The conservative Democrat from Altoona was traveling out of state Friday and missed the vote, making her the only Democrat still technically undecided. She is expected by most observers to cast a “no” vote, but the possibility remains that Huser could still defy expectations and become the 51st vote in favor of prevailing wage.

Huser was one of three legislative Democrats who faced a primary in 2008.  She easily defeated Matt Ballard, a Teamsters leader whose campaign was based almost entirely on Huser’s opposition to union legislation. She was unopposed in the general election.

She also ran unopposed in 2006, and, in 2004, she won the general election with more than 60 percent of the vote. Since her district could be considered safe, she could have the political cover necessary to change her mind and support the prevailing wage measure.

Huser has been a vocal critic of so-called “Fair Share” legislation, which would allow unions to negotiate to collect fees in lieu of membership dues from employees covered by collective bargaining but who don’t belong to the union.  In general, she is seen as a conservative, pro-business Democrat.

But last year, she voted in favor of the labor-backed collective-bargaining legislation that passed by a razor-thin margin and was ultimately vetoed by Gov. Chet Culver.  So Huser’s record on labor issues is not completely one-sided.

Prevailing wage, which would set minimum pay and benefit standards for workers of public projects, is one of the most contentious measures lawmakers have considered so far this year, but it was thought to be somewhat less contentious than other labor bills that have been discussed in the context of this year’s session.

Debate on the bill stretched out over five hours Friday. Democratic Rep. McKinley Bailey was expected to be the 51st vote, but an amendment he sought was not included in the legislation, so he voted no and abruptly left the statehouse.

Huser, who was stripped of her position as chair of a committee before the 2009 session began, has already expressed opposition to the prevailing wage bill, but she is sure to garner a lot of attention over the weekend from Democratic leaders seeking a way out of what’s shaping up to be an embarrassing loss.

Sources inside the Register’s newsroom confirmed to the Iowa Independent that the layoffs will affect “The Newspaper Iowa Depends Upon,” although no details are available at this time.

“People are upset because they are planning the layoffs right before Christmas,” one employee said. “They should just go ahead and get it over with so people won’t have to worry about it for the next two months.”

Since August, Gannett has eliminated 1,000 jobs at its 84 daily newspapers. Register Editor Carolyn Washburn told the staff layoffs were coming at the beginning of August, and by Aug. 19 several veterans of the newsroom were either let go or accepted buyout packages. However, most were well aware that unless Gannett’s financial situation improved dramatically, more job cuts were a foregone conclusion.

Gannett announced Friday that its third-quarter profits fell 32 percent as advertising revenue declined.

Below is the memo from Gannett Newspaper Division President Bob Dickey, first posted by Jim Hopkins at Gannett Blog:

To: [U.S. Community Publishing newspaper division] Publishers & General Managers

As all of you are painfully aware, the fiscal crisis is deepening and the economy is getting worse. Gannett’s revenues continue to be severely impacted by this downturn, and our local operations are suffering. While we are doing our best to reduce all non staff-related expenses, I am sorry to report that we must do another round of layoffs across our division.

To that end, we will institute an involuntary staff reduction of approximately 10% by the first week of December. The terms of the severance will be one week for each year of service with a cap of 26 weeks.

Each publisher is responsible for developing their local plan to achieve the expected goal. Decisions will be made locally because each of our markets is unique, with differing market conditions and individual needs in light of our previous reductions.

I have asked that all plans be completed by Nov. 14 at which time they will go through the standard review process.

I fully understand this announcement will cause you concern but I felt that once a decision was made it should be communicated as quickly as possible.

While this is more bad news, it is a sign of Gannett’s determination to remain healthy and viable as a company during these turbulent economic times. We continue to be a leader in our industry, not only because of our fiscal strength but also because we have a plan to aggressively grow the company when the economy returns.

To that end, I encourage you to contact me with your thoughts and ideas. We need to grow revenue as well as continue to find efficiencies. I would appreciate your help and ideas on both fronts.

My e-mail address is rdickey@gannett.com. I promise you will be heard and receive a timely response.

