State candidate fundraising, second GOP debate

May 25 edition of "KHOI's Capitol Week"

Rob Sand, Zach Lahn, and Randy Feenstra (photos cropped from images published on their campaign Facebook pages in May 2026)

A quick note on upcoming events: I will recap the Iowa primary results and take questions about the 2026 elections at the June 4 meeting of the Urbandale Area Democrats, and later the same evening on a Zoom organized by Heart of Iowa Democrats. On June 9, I’ll be in Iowa City for an IC Giving Circle panel discussion about competitive state legislative races. Let me know if you’d like further details about any of those events.

Last Monday, I moderated a conversation about Christian nationalism with Interfaith Alliance of Iowa executive director Connie Ryan and Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush, President and CEO of the Interfaith Alliance nationally. That’s on YouTube, for anyone who’s interested.

I don’t charge a fee to speak at nonprofit or political events, but I do need to keep this ship running! So I’m organizing a series of fundraisers around the state this summer. These are informal gatherings, where we have some social time, I talk about my reporting journey and the 2026 campaign landscape, and leave plenty of time for Q&A about anything related to Iowa politics. No donation is required to attend, but people who are able to contribute are encouraged to help me cover my operating costs.

Events are tentatively scheduled for Davenport (June 16), Newton (June 17), and Des Moines (June 24), with more in the works, including a swing through northeast Iowa.

Please reach out if you’d like to attend a fundraiser or help plan one in your area. If you can’t come but want to chip in—and are not an Iowa elected official, candidate, or paid campaign staffer or consultant—you can make a one-time gift using a credit card, PayPal, Venmo, or personal check (message me for the mailing address), or a recurring donation via credit card or Substack.

On to our regularly scheduled programming! The audio file from the May 25 edition of “KHOI’s Capitol Week” is at the top of this post. The archive of past programs is available for free.

For those who would rather read than listen, I always provide a written recap of the news Spencer Dirks and I covered. If your email provider truncates this post, you can read it without interruption here.

A heavy Memorial Day for Iowa

Sometimes years go by with no Iowans dying in a war theater. But this Memorial Day was particularly hard for those who lost loved ones in the Middle East over the winter. We began the show by remembering the four Iowans killed in action. Two Iowa National Guard soldiers, Staff Sergeant William Nathaniel “Nate” Howard and Staff Sergeant Edgar Torres-Tovar, died in an ambush in Syria in December.

Remains of the fallen Iowa National Guard Soldiers arrive at Des Moines International Airport on December 24, 2025. (U.S. Army National Guard photo)

That attack was both tragic and shocking for many people (myself included) who didn’t know hundreds of Iowa National Guard troops were deployed in Syria on a counter-terrorism mission.

The Guard announced last Wednesday that the “final major group of Iowa National Guard Soldiers assigned to the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 34th Infantry Division have returned home to the United States today following deployment in support of Operation Inherent Resolve.” We are grateful they got home safely.

On March 1, two Army Reserve soldiers from Iowa were among the first U.S. casualties in the war against Iran: Major Jeffrey O’Brien and Sergeant Declan Coady. They were assigned to the 103rd Sustainment Command in Kuwait. A number of Iowa-based soldiers were wounded in that attack as well. The military doesn’t release details about that, so we don’t know their names or their current health conditions, but we hope they are recovering well.

State Senator Matt Blake, who was deployed in the Middle East years ago, noted during a point of personal privilege earlier this year that “Kuwait’s supposed to be the safe deployment.” He said that whenever he was in Iraq, his wife prayed every night for his safety. But when he was in Kuwait, his wife was relieved. Serving in Kuwait typically doesn’t earn service members combat badge. But unfortunately, combat found the 103rd Sustainment Command.

I wrote more about Major O’Brien, Sgt. Coady, Staff Sgt. Torres-Tovar, and Staff Sgt. Howard at Bleeding Heartland.

A huge fundraising haul for Rob Sand

We spent most of this week’s show on 2026 campaign news, starting with the reports on fundraising and spending that state candidates had to file by May 19. State Auditor Rob Sand, the Democratic candidate for governor, dropped a very big number: $9.6 million raised since the beginning of this year, with more than $18 million cash on hand.

