Iowa State CapitolI’m not ready to throw these Iowa House Republicans under the bus – yet.

The first statement of the first plank of the Republican Party of Iowa platform says: “We believe human life should be protected from conception to non-intervened natural death, excluding acts of capital punishment.”  The fourth statement in the first plank says, “We affirm that science has now proven that life begins at conception. On day one (1) a baby’s genetic code and DNA are formed. That is the beginning of life.”

The sixth statement of the first, FIRST plank dealing with Life says, “We disagree with Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton as settled law, therefore we call for the return of the rights to the states to determine their abortion laws.”

Since it is clearly in the party platform, not only that is given preeminence in the platform, could someone please give me a rational explanation why the following Iowa House Republicans voted against the motion offered by State Representative Kim Pearson (R-Pleasant Hill) to suspend House rules to allow a vote on the Personhood bill?

  • Rep. Rich Arnold
  • Rep. Chip Baltimore
  • Rep. Clel Baudler
  • Rep. Josh Byrnes
  • Rep. Peter Cownie
  • Rep. Dave Deyoe
  • Rep. Jack Drake
  • Rep. Greg Forristall
  • Rep. Mary Ann Hanusa
  • Rep. Dave Heaton
  • Rep. Lee Hein
  • Rep. Erik Helland
  • Rep. Lance Horbach
  • Rep. Stewart Iverson
  • Rep. Jeff Kaufmann
  • Rep. Mark Lofgren
  • Rep. Steven Lukan
  • Rep. Linda Miller
  • Rep. Steven Olson
  • Rep. Kraig Paulsen
  • Rep. Ross Paustian
  • Rep. Scott Raecker
  • Rep. Dan Rasmussen
  • Rep. Henry Rayhons
  • Rep. Thomas Sands
  • Rep. Dave Tjepkes
  • Rep. Linda Upmeyer
  • Rep. Jim Van Engelenhoven
  • Rep. Guy Vander Linden
  • Rep. Nick Wagner
  • Rep. Matt Windschitl
  • Rep. Gary Worthan

Now I’m not going to pretend like I know the reasoning why each of these State Representatives didn’t vote in favor of this motion.  Some perhaps felt like it was a waste of time because it would go nowhere in the Iowa Senate (which is true).  Some like Representative Scott Raecker (R-Urbandale) are marginally prolife, while he would vote for the late-term abortion ban, he wouldn’t vote for this.  Others perhaps cast their vote against the person who filed the motion – Kim Pearson.  They were frustrated because Pearson, State Representative Tom Shaw (R-Laurens) and Representative Glen Massie (R-Des Moines) gave them fits over the late-term abortion ban.

I have criticized Pearson, Shaw and Massie over this as well as I saw their position as wrongheaded.  This was a chance to go on record voting for life – and the Representatives above blew it.  Was it a symbolic vote?  Sure, but it one you still take.  It is also a vote you take even if you’re frustrated with the person who filed the motion.  If you are prolife you vote for the personhood bill.  Period.  Their vote is for representing their constituents.  They serve at their pleasure, not the party leadership.  Even if you were frustrated with the resistance that Pearson, Massie and Shaw gave on the ban – you vote for this motion anyway.  It’s time to put on your big boy pants, get over yourself and get it done.

Otherwise you’ve proved that you care more about politics than principles.  A wasted opportunity to show some unity on life.  If they are given the opportunity to vote on this again next session, they’d better get it right because I wouldn’t be surprised to see many of them have a primary opponent.

I’d also like to thank the following Representatives who did vote in favor of this motion:

  • Rep. Dwayne Alons
  • Rep. Richard Anderson
  • \Rep. Mark Brandenburg
  • Rep. Roy E. Chambers
  • Rep. Betty R. DeBoef
  • Rep. Cecil Dolecheck
  • Rep. Joel Fry
  • Rep. Pat Grassley
  • Rep. Chris Hagenow
  • Rep. Bob Hager
  • Rep. Ron Jorgensen
  • Rep. Jared Klein
  • Rep. Kevin Koester
  • Rep. Brian Moore
  • Rep. Glen Massie
  • Rep. Dan Muhlbauer (D)
  • Rep. Kim Pearson
  • Rep. Dawn Pettengill
  • Rep. Walt Rogers
  • Rep. Jason Schultz
  • Rep. Tom Shaw
  • Rep. Jeff Smith
  • Rep. Chuck Soderberg
  • Rep. Annette Sweeney
  • Rep. Jeremy Taylor
2 comments
  1. If this bill was passed it would be struck down by the judicial system. What would be the point of passing such a bill? South Dakota tried doing it and it didn’t work.

    1. Strikes me as a silly reason. Why not just let the courts legislate, too?

Comments are closed.

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

New Business Creations Off to Strong Start in Iowa in 2019

Iowa’s Secretary of State’s Office processed 2,195 new business filings last month, just shy of the previous record of 2,204, set in March 2018.

Reynolds Encourages Iowa Churches to Reopen Safely and Responsibly

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds said that while church leaders are eager to meet, they are aware of the importance to do so in a safe and responsible way.

Mark Seidl in Iowa House District 67 Needs to Go Back to Shool

Mark Seidl in Iowa House District 67 has a campaign ad that not only contains an amateurish mistake, but promotes education policy that won’t work.

Branstad-Reynolds Launch “Iowans Agree” TV Ad in Iowa’s Gubernatorial Race

The Branstad-Reynolds campaign yesterday released its seventh TV ad for the general election campaign in Iowa’s Gubernatorial race.