I appreciate your understanding and commitment during these challenging times.

Thank you.

Sarah Palin

For the past 18 months the nation has had opportunity to discuss and confront a myriad of issues: Infrastructure deficiencies, the Iraq war, treatment of veterans, energy independence, government corruption, the continued conflict in Afghanistan, education, the national deficit, immigration, health care and, yes, even society’s perception of race and gender. Conversations on these topics, however vital they may be to the nation, do not easily lend themselves to the marketing jargon and quick quips that have become the hallmarks of today’s Republican Party.

It should come as no surprise then, when even the most staunch within the GOP are finding it difficult to be inspired by the party’s candidate for our nation’s highest office, that Arizona Sen. John McCain would reach out and tap an individual with a personal story loud enough to drown out the collapse of interstate bridges.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a former beauty queen, sports journalist, city councilor and mayor, is the mother of five children. She has three daughters: Bristol, 17, Willow, 13, and Piper, 7. She also has two sons. Her eldest son, Track, joined the Army last fall. Her youngest son, Trig, was born this past April and has Down Syndrome.

As Iowans saw when Rep. Janet Petersen took time off this spring to give birth to her son, conservatives aren’t always tickled when a female public servant takes time away from her duties to give birth. In Palin’s case, however, there was a reason to celebrate the otherwise termed “dereliction of duty.” While speaking with Michael Baggot of LifeSiteNews.com, Palin described her newborn as a “gift.”

“We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives. We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed.”

I’ve no doubt she and her entire family have been and will be blessed by their new member. I’ve also no doubt that her choice to carry this child to term played heavily in the vice-presidential selection process — something that saddens me and should sadden us all.

Standing alone McCain had little hope of winning the emotional support and excitement of social conservatives. Standing with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, McCain’s own short-comings would have been highlighted. While Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty definitely brought a strong anti-abortion stance to the ticket, but he, like McCain, lacked the ability to pull the heart strings of social conservatives and make them want to support McCain. Palin, as a woman with a compelling personal story, can provide McCain what no other individual could. Even at the cost of lowering the national conversation once again into divisive politics… even while publicly proclaiming his desire for armed conflict to continue for 100 years… McCain has gladly and gleefully grasped Palin’s “pro-life” credentials as a last resort to motivate the previous supporters of Pres. George W. Bush to head to the polls in November.

Looking past November and at Palin’s record in relation to government corruption, however, it’s difficult to know the role she will play if she and McCain meet with success in the general election. In many ways, she is the true maverick, having bucked Alaska GOP leaders to take on incumbent and fellow Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski in a heated primary. Then rising above the monetary to defeat former Democratic Gov. Tony Knowles in the general election to become not only Alaska’s first female governor, but the youngest governor in the state’s history.

She has built her administration on the foundation of old-time GOP values such as fiscal responsibility and limited government. While Republicans in the beltway have dived further under the covers with their big oil partners, her administration is noted for seeking independence from such interests. While Republicans in the beltway are linked to lobbyists like Jack Abramoff, Palin sold a jet purchased on a state government credit account on eBay for $2.7 million.

Although she is currently embroiled in a legislative probe as to whether she abused the power of her gubernatorial office — a probe not expected to be completed until after the November general election, it’s worth noting that McCain, in his lust to entice social conservatives, may have neglected to consider the ramifications of bringing someone so well known for unearthing government corruption into a White House so recently vacated by the Bush administration.

The same developer is also planning a 29,000-square-foot strip mall to the west of the Supercenter complex.

An earlier piece in Iowa Independent examined how other retailers are adapting in Carroll, a community of 10,000 people that serves as the retail hub for a huge swath of west central Iowa.

Jeff Dozier, vice president of retail development for Kansas City, Mo.-based Kessinger/Hunter & Company, said he’s working with the popular home-improvement chain on the potential size for the Carroll store. Company officials have been to Carroll.

“They’ve been to the market twice, and they like it,” Dozier said.