I never report on campaign fundraising based solely on a press release, and this was a good example of why. Sand’s campaign announced the topline number of $9.6 million, “surpassing the total raised in all of 2025 and more than tripling the previous record for the most money raised during the same period in the state’s gubernatorial campaign history.” That’s accurate, but it glosses over the fact that about $4.5 million came from family members: $1.5 million from Sand’s wife, just over $2 million from his father-in-law, and $500,000 each from two brothers-in-law.

You might say, who cares, since money spends the same no matter where it comes from. I like to look at the source, because that can tell you how much grassroots support a candidate has. And raising nearly $5 million from non-family members from January through mid-May is a massive number. Sand’s cash-on-hand total at this stage of an Iowa campaign is also record-breaking.

Sand has a ton of small donors, many donating each month. His campaign finance disclosure was more than 2,500 pages long. That means he can count on a lot more money coming in as the campaign progresses.

To put these numbers in perspective, I looked up a few other disclosures for Iowa candidates for governor. During the first four and a half months of 2014, then Governor Terry Branstad raised about $1.16 million and reported $4.5 million cash on hand.

At this point in 2018, Democrat Fred Hubbell had raised about $3 million from January to mid-May, but around $2.1 million of that amount came from the candidate himself. He spent most of what he had raised just to get through that primary, so had little cash on hand.

Governor Kim Reynolds reported raising just under $1.3 million in May 2022 and was entering the general election with a little less than $5 million cash on hand.

Despite his reputation for frugality (used to comic effect in one of this year’s TV ads), Sand’s campaign has been spending heavily: around $4.5 million from January 1 through May 14. This year alone, he has already spent more than $800,000 on digital advertising and more than $800,000 on television advertising. By the end of this month, he will have spent more on TV ads than Deidre DeJear spent on TV during her entire 2022 campaign for governor. And with $18 million in the bank, he can stay on the air through November, if that’s the plan.

Lahn outpaces Feenstra in fundraising this year

Of the five Republicans running for governor, Zach Lahn raised the most so far this year, with about $980,000 in receipts to Randy Feenstra’s $739,000 during the period from January 1 to May 14.

Again, it’s important to look beyond the topline numbers. Lahn’s campaign put out a news release touting his “momentum,” but about three-quarters of what he raised came from four individuals: two gave $250,000, one gave $150,000, and one gave $100,000. He also had a bunch of donations ranging from $10,000 to $25,000 donations, mostly not from Iowans.

Most of Lahn’s smaller donors don’t live in Iowa either. I noticed a lot of those contributions came in soon after Tucker Carlson interviewed the candidate in late February. There was another burst in small donations after conservative podcaster Shawn Ryan interviewed Lahn in March.

Again, money spends the same, regardless of the source. But Lahn could more credibly claim to have grassroots momentum if he had raised a million dollars from small donors living in Iowa. As we’ve mentioned before, Lahn got a very late start to this race, and as a first-time candidate, he didn’t come in with a social media following that would help him raise big bucks. Sand has been building up his social media presence for a decade.

Lahn’s campaign spent about $2.4 million from January through mid-May. Media buys were the biggest line item, as he’s banked on TV and digital advertising to bring his message to Republican voters. I forgot to mention during the show that Lahn has also invested heavily in polling: about $46,000 last October and several expenditures totaling $100,000 this year.

Feenstra’s haul was underwhelming. The establishment favorite should be able to raise more than $739,000. His campaign spent more than $3.3 million during the reporting period, including more than $1.8 million on media placement and about $1 million on other paid messaging (printing, digital ads, direct mail, media production).

The front-runner’s campaign spent around $112,000 on polling in 2025 and dropped another $39,000 on polling in March of this year. (That was was presumably the survey we covered in April, which showed Feenstra leading the GOP field with 41 percent and everyone else in single digits.)

Danger sign: Feenstra had less than $600,000 cash on hand as of May 14. He doesn’t have the grassroots support to replenish what he is spending, so if he does win the primary, he’ll enter the general election at a big financial disadvantage.

