The new Iowa Down Ballot podcast brings you up to date on big developments over the past week

Meanwhile, I'm waiting for Joni Ernst to speak up about a Trump campaign promise to help wealthy New Yorkers at the expense of Iowans

One of the great things about being a member of the Iowa Writers’ Collaborative is I get to work with some pretty talented people.

This week, I hosted the Collaborative’s Iowa Down Ballot politics podcast. A half-dozen of the sharpest political analysts in the state joined me to delve into the new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll, which made national news by reporting that Vice President Kamala Harris has come within 4 points of Donald Trump in red-state Iowa.

That’s a big difference from the 18-point lead the poll said Trump held over President Joe Biden in June, before Biden dropped out of the race.

In this week’s podcast, our panel discusses the most significant findings in the new poll and its implications.

Laura Belin, Dennis Goldford, Kathie Obradovich, Bob Leonard, Barry Piatt and Ty Rushing—all experienced hands at judging the political landscape in Iowa—joined me to give their insight. We also analyzed new advertising and state court decisions that could have a significant impact on two hotly contested congressional races in Iowa.

In the First District, Democrats now think they have a better chance of defeating incumbent US Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks. This month, a Democratic super PAC announced it was reserving more than $2 million in TV advertising time in hopes of flipping the seat. Meanwhile, Miller-Meeks has also been running her own ads, emphasizing high prices and inflation.

In the Third District, the Democrats’ campaign arm in the US House has released a new TV ad that criticizes incumbent Rep. Zach Nunn, a Republican, on reproductive freedom.

Nunn’s opponent, Democrat Lanon Baccam, already has emphasized the issue in his own advertising. The ads seize on Nunn’s response to an abortion-related question in a 2022 primary debate.

The Democrats hit on this issue in 2022, but Nunn went on to win a narrow victory.

This time, our panelists point out what’s changed since then.

We also discuss the implications of an Iowa Supreme Court decision that kept Libertarian candidates off the ballot in the First and Third District congressional races. And we examine the findings and potential political implications of a new audit by State Auditor Rob Sand that says Iowa nursing homes aren’t meeting federal inspection requirements.

We pack all this and more into about 35 minutes.

If you care about Iowa’s politics—whether you live here or not—this podcast is a chance to learn about the latest developments in our state’s elections. And did I mention, I’m hosting?

I hope you’ll give it a listen.

Iowa's 1st and 3rd Congressional races heat up

We’re squealing. Where’s Joni Ernst?

I’ve been waiting for US Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa to complain about Donald Trump’s latest campaign promise that would pile hundreds of billions of dollars onto the already bulging US debt.

I searched news reports and her Twitter account. But so far: Zip.

You’d think she’d say something, right? I mean, Ernst is famous for caring about budget discipline. Isn’t she?

Surely, she wouldn’t stand mute in the face of a move that would cost the federal treasury more than $1 trillion over 10 years.

Here’s what’s going on: Trump was campaigning in New York this week, and on his social media network he promised that he would “get SALT back.” This refers to the tax deduction for certain state and local taxes that was capped at $10,000 in the ex-president’s 2017 tax law.

Democratic lawmakers in high tax states like New York hate the cap, and Axios reports Trump’s promise could help GOP candidates in tight elections there.

But what about all those Republicans who campaigned against this tax break back in the day and have lampooned Democrats for wanting to let the SALT cap expire? Like Joni Ernst.

Not only would Trump’s promise pile a whole lot more debt onto future generations, but it also would deliver a massive tax break for the wealthy. In blue states!

A recent MarketWatch article said that people in six states would benefit the most, including New York, California and New Jersey.

Guess who wasn’t on that list: Iowa.

Axios reported that removing the $10,000 SALT cap would cost the federal treasury $1.2 trillion over a decade, and 92% of the benefit would go to the top 10% of earners, citing the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

A year ago, Ernst complained about Democrats trying to get rid of the SALT cap, tweeting they wanted to give “wealthy coastal elites” a “massive” tax break.

Yet, what has she said about Trump’s new promise to give wealthy coastal elites a massive tax break?

I have yet to hear a word.

Yes, I realize Ernst’s worries about budget discipline and tax fairness are selective. She voted for the 2017 Trump tax cut that added almost $2 trillion to the debt over 10 years and provided most of its benefit to the wealthy. But in Ernst’s own words, it’s “wealthy coastal elites” that will gain the most from this move. Not Iowans. So, why isn’t she standing up for us?

Surely, our senator wouldn’t acquiesce to a Trump campaign promise that would help wealthy people in blue states and make future generations shoulder an even heavier debt burden. Would she?

Along the Mississippi is a proud member of the Iowa Writers Collaborative. Please check out the work of my colleagues and consider subscribing. Also, the collaborative partners with the Iowa Capital Dispatch, which provides hard-hitting news and commentary by members of the Iowa Writers Collaborative. Please consider making a donation to support its work, too.