Christopher Reed, who narrowly won a three-way Republican primary to challenge U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin in 2008, will officially become a candidate for the U.S. House on Thursday, with a planned announcement in Ottumwa. Following the first stop, Reed also plans to visit the communities of Solon, his hometown, and Cedar Rapids, a part of the metropolitan area where he and his family currently live.

The tour, which the campaign has dubbed as “Defending our Children’s Future Tour,” will set the stage for a campaign that Reed said will focus on fiscal issues.

Christopher Reed was the only political candidate to take part in an anti-immigration rally in Postville following a massive 2008 immigration raid at a meatpacking plant. Reed, who was then a U.S. Senate candidate for Republicans, will announce his candidacy for U.S. House this week.

This appears to be a switch of tactics from his campaign against Harkin. During that race, Reed made national news for his personal attacks on Harkin, especially his proclamation that Harkin was the “Tokyo Rose of Al-Qaeda” during an October 2008 debate.

Reed, however, is not the only individual who has been mentioned as a Republican candidate for Iowa’s 2nd district.

Steve Rathje, a Cedar Rapids businessman who faced Reed for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate, has also been making statements on social networking sites that seem to indicate an interest in a congressional run. Although the titles of the pages on Rathje’s website continues to reference his past U.S. Senate aspirations, the overall theme of the site now simply references Congress, leaving open which chamber he is considering.

Ottumwa ophthalmologist Mariannette Miller-Meeks, who served as the 2008 Republican nominee for the 2nd district race, has also remained active — especially in the area of health care reform. While the domain associated with her former campaign site remains active, it automatically redirects to her personal blog, Doctor’s Notes, where she writes on numerous topics that are consistent with someone who is considering a second run.  Further, it is widely anticipated that she will be making her own announcement in relation to the 2nd district in the near future, and the fact that Reed has chosen her community of Ottumwa to spark his own campaign launch does little to tamper such speculation.

Since there doesn’t appear to be any Democrats positioning themselves for a primary run against incumbent U.S. Rep. Dave Loebsack, it is nearly certain that the Republican chosen during the primary process will challenge the Democratic incumbent. The 2008 election ended with Loebsack claiming 57 percent of the vote and, according to the Cook Political Report, Iowa’s 2nd district is considered the state’s most solid Democratic voting block with a partisan voting index of  D+7.

Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks speaks with an audience member following consumer-driven health care forum in Cedar Rapids where she was a panelist. (Iowa Independent photo)

Dr. Don Racheter, president of the Public Interest Institute, which hosted the event, painted a picture of where health care reform stands in Congress for the approximately 30 attendees. He focused in particular on the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee bill that was unveiled the same day as the forum, and on the continuing negotiations between U.S. Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.) on the Senate Finance Committee.

The largest point of contention between the two political parties, according to Racheter, is whether the reform efforts contain a public option.

While quoting from a study conducted by the Lewin Group, Racheter said that government entering into the health care insurance fray would be unfair.

“The government has deep pockets … they don’t have to worry about recessions, they don’t have to worry about layoffs and they don’t have to worry about everything a private company has to worry about,” Racheter said.

In addition, the implementation of a public health care insurance option, operated by the government, according to Racheter, would provide an incentive for employers to no longer offer insurance through private companies.

“The reality is that if a public option is a part of the equation, then [then-candidate Barack] Obama’s statement about people being able to choose whether or not they want to enroll in something new or keep their existing coverage is not probable,” Racheter said, arguing that the introduction of a public option will effectively dry up other currently available insurance. “The idea that you can keep what you’ve got if you like it just isn’t reality.”

Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, a former congressional candidate and Ottumwa ophthalmologist, spoke as a provider within the current health care delivery system and praised recent activities that have placed more competition within the system. She is also extremely leery of taking health care delivery out of a competitive market and placing it in the hands of government.

“If we are going to provide health care to everyone regardless of citizenship status, health care will have to be rationed,” she warned. “So, the question is, ‘Who do you want to ration your health care?’ … Just because we all have insurance is no guarantee that costs will go down. In fact, it may actually increase costs until we begin to ration.”

As evidence that government intervention results in a rationing of health care services, Miller-Meeks points to the recent appearance of ads in newspapers for $79 screening tests.

“Under Medicare, for me to order those same tests, I have to have a reason for doing so,” she said. “If you want it, I need to make-up a reason or you can’t have the test done. And, even if there was an indication and I ordered the tests, the charge would be around $600.”