I needed to get something off my chest that’s been bothering me for a while. We didn’t have time to discuss it when the last batch of state candidate fundraising reports came out in January.

Last June, Feenstra’s campaign announced in a news release that it had raised “over $1 million” in its first 24 hours, and “amassed over $3.2 million for the race in just 3 weeks.” Most of the mainstream media mentioned that in their coverage. But the report Feenstra filed in January of this year was not consistent with that claim. As of June 11, 2025, his campaign had collected a little more than half a million dollars. Nothing remotely close to $3.2 million in three weeks. Feenstra’s campaign only raised $4.3 million for the entire calendar year 2025, and that total included more than $1.4 million transferred from his Congressional committee.

Another example of why I don’t ever write a campaign finance story based solely on a candidate’s press release.

Other GOP candidates for governor trail in money race

Adam Steen was third in fundraising of the Republicans running for governor, reporting about $486,000 raised so far this year. Most of Steen’s contributors—including small donors and those who gave amounts ranging from $5,000 to $50,000—were from Iowa. I noticed he received another $5,000 from David Bush, best known as the guy who challenged Eddie Andrews’ nominating papers.

Steen spent just under $690,000 during the period. It looks like less than $100,000 of that amount went toward TV advertising. He’s purchased a fair amount of digital advertising, but Feenstra and Lahn are massively outspending him on television. With only about $147,000 cash on hand as of May 14, Steen can’t afford to match what his rivals are spending on paid media down the home stretch.

Compared to Brad Sherman and Eddie Andrews, though, Steen is flush with money. Sherman reported raising about $153,000, which included one $50,000 donation. One of his top contributors ($25,000 last year and $5,000 on the latest report) is Leo Kelly. He was sentenced to 30 months in prison and served 11 months of that sentence after storming the U.S. Senate chamber on January 6, 2021. As you may have guessed, Sherman is a big 2020 election denier.

Sherman’s campaign spent around $110,000 from January through mid-May. The biggest line item was $40,000 for that digital ad buy we mentioned on a previous show.

Eddie Andrews reported raising $15,565.50—which would be a small amount for a state legislative candidate, let alone someone running for governor. Nearly a third of his haul came from Don Lamberti, a major donor to countless Iowa GOP candidates. His campaign spent around $15,000, which was enough for some printing and a small amount of digital advertising. But with less than $6,000 cash on hand, Andrews lacks the resources to get his message out.

Fundraising for other statewide candidates

We didn’t have time to get into the details of other statewide candidates’ fundraising, but I flagged a few things that caught my eye.

We already knew the attorney general race will be competitive, and these reports are another data point. Incumbent Brenna Bird raised about $1.775 million, most of which ($1.425 million) came from the Republican Attorneys General Association. Miriam Adelson (one of the biggest GOP donors nationally) cut a $50,000 check to Bird’s campaign, and she received $3,000 from former U.S. Attorney General William Barr. She raised around $64,000 from various PACs.

The upshot is, Bird doesn’t have a large base of donors. That may not matter, since the Republican AGs Association is clearly prioritizing her re-election, but it means she will rely heavily on out-of-state funding.

Democratic challenger Nate Willems raised just under $500,000 so far this year, mostly from individual donors. He received about $40,000 from various labor unions, $10,000 from the individual PAC associated with the Democratic Attorneys General Association, and another $10,000 from the Wyoming-based Way Back PAC.

Bird has a huge lead in cash on hand: around $3.8 million as of May 14, while Willems’ campaign had around $856,000 in the bank. A big question for me: how much will the Democratic AGs Association invest in this race?

Democrat Ryan Peterman out-raised Secretary of State Paul Pate (around $84,000 during the reporting period to $13,000 for the incumbent). But that wasn’t a big surprise for me, since Pate has never been a big fundraiser. He’s self-financed a large share of his past campaigns.

Also expected: State Treasurer Roby Smith raised more (around $88,000) than his Democratic challenger, John Norwood (just under $60,000).