Dozier is part of Carroll 30 Investors, a collection of people from Kansas City that owns the nearly 13 acres east of the Supercenter — an area known as Westfield Plaza. Carroll 30 Investors is simultaneously involved in discussions to locate the strip mall, which would have two large users and several smaller businesses, Dozier said.

“The only thing I can say is we are talking clothing, office supplies, shoes and restaurants,” Dozier said.

Dozier said he didn’t want to jeopardize any deals by prematurely releasing names of potential tenants, but he said all of the discussions have involved well-known national chains — and he emphasized that his development group plans to have more than one restaurant in the complex.

He said the strip mall could be open next spring. Carroll 30 Investors owns 2 acres to the west of Wal-Mart and is ironing out arrangements for the purchase of another 5 acres on that side of the retail giant.

In March, Wal-Mart held a grand opening for its 143,000-square-foot Supercenter at 2014 Kittyhawk Ave. The former store in the central business district is being redeveloped by Badding Construction of Carroll.

Dozier said the Carroll area holds great possibility. Market research and other factors have prompted Dozier and his associates to laser in on home improvement.
Dozier did not offer the name of the company with which he is negotiating.

But he did say it is not Menards. What’s more, Dozier was involved with developing a 94,000-square-foot Lowe’s in Chillicothe, Mo., a city of 9,000 people with similar regional retail pull to Carroll. The Chillicothe Lowe’s opened in 2006 about a block away from a Wal-Mart Supercenter.

Through the Kessinger/Hunter database of companies, Dozier and his associates have made some form of contact with more than 200 businesses about coming to Carroll.
He said those contacts involved mass e-mails, cold calls, marketing and the tapping of personal business connections developed over the years.

“Carroll’s a wonderful city, and I think any retail will do well,” Dozier said.

As I was reading the Iowa Independent commentary by my colleague Douglas Burns, “How to Hit College Campuses with All the Right Moves,” I found myself nodding at most of what he had to say. That is, until I got to point No. 7:

Women should always travel with friends to parties.

On the college-campus party landscape, women can be in an especially vulnerable position. This goes for universities and small colleges alike.

If you doubt this, ask the directors at the women’s centers on campuses how many calls they get each year about date rapes.

When a young woman leaves her group of friends and goes it alone at a fraternity party, a dorm bash or an off-campus gathering, she is at the greatest risk of becoming a victim.

Remember, perpetrators generally aren’t the guys who pop out from behind trees in the night. They are friends or acquaintances.

While I find no fault with instructing young people to travel in groups or with a buddy, I do think it is unfair to only hold females to this standard of safety. It implies that women are unable to protect themselves. It implies that freedom, at least if you are female, has consequences. Far worse still, it implies that women who do choose to go stag are somehow “asking for it” because — let’s face it — women have been warned.

Those men, even those you know, can’t be to blame for their actions if you are alone at a party. (God forbid that a woman should be both alone at a party and wearing make-up or perfume!) This is presumably because men are entirely unable to control themselves. It is just as your dear old abstinence-only educator taught you: women must have enough control for both genders.

If I could give Burns and other like-minded people a gift it would be for them to be able to visit a domestic violence shelter and have the residents speak openly and honestly to them. Most who have never been subjected to that type of situation often think of it in terms of violence. We imagine the hitting, the raping, the kicking, the injuries. But the really deep stuff isn’t typically what can be seen. It’s the stuff that is carried inside — fear and guilt of the same type, but on a much larger scale, than what Burns is advocating with his well-meant advice.

One of the most poignant things I’ve read this year is “Beyond Rape,” the first-hand account by journalist Joanna Connors. It details not only the rape she suffered 20-some years ago, but her reaction and embodiment of it. For more than two decades she believed it was her private burden, but acknowledges that it became little more than a “genetic disease” that she probably passed on to her children.

There are some of us — myself included — who have had trauma so great in our lives that we cannot help but to pass some of the fear, guilt and anger to our children. My children will never have opportunity to escape their brother’s death. Because I’m afraid, they will never know a carefree mom who allows them to circle the block alone on their bicycle. Only time will tell how many generations of my family will feel the breeze from the butterfly wings that were fluttered nearly 10 years ago.

