But almost immediately after taking office in 2011, Branstad began imposing those same fees. In September, the Register agreed to pay $626 for a legal review of 677 emails involving the Iowa Juvenile Home. The Register paid the fee, but the state, under a policy endorsed by the Iowa attorney general, initially decided to keep 1/3 of the requested emails confidential.
[In 2013], the Register requested detailed information on the number of youths kept in isolation cells at the Iowa Juvenile Home. The Iowa Department of Human Services responded that it would compile the information if the newspaper first paid $31,776. The newspaper rejected the proposal, and the state later provided similar information at no charge.
PERRY: I think that it's the states' call, not the federal government. But the real issues that we have in this country are that people are sick of Washington, D.C. They're sick of the money that they're seeing spent, they're sick of the fraud and the corruption that they're seeing. They're sick of seeing their kids' futures mortgaged because we've got a Washington, D.C., that is out of touch with the country. It's the reason, when I talk about my overhauling Washington plan, and I've gotten a pretty good response when I talk about going to a part-time Congress. Cut their pay in half, let 'em spend half the time in Washington, D.C. Send 'em back home to have a regular job like the rest of the people in their districts, and work under the laws that they pass. That, I suggest, along with a balanced budget amendment, will go a long way toward stopping a lot of the nonsense that we're seeing coming out of Washington.
Q: I think those are questions that a lot of peopl want to hear answers to, and you're responsible for your record.
I think that there's too much attention paid by the press corps about the campaign minutia and not enough paid by the press corps to the basic ideas that distinguish us from Barack Obama.
A: The stump message is that Washington is broken. It canít be fixed by sending the same man back with his out of control spending, his socialized plans for America. This is the freest, greatest country God has ever put on the face of the Earth and it was made that way by people coming across the ocean from Europe to settle a new country, to be entrepreneurs, to be free. We donít need policies and plans that take us back to European socialism.
A: It depends on the credentials of the president. I served in Vietnam; and my son has now done two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. I can look the American people in the eye and say, ďWeíre all in this together.Ē So I would not share the role of commander in chief with a vice president. If youíve got other folks that have less background in national security, theyíre going to need to have a V.P. that they rely on much more.
A: Having been considered for that post several times, Iíve thought a lot about that. The vice president really only has two duties. One is to cast a tie-breaking vote in the case of a tied vote in the Senate. And the other is to inquire daily as to the health of the president. I really would do what some presidents have done in the past. A vice president brings a certain area of expertise and talent. I would probably assign some of those areas, like telecommunications or some other important issues.
Q: So not as wide-ranging as Vice President Cheney had?
A: Look, I would be very careful that everybody understood that thereís only one president.
A: I would restore openness to government. I do not think in this country we should have secrecy of government. The purpose of government is to provide privacy for the people. I would never use executive privilege to deny information to the Congress, with the full realization that you protect security information, but in the very general sense, we should be very, very open. We want a transparent government. Currently I believe we could improve on that.
A: I certainly wouldnít support an amendment to change the role of the vice president. But thereís no way to know exactly what goes on, but if you take perceptions from Washington, most people there behind the scenes think the vice president is more powerful than the president. Philosophically, I think this is the case. Itís obvious that he represents a neoconservative viewpoint. And my objection is that that has been the rejection of the Republican Party platform and traditional conservatism. And I think this is where we have gone astray. We have drifted from our fundamental premises and the conservative values that this party used to get.
A: The vice presidentís office has to be worked out with the president. And the thing thatís clearest about it, now that weíre at war, is that a vice president has to be just as capable, just as ready to take over that office, literally on a momentís notice. And that should be the major qualification. And then it should be in the discretion of the president and the vice president to decide on what kind of responsibilities they should have.
Q: But would you like to have a vice president like Vice Pres. Cheney, with that wide range of responsibility?
A: I thought the division of responsibilities between Pres. Reagan and Vice Pres. Bush was a good one. I thought it was a really comfortable one. And Iím comfortable that you select somebody who can step in on a momentís notice with experience, background, knowing whatís going on.
A: I believe that Vice President Cheney is criticized for a lot of things that he doesnít do. I believe that Dick Cheney is an honorable individual. And I think President Bush depends a great deal upon him.
A: we are going to prechallenge some of these automatic machines -- the Diebold machines -- where there have already been problems. And weíre going to prechallenge and have a team across this country who are focused on those particular areas of the country where they are notorious about switching addresses, telling people theyíre not registered
EDWARDS: So you would agree with my proposal to ban contributions from lobbyists?
GEPHARDT: Yes, Iím with you.
FACTCHECK: But Gephardtís various campaigns have received $8 million from political action committeeís since 1989-amounting to one dollar of every five he has raised. Counting both PAC money and donations from individuals, Gephardt got $4.4 million from lawyers and lobbyists during that period, making that industry his biggest supporter by far. In second place is the beer, wine and liquor industry at $1.3 million. To be sure, it isnít necessarily inconsistent to take lobbyistsí money while advocating a ban. In fact, Edwards himself is heavily funded by fellow trial lawyers even though he turns away money from registered lobbyists. But we thought you would like to know.
GRAHAM: We have a crisis. Some would say, ďWell, this is not a federal responsibility. This is a result of state mismanagement.Ē It is a federal responsibility. The federal government has passed a series of mandates on the states, everything from special education, to No Child Left Behind, to homeland security, and failed to provide the dollars that it was committed to do to make those programs real.
What I think we ought to do is this year is to put $40 billion into the states to help them immediately deal with their crisis. That would provide $330 million for Iowa, incidentally, and to see that those funds are expedited to the states by doing it through a change in the Medicaid formula with the federal government picking up a larger proportion of the costs. Thatís the best remedy. Thatís the best prescription to the current crisis.
MOSELEY BRAUN: The first and most important thing is to get the economy going again so that the tax revenues flow into state coffers sufficient to meet their budget obligations. But what weíre watching here is a shift of responsibility from the federal government, making rules and not paying the cost-talking the talk but not being willing to pay for it.
I proposed in the Senate, [relevant to] unfunded mandates, to make certain that the federal government sent the dollars behind their dictates to the states and also to invest in infrastructure in ways that would have the federal government picking up its fair share, [including education and Medicaid]. We have to transform the [federal-state relationship to provide] some fairness between who pays for what and that the national politicians donít keep getting away with saying theyíre cutting taxes and just pushing them down to the lowest possible level.
EDWARDS: I have a plan about how to get the economy going and to help states and municipalities with this terrible budget crisis. I have introduced legislation that would provide $50 billion to states and municipalities so that they donít have to lay off workers, so they are not laying off fire fighters, so theyíre not cutting education.
GORE: Iíve presided over the so-called reinventing government program to downsize our federal bureaucracy, including, more than any other, the Pentagon and the Defense Department. But even as weíve kept our military strong, weíve turned the biggest deficits into the biggest surpluses in history. Now we have an opportunity to invest in education & human services. And if you work in the field of human services, you know how important Medicaid is to the people who receive those human services.
|2016 Presidential contenders on Government Reform:|
Mayor Rahm Emanuel(IL)
2016 Third Party Candidates:
Mayor Michael Bloomberg(I-NYC)
Please consider a donation to OnTheIssues.org!
Click for details -- or send donations to:
1770 Mass Ave. #630, Cambridge MA 02140
(We rely on your support!)