A rose to both Sen. Chuck Grassley and Sen. Tom Harkin for their efforts to make the United States Senate more transparent and effective. Harkin was among the minority who tried to curb abuse of the filibuster rule. Alas, the effort was defeated last week. Instead, Senate leaders agreed to behave more responsibly. Right. Grassley, however, was successful in getting a binding resolution approved that requires a senator to go public when he or she puts a "hold" on legislation. Holds, which allow a single senator to block action by the entire Senate, have increasingly been invoked in secret. Grassley joined a bipartisan effort to require members to at least identify themselves when they throw sand in the Senate's gears. A small step, maybe, but a small step in the right direction.A rose to Sen. Chuck Grassley for trying to save taxpayers' money. He proposed that the new health reform law (which he didn't vote for) apply to members of Congress, their staffs and administration employees. Great idea. Taxpayers now subsidize health insurance coverage for these public employees. If it works as it will for all other Americans, Grassley's proposal would end those subsidies. The new law will provide financial help only to middle- and lower-income Americans. It's doubtful many in Washington would qualify.
A thistle to Iowa state legislators who want to prevent cities and counties from enacting any local gun-control laws. This is a slap at the notion of local control under the Home Rule amendment in the Iowa Constitution. It is also hypocritical. Imagine, if you will, legislators sitting in the comfort of the state Capitol, with guards and metal detectors at the entrances screening for weapons. Meanwhile, they propose a law to prevent such protections at City Hall. Perhaps these legislators would change the rules and let people carry guns into the House and Senate chambers. Too bad Iowans repealed the section on dueling in the Iowa Constitution back in 1992.
A rose to Sen. Chuck Grassley for trying to save taxpayers' money. He proposed that the new health reform law (which he didn't vote for) apply to members of Congress, their staffs and administration employees. Great idea. Taxpayers now subsidize health insurance coverage for these public employees. If it works as it will for all other Americans, Grassley's proposal would end those subsidies. The new law will provide financial help only to middle- and lower-income Americans. It's doubtful many in Washington would qualify.
A thistle to Iowa state legislators who want to prevent cities and counties from enacting any local gun-control laws. This is a slap at the notion of local control under the Home Rule amendment in the Iowa Constitution. It is also hypocritical. Imagine, if you will, legislators sitting in the comfort of the state Capitol, with guards and metal detectors at the entrances screening for weapons. Meanwhile, they propose a law to prevent such protections at City Hall. Perhaps these legislators would change the rules and let people carry guns into the House and Senate chambers. Too bad Iowans repealed the section on dueling in the Iowa Constitution back in 1992.
A thistle to Iowa state legislators who want to prevent cities and counties from enacting any local gun-control laws. This is a slap at the notion of local control under the Home Rule amendment in the Iowa Constitution. It is also hypocritical. Imagine, if you will, legislators sitting in the comfort of the state Capitol, with guards and metal detectors at the entrances screening for weapons. Meanwhile, they propose a law to prevent such protections at City Hall. Perhaps these legislators would change the rules and let people carry guns into the House and Senate chambers. Too bad Iowans repealed the section on dueling in the Iowa Constitution back in 1992.
