Thirty-three percent of those polled said they consider themselves “a supporter of the tea party movement,” with 49 percent of supporters defining themselves as independents, 34 percent Republicans and 17 percent Democrats.

Forty-nine percent of those polled said they do not support the tea party movement.

Iowans are evenly split on whether they are inclined to “keep or replace” incumbents who represent them, with a slight majority favoring to oust incumbents at the state level. Most observers say the 2010 elections will be dominated by anti-incumbent sentiment, but in a state that hasn’t voted out an incumbent governor since the 1960s, the even split does give some slight comfort to Gov. Chet Culver, who has seen his job approval ratings drop steadily since 2008.

At the local level, the poll found 59 percent favored keeping their incumbent in office.

The Register correctly points out that this anti-incumbent mood benefits Republicans, since Democrats control both chambers of the legislature and the governor’s mansion. But tea party leaders are quick to dismiss the idea that the GOP is entitled to their votes. Ryan Rhodes, chairman of the Iowa Tea Party Patriots and campaign manager for 3rd District Republican Congressional candidate Dave Funk, told The Iowa Independent in December that the movement gained momentum based on frustration with both Democrats and Republicans.

Another point of note is that nearly all those polled who do support the tea party movement live in rural Iowa, small towns or the suburbs, each already considered Republican strongholds. Only 7 percent said they live in a large city. Forty-six percent consider themselves “born-again” Christians.

The GOP’s 2010 success could also hinge on its ability to mend fences after what’s shaping up to be a contentious primary season. A divide between grassroots conservatives and the party’s “establishment” is popping up in races up and down the primary ballot. The most high profile example can be found in the race for the Republican gubernatorial nomination, with supporters of Bob Vander Plaats vowing to sit out the fall campaign if the party nominates four-term former Gov. Terry Branstad. For his part, Vander Plaats has refused to rule out running as an independent if he does lose the primary.

In Iowa House District 8, a former GOP county chair who originally entered the race as an independent has returned to the party to run against a candidate viewed by many as an “establishment” Republican. The winner will try to win a district held by a conservative Democrat for 20 years.

Tom Shaw, a former chair of the Pocahontas County Republican Party, announced last year he was leaving the party to run as an independent, saying the GOP had walked away from its values. Shaw has become a darling of the Tea Party movement and earned the formal endorsement of Republican gubernatorial hopeful Bob Vander Plaats.

Last month he changed his mind and came back to the Republican Party, saying his change of heart stems from the Iowa Family Policy Center (IFPC) and state Rep. Kent Sorenson, R-Indianola, publicly endorsing Vander Plaats, and in doing so, vowing never to support his chief rival for the party’s nomination, former Gov. Terry Branstad.

Shaw is running against Steve Richards of Algona, who The Des Moines Register called “a more establishment Republican.” Richards is a doctor and an Air Force veteran. He ran for the seat in 2008, losing by only 42 votes to Democratic state Rep. Dolores Mertz, who has held her seat for more than 20 years but has not announced whether she will run again this year.

The two men will share the same stage Friday in Pocahontas.

The forum is also well timed, as it will take place just a few days after The Des Moines Register’s latest Iowa Poll is released. The paper has already begun promoting the poll, scheduled for release Sunday, which it says will be a “measure of Tea Party support in Iowa.“

Bob Vander Plaats speaks to supporters Wednesday night in Ames (photo by Dave Davidson, www.davedavidson.com).

“Governor after governor after governor… you do the math about how many governors that is,” he said.

The not-so-veiled shot was directed at Vander Plaats’ chief rival for his party’s nomination, former Gov. Terry Branstad.

While both Branstad and Vander Plaats have avoided directly attacking the other, their rivalry has nonetheless boiled over in recent weeks. Last month, several lawmakers and the influential social conservative group Iowa Family Policy Center endorsed Vander Plaats’s campaign and vowed to sit out the fall election if Branstad were the party’s nominee. The move sparked outrage in many Republican circles and motivated the Linn County Republican Party pass a resolution demanding candidates support the eventual nominee if they want the county party’s support.

Vander Plaats was the only candidate not to sign on to the pledge, causing many to surmise he would run as an independent if he loses in the primary.

In an exclusive interview with The Iowa Independent, Vander Plaats said he would never sign on to “blind loyalty pledges,” saying the idea “just doesn’t sell to the general voter.”

