Coralville Courier

The Latest Scoop On The Coralville Courier

 

 

Sponsor

 

Ben Lange provides FEC with an update

By Mike Thayer

It's amazing what a couple of articles can do....

Back on January 19, I wrote an article about there being a void in Iowa's First Congressional District, that the GOP hopefuls Rod Blum (an announced candidate) and Ben Lange ( in exploratory committee status) were making some mistakes that Republicans just can't afford to make if they hope to defeat liberal incumbent Bruce Braley in November. 

I also noted in that article how Ben Lange, never closed out his 2010 campaign account with the FEC, that he still had some campaign cash on hand from that losing run against Braley.

In a review of the FEC site today, it seems that Lange has now updated the FEC, morphing his 2010 campaign account into the 2012 election cycle.  It's a sure indicator that he plans to run.  He didn't have to do that until January 31, so it's reasonable to conclude that the spotlight placed by yours truly on his recent mistakes - at the very least sloppiness - with FEC rules and regulations prompted him to move forward with the update.

The content on his website still says, "Ben Lange 2012 Exploratory Campaign" even though the url address for the site reads, http://www.langeforcongress.com/, a statement of candidacy.

So does this mean Ben has officially filed as a candiate you ask?

No.  If you click the link, http://www.fec.gov/disclosurehs/HSCandList.do you'll see that his name is not hot-linked like Rod Blum's and Bruce Braley's are, indicating that Lange has not yet filed an FEC Form 1 and FEC Form 2 declaring himself a candidate as well as providing campaign structure information.  

He'll get around to declaring himself a candidate at some point, perhaps after he comes clean about blowing off FEC rules and guidelines clearly distinguishing the differences between testing the waters and outright campaigning.

Related story:  http://coralvillecourier.typepad.com/community/2012/01/vetting-ben-lange-in-iowas-first-district.html

Hey Ben, you're welcome.  It's better that this comes out now, so you can fix the mistakes you've made.  But frankly, you've been there and done that, you're a lawyer, you shouldn't have ignored rules and put yourself into a situation like this in the first place.

The voters in Iowa's First District don't want sloppy candidates, they deserve better.

Vetting Rod Blum in Iowa's First Congressional District

By Mike Thayer

Does Rod Blum have what it takes to win the Republican nomination, let alone take on Bruce Braley in November?

As it stands right now, the answer is no.

The last time I wrote about Blum, it was January 19 and I stated the following:

Rod Blum of Dubuque, Iowa is an announced candidate.  He's got a campaign website, he submitted paperwork with the Federal Election Commission as an official candidate, although the information he filed was inadequate according to the FEC.  Perhaps just a rookie mistake....  The FEC letter requesting more information wanted a response back from Blum by December 28.  He didn't meet that deadline, there is no update from him in the record.   That's a problem.

That problem has since been corrected.  Kudos to Blum.  Paperwork now seems to be squared away so chalk it up to a rookie mistake.

I also wrote that Blum didn't have any campaign cash.  His FEC report displayed a "0" when I checked on January 19, and granted, Blum didn't have to report his financial status until January 31, but he has updated that with the FEC as well.

Blum has since reported generating about $71,000 in campaign cash for the fourth quarter of 2011.  He has some money in the bank, however upon closer review, about $22,000 of that came from his own pocket and another $20,000 from his family.  That's not a good sign and it's only about slightly less than 15 percent of what Bruce Braley has in his campaign warchest, and Blum needs to spend money on a primary race first.

I had the opportunity to meet Rod Blum personally and listen to him speak at a Republican Central Committee meeting in Clayton County on January 26.  He told a nice About Rod Blum story, complete with talking point one-liners like, "I'll term limit myself," and "This bailout stuff has got to stop," and "Everything you hear about the EPA, it's true."  The problem with that is, it all lacked detail.  When pressed on the issues he mentioned during an approximately 20 minute speech and question/answer period, Blum really didn't provide any direct answers beyond expressing his belief.  It's fine to convey a belief in personal responsibility, but people want to know how a candidate is going to address the fraud, waste and abuse that exists in the Food Stamp program for example.  Blum didn't respond well to those kinds of questions, he lacked detail, specifics, a plan of action.  In fact, at one point he even said, "Any candidate that tells you they have a plan, it has zero chance of passing."

