We now know why gubernatorial candidate Mike Blouin went to the television airwaves with commercials showing him buddy-buddy with the governor - without asking the popular Tom Vilsack if he could do it: Blouin needs a Hail Mary if he's going to have any kind of chance of catching Democratic opponent Chet Culver. True, Vilsack is in the Blouin camp - but can't play favorites if he wants to run for president; however, it will take more than the governor for Blouin to even be in the game. Why so? Because it's not even close. According to recent polling (based on 616 likely Democratic primary voters in April), Culver is up on Blouin by 25 percent, 42 to 17. Ed Fallon was selected by 12 percent of those polled. Undecided voters still make up some 27 percent of those polled. In a similar poll done in August 2005, Culver was the choice of 26 percent of voters, followed by 13 percent for his running mate Patty Judge, while Blouin and Fallon both were in the single digits. Thus, Culver's handlers insist Judge has given Culver a big bump - opposite of what many insiders predicted, while Blouin's running mate, Andrea McGuire, according to the poll, is viewed favorably by only 8 percent of those polled. Republicans continually knock Blouin because he is perceived to be "Republican light" and might be more difficult to campaign against, the pundits maintain. But Culver has been the only Democrat who has shown to be equal to or ahead of Jim Nussle in spring polling. Culver, overall, has a favorability rating of 65 percent of primary voters, including 70 percent of union households. Blouin is seen favorably by only 41 percent of those polled. With Culver set to go up on TV with much more cash on hand than any of his opponents [although Blouin has picked up $400,000 in some cash and promised donations recently, and Fallon put $30,000 down for a couple hundred points in Cedar Rapids and Des Moines for the last seven days of the election], a top statehouse source said, "If Chet can keep it together, it's over."

The Democrat-Republican rift at the Polk County building seems to be going away - at least kind of. Following what Angela Connolly, John Mauro and Tom Hockensmith viewed as being "insensitive remarks" and "grandstanding" by EJ Giovanetti and Bob Brownell over the CIETC fiasco, the Democrats gave the suburban duo the silent treatment. As of last week, though, we were told that, while not chatty, the leaders had begun to speak again. "Johnny was trying to lay low and not say much and felt that those guys were digging in for no reason," a top Polk County source told us. "But I think civility has been restored. This is not a Democrat-versus-Republican deal. It's a disaster for everyone. We just want it to be over. It's embarrassing for everyone. We're all in it together." Last Thursday, Giovanetti and Hockensmith had breakfast together.

Some Republicans, however, laugh at this so-called "bi-partisan" issue - namely GOPers from the farm. "Polk County Democrats are mired at the center of this controversy," a top-ranking House source told us. "And while the vultures are out, we're going to take a run at them." The next target? Prairie Meadows. Republicans and non-Des Moines pols see the racetrack/casino as a cash cow for a selfish Polk County (Prairie Meadows benefits local charities and projects) that refuses to share the wealth. A Central Iowa Republican told us the party faithful are ready to exploit Prairie Meadows next, with the fiscal, good-government types teaming up with the social conservatives who hate gambling. "For years, debate has centered on the fat cats' unwillingness to share their profits with any county outside Polk," our House source said. "Now they think it's time for payback." Republicans are ready to set the train in motion and let the media finish the job - just as they have done with CIETC, this individual told us. When we asked a Polk County source his thoughts on this, he said: "Has Prairie Meadows given money to CIETC? Yes. Have there been CIETC luncheons there? Yes. Is Prairie Meadows beyond reproach? Yes. As long as the rural horsemen get their big fat checks they don't deserve, they won't bite that hand. Not to mention, trying to politicize Central Iowa's biggest donor to charities and projects is political suicide. They'd get squished."

And finally, we asked two top pols - one from each party - who the big winners and losers were this legislative session, and both agreed that Gov. Vilsack and Sen. Mike Gronstal were the biggest losers, while Sen. Mary Lundby and Speaker Chris Rants were the big winners. Why? "If you look at what Republicans offered right out of the shoot: elimination of Social Security taxes (which had been promised for years and years but nobody ever thought it could actually happen), stronger education standards over just dumping in more money, no ethanol mandate but a series of incentives to boost it - despite the screams from the left, we got it done," said the Republican. Our Democratic source pointed out how Rants was able to do some arm-twisting by offering even more money for teacher pay than Vilsack did, while tying it to the Social Security and retirement tax cuts. "What could we do, tell them no? Rants had us in a box. Education was our issue. He made it his." The biggest winner, though, was Lundby. "[Gronstal] didn't have a plan. We tossed [Iverson] overboard at the perfect time. And new breath was breathed into those negotiations that looked like they were heading for June," said our Republican source. "Mary put together a tax package that everyone could agree to, and that everyone can go campaign on. She grabbed the reigns. It was going nowhere without her." CV

Comment on this story | Return to top