Sen. Brad Zaun

Zaun Introduced A Bill To Privatize The Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System For All Future Members

Zaun Introduced A Bill Which Would Repeal Iowa’s Pension Systems For All New Public Employees And Replace Them With A Private Market/401(K) Type Plan

The Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System Was A Defined-Benefit Program Which Assured Retirees A Monthly Payment. “IPERS is a defined-benefit program - which assures retirees a monthly payment - while many private employers have shifted to 401(k)-style defined-contribution retirement programs, which do not promise a monthly check while building an account for retirement income. In addition, some states have hybrid pension plans that contain elements of both defined-benefit and defined-contribution plans.” [Inside Sources, 8/4/18]

● 1 In 10 Iowans Was An IPERS Member. “IPERS represents more than 360,000 members who teach our children, maintain our roads and parks, care for our most vulnerable residents and protect our citizens. 1 in 10 Iowans is an IPERS member.” [Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System, 2020]

● IPERS' Members Included Current, Former And Retired Employees Of State Agencies, School Districts, Cities, Counties And Other Iowa Government Agencies. “IPERS' members include current, former and retired employees of state agencies, school districts, cities, counties and other Iowa government agencies. The average IPERS member retires after 22 years and receives an annual pension of $16,000.” [Des Moines Register, 12/4/14]

● The Average IPERS Member Retired After 22 Years Of Service, Earning An Annual Pension Of $16,000. “Over 108,000 retirees and their beneficiaries receive IPERS retirement benefits. IPERS paid $1.8 billion in retirement benefits during the last fiscal year, with $1.6 billion paid in Iowa. IPERS is a prefunded system – contributions from employees and employers are pooled and invested over the member’s career. The average IPERS member retires after 22 years of service, earning an annual pension of $16,000.” [Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System, 2/3/15]

Zaun’s Bill Would Take Away Guaranteed Benefits For New Public Employees, Forcing Them Onto Privatized Plans Which Often Left Workers Earning Less Than Expected And Ending Up With Too Little To Cover Their Retirement Needs

Zaun Introduced A Bill To Prohibit Any New Iowa Public Employees From Becoming Members Of Existing Public Pension Funds. “Meanwhile, a bill remains alive in the Iowa Senate for consideration in the 2018 session that would prohibit all Iowa public employees hired after July 1, 2019, from becoming members of existing public pension funds. Senate File 45, authored by Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, calls for the development of a mandatory defined contribution pension plan for new public employees.” [Des Moines Register, 7/4/17]

Zaun’s Bill Would Divert New Public Employees Into Defined Contribution Retirement Programs Similar To Private-Sector 401(k) Programs That Did Not Guarantee Benefits. “McCoy said he is concerned about Senate File 45, introduced last session by Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, which McCoy contended would ‘dismantle’ IPERS and other public pension programs that promise monthly benefits checks. The legislation would require that all new public employees hired after July 1, 2019, would be diverted into defined contribution retirement programs similar to private-sector 401(k) programs that do not guarantee benefits.” [Des Moines Register, 12/11/17]

A Defined Benefit System Typically Paid A Set Amount To Employees When They Retired Whereas Defined Contribution Systems Did Not Promise A Specific Amount To Beneficiaries. “A defined benefit system typically pays a set amount to employees when they retire. Defined contribution systems do not promise a specific amount to beneficiaries.” [The Gazette, 10/24/18]

● Americans For Prosperity Called For A Shift To A Defined Contribution Arrangement. “Some conservative groups have called the IPERS defined benefit system outdated. Americans for Prosperity has called for a shift to a defined contribution arrangement. However, if changes were proposed, they would surely be opposed by public sector unions.” [Quad-City Times, 1/26/17]

CNN Money: Investors In Defined Contribution Plans Often Earned Lower Returns Than They Expected. “Studies have shown that 401(k)s and other defined contribution plans haven't been as successful as many proponents hoped. […] The array of investment options - many plans have more than a dozen funds to choose from - can be another turnoff. And investors in those plans often earn lower returns than they expected.” [CNN Money, 2018]

● CNN Money: Studies Showed That Defined Contribution Plans Were Not As Successful As Many Proponents Hoped Because Employees Often Declined Investing Their Own Money For Retirement Or Invested Sums That Were Way Too Small To Cover Their Retirement Needs. “Studies have shown that 401(k)s and other defined contribution plans haven't been as successful as many proponents hoped. Turns out that when employees are given the choice of investing their own money for retirement, lots of them say no thanks, or else invest sums that are way too small to cover their retirement needs.” [CNN Money, 2018]

● CNN Money: “Obviously, A Defined Benefit Plan Is A Much Better Deal For You.” “You typically don't fork over any of your paycheck to participate in a defined benefit plan. Your employer does. But you do have to put your own money into a defined contribution plan like a 401(k) or a 403(b). Obviously, a defined benefit plan is a much better deal for you. Because defined benefit plans are more costly for employers than defined contribution plans, most of them have - you guessed it - scaled back dramatically or eliminated these plans altogether in recent years. If you still have a defined benefit plan at your company, consider yourself lucky.” [CNN Money, 2018] Zaun Voted For A Bureaucratic Employment Verification Measure That Would Make It Harder For At Least Tens Of Thousands Of Iowans To Access Medicaid And Food Stamps

Iowa Republicans Supported An Employment Verification Measure That Would Subject Over 50,000 Iowans To Confusion, More Paperwork, Increased Bureaucracy And Loss Of Health Insurance

Iowa Republicans Voted To Make Those Receiving Medicaid Benefits Or Public Food Assistance To Show They Were Working, Volunteering Or Performing Charity Work In Order To Receive Benefits. “‘Able-bodied adults without school-aged children or dependents would be required to work, volunteer or perform charity work to receive Medicaid benefits or public food assistance under legislation passed Tuesday by the Iowa Senate. A total of 31 Republicans voted for Senate File 2366 while 17 Democrats and one GOP senator opposed the measure.” [The Gazette, 3/3/20]

Des Moines Register Editorial: Iowa Republicans Should Lean From Arkansas’s Mandated Work Requirements, Which Resulted In “Confusion, More Paperwork, Increased Bureaucracy, Court Fights And People Losing Health Insurance.” “Every once in a while you get to see what happens when a bad policy idea becomes reality. Look no further than Arkansas, which enacted work requirements for Medicaid recipients. Iowa’s Republican lawmakers and governor should take an especially close look. In 2018, Arkansas embarked on an experiment to become the only state to fully implement Medicaid work requirements. Medicaid, funded by federal and state governments, provides health insurance for low- income Americans and ensures health providers who treat poor patients are compensated. Arkansas required many residents covered by an Affordable Care Act expansion to perform at least 80 hours per month of work, volunteering, job training or other activities. What ensued was exactly what should have been expected: confusion, more paperwork, increased bureaucracy, court fights and people losing health insurance.” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 10/30/19]

More Than 70,000 Iowans Would Have Been Affected By A 2019 Employment Verification Measure. “Earlier this year the GOP-led Iowa Legislature jumped on the misguided work requirement bandwagon and supported legislation with language that looks a lot like what Arkansas implemented. […] The nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency cautioned Iowa lawmakers that more than 70,000 Iowans would be affected. The additional work for state employees, hiring more staff, gathering information on beneficiaries and other newly created bureaucratic issues were estimated to cost $5 million the first year and nearly $12 million the second.” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 10/30/19]

The Fiscal Note For The 2020 Bill Anticipated That Over 50,397 Requests For Information Would Be Made To Individuals To Determine If They Were Meeting Work Requirements. “The DHS will need to send 50,397 Requests for Information (RFI) to individuals to determine if they are currently meeting work requirements at $0.60 per mailing and 15 minutes of work for each IM2 FTE position. • There will be an estimated 47,877 individuals enrolled in both the Medicaid and Iowa Health and Wellness Program who do not qualify for an exemption and who are not currently meeting the work requirement.” [Fiscal Note for Senate File 2366 – 2020 Session, 3/3/20]

Zaun Voted For The Bill. [Senate File 2366 – 2020 Session, 3/3/20] The Unnecessary Bureaucratic Requirements Would Result In Workers And People Who Should Be Exempt Due To Illness Or Disability Losing Coverage

Democrats Warned That Qualified Medicaid Recipients Could Unintentionally Lose Health Coverage Because Of Missed Paperwork Deadlines. “Opponents of the program said qualified Medicaid recipients could unintentionally lose health coverage by missing paperwork deadlines. ‘Even if you do catch a couple of those people the question arises, what about the children of those individuals who are going to get removed?’ said Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo. ‘Who’s going to take care of them?’” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20]

