Traveling Northward

Posted on February 27, 2019 by Marty Ryan

This story is both funny and sad.

I came home from a Monday night meeting and saw that my neighbor’s lights were still on, so I decided it would be a good time to deliver an apple cream pie to him. I had made the pie earlier as a token of appreciation for him clearing my driveway of snow and salt after the winter’s latest dump.

I rang his doorbell, but he didn’t answer. I guessed he was next door at the triplex he owns because a van advertising solutions to sewer problems was left running outside. Renters don’t call service people on their own.

After realizing that he wasn’t in his home, I was about to set the pie down on his step and go home, knowing that he would see it, know where it came from, and bring it inside to place in his freezer (the pie was already cut up into pieces). But I changed my mind when I saw a stranger walking up his driveway. The man had a huge backpack on his shoulders. He said he was hungry. Well, hell, I’m not going to give him the pie.

He asked for a ride and I told him I wasn’t going anywhere. He sat down on a decorative barrel that holds flowers in warmer months. I told him to leave. He shuffled down the driveway and headed north. I left the pie on the steps.

Catholic guilt got the best of me. I had just attended a funeral the Saturday before and heard the biblical passage of Matthew, Chapter 25, verses 35-40 [Matthew 25: 35-40]

35‘For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; 36naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’ 37“Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 38‘And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 39‘When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40“The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’

Okay, the bible verse didn’t actually say, “I was walking and you gave me a ride”, but I think the sentiment was the same. I pulled out of the driveway and headed north. I didn’t see him. Perhaps he got a ride from someone else. I went around the block, saw my neighbor and told him the pie was on his step, and began driving north again. I saw the stranger coming out from behind some houses. I rolled the window down and said, “do you still need a ride?” He got into the car.

“Where you going”, I asked him. He mumbled something about a convenience store at the top of the hill. There is a convenience store on Lower Beaver Road, not that far from where we were. Then he said it was near a Perkins restaurant with a gas station across the street and that it might be on Merle Hay Road. “Okay, I know exactly where that it is.”

We get to the intersection of Merle Hay Road and Meredith Avenue and he says, “this isn’t it.” He spotted a McDonalds down the road and said, “I remember that McDonalds, go that way.” So, I make a possible illegal turn and head north on Merle Hay Road. As we get close to the McDonalds, he notices that there is a QuikTrip on the other side of the Interstate and tells me that is the gas station by where he camped.

Under Interstate 35/80 and into the QuikTrip we go. He has second thoughts. I said, “You’re not from around here, are you?” “No, Washington state.” There was no way I was going to drop him off so that he could sleep under a bridge. The temperature thingy on my car’s dashboard indicated that it was 9 degrees outside.

I asked him what he was doing in Iowa. “No one comes to Iowa to bed down for the night in the middle of winter,” I told him. He said he was kicked out of some town in Illinois and went to Idaho. He didn’t want to go through Michigan. “I guess I’m just a rambler,” he said. No, it didn’t make sense to me either and I didn’t want to pursue it further.

He asked if we were in Urbandale. “No”, I said, “we’re in Johnston. He mumbled some things I didn’t understand and asked if we could drive up the road into Johnston. “What are you looking for,” I asked him. “Are you looking for a place to sleep?” I never got a straight reply. He wanted to travel up to the bridge straight ahead. I told him there was no bridge straight ahead and he wanted to argue with me. I once lived in Johnston – on the poor side of town.

“What’s over that way?” he asked.

“Grimes.”

“What’s in Grimes?”

“More houses like these.” I swept my hand over the homes north of 62nd Ave. He told me there was a golf course in Johnston.

“Yes, there is a golf course in Johnston. You’re not thinking of playing a round, are you?”

It was this point in our venture in which I began to either get pissed or scared. I turned around and said nothing more to him.

I pulled into a Casey’s store and asked him if he wanted anything. “Can you get me a maple log and a cup of coffee?”

I went into the store, almost forgetting to shut the car off and take the key with me. I asked the clerk if they had any maple logs. She told me that all the pastries were thrown out for the day. I poured a cup of coffee, put a lid on it, picked up a slice of pepperoni pizza and paid for it all. When I got in the car, I handed it to him.

