Joe Bolkcom

Sen. Joe Bolkcom (D-Iowa City) said in a statement Tuesday he will introduce a new abortion bill this week aimed at prevening a Nebraska doctor from opening a family planning clinic in western Iowa that would offer late-term abortion services. Whether or not it will match Republican desires for a ban on abortion procedures after 20 weeks remains to be seen.

Bolkcom, who will run House File 657 in the Senate, said his chamber’s version of the Iowa House’s late-term abortion bill will be introduced in the Senate Ways and Means Committee this week. The day was not specified.

Last week, Bolkcom told The Iowa Independent that he wanted to thoroughly examine “the constitutionality” of House File 657 before bringing a version to the Senate floor for debate. Pro-choice advocates have said the House bill would actually ban all abortion procedures in Iowa, though proponents have said the bill aims to ban procedures after 20 weeks gestation.

That bill was discharged to the floor last week.

Bolkcom released this statement this morning:

“I share most Iowans’ goal of preventing Dr. [LeRoy] Carhart from moving his practice to Iowa. That’s why I’ll be introducing a new bill later this week in the Ways and Means Committee that will prevent him from coming to Iowa.

“What I won’t do is endanger a woman’s health and safety. As the House-passed bill is drafted right now, there’s no exception for life of the mother, rape, incest or fetus abnormalities that would prevent the baby from surviving after it’s born.

“Not every pregnancy ends the way a family hopes it will. A woman with a wanted pregnancy that goes terribly wrong must face an awful decision that none of us ever want to face. A Nebraska-style total ban will only make a difficult situation worse, and that’s no place for politicians to meddle.

“Republicans know this. Their version of the bill is a political ploy. In fact … key supporter Senator [David] Johnson said in an interview last week that ‘the bill makes it more dangerous for pregnant women with a medical emergency to have to wait until the last minute if the woman truly needs an abortion after 20 weeks.’

“What’s more, constitutional experts say the bill as drafted is blatantly unconstitutional. There’s not much point in passing an unconstitutional bill that will only embroil Iowa in an expensive court battle.

“We can all agree that there should be fewer abortions. I hope Senate Republicans will put politics aside and help me pass legislation that will prevent Dr. Carhart from coming to Iowa.”

The Texas Congressman will be in Iowa Tuesday to open a campaign office in Ankeny, Dr. Drew Ivers, chairman of Paul’s Iowa presidential exploratory committee, said Friday. Following a press conference at the office, where the Republican intends to announce his Iowa field team, Paul will caucus with Senate and House Republicans at the Iowa Capitol, Ivers said.

Paul will also be interviewed by Simon Conway of WHO Radio Tuesday evening.

Paul was in Iowa most recently last month. In March, he appeared alongside U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and Atlanta business executive Herman Cain to rally for homeschooling rights at the Iowa Capitol. At that rally, Paul said he would support getting “rid of the (U.S.) Department of Education.”

He was also one of five Republican presidential prospects to participate in the GOP debate in South Carolina last night.

And as for a possible big announcement about 2012?

“Well, I can’t disclose anything about that,” Ivers said.

The ad, embedded below, is scheduled to appear in the upper northwest quadrant Monday through Thursday of this week, and asks “What were you thinking?”

In addition to King, the organization has nearly identical ads airing in criticism of U.S. Reps. Ryan, Chip Cravaack (R-Minn.) and Sean Duffy (R-Wis.). In total, the ad buys are costing five figures and are being done in conjunction with an automated call campaign in 23 Congressional districts throughout the country that began last week.

In Iowa the automated calls follow this script:

I’m calling from Americans United for Change.

On April 15th, your Congressman Steve King voted to end Medicare and its guaranteed health care benefits. Instead, he wants to give seniors a voucher, forcing them to go out and find coverage from private insurance companies. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates this proposal will increase seniors’ out-of-pocket costs by $6,000 each year — and Congressman King is using the savings to give corporations and millionaires another tax break. Congressman King even voted to slash Medicaid funds that pay nursing home care for seniors and the disabled.

Call Congressman King at 202-225-4426 and tell him that cutting Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to pay for tax cuts for corporations and millionaires is just wrong. Tell him to keep his hands off our Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

While there has been little shortage over the years of progressive outrage directed at King, it hasn’t been commonplace for national groups to spend money in an effort to target him. This has been because the existing 5th District hasn’t been considered competitive. This particular ad buy signals that either national organizations view the newly remapped 4th District as being somewhat more competitive or that they believe a high-profile Democrat could make inroads come 2012 — or perhaps a bit of both.

