Rep. Ashley Hinson

In January, she'll begin
her second term in Congress,

this time representing Iowa's
second District.

We'll sit down with Republican
Congresswoman Ashley Hinson

on this edition of Iowa Press.

Funding for Iowa Press
was provided by Friends,

the Iowa PBS Foundation,

the Associated
General Contractors of Iowa,

the public's partner in building
Iowa's

highway, bridge and municipal
utility infrastructure.

Small businesses
are the backbone

of Iowa's communities,
and they are backed

by Iowa banks with advice, loans
and financial services.

Banks across Iowa are committed
to showing small businesses

the way to a stronger tomorrow.

Learn more at Iowa bankers
dot com.

Our guest on this edition of
Iowa Press was first elected

to the United States House
of Representatives and to 2020.

She was reelected
this past November.

She will be representing the
second congressional district.

She'll be sworn into office
on January 3rd.

Ashley Hinson,
welcome back to Iowa Press.

Thanks for having me, Kay.

Joining the conversation,
Clay Masters from Iowa Public

Radio and Erin Murphy
of the Gazette in Cedar Rapids.

Congresswoman,
the Senate and House this week

voted on legislation
that essentially codifies

states that recognize same sex
and interracial marriages.

You voted for that,
but also criticized

the vote more broadly

because you were hoping
you could kind of explain why

you kind of had two minds
about that issue, sort of.

Well, Erin,
this bill preserves current law

and that's the way
I thought about it.

It's the full faith and credit
clause of the Constitution

where you look at birth
certificates, death

certificates,
I believe concealed

carry permits
apply to this same standard.

So I think that same standard
should apply to marriage

certificates in all states,
and that's why I supported it.

You know,
I think my constituents

are very concerned
about other things.

So that's why I think,

you know, right now we're up
against a lot of deadlines.

We should be focusing
on fixing the solutions

that Iowans
clearly told me they want fixed.

And that's why
I issued the statement I did.

We need to be focusing
on fixing inflation.

We need to be focusing on energy

independence,
securing our border.

So, you know, I supported it,
but that's where I stand on

on these issues.

And I you could understand,

given the atmosphere,
surely you had some constituents

who did want to see this happen.

And especially for whoever you
fall on that particular issue,

the Supreme Court's ruling
and how that's affected abortion

regulations now.

Surely there were

people in your district
who wanted to see

some kind of legislation
that protected this issue.

I mean, it's important
to some of those folks,

too, isn't it?

And I understand it's important
and on both sides. Right.

I've heard from people on both
sides of this issue, obviously.

But again,

the issues that I continue to
hear most about are the economy.

That's what I think

this election was about,
was about the economy

and about wanting someone
who is going to go to Washington

and be a check
on the administration

and all the spending that's
been happening in Congress.

So, you know,
I don't want to discount

where people are on this issue.

But at the same time,

I think that our focus
in Washington, D.C.

needs to be on those issues
that people

are contacting us about.

One of the things
that needs to be done

next week for Congress
is set a budget moving forward.

It's been a while since there's
been split control in Congress

and we haven't seen
these kinds of games of chicken

when it comes

to keeping the government
open, avoiding shutdowns.

Some of those are

become inevitable, it seems,
when there split control.

How are Iowans
going to be impacted

when Republicans
do take control of the House?

And we might see

looks like we'll see more of
these kinds of games of chicken

as to whether or not
the government will stay open.

Well, right now, Democrats
control everything

and I'm the only I went
on the Appropriations Committee.

So I have been a part
of this process both on the

the spending side and
on the Budget Committee as well.

So I've witnessed
kind of that chaos

and dysfunction
through the process.

We were able to get to a deal
that I think was targeted

for Iowans back in the spring,
and that's why

I supported those appropriations
bills in the spring.

I'm hopeful
we can come to an agreement

in the next couple of weeks here
so that we can,

number one,
fund the government responsibly,

but also make sure that some of
Iowans priorities are included.

And so that's what I'm
going to continue to fight for.

And as we enter
this next Congress, I think

what's really important is

I've tried really hard
to build relationships

in both on
both sides of the aisle

and in both chambers,

because I think it is
really important

that I've been in the minority
for two years.