I was surprised, though, to see Democrat Taylor Wettach raised far more than both of the Republicans running for state auditor. He reported raising around $700,000, which included a $123,000 transfer from his Congressional campaign, one donor who gave $100,000, and another who gave $70,000. Even taking all that into account, he raised a ton of money for a state auditor candidate. He had about $590,000 cash on hand.

Meanwhile, Lieutenant Governor Chris Cournoyer, the GOP establishment’s choice for state auditor, raised around $55,000, and had around $132,000 cash on hand in mid-May. Her Republican primary rival, Abigail Maas, raised less overall (around $39,000), but her filing listed a few big name Republican donors: Denny Elwell, Jeff Lamberti, Don Lamberti.

I would love to see the internal polling on the Iowa secretary of agriculture race. The Republican State Leadership Committee, which supports GOP candidates for state offices around the country, transferred $150,000 to Mike Naig’s campaign. That was about three-quarters of the $202,000 Naig raised from January to mid-May. By way of comparison, the Republican State Leadership Committee gave only $10,000 to Paul Pate’s campaign this year.

Democratic challenger Chris Jones raised around $104,000, all from individuals, and mostly from Iowans. Naig reported almost ten times more cash on hand (around $490,000) as Jones (just under $50,000). I expect Big Ag interest groups to spend heavily for Naig and against Jones as we get into the general election period.

Click on any of the links below for the candidates’ financial disclosures:

• Attorney general: Brenna Bird (R), Nate Willems (D)

• Secretary of agriculture: Mike Naig (R), Chris Jones (D)

• Secretary of state: Paul Pate (R), Ryan Peterman (D)

• State auditor: Chris Cournoyer (R), Abigail Maas (R), Taylor Wettach (D)

• State treasurer: Roby Smith (R), John Norwood (D)

All but Feenstra take stage at second GOP debate

Last Tuesday, KCCI-TV and Gray Media stations broadcast a debate featuring four of the five GOP candidates for governor. They recorded the Saturday before to make it easier for Feenstra to attend, since Congress might be in session during the week. But as everyone would have predicted, he did not show up.

I understand why Feenstra has been avoiding these multi-candidate events, but it is a risky strategy, because it’s a bad look.

I felt Lahn and Steen were most successful in framing the questions to line up with the main themes of their campaigns. Lahn kept bringing the conversation back to systemic problems such as young Iowans leaving the state and public education declining. When moderators asked about legal immigrants working temporarily in the U.S., Lahn’s answer centered illegal immigration, which is the theme of the current TV ad he is running.

Steen mentioned Rob Sand the most and argued that having dealt with Sand in state government, he would be the best positioned to take on the Democrat in a general election.

On the other hand, I don’t think either Lahn or Steen succeeded in making themselves the consensus alternative to Feenstra. That’s why I continue to believe they are each other’s biggest problem as the June 2 primary approaches.

One way Steen tried to differentiate himself was to defend agriculture. For instance, whereas Lahn bashes Big Ag companies for some of rural Iowa’s economic struggles and our state’s high cancer rate, Steen emphasized that he doesn’t want to put the blame on farmers.

Sherman brought up God and prayer multiple times. It appeared that he was trying to compete with Steen for the religious conservative vote. That could be hard, since The FAMiLY Leader organization is pulling hard for Steen.

I felt sympathy for Andrews, because he had to take every question first, under the rules used for this debate. That meant his opponents always had more time to think about their responses. He wasn’t happy about the ground rules and complained later on his social media. If I were organizing a debate, I would switch up the candidate order.

Dave Price, Kathie Obradovich, and I spent most of the latest “Iowa Down Ballot” podcast talking about this debate, if you want to hear more.

Iowa Down Ballot with Dave Price 5-23-26

Feenstra touts Naig endorsement, work with Trump

Secretary of Agriculture Naig endorsed Feenstra last Thursday, saying in a statement that the member of Congress has “fought for priorities that matter to agriculture” and “consistently delivered for Iowa agriculture, farm families, and rural communities.”