“I’m taking you to the shelter,” I said.

“The one on University and Ninth?”

Hmm, I hadn’t thought of that one. I was thinking about the one on Mulberry Street. But that’s where I’ll take him; to the closest.

The guy didn’t eat the pizza right away. Out of the corner of my eye, I could see that he was staring at me. Then, he ate the pizza slice in about 3 bites.

On the way to the shelter, he started moving his arms and hands as though he was chasing a fly away and kept repeating: “Oh, Alice. It’s going to be alright.” Yep, he verified that there may be a mental screw out of place.

He asked me if I had any old cars. “This is the only old car I own. It’s the only car I own.” Well, that’s not true, but I think I know where he was going with the questioning. He had been looking for a car to sleep in.

I quit talking to him. A van in the left lane began to merge into our right-hand lane and I reacted quickly. He started rattling off all sorts of incomprehensible mumblings.

Well, I dropped him off at the Bethel Mission on 6th Ave. He got out, threw his backpack over his shoulder and thanked me. I told him to get a good night’s sleep and take care of himself. He closed the car door and I took off down the road. I could see in my mirrors that he did not walk into the mission, but proceeded to walk north, probably in search of an old vehicle with unlocked doors. He had told me earlier that he needs to protect himself and his possessions.

I realized there was nothing more I could do. I turned west onto Indiana Avenue and traveled to 9th street. I turned north onto 9th and when I got to 9th and Clark Streets there was a car with its front wheels stuck in a snowbank. A person was standing by the front of the car looking at the situation.

I quickly turned to the Bible verse. No, there was nothing there that I can recall about “I was stuck in the ditch and you pushed me out.” Nope.

 

 

Posted in General | Tagged , | Comments Off on Traveling Northward

Flaws in the Laws: Part I – Employment Drug Testing

Posted on February 20, 2019 by Marty Ryan

Prior to 1987, there was no law that regulated drug testing of employees or applicants for employment in Iowa.  Employers were free to test an employee, or an applicant for employment, for any drug or substance with impunity.  Since 1987, Iowa’s law addressing matters of employment drug testing have seen several drastic changes.

House File 469 passed the Iowa House of Representatives in 1987 by a vote of 93-1.  The Senate passed the bill 31-16 and sent it to the governor.  Governor Terry Branstad signed the measure into law on June 5th.  The original bill, House File 63, was introduced by Rep. Ralph Rosenberg (D) of Ames.  It was referred to the Committee on Labor & Industrial Relations where it was assigned to the subcommittee of Reps. Tony Bisignano (D-Des Moines); Joan Hester (R-Honey Creek); and Rich Running (D-Cedar Rapids).

The bill defined a “drug test” meaning “any blood, urine, saliva, chemical, or skin tissue test for the purpose of detecting the presence of a chemical substance in an individual.”  The bill prohibited “random drug testing of employees.”  It required “reasonable suspicion” before an employee could be tested, and it allowed drug tests “authorized for peace officers or correctional officers of the state, or to drug tests required under federal statutes or regulations, or to drug tests conducted to determine if an employee is ineligible to receive workers’ compensation.”  The bill also required testing by laboratories approved by the Iowa Department of Health and provided that samples had to be split for the purpose of conducting confirmatory testing if the employee questioned the results of the original test.

The bill provided other language that protected the employer under certain conditions, prevented termination of an employee if the employee underwent a drug or alcohol evaluation and followed up with the evaluation’s recommendations.

The bill was a project by my predecessor at the Iowa Civil Liberties Union, Mark O. Lambert.  He had crafted the bill after a City of San Francisco ordinance.  At the time, Labor unions were not particularly fond of the bill.  Eventually, Labor began to see that the legislation actually protected employees from intrusive and unnecessary testing of employees and grew to accept the law and protect it.  The only changes to the law between its inception and my succession of Mark Lambert were amendments to coincide with the federal Commercial Drivers’ License laws.