78 Percent Of Working-Age Medicaid Recipients In Iowa Were Already Employed. “According to figures gathered by the Kaiser Family Foundation, 78 percent of working-age Medicaid recipients in Iowa are already employed. Opponents said that shows the bill is unnecessary.” [The Gazette, 3/3/20]

Medicaid Work Requirements Resulted In Those Already Working Or Who Should Be Exempt Due To Illness Or Disability Losing Coverage Because Rules For Reporting And Claiming Exemptions Increased Paperwork And Red Tape. “First, any work requirement will have the unintended consequence of taking coverage away from people who are already working or should be exempt due to illness, disability, or other factors. That’s because rules for reporting and claiming exemptions increase paperwork and red tape, which cause eligible people to lose coverage and become uninsured.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 1/10/19]

The Bill Would Throw 16% Of Iowa Families Receiving Food Benefits Off Of The Program

The Bill Would Eliminate Categorical Eligibility For Food Stamps And Enforce An Income Limit Of 130 Percent Of Poverty. “Iowa families earning up to 160 percent of the federal poverty level can automatically qualify for SNAP if they also participate in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF). Under the bill, Iowa would stop using that form of categorical eligibility and enforce the original income limit of 130 percent of poverty.” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20]

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation: Eliminating Categorical Eligibility Would Have Resulted In 16 Percent Of Iowa SNAP Households Losing Access To The Program. “According to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a proposed federal rule eliminating categorical eligibility would have resulted in 16 percent of Iowa SNAP households losing access to the program.” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20]

Luke Elzinga Of The Des Moines Area Religious Council: “A Family Of Four With Two Parents Both Working $8.50 An Hour For An Income Of $35,360 Annually Can Currently Receive SNAP Benefits. No Longer If We Eliminate Categorical Eligibility.” “Luke Elzinga of the Des Moines Area Religious Council said that would cause working families to lose food access. ‘A family of four with two parents both working $8.50 an hour for an income of $35,360 annually can currently receive SNAP benefits,’ Elzinga said. ‘No longer if we eliminate categorical eligibility.’” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20]

The Bill Would Prohibit Iowa From Applying For A Waiver To Suspend Employment Verification For Food Stamps In Times Of High Unemployment Or Where Persistent High Jobless Rates Existed

The Bill Would Prohibit The Iowa Department of Human Services From Applying For A USDA Waiver To Suspend Rules Forcing Employment Verification In Times Of High Unemployment Or In Certain Cities Or Counties With Persistent High Jobless Rates. “Work requirements already exist in SNAP for people who are not disabled and don’t have children or other dependents. States can apply for a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to suspend those rules in times of high unemployment or in certain cities or counties with persistent high jobless rates. The Senate bill would prohibit the Iowa Department of Human Services from applying for a USDA waiver in the future. It requires DHS to assign people subject to SNAP work rules to a job training program.” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20]

Blocking Health Care That People Needed Was Counterproductive, Making It Harder For Them To Get Jobs

Preventing People From Getting The Health Care They Needed To Work Or Look For A Job Undermined The Goal Of Promoting Employment. “Second, work requirements are ineffective in promoting employment because they don’t accurately identify those who can work but aren’t working (often for reasons beyond their control), nor do they assess their needs or provide them with supports. And they can undermine work when people can’t get the health care they need to work or look for a job.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 1/10/19]

Des Moines Register Editorial: “Medicaid Gets People Connected With The Health Care They Need To Be Well Enough To Hold Jobs.” “Arkansas has no evidence to show the work requirements increased employment. It does, however, have thousands more people without insurance and many health providers, including hospitals, not being compensated. Will Iowa's GOP lawmakers learn from this? Will they finally understand that Medicaid gets people connected with the health care they need to be well enough to hold jobs?” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 10/30/19]

The Bill Would Punish Those Without Child Care Or Who Struggle To Secure Full Time Work

Opponents Warned Those Without Training Or Easy Access To Transportation Or Child Care Could Be Punished. “Opponents of the program said qualified Medicaid recipients could unintentionally lose health coverage by missing paperwork deadlines. ‘Even if you do catch a couple of those people the question arises, what about the children of those individuals who are going to get removed?’ said Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo. ‘Who’s going to take care of them?’ […] They said instead of helping people advance in a career, work rules would punish those who have not had training or don’t have easy access to transportation or child care.” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20]

The Bill Would Apply To Mothers A Year After Giving Birth. “Jessica Lunsford is a single mom living in Cordyn, pregnant with her second child. She works at the Dollar General in town and says she’s making ends meet, helped in part by food assistance and Medicaid from the state. Under a proposal at the Iowa statehouse, Lunsford — after her newborn’s first birthday —would need to work or volunteer 20 hours per week in order to stay on Medicaid, an effort Republicans backing the bill say is a way to plug workforce shortages and curtail abuse of the system.” [CBS Iowa, 3/2/20]

Jamie Swearingin Of The South Central Iowa Community Action Program: In Wayne County, “Our Day Care Is Open Like 6 To 5:30. But There Are Lots Of Job Openings On A Shift From Maybe 2 [To] 10. Well Who Is Going To Keep That Child From 5 To 10?” “ ‘I understand where they are coming from but being in the field and seeing it, I think it’s going to back fire and it’s going to do the opposite,’ said Jamie Swearingin, who works with the South Central Iowa Community Action Program at the Wayne County center in Cordyn. […] She argues one of the biggest hurdles to working more hours, as prescribed by the legislation, is lack of affordable and accessible childcare. Wayne County has one of the lowest per capita income rates in all Iowa counties and a poverty rate of 13%, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. ‘I think the biggest difficulty here in Wayne County is that our day care is open like 6 [a.m.] to 5:30 [p.m.],’ she said. ‘But there are lots of job openings on a shift from maybe 2 [p.m.] 10 [p.m.]. Well who is going to keep that child from 5 [p.m.] to 10 [p.m.]?’” [CBS Iowa, 3/2/20]

A Single Mom Noted “It’s Going To Be Very Difficult For Some Families To Get To Those 20 Hours—Not Because They Don’t Want To, But Because The Employers Can’t Give Them All Of Those Hours.” “Jessica Lunsford is a single mom living in Cordyn, pregnant with her second child. […] ‘I understand where they are coming from but being in the field and seeing it, I think it’s going to back fire and it’s going to do the opposite,’ said Jamie Swearingin, who works with the South Central Iowa Community Action Program at the Wayne County center in Cordyn. She assists Jessica Lunsford in a program called Family Development Self-Sufficiency, which is designed to help people on cash assistance. Many of the people she works with, she says, are shift workers whose work schedule is often out of their control. ‘It’s going to be very difficult for some families to get to those 20 hours—not because they don’t want to, but because the employers can’t give them all of those hours,’ Lunsford said.” [CBS Iowa, 3/2/20]

Working Medicaid Beneficiaries Often Had Low-Wage Jobs With Volatile Hours And Little Flexibility And Could Lose Benefits If Their Employer Did Not Give Them A Set Number Of Hours Each Month. “In addition, working Medicaid beneficiaries often have low-wage jobs with volatile hours and little flexibility, so they may not be able to work a set number of hours each month — meaning that even people strongly attached to the labor force will lose coverage.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 1/10/19]

Half Of Working Low-Income Adults Potentially Subject To Medicaid Work Requirements Could Not Meet A 20-Hour-Per-Week Standard Every Single Month. “In Iowa, nearly three-quarters of adults with Medicaid are already working, but the most common jobs are in restaurants and food service. Low-wage jobs like these have volatile hours and little flexibility, so an illness or family emergency can lead to job loss and periods of unemployment. That’s why our analysis found that, nationwide, nearly half of working low-income adults potentially subject to Medicaid work requirements couldn’t meet a 20-hour- per-week standard every single month.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 3/20/19]

Despite A Koch-Backed Group’s Claim That The Bill Would Preserve Limited Resources, The Bill Would Actually Cost The State Six Times What It Would Save

Americans For Prosperity Supported The Bill, Claiming It Would Preserve “Limited Resources” By Restricting Benefits To “The Truly Needy.” “Bill supporters said it would restore the original intent of the income limits and ensures the neediest families receive assistance. ‘There are limited resources in this state,’ said Drew Klein of Americans for Prosperity. ‘We should preserve the integrity of these welfare programs for the truly needy.’” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20]

The Bill Would Require The State To Give Up Federal Medicaid Funds Totaling $108 Million In Fiscal 2021 And $224.6 Million In Fiscal 2022, Exceeding The Bill’s Estimated Net Savings Of Nearly $17.6 Million In Fiscal 2021 And $37.2 In Fiscal 2022. “‘This seems mean-spirited to me, un-Iowan to me and I don’t like it,’ said Sen. Rob Hogg, D-Cedar Rapids, a Democrat who argued many Iowans already are working in low-wage jobs but still need assistance and will get ‘tripped up’ by new requirements. According to a fiscal note prepared by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency, the state would see an estimated net savings of nearly $17.6 million in fiscal 2021 and $37.2 million the following year. But Hogg noted the bill would require the state to give up federal Medicaid funds totaling $108 million in fiscal 2021 and $224.6 million in fiscal 2022 due to bureaucratic hurdles established in the measure. ‘This bill is bad for the Iowa economy,’ he said.” [The Gazette, 3/3/20]