I can’t imagine many GOP voters were waiting to hear where Mike Naig came down on this race. The endorsement that matters in any Republican primary these days seems to be Donald Trump and he decided not to weigh in on our governor’s race.

Feenstra’s social media feeds are full of posts trying to associate himself with Trump. One recent example:

I worked with President Trump to get Sarah’s Law signed into law to detain and prosecute illegal immigrants who kill Americans.

I worked with President Trump to pass the largest tax cuts for working families in U.S. history.

I worked with President Trump to pass the Farm Bill and year-round E-15.

As Governor, I’ll keep working with President Trump to deliver for Iowa.

Zach Lahn ad spotlights immigration

I mentioned above that Lahn’s campaign has spent a lot money on polling. Although I haven’t seen the findings, it’s a safe bet that anti-immigrant statements polled well. The latest TV ad pushes an immigration angle to Lahn’s “Iowa First” theme.

He said government benefits “are over,” and called for banning legal immigrants holding H1B visa holders from working in state government or at our universities. “Iowa jobs are for Iowans. Iowa benefits are for Iowans. And our universities are for Iowans. Iowa first.”

Dan Gable endorses Adam Steen

A blast from the past: who else remembers when legendary Iowa wrestling coach Dan Gable was seen as a possible candidate for governor after Terry Branstad?

Earlier this month, Gable and his wife, Kathy, endorsed Steen. The coach said in a written statement, “I don’t even have to second-guess… I run into people who really like him, and for the right reasons.”

The Steen campaign asserted, “Their support reflects the growing momentum behind a leader who is ready to Keep Iowa families, values, and culture free.”

I’m skeptical any endorsement other than Trump’s would move many voters.

Big picture take on the GOP primary

A week out from the primary, I still think Feenstra is favored to clear the 35 percent threshold and win the nomination outright. If no candidate gets 35 percent, the GOP state convention delegates will decide the nomination, and I have no clue who would win.

Depending on whom Feenstra selects as his running mate, I expect a serious effort to nominate a different person (possibly someone in the Steen mold) for lieutenant governor. The state convention delegates formally select the lieutenant governor. Usually it’s a foregone conclusion, but in 2010 hundreds of delegates voted for Bob Vander Plaats instead of Kim Reynolds for lieutenant governor.

What do you think will happen in the GOP race for governor?

New Wahls ad: “Iowans need a fighter in Washington”

Democratic candidate Zach Wahls launched his second TV ad last week, promising to fix health care, protect Social Security from Ashley Hinson, take on ICE, Trump, and his assault on our democracy. His closing line: “Now more than ever, Iowans need a fighter in Washington. I approved this message because I have never backed down, and I never will.”

I’m having trouble getting the video to embed in this post, but you can watch the ad here.

And in another video his campaign is circulating on social media, Wahls calls out Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer directly. Alluding to the VoteVets super PAC, which has spent more than $9 million since late March to promote Josh Turek for Senate, Wahls says, “Iowa is not for sale.”

By the way, federal candidates had to file pre-primary reports last week, disclosing their fundraising and spending from April 1 to mid-May. Turek’s report showed that in April, he received $10,000 from a PAC associated with Schumer and $5,000 gifts from PACs associated with other Democratic senators: Richard Blumenthal, Patty Murray, Kirsten Gillibrand.

That reinforces one of the top Wahls campaign talking points: that even though the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has not formally endorsed Turek, he is the candidate backed by DC insiders.

Iowa Senate committee tables ethics complaint against Wahls

On Friday morning, I listened in as the Iowa Senate Ethics Committee considered a complaint against Wahls, filed in late April by a Turek supporter. The committee voted to take no further action and to dismiss the complaint unless the person who filed it produces evidence supporting the allegations within 120 days.

You can read the complaint here and the response from an attorney for Wahls here. Tom Barton and Erin Murphy explained more of the details in this story for the Cedar Rapids Gazette. The gist is that from January 2024 through April 2025, Wahls was executive director of The Next 50 Network LLC. He sought guidance from the secretary of the Iowa Senate before taking the job to confirm “that employment with Next 50 Network LLC would not violate Senate ethics rules so long as Wahls did not directly oversee affiliated PACs or nonprofit entities.” Wahls’ attorney said he did not lead The Next 50 PACs or influence their decisions during his time as executive director of the LLC.