There was an attempt in the early 1990s to amend the law by Republicans in the House.  However, Democrats continued to control the Iowa Senate, and although the majority party was pressured heavily to go along with the Republican changes, the session ended with the House bill landing in the round file.

Then, a man from Kiron, Iowa, became an Iowa Senator.  One of State Senator Steve King’s priorities was to amend Iowa’s drug testing law in favor of employers.  His bill was massive.  It would provide very few protections for workers and allow employers carte blanche control over employees’ bodies.  A favorite moment of mine was the day in which the bill was to be debated in the Senate Judiciary Committee.  Senator Tom Vilsack (D-Mount Pleasant) sat across from Senator King (R-Kiron) and when the bill was brought up for consideration, Senator Vilsack asked Senator King if it would be alright to record the proceedings.  Senator King was relaxed as he said it was fine.

I don’t recall another senator speaking during the committee consideration on Senator King’s bill.  It did surprise me that both adversaries were calm in their questioning of each other, citing facts, and expressing opinions.

Even after the bill was debated on the floor of the Senate, no one noticed a serious flaw in the bill.

“Sample” means such sample from the human body capable of revealing the presence of alcohol or other drugs, or their metabolites. However, sample does not mean blood except as authorized pursuant to subsection 7, paragraph “I”.

As you can see, a sample can mean just about anything; breath, urine, ear wax, skin, saliva, etc.  But not blood.  Breath is highlighted because of another provision in the bill:

Sample collection for testing of current employees shall be performed so that the specimen is split into two components at the time of collection in the presence of the individual from whom the sample or specimen is collected. The second portion of the specimen or sample shall be of sufficient quantity to permit a second, independent confirmatory test as provided in paragraph “i”. If the specimen is urine, the sample shall be split such that the primary sample contains at least thirty milliliters and the secondary sample contains at least fifteen milliliters.

As you can see, no one noticed that a sample of breath would have to be “split into two components.”  It wasn’t until the bill was debated on the floor of the House when someone asked me how they were going to split breath.  I heard that question when I was sitting in the gallery watching the debate.  Sitting in the gallery working on something apart from the debate was Rep. Phillip Wise (D-Keokuk). I went over to where he was sitting and asked him if he could go to the floor, be recognized (at that time, you raised your microphone) and ask the floor manager how an employer would actually split the breath specimen into two components.  Rep. Wise was happy to do so.  When he was recognized, Rep. Wise asked the question, and the floor manager of the bill, Rep. Steven Sukup (R-Sheffield) said, “I don’t know.”  Any other questions Rep. Wise asked that pertained to that matter were answered in the same manner: “I don’t know.”  The bill passed along party lines, 54-44.

The following year, Senate File 115 was introduced and passed the Senate and the House.  The subject matter of the bill?  Making a correction to the employee drug testing law.  It seems as though there was a flaw in the previous year’s bill.  Someone came to the conclusion that an employer would not be able to split a sample of breath.

The employment drug testing law, Iowa Code §730.5, has been amended several times since the 1990s.  It was amended in 2018 to lower the acceptable level of BAC (Blood Alcohol Concentration) from .04% to .02% to mirror the federal standard.  That is all the 2018 legislation did to Iowa Code §730.5.  There was more to do that wasn’t done.

In 2017, the Legislature decided to add “hair” as one of the samples that could be used to determine presence of drug metabolites in an employee’s body.  Naturally, a lobbyist acquired a new client that wanted to analyze employment drug testing results using hair samples.  Hair is a very unreliable source of determining whether someone is impaired, which is what several Labor Unions and I have always argued.  You want safety, not a history of past usage, which may not be the case anymore.  Besides, hair testing has been controversial in how it affects African-Americans.

A recent decision from the United States District Court of Appeals for the First Circuit revived a lawsuit filed by eight police officers, a cadet, and a 911 operator. All are African American. All tested positive for cocaine after a hair follicle test was administered by the Boston Police Department. This was the second time the First Circuit found that the hair follicle test had a statistical disparate impact on African American officers in violation of Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/recent-challenges-to-use-hair-follicle-drug-testing

Nonetheless, Iowa Code §730.5 was amended to add “hair”.