Competition in the private marketplace, she said, is the key to lowering health care costs for the majority of Americans. This includes allowing individuals to buy coverage a la carte, picking and choosing the coverage needs they require, and making health care more portable.

The vast consensus of those attending the forum is that politicians — individuals described as being out-of-touch with the realities of average Americans — are contemplating comprehensive health care reform in this manner because they are interested in increasing their voting base. Further, even if the doomsday scenarios painted in conjunction with a public option come true, those in attendance believe it will be more than a decade later before ramifications begin to really impact politicians at the voting booth.

“If they go with a public option, there is no doubt that it will transition to single-payer health care,” Miller-Meeks said in answer to a question from the audience. “The current administration is extraordinarily intelligent. They know the full impact of similar policies took 29 years in Canada. So the full impact of what is now being discussed in our country won’t happen for at least 8 to 10 years. By that time a lot of the current politicians will have have already been transitioned out of office.”

If there was one glimmer of hope for those against a public option in health care reform it came in the fact that the Democratic majority in the nation’s capital appears so splintered.

“Looking at the numbers, the truth is that we could have health care reform passed next week,” Racheter said. “But I don’t think that is going to happen.”

He and others on the panel pointed to the Blue Dog Democrats and the Progressive Caucus as being two Democratic groups holding diametrically different opinions on what health care reform should be. The Progressive Caucus has vowed not to vote for reform that does not include a public option while the Blue Dogs have publicly voiced concerns over costs of nearly all options that have been discussed.

The Cedar Rapids forum was one of a three-part series hosted by the Public Interest Institute in cooperation with Patients United Now.

Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks visited with area veterans after delivering the keynote address at the Metro Area Veterans Council service on Tuesday.

There was nothing usual about the Metro Area Veterans Council inviting Ottumwa ophthalmologist Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks to keynote their annual Veterans Day service in Cedar Rapids. Miller-Meeks, a Republican who recently lost her bid to become Iowa’s first female member of Congress, is a veteran, as is her husband. But as she spoke of honor, commitment and the quest of veterans to remain relevant, the political undertones were unmistakable.

“Your actions have consequences, and your words have meaning,” Miller-Meeks said during her keynote address. “For those of you in this room who are worried that Veterans Day and the honor and commitment and sacrifice that you’ve made is losing its popularity and you will be forgotten, I’m imploring you to become relevant again.”

Miller-Meeks went on to tell veterans and their spouses that they can play a significant role in welcoming home the men and women who are now returning from war and by serving as a support system for the families who await their soldier’s return.

“So, for those of you who think you may become irrelevant, I am telling you that your time for leadership has not passed,” she said. “Your time for leadership is now. It is not the person who has the rank that is the leader. It is the person who emerges from whatever circumstance to bring the solution, to forward the issue, to speak for those who cannot speak. Your time for leadership is now.”

The call for a second wave of service ends with Miller-Meeks stating, “It is not always the victor who is well-remembered in history; sometimes it is those who have been vanquished.”

Following the event, many in the audience came up to speak with Miller-Meeks and show their support for her congressional run and her continued service in Iowa’s 2nd District. She has not publicly indicated if she will again venture into politics, but, if she takes her own advice, it’s quite certain that she will remain relevant.

An audio file featuring a musical selection from the service performed by the New Horizons Band and narrated by Cary J. Hahn, a journalist and Navy veteran, is available.

Steve Roberts

Steve Roberts, a man who was elected to represent Iowa Republicans for years on the Republican National Committee, believes that a state GOP official’s affiliation with an independent anti-abortion group that does not toe the party line presents a clear conflict of interest.

The conflict, which has left an already divided Iowa Republican Party even more splintered, stems from an article in an Iowa Right to Life Coalition newsletter that attacked Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, the Republican nominee for Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District.

Kim Lehman, director of Iowa Right to Life, ousted Iowa Rep. Sandy Greiner during an extremely spirited Republican State Convention this summer to serve on the Republican State Central Committee as Iowa’s female Republican National Committee member.

“I think it’s a problem on several fronts,” said Roberts, who was also ousted this year from his role representing Iowa on the RNC by a prominent social conservative. “[Lehman] was asked on Iowa Public Television what she would do if there was a race that had a pro-choice Republican running against a pro-life Democrat. She gave the right answer at that time. She said that, as a national committeewoman, that she would support all of the Republicans who won the nomination.”

