular budget comes with very little increase,' Winckler said. '… It's historic, and you need to be aware of when you vote for this budget, if you do, that you are underfunding the future of Iowans and the workforce. Sen. Jesse Green, R-Boone, said the budget keeps 'steady funding towards higher education.' He also said he was shocked after being elected to the Legislature to learn 'we subsidize college education to the amount that we actually do,' and said the current budget better aligns with Iowa voters' expectations for state spending. 'This year, I'll admit, when I was on the campaign trail, I had a lot of constituents ask to shrink government, literally asked us to shrink government, and here we have a status quo budget,' Green said. 'So … I think this aligns with our targets. I think this aligns with what Iowans are expecting of us at this point in time, they expect us to put more money into their hands than in the government.' Differences over nursing homes, Medicaid The Senate health and human services budget bill also has differences when compared to its House companion, House Study Bill 342. The House version has $9 million more, a total of $25 million, for nursing facility provider reimbursement rate adjustments while the Senate allocated $16 million. Another difference is the inclusion of language stating Iowa's Medicaid program funding 'shall not be used for sex reassignment surgery or treatment related to an individual's gender dysphoria diagnosis.' Blocking Medicaid coverage for transgender Iowans is something the Republican-controlled Legislature has attempted to enact before, but similar measures were struck down in courts. Supporters said this year's provision would be legal as Gov. Kim Reynolds signed into law a measure that removed gender identity as a protected class in the Iowa Civil Rights Act, one of the legal protections cited in court decisions. But Sen. Molly Donahue, D-Marion, said the provision would still be found unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, pointing to the 2021 district court ruling that found a similar law prohibiting Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming care violated state civil rights laws and the Iowa constitution. 'It restricts (Medicaid coverage) based on someone's identity as transgender or non-gender conforming, and that is wrong and unconstitutional under Equal Protection,' Donahue said. The Senate language goes further than previous Iowa laws, as it applies to all medical treatment related to a person's gender dysphoria diagnosis. Keenan Crow, policy and advocacy director at One Iowa, said this provision could prevent transgender Iowans on Medicaid from accessing mental health care or other medical services not related to medically transitioning. Rep. Ann Meyer, R-Fort Dodge, said last week House Republicans support a restriction on Medicaid coverage for sex reassignment surgery and hormone therapy, but would take up language that would not affect mental health care access for individuals with gender dysphoria. The Senate Appropriations Committee did not make or recommend any amendments to the bills passed Tuesday, meaning changes would come on the Senate floor during debate on these or other areas of contention. Sen. Tim Kraayenbrink, R-Fort Dodge, the appropriations committee chair, asked for committee members to be prepared for another meeting to discuss the standings bill and any other remaining legislation as soon as compromises are reached. He said that could be as early as Thursday, but that negotiations could take longer. 'This is always kind of a time we have to be ready and able just to meet when we can meet if we want to try to get out of here as soon as we can,' Kraayenbrink said.