Um, Rod, candidates that win in the general election, get assigned to committees after being sworn in.  In committee, they have the chance to put their plans out for review and debate.  If they're not on an appropriate committee to put a particular plan on display, they can still push their plan with other congressmen or they can co-sponsor and/or help write legislation outside their committee assignments.   So to Rod's slam on having a plan comment I would say this, any candidate that doesn't have a plan, has a zero chance of winning!

Blum did have some good Ron Paul-like one-liner moments during his speech.

"A dependent voter is a dependable vote," he said when characterizing Democrat motives and questionable leadership.  That comment was spot on.

Then there's this beauty when talking about illegal immigration:

"If fences don't matter, then why do they have a fence around the White House?" he said, drawing laughter and nods of approval from the audience.

Blum, a businessman, tells a nice story and seems to be a good guy.  But he's going to have to do better when it comes to doing what it takes to finance his campaign and he's going to have to provide much more substance and detail to voters.  Here's a hint:  Doing the latter might help the former. 

Iowa House sheds light on Coralville TIF shenanigans

Kudos to Charlotte Walker for forwarding the following information and link.  After reading the story, be sure to click the three informational links at the bottom of the page.

Government Oversight-Coralville use of TIF Funds

Coralville City Administrator Kelly Hayworth was brought before the House Government Oversight committee last Thursday. The committee members raised questions regarding the way the city is using tax increment financing in its Iowa River Landing commercial development.

Retail growth in Coralville has exponentially grown since the city began using TIF in 1998 to develop land that is now Coral Ridge Mall. The city has borrowed over $200 million in bonds to be repaid by tax increment financing

Read On.....  http://www.iowahouserepublicans.com/government-oversight-coralville-use-of-tif-funds#more-11622

Documents presented to the committee:

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/DOCS/LSA/SC_MaterialsDist/2012/SDMAS001.PDF

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/DOCS/LSA/SC_MaterialsDist/2012/SDMAS003.PDF

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/DOCS/LSA/SC_MaterialsDist/2012/SDMAS004.PDF

 

Ben Lange shouldn't listen to Chris Reed

You have to wonder how smart a congressional candidate is, if he's accepting the advice of Chris Reed. ~ Mike Thayer

An exclusive Sick Of Spin Video: Vetting Ben Lange in Iowa's First District

By Mike Thayer

If Ben Lange - a lawyer from Independence and potential Congressional candidate - can't handle a political blogger from Coralville, how is he going to deal with reporters in Washington D.C.? 

First District voters need to ask if their signatures on the nomination petitions Ben Lange put out on Caucus night are any good now, because he wasn't at the time an officially declared Congressional candidate.  The whole process might have to be done over again.  Lange is a lawyer, he's been there and done the congressional race thing.  It looks like he wasted voter efforts and not to mention volunteer efforts by blowing off FEC rules.  The First District deserves better.

Related story:  http://coralvillecourier.typepad.com/community/2012/01/a-filing-deadline-has-passed-are-congressional-candidates-rod-blum-and-ben-lange-violating-the-law.html 

Related story:  http://coralvillecourier.typepad.com/community/2012/01/a-decision-that-was-only-to-take-a-few-weeks-turns-to-more-than-3-months-for-ben-lange.html

Related story:  http://coralvillecourier.typepad.com/community/2012/01/another-sloppy-ben-lange-mistake.html

The importance of properly vetting political candidates

By Mike Thayer

So what does vetting actually mean exactly? 

The term comes from horse racing, the act of a veterinarian examining horses, making sure they are healthy enough to run a race. The job of the veterinarian isn't just about checking the general condition of the horse either.  It goes deeper than that.  The veterinarian also evaluates for illegal substances and assesses risk.  A veterinarian can scratch a horse from the race.

A political race is really no different than a horse race.  Consider the primary season, where political parties go through the process of determining their nominee for a governor race, a senate seat, the presidency.  Candidates are the horses, that's obvious, so who are the veterinarians?  Party activists.   For the most part, the party faithful examine the horses, to see if they're healthy enough to run.  Activists evaluate risk, review backgrounds, analyze flaws and assess the lies.  Party activists, scratch horses from the race.

That's what's supposed to happen anyway.  The final act of that party activism is voting and it's a duty that must be taken seriously.  Unfortunately not enough people do so.    Another problem:  Of those people that do vote, they aren't as informed as they need to be - many, are not even close to being properly informed.  In other words, we don't have enough veterinarians evaluating horses and of those veterinarians checking out horses, some of them don't know enough to be good pet owners, let alone be assessors of political health.   