Des Moines Register Editorial: “Of Course, There Would Be The Expense Of Defending The State Against Inevitable Lawsuits.” “The additional work for state employees, hiring more staff, gathering information on beneficiaries and other newly created bureaucratic issues were estimated to cost $5 million the first year and nearly $12 million the second. Plus, of course, there would be the expense of defending the state against inevitable lawsuits.” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 10/30/19]

Zaun Voted To Let Landlords To Discriminate Against Low-Income Tenants Throughout Iowa By Banning Cities And Counties From Passing Local Laws To Block Discrimination Against Renters On Public Assistance

After The Des Moines City Council Unanimously Passed An Ordinance Requiring Landlords Whose Rent Qualified For Housing Choice Vouchers To Accept Them, The Iowa Senate Passed A Bill To Ban Any City Or County From Enacting Such Legislation

The Iowa Senate Passed Legislation To Ban Cities And Counties From Passing Local Laws To Block Discrimination Against Renters On Public Assistance. “The Iowa Senate on Tuesday passed legislation to ban cities and counties from passing local laws to block discrimination against renters who are on public assistance. Des Moines and Iowa City have ordinances that ban the discrimination. Democrats criticized Senate File 2368 as a way for landlords to discriminate against renters because they are racial minorities, for example, but under the guise of turning down federal aid such as Section 8 certificates.” [Iowa Capital Dispatch, 3/3/20]

The Bill Was Introduced After The Des Moines City Council Unanimously Passed A 2019 Ordinance Requiring Landlords Whose Rent Qualified For Housing Choice Vouchers To Accept Them. “Iowa cities including Des Moines could not prevent landlords from turning away tenants who use public assistance to pay rent under bills that advanced Monday in the Senate and House. […] The bill's introduction comes after the Des Moines City Council unanimously passed an ordinance last year requiring landlords whose rent qualifies for housing choice vouchers to accept them.” [Des Moines Register, 2/17/20]

Des Moines Councilman Josh Mandelbaum: “We’re On The Front Lines Of Dealing With These Challenges, And This Just Takes Away One Of The Tools We Have To Address This.” “Des Moines Ward 3 Councilman Josh Mandelbaum said of the proposed bills: “We’re on the front lines of dealing with these challenges, and this just takes away one of the tools we have to address this.”” [Des Moines Register, 2/17/20]

The Daily Iowan Editorial: Landlords Were Presented With No Kind Of Financial Or Foreseeable Disadvantage In Accepting Tenants Assisted By The Program And Still Able To Evict Tenants Who Broke Lease Agreements Or Caused Damage Or Disturbance To Their Property. “Property owners are presented with no kind of financial or foreseeable disadvantage in accepting tenants who are assisted by the program. The voucher pays the rent. This source of income is still income that is used to pay rent fully and on time. To be clear, the program does not absolve residents of their responsibilities as tenants; it only aids in financial assistance. Landlords are still able to evict tenants who break their lease agreement, or cause damage or disturbance to their property.” [Editorial – The Daily Iowan, 3/3/20] Over 70,000 People In 43,000 Iowa Households Used Federal Rental Assistance To Afford Modest Housing, Most Of Whom Were Seniors, Children Or People With Disabilities

Over 70,000 People In 43,000 Iowa Households Used Federal Rental Assistance To Afford Modest Housing. “71,300 people in 43,000 Iowa households use federal rental assistance to afford modest housing.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 12/10/19]

● 75% Of Those Benefiting From Federal Rental Assistance Were Seniors, Children Or People With Disabilities. “75% are seniors, children, or people with disabilities.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 12/10/19]

The Daily Iowan Editorial: “This Bill Would Encourage Profiling Of Low-Income Families And Risk Individuals Facing Homelessness. Iowa Legislators Should Prioritize Poverty Prevention Instead Of Making It More Difficult For Iowans To Seek Housing For Their Families.” “For a property owner to then reject a rental application simply because the applicant is poor or disadvantaged, that is a dangerous agency of socioeconomic prejudice. This bill would encourage profiling of low-income families and risk individuals facing homelessness. Iowa legislators should prioritize poverty prevention instead of making it more difficult for Iowans to seek housing for their families. All Americans should have access to stable, affordable housing. This idea is not novel — Section 8 was passed in 1937. There is no necessary cause for the Iowa Legislature to make it legal for property owners to discriminate against their tenants’ socioeconomic background.” [Editorial – The Daily Iowan, 3/3/20]

128,400 People In 67,400 Low-Income Iowa Households Had To Pay More Than Half Their Income For Rent, Pushing Many To Move Or Suffer Homelessness

Des Moines Register Editorial: Iowans Seeking Housing Faced Criminal Background Checks, Credit Checks, The Cost Of A Deposit And Rental Insurance Requirements While The Fair Market Rent For A Two-Bedroom Unit Was Nearly $800 Per Month, Difficult To Afford For Minimum Wage Earners. “Iowa has more than 360,000 rental households, and renting is no easy task. People seeking housing face criminal background checks, credit checks, the cost of a deposit and even requirements for rental insurance. The fair market rent for a two-bedroom unit in Iowa is nearly $800 per month, which is difficult to afford for those earning minimum wage. Prohibiting landlords from discriminating against tenants who receive government assistance is the right thing to do. The bill to do the opposite passed the Senate in a party-line vote this week.” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 3/6/20]

Emergency Residence Project Executive Director Jodi Stumbo: People Who Received Approval For Section 8 Vouchers Had To Relocate To Another County Because They Couldn't Secure Housing. “Jodi Stumbo, executive director of the Emergency Residence Project in Ames, told lawmakers Monday that 21 people the project served who received approval for Section 8 vouchers had to relocate to Boone County because they couldn't secure housing in Ames or Story County. Ames City Councilman David Martin said the city doesn't have an existing ordinance but has planned to discuss one.” [Des Moines Register, 2/17/20]

Polk County Housing Trust Fund Executive Director Eric Burmeister: The Bill Would Make It More Difficult For People With Housing Choice Vouchers To Find Places Where They Could Use Them To Rent Apartments. “Eric Burmeister, executive director of the Polk County Housing Trust Fund, said the bill voiding the ordinance would make it more difficult for people who have housing choice vouchers to find places where they can use them to rent apartments. ‘This is an urban issue that the urban cities have chosen to deal with in a certain way, and I don’t see where the state Legislature sees a compelling state interest in regulating local housing programs,’ he said.” [Des Moines Register, 2/17/20]

128,400 People In 67,400 Low-Income Iowa Households Paid More Than Half Their Income For Rent, Often Forgoing Necessities, Like Food Or Medicine, To Keep A Roof Over Their Heads. “As a result, 128,400 people in 67,400 low-income Iowa households pay more than half their income for rent, often forgoing necessities, like food or medicine, to keep a roof over their heads. The federal government considers housing unaffordable if it costs more than 30 percent of a household’s income.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 12/10/19]

● Of Those In Low-Income Households Paying More Than Half Their Income In Rent, 45% Were Working Adults, 13% Were Seniors, 17% Had A Disability And 3% Were Veterans. “128,400 low-income Iowa renters pay more than half their income for housing. Most don’t receive rental assistance due to funding limitations. Who are they? 26% are children[;] 45% are working adults[;] 13% are seniors[;] 17% have a disability [;] 3% are veterans[.] When low-income renters can't find a decent, affordable apartment, they are more likely to be evicted and risk becoming homeless.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 12/10/19]

● 26% Of Those In Low-Income Households Paying More Than Half Their Income In Rent Were Children, With Over 7,000 Iowa Children Estimated To Have Lived In Shelters, On The Street, Doubled Up With Other Families, Or In Hotels Or Motels During The 2016-2017 School Year. “128,400 low-income Iowa renters pay more than half their income for housing. Most don’t receive rental assistance due to funding limitations. Who are they? 26% are children […] On a single night in 2018, 2,750 people experienced homelessness in Iowa. An estimated 7,100 Iowa school children lived in shelters, on the street, doubled up with other families, or in hotels or motels during the 2016-2017 school year.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 12/10/19]