I wanted to make sure
that Iowans

priorities were included
and that I have respect from

fellow members of the committee
and so that's my main goal,

is to make sure we're doing that
in a responsible way

while still pushing back
on things

that I see as going too far,
spending too much money, etc..

So do you, as in your fellow

Republicans in the House,
intend to sort of weaponized

the debt ceiling vote,
which will be looming in 2023?

I think what we're focused on
as a Republican conference

is just making sure

we're we're putting our country
on a better fiscal path.

We have seen out of control
spending.

The Democrats

raise the debt ceiling

with no account

for trillions
and trillions of dollars

in spending and what
that would do to our economy.

So in my mind, the conversation
next year needs to be about

how are we more responsible?

It's why I introduced

bills to help make sure Congress
actually knew what the impact

of inflation was on a bill
before we actually pass it.

I think Congress has been

incredibly irresponsible

in how it's been

passing legislation
without understanding

the real impact on the economy.

So that's
where our focus is going to be.

Obviously,
we're going to have to have

the conversation around the debt
ceiling next year.

In my mind, it's

how do we make sure we're
leveraging things going forward?

So we put our country
on a better fiscal path

so we don't have to continue

to have this conversation
every year.

So should
there be a debt ceiling?

I think there has to be or
Congress won't control itself.

I think that ultimately
you look at the state of Iowa

and how we do things here.

I've served on the
Appropriations Committee here.

Right. We live
within our means here in Iowa.

And if you don't have
leverage is of control there.

Congress
will not control itself.

And so I think it's

really important that we start
to be more responsible.

And those are the policies

that I'll continue to advocate
for as

a member of the Appropriations
Committee.

One of the important bills
that passed Congress

this past week

was a military bill,
but it also included a proposal

that Republicans
had been out of advocating for,

which removes the vaccine
mandate, the COVID vaccine

mandate
for members of the armed forces.

Are there

other vaccine mandates
that you would like to eliminate

that the military currently
imposes on its soldiers?

Well,
I can tell you that the COVID 19

mandate is the one
that we have heard about.

And that's why
I think it was so important that

that conversation happened,
because it came down to a point

where this is impacting
our readiness.

This is impacting our ability
to be safe

and secure in this country,

which is why Republicans

and Leader McCarthy fought
for that provision in the NDAA,

the authorization bill
for defense this week.

Many members of the military

have left because
they felt strongly about that.

And I think it's important
to know

we've been missing
our recruiting goals as well,

because people feel
very strongly about that.

So I think this is
this is about making

sure our military can continue
to be strong and be ready to go.

Understanding that many
I mean, I,

I got my kids vaccinated
with their childhood vaccines.

I think vaccines are safe
and effective.

But I think
especially when it came

to the COVID vaccine,

it should be people's choice,
whether they get it

and that dramatically affected
our military.

One of the
first things you'll be doing

coming up soon is

electing new leadership
for your conference.

You have said you support.

You mentioned Leader McCarthy,

Kevin McCarthy from California
to be the House speaker.

But there are reports
that he's not quite.

Doesn't quite have enough votes
to confirm that yet.

I'm curious,

are you talking to your
other members to to to try and,

you know, swing some votes
and get enough support for

Representative McCarthy?

And and
are you comfortable with him

maybe having to make deals

with some members
in order to get enough votes

to be the next House speaker?

Well,
I have supported Kevin McCarthy.

I think he's going to be
a really good speaker.

He has done an incredible job
of helping our conference unite.

Not only to be the check
on the Biden administration

and fire

Nancy Pelosi,

but unite behind an agenda
that we want to deliver

and execute
on starting on January 3rd.

So I'm hopeful we're able
to get moving on

that as quickly as possible
and get through

some of the drama

of the leadership elections
and get down to business.

And, you know, honestly,
the one thing Leader McCarthy

has been very good
at is building coalitions.

We have a wide
variety of viewpoints in our

in our conference,
and that's okay. Right.

And I think
having those conversations

and making sure that we unite
behind the things that matter,

the agenda
that Iowans and Americans

sent us to Congress
to execute on.