A great song that describes the concept of passing fear and self-blame to subsequent generations is “Because of You,” sung by Reba McEntire and Kelly Clarkson:

Because of you I never stray too far from the sidewalk.
Because of you I learned to play on the safe side so I don’t get hurt.
Because of you I find it hard to trust not only me, but everyone around me.
Because of you I am afraid.

My oldest daughter will begin her junior year in high school this fall. In just two short years I will watch, with much more fear than should be allotted any one mother, as she takes her final few steps toward independence. Neither she nor I can escape the fear that has already been placed in our hearts because of a family member who died too soon. But both she and I — as well as all the other women in the world — can stop this dreadful practice of self-doubt and self-blame.

Women don’t make men rape them. Women don’t “ask for it” by the way they dress, going alone to parties, having breasts or vaginas, parking in dark areas, carrying condoms or wearing make-up.

Just like all other members of society, we do our best to protect ourselves. If we do fall victim to some nefarious person, we must always remember — in spite of the multitude of friendly advice we’ve been given — that the blame lies solely on the back of those who would harm others.

Merle Wilberding, a 1962 St. Bernard (Breda) Catholic School graduate and a son of a Carroll County farmer who worked for the Breda Grain Company, is the attorney for Mary Lauterbach, the mother of Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach, the slain female Marine found buried in North Carolina last month.

Wilberding, 64, has appeared on the “Today Show” with Matt Lauer, taped a segment for “Dateline” and represented the family in other high-profile media venues.

With its chilling elements, Lance Cpl. Lauterbach’s case has generated a swirl of media attention around the world.

“This case caught the nation’s attention when it broke in a way few cases have,” Wilberding told Iowa Independent in a phone interview from his home in Dayton, Ohio.

Maria Lauterbach’s  body – and that of her unborn baby – were found near the home of Cpl. Cesar Laurean, the main suspect in the case.

Laurean, who was accused of a May 2007 rape of Lauterbach, is believed to be on the run in his native Mexico with an international manhunt on his scent.

“He’s clearly still at large and the general belief is he’s still in Mexico,” Wilberding  said.

Does he think Laurean did it?

“She was buried in his backyard,” Wilberding said.

He also thinks the alleged rape resulted in the pregnancy.

“Yeah, that’s how she got the baby,” Wilberding said.

Living in Ohio near the Lauterbachs, Wilberding was familiar with the family before the murder. When the case generated so much ink and airtime, Mary Lauterbach looked to him as an attorney.

“The real reason was that when all this broke she was overwhelmed and friends urged her to have a lawyer,” Wilberding.

A major reason for his role in the case is Wilberding’s experience with the military in sensitive, closely watched cases with major social implications. A generation ago, Wilberding served as a military attorney in the infamous trials surrounding the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War.

That case is very much on his mind now.

Wilberding, who earned his law degree from Notre Dame University, wrote the cover story this month for Vietnam magazine on the 40th anniversary of My Lai on March 16, 1968.

  “One of the rifle platoons of Charlie Company was led by Lt. William L. Calley who swept through the My Lai 4 subhamlet and, according to the testimony at his court-martial, gathered together hundreds of old men, women and children – perhaps as many as 500 – and then systematically massacred them,” Wilberding said.

Calley was charged and subsequently convicted by a general court-martial board. 

As a young Army Judge Advocate General captain, Wilberding was assigned the responsibility to represent the government in  Calley’s appeal of his conviction. Wilberding briefed and argued the case before the military appellate courts with the eyes of the nation on it.

Calley’s life sentence was later reduced. He lived under house arrest in Fort Benning, Ga., and then served four months at Fort Leavenworth before being paroled by the Army. Today he manages a jewelry store in Georgia that he inherited from his father.

Wilberding said he has not spoken to Calley since the trial.

Wilberding said the lessons of My Lai are relevant today.

“There is an enduring risk that one or more incidents like My Lai will recur in other `nonconventional’ wars,” Wilberding writes in the Vietnam magazine article.

He referenced the Abu Ghraib prison abuse cases in Iraq as one episode that has been compared to My  Lai.