Kathy Ulrich, who filed the complaint, declined to comment when I asked whether she drafted the document herself. Based on my experience covering ethics complaints in the Iowa House or Senate, this seemed like a document written by an attorney or political consultant. The Turek campaign didn’t respond when I asked if any of their representatives helped draft the complaint.

Unlike most Iowa legislative committees, which are controlled by the majority party in the chamber, the House and Senate Ethics Committees have equal representation for each party. On Friday, the three Republicans initially wanted to take no action on the complaint but forward it to the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board for further investigation of whether Wahls was leading a PAC. The three Democrats voted against that motion, saying there was no evidence to warrant forwarding the complaint.

The Democrats then offered a motion to simply dismiss the complaint against Wahls, but Republicans voted against that motion, leading to the same 3-3 deadock.

After a brief Republican caucus, the six Ethics Committee members voted for the compromise motion, which means the complaint will be dismissed in 120 days unless Ulrich comes up with additional evidence.

A statement from Wahls slammed what he called “baseless political attack from the Turek campaign.” From where I’m sitting, if this were a real concern someone should have filed a complaint last year instead of shortly before the primary election.

Bohannan, Terrell make their cases

Christina Bohannan didn’t agree to debate her primary rival in the first Congressional district, Travis Terrell. But Ray Baccari of KGAN-TV recently interviewed both Democrats in that race.

Asked why voters should choose her over her opponent, Christina Bohannan said she’s the one who can beat the Republican incumbent, Mariannette Miller-Meeks. She emphasized that she came very close to beating Miller-Meeks in 2024, and was supported by tens of thousands of people who voted for Trump on the same ballot.

The two Democrats agree on some issues, like term limits and banning stock trading by members of Congress. But Bohannan is staking out more moderate positions than Terrell on some issues. For instance, during this interview she said she’s for reforming Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, not abolishing ICE. She was very on message saying Miller-Meeks’ votes had raised people’s costs. You can watch here.

We were running short on time so didn’t discuss Terrell’s interview on the show. One of the most newsworthy bits was that when asked whether he would support impeaching Donald Trump, he said, “On day one.” Bohannan dodged the same question, saying, “All of these calls for impeachment – those are things, honestly – nobody thinks those are going to go anywhere.” Asked to answer yes or no on impeaching Trump, she said “no.”

You can watch Terrell’s full KGAN interview here.

Budget reconciliation bill in trouble

We squeezed in some news from Congress this week. We reported earlier in May that $1 billion in proposed funding related to the White House ballroom project was going through the Senate Judiciary Committee. That hit a snag when the Senate parliamentarian ruled,

This section provides $1 billion to the U.S. Secret Service for the ballroom project in the East Wing of the White House. A project as complex and large in scale as Trump’s proposed ballroom necessarily involves the coordination of many government agencies which span the jurisdiction of many Senate committees. As drafted, the provision inappropriately funds activities outside the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee.

The Senate Republicans could overrule the parliamentarian. But if they don’t go that route, they will need 60 votes for any “security” funding related to the ballroom. No Democrats other than John Fetterman would go for that.

In a separate ruling, the parliamentarian said some of the Customs and Border Patrol funding in the reconciliation bill would also be subject to the 60-vote threshold because it’s outside the scope of the Homeland Security committee.

The Senate adjourned last week without a clear path forward on this legislation, a priority for Trump and Republicans in Congress. As chair of the Judiciary Committee, Grassley will be a key figure in passing this bill.

Grassley, Hinson on board with “weaponization” slush fund

Another hot topic Grassley will be dealing with is the fund the Trump administration announced last week, which will compensate alleged victims of “weaponization” by the Justice Department. Democrats have accused the president of creating a “slush fund” of $1,776 million for his political allies.

Grassley and his staff don’t allow me to participate in any of his conference calls with Iowa reporters. But Brianne Pfannenstiel reported for the Des Moines Register that Grassley “defended” the fund in last week’s call.

