Recent Articles

This week the state senate issued its spending targets for the 2006 budget year that begins July 1. The $4.8 billion budget is a responsible proposal that funds important priorities without raising taxes.

Our proposal includes $129 million to fully fund Medicaid and allows a rate increase for providers. In total, spending for health and human services under our plan would near $1 billion, an increase of $141.9 million over fiscal year 2005.

In addition, our plan would increase education funding by $115.8 million. I think that it is particularly important to maintain funding for class size and reading at $29.3 million, the same as fiscal year 2005. Increasing education funding is important to our schools, but it is not the only answer. Future success in education also needs to be tied to accountability measures that will help improve student achievement. How to do this has not been decided yet.

While the Senate Republican plan does not include a cigarette tax increase, the Senate Democratic budget does raise taxes on cigarettes. With these two budget plans still millions of dollars apart, it will take some negotiation to reach an agreement on the budget.

A woman enjoys a morning walk with her dog along the trail through Devils Glen Park, Bettendorf. Warmer weather as spring approaches draws more runners and walkers to the scenic Duck Creek pathway.

Senators Take Action to Combat Meth Labs

This week in the Senate we moved forward with a bipartisan bill to help curb methamphetamine production in Iowa.

The relative ease it takes to cook up meth using accessible and affordable supplies has led to an abundance of meth labs across the state. According to the Governorís Office of Drug Control Policy, Iowa law enforcement dismantled a record-high 1,425 labs in 2004 and Iowa ranks second behind only Missouri in per-capita meth lab making.

The bill aims to crack down on Iowaís meth labs by making it harder for meth makers to get their hands on pseudoephedrine, a popular cold decongestant and key ingredient in meth manufacturing.

Under the legislation, consumers would be required to buy most products containing pseudoephedrine from pharmacists. However, products containing less than 360 mg of pseudoephedrine ñ an amount equal to 12 tablets or that found in a small bottle of childrenís cold medicine ñ could still be sold at stores as long as the product is kept in a locked cabinet or behind the sales counter. Consumers who purchase the product from stores would be limited to two packages per customer in a 24-hour period.

In addition, buyers would be required to show photo identification and sign a log book with consumer information that could be made available to law enforcement officials. Retailers would have to keep records of the amounts of pseudoephedrine purchased from a wholesaler, the amount of products sold by the store and the number of products stolen or damaged.

Members of the Iowa House are also working on legislation to restrict pseudoephedrine sales in Iowa. Under the House proposal, a pharmacist must sell products containing more than 240 mg of pseudoephedrine, and consumers would be limited to one package per 24-hour period.

I think that the real issue faced by lawmakers is how to balance restrictions on pseudoephedrine sales with consumer access to this common cold remedy. I agree that the Senate bill strikes an important compromise. It aims to limit the sales of pseudoephedrine while still allowing parents, especially those in rural areas, to buy the product from local stores when their child suddenly comes down with a cold.

While the legislation will not completely eliminate Iowaís meth scourge, I believe that it will dramatically decrease the amount of meth manufactured within our state borders. Cracking down on the number of meth labs in Iowa will help free up important law enforcement resources to go after those who import meth into the state.