But Lehman’s organization published a newsletter article that strayed from that message.  The newsletter blasted Miller-Meeks by referring to her as a “great pretender” who is trying to pass herself off as being against abortion when she is not.

“She is certainly pro-life,” said Eric Woolson, communications director for the Miller-Meeks campaign. “She was on the Jan Mickelson program talking about it. Pure and simple, she is a pro-life candidate.”

Woolson added that average voters are more concerned about flood relief, protection of their retirement accounts and corruption in Washington.

“That’s what the voters of the district are focused on and that’s what Dr. Miller-Meeks is focused on,” he said.

In an earlier interview with Iowa Independent Miller-Meeks said that she condoned abortion only in cases of rape, incest or if the mother’s life is in danger.

“I think Kim’s statement was that she didn’t catch it or that it wasn’t her article,” Roberts said. “If you’re going to have a position in the party like she does, however, you have to make sure that your other activities don’t conflict — particularly when it comes to candidates. It may be that she will need to decide if she wants to be head of the pro-life movement in Iowa and not a party leader or vice versa.”

When current members of the Republican State Central Committee have phoned him to discuss the issue, Roberts said he has advised them that they first need to talk to Lehman and hear her side of the story. The second order of business, he said, depends on what Lehman has to say.

Republicans in Muscatine County, one of 12 counties that make up the 2nd Congressional District, didn’t wait. Reeling from both the recent newsletter article and a radio interview from the primary season in which Lehman referred to Miller-Meeks as a “wolf in sheep’s clothing,” the group penned a letter to the Republican State Central Committee and other interested parties that was signed by local party officials, Iowa Sen. Jim Hahn of Muscatine and Iowa Rep. Jeff Kaufmann of Wilton asking for Lehman to either apologize to Miller-Meeks or be removed from her official party roles.

“Addressing this issue has taken time away from campaigns in the 2nd District that we can not afford to lose,” the letter charged. “Kim Lehman should be representing ALL IOWA Republicans as National Committeewoman. Her personal stance as IRLC President is in direct conflict with her RPI role – she is actively working against our Republican candidates.”

Lehman has publicly stated that she had nothing to do with writing the specific article in question, but that she did see it before it was placed in the newsletter and distributed.

“I had a false humility thinking that people could understand that Kim Lehman is not Right to Life,” Lehman told O. Kay Henderson of Radio Iowa. “Iowa Right to Life is its separate bylaws. Its purpose is one issue. It’s focused on its issue and nowhere in the bylaws does it talk about elections or candidates or anything. … I realize people are connecting me as personally responsible because I head the organization. My responsibility to the organization is to make sure that the organization contains and does its bylaws. The integrity of the bylaws is what I’m responsible for to the board.”

Roberts believes that Lehman’s two positions present an inesecapable conflict of interests.

2nd Congressional District GOP hopeful Mariannette Miller-Meeks receives the Great Pretender Award in Iowa Right To Life newsletter.

“This is not a case of just staying quiet” on the 2nd district race, he said. “Iowa Right to Life came out and … well, they trashed Miller-Meeks. The standard I’ve always used is that the candidates who won the Republican primary — whether they are conservatives or liberals or moderates — deserved the support of party leadership including myself unless they were guilty of some crime, such as taking bribes or something like that. Short of that, you supported them on one hand and, on the other hand, you certainly didn’t trash them publicly.”

Roberts continued: “Suppose you have a Democratic candidate that is strongly pro-life and a Republican candidate that is strongly pro-choice. If you are a member of the Iowa Right to Life board of directors, you may be saying that you want staff to work to elect that pro-life person. So, it can work both ways and it may end up that [Lehman] is going to have to make a decision as to which group she wants to support. In effect, she’s trying to serve two masters, and it’s already running into a problem.”

Roberts, a relatively moderate Republican, was replaced as Iowa’s male representative to the RNC by Steve Scheffler of the Iowa Christian Alliance, another third-party issue advocacy group.

Roberts said this controversy is indicative of a wider, ongoing conflict within the Republican Party. “After the election, depending on how bad the Republican defeat is, I think you’re going to have further debate about the direction of the party in Iowa.”

“You’ve got people who say that if we didn’t have the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) or people that are not strong on social issues then Republicans would stand a better chance of winning. There are other people who are saying the party needs the Evangelicals, but that group is not the sole base of the party,” Roberts said. “You’ve got people who have been disaffected who have become independents and who are no longer enthusiastic.”