“Sample” means such sample from the human body capable of revealing the presence of alcohol or other drugs, or their metabolites, which shall include only hair, urine, saliva, breath, and blood. However, “sample” does not mean blood except as authorized pursuant to subsection 7, paragraph “l”.

In the process of adding “hair” to the list of acceptable means of testing, the Legislature once again reverted to splitting the sample into two components at the time of collection:

Collection of a urine sample for testing of current employees shall be performed so that the specimen sample is split into two components at the time of collection in the presence of the individual from whom the sample or specimen is collected. The second portion of the specimen or sample shall be of sufficient quantity to permit a second, independent confirmatory test as provided in paragraph “i”. The If the sample is urine, the sample shall be split such that the primary sample contains at least thirty milliliters and the secondary sample contains at least fifteen milliliters. Both portions of the sample shall be forwarded to the laboratory conducting the initial confirmatory testing. In addition to any requirements for storage of the initial sample that may be imposed upon the laboratory as a condition for certification or approval, the laboratory shall store the second portion of any sample until receipt of a confirmed negative test result or for a period of at least forty-five calendar days following the completion of the initial confirmatory testing, if the first portion yielded a confirmed positive test result.

The change in the paragraph above was intended to simplify the means of splitting specimens.  In the process of simplification, the drafters may not have realized that breath cannot be split.  Legislature in charge of managing the bill had no idea that the changes were again requiring employers who use breath testing to split the breath at the time of collection.

It’s been two years since this “Flaw in the Law” occurred.  How many employers are not or have not been adhering to the law?

 

Posted in Fairness, General, Privacy, Substance Abuse and Alcoholism/War on Drugs | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Flaws in the Laws: Part I – Employment Drug Testing

The Green Latrine

Posted on February 12, 2019 by Marty Ryan

When I was 19-years-old, I purchased a 1954 Ford 2-door station wagon from Tom & Brian Dieter.  They had nicknamed it “The Green Latrine”.  The entire wagon was green – a green I can’t describe.  It may have been close to blue-green, but that’s stretching it.  It was an ugly green that made the car stand out.  I loved it.

The Dieter boys got $60 out of me for that unique antique.  I had never seen one quite like it, and I may have seen only one like it since (50 years).  The exterior was in pretty good shape.  The interior of the vehicle was fairly decent, also.  The engine did burn about a quart of oil every 500 miles, but I didn’t plan on taking a long trip, and oil wasn’t that expensive.  It was a good piece of transportation; one of the best automobiles I’ve ever owned.  However, I have to give my 1998 Ford Explorer a better rating.  I’ve had it for over 15 years and 170,000 miles.  I got my money’s worth out of both Fords.

One winter’s night, Mike Ruch, John DeVolld and I were traveling along country roads west of Vail, Iowa, when Mike and I got into an argument.  Next thing you know, we’re upside down in the ditch.  Alcohol may have had influence.  The three of us walked into town, a little over a mile and one-half; Mike and I arguing all the way.

The car was towed out of the ditch the next day.  I can’t remember who helped, but I do recall being grateful.  That’s what people do in small towns, they help each other in need.  Everyone was surprised when I turned the ignition and the engine started up right away.  It seemed to be running smoother.  As a matter-of-fact, I never had to put oil in it again – ever.  The Green Latrine would be a model of oil efficiency.  Someone explained the phenomenon to me, but I’m not going to repeat it because I doubt the accuracy of the knowledge, as well as its source.

I drove that car around town for several months without a windshield, windshield wipers, a bumper and the doors wired shut.  It could have been weeks as opposed to months, but as the memory fades the tales get longer.  Actually, the windshield wipers did work, but what good where they if there was no windshield?  Someone bent them back (or forward) so that they were sticking out toward the front of the car’s hood.

That car saw so many parties, especially after it was damaged.

On a nice April afternoon, Jim DeVolld, Jim Malloy and I acquired a case of beer.  I believe Honcho (Devold) bought it since he was home on leave from the Marine Corps after serving his first tour of duty there as a grunt.  If I was 19, he had to have been 21.  The case was put into the folded down back seat, which made the entire back of the wagon a cargo area.