I can't stress enough the importance of really knowing everything possible about a candidate, that the truth must be told about every candidate.  It doesn't matter if it's for the position of dog catcher or president.  In order to make a truly informed vote, everything possible must be learned about a candidate.  We can't ignore anything, it must all be looked at.  Why do you think we have the current problems we have at all levels of government?  Because far to many veterinarians, er, party activists don't do thorough evaluations.  What a shiny coat, or, he seems to be the most electable simply isn't good enough.  That's like saying, that horse looks fast.  You need to KNOW, a vote is too important to be guessing at.   

To me, properly vetting a political candidate is a more important duty than the vote.  The vote is the part where the doctor is putting the stethoscope away.    The important part is when the stethoscope and the gloves are put on, not taken off, the important part is in the examination, determining the truth.....  The vetting.

People who don't care to be real activists and just cast a vote in the name of participating in the political process are nothing more than casual fans placing bets at the horse track.  That's a description for the general election to be sure.  And I'm only writing what many of you are already thinking when I state; I'd rather not have uninformed people casting votes. 

John McCain anyone?    

Ladies and gentlemen we can no longer afford to treat the political arena like a horse track.   I'll ask again, why do you think we have the current problems we have at all levels of government?  Because too many people aren't taking the job of voting, seriously enough.  We're not examining the candidates as intensely as we should be, we're not demanding details and more importantly the truth.  It's not enough to hear a candidate say they are for or against something.  We need to know what a candidate's plan is to fix a problem.  We need to hear a candidate's actual proposal to take something that's working for people and expand on it.   It's not enough to hear a candidate say they believe in the American Dream, we need to hear what their plan of action is for maintaining it!  Mr. Candidate, you have a nice looking family, but this isn't a photo op, I respectfully don't want stories about how Democrats have straddled your kids with debt.  We all know that already.   I want details, plans of action.  You say you want to lower the nation's debt and that sounds great, but just how are you going to go about doing that?  Cut spending?  How exactly?  Get with peers and form a coalition?  Use the media and voter pressure against opposition to persuade?  Negotiate an exchange of some kind?  What?  All I hear are shallow talking points, give us details please.

When a candidate doesn't answer our questions with a straight forward and direct answer, we need to put the rubber gloves on.  I know that's not a pretty visual, but if we're to truly examine candidates, it MUST be done.  Otherwise, we'll find ourselves stuck at the track, watching the same old horses, placing the same losing bets.  We need to ask candidates tough, probing questions, give them a thorough examination.

Put the rubber gloves on, it's the only way to get better government.

Gallup: Gingrich maintaining grip on new lead

Newt Gingrich is now the candidate of choice for 32% of Republican voters nationwide, his highest level of support this year. The 24% supporting Mitt Romney is his lowest.

Read more at GALLUP.com.

Warren Buffett hypocrisy

"Warren Buffett says the criticism of his secretary is 'ridiculous,' and he wants everybody to leave her alone.  Well, who brought her up?  Who put her up there in the gallery next to Moochelle Obama during the State of the Union rally?  Warren Buffett and Barack Obama!" - Rush Limbaugh

Will Peyton Manning play again?

NFL.com writer Pat Kirwan joins Tim Brando to discuss Jim Irsay's reaction to Peyton's recent interview. Tune in as Kirwan also shares his thoughts on whether Peyton will be able to play again.

Iowans For Tax Relief: Governor Announces Efficiencies

This week Governor Branstad announced $50 million in efficiencies from the Department of Transportation. These efficiencies were originated to help cover the shortfall for road repairs. It is important to note that $33 million of the $50 million in efficiencies will be annual savings and only $17 million will be one time. Iowans for Tax Relief applauds the Governor and the Department of Transportation for working towards these savings, but we are disappointed by legislators that continue to push for a gas tax increase on all Iowans.

Despite the new found savings, Senator Rielly, D-Oskaloosa announced that he would be moving forward with a bill, in the Senate Transportation Committee, to raise the gas tax by 8 to 10 cents. This is more disappointing when considering that the Director of the Department of Transportation, Paul Trombino, stated in a House Transportation committee meeting on Thursday that, “our primary road system is functioning well”.

ITR still believes that this is the absolutely wrong time to raise the gas tax on Iowans, especially, by such a significant amount. We continue to urge legislators to consider the economic consequences such an increase would have on border communities and many hardworking Iowa families.

ITR encourages you to email your legislators to ask them not to raise the gas tax. You can find their e-mail addresses by going to ITR’s Legislator Lookup feature at: http://www.taxrelief.org/legislators.