30% Of Low-Income People In Iowa Were Homeless Or Paid Over Half Their Income For Rent. “...but 3 in 10 low-income* people in Iowa are homeless or pay over half their income for rent. [*Low-income = household income not exceeding 80 percent of local median income. For a family of three in Iowa, 80 percent of the local median is equivalent to $55,350.] Most don’t receive federal rental assistance due to limited funding.” [Center for Budget & Policy Priorities, 12/10/19]

The Daily Iowan Editorial: Iowans Should Not Be Ashamed To Depend On A Federal-Government Program Designed To Keep Vulnerable Communities, Including Low-Income Families, Veterans, As Well As Elderly And Disabled Residents, From Being Homeless. “Iowans should not be ashamed to depend on a federal-government program designed to keep vulnerable communities from being homeless. These communities include low-income families, veterans, as well as elderly and disabled residents who are unable to afford housing without federal assistance. Even if the Republican-controlled Legislature doesn’t recognize this, Iowa City does. The proposed bill would invalidate current ordinances set by the city council to block this discrimination.” [Editorial – The Daily Iowan, 3/3/20]

Zaun Claimed To Support “Local Control” When It Served His Agenda

Des Moines Register Editorial: The Des Moines Policy Was “An Important Protection, And One Lawmakers Should Be Expanding To All Iowans By Codifying It In State Law. Instead They Are Again Trampling On Local Control And Trying To Thwart Anti-Discrimination Efforts By Cities.” “Des Moines is among the cities that have adopted a ‘legal source of income’ ordinance. It requires landlords to consider all sources of legal income — including child support, Social Security, welfare and vouchers — in determining income for rental eligibility. That prevents landlords from discriminating against potential tenants who receive government subsidies and assistance. This is an important protection, and one lawmakers should be expanding to all Iowans by codifying it in state law. Instead they are again trampling on local control and trying to thwart anti-discrimination efforts by cities.” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 3/6/20]

● Zaun: “I Believe It Is Important To Trust Parents And Our School Board Members And Give Local Control Back To Our School Districts.” “What works for one district does not always work for another, especially when looking at the differences in urban and rural schools in Iowa. This is why I believe in providing flexibility to school boards when they make decisions for their district. This bill was advanced because I believe it is important to trust parents and our school board members and give local control back to our school districts.” [Brad Zaun – Des Moines Register, 3/24/19]

● Zaun: “I Believe In Local Control. I Wish We Did More Local Control.” “‘The bottom line is education is a priority, and I believe in local control. I wish we did more local control in this committee,’ said Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale. Zaun said he did much ‘soul-searching’ over the issue.” [Quad-City Times, 2/11/15]

Zaun Voted For Senate File 2368. [Senate File 2368 – 2020 Session, 3/3/20]

In 2020, Zaun Introduced Legislation To Require A Three Day Waiting Period To Receive An Abortion Which Had Already Deemed Unconstitutional, While Also Seeking To Change The Iowa Constitution To Nullify Abortion RIghts

Zaun Introduced A Bill To Require A 72-Hour Waiting Period To Get An Abortion Despite The Iowa Supreme Court Ruling That The Requirement Was Unconstitutional Just Two Years Prior

Zaun Introduced A Bill To Add Requirements Around Providing An Ultrasound Before An Abortion And Require A Three-Day Waiting Period. “Republicans on an Iowa Senate panel advanced a bill Tuesday that would add requirements around providing an ultrasound before an abortion, and that requires a three-day waiting period between the ultrasound and the abortion. […] IPR asked Sen. Brad Zaun, R- Urbandale, why he is proposing a law that has been declared unconstitutional in the state.” [Iowa Public Radio, 2/18/20]

● Zaun’s Bill Would Require Ultrasound Technicians To Display Ultrasound Images To The Pregnant Person While Describing The Images And Listing Specific Details About The Fetus And To Make It Possible For The Pregnant Person To Hear Any Fetal Cardiac Activity. “Ultrasounds are already required under Iowa law prior to proceeding with an abortion procedure. But Zaun’s bill would require ultrasound technicians to display ultrasound images to the pregnant person while describing the images and listing specific details about the fetus. And it requires the tech to make it possible for the pregnant person to hear any fetal cardiac activity. The bill would allow women to look away from the images and ask for the sound of cardiac activity to be turned off.” [Iowa Public Radio, 2/18/20]

There Was Already A 72-Hour Waiting Period Under Iowa Law But The Iowa Supreme Court Ruled It Was Unconstitutional In 2018 And Blocked It From Taking Effect. “Republicans on an Iowa Senate panel advanced a bill Tuesday that would add requirements around providing an ultrasound before an abortion, and that requires a three-day waiting period between the ultrasound and the abortion. There is already a 72-hour waiting period under Iowa law, but the Iowa Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional in 2018 and blocked it from taking effect.” [Iowa Public Radio, 2/18/20]

● Zaun On Why He Proposed A Law That Had Already Been Declared Unconstitutional: “We Got A New Court… And I Can File Any Bill That I Want.” “IPR asked Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, why he is proposing a law that has been declared unconstitutional in the state. ‘First of all, we got a new court,’ Zaun said. ‘And I believe in this bill, and I can file any bill that I want.’” [Iowa Public Radio, 2/18/20]

● Four Of The Five Justices Who Agreed The Waiting Period Was Unconstitutional Were Set To Be Off The Court By The End Of March And Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds Was Soon To Get Her Fourth Appointment Opportunity In Recent Years. “Four of the five justices who agreed the waiting period was unconstitutional will be off the court by the end of March. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds has appointed three justices to the court in recent years and will soon get a fourth choice.” [Iowa Public Radio, 2/18/20]

Zaun Voted For A Constitutional Abortion Ban

Iowa Senate Republicans Approved A Resolution To Amend The Iowa Constitution To Declare There Wass No Right To An Abortion In The State. “Iowa Senate Republican lawmakers on Thursday approved a resolution that would amend the Iowa Constitution to declare there is no right to an abortion in the state. The measure passed the Senate 32-18 along party lines with only Republican votes. It says in part ‘we the people of the state of Iowa declare that this Constitution shall not be construed to recognize, grant or secure a right to abortion or to require the public funding of abortion.’” [Associated Press, 2/13/20]

The Bill Would Go To A Statewide Vote If It Passed Both Chambers And Did So Again Within The Following Two Years. “It must pass in the House and then pass in the legislature again in 2021 or 2022 before it would go to a statewide vote.” [Associated Press, 2/13/20]

The Bill Was A Response To An Iowa Supreme Court Ruling In 2018 That Struck Down The Legislature’s 72-Hour Waiting Period For An Abortion. “The measure is a response to an Iowa Supreme Court ruling in 2018 that struck down the legislature’s 72-hour waiting period for an abortion. In that ruling the court more broadly declared that the state constitution guarantees women the freedom to make their own health decisions, including whether to terminate a pregnancy. The ruling infuriated some conservative lawmakers and brought accusations that the court was usurping the power of the legislature to create laws.” [Associated Press, 2/13/20]

● The Courts Had Struck Down Fetal Heart Beat Legislation That Would Have Made Abortion Illegal As Early As Six Weeks Into A Pregnancy. “The courts have struck down Iowa laws that would have made abortion illegal at the detection of a heartbeat — as early as six weeks into a pregnancy — and the 72-hour waiting period.” [Associated Press, 2/13/20]

● A 2019 Law Denying Federal Funds Administered By The State For Sex Education Programs Conducted By Any Organization That Performed Abortions Was Being Challenged In Court. “A law passed last year denying federal funds administered by the state for sex education programs conducted by any organization that performs abortions is being challenged in court now.” [Associated Press, 2/13/20]

Zaun Supported A Racist Voter Identification Bill Which Threatened To Disenfranchise More Than One In Ten Iowa Voters

Iowa Republicans Passed A Bill Which Threatened To Disenfranchise More Than One In Ten Iowa Voters

More Than One In Ten Iowa Voters—260,000 People—Did Not Have A Driver’s License Or Non- Operator ID And Could Be Disenfranchised By The Bill. “The ACLU of Iowa reports that 11 percent of eligible Iowa voters—260,000 people—don’t have a driver’s license or non-operator ID, according to the US Census and the Iowa Department of Transportation, and could be disenfranchised by the bill.” [Ari Berman – The Nation, 4/13/17]

House File 516 Sought To Eliminate The Option For Voters To Check A Single Box For Straight-Party Voting, Put Money Toward Helping Precincts Purchase Digital Poll Books, And Establish Post-Election Audits. “Other provisions would eliminate the option for voters to check a single box for straight-party voting, put money toward helping precincts purchase digital poll books, and establish post-election audits.” [The Gazette, 3/23/17]

House File 516 Sought To Reduce The Time For Sending Out Absentee Ballots Before An Election By Over 25%. “Republicans made changes that would reduce the time for sending out absentee ballots before an election from 40 days to 29; would allow teenagers who turn 18 by the general election to vote in the earlier primary; and would establish four-digit voter ID cards.” [The Gazette, 3/23/17]