We decided to head out of town.  I pulled onto Highway 30 heading southwest.  About that time, traveling northeast was an Iowa Highway Patrolman.  “Shit!” We all said in unison.  The Green Latrine was a manual transmission (gear shift on the steering column).  I went through those gears like I was Mario Andretti.  “Give ‘er hell, MT!”  Honcho yelled at me.  [One of my nicknames was MT – don’t know if that’s because my first two names begin with those letters, or because of the way I did things sometimes in which it seemed as though the brain was MT.]  The State Trooper had turned around, turned on his lights, and turned on the muscle in the interceptor’s engine.

My foot was to the floorboard as we headed out toward Tracy North’s place southwest of Vail.  When we approached the dirt road heading west, I slowed enough to make the turn on two wheels.

“He’s gaining on us!” “Stomp on it!”  And several other cheers kept me going and seeing nothing but dust in the rearview mirror, one of the car’s rare amenities at the time.

One more mile on the dirt road and I made a hard right.  I almost rolled it again, but kept fish-tailing for a few hundred feet before I straightened it out and hit the foot feed hard.  About that time, the patrolman was right on my ass.  His patrol car wasn’t even eating dust he was so close.

I said: “This is it, guys.”  And I pulled over.

I can no longer remember his exact name.  Robert Hansen, Donald Hansen, Hanson, or whatever.  His name stuck in my head for years.  Lately, I have forgotten it, precisely.  “Officer” is what I called him as he approached the driver-side door. “License and registration?”  Yeah, I had that stuff.  “Will you step out of the car?”  I couldn’t do that.  I had to crawl out of the driver-side window.  The doors were wired shut.  He had me get into the patrol car on the passenger side.

While he was paging through an Iowa Code book, I struck up a conversation with him.  I found out that it was his first day on the job alone, and I was his first stop.  After what seemed like 30 to 40 minutes, he gave me a citation.  He went back to the car with me and he made the Jims hand him the beer.  He confiscated it.

I looked at the ticket.  “No windshield wipers.”  He told me to take it easy driving back to town, to park the car, and never get in it again.  No windshield, no bumper (with the license plate attached), tried to elude, speeding, ran a stop sign, possession of beer as a minor, and he gives me a ticket for “No windshield wipers”.  Wow!

I brought the ticket with me to court.  The magistrate said “I heard about this car.  What are you going to do about it?”  I told him that I was entering the U.S. Navy at the end of the month, and that I had sold the car for $5 to a person who wanted it for soil erosion in a creek bed – all true!  He tore up the ticket and told me to stay clean until I was in the military.

Epilogue

Jim DeVolld (Honcho) went back to serve another tour of duty in Vietnam.  He was honorably discharged from the Marines about the same time I was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army (I know, it’s another story how I was to enter the Navy and ended up in the Army).  Honcho died in the Crawford County Jail after an “alleged” suicide.  Another story for another time.

Jim Malloy (Jocko) entered the Navy about a year after the Green Latrine’s last run.  He is currently a resident of the Iowa Veterans Home in Marshalltown.  I visit him once a month.

Leaving work at Farmland Foods in Denison one night around midnight (working the evening shift), I saw flashing red lights reflected in my rearview mirror.  I pulled into the Super Value parking lot along Highway 30.  “License and registration?”  Yeah, I had that stuff.  “You have a taillight out.  You want to come back to the car with me?”  He was going to give me a fix-it ticket.  It was Officer Hansen.  I asked if he remembered me.  “Vaguely”, he said.  I talked about the day the Green Latrine was put to rest and his memory of the event slowly crept into his memory, but I think he wanted to forget it.  I struck up a conversation.  It was his last night on the job.  He was retiring early because of a health problem.

I asked him if he could make me the last stop of the night.  You know, to say that I was his first and last stop.  He wouldn’t make that commitment.

The Green Latrine is lying in the bottom of a creek bed somewhere approximately 4 miles south of Vail.

I wish I would have taken better care of it.  I wish I could have afforded to stow it away somewhere until I had enough money to fix it up.  Of course, it would be stowed there, yet.

