If you were wondering how much of it was intentional and how much of it wasn’t, consider this: Grassley was reportedly surprised when Linn County GOP Chair Tim Palmer asked him about the controversies.

I found it somewhat amusing when I asked the Senator about his frequent trips to the banner position of the Drudge Report in the last few weeks and he was seemingly “unaware” of his celebrity status. I had to explain his “3″ recent splashes onto the blogs and news cycles including the “honor & suicide, sucking in the tit of the taxpayer,” and of course his recent comment to Senator Kent Conrad where he quipped, “your wife said the same thing” after Conrad said, “Oh you are good.”

Seeing first hand just how surprised and bemused Grassley was, it truly occurred to me just how little attention he pays to himself and how much of his work is focused on behalf of us Iowans.

The bill was approved by a 328-93 vote, with 85 Republicans supporting the measure.

The bill put conservative Republicans in a difficult position of choosing between increasing a tax and opening themselves up for criticism for not supporting efforts to recover bonuses paid to AIG executives. The vote even split House Republican leadership, with Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., voting yes and Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, voting no.

Latham joined Democrats Bruce Braley, Leonard Boswell and Dave Loebsack in supporting the measure.

(Hat tip to Huffington Post.)

Congressman Dave Loebsack, D-Mount Vernon, pointed to the fact that 34,000 Iowa jobs are tied to the auto industry. Those jobs would be in jeopardy of the industry was to fail.

Rep. Bruce Braley, D-Waterloo, echoed those concerns, saying his decision to support the legislation, which passed the House 237 to 170, was a “decision to protect American jobs.”

Congressman Steve King, R-Kiron, had made his opposition to the bailout public before any votes were cast. He said instead of pushing for major reform of the poorly-managed automakers, Congress instead “chose to kick the can down the road.”

Rep. Tom Latham, R-Ames, said that just as the bailout of Wall Street had failed, another “poorly crafted bailout plan will not truly solve the ills of the auto industry.”

Congressman Leonard Boswell, D-Des Moines, has not issued a statement regarding the bailout.

“Lee Iacocca essentially worked for pennies to demonstrate leadership and forcefully prove to his colleagues that he was ready to make sacrifices to reinvigorate Chrysler,” Grassley said. “Today’s executives could learn a lot from this example. They should take every step possible, including cutting executive salaries and bonuses, and exhaust all alternatives before coming to the taxpayers for tens of billions of dollars in help.”

The letter, which was sent yesterday to the CEOs of Ford Motor Co., General Motors and Chrysler, is below.

November 13, 2008

Mr. Alan R. Mulally
President and Chief Executive Officer
Ford Motor Company
1 American Road
Dearborn, Michigan 48126-2798

Mr. G. Richard Wagoner, Jr.
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
General Motors
300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, Michigan 48265

Mr. Robert Nardelli
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Chrysler
1000 Chrysler Drive
Auburn Hills, Michigan 48326-2766

Dear Mr. Mulally, Mr. Wagoner and Mr. Nardelli:

I understand that your company has been lobbying the Department of Treasury and congressional leaders for additional financial assistance via loans or through inclusion in the Troubled Asset Relief Program. While I understand the economic turmoil that many American businesses face today, I think it’s appropriate to ask those who seek a bailout from the federal government to do everything they can to first cut internal expenditures, including and especially executive salaries and compensation packages.

Most hardworking, taxpaying citizens would like to see all companies, including yours, pursue alternatives to a federal bailout. For example, some experts believe that Chapter 11 bankruptcy would help companies succeed in the long run by allowing them to reorganize while continuing production. They argue that such an alternative will preserve jobs while a handout would only serve as a band-aid to the problems caused by a lack of innovation in your industry.

However, should the federal government assist your company and other auto manufacturers who have failed to make sound business decisions, it’s important to remember that any funding you receive is money from the pockets of American taxpayers. Many men and women are pinching pennies just to get by, making sacrifices and changing their lifestyles to stay in their homes, send their children to school, and grow their retirement savings. I think it’s highly appropriate, if not absolutely necessary, that you do the same.

Most American taxpayers are rightly concerned about the federal government coming to the aid of companies who are in financial trouble, possibly as a result of their own mismanagement and poor business decisions. I agree that it’s time to stifle corporate excess and stop rewarding bad business practices so that we are not providing an incentive for irresponsible behavior in the future. That is why I have asked the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to rein in the executive compensation, travel, and other expenses of the companies and banks that are getting federal financial aid.