“The need for discipline in the military must be tempered with more effective training on the absolute obligation to protect both non-combatants and combatants who are no longer a danger and completely under control,” Wilberding said.

Like My Lai, the Lauterbach case also involves a breakdown in military order, he said.
Wilberding, who told Iowa Independent that suing the Marines is a “difficult proposition,” said the military could have done more to protect Lauterbach after she made the rape charge – chiefly separating the duties of the two Marines as the investigation proceeded.

“Yeah, clearly I think they could have done things to protect her,” Wilberding said.

Since he has been a visible advocate for Lauterbach, and by extension, women serving in the U.S. military, Wilberding said he’s been contacted by many parents of females in the services – and women in uniform themselves.

One parent told him, “The only difference is my daughter hasn’t been murdered yet.”

They see parallels with the Lauterbach case and their own experiences in the military, a culture Wilberding said that has not fully accepted women.

“I don’t think they (the military) have been fully able to absorb the cultural aspects,” Wilberding said.

After graduating from St. Bernard’s High School in Breda, Wilberding earned a bachelor’s degree from St. Mary’s University (Minnesota), and then his law degree from Notre Dame.

He has practiced law for the past 35 years in Dayton, Ohio, at Coolidge Wall, LPA, a law firm of more than 40 lawyers.  He has authored four books and a large number of law review and general interest articles.

(Photos: (Top) As a young Army JAG captain, Merle Wilberding was assigned the responsibility to represent the Government in Lt. Calley’s appeal of his conviction in the infamous My Lai massacre.  Merle Wilberding briefed and argued the case before the military appellate courts.  Those arguments were memorialized in a series of courtroom sketches that appeared in a report by Bob Schieffer  on the CBS Evening News on Dec. 4, 1972.  After his own discharge, Merle Wilberding acquired one of those original courtroom sketches and is seen standing beside it in the accompanying photograph. Today, Wilberding is the attorney for the family of a slain female Marine whose suspected killer is reportedly on the run in Mexico. (Middle) Maria Lauterbach. (Bottom) Cover of Vietnam magazine.)

As Pettengill herself noted in a Des Moines Register article a month ago, “I don’t fit in either place, really.” At that time she indicated if she switched it would probably be to independent. If her voting record in the state legislature is any indication, she’s wrong about not fitting with the Democratic Party. Her record shows her squarely in the middle on many key issues as outlined in the party’s platform (and in direct opposition of many on the other side of the aisle).

In looking at Pettengill?s 2006 voting record on issues key to labor, she scores high. Seventy-five percent of the time she and the Iowa Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO took the same position. (Voting record comparison at end of post)

There were 49 Democratic members of the Iowa House of Representatives during the 81st General Assembly. Rep. Ray Zirkelbach was excused for active military duty which left 48 on the Democratic side of the aisle.

If the 48 representatives were lined up, those with the highest percentage of votes aligning with labor to the lowest, Pettengill would be tied for number 19. Fourteen other members of the Democratic caucus had lower percentages than Pettengill. In contrast, four Republicans tied for their caucus’s highest percentage of labor agreement with 25 percent.

Likewise, when looking at GLBT issues this session, Pettengill received a grade of B (Pro-Gay). She voted with this constituency on three out of five issues.

Again, in contrast, 33 members (72 percent) of the Republican Caucus received an F- as their grade.

Pettengill voted with the Iowa ACLU 50 percent of the time this session while the best a member of the Republican Caucus could muster was 30 percent. The votes were on such issues as the separation of church and state; employee rights; voting rights; and due process.

The Association of Business and Industry shows during this session Pettengill only agreed with business interests 25 percent of the time. Eleven other Democratic representatives scored higher than she did. The lowest any Republican scored was 83 percent.

If we backtrack to the previous session, she scores a bit better with 33 percent. Still 24 other Democratic representatives scored that or better. The lowest score grabbed by a member of the GOP? Sixty-six percent.

During the 81st General Assembly, Pettengill sponsored 66 pieces of legislation. They ranged from mandated coverage for mental health conditions to increasing the state minimum wage to restriction of the viewing and sale of sexual devices.