I learned a lot from owning the Green Latrine.  Get a Ford!

Posted in General | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The Green Latrine

Rock The Boat

Posted on September 12, 2015 by Marty Ryan

webeagleSometimes you win; sometimes you lose; and sometimes you win losing. The latter is what happened to Lead Is Poison Coalition (LIP-C) on Tuesday morning, September 8, 2015.

ARC 2087C is a proposed rule (Intended Action) that amends “the season dates, bag limits, possession limits, shooting hours and areas open to hunting for” snipe, woodcock, mourning doves, and a few other avian species. Last month, LIP-C submitted testimony to the Natural Resources Commission (NRC) requesting that it remove “Eurasian collared-dove” from the list. In 2011, the Iowa Legislature passed, and governor enacted Senate File 464, “An Act allowing the establishment of an open season for hunting Mourning Doves.” The law does not say “doves”; it does not say “Eurasian collared-doves”; it does not say “rock dove”; it does not say “turtle dove”; it specifically and unequivocally says “Mourning Dove”.

Since the NRC has incorporated Mourning Doves into the rules defining bag limits, shooting hours, etc., it has included the Eurasian collared-dove as if the legislature had passed a law establishing the open season for Mourning Doves AND Eurasian collared-doves. It did not. LIP-C has been struggling for years to have the Eurasian collared-dove removed from the rules because of one reason only – the NRC does not have authority to add anything beyond the statutory authority given it by the law that was enacted.

On Tuesday, September 8, the Iowa Legislative Rules Review Committee met, and one of the rules reviewed was the controversial ARC 2087C. You know it’s controversial when people entering the room in early September find standing room only and the Department of Natural Resources’ director is in attendance.

The NRC attorney claims the Commission has the authority to include Eurasian collared-doves because the definition of “Columbidae” in section 481A broadens the scope of game birds with the definition’s introduction of “such as”. “’Such as’ is legally considered to be an expander”, she said. What she failed to mention is that the definition ends with the word “only”.

“Game” means all of the animals specified in this subsection except those designated as not protected, and includes the heads, skins, and any other parts, and the nests and eggs of birds and their plumage.

  1. The Anatidae:  such as swans, geese, brant, and ducks.
  2. The Rallidae:  such as rails, coots, mudhens, and gallinules.
  3. The Limicolae:  such as shorebirds, plovers, surfbirds, snipe, woodcock, sandpipers, tattlers, godwits, and curlews.
  4. The Gallinae:  such as wild turkeys, grouse, pheasants, partridges, and quail.
  5. The Columbidae:  such as mourning doves and wild rock doves only.

Iowa Code § 481A.1(21)(2015)(Emphasis added). Notice that the Columbidae is the only species that ends with the qualifier “only”.

The Eurasian collared dove is not a protected bird. The only members of the Columbidae family that are protected species are:

DOVE, Inca, Columbina inca
Mourning, Zenaida macroura
White-tipped, Leptotila verreauxi
White-winged, Zenaida asiatica
Zenaida, Zenaida aurita

Title 50, section 10.13, Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 10.13). The Eurasian collared-dove, Streptopelia decaocto, falls into a category of non-protected “Family Columbidae”, which includes the Rock Pigeon, the Island collared-dove, and many more.

The Commission’s attorney has said that, since the Commission may protect a bird that is considered protected, it may also protect a bird that is not protected. Possibly so, but that doesn’t mean that the Commission can include what it wants to include when the law is narrowly tailored to one specifically indentified bird – the Mourning Dove.

Now here’s the crazy part. “There is justifiable concern, that over time,” the Commission’s lawyer said, “there is a possibility that the Eurasian collared-dove could push Mourning Doves and other native birds out of their native habitat, which could impact their (sic) population of birds”. We don’t disagree, if we understand her babble correctly. But then, why would you want to protect them? From that point on, the protection of Eurasian collared-doves became the theme rather than disrespect for the law.

Nevertheless, Senator Courtney pushed on: “I want you to understand, I am not opposed to dove hunting, but I am opposed to not following legislation.” Sen. Courtney made our point! But no one seemed to listen.