“We don’t want a shutdown,” U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said, contrasting federal Democrats with Republicans. “We are not applauding anyone who says they want to shut the government down, but evidently the entire Republican caucus in the House would like to see the entire government shutdown.”

Harkin — as well as U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Waterloo) in a Wednesday conference call — briefly described scenes around the U.S. Capitol that included citizens holding signs advocating for a shutdown, or loudly voicing their opinion that if certain cuts were not agreed upon by Democrats that the government should stall. Harkin noted that he had seen U.S. Reps. Michele Bachmann, a Minnesota Republican considering a 2012 presidential run, and Mike Pence, an Indiana Republican once a rumored 2012 GOP candidate, encouraging such demonstrations.

“It is flabbergasting that people are walking around and saying, ‘Shut the government down.’ I’ve got to ask sometimes: Where is their patriotism?” said Harkin.

Such a situation, he said, will not only directly impact Iowans and state agencies that work with federal agencies like the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Department of Transportation, but would hurt the national economy. A shutdown would directly impact the National Parks Service, which has been preparing events to commemorate the 150-year anniversary of the start of the Civil War.

“It sends a terrible signal to the rest of the world that we can’t govern ourselves,” Harkin said.

The bill, presented by Republicans to slash $12 billion from the budget while agreeing to fund operations for a single week, has attached “rider” policies such as a ban on all federal funding for Planned Parenthood and limits to environmental protection regulations.

On the Senate floor Thursday morning, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said such riders have no place in “a stopgap spending measure.”

“The only thing holding up an agreement is ideology,” Reid added, making a point that Harkin and Braley have previously made toward GOP budget motives.

In response, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell described the bill as “reasonable” and said that Democrats could either accept it or deal with a shutdown.

“That’s it. That’s the choice,” he said.

U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), however, remains at least somewhat optimistic that an agreement can be hammered out before the Friday deadline, and that Republicans are working to fill a leadership void that President Obama has allowed.

Grassley told Bret Hayworth of the Sioux City Journal that a lot people believe it’ll be great to have a halting of government services, seeing a paring of expenses. However, he said, lots of federal government employees will then have to handle duties missed during the shutdown, meaning a lot of “overtime pay to catch up.”

Grassley also said a government shutdown would have one certain result: “It will make (Americans) more cynical.”

At a news conference Thursday morning, U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said negotiators are further away from a deal than they were even on Wednesday night, adding that Democrats were using “gimmicks” instead of real spending cuts.

If the government shuts down, agencies could have a difficult time processing first-time payments from the Veteran’s Administration or through Social Security, including disability benefits. Taxpayers with outstanding tax refunds may have delays in receiving their checks, and their might be difficulties for those taxpayers who do not file tax documents electronically. Although the Republican bill provides funding for the Defense Department through Sept. 30, failure to reach an agreement on that bill could cause delays in payment and outreach services to Iowas military veterans and their families. Citizens heading out on spring break may find national parks closed, and those needing access to the federal court system may also see delays.

A shutdown would not, however, send home employees who deliver what are considered “essential services.” For instance, air traffic controllers would not be subject to the shutdown due to the obvious public safety implications. Such individuals could be asked to work without pay, however, on a promise of reimbursement at a later date.

“Perhaps one of things most under-reported about this is the fact that the Senate passed a bill that said if the government shutdown we would stop being paid,” Harkin added. “To date, that same bill has not been approved by the House.”

“Senate Democrats have agreed to meet House Republicans half-way, with more than $30 billion in cuts,” Harkin told reporters. “But the tea party contingent is still trying to call the shots in the House, threatening to throw a temper tantrum and shut down the government if they don’t get all of their demands.

“This is not what Iowans wanted when they voted last November. That’s not the way they want government to work, where one side says, ‘It has got to be my way or the highway.’ They want us to work together.”

During discussions on the budget, Harkin said, discussions regarding cuts to Social Security should be off the table.

“Republicans are seizing on the budget crisis as a pretext to ram through their long-standing ideological wish list,” he said. “At the state level, they are using the budget crisis to attack public-employee unions and to try to privatize public services. Here in Washington they are using it to go after Social Security. This has been their goal since this program was created by Franklin Roosevelt in 1935. George W. Bush and the Republicans made a run at privatizing Social Security in 2005 and they failed. Well, here they go again.”

