The latest episode of Iowa Press featured Iowa Senate Minority Leader Pam Jochum as the guest.  Here is my review of the program.

Let’s start with moderator Kay Henderson’s opener: “Iowa democrats will try to win back State Senate seats this fall after republicans gained a super majority in 2022.”

What’s wrong with that, you may ask.  She’s just stating the facts.  I’ve picked up this pattern in the national media as well. They don’t tend to say republicans “try.” They more often say simply what republicans are going to do. In this case, Henderson could have said, “Democrats set their sights on winning back senate seats” or  “Democrats will focus on…”

Linguistically, the word “try” suggests that it won’t happen. It sounds weak. Is this a purposeful choice, coincidence, unconscious or conscious bias, repeating the narrative, or simply not being thoughtful about how to fairly present information. It could also be they don’t want to hear from Jeff Kaufmann that they are being soft on Democrats. I believe in this instance it was most likely unconscious bias. It wouldn’t be a big deal if it was not a consistent pattern.

Also in Henderson’s opener she chooses to remind viewers that republicans currently enjoy a Super Majority! She’s just sayin’! Not looking good for democrats!  They never fail on this.

Starting off Pam Jochum scores a point when she replies to Kay’s “welcome to the program” with “hopefully, this won’t be my last one.” See my previous post about the D-R imbalance on the show.  Iowa-Press-Republicans-17/Democrats-9

Next Erin Murphy asks a punchy question about immigration. Notice the Republican framing. I will add what I feel is the subtext in brackets within the text of the question.

Murphy:  “Another issue that voters are going to be hearing a lot about is immigration [Rs are making sure we hear a lot about it because they are trying to beat up Biden with misinformation about border policy] and I know that is typically federal policy [is federal policy], but republicans passed a state law here [Rs do whatever they want to do here] that is now being challenged in the courts. We’ve seen polling [I’m not making this up – there’s polling] that actually this topic is important to voters across political boundaries [justification for why they continually ask questions that are basically Republican talking points]. Democrats opposed the state law that passed. If that wasn’t the answer, what is? [there is always only two choices] And what will democrats say to those voters who want action on this issue? [as if Democrats are to blame for the fact that federal law supersedes state law. What should Dems tell voters?  As Jochum explains in her answer, Dems will tell voters the facts about how government actually works.]

Jochum gives a thorough answer to Murphy’s question, reminding viewers that we are a nation of immigrants, educating the public about the fact that Iowa’s Republican representatives in congress have the power to do something on immigration because it is a federal issue. She adds that local law enforcement have indicated the Iowa law is unenforceable.

Murphy comes back with a follow-up challenge. As I’ve noted previously, they rarely challenge anything republicans say, especially when it is obviously false or crazy. Using tone that I never see anyone on this panel use with republicans he asked the question again, this time accusing her of “punting” the issue.

Murphy: “So, when your candidates are knocking doors this fall and if a voter asks one of your candidates that question and if the answer is that is the responsibility of the federal government, not me at the Statehouse level, will that resonate with voters?

me: Will facts resonate with voters? Will truth and reality resonate with voters? Probably not because they are fed a daily diet of Fox News, disinformation from Sinclair TV stations  and conservative talk radio but shhh… we must never speak of that.

Jochum replies in part: “I think that it’s part of our job to also educate the voters on who is responsible for immigration law.” She has more to say on the subject, you’ll just have to watch.

If the Iowa Press panel sees it as part of their job to educate voters they do a great job of concealing it. They seem to see their job as being cynical toward Democrats so they don’t lose their jobs.

Next question –

Gruber-Miller: “..republicans this year passed a law changing the AEA system, changing some of the funding and responsibilities. What are you hearing so far about how that is going? And what issues do you think a future legislature may need to come back and take a look at?”

me: Here “change” is a word choice that suggests it is a neutral event with no bad outcome. “Fundamentally altering” the educational landscape in Iowa, would be far more accurate and informative. He makes what they did to the AEAs sound benign. This is important because viewers don’t necessarily know the sordid details of what happened and what Rs did and the results. They won’t find out by watching Iowa Press either unless a Democrat tells them.

Jochum next answered a question by Gruber-Miller on the “private school scholarship, education savings account” law (school vouchers).

After Jochum’s answer Kay added,  “the Governor made it an issue in her re-election campaign and was re-elected overwhelmingly. Why do you think it will be an issue in this legislative race?”

me:  Overwhelmingly! Emphasis noted.  Henderson asks democrats “why” questions a lot. To me, the way she says it communicates that she can’t fathom why the democrat on the stage would think something, suggesting there is no apparent reason for it.

Why would Henderson seemingly have no idea there was enormous push back from the public about the voucher bill? With the amount of public outcry and facts that have come out since the bill passed, it makes perfect sense that it could well be an issue in November. She covers the legislature. She should know.

I feel Henderson was carrying water for the guv on this one. Kim ran on “parental choice”  not “let’s destroy Iowa’s public schools” and gave few details during the campaign. Only later did the details come out and voters realized the negative impact the law is having and will continue to have on our public schools. Jochum concurred in a more polite Iowa nice manner and longer response.

I have mentioned previously, the panel has to say to every Democrat that comes on the show that Joe Biden is unpopular in Iowa, a fact that they smartly point out will make things difficult for Democrats. Yes, we all understand Iowa is a VERY RED state! We get it. Can you think of a new question? They did not disappoint. Gruber-Miller did the honors this week. I’ve observed that whenever an interviewee responds to a question with “that is a good question” it usually is a bad question. Jochum was effective in her response to the “Biden is unpopular in Iowa and that is bad for Democrats so what will you do about it” question. Just for the record, they asked the same question of Jennifer Konfrst, Rita Hart and Rob Sand.

These are examples of Republican framing, the mindset of the program’s panel. For info on political framing check out the work of George Lakoff and Gil Duran at FrameLab.org.

They asked Jochum if she was running for governor after she retires from the legislature.

Jochum:  “No, I’m not. There are plenty of other younger people, quite frankly, that I think have already expressed some interest in running and I think they would do an absolutely superb job of they decide to do that.”

That is all. Happy Tuesday!