There was considerable banter between Rep. Rick Olson and the Commission’s attorney about the wild rock dove. Neither the attorney nor Rep. Olson knew what a wild rock dove looked like. A wild Rock Dove is a common pigeon. Later, during testimony, a self-described wildlife biologist, and a deputy director, claimed that there were no rock doves in Iowa; that they were very limited. Rep. Olson asked which answer was it – there are no rock doves in Iowa, or they are very limited? He received an identical response. The meeting over this rule was getting almost comical.

Rep. Olson asked if there were any other doves in Iowa besides the Mourning Dove, the Eurasian collared-dove and the very limited non-existent rock doves. No one knew the answer. The deputy director, relying upon information from staff, claimed that the Mourning Dove and the Eurasian collared-dove are the only two doves hunted in Iowa. That still doesn’t answer the question of why the bureaucrats cannot see beyond the very narrowly-tailored law that establishes a hunting season for Mourning Doves only.

So, the Commission and all of its supporters won. Or did they? In the end, the non-protected invasive species (the Eurasian collared-dove) is protected. It’s like having the Iowa Dept. of Agriculture and Land Stewardship adopting a rule to protect the Canadian thistle.

The sad end to this story is the fact that bureaucracy won, and legislators lost authority.

Posted in Fairness, Issues | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Iowa Made a Costly Mistake

Posted on August 27, 2015 by Marty Ryan

webeagleAs I was leaving the Annual Iowa CURE meeting this past Sunday, I had a brief conversation with the mother of a former inmate at Iowa Correctional Institute for Women at Mitchellville. She correctly identified the impossibility of any inmate paying off their restitution.

I understand a defendant paying off the damages caused to a victim, but the matter of restitution has gone too far. It began in 1998 when the Iowa Constitution was amended because of a suggestion made by Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller. He claimed that the Iowa Constitution should be amended to remove the cap of $100 for a simple misdemeanor fine. He didn’t believe that a C-spot was a big enough deterrent.

Prior to 1998, Article One, Section 11 of Iowa’s Constitution stated:

All offences less than felony and in which the punishment does not exceed a fine of One hundred dollars, or imprisonment for thirty days, shall be tried summarily before a Justice of the Peace, or other officer authorized by law, on information under oath, without indictment, or the intervention of a grand jury, saving to the defendant the right of appeal; and no person shall be held to answer for any higher criminal offence, unless on presentment or indictment by a grand jury, except in cases arising in the army, or navy, or in the militia, when in actual service, in time of war or public danger.

The change makes the amendment read:

All offenses less than felony and in which the maximum permissible imprisonment does not exceed thirty days shall be tried summarily before an officer authorized by law, on information under oath, without indictment, or the intervention of a grand jury, saving to the defendant the right of appeal; and no person shall be held to answer for any higher criminal offense, unless on presentment or indictment by a grand jury, except in cases arising in the army, or navy, or in the militia, when in actual service, in time of war or public danger.

The people of Iowa approved the change in constitutional language substantially with 63.9% favoring the ballot measure. By contrast, the amendment adding “women” to the Iowa Equal Rights Act, passed the approval of Iowa voters overwhelmingly with 83.4% of the vote.

Today, a fine for a simple misdemeanor is “a fine of at least sixty-five dollars but not to exceed six hundred twenty-five dollars”. The high end, $650 has become the norm. It starts the spiraling process of people unable to get their head above water. They are unable to pay the fine, the court costs, the surcharges, so they don’t. Next, they are stopped for a minor scheduled violation (fix-it ticket) and find out that there is a warrant for their arrest because they have failed to pay the fine, court costs, etc. So they get slapped with another misdemeanor, or contempt. The financial obligations are piled on. The more judges pile on, the more unrealistic it becomes for the defendant to pay.

The courts, the Iowa Legislature, and county attorneys wonder why we have such a huge figure of unpaid fines, surcharges, etc. The answer is simple. Ever since the thought of “$100 isn’t much anymore” entered minds of exceedingly well-paid public officials, the debt owed to the state, counties and municipalities has increased exponentially. Over $650 million of fines, surcharges, etc. is outstanding. In 1998, the year of the constitutional change, the court debt was $143.4 million.