Social Security, he said, has never “contributed one dime to the deficit — and, by law, it never will.” Harkin noted the 2010 annual reports filed by the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees, which state that existing trust funds are capable of funding the program for more than two decades — even as the program absorbs massive numbers of baby boomers who are about to reach retirement.

As early as next week, he said, House Republicans are expected to present their budget blueprint “that will end Social Security as we know it.”

“According to press reports, Republicans are looking at raising the Social Security retirement age, decreasing benefits and maybe even privatizing all or part of the program — turning Social Security funds over to Wall Street,” he said. “So, let’s be clear what’s going on here: This latest radical attack on Social Security benefits has nothing what-so-ever to do with reducing budget deficits.”

If House Republicans would agree to lift the cap that requires Americans to only pay Social Security on their first $106,000 of annual income, the program could be stabilized for “generations to come,” he said.

“I will adamantly oppose all Republican efforts to slash Social Security. And, you can mark my words that Iowans and other working Americans won’t stand for cutting Social Security either.”

On Monday, Mother Jones released a memo (PDF), obtained from House Republicans, demonstrating the GOP’s efforts to appease opponents by eliminating some of the more controversial provisions, such as redefining rape (the bill formerly outlined rape resulting from force as the only kind eligible for taxpayer funding for abortion, not statutory rape or drug-induced rape).

The idea behind New Jersey Republican Rep. Christopher Smith’s bill is to make permanent the annually-renewed Hyde Amendment, which prohibits funding abortions through Medicaid, but also to prevent employers from being able to deduct insurance plans that cover abortion.

Other policies the GOP wishes to make permanent, according to the Committee on the Judiciary memo:

• Helms amendment: prohibits funding for abortion overseas
• Smith Federal Employees Health Benefits Program amendment: prohibits funding for abortion coverage for federal employees
• Dornan amendment: bans congressionally appropriated funds for abortion in the District of Columbia
• Restrictions on abortion funding through Peace Corps and federal prisons
• Hyde-Weldon conscience clause: prevents recipients of federal funding from discriminating against health care providers who do not cover or provide abortions

The main intent, as stated: “H.R. 3 will allow Congress to pass one piece of legislation that prohibits any federal funding of abortion, no matter where in the federal system that funding might occur.”

There is an exception for cases of rape, incest and when it is necessary to save the life of the mother.

The updated version clarifies that the bill does not prohibit individuals or entities from buying privately funded coverage that includes abortion — it just cannot be purchased using federal funds or matching funds required for a federally subsidized program. Those who receive a federal health insurance subsidy would be able to pay for abortion but could not use a federal premium payment to pay for any abortion-coverage premiums.

Perhaps a small victory for women, Mother Jones notes that the Republicans’ new version refers to women as “woman,” changed from the initial language “pregnant female” — which the magazine views as a move of respect: ” … the latter certainly gives more respect and agency to the woman rather than merely referring to her as a vessel for an unborn child.”

The House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to mark up the bill on Thursday at 10 a.m.

The Census apportions congressional districts every ten years, while state legislatures are generally in charge of redrawing the districts based on those apportionments. The population of the United States is now 308,745,538, and each congressional district will average 710,767 persons.

Texas, where Republicans have a supermajority in the House and Senate and hold the governor’s mansion, gained four new House seats with the population growing by 20.6 percent in ten years. However, the growth broken down by race will be released in February — the Voting Rights Act could mean that some of those seats have to be drawn with a majority of Hispanics that have accounted for much of the recent growth.

Florida gained two seats, where Republicans also have a supermajority in both legislative chambers and hold the governor’s mansion. Amendment 6, limiting the power of the legislature to redraw congressional districts, passed in the November elections, but it is being challenged in court by Reps. Corrine Brown (D-Fla.) and Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.)

Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington all gained one seat.

New York and Ohio lost two seats each, representing the longstanding decline in growth in the Rust Belt. Iowa, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey and Pennsylvania all lost one seat.

The reapportionment process will also have implications for the 2012 presidential campaign, as the Electoral College is based on the number of congressional districts in each state. In 2008, Barack Obama beat John McCain by 365 electoral votes to 173. With today’s reapportionment, McCain would have picked up six seats and Obama would have lost five.