The Bill Was Supposedly Going To Provide Voter ID Cards For Those Without ID, But The GOP Bill’s Red Tape Measures Failed, Leaving Voters Waiting And Wondering If They Would Be Able To Exercise Their Right To Vote

The Bill’s Sponsor Projected That Half A Million Would Be Needed To Implement Voter ID Cards; Other States Enacting Voter ID Requirements Have Spent Millions On The Change. “Voter ID, on the other hand, won’t come cheap. It would almost certainly create confusion and delay at the polls. Pate initially projected $500,000 would be needed to implement voter ID cards, later reducing this estimate. But Pate’s estimates are based on currently registered voters, not the number of eligible voters who lack an ID. Other states enacting voter ID requirements have spent millions on the change.” [Editorial – The Gazette, 2/2/17]

Registered Voters Without An Iowa ID Were Supposed To Receive A Voting Card In The Mail Automatically, But Some Said They Waited Weeks Without Getting Theirs. “Iowa’s voter identification law is creating confusion for some Des Moines college students who have out-of-state IDs. Registered voters without an Iowa ID are supposed to receive a voting card in the mail automatically, but some Drake University students say they have waited weeks without getting theirs. Katie O’Keefe is a recent graduate with a Minnesota driver’s license. She updated her voter registration in Iowa more than a month ago, ‘but I have not received anything in the mail yet so I still don’t have any card or anything to prove I can actually vote here,’ O’Keefe said.” [Iowa Public Radio, 10/24/19]

The Gazette Editorial: “There Simply Is No Justification For A New, Expensive Voter Identification System, Especially At A Time When Lawmakers Are Wrestling With Commitments That Outpace Revenues.” “There simply is no justification for a new, expensive voter identification system, especially at a time when lawmakers are wrestling with commitments that outpace revenues. And especially one that will make it more complicated for Iowans to exercise their right to vote.” [Editorial – The Gazette, 2/2/17]

Quad City Times Editorial: The Suppressive Measure Was Intentionally Racist— “Nothing More Than Jim Crow's Well-Dressed Grandson”

Minority Voters Were Incredibly Less Likely To Vote In States With Voter ID Laws. “Minority voters are incredibly less likely to vote in states with voter ID laws, says a 2016 landmark study by researcher at University California, San Diego. Blacks are especially hard hit, the first-of-its-kind study says. But Hispanics, Asians and mixed-race voters, too, are exponentially less likely to cast ballots.” [Editorial – Quad City Times, 2/2/17]

Quad City Times Editorial: The Policy Was A Strategy That Opted To Keep Opposition Voters From The Polls Instead Of Working For Their Votes— “Nothing More Than Jim Crow's Well-Dressed Grandson.” “Minority voters are incredibly less likely to vote in states with voter ID laws, says a 2016 landmark study by researcher at University California, San Diego. […] The result — already known by the masterminds of these ridiculous laws — is a pronounced benefit for Republican candidates. It's a strategy that opts to keep opposition voters from the polls instead of working for their votes. It's nothing more than Jim Crow's well-dressed grandson.” [Editorial – Quad City Times, 2/2/17]

Quad City Times Editorial: The Suppressive Effect These Voter ID Laws Had On Targeted Communities Was Intentional, With Public Services Harder To Access For The Poor And Public Transportation “Somewhere Between Lackluster And Nonexistent In Most Of Iowa.” “I thought of my grandmother, who passed away in 2005 at 99, when the Iowa Legislature passed a strict voter-ID law today. She didn’t have a driver’s license because she never drove (she’d frequently walk two miles from her apartment to the grocery store). Her passport expired long ago. She never had a US birth certificate because she was born in Poland and fled the Holocaust. She used her Medicare card as identification. She didn’t possess any of the forms of government-issued photo identification that Iowa will soon require to vote.” [Ari Berman – The Nation, 4/13/17] Iowa Republicans Cited The Circular Logic That The Law Was Necessary To Combat The Perception Of Fraud Which They Stoked, Though Its Existence Was Infinitesimal

Iowa Republicans Asserted That The Law Was Necessary To Combat The Perception Of Fraud, Which Republicans Commonly Claimed Was Widespread. “Iowa has some of the best-run elections in the country. There were only 10 alleged cases of fraud out of 1.6 million votes cast in 2016 and no cases of voter impersonation that a voter-ID law might’ve stopped. […] Yet Iowa Republicans, who now control state government for the first time in two decades, say the law is necessary to combat the ‘perception’ of fraud—a perception created by Republicans who alleged for a decade without evidence that such fraud was widespread. ‘It is true that there isn’t widespread voter fraud,’ State Representative Ken Rizer told The New York Times. ‘But there is a perception that the system can be cheated. That’s one of the reasons for doing this.’ The fact that Republicans are pointing to the mere ‘perception’ of fraud as a reason to disenfranchise thousands of voters shows why Trump’s baseless assertions that millions are voting illegally is so damaging.” [Ari Berman – The Nation, 4/13/17]

Voter Fraud Was Found To Exist In “Very Small Numbers” Between 0.00004% And 0.0009% Nationally. “A report called ‘The Truth About Voter Fraud’ issued by the Brennan Center for Justice found voter fraud rates were between 0.00004% and 0.0009%. Voter fraud exists ‘in very small numbers,’ said David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research.” [CNN, 1/26/17]

Investigations Found Statistically Insignificant Instances Voter Fraud In Iowa, With The Majority Of Those Cases Attributable To Errors Rather Than Nefarious Intent. “And for what? Iowa elections are celebrated as one of the nation’s most voter-friendly. Relatively speaking, Iowa boasts high voter turnout. Previous investigations have found statistically insignificant instances voter fraud. The majority of those cases can be attributed to errors, not nefarious intent.” [Editorial – The Gazette, 2/2/17]

Zaun Voted For The Bill

Zaun Voted For The Bill. [House File 516 – 2017 Session, 3/23/17]

Zaun Pushed ALEC Model Legislation To Implement Red Tape Requirements Making It Harder For Those Sick Due To Asbestos Exposure To Hold Companies Accountable

2017: Iowa Republicans Passed Legislation To Limit Asbestos-Related Liability Lawsuits Using Model Legislation Recycled From Several Other States, Crafted By The Industry- Sponsored, Koch-Supported, Influence-Peddling American Legislative Exchange Council

The Bill Imposed A 90 Day Window After The Filing Of An Asbestos Claim In Which Plaintiffs Had To Provide Certain Information Or Their Case Could Be Dismissed For Noncompliance

Iowa Senate File 376, Introduced In 2017, Was One Of At Least A Dozen Enacted Laws Since 2011 Based On Model Legislation Called The “Asbestos Claims Transparency Act” From The American Legislative Exchange Council. “Model legislation from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which is also called the Asbestos Claims Transparency Act, includes many of the changes in the bill. Since 2011, at least twelve states have enacted similar laws. […] Iowa, Senate File 376 (2017)[.]” [Michigan House Fiscal Agency, 2/7/18]

The Iowa Bill To Limit Asbestos Lawsuits Contained Whole Passages That Were Lifted Word-For-Word From An ALEC Bill That Popped Up In At Least Eight Other States. “It was March 2017, and the Hiawatha Democrat speculated that a bill by Sen. Brad Zaun to limit asbestos lawsuits was based on language crafted by the conservative group American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC. ‘Where did this bill come from?’ Mathis asked. At one point, Zaun, R-Urbandale, said: ‘I have had no contact from ALEC or any other organization out there.’ The asbestos bill, which would get signed into law that year, did have whole passages that were word-for-word from an ALEC bill that popped up in at least eight other states.” [Des Moines Register, 4/4/19]

The Industry-Sponsored ALEC Was The Nation’s Best-Known Model-Bill Factory, Providing Conservative Republican Elected Officials Fill-In-The-Blank Legislation, Access To Campaign Donors And Networking Opportunities Where They Feted And Entertained Lawmakers And Their Families. “The American Legislative Exchange Council became the nation’s best-known ‘model’-bill factory over its four decades by providing more than fill-in-the-blank legislation. The industry-sponsored group has weathered controversy and flourished because it also offers conservative Republican elected officials a social network, access to campaign donors and a blueprint for how to accelerate their political careers. The networking takes place at ALEC's annual meetings, where the group fetes and entertains lawmakers and their families. Relationships are forged over drinks and dinners, where lawmakers sit alongside conservative luminaries and corporate chiefs.” [USA Today, 4/3/19]

