Democrat Bonding Proposal Gives 11 Member Board Total Control Over Funds

Monday, March 23, 2009, 4:30
Iowa, Top Story
1,100 views
19 comments

capitol Governor Culver and Democrat Leaders in the House and Senate say they are close to finding a compromise between their bonding proposals. Both plans call for the state to borrow at least $700 million dollars, but that’s where the similarities end.

Legislative Democrats want to use the bulk of money to pay for flood-related projects, while Culver wants to use some of the money to improve Iowa’s roads and bridges. Republicans, on the other hand, are united in their opposition to both proposals saying that the proposals do little to create jobs, and they saddle future generations of Iowans with massive amounts of debt.

Most of the debate on the bonding proposals has been philosophical thus far. The first phase, $175 million for existing projects, has already passed in the Senate. While there has been strong objection by Republicans to borrowing money for projects like bike trails and highway fences, there hasn’t been much discussion about the projects that Culver and the Democrats have in mind.

TheIowaRepublican.com has obtained a list of projects that was generated by the Iowa Department of Economic Development. It is a survey they sent out to cities, counties, schools, and colleges. The Governor’s office is quick to say that this is only an example of the infrastructure needs in the state, not an official endorsement.

Governor Culver is recommending an eleven-member board to develop rules, review applications, and make grant decisions for other projects. Of the eleven members, five will be members of the public who will provide state-wide representation, and the other six will be directors of various state agencies.

This means that legislators are only being asked to sign off on the state going $750 million dollars into debt. Once they make that decision, they have to trust that the money will be used wisely.

Republicans have good reason to be suspicious of the proposal. Included on the Iowa Department of Economic Development’s list is:

• Tower of Invincibility for Maharishi Vedic City.
• New club house for the Grandview Golf Course in Des Moines.
• The Iowa Transportation Museum in Grinnell.
• Furniture/fixtures/furnishings for the bar at Golf Course in Le Mars.
• Two bronze John Bloom sculptures in DeWitt.
• Synthetic football field for Buena Vista University.

The list is 454 pages long and contains 3834 different project, of which only 410, or 11% of the projects are disaster related. The list is littered with swimming pools, nature trails, picnic shelters, and sidewalks.

If we as a state are going to go in to debt to the tune of $750 million, we better make sure it actually creates permanent, well paying jobs, not temporary construction jobs.

Another aspect of the bill that deserves debate is that it takes local control over infrastructure needs out of the hands of the people and gives it to an eleven member board. So, not only are our legislators only involved in giving the green light to borrow the money, the local taxpayer has no say in whether or not a project is actually needed or not.

There are 292 school projects on the list. Why should a panel of eleven people decide if a school project moves forward or not? Why should someone living in Scott County be asked to pay for a new school for Center Point-Urbana. And furthermore, local option sales taxes were supposed to be used to for local school maintenance and infrastructure, not state-wide bonding.

Governor Culver and legislative Democrats like to talk about how many jobs this $750 million will create. Yesterday, an economics professor at Iowa State University told the Des Moines Register that Culver’s proposal would likely only create 4000 jobs, far less than the 21,000 Culver had estimated.

If the goal of this proposal is to create jobs, then we need to be looking at projects that will create jobs after the initial building process, instead of just looking at the jobs that will be created to construct the projects themselves. Where are the big ideas? Where are the visionaries? As it stands in its current form, this program is nothing but a compilation of government wish lists. There is nothing in the proposal that will create jobs, save rural communities, or keep our college graduates in the state.

This is just another massive pork project that is about to be passed under the guise of flood relief, jobs, and economic stimulus.

Tags: Bonding, Culver, Debt, Gronstal, Murphy

About the Author

Craig Robinson has written 454 stories on this site.

Craig Robinson serves as the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheIowaRepublican.com. Prior to founding Iowa's largest conservative news site, Robinson served as the Political Director of the Republican Party of Iowa during the 2008 Iowa Caucuses. In that capacity, Robinson planned and organized the largest political event in 2007, the Iowa Straw Poll, in Ames, Iowa. Robinson also organized the 2008 Republican caucuses in Iowa, and was later dispatched to Nevada to help with the caucuses there. Robinson cut his teeth in Iowa politics during the 2000 caucus campaign of businessman Steve Forbes and has been involved with most major campaigns in the state since then. His extensive political background and rolodex give him a unique perspective from which to monitor the political pulse of Iowa.

19 Comments on “Democrat Bonding Proposal Gives 11 Member Board Total Control Over Funds”

Williiam wrote on 23 March, 2009, 5:29
This is amazing. We have RIO, the office which can’t quite shoot straight.