“But I do know after running for this office a couple times that whoever the nominee is of the party carries a huge responsibility,” he said. “That responsibility is to genuinely and authentically earn the support and endorsement of your peers in the race and their supporters. They don’t want to be taken for granted. They don’t want to be, ‘OK, I guess we’re Republicans so we’ll hold our nose and get behind Vander Plaats.’  They want you to earn their support and endorsement as well. “

For many, the primary campaign between Branstad and Vander Plaats is a battle for the soul of a party. Branstad, a four-term governor who left office in 1998, has had difficulty winning over social and religious conservatives since entering the campaign last year. Those voters, who make up the base of the party, point to his appointment of a lieutenant governor who supports abortion rights and a Supreme Court Justice who penned the decision legalizing same-sex marriage as proof that his conservative credentials are in doubt. They also question his association with Doug Gross, a Des Moines attorney and longtime adviser to Branstad who has angered many social conservatives for calling for the party to be more accepting of differing ideas.

Vander Plaats said the primary will decide whether Republicans truly believe in conservative principles or not.

“I think what Iowans want is they want to see someone who’s principled and someone who can cast a compelling vision,” he said, adding: “The danger is when we try to be all things to all people. The people of Iowa will think, ‘well, you really don’t stand for anything.’ So, whether I’m left of you or right of you is irrelevant because I don’t trust you because you’re all over the place.”

While Vander Plaats said he wants to stay away from attacking Branstad personally, saying candidates should “give people reason to vote for you, not vote against your opponent,” he does plan to draw sharp contrasts with his rival, whom he characterized as the “establishment” candidate.

“The environment today may be against the establishment that’s in charge right now, but they really don’t want to go back to another establishment,” he said. Voters want someone to speak up for all of Iowa, “not just a part of Iowa or a sect of Iowa or just those with access.”

The majority of Vander Plaats’ remarks Wednesday night focused on the economy and the size of state government. He said the bureaucracy that has grown over years is not only hurting Iowa business but also education. Things were already bad before Gov. Chet Culver took office, he said, but they quickly got worse.

“He decided to be a Hillary Clinton Christmas tree on steroids,” Vander Plaats said.

One of the first things he hopes to do in office is shrink that bureaucracy and find ways for the private sector to take on many of the jobs currently performed by the state.

It took more than an hour for Vander Plaats to address same-sex marriage, an issue that has long been the centerpiece of his campaign. Vander Plaats believes he can stop the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision legalizing gay marriage with an executive order, pointing to language in the state’s constitution that calls the governor “chief magistrate of the state.”

This interpretation doesn’t bode well with constitutional scholars or Vander Plaats’ fellow Republican gubernatorial hopefuls. They say the governor does not possess that type of authority and issuing an executive order like that could result in a constitutional crisis, pitting branches of government against each other.

Conservative blogger and former Republican Party of Iowa political director Craig Robinson pointed out the flaw in Vander Plaats’ logic, saying the use of “chief magistrate” in the constitution “is just another name for governor, just like the constitution refers to voters as electors. This provision simply gives the office of governor its name, nothing more.”

“In fact, the historical analysis that I’ve found argues that the lack of any description of gubernatorial duties in the Iowa Constitution shows that the drafters constructed the governorship to be a relatively weak office,” Robinson said.

But those critics won’t deter Vander Plaats.

“I see this as a great civics lesson,” he said. “That’s the former teacher in me, I guess. The Supreme Court doesn’t make law. And this goes beyond just marriage. This will impact private property rights, free enterprise, education, health care, free speech, you name it.”

Mitt Romney’s PAC is burning through money — the PAC reported a 78 percent overall burn rate as of Dec. 31 — but he has plenty of cash to spare. Romney’s PAC reported $1,125,375 cash on hand as of Dec. 31, beating out both Sarah Palin’s SarahPAC and Tim Pawlenty’s Freedom First PAC in cash available, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney

Romney has raised a total of $3,565,311 and spent $2,777,912, since he first formed his PAC months after exiting the presidential race in 2008.

Pawlenty only formed his PAC in October 2009, so his totals were expected to be less robust than the those of Palin and Romney (who recently vied for vice president and president, respectively). Pawlenty’s burn rate was just about 31 percent overall and he reported $884,075 on hand. He raised $1,279,906 and spent $395,831 total through Dec. 31.

Since SarahPAC was first formed in Jan. 2009, the committee has raised $2,132,119, spent $1,203,782 and reported $928,337 on hand as of Dec. 31.

While most of SarahPAC’s money was spent on consulting, fundraising and other typical campaign expenditures, the committee reported spending tens of thousands on photographs, books and trinkets in the last half of the year. SarahPAC spent $13,668 on photos, $63,498 on books, $6,455 on t-shirt design and printing and nearly $3,000 on pens and rubber bracelets in the latter six months of 2009. These and other items contributed to SarahPAC’s overall burn rate of 56 percent.

