Growing list of GOP social issues upsets legislative Democrats

DES MOINES – Legislative Democrats don't like the fact that their GOP counterparts are getting too socially minded, and it's got nothing to do with Facebook or those kinds of trendy social networks.

Democrats are concerned about a proliferation of social issues targeting things like restricting late-term abortions, banning same-sex marriages or civil unions, paring back stem-cell research conducted in Iowa, eliminating government-funded preschool for 4-year-olds, and other hot-button issues like revising the state's collective bargaining law that were not the focus of a 2010 election cycle that mostly dealt with government fiscal matters.

“Our fear is that many of our committee members are getting signals from the other side that we're going to be moving from one socially divisive issue to another,” said House Democratic Leader Kevin McCarthy of Des Moines, who worried the 2010 session will get “bogged down” in hot-button topics that “just tear our society apart” rather than focusing on “bread-and-butter” issues like education, health care and environmental issues that are of most concern to Iowans.

House Speaker Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, said Republicans who hold a 60-40 edge in the House will focus on their campaign promises to cut government spending, ease burdensome regulations and reduce taxes but he noted there also is ample time during a 110-day scheduled session to consider a lot of different topics that likely will include social issues.

“I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time,” added Senate GOP Leader Paul McKinley of Chariton. “I think the discussion about the divisive social issues is a construct used to beat up on those people who have a true agenda to move this state forward and do what the voters wanted us to do.”

House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer, R-Garner, said she expected bills dealing with requiring photo IDs for voters, giving voters an opportunity to vote on a marriage amendment to the state constitution, and restricting late-term abortions will be moving through House committees for floor debate in the coming weeks as part of the normal flow of legislation.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, said he is trying to get legislators to focus on the fact that the election is over and it is time for them to work together as a divided government to find common ground – something that gets impeded by divisive issues.

“I've told the leaders in the House that if they want to pass a bunch of bills that they know the Senate's going to kill so they can get the House Democrats on record or blaming the Senate for killing bills, that's a fine game to play. Let's play that in the election year. Let's not play it this year,” he said. “It's time for common ground. We've got divided government, people of good faith ought to sit down and find out where they can agree. They're still focusing on our areas of disagreement. That was the election. This is now governing. We need to focus on our areas of agreement.”

Republican Gov. Terry Branstad opened a new front that likely will divide legislators by suggesting that they should give consideration to revisiting the state's 1974 collective bargaining law based on recommendations from his labor consultant.

However, Democrats said they would not consider changes to the Chapter 20 collective bargaining laws after Republicans refused to discuss that topic in recent years, especially if the intent is to repeal the statute or undo binding arbitration provisions designed to resolve impasses between public employees and state negotiators.

“Chapter 20 was a Republican idea. This is Gov. Ray's idea. They came up with Chapter 20 to keep public employees from striking. If they want to go back to letting public employees strike, maybe that's what we ought to do. I don't think that's going to happen. I don't think it's going anywhere. I think it's wrong-headed to pick a fight with your employees,” said Sen. Tom Courtney, D-Burlington. “It seems to me like we're not going to do much in (the Labor Committee) the next two years.”