As you and your colleagues continue to seek federal financial assistance, I urge you to keep in mind the actions taken by former Chrysler Chief Executive Officer Lee Iacocca. When his company was saved from bankruptcy by the Loan Guarantee Act of 1979, he slashed his yearly salary to just $1.00 and those of his executives by as much as 10 percent. Lee Iacocca essentially worked for pennies to demonstrate leadership and forcefully prove to his colleagues that he was ready to make the same sacrifices they would have to make in order to reinvigorate Chrysler. Allow me to quote straight from Mr. Iacocca:

“I began by reducing my own salary to $1.00 a year. Leadership means setting an example. When you find yourself in a position of leadership, people follow your every move. I don’t mean they invade your privacy, although there’s some of that, too. But when the leader talks, people listen. And when the leader acts, people watch. So you have to be careful about everything you say and everything you do. I didn’t take $1.00 a year to be a martyr. I took it because I had to go into the pits. I took it so that when I went to Doug Fraser, the union president, I could look him in the eye and say, ‘Here’s what I want from you guys as your share,’ and he couldn’t come back to me and ask: ‘You SOB, what sacrifice have you made?’ That’s why I did it, for good, cold, pragmatic reasons. I wanted our employees and our suppliers to be thinking: ‘I can follow a guy who sets that kind of example.’”

Mr. Iacocca stated that a government-backed loan was not the only thing that saved Chrysler when it was on its deathbed. Rather, it was the “equality of sacrifice” that allowed Chrysler to survive and return to profits. He stated, “It wasn’t the loans that saved us, although we needed them badly. It was the hundreds of millions of dollars that were given up by everybody involved.”

As you attempt to lead your company out of the red, and especially if you intend to do so with the assistance of federal funds, I urge you to emulate Mr. Iacocca and be the first employees of your companies to make a personal sacrifice. Hardworking American taxpayers, including me, expect it.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Grassley
United States Senator

“I couldn’t agree more and we have to find out how we got into this mess and then we need to resolve the problem,” Loebsack said, when asked by Maria Conzemius of Iowa City if there was bipartisan blame for the financial crisis. “We need to hold folks accountable who made these mistakes, and if we find malfeasance we ought to punish them with prison terms,” he added.

But Loebsack said the bill was, ultimately, necessary. “When it didn’t pass, you saw what happened in the stock market,” he said of the Dow Jones drop of more than 700 points the day the first version of the bill failed in the House.

Loebsack said the second version of the bill included more provisions for individual homeowners.

“If I had my way, we would have had a quick vote on the Paulson plan and voted it down. But over the course of a week to ten days the plan improved. I was concerned that if we didn’t do anything the consequences would be far worse,” Loebsack said.

Loebsack’s three opponents — Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Green Wendy Barth, and independent Brian White — have all said they would have voted against the bailout.

“This is one of those issues where people really have to search their conscience,” said Loebsack.

Braley, along with fellow Democratic lawmakers Leonard Boswell and Dave Loebsack, joined with 260 other members of Congress from both parties to pass the bill that failed on Monday. Republicans Tom Latham and Steve King continued their opposition to the measure.

“While I would have liked more improvements, I am happy that the improved legislation includes billions of dollars that will go directly to Iowa, including $4.6 billion in tax relief for Iowans recovering from this year’s unprecedented floods and tornadoes,” Braley said in a statement. “As Iowans across the state continue their work to rebuild, this provides additional resources and support.”

He went on to say that Iowans will be much better off under this new economic recovery package, which is why he supports it.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama called Braley at his home in Waterloo Tuesday night to encourage him to support the measure.

“I am uneasy about a negotiated bill being brought up in the Senate on Thursday and sent over here, because that means there’s less House leverage, not more,” said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. “I want to see it start here.”

Both Iowa Republicans — U.S. Reps. Steve King and Tom Latham — voted against the bill, along with Democratic U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley. Iowa’s two other Democrats, U.S. Reps. Leonard Boswell and Dave Loebsack, went along with the leaders of both parties and supported the bill.

Polling on the bailout has been mixed over the past week, but these were likely votes of conscience and not political calculations. Of Iowa’s five congressmen, only Latham faces a serious challenge at the ballot box this November.