Julissa Treviño contributed research to this post. ]]> http://iowaindependent.com/26860/romney-pac-has-highest-burn-rate-but-leads-palin-and-pawlenty-in-cash/feed 0 http://iowaindependent.com/26766/branstad-vander-plaats-rivalry-erupts-in-blogosphere http://iowaindependent.com/26766/branstad-vander-plaats-rivalry-erupts-in-blogosphere#comments Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:15:00 +0000 Jason Hancock http://iowaindependent.com/?p=26766 A growing rift between supporters of the gubernatorial campaigns of Bob Vander Plaats and Terry Branstad spilled out into the conservative blogosphere Monday, with both sides taking the other to task over perceived hypocrisy.

Vander Plaats supporter and Christian radio host Steve Deace lobbed the first volley in an e-mail to conservative activists. He pointed to portions of Branstad’s record — such as tax increases during his tenure, earning an endorsement from teacher’s unions and his appointment of a lieutenant governor who supports same-sex marriage and abortion rights — and asked if they would ever consider supporting a “hypothetical candidate” with that kind of platform.

Deace got responses from numerious individuals, including former and current GOP candidates and the leaders of several of the state’s most influential conservative organizations.

Blogger and former Republican Party of Iowa Political Director Craig Robinson, a regular guest on Deace’s program who calls the radio host a “good man” and genuine friend, quickly fired back with a hypothetical of his own that criticized Vander Plaats’ record. He then took Vander Plaats supporters to task for blasting Branstad for doing things similar to another governor many of them once defended, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

I also would remind you, and a number of people on this e-mail chain (and my wife for that matter), that you guys voted for a candidate who was in favor of higher income taxes, higher sales taxes, higher gas taxes, higher grocery taxes, higher tobacco taxes, higher beer taxes, higher Internet taxes, and higher nursing home bed taxes.

You voted for a candidate who was the ONLY Republican to speak to the [National Education Association] and later receive their endorsement.

You voted for a candidate who called No Child Left Behind “the greatest education reform effort by the federal government in my lifetime.”

You voted for a candidate who supported amnesty and taxpayer-financed welfare and health care for illegal aliens.

What’s so ironic about your hypothetical question is that almost everything you take issue with in Branstad’s record are things that you either didn’t care about or chose to overlook in regards to Mike Huckabee. It looks like you have flip-flopped on these issues quicker than Mitt Romney ever could have.

Vander Plaats was Huckabee’s Iowa campaign director during the 2008 presidential caucus season, and Huckabee endorsed his gubernatorial bid last May. Many of the same groups and individuals who were active in the Huckabee presidential campaign are now supporting Vander Plaats. By the same token, many of Branstad’s supporters, including one-time chief of staff Doug Gross, were active in the campaign of Huckabee’s chief rival, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Branstad has been drawing fire from social and religious conservatives from the moment he announced he was interested in re-entering politics. A meeting with several social conservative leaders aimed at soothing their concerns ended up bolstering them, as details of a disappointed group ended up on several blogs. The back-and-forth culminated last month with state Rep. Kent Sorenson, R-Indianola, and the Iowa Family Policy Center announced that not only would they be endorsing Vander Plaats but that they would never support a Branstad candidacy.

In the aftermath, Vander Plaats refused to sign on to a loyalty oath passed by the Linn County Republican Party and also would not rule out a third-party run for governor should he be defeated in the primary.

Earlier in the month, U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley had some questions for the Obama administration about just how it happened that a top AIG lawyer was given millions of dollars in severance after she quit the bailed-out company in lieu of accepting a pay cut.

Monday Grassley asked Kenneth Feinberg — executive pay czar for the Troubled Asset Relief Program — for details of yet another enormous AIG severance deal, this one to Suzanne Folsom, the company’s former chief compliance and regulatory officer. AIG announced last month that Folsom left “to pursue other opportunities.” She was reportedly given more than $1 million in the process.

Grassley wants the details surrounding Folsom’s windfall, including “copies of all severance plans or arrangements signed by Ms. Folsom.”

You can already hear the complaints from Wall Street: Who cares about $1 million in this universe of billion-dollar payouts and trillion-dollar leverage arrangements? But that, of course, is precisely the sentiment that led to the historic bank collapse.