One hundred dollars is still a lot of money to a large group of Iowans. I knew it back in 1998. But I didn’t do enough to defeat the constitutional amendment. I didn’t think judges would be senseless enough to charge ridiculous amounts in fines to people who couldn’t afford them. I didn’t think prosecutors would be cruel enough to ask for the maximum fine, knowing that they would not be paid. And I didn’t think legislators would be foolish enough to continue their push to increase the add-ons that go with every fine; surcharges, penalties, interest, hiring ruthless, private debt collection companies; and enacting provisions that create more of a hardship for those who can least afford it.

I’m not going to take the blame for allowing the amendment to pass. Someone needs to take the blame for failing to fine the poor a minimum of $65 for a simple misdemeanor. The $650 top end should be reserved for individuals who are capable of paying it; those who earn six-figure salaries, such as the Iowa attorney general.

Posted in Criminal Justice, Issues | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Fun With Geography

Posted on May 28, 2015 by Marty Ryan

webeagleIOWA

Iowa can be a state of confusion. Sorry about the bad pun.

Why is the city of Osceola in Clarke County when the county of Osceola is about 250 miles away? Not only should Osceola be in Osceola County, it should be the county seat. After all, Dubuque is in Dubuque County, Clinton is in Clinton County, and Audubon is in Audubon County, and they are all county seats. This is only one example of an Iowa oddity. There are numerous others, such as: Marion County is more than a two-hour drive from the city of Marion.

Des Moines County was one of the first counties in Iowa. But it’s not on the Des Moines River. Go figure! However, as expected, the City of Des Moines is located on the Des Moines River. The river also runs through Wapello County, but the town of Wapello is located on the Iowa River in Louisa County.

Also sited on the Iowa River is Iowa City, but Iowa City is not the county seat of Iowa County. It is the county seat of Johnson County. Iowa County lies west of Johnson County. You expect that there would be a Johnson, Iowa. You would be wrong, unless it’s one of those vanished communities like Buxton. Evidently, Vice President Richard M. Johnson was not popular enough to have a town named after him.

Imagine someone leaving Des Moines to visit someone in Monona, and winding up in Onawa asking directions. That’s because Monona is a city in a county (Clayton) that borders the Mississippi River. The County of Monona borders the Missouri River in Western Iowa. That person was not ‘exactly’ wrong, but they certainly weren’t right.

It’s only natural that Webster City would be in Webster County, or that the Little Sioux River flow through Sioux County. After all, Humboldt is in Humboldt County, and Boone is in Boone County (although the Boone River is not), and the Cedar River flows through Cedar Falls and Cedar Rapids. But you would be wrong. Webster City is in Hamilton County, and the Little Sioux River barely comes close to Sioux County. However, Sioux Center is located in Sioux County, but not Sioux City, which is not on the Sioux River.

Black Hawk Lake is located in Sac County, not Black Hawk County. Crawfordsville is on the opposite side of the state from Crawford County. The Floyd River flows into the Missouri River, but rain falling in Floyd County reaches the Mississippi. Greene County is just less than 40 miles west of Interstate 35, and the community of Greene is approximately 30 miles east of Interstate 35. Speaking of Greene County, its county seat is Jefferson, but – you guessed it – Jefferson County is in Southeast Iowa.

Keokuk is in Lee County, not Keokuk County; Monroe is in Jasper County, not Monroe County; but Polk City is in Polk County, and Story City is in Story County.

There is no Lincoln County in Iowa. All counties were named before Lincoln became President. There is, however, The Lincoln Highway, which runs from Clinton to beyond Missouri Valley, river to river; and the town of Lincoln was once called Berlin. Berlin’s name changed to Lincoln after World War I.

And finally, the Iowa city of Washington is actually the county seat of Washington County. Hey! What’s up with that?

No wonder people get confused crisscrossing Iowa. They’re probably in a state of confusion! Sorry.

 

Posted in General | Tagged | 3 Comments