That's what's
going to be really important.

And I think he's the
right person to do that. And

I was
going to ask you that because

whether you feel he he should be
the leader, obviously you do.

You've said that.

But if given the
the recent election and

obviously Republicans did
well in Iowa, but nationally,

while Republicans

took over the House, the margins
maybe weren't as big as

history might have suggested
they could have been.

But you feel despite that
performance,

Kevin McCarthy has done
enough, that he should be leader

despite that? Yeah.

Kevin McCarthy helped us
get the majority

and we have the majority

and I think

that's really critical.

It is that check and balance
that we have

been advocating for.

So going forward,
we're going to execute

on the priorities that I heard
about on the campaign trail,

firing
the 87,000 new IRS agents.

I hope that's the first thing
that we do

before lunch,
after electing Kevin.

Making sure that we're
controlling our spending

as we've discussed,
how important

that is, how out of control
that's gotten.

So I think it's about making

sure that we deliver
on those priorities

no matter if our majorities
to 22 or to 40.

That's
what people expect us to do.

And that's why
they sent me back to Congress.

And we have a red wave.

I think that happened here
in Iowa.

I joke it's between the
Mississippi and the Missouri.

We got it done here in Iowa.

And I think Iowans
very clearly rejected the D.C.

way and they want us to double
down on the Iowa way.

Speaking of leadership,
how about yourself?

When we
when we do our reporting,

we hear that
maybe Ashley Hinson

could be in line

for moving up the ladder
within the House

Republican caucus and
being in a leadership position.

Should we expect to see you
among the House

Republican leaders
any time soon?

Well, I am focused on

being a really good member
and a really good legislator.

I'm a member of
the Appropriations

Committee, as I've mentioned,

and I think that's going to be
a really critical committee.

So that's where I'm focusing
all of my efforts.

My bosses are the taxpayers
of this state,

not leadership
in Washington, D.C.

And I am focused on
doing that job really well.

But if presented
with that opportunity,

is that something you would
welcome or accept?

My biggest focus is on where

can I make the most impact
for Iowa?

So where can I make sure
Iowa has the biggest voice

and the biggest seat
at the table?

So if those opportunities

arise where I can make sure
Iowa is heard,

that's
what I'm going to focus on.

So let's dive in a little bit
into what that voice would be

when Republicans
during the Trump administration,

they're pretty critical

about investigations,
impeachment proceedings.

How much are we going

to see investigations
from the House versus problem

solving and bipartisan work
among members of Republicans

and maybe some Democrats, too,
to try to get deals done?

Yeah,
well, I'm always going to try

to get the best deal for Iowa.

I think I've made that
very clear in

how I have done my job
the first two years,

but I think
what's also important is

Iowans expect accountability.

I think that's where, again,
as a member of the Approach

Committee, I'm going to be able
to execute that oversight

because they do have to come
to us

and ask us for those hard
earned taxpayer resources.

So I think asking questions
is what people would expect us

to do.

They would expect us to say,

for instance,
I'm on Homeland Security.

Secretary Mayorkas has to come
before our committee.

I've asked for him to resign
because I think

he has failed at doing his job.

So we're going to ask questions.

We're going to make sure
that he's held accountable.

And I think that does
have an impact

not only on spending,
but on policy.

So I think we need to be
judicious in any questions

that we're asking.

I think where people got
tired of this

in this entire country is
investigations. Just because

asking questions and making
our case in the right way,

I think is going to be
incredibly important.

And I think that's
how you'll see

the Republican majority
focus on accountability.

We've seen such
a partizan split.

And I'm curious,
do you feel like there's room

for bipartisan work anymore

in Congress,
especially in the House?

And as Republicans

take over in the House
and there is a

Democratically controlled
Senate?

Yeah, absolutely.

I mean, our our work didn't stop
when I was reelected.

We kept going with priorities

I've been working on
for the last two years.

And many of those priorities
I'm the lead Republican on now.

And we have a lead Democrat on

and we're going to continue
those bills.

Our roles overlap
and I'll be the lead

Republican
and we'll have a lead Democrat.

So I think that the way we get
things

done is balance
and bipartisanship.