Below is the letter Grassley sent to Feinberg:

January 25, 2010

Kenneth R. Feinberg

Special Master for Compensation

Troubled Asset Relief Program

U.S. Department of Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20220

Dear Mr. Feinberg:

On January 15, 2010, I wrote you to express my concern and frustration with the reported payment by AIG of a multi-million dollar severance award to Anastasia D. Kelly, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Senior Regulatory and Compliance Officer, following her resignation effective December, 30, 2009.  It is my understanding that a million dollar severance payment was made to another former executive of AIG.  Also, it has been reported that Ms. Kelly was either directly or indirectly related to an investigation at AIG in 2009, prior to AIG’s decision to proceed with her multi-million dollar severance award.  Consequently, my concerns about the apparent lack of scrutiny given to executive severance payments at AIG are increasing. Indeed, it seems as if the Obama Administration is more concerned with paying out taxpayer money to highly compensated AIG employees rather than safeguarding every taxpayer dollar. Let me elaborate.

Section 111(b)(2) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA), as amended by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), provides that the Secretary of the Treasury shall require TARP recipients like AIG to meet appropriate standards for executive compensation and corporate governance.  Despite this broad authority given to the Obama Administration by Congress to protect taxpayers, it appears that the Administration has dropped the ball when it comes to rich severance pay plans that are enjoyed by AIG executives, but out of the reach of ordinary American workers.

Regarding the media reports about Ms. Kelly, it is my understanding that a law firm was retained to conduct an investigation into, among other things, whether she was properly performing her duties as General Counsel.  It was further reported that the law firm made recommendations to AIG in this matter.  Consequently, in addition to the information and documentation I requested in my January 15 letter, please provide a complete description of the investigation/law firm inquiry, including all documents or other materials prepared by AIG internally, by the law firm, or by any other government office or third party.  Please include all information regarding the basis for the decision made by AIG or any government official to pay or allow to be paid between $2.8 million and $3.8 million in severance or other payments to Ms. Kelly.  In the case of any verbal reports, please describe such reports and any statements made or actions taken by AIG or any government official in response.

Furthermore, reports have surfaced about a severance payment made to another former executive of AIG.  It has been reported that Suzanne Folsom, Chief Compliance and Regulatory Officer, also resigned at the end of 2009, and supposedly received a $1 million severance payment.  This enormous payment raises the same sort of concerns I detailed in my earlier letter in regard to the multi-million payment to Ms. Kelly.  As a result, I request that you provide my staff with the same detailed information regarding Ms. Folsom that I requested for Ms. Kelly in my January 15 letter.  Accordingly, please provide my office with the following information:

1)      The date Ms. Folsom joined AIG and her salary on that date.

2)      A complete promotion and salary history for Ms. Folsom through the date of her departure from AIG, including titles, salary amounts and relevant dates.

3)      The salary that that Ms. Folsom was scheduled to be paid at the time of her resignation and whether she was a member of  Most Highly Compensated Group at AIG or the member of another group of highly compensated employees.

4)      The amount of Ms. Folsom’s severance, the formula under which it was determined, the salary on which her severance was based and, if different, her salary on the date of her resignation.

5)      A copy of the AIG severance plan, agreement or program that governs Ms. Folsom’s severance and all previous versions of the plan, agreement or program back to the date Ms. Folsom joined AIG.  Include copies of all severance plans or arrangements signed by Ms. Folsom.

6)      The amounts and dates of all severance payments already paid to Ms. Folsom and all severance payments, if any, scheduled for the future, including relevant dates.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, please explain in detail all actions your office took to modify, amend and/or terminate the AIG severance plan or program that covered Ms. Folsom as it existed when you assumed your duties as Special Master.  Also, if you know, please describe in detail all actions taken by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Department of the Treasury to modify, amend or terminate the AIG severance plan or program that covered Ms. Folsom as it existed on or after September 16, 2008.

In cooperating with the Committee’s review, no documents, records, data or information related to these matters shall be destroyed, modified, removed or otherwise made inaccessible to the Committee.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation.  Please provide the requested information by February 8, 2010.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Grassley

United States Senator

But at least two of his budget proposals could already be dead.

Roxanne Conlin is wealthy, but not as wealthy as her critics accused.

Terry Branstad’s engaging in balancing act on same-sex marriage.

Conservative blogger goes inside his very cordial local caucus.

Transparency key to avoid poor budget decisions.

High Republican disapproval makes Obama the most polarizing president ever — and by a wide margin.

Linn County Republicans sent the pledge, which asks candidates to promise to support the party’s eventual nominee, to all four gubernatorial candidates. Former Gov. Terry Branstad and state Reps. Chris Rants and Rod Roberts have reportedly agreed. Vander Plaats remains the lone hold out.

Republcan Bob Vander Plaats (photo by Jason Hancock/Iowa Independent).

The resolution was a reaction to the the politically influential Christian group Iowa Family Policy Center endorsing Vander Plaats in the GOP primary and promising to sit out the general election if the party nominated Branstad. Response to the anti-endorsement of Branstad was quick, with many Republicans fearing the move could splinter the party and guarantee Democratic Gov. Chet Culver a second term in office.

