$235,000 Spent on Entertaining Lawmakers

From the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure office:

2009 LEGISLATIVE SESSION FUNCTION TOTALS RELEASED

The Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board has posted on its Web site reports filed by sponsors of functions held during the 2009 legislative session and the total amount of money spent on these functions.

The total amount reported as being spent on the functions was $ 235,828.55. Reports were filed for 90 functions held during the session. Reports disclose the amount of food, beverage, and entertainment spent at the functions regardless of the number of people who attend. The $3.00 gift limit in the state’s code of ethics does not apply to government officials and employees when attending these types of functions.

“This is the only exception for gifts directly received by state officials and employees that includes public disclosure,” said Charlie Smithson, the Board’s Executive Director. “These reports show that the political economy in Iowa remains robust.”

The reports may be found on the Board’s Web site at: http://www.iowa.gov/ethics/viewreports/2009session_reports.htm

UPDATE — Iowa Independent has a list of the Top 10 priciest receptions. Realtors and the Iowa Farm Bureau lead the list.

Harkin likes Junk Food Tax

U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin said this morning that the idea of using a tax on sodas/junk food to help pay for health care reform is generating some  fizz in Capitol Hill.

“It’s on the table. It could be,” Harkin said during his weekly conference call with print scribes. “And quite frankly, I’m pre-disposed (to it).

“That’s what’s making people unhealthy and obese,” he said.

Harkin rejected the notion that a government tax on food choices could play into the hands of critics trying to shoot down the broader health overhaul.

Actually, Harkin said, all the tax would do is help us listen to our “DNA.” Harkin says we’re all wired genetically to be healthy, but our sugar-coated society steers us to make bad choices. A tax hike, he contends, would help rewire our Twinkie-centric social structure.

It’s actually about eduction, not revenue, he said.

“We’re not telling people what they should eat or what they shouldn’t,” Harkin said. “It’s going to give people the information of how to be healthy.”

Still, he didn’t explain how this fairly complex argument about the unhealthy structure of society would counter the fairly simple, bumper-sticker-sized contention that is sure to be leveled by opponents – “Taxing my Ho Ho is a No No.” Or something like that.

Harkin is also pushing for several other provisions focused on preventative health, including workplace wellness programs, reimbursements to health care providers for diabetes screening and other preventative tests and the elimination of patient co-pays  and deductibles for those tests.

Harkin said he expects health care reform legislation to be ready for debate by July and on President Obama’s desk this fall.

Thursday Column – Soda Tax

The socialists are coming after our soda pop.

It’s an outrage. I’m going to waddle into the street and, as soon as I catch my breath, start chanting “Tax my pop? Where does it stop?”

OK, I exaggerate. It’s the high fructose talking.

The U.S. Senate is thinking about charging a 3-cent-per-12-ounce excise tax on soda and other sugary drinks as a way to help pay for overhauling the health care system.

Health groups, led by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, also are calling for such a tax with hopes bulging Americans put down their Big Gulps.

This is the sort of thing that gets our attention. As I write, there are 11 empty soda cans and bottles sitting next to my computer. I like full-strength Coke — a lot. I feel positively more American with every syrupy sweet sip.

And the more I drink, the more American real estate I take up. Sigh.

It’s tough to argue with the hard reality that soft drinks are a bad nutritional choice. And if you don’t believe that obesity is an epidemic, take a look at some animated maps on the Centers for Disease Control Web site.

They show a nation that, in 1985, had no states with an adult obesity rate more than 15 percent but morphed into a bloated country where most states are now more than 25 percent.

Still, the soda tax is a bad idea. It could be bad for our nation’s health.

All this soda tax talk could harm uphill efforts to get health care reform passed this year. It’s the sort of side issue that can become a main event in the hands of opponents eager to paint reform as a big government power grab. They’ll have plenty of help from reporters eager for a “Joe Six Pack” reform narrative.

One problem is you can’t control do-gooders, even for their good.

Word of a soda tax barely had leaked when health advocates started talking about the feds cracking down on salt and trans fat. I can hear the TV ads now: “Barack Obama and liberals not only want to control your health care, they want to control what you eat.”

Handing opponents that sort of weapon just isn’t worth it. A 3 cent tax would raise about $24 billion over four years. Obama’s plan costs $1.2 trillion. It’s like tossing an ice cube into the Gulf of Mountain Dew.

And do we really want a pitched battle between food industry groups determined to feed us fattening garbage and health activists determined to treat us like children?

And don’t our Iowans in Congress have better things to do than spending time defending corn syrup?

Health reform is an issue affecting everyone and should be paid for by everyone. Congress must find a real strategy to cover the price tag, otherwise we’ll be kicking the can down the road yet again.