And that's absolutely critical.

I've worked across the aisle
and gotten many priorities

for Iowa, done

worked with our entire Iowa
delegation and Cindy Axne,

who's not coming back.

But we did work together a lot.

We worked together to get the
sergeant ketchum bill passed.

That helps with veterans
mental health.

I worked with Cheri Bustos
in Illinois.

She's retiring
so I'm going to try to develop

new relationships there,
but to help

get additional investment
for our lock and dam system.

So I think there are
a lot of places that we do agree

and you'll continue to see
a lot of bipartisan work happen.

Maybe it doesn't leave

the 5:00 news
because it's not as exciting,

but you can count on us

to continue to say, hey, here's

the story
we're hearing from people.

Here's how we're actually going
to Washington, D.C.

and executing
on those bipartisan priorities.

And we'll just make sure

everybody knows the work
that we're doing.

And not to put too fine
a point on that.

But as Clay mentioned,
that we'll have split control

now, a Republican led House
and a Democrat.

Can we expect

I mean, will the House
send bills to the Senate that

the Senate will actually,
you know,

actually
consider and vice versa,

although you're in the House,
I'll ask you there.

And, you know,

can Kevin McCarthy work
with Chuck Schumer,

the Democratic Senate majority
leader,

to get things to the president's
desk?

Can we expect that kind of work

or is that that's happening now?

I mean,
I think it's important to note

that we get Republican bills
in the Senate all the time.

If it's good policy.

I think our leadership
understands

people expect you to get work
done.

You're going to have your very
public fights.

But, you know, many of the bills
that we we pass

under a suspension
where we are mostly in agreement

as both conferences
in both caucuses,

that was passed
without a whole lot of fanfare.

And we get the work done right.

And so I think you'll continue
to see that happen.

And again, this is where I think

it's really important to operate
like I've operated

that I could be in the minority,
I could be in the majority.

And for me, it's about

who can I work with
and what relationships

can I develop
on those shared priorities.

So Biofuels Caucus, for example,
that's a great place

where we've been able to do

a lot of work together,
fight for Iowa's priorities.

But you've got bipartisan
members from Minnesota,

Illinois,
Wisconsin, Nebraska, Missouri.

I mean,

so there are a lot of places
where we can find

some really good alliances
to get stuff done.

The farm bill is coming up
in the coming year.

How are you going to convince
Republicans

who are skittish about
providing healthy subsidies

to America's farmers?

Well, it comes down to a whole
bunch of conversations here.

And again,

this is where developing
relationships and understanding

priorities for districts
all over

the country
are going to be really important

to making sure
we have a strong farm

bill that helps support
Iowa agriculture.

There are a lot of provisions
in that bill.

Food bank and food security
is a huge part of that bill.

It's a passionate area of mine.

I visited a lot of food banks
in the district.

I want to make sure that they
have resources going forward.

A lot of the programs
that our farmers know and trust,

not only for crop insurance
and things like that, but for

but for conservation,
which is alive

and very well here in Iowa.

The demand is great
for those programs, too.

So we're listening

to all of the commodity
groups and all farmer groups and

every stakeholder,
and that's what

we're going to continue to do
is say,

hey, these are all
the priorities

that need to be included
in that bill, and here's why.

And so it's my job to go out
and make the case that,

you know, people
who might not traditionally

support a farm bill,
why they should.

I just remember
covering Rand Paul, Kentucky

senator, Republican,
when he ran for president,

who argued that the subsidy
situation for farmers is unfair

to other businesses.

How do you convince

reluctant Republicans that you
should continue these subsidies?

Well, feeding and fueling
the world is of absolute

public interest.

And our Iowa farmers work
very hard to do that every day.

And it is a very volatile
industry.

Right. I mean, we've seen.

So let's
talk about crop insurance.

And, you know, that's an area
that has helped to make sure

the food supply was stable
long term.

Our farmers had incredible
damage during the trade show.

They needed that

that certainty to make sure
that they could recover

and come back
and continue to farm.

So that's where my argument
to Senator Paul would be.

We need to make sure that
we have a stable food supply.

We absolutely need to make sure
we're doing that

in a targeted way and that
there's oversight and programs.