● ALEC Was A Koch-Supported Organization. “Three decades after David Koch’s public steps into politics, analysts say, the Koch brothers’ money-fueled brand of libertarianism helped give rise to the Tea Party movement and strengthened the far-right wing of a resurgent Republican Party. […] Still, he and his brother acknowledged roles in founding and contributing money to Americans for Prosperity, the right-wing advocacy group that was widely reported to have provided logistical backing for the Tea Party and other organizations in election campaigns and the promotion of conservative causes. Among the groups they supported was the American Legislative Exchange Council, an organization of conservative state legislators and corporate lobbyists. Alec, as the group is known, drafts model state legislation that members may customize for introduction as proposed laws to cut taxes, combat illegal immigration, loosen environmental regulations, weaken labor unions and oppose gun laws.” [New York Times, 8/23/19]

Iowa Republicans Passed The Bill Restricting Asbestos-Related Liability Lawsuits Over Democratic Objections That The Measure Would Hurt Sick And Dying Iowans. “Legislation aimed at restricting asbestos-related liability lawsuits was approved Wednesday by the Republican-controlled Iowa Senate, despite heated complaints by Democrats that the measure will hurt sick and dying Iowans. […] The bill passed 27-22 with most Republicans in favor and all Democrats opposed.” [Des Moines Register, 3/8/17]

The Bill Imposed A 90 Day Window After The Filing Of An Asbestos Claim In Which Plaintiffs Had To Provide Certain Information Or Their Case Could Be Dismissed For Noncompliance. “Legislation aimed at restricting asbestos-related liability lawsuits was approved by majority Republicans, despite heated complaints by Democrats that the measure will hurt sick and dying Iowans. The measure requires plaintiffs to meet deadlines within 90 days of filing an asbestos claim for disclosing certain information. The case may be dismissed for noncompliance. Senate File 376 signed.” [Des Moines Register, 3/31/17] ● The Bill Included Provisions About Identifying Additional Or Alternative Asbestos Bankruptcy Trusts That Were Established To Pay Claims Arising From Asbestos Exposure. “The bill, which floor manager Rep. Andy McKean, R-Anamosa, said is like laws in eight states and includes components of laws in 26 states, would require plaintiffs to meet a 90-day deadline for disclosing certain information. It also includes provisions about identifying additional or alternative asbestos bankruptcy trusts that were established to pay claims arising from asbestos exposure.” [Des Moines Register, 3/13/17]

Zaun Voted For The Bill. [Senate File 376 – 2020 Session, 3/8/17]

2020: Iowa Republicans Passed A Bill Installing More Roadblocks To Asbestos-Related Litigation, Requiring Sickened Iowans To List Sites They Worked At, Each Asbestos- Containing Product They Were Exposed To And The Frequency Of Exposure

2020: Iowa Republicans Passed A Bill To Require Iowans Who Become Sick From Asbestos Exposure To Provide More Detailed Information To File A Lawsuit. “Iowans who become sick from asbestos exposure would have to provide more detailed information to file a lawsuit under a bill that was sent to the governor for her signature. The bill passed the Iowa House Tuesday on a mostly party-line vote of 54-46, with all Republicans and one Democrat voting for it. […] The Senate passed the same bill two weeks ago, so it goes to Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds’ desk for her signature or veto.” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/11/20]

The Bill Added Requirements For Plaintiffs To List Sites They Worked At, Each Asbestos-Containing Product They Were Exposed To And The Frequency Of Exposure To The Product. “The bill adds requirements for plaintiffs to list sites they worked at, each asbestos-containing product they were exposed to, and the frequency of exposure to the product. Lohse said this will ensure attorneys do more research before filing these lawsuits to avoid delays as the case plays out.” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/11/20]

Democratic Rep. Karin Derry On Her Father’s Asbestos Exposure-Caused Death: He Did Not Know When Or Where The Exposure Happened, Nor Would Many Other Iowans Because Illnesses Could Take Decades To Develop. “Rep. Karin Derry, D-Johnston, said the current law already requires detailed information from plaintiffs, including location, manner, and dates of each exposure, and a medical report. Derry said her father died of lung cancer caused by asbestos exposure. She said he didn’t know when or where the exposure happened, and many other Iowans wouldn’t know that either because it can take decades for illness to develop. ‘It was, and still is, a tragedy,’ Derry said. ‘I cannot support a law that puts up further roadblocks to Iowans seeking justice after they’ve been exposed to asbestos.’” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/11/20]

● TIME: “The Full Toll From The 9/11 Attacks Has Yet To Be Calculated” Because First Responders Were Exposed To Substances Like Asbestos And “It Can Take Years, Or Even Decades, For Exposure To Some Of These Substances To Result In Conditions Including Cancer And Respiratory Illnesses.” “Among other substances, first responders and volunteers in the World Trade Center area were exposed to asbestos, lead, dioxins and benzene following the attacks. It can take years, or even decades, for exposure to some of these substances to result in conditions including cancer and respiratory illnesses—meaning the full toll from the 9/11 attacks has yet to be calculated. As of September 2018, 10,000 people had been diagnosed with cancers related to the attacks and 2,000 had died from related illnesses, approaching the number of fatalities that resulted from the day itself, according to Mount Sinai researchers.” [TIME, 1/14/20]

● New York Times: “It Takes 30 To 50 Years After Exposure To Develop Asbestosis, Mesothelioma Or A Related Lung Cancer.” “Deaths from asbestos-related diseases will surge in Asia over the next 20 years, a recent study has warned. Asia now accounts for 64 percent of the world’s asbestos use, according to the study in Respirology, the journal of the Asian Pacific Society of Respirology, but for only about 13 percent of the asbestos-related deaths in World Health Organization mortality data. It takes 30 to 50 years after exposure to develop asbestosis, mesothelioma or a related lung cancer.” [Des Moines Register, 3/8/17]

Thousands Of Iowans Were Known To Have Died From Asbestos-Related Illnesses Over The Past Two Decades. “More than 2,000 Iowans have died from asbestos-related illnesses since 1999.” [Des Moines Register, 3/8/17]

Iowa Republicans Captured The Statehouse With Heavy Koch Support And Advanced Their Financial Interests At The Expense Of Sick And Dying Iowans

Zaun: “This Is Not A Koch Brothers Bill.”

Zaun: “This Is Not A Koch Brothers Bill.” “But Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, the bill's floor manager, said he's had no contact with the Virginia-based group, adding his goal is to avoid double-dipping by people who have already received an average of $600,000 in liability claims. ‘This is not a Koch brothers bill,’ said Zaun, referring to Charles and David Koch, wealthy businessmen who have funded a number of conservative organizations.” [Des Moines Register, 3/8/17]

The Gazette: “The Data Shows The Imprint Of The Koch Brothers And Their Groups Are All Over The 2017 Legislative Session, Starting With The 2016 Election That Produced All-Republican Control At The Capitol For The First Time In Two Decades.” “But the data shows the imprint of the Koch brothers and their groups are all over the 2017 legislative session, starting with the 2016 election that produced all- Republican control at the Capitol for the first time in two decades. Campaign support Koch Industries’ political action committee donated $46,000 to Iowa Statehouse candidates in 2015 and 2016, according to state campaign finance records. All but $500 of that money went to Republican candidates. The largest donations went to Republican leaders: $7,500 to state Sen. Bill Dix, who after the election became Senate majority leader, and $5,000 to House Speaker Linda Upmeyer. And donations ranging from $1,000 to $2,500 went to Republican chairmen of key committees and candidates in competitive districts that were crucial in flipping control of the Senate from the Democrats.” [The Gazette, 5/6/17]

Iowa Statehouse Candidates Benefited From Tens Of Thousands Of Dollars In Contributions From Koch Industries With On-The-Ground Assistance From Their Political Arm. “But the data shows the imprint of the Koch brothers and their groups are all over the 2017 legislative session, starting with the 2016 election that produced all-Republican control at the Capitol for the first time in two decades. Campaign support Koch Industries’ political action committee donated $46,000 to Iowa Statehouse candidates in 2015 and 2016, according to state campaign finance records. […] And donations ranging from $1,000 to $2,500 went to Republican chairmen of key committees and candidates in competitive districts that were crucial in flipping control of the Senate from the Democrats. Americans for Prosperity, a political advocacy organization funded by the Koch brothers, also was heavily involved in the campaign leading to the election. While the group does not divulge its spending, it says that during the 2016 campaign in Iowa, it made 718,408 phone calls, knocked on 52,903 doors and sent 318,048 mailers.” [The Gazette, 5/6/17]

Koch Industries Had A “Titanic Liability” Because Hundreds Of Thousands Reported Lung Disease And Cancer Because Of Their Products