The Republican State Central Committee had intended to raise the controversy at their October meeting, but the meeting was canceled because of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s visit to Des Moines. GOP officials are expected to discuss the matter at their next meeting in December.

John McCain picked up a relatively rare newspaper endorsement Saturday from the Cedar Rapids Gazette. The eastern Iowa daily also backed incumbent Democrats Tom Harkin for U.S. Senate and Bruce Braley in the 1st Congressional District, but chose Republican challengers Mariannette Miller-Meeks over 2nd District Rep. Dave Loebsack and Kim Schmett over Leonard Boswell in the 3rd District.

“Obama has offered no clear plan to deal with our country’s staggering debt,” wrote the Gazette editorial board, citing McCain’s economic policies as the main reason for the endorsement. “(Obama’s) tax plan could stifle the economic rebound we desperately need.”

But the Gazette expressed disapproval of McCain’s vice presidential choice. “Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin might well shake up Washington’s entrenched politics as usual, but she obviously lacks working knowledge and understanding of foreign policy and many national issues, which raises valid questions about McCain’s judgment in choosing her.”

The Gazette cited Harkin’s seniority in its endorsement and noted that his Republican challenger, Marion businessman Christopher Reed, did not meet with the editorial board.

Likewise, Bruce Braley’s challenger, state Sen. Dave Hartsuch, did not meet with the editorial board, which said Braley “quickly gained a reputation in his first term as a smart, bulldog questioner who does his homework.”

“We were pretty comfortable with endorsing Loebsack for a second term … until we met Mariannette Miller-Meeks,” writes the board. While praising the Mt. Vernon freshman Loebsack, the endorsement calls Miller-Meeks a “dynamo” who can “say no to requests and programs that can’t be funded without more taxpayer debt.”

In contrast, the Gazette had little praise for the 3rd District candidates and said Boswell offered few specifics. Schmett “didn’t exactly wow us… but it’s time for someone else to represent the 3rd District.”

The Gazette has a policy of no endorsements in caucuses and primaries.

“We like Dave Loebsack,” the endorsement begins, praising the incumbent for his work during a “volatile” year that saw massive flooding in the district.  He “has done a good job of representing his district in Washington.”

But “We also like Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks,” the Courier continues.

In the end, the Courier’s endorsement seems to come down to questions about whether the southern part of the district — where Ottumwa is — gets as much attention as Linn and Johnson Counties, which are home to the district’s Democratic base and a large percentage of its voters:

To his credit, Loebsack has continued to return to his district. He’s returned to Ottumwa more than 40 times this year alone to discuss issues with district patrons.

But there are concerns that Loebsack, like his predecessor, focuses too much of his attention on Cedar Rapids and Iowa City.

The district is made up of 15 unique counties and the needs of people living in Ottumwa, Centerville, Fairfield, Bloomfield, Burlington and Keokuk are just as important as those folks living in Linn and Johnson counties.

This is a tough decision. Both candidates are qualified to serve and both will do a solid job of representing our views.

But this year, the edge goes to Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks and we endorse her candidacy for Congress.

Roger Schwieso, Iowa VFW state legislative chairman, wrote in a letter to Loebsack Sep. 15:

“Congressman Loebsack has been a tremendous advocate for veterans in Eastern Iowa. Congressman Loebsack earned the support of Iowa veterans and the VFW Political Action Committee because he has championed the issues most important to active servicemembers, veterans, and our families. Since entering office, Congressman Loebsack worked to ensure passage of the largest ever funding increase for the VA, a new GI bill for the 21st century, and the Wounded Warriors Act. We are greatly appreciative of the Congressman’s efforts, and we are looking forward to working with him in the future.”

During his first term representing Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District, Loebsack was named to the House Armed Services Committee, where he supported the largest funding increase in the 77-year history of the Veterans Administration, cosponsored the 21st century G.I. Bill and funding for mental health care for veterans.

“It is truly an honor to have the support of the Veterans of Foreign Wars Political Action Committee,” Loebsack said in a statement. “I strongly believe that our nation has a solemn responsibility to care for those who have worn our nation’s uniform, and I work every day to assure that we serve them with the same dignity and honor with which they have served our country. I am proud of my record, and I will continue to fight every day for our veterans, servicemembers, and military families.”