There are many places
where we're now saying,

okay, there's
a duplicative program over here.

Let's combine those or let's

have that conversation
about how we're more efficient.

So you're going to find us

looking at ways to do that
in the next Congress

as we
look at this next farm bill.

But that's going to be
our approach

to the negotiation there.

And you kind of alluded to it

early on in the response
to this question.

But, I mean, a large portion
of the farm bill, I mean,

people think of agriculture, but
is the Supplemental Nutrition

Assistance Program, formerly
referred to as food stamps,

as inflation has gone up and pre

pandemic relief funding
has kind of gone by the wayside

or help for people that need
that.

You're seeing a change in
the way that people can afford

food and things have changed
for the SNAP program

as far as what people,
families can afford.

How do you take that
into consideration

when you're drafting a farm
bill,

when that's not kind of
top of mind?

I guess

just how the general public
might think of

the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance.

Program
and just had a conversation

in our office
this week about it, actually.

But, you know,

it's it's challenging
because you're facing

not only that,
increased inflation

they gave obviously

for other programs,
cost of living increases.

This bill is interesting.

It sets the kind of the price
and it isn't reviewed again

for another couple of years

in terms of like reimbursements
and things like that.

So we're having conversations
about what that looks like

so it can be more reactive
while at the same time

looking at mandatory
spending is what's driving

a lot of the debt
in this country.

You know,

there's a lot of focus
on discretionary spending,

but mandatory
is the out of control

train that's left the station
that nobody's really checking.

So making sure that we're being

thoughtful
in looking at those formulas

and how they how they react

when they leverage is going
to be absolutely critical

because this is a bill that we
don't review every year. Right.

A lot of the programs

are pilot programs
that are designed to be reviewed

every 3 to 5 years.

But programs like that,
you know, when we set it

and then we have
an incredible circumstance

like what we've had,

it makes it hard to
to be able to adjust

some of your Republican
colleagues

have talked about making changes
to Social Security.

Is that something you support?

Well, here's the situation
with Social Security,

is that if we do nothing
on social security

and I was here two years ago
talking about this same issue,

and if we do nothing,
the benefits

will automatically cut in 2034.

And that's not
what I want to see happen.

So I'm willing to have
conversations with anybody

about serious solutions,
if serious for our seniors.

We need to be serious about
the longevity of the program.

And at the same time
talking about

how do we encourage people
to start saving earlier. Right.

Social Security is, you know,
people are living longer.

People need to have more
resources for longer,

for a longer life.

And so I'm focused on secure

that I would like to see passed,

for instance,
that's encouraging more people

to sign
up for employer sponsored

retirement plans.

Getting younger
people, millennials

who are not saving money

so that we can make sure
we're not ending up

in a situation
where we have people

who don't have benefits
and have to retire.

So does that mean that

you would have sort of a George

W Bush system that he proposed
back in the early part of

the century, whereby some people
would opt for this savings

plan instead of being part
of the Social Security system?

Well, first of all,
let me say anybody who proposes

cuts to the benefits,
that's going to be a no for me.

I think what we need to be

talking about

is think about retirement
as a three legged stool.

All of the the

ways you save for retirement,
the things you need to plan on.

I hope people think about
having other resources

to help supplement
their Social Security.

I'm not sure.

I hope we are able
to get something done

where it's going to be preserved
long term.

And those benefits are there

for seniors who've worked hard
and expect to have them.

So I'm hopeful
we can find some bipartisan work

there and get that done.

I think it should be bipartisan

because this is an issue
that Congress needs to address.

But again, there are,

I think,

all these other conversations
that need to happen about

making sure we make it easier
for people to save money,

making sure we make it easier
for employers

to offer that as a benefit,

and making sure
that we are serious

about that conversation
long term,

because otherwise
we're going to have this

epidemic of people who haven't
saved money in 20, 30 years.

I think another question
that I have

that I'm
definitely looking into,

you know,
with with the pandemic,

we had a bunch of people
who weren't working

and weren't
paying into the system.

And then you had this incredible
inflation hit and a big cost

of living increase.