On Capitol Hill And In Regulatory Proceedings, Koch Industries Worked To Dilute Or Halt Tighter Regulation Of Toxic Cancer-Linked Byproducts That Could Affect Its Bottom Line, Including Asbestos. “In 2005, as part of the same corporate diversification and expansion strategy, Koch Industries bought the giant wood and paper products firm, Georgia-Pacific, adding Brawny paper towels, Angel Soft toilet paper, Dixie cups and dozens of factories and plants to its holdings. Koch has since worked, on Capitol Hill and in various regulatory proceedings, to dilute or halt tighter federal regulation of several toxic byproducts that could affect its bottom line, including dioxin, asbestos and formaldehyde, all of which have been linked to cancer.” [Center for Public Integrity, 5/19/14]

Center For Public Integrity: Koch Industries “Inherited A Titanic Liability Regarding Asbestos” When It Purchased Georgia-Pacific In 2005. “In 2005, as part of the same corporate diversification and expansion strategy, Koch Industries bought the giant wood and paper products firm, Georgia-Pacific, adding Brawny paper towels, Angel Soft toilet paper, Dixie cups and dozens of factories and plants to its holdings. […] When Koch Industries purchased Georgia-Pacific, it inherited a titanic liability regarding asbestos.” [Center for Public Integrity, 5/19/14]

Over 340,000 People Reported Suffering Lung And Other Diseases, Including The Deadly Cancer Mesothelioma, Because Georgia-Pacific Used Asbestos To Make Drywall Products. “Georgia-Pacific had used asbestos to make gypsum-based drywall products, and starting in the 1980s the firm became a target for more than 340,000 claims by plaintiffs who said they suffered lung and other diseases, including mesothelioma, a deadly cancer. By 2005, the company was spending $200 million a year and had to build a $1.5 billion reserve fund for asbestos liabilities and defense costs.” [Center for Public Integrity, 5/19/14]

By 2005, Georgia-Pacific Was Spending $200 Million A Year And Had To Build A $1.5 Billion Reserve Fund For Asbestos Liabilities And Defense Costs. “Georgia-Pacific had used asbestos to make gypsum- based drywall products, and starting in the 1980s the firm became a target for more than 340,000 claims by plaintiffs who said they suffered lung and other diseases, including mesothelioma, a deadly cancer. By 2005, the company was spending $200 million a year and had to build a $1.5 billion reserve fund for asbestos liabilities and defense costs.” [Center for Public Integrity, 5/19/14]

2017: Bestwall LLC, An Affiliate Of Georgia-Pacific LLC, Filed For U.S. Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, Citing Soaring Costs Of Defending Against Claims Its Products Caused Asbestos-Related Diseases. “An affiliate of Georgia-Pacific LLC, which makes Brawny paper towels, has filed for U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy amid soaring costs of defending against claims its products caused asbestos-related diseases, according to a company statement on Thursday. The affiliate, Bestwall LLC, joins scores of U.S. manufacturers that have filed for bankruptcy due to asbestos litigation, and comes as the U.S. Congress mulls a bill that plaintiffs’ lawyers say would discourage asbestos claims.” [Reuters, 11/2/17] Zaun Supported The Most Restrictive Abortion Law In The Country, Which Was Designed To Force A Lawsuit So Trump-Appointed Supreme Court Justices Could Overturn Roe v. Wade

Iowa Republicans Passed A Fetal Heartbeat Bill With Hopes That It Would Be “The Vehicle That Will Ultimately Provide Change And Provide The Opportunity To Overturn Roe v. Wade”

The Law Was Struck Down As An Unconstitutional Violation Of A Woman’s Fundamental Right To An Abortion

The Iowa Legislature Passed A Fetal Heartbeat Bill That Would Make Most Abortions Illegal After About Six Weeks Of Pregnancy. “Iowa's Legislature has passed a bill that would make most abortions illegal once a fetal heartbeat can be detected. The measure, which would effectively ban abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, passed the state House late Tuesday and the state Senate early Wednesday. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds has not said whether she will sign the bill.” [NPR, 5/2/18]

● Pregnant Women Were Often Unaware Of Their Pregnancies At The Six Week Mark. “The legislation would ban most abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected, at about six weeks into a pregnancy — often before many women even know they’re pregnant.” [Des Moines Register, 5/1/18]

Iowa Republicans Wanted The Bill, Senate File 359, To Draw A Legal Challenge So It Could Advance To The U.S. Supreme Court, With The Goal Is Of Overturning The Landmark Roe v. Wade Decision. “Republicans who debated Senate File 359 late into the night Tuesday said they hope their law will face a legal challenge so it can advance to the U.S. Supreme Court. Their goal is to overturn the 1973 landmark case Roe v. Wade, which established that women have a constitutional right to an abortion. The Supreme Court has declined to hear similar cases in recent years. But as states continue to pass legislation restricting abortions and President Donald Trump appoints more conservative federal judges, such as Justice Neil Gorsuch, abortion opponents are increasingly optimistic.” [Des Moines Register, 5/1/18]

As National Republicans Prepared For A Fight To Replace Justice Anthony Kennedy, Iowa Republicans Anticipated That By The Time The Bill Reached The U.S. Supreme Court, Trump Could Have Appointed Another One Or Two Justices Who Could Bolster Gorsuch And Overturn Roe. “Conservatives' argument for passing a law now is that by the time it reaches the U.S. Supreme Court — which could take three or four years — Trump could potentially have appointed another one or two justices who could bolster Gorsuch and overturn Roe. Several national groups are gearing up for a fight to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy, who legal experts speculate could retire as soon as this year. Kennedy was nominated by President Ronald Reagan, but has voted in favor of abortion rights in key cases.” [Des Moines Register, 5/1/18]

● Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds Boasted That “The Movement That Elected A Pro-Life President And Vice President In President Trump And Vice President Pence” Was “Shifting The Direction Of The Supreme Court.” “At an antiabortion event last year, Reynolds advocated for legislation ‘that protects mothers and the unborn.’ ‘All of you are part of the movement that elected a pro- life president and vice president in President Trump and Vice President Pence,’ she told supporters, adding that they are ‘shifting the direction of the Supreme Court.’ Planned Parenthood Voters of Iowa predicted an ‘expensive, lengthy legal battle’ after lawmakers passed the bill on Wednesday. ‘Today's actions to ban abortion are an embarrassment to Iowa and they will remain a blemish on our state for the foreseeable future, serving as one more reminder that Iowa's leadership does not value health care,’ the organization said in a statement.” [Washington Post, 5/2/18]

● Republican Sen. Rick Bertrand: “This Bill Will Be The Vehicle That Will Ultimately Provide Change And Provide The Opportunity To Overturn Roe v. Wade.” “Many lawmakers who support the ‘heartbeat bill’ hope it does lead to a legal battle that winds its way to the highest court of the land. Emboldened by the court's makeup, they think it will help overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision by the Supreme Court that legalized the right to an abortion in all 50 states. ‘This bill will be the vehicle that will ultimately provide change and provide the opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade,’ Sen. Rick Bertrand, a Republican, said during the floor debate. ‘There's nothing hidden here about the agenda.’” [CNN, 5/2/18]

The Bill Was The Nation's Most Restrictive Abortion Ban. “The Republican-led legislature in Iowa has passed a bill that, if signed into law, will become the nation's most restrictive abortion ban: It forbids doctors from performing the procedure after a fetal heartbeat is detected.” [CNN, 5/2/18]

A State Judge Struck Down The Law, Finding It Was Unconstitutional And Ran Counter To Iowa Supreme Court Decisions That Affirmed A Woman’s Fundamental Right To An Abortion. “A state judge on Tuesday struck down Iowa’s restrictive ‘fetal heartbeat’ abortion law, which would have been the most restrictive anti-abortion law in the nation. Judge Michael Huppert found the law unconstitutional, concluding that the Iowa Supreme Court’s earlier decisions that affirm a woman’s fundamental right to an abortion would include the new law passed last year[.] He also cited several cases in federal court, including decisions in 2015 and 2016 in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that indicated such abortion laws were unconstitutional.” [Associated Press, 1/22/19]

Zaun Voted For The Bill. [Senate File 359 – 2018 Session, 5/1/18]

Zaun Supported An Unprecedented Legislative Coup To Strip The Attorney General Of Authority To Oppose Trump Policies Like Family Separation

Zaun Voted For A Bill To Strip The Democratic Attorney General Of His Power To Join Lawsuits Against Policies Coming Out Of The Trump Administration, A Limit Which Existed In No Other State

