As I wrote on Monday, I attended a debate hosted by the Ames Chamber of Commerce and the League of Women Voters for the Iowa House candidates in the Ames area. One topic that got brought up was the issue of special interests and their role in the election process. All three Democratic candidates decried the influence of special interests and voiced that they would be in favor of laws that would restrict this influence.
Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell of House District 45 was in attendance and was the most outspoken opponent of the influence that special interests have in elections. See this article here from the Ames Tribune quoting Wessel-Kroeschell from Monday’s debate. So, to keep her honest I decided to see if her rhetoric matched reality. What I found digging through her campaign disclosure reports for this election shows that, in fact, her rhetoric DOES NOT match reality. I found that Wessel-Kroeschell received contributions from 21 special interest groups (political action committees; PACs). A variety of PACs contributed to Wessel-Kroeschell’s cause, which you can see from her campaign disclosure reports here and here. By my calculations, special interests have donated a total of $8,200 to her campaign. I will highlight two of the most interesting contributions below:
- Rainbow Equality PAC ($150)- this PAC is located in Indianola and has also given $1000 to Sen. Mike Gronstal– see here. I couldn’t find a website for this PAC but given it’s name you all probably can figure out what type of legislation they support.
- Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa/Meskwaki ($500)- this is the tribe that owns the Meskwaki Casino in Tama, IA. See their website here. What makes this contribution especially interesting is that Wessel-Kroeschell is very proud of her “yes” vote on the smoking ban (she glowed on Monday night when she talked about the ban). However, casinos such as the Meskwaki are exempt from the smoking ban. Things that make you go “hmmmmmm”.
I was absolutely shocked by what I found in my research on Rep. Wessel-Kroeschell. How can an elected official sit and face her constituents and blatantly lie? Stating in a public debate that you have issues with the influence that special interests have in elections but yet you receive contributions from 21 special interest groups is a double-standard and the actions of a hypocrite. The citizens who live in Iowa House District 45 deserve better representation. Wessel-Kroeschell’s opponent, Ryan Rhodes, is someone who will serve the people of District 45 honestly and respectfully. His support for lower taxes, less spending, and more government accountability and transparency are what the the people in District 45 need and deserve. And if you are wondering how many special interest groups have donated to Ryan’s campaign look here. Let me know what you find.
Filed under: Politics, palmofdeborah | Tagged: Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, Iowa House District 45, Meskwaki Casino, Rainbow Equality PAC, Ryan Rhodes, Special Interests
Typical liberal hypocrisy. I hope that the voters of this district can see through her lies.
I hope voters in this district do this type of research also. We have got to quit assuming that candidates are being straight with us, especially incumbents.
As a voter in the 45th district, this is really disturbing. I will definitely be voting Rhodes on the 4th.
Hypocrit, indeed. She thinks we’re stupid.
A total of $650? Is that it? Wow… She really is in the bag of big donors.
I finally managed to look through your (malformed) links. I have no idea where you got your 21 PACs, or your $8,200. There is only $550 from Lawyers and Lobbyists”.
I did see that the firefighters gave her money. Are the firefighters a special interest group in your book?
On the other hand, she hasn’t been convicted of anything (say, public drunkenness; nor is there a warrant for her arrest). She also is not in the red.
Hard to have a lot of confidence on the ability to reduce spending by someone who can’t even keep his own campaign in the black…
Also, if you spell it “hypocrit”, maybe you are, you know, well, Palin-like.
Confused- your title here is appropriate for your take on the District 45 race.
From what I read, it would be very hard to have any kind of confidence in the candidate that you are supporting- a woman who would return to her current position and continue to spend, spend, spend.
From some research I have done Beth WK supports gay rights issues which is an even bigger red flag to me than the stones you throw at her opponent.
Glad you are confused. Those who get to vote for Rhodes know a good candidate when they see one. He must be up against a big mean Democrat machine- even in Ames, Iowa. I say good for Rhodes and may the conservative, young and committed to less tax and spend voice in this race win!
Confused, what an apt moniker for someone like yourself.
For your education a special interest is more than just lobbyists. Special interests are political action committees, PACs if you will whose sole goal is to funnel money to their selected politician.
While no Beth hasn’t been convicted of a crime. Of course ignorance isn’t a crime. You are supporting a woman who when asked the definition of a corporate farm her only response was they stink.
Of the candidates in District 45 I would take the fresh face Ryan Rhodes over Beth.
Thanks, Confused, for doing a spell check for me. But as you can see by our “members” page, I am the editor and not you. Thanks for the cheap shot, that made you even sound more credible. If you have got so much time on your hands to critique spelling on blog comments, then I suggest you use your time a little more wisely and research special interest Beth, doggonit.
Take a look at the supposed “malformed” link from the Iowa ethics boards which is an exact copy of her disclosure reports and you will see 21 lobby/special interests groups most of which have PAC in their name. Add up the money given by those 21 groups and you get $8200.
I do consider firefighers a special interest. That doesn’t mean I am saying it is bad or they shouldn’t be a able to form a PAC (my dad was a volunteer firefighter for over 30 years). Bill Maher always says that both Democrats and Republicans are bought off by special interests–Democrats are just bought off by a less scary bunch. Once again, special interest does not necessarily mean bad in my book.
What I do take issue with is the fact that she says special interests shouldn’t have a role in elections and then blatantly goes and takes money from special interests.
Confused… and the “Palin-like” comment… you showed me your true colors!
Anyway, welcome to the Iowa Defense site- we don’t mind confused people like your, even when they take nasty digs at Sarah Palin. Now, there is a woman I can support!
Come on everybody, give Confused a break. I didn’t expect a liberal to get my joke.
There is no arrest out for Rhodes. I do believe you are referring to some parking tickets that didn’t get paid—that has been taken care of. As for the MIP, he’s been forgiven and probably has learned from the mistake of his past. Let’s leave it at that.
Was not at the meeting so I’m not commenting directly on what was said or not said there… and I’m not going to disagree with the exit impressions held by someone who did attend.
What I do want to point out is that I believe a politician can honestly state his/her belief that the current system should be changed while still playing by the current rules on the books. That is, I don’t think it’s hypocritical for a politician from either party to discuss campaign finance reform while accepting money from existing special interest groups.
By that same token, I listen year after year as folks rail against special interest groups and grumble about campaign finance laws. Despite whatever party holds the majority in Des Moines, the proposed laws to change the status quo get sidelined. Perhaps it is time, if the citizens of this state really value finance reform, for them to step up to the plate and scream to high heaven.
As a side thought, it seems to me that politicians earn a lot of breathing space because they’ve been so successful in pitting one major party against the other and both against the minor parties. Perhaps it is time that we, as a people in a society, learn to move away from daily divisive tactics and come together on legislation that benefits us (and not necessarily those within the parties or elected to serve in Des Moines). Then again, I’ve always been a dreamer.
Lynda,
I understand what you are saying.
I have to say that I don’t think a politician that has taken special interest money will make any kind of attempt at real election reform.