Grassley said on May 20 call with reporters that he believes “there’s a unanimous understanding that the federal government shouldn’t be weaponized against … your political enemies, whether they’re Republican or Democrat.” […]

“Well, first of all, don’t forget that this is subject to congressional oversight,” he said. “My Judiciary Committee has the attorney general in frequently for oversight hearings. I’m sure this is going to be a big subject of discussion with them.”

Grassley’s “oversight” only seems to find wrongdoing by Democratic administrations. So I wouldn’t bet on him to push back against anything Trump wants to do with this fund. Fortunately, other Republicans in Congress may not be on board.

In a separate conference call, Ashley Hinson told reporters last week, “I did hear a lot during the Biden administration from Iowans about how they saw the government being weaponized against law-abiding Americans.” She added, “I don’t want to see that continue to happen, no matter who is the president. And so I am encouraged that this is the avenue that they’re taking.”

Hinson has said nothing while Trump directly ordered Justice Department leaders to pursue criminal charges against some of his political adversaries. So I don’t think her concerns about “weaponization” are sincere.

House finally approves year-round E15 sales

We didn’t get to this story last week: in a victory for the Iowa delegation, the U.S. House approved a bill that would allow the higher ethanol blend known as E15 to be sold year-round.

I was a little surprised it passed. The vote was scrambled, with 122 Republicans, 95 Democrats, and one independent in favor of year-round E15, and 90 Republicans and 113 Democrats opposing the bill (roll call). Iowa’s four House members were all in the “yes” column and have been touting the vote in their newsletters, social media feeds, and public appearances.

The win was especially important for Zach Nunn and Randy Feenstra, who serve on the House Agriculture Committee. Feenstra was chairing the special committee formed this year to work on getting E15 passed after language to that effect was removed from the Farm Bill.

I don’t have a good sense of whether the Senate will pass this legislation. With significant opposition in Republican circles, it may not be possible as a stand-alone bill. And the Senate has made no progress on passing a new Farm Bill, which is more than two and a half years overdue.

Tough votes on war powers coming

Both the House and the Senate voted on war powers resolutions again this month. The Iowa delegation has consistently stood with President Trump, but more Republicans are breaking ranks on the war in Iran.

Earlier in May, war powers measures failed by a single vote in each chamber. But in the latest Senate vote, Republicans were unable to stop debate on the measure—partly because Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana (who just lost his Republican primary) flipped to vote against Trump.

It appears that House Republican leaders may not be able to stop a war powers resolution from passing either. They decided not to bring it to the floor last week.

I assume the Iowa delegation will remain loyal to Trump, because they haven’t voted against him on anything important for years. But as prices continue to rise, voting against stopping the war in Iran could be politically costly.

Governor signs “MAHA” bill with RFK, Jr. at her side

We spent the last minute or two on Iowa’s new “MAHA” (Make America Healthy Again) law. Governor Kim Reynolds signed House File 2676 last Wednesday, with U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. alongside her.

I posted the video from the bill signing on my YouTube channel. Iowa Capital Dispatch, the Des Moines Register, and the Cedar Rapids Gazette summarized the law’s key provisions.

This wide-ranging bill began as a proposal from the governor, but House Republicans added quite a few parts. Some of them even had bipartisan support, like limits on screen time in elementary schools (which Reynolds and Kennedy emphasized at the press conference), and language to require more physical activity for young students. Democrats didn’t object to some of the other parts, like requiring more nutrition education for physicians, and making it easier for psychologists licensed in other states to practice in Iowa.

So why did all House and Senate Democrats vote against the bill? Largely because it will codify restrictions on what Iowans can buy using federal food assistance (either the SNAP program or the summer meals program for children who qualify for free or reduced-price school lunch).

In addition, the bill would allow pharmacists to dispense ivermectin without a prescription. No one mentioned that provision at last week’s press conference. The only Republican who voted against this bill, State Representative Matt Rinker, told me at the time it was because of the ivermectin language.

That’s all for now! Thank you for reading or listening.