Iowa Republicans Proposed New Restrictions On The State's Democratic Attorney General To Prevent Him From Joining Lawsuits Against Policies Coming Out Of The Trump Administration. “Iowa Republicans have proposed new restrictions on the state's Democratic attorney general to prevent him from joining lawsuits that target President Donald Trump's administration. Tom Miller, as the state's chief legal officer, joined six lawsuits in 2018 that were initiated in other states seeking to block many of Trump's policies, including separating families on the southern U.S. border and requiring citizenship information in the 2020 census.” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19] The Proposal Would Require Miller's Office To Get Permission To Join Out-Of-State Lawsuits, Only Allowing Non-Iowa Suits If Requested By The Governor, The General Assembly Or The Executive Council, Which Also Included The Governor. “Worthan filed his proposal this week, tacking it onto a budget bill moving through the Iowa House of Representatives, that would require Miller's office to get permission to join out-of-state lawsuits. If the proposal becomes law, the attorney general could only prosecute non-Iowa suits if requested by the governor, the General Assembly or the Executive Council, which also includes the governor.” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

Iowa Would Have Been The Only State With Such A Provision. “Had Reynolds let the measure become law, Iowa Code would have required the attorney general to seek permission from the governor, Legislature or executive council — which includes the governor — to join multi-state lawsuits. Iowa would have been the only state with such a provision.” [Des Moines Register, 5/22/19]

● Former Maine Attorney General Jim Tierney "There Is No Question That Iowa Would Be The Only State That Has Done This To Itself, And That The Only Losers Are The People Of Iowa.” “‘There is no question that Iowa would be the only state that has done this to itself, and that the only losers are the people of Iowa,’ said Jim Tierney, a Harvard Law School lecturer who served as Maine attorney general from 1980 to 1990.” [Associated Press, 5/15/19]

Attorney General Tom Miller: The Proposal “Goes To The Heart Of The Office Of The Attorney General.” “‘What’s being proposed sort of goes to the heart of the office of the attorney general,’ Miller told the Des Moines Register. ‘Deciding when to file a lawsuit and whether there’s a legal basis for it, is within our authority, expertise … what the public expects of us.’” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

2018: Attorney General Tom Miller Joined Six Lawsuits To Block Trump's Policies Like Separating Families On The Southern U.S. Border And Requiring Citizenship Information In The 2020 Census. “Iowa Republicans have proposed new restrictions on the state's Democratic attorney general to prevent him from joining lawsuits that target President Donald Trump's administration. Tom Miller, as the state's chief legal officer, joined six lawsuits in 2018 that were initiated in other states seeking to block many of Trump's policies, including separating families on the southern U.S. border and requiring citizenship information in the 2020 census.” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

Miller’s Office Joined About 26 Amicus Briefs And 50 Letters To Federal Agencies Challenging The Trump Administration, At An Estimated Cost Of $10,000 Or Less. “Miller’s office also has joined other states in signing on to about 26 amicus briefs and 50 letters to federal agencies challenging the Trump administration's actions, according to the attorney general’s office. The office estimates its cost of participating falls between $7,500 and $10,000.” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

Miller: “As Written, The Language Would Affect Far More Than Lawsuits Against The Federal Government And Would Limit Our Ability To Act On Such Issues As Consumer Protection, Antitrust Violations And Medicaid Fraud.” “‘We believe Iowa would be the only state in the nation to have these restrictions on the power and duties of the Attorney General,’ Miller said in a later statement Thursday afternoon. ‘As written, the language would affect far more than lawsuits against the federal government and would limit our ability to act on such issues as consumer protection, antitrust violations and Medicaid fraud.’” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

Zaun Voted For The Bill. [Senate File 615 – 2019 Session, 4/24/19] Republicans Acknowledged The Effort Was Partisan, Charging That The Attorney General Had No Right To Pursue The Agenda Which Voters Ratified By A Margin Of More Than 50 Points In 2018

Republicans Admitted That Their Opposition Was Because The Attorney General’s Actions Were Contrary To The Partisan Agenda Of The Republican Governor And Republican Legislature. “But Republicans say the efforts are partisan. ‘We have a Republican governor, we have a Republican Legislature, and we have had an attorney general that has been going outside of the state taking part in lawsuits that are the complete antithesis to the agenda that the governor and the Legislature has set,’ said Rep. Gary Worthan, R-Storm Lake.” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

The Bill Sponsor Cited Several Legal Actions From Miller's Office, Including On The Census Case And Suits Against The 2017 Travel Ban: “If He Had Had To Come To Us For Any Of Those, He Wouldn’t Have Gotten Approval To Take Part.” “Last year, the Republican lawmaker called out lawsuits and other legal actions taken by the attorney general's office during a House floor debate on Miller's office budget. He threatened to dock the office’s budget by 10 percent in response to its involvement in these lawsuits. Worthan cited several legal actions from Miller's office, including on the census case and suits against the 2017 travel ban. ‘If he had had to come to us for any of those, he wouldn’t have gotten approval to take part,’ Worthan said.” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

● Bill Sponsor: “It’s Up To The Governor And The Legislature To Set The Agenda For The State, Not The Attorney General.” “‘It’s up to the governor and the Legislature to set the agenda for the state, not the attorney general. And that’s the motivation behind it.’” [Des Moines Register, 4/18/19]

Miller Argued That He Was Overwhelmingly Re-Elected By Iowans In 2018 After He Took On Some Trump Administration Policies Regarding Internet Access And Safeguarding The Federal Health Care Law's Guarantee Of Coverage For People With Pre-Existing Conditions. “Miller has said he joins out-of- state cases only when the law and the interest of Iowans indicate that he should. Cases he joined against the Trump administration involved internet access, immigration policies including the separation of children from their parents, and safeguarding the federal health care law's guarantee of coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. Miller also said Iowans overwhelmingly re-elected him in 2018 after he took on some Trump administration policies during the president's first two years.” [Associated Press, 5/15/19]

● Miller Was Re-Elected By A 54 Point Margin, 77-53. “Tom Miller[-] Democrat[:] 871,646[,] 77.0%[;] Marco Battaglia[-] Libertarian[:] 259,630[,] 23.0[.]” [New York Times, 11/6/18]

Iowa’s Republican Governor Vetoed The Bill After Attorney General Tom Miller Gave Away His Power To Sue In Order To Preserve It For Future Attorneys General

The Republican Gov. Vetoed The Legislation, In Exchange For A Promise From The Attorney General To Not To File Out-Of-State Lawsuits On Behalf Of The State Without The Consent Of The Governor's Office. “Gov. Kim Reynolds on Wednesday vetoed legislation that would have limited the powers of the Iowa attorney general's office, in exchange for a promise from the current attorney general to seek the governor's permission before filing some lawsuits. The measure that the Republican governor vetoed, passed by the Republican-controlled Iowa Legislature last month, was intended as a rebuke of Democratic Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller's decision to join lawsuits targeting President Donald Trump. Republicans still got much of what they wanted. After meeting privately with the governor and negotiating through staff, Miller agreed not to file out-of-state lawsuits on behalf of the State of Iowa without the consent of the governor's office. But he could continue to file suits when the Attorney General of Iowa is the plaintiff.” [Des Moines Register, 5/22/19]

Miller, The Nation's Longest-Serving Attorney General, Explained That The Agreement Meant That He Generally Would Not Be Suing The Trump Administration But It Was More Important To Protect The Power And Duties Of The Attorney General's Office Than Join Those Suits. “Miller, in a statement, said his agreement with Reynolds ‘means that, generally, I will not be suing the Trump administration.’ He said it was more important to protect the power and duties of the attorney general's office than join those suits. The nation's longest-serving attorney general, Miller had lobbied the Legislature not to approve the measure.” [Des Moines Register, 5/22/19]

Attorneys General From Both Parties, Across The Nation, Spoke Out Against The Attempted Seizure Of Power

Idaho’s Republican Attorney General Lawrence Wasden Rebuked The Bill: “It Is Essential That We Retain As Many Of Our Inherent Checks And Balances As Possible To Ensure The Our Offices Function As That Envisioned By Our States' Founding Fathers, Instead Of According To Political Cycles.” “He asked fellow attorneys general to write to Reynolds and explain why the limitations are a bad idea. "As a nation of checks and balances, it is essential that we retain as many of our inherent checks and balances as possible to ensure the our offices function as that envisioned by our states' founding fathers, instead of according to political cycles," wrote Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, who is a Republican.” [Des Moines Register, 5/15/19]

Former Democratic And Republican Attorneys General Asked Gov. Reynolds To Veto The Measure: “Our Office Holders Should Cultivate — Not Impede — Elected Officials' Ability To Work Together And Independently For The Good Of Us All.” “In another letter to Reynolds, a group of former Democratic and Republican attorneys general asked her to veto the measure. ‘Our office holders should cultivate — not impede — elected officials' ability to work together and independently for the good of us all,’ they wrote. The signers included Republican Jon Bruning of Nebraska, Betty Montgomery of Ohio and Democrats Dustin McDaniel of Arkansas, and Patrick Lynch of Rhode Island.” [Associated Press, 5/15/19]