Linn County Supervisor Brent Oleson, who has formally endorsed Branstad’s campaign for a fifth term as governor, said the conservatives who push this strategy are a  “jihadist sleeper cell of so-called GOP leaders” that is “refusing to work towards post-primary unity.” He formally introduced the loyalty resolution at his county’s central committee meeting last week.

David Chung, a member of the Linn County Central Committee who opposed the resolution, said on his blog that Vander Plaats’ campaign has promised to issue a press release clarifying their position soon.

It puts Vander Plaats in an interesting position. If he agrees to the pledge, he runs the danger of alienating some of his strongest and most vocal supporters who have said that they will not support Branstad even if he wins the primary. On the other hand if he does not agree to the pledge he runs the risk of alienating others in the party who consider all four of our candidates to be a better choice than re-electing Chet Culver. People seem to forget that in 2006, Vander Plaats played the good party soldier and suspended his campaign to run on a Nussle/Vander Plaats ticket. It will be interesting to see what he does this time.

Vander Plaats’ campaign manager has repeatedly refuse to rule out a third-party run for governor should he lose in the June GOP primary, first in a statement to The Des Moines Register then again to The Iowa Independent.

Bret Hayworth of the Sioux City Journal reports Branstad faced tough questions about his stance on same-sex marriage, his choice Joy Corning as lieutenant governor and his past support of Democratic U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. Each of the issues has been used over the past few months to attack the former governor’s conservatives credentials.

The fact that Branstad didn’t mention overturning the 2009 Iowa Supreme Court ruling that brought same-sex marriage to the state displeased two area Republicans — a middle-aged guy who wouldn’t identify himself other than being a Sioux City Republican and Woodbury County Republican Party Chairman Brian Rosener of Bronson. The first man said Branstad should have included his stance on marriage in the list of priorities. He added that when voters have the chance to vote on gay marriage, it has unanimously (31 times) been cast aside in support of traditional marriage by a man and a woman.

Branstad reiterated that he supports a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and thinks it’s wrong Democratic legislative leaders have refused to let lawmakers vote on the issue.

In an interview with a conservative blog, Branstad upped the rhetorical ante by voicing support for calling a constitutional convention to overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling. Every 10 years, Iowans get the opportunity to vote on whether to hold a constitutional convention. In 2000, the last time Iowans voted on whether the state should convene a constitutional convention, only about 32 percent supported it.

Some same-sex marriage opponents have advocated for the idea, saying it is the quickest way to reverse the court’s ruling. But most have concluded that since Democrats will likely control the legislature beyond 2010, Democrats would also control any constitutional convention.

From The Iowa Republican:

Branstad said that as governor, he would offer to preside over such a convention. While groups like [Iowa Family Policy Center] are afraid to explore the constitutional convention option because they concede that Mike Gronstal will remain in his leadership role, Branstad thinks the idea is worth exploring. He also added that, no matter what comes out of the constitutional convention, the people of Iowa still must vote on each proposed change to the state’s constitution.

Branstad also said that while he would not criticize the Iowa Family Policy Center for publicly pledging not to support his candidacy should he win the GOP nomination, he did say he was disappointed in Danny Carroll, IFPC chairman and a former lawmaker from Grinnell.

Shaw said his change of heart stems from the Iowa Family Policy Center (IFPC) and state Rep. Kent Sorenson, R-Indianola, publicly endorsing Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats, and in doing so, vowing never to support his chief rival for the party’s nomination, former Gov. Terry Branstad.

Tom Shaw

“The leadership Sorenson and IFPC have demonstrated has convinced us there are too many issues at stake for Iowa’s future to further confuse voters by running as an independent at this time, because it’s clear that grassroots Iowans are rising up to take a stand and we want to join that fight,” Shaw said in a statement Wednesday night. “We must also acknowledge the steadfastness of the Republican Caucus of the Iowa House. However, being a Republican is not an unconditional allegiance for us. Should the party establishment succeed in further marginalizing grassroots Iowans we reserve the right to respond accordingly.”

Shaw wanted to make it clear he did not come to this decision because of any promises or favors from the Republican Party of Iowa.

“In fact, for several months we have rebuffed numerous attempts by the Republican Party to get us to run as Republicans,” he said. “We are only doing so now for the reasons I just listed.”

In September, Vander Plaats garnered headlines when he endorsed Shaw’s independent candidacy, which is based around his opposition to same-sex marriage, support of Iowa’s “English only” laws, opposition to labor legislation and opposition to abortion.