Q&A with House 67 candidate Terry McGovern

Terry McGovern, 53, of rural Delaware County, is the Democratic candidate for House District 67 in the Nov. 8 general election. McGovern, a business professor at the University of Wisconsin-Parkside, is seeking his first term in the state House.

The Gazette posed a set of questions to all area statehouse candidates. Below is the transcript of McGovern’s answers. Polls will be open on election day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

What do you think are the three most important issues the state is facing? What would you do to address them?

McGovern: Key issues are the labor shortage, education crisis, and women's reproductive rights. To address the labor shortage, we need to attract working families to Iowa. We can do this with high quality K-12 schools, affordable in-state colleges, access to childcare, affordable healthcare, and better quality of life initiatives to include clean waters. As for the education crisis, we need to invest in Iowa's public schools and stop criticizing our educational professionals. We need teachers and I support an educator's bill of rights in Iowa that establishes expectations, boundaries and processes related to teaching. As for women's reproductive rights, outlawing abortion will not end abortions. Strict abortion bans will reduce women's participation in the labor force at a time when we need workers!

Do you support the use of eminent domain for CO2 pipelines? Why or why not?

McGovern: No, I DO NOT support eminent domain for CO2 pipelines. Private projects like this should never be allowed to use eminent domain. To steal someone's land so someone else can profit goes against the very core of landowner rights in Iowa. I will vote to prohibit eminent domain for private profits. The use of eminent domain should be for clear and obvious public works that clearly benefit the public and it should be only be exercised when faithful efforts for voluntary participation have been fully executed. CO2 pipelines are sketchy in terms of efficacy--research shows most projects fail, many of the underground storage facilities leak, the amount of carbon they actually save is negligible when considering the global output of carbon. There are better green projects worthy of taxpayer funds.

What restrictions or limitations should be placed on the use of eminent domain for CO2 pipelines?

McGovern: I support, 100 percent, to deny the use of eminent domain for private profits. This should not even be a discussion -- stealing someone else's property so someone else can make money off it should be illegal. The CO2 pipeline is a form of eminent domain abuse; allowing it once sets a dangerous precedent for future landowners in Iowa. Related to this is the idea of absentee land ownership in the state. With increased investment into ag land by parties who reside outside of the state or even the country, it may be time to consider legislation that gives more weight to Iowans living on the land who have to live with these projects. It's easy to allow CO2 pipeline if you never have to worry about a leak because you live in a different state or country; a different case for us living near toxic pipes.

The state is projected to have a budget surplus of more than $1 billion. What would be your top priorities for that surplus?

McGovern: 1) Invest in education to give Iowa a competitive advantage to attract workers. Families will relocate to states with high-quality K-12 education & affordable in-state colleges. Businesses want access to well educated and skilled workers. 2) Invest in expanding childcare and housing access for more affordable options for working families. 3) Incentivize nuclear power development for Iowa's baseload power needs. Atomic energy is safe, more than twice as reliable as industrial wind/solar and it has a much smaller geographic footprint, less ecological impact. Nuclear power plants provide great jobs and tax revenues for host communities. 4) De-privatize healthcare in Iowa. The GOP's privatized Medicaid in Iowa has been an abject failure. Quality healthcare attracts working families to our state.

What changes — beyond those made in recent sessions — would you like to see made to Iowa's tax code?

McGovern: We need to bring back the progressive tax code. It's a system that has worked for over 160 years in America and it's needed for Iowa to be able to provide the services necessary to support public health and welfare. The flat tax plan reduces state revenue by $226 million in year one, and by $1.6 billion at full implementation. This means less money for schools, higher costs for college, less funds for police, roads, bridges, etc. Companies are reshoring jobs back to the U.S. and this trend is expected to increase. We need a well-skilled workforce to attract future businesses to Iowa. This means we need public funds to invest in programs to attract working families and companies. The flat tax limits Iowa's ability to gain competitive advantage over other states competing for labor and firms.

Under what circumstances should Iowans be able to access abortion services in the state? What if any, exceptions should apply to any abortion bans?

McGovern: Abortion is a private matter between a pregnant mother and her doctor, government needs to stay out of this personal decision. Restrictive abortion bans leads to higher rates of abortion per research by the Guttmacher Institute. It's estimated nearly 30,000 women die throughout the world each year due to amateur or self-abortion attempts -- most happening where abortion services are banned. If someone is serious about reducing abortion, then they need to address the root-cause -- unintended pregnancies. To reduce unintended pregnancies requires greater access to the pill (think over-the-counter sales as is done in China, Turkey, Russia, etc.) and greater sex education. As noted, restrictive abortion bans reduce women's participation in the labor force -- not good during a labor crisis.

What are your ideas for improving public schools?

McGovern: The best investment we can make is not stocks, bonds, real estate -- it's in our children. Education is an investment that will pay dividends for generations. Working families will relocate to give their kids access to high-quality schools. Companies want to build where there are skilled workers. This takes funding and excellent teachers to make it possible. To get the best teachers means we need to pay them well, RESPECT them, give them access to resources to do their job, and ensure they have a healthy working environment. I support creating an educator's bill of rights that provides a foundation of basic expectations, processes, and boundaries concerning teaching. Given forecasts for future business trends, Iowa's kids should be bilingual, e.g. Spanish required each year for K-12.

Do you support further use of state funds to help parents pay the costs of non-public schools or home schooling for grades K-12? Why or why not?

McGovern: No, I do not support using public dollars for private education. The state already provides over $65 million a year in assistance to private schools in Iowa through transportation, private pre-K, tax credits, etc. If someone wants to send their children to a private school or home school, that is their choice, they should not expect a $50M state hand-out to support that choice. The best thing Iowa can do for the private schools is reduce to the cost to attend our public universities. It's no surprise that as the GOP continually defunded our universities and increased college costs to families, private school enrollments decreased. Add to this the high costs of childcare, healthcare, and housing, it's no wonder Iowa families can no longer afford the privates.

Should Iowa ban the use of hand-held mobile devices while driving?

McGovern: Yes. Empirical studies have shown time and again that distractions by mobile devices cause automobile accidents. Illinois has addressed this and I agree with their approach that prohibits the use of cellphones, texting or using other electronic communication device when operating a motor vehicle. Even hands-free is shown to be dangerous, so the use of hands-free devices or Blue Tooth technology should be limited to persons with more driving experience--say age 19 and older.

Should automated traffic cameras be banned?

McGovern: No, I disagree with a ban on traffic cameras. In areas that experience high rates of traffic accidents due to high speeds, the traffic cameras probably make sense. This is a local issue and I trust local governments to do what makes the most sense for their community. Traffic cameras are a tool that should be available if local communities that see a need to employ them as a means to protect the public.