What will this be, PIO, the Pork Investment Office?
wayne Judkins wrote on 23 March, 2009, 8:13
Evil Republicans! How can you be against a Tower of Invincibility! You should be ashamed of yourselves! And what’s wrong with artificial turf? Other than the fact that it’s tougher on the joints, causes more injuries (how did Barry Sanders make it so long on that stuff?)..But I digress. Clearly, invincibility is worth pennies per day. I can hear the ad now. “Republicans don’t want Iowans to be invincible.” ugh…
Peggy wrote on 23 March, 2009, 8:16
WHO is on the eleven member board?
Craig Robinson wrote on 23 March, 2009, 8:37
Directors of the
Iowa Finance Authority
Department of Economic Development
Department of Transportation,
Iowa Workforce Development
Rebuild Iowa Office
Office of Energy Independence
Anonymous wrote on 23 March, 2009, 8:48
This is absolutely pathetic. What is wrong with ANY elected leader no matter what party that endorses this crap?
Peggy wrote on 23 March, 2009, 8:59
To maintain the integrity of this site, ‘anonymous’ posters should be banned. Let them use a fake name but not ‘anonymous.’ When the discussion gets heated, numerous ‘anonymous’ posters drag down the exchange and will keep me from visiting the site.
steve right wrote on 23 March, 2009, 9:05
Peggy speaks the truth.
Iowa Cynic wrote on 23 March, 2009, 9:09
“The list is 454 pages long and contains 3834 different project, of which only 410, or 11% of the projects are disaster related. The list is littered with swimming pools, nature trails, picnic shelters, and sidewalks.”

This is huge. This is Culver’s Katrina and this is how you beat him. Some Republicans are going to have a problem associating Bush with any kind of failure (especially the kind of people who make decisions in the party), but the truth is that everyone capable of original thought knows Katrina was two disasters: the hurricane, and then the government response. The 2008 floods are shaping up to be a similar one-two punch for Iowa.

The GOP needs to be out there drawing attention to the ongoing struggles in CR and IC, and to the barely-token level concern on display in Des Moines. Culver’s sub-50 approval ratings could plunge even further, especially in Eastern Iowa. We need to prove the Culver is actually vulnerable so the GOP can get a legitimate candidate to challenge him (Sorry Bob, it ain’t you).
Making Peggy Happy wrote on 23 March, 2009, 9:36
What you wrote is assinine.
wayne Judkins wrote on 23 March, 2009, 9:40
Peggy, not to start a feud, but first, who are you referring to and secondly, it’s spelled asinine. Sort of hurts your cause when you misspell. Again, no harm meant! hate to be called a name in a blog. I am interested in to whom you refer?
wayne Judkins wrote on 23 March, 2009, 9:41
Oh, I get it you must be mr. anonymous! Now I got it. Slow morning.
Making Peggy Happy wrote on 23 March, 2009, 9:45
Wayne tanks fer korecting mi speling. dont u capitalise the “w” en yer firs namee? gro UP
wayne Judkins wrote on 23 March, 2009, 10:10
i don’t think MPH gets irony. My most heartfelt apologies, and I shall take my daily multivitamin and work on growing.
Paul Duke wrote on 23 March, 2009, 11:13
So have any Republicans issued comment on this massive pork list? It is embarassing to read through.
Darren wrote on 23 March, 2009, 11:40
This list is beyond stupid. Republicans need to be taking out full page ads with this nonsense.

What more evidence do we need that Democrats are out of control both in Iowa and DC.

Unbelievable!!!!!!!!
Darren wrote on 23 March, 2009, 11:41
That Democrat whack job who thinks he’s entitled to other people’s money is the poster boy for today’s Democrats. They’re all nuts!!!!!!
I can think of some really nice projects for my church, too. How ’bout it? If we can fund the kooks in Fairfield, we can fund my church.
Paulie Walnuts wrote on 23 March, 2009, 14:57
How do I get a piece of the action? Do I call Tom Slater or what?
BHO's Teleprompter wrote on 23 March, 2009, 18:18
“You can spend your way to prosperity, brother Culver.”
Todd Versteegh wrote on 23 March, 2009, 21:32
Wow..I thought these were supposed to be “public infrastructure” projects…

I would hardly call a “Tower of Invincibility” or paying for projects at PRIVATE educational institutions such as Grand View and Buena Vista “public infrastructure”.

Basically what we have here now is Iowa’s own version of the porkulus bill. Except Iowans wont have a say in how the money gets spent. An unelected, unaccountable group of Chet’s nominees will get to decide how to spend our taxpayer dollars.