The VFW Political Action Committee, a nonpartisan organization, was founded in 1979 to support candidates for federal office who advocate for our nation’s veterans and military personnel as well as for America’s national security. It is the nation’s only major Veterans Service Organization political action committee and represents more than 2.2 million members of the VFW, its auxiliaries and their families.

In closing remarks in the KCRG-sponsored debate, Miller-Meeks criticized Loebsack for voting with the Democratic leadership “98 percent of the time” and for accepting political action committee money. “America is not divided,” Miller-Meeks said, “Congress is divided.”

Loebsack said that despite Miller-Meeks’ contention, he had never taken a no PAC money pledge, and that he listens to his constituents. “I’ve been back to the district every weekend, except for the times I went over to Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Loebsack, citing trips to the war zones he made as a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

“You didn’t listen to your constituents on the bailout bill,” Miller-Meeks retorted.

The candidates clashed on Social Security and health care. Miller-Meeks favored a move toward at least partial individual accounts on both fronts. Loebsack endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama’s health care plan, and said any move toward privatizing Social Security was risky. “Right after he was re-elected, George Bush pushed this risky scheme, and it was rejected by the American people,” he said.

Panelist James Lynch of the Cedar Rapids Gazette cut to the chase and asked about Miller-Meeks’ nickname for Loebsack, “Do-Nothing Dave.” “We haven’t seen leadership… when it comes to flood relief or the bailout bill,” said Miller-Meeks.

“As a freshman, I think I’ve accomplished quite a lot,” said Loebsack, citing the $4.6 billion Midwestern Disaster Tax Relief Act he cosponsored with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley that was included in the revised bailout plan.

At that point, Miller-Meeks tossed out a well-rehearsed “You’re no Chuck Grassley” line.

The two-candidate format in a TV studio, with questions from journalists rather than the public, made for a more formal debate than the previous four-way debate in Coralville. Longer responses gave the major party candidates more opportunities to flesh out their proposals.

Green candidate Wendy Barth and independent Brian White participated in the earlier debate, but were not invited by KCRG. Barth liveblogged her responses to debate questions from an Iowa City coffee shop.

Loebsack took many opportunities to mention communities in the southern tier of the district. “I’ve been to Ottumwa 41 times,” he said, citing Miller-Meeks’ home town.

Loebsack also named Obama four times, and Republican nominee John McCain once. Miller-Meeks did not mention McCain’s name.

Iowa Independent’s Lynda Waddington contributed to this report.

In 2006, veteran Republicans Gil Gutknecht in Minnesota, Jim Leach in Iowa and Jim Ryun in Kansas suddenly found themselves in tough reelection fights. By the time the party saw what was happening, it was already too late.

And thus it is this year, as the GOP moves resources. In Iowa, that’s going to mean, if anything, Rep. Tom Latham, who has a race on his hands in the 4th District against Becky Greenwald.

National Republicans don’t have much invested in the other races, and the Latham-Greenwald race is the only one in the state that’s on the national handicapper’s lists (though still near the bottom.)

Democrat Rob Hubler is running a spirited race against Steve King, the other Republican incumbent, but the district lines strongly favor King.

In the 2nd District, Mariannette Miller-Meeks is an energetic and very visible opponent to Dave Loebsack, but she was never the pick of the RNCC. They’re the ones who recruited Peter Teahen, but the base rejected him in the primary. His donation to Democrat Julie Thomas in her 2002 race against Leach was probably the fatal blow. “Support ALL Republicans” is a big meme on the GOP side of the Iowa blogosphere.

Of course, Loebsack wasn’t on the Dem’s national priority lists in 2006 until … well, until after he won. But he was swimming with the national tide, not against it. And the fact that Leach has enthusiastically and actively been campaigning for Obama doesn’t help the Republican who’s trying to win his seat back.

In the Des Moines-based 3rd District, Kim Schmett looks like an abandoned backup plan, positioned for a serious race if Ed Fallon had knocked off Leonard Boswell in the Democratic primary.

And in the 1st District, the race has descended to the point that Dave Hartsuch is calling John McCain too pro-gay. Seriously. Hartsuch has said he was not invited to Saturday’s McCain rally in Davenport because he disagreed with McCain on the definition of traditional marriage. The Hartsuch campaign, and the Christopher Reed Senate campaign, seem to be focused now more on winning position in the ongoing internal battle within the Republican Party of Iowa than on their opponents.