Her 44 pieces of sponsored legislation in the 82nd have included a minimum wage hike and Sudan divestment.

In addition, her web site lists several items she dubs “accomplishments.” In addition to her appointment to the Elder Affairs Commission in 2005, she lists being named as “2006 Legislator of the Year” by the Heritage Agency on Aging and her 2006 endorsements from AFSCME, AFL/CIO, ISEA, Hawkeye Labor Foundation, Iowa Farm Bureau, Agribusiness Association and Iowa PACE. We could locate no members of the GOP Caucus who touted endorsements from these major labor organizations.

It is unclear if Pettengill’s switch indicates these votes, or a portion of these votes, are out of sync with the wishes of her constituents back home. It is also unclear at this time how the Republican Caucus, which has not had a member of the same ilk as Pettengill, is going to react to her more liberal leanings. Attempts were made to reach Pettengill for comment on these discrepancies without success.

Pettengill Votes vs Labor Initiatives 2006

• HF 2045 (Social Security/Pension Tax Cut) ? would have eliminated state tax on social security and pension income and exempted incomes under $48,000 per year for persons over age 65 from income tax.
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was against
    • House vote was 81 to 18 in favor of the bill. It later died in Senate Committee
• SF 2408 (Senior Tax Cut) ? phased out state tax on social security over eight years and eliminated income tax for seniors over age 65 who made less than $24,000 (singles) or $32,000 (other), cut state revenues by $120 million when fully implemented.
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was against
    • House vote was 89 to 6, passing the bill
• SF 2409 (Tax Credit for Tuition Donations) ? allowed a tax credit for donations to mostly private school tuition organizations to fund scholarships or vouchers.
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was against
    • House vote was 75 to 19, passing the bill
• Amendment H 8128 to HF 2459 (Minimum Wage) ? Would have increased Iowa?s minimum wage by $1 per hour to $6.15.
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was in favor
    • House vote was 55 to 43 in favor of the bill. It later died in the House due to a procedural ruling
• HF 2770 (Wage Thresholds) ? Would have lowered Values Fund wage thresholds in rural counties by allowing new hire wages to be the determining factor in calculating wage requirements
  • Pettengill voted no
  • Labor was against
    • House vote was 54 to 43 in favor of the bill. It later died in Senate committee.
• Amendment H 8649 to HF 2459 (Funding for Workforce Centers) ? Provided $4 million in additional funding to keep rural workforce centers open.
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was in favor
    • House vote was 48 to 46, passing the bill
• HF 2597 (Voter ID) ? Would have required all voters to show a photo identification before casting a ballot, and required a photocopy of identification when casting an absentee ballot.
  • Pettengill voted no
  • Labor was against
    • House vote was 51 to 48 in favor of the bill. It later died in the Senate
• Amendment H 8347A to HF 2597 (Electronic Voting Machines) ? Would have required electronic voting machines to produce voter verified paper trails.
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was in favor
    • House vote was 48 to 51, killing the amendment
• HF 2648 (Drug Testing) ? Would have allowed employers to treat an inconclusive test as though it was a positive test.
  • Pettengill voted no
  • Labor was against
    • House vote was 58 to 41 in favor of the bill. It later died in Senate Committee
• Amendment H 8535 to HF 2790 (Health Insurance Pooling) ? Would have allowed certain business associations to pick those with lower risk, disrupting the small group insurance market and making health insurance even more costly for non-member small business.
  • Pettengill voted no
  • Labor was against
    • House vote was 44 to 55 and the measure failed
• Amendment H 8655 to SF 2410 (Whistleblower Protection) ? Would have prohibited retaliation against state workers for disclosing information regarding violation of professional standards or unsafe practices
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was in favor
    • House vote was 42 to 49, killing the amendment
• HF 729 (IPERS) ? Increased IPERS contribution rates for both employers and employees at the same 60/40 ratio.
  • Pettengill voted yes
  • Labor was in favor
    • House vote was 97 to 0, passing the measure