So that's going to change things

a lot in terms of the mechanisms
of evaluating the long term

viability
of the program as well.

So we have some work
to do there.

But again, I'm hopeful

that we can do it
in a bipartisan way.

I wanted to move on to education
policy.

Some House
Republicans have in recent past

introduced a patient's
bill of rights regarding to

what parents of school

children can know about
what's going on

in their schools, whether it's
curriculum, finances, etc.

This was also a central theme
in your reelection campaign,

so it's safe to assume
that you would support that.

And I also wanted to ask,

why do Republicans feel
this has become

an issue for Congress
when traditionally,

for the most part, education
is something that's handled

at the local level
by school boards?

Yeah.

Well, and I do support
the Parents Bill of Rights.

I'm one of the co-sponsors
on that.

I think for me, as a
as a mom to two school age

kids, soon to be ten and 12,
I can't believe I'm saying that.

I think it's really important
that we just have good dialog

as parents with

with our teachers
and with school boards.

I think people have woken up
to the process

a little bit more,
which is another part of why

I focused on that
as a conversation.

I want healthy dialog.

I want good civics engagement.

Parents have felt like
they were being shut out.

I think it also goes
without saying.

We had an administration
that was working with a teachers

union
and the Department of Education

to, you know,
to make changes to policy.

And they were shutting
other people out.

That's where the federal nexus
comes in.

It's making sure that
those things are transparent.

So that's why I pushed
for that policy.

What I think parents really want
is just to know that

they have a say in their kids
education.

Parents. Kids belong to parents,
not the government.

I think I made that position
very clear,

and I think that's where a lot

of the conversation
and a lot of that intent lies.

Former President Donald Trump

endorsed
you ahead of the 2022 election.

He has announced he's
going to run for a third time.

Iowa's kicking off the calendar

for the Republicans
anyway ahead of the next cycle.

Do you think it's

good for him
to be the nominee in 2024,

especially as he's

called for the termination
of the Constitution?

Well, let me say this.

First and foremost,

I started off

in Congress

taking that oath
and swearing that I

would protect the Constitution.

And that is my job
is to protect the Constitution.

So any talk of undermining
the Constitution is a nonstarter

for me.

What I will say about

the presidential
nominating process,

I'm glad Iowa is still going
to be first for Republicans.

I think it was a mistake
for Democrats to make that move.

And I think that Iowans
know how to vet our candidates.

We know how to ask
tough questions.

President Trump's
going to have to come to Iowa

and ask tough questions.

And the other candidate
will see in Iowa, too.

And that's

my perspective on anyone
who wants to be the president.

They should come

and go through that same process

and answer
those tough questions.

But is it good
for the Republicans

to win back the White
House if he's the nominee?

Well, I can tell you that
I heard from a lot of people

who do want President Biden
to be the president.

So I think in my mind,
it's about making sure

we have the right person

in the White House who can

move this country forward,
but can also focus on policies

that are not going to

spend trillions of dollars
and not take our country

in the wrong direction.

So I will support who is
the best person to do that.

And again, all these candidates
are coming to Iowa.

So we'll see you here.

And I'll ask those same
tough questions.

Of, are you going to bolster,
endorse?

Well, I'll probably do both. So.

Well, we'll cross that bridge
when we get there.

I want to make sure that I see
what the field is

and get a chance

to ask questions of people, too,
because ultimately

we want the best person.

I want someone who I'm going
to be able

to work
with as a member of Congress,

but I also want the right person
to move our country forward.

We are done
with this conversation.

Thanks for joining us
on this edition of Iowa Press.

Thanks, Kay.

You can watch every edition
of Iowa Press online

at Iowapbs.org for everyone
here at the network.

Thanks for watching.

Funding
for Iowa Press was provided

by Friends,
the Iowa PBS Foundation,

the Associated
General Contractors of Iowa,

the public's partner in building
Iowa's

highway, bridge and municipal
utility infrastructure.

Small businesses
are the backbone

of Iowa's communities,
and they are backed

by Iowa banks with advice, loans
and financial services.

Banks across Iowa are committed

to showing small businesses
the way to a stronger tomorrow.

Learn
more at Iowa Bankers dot com.