Iowa Senate President

Kay Henderson

As the governor continues analyzing bills that landed on her desk, we continue our conversations with legislative leaders. We'll visit with Iowa Senate President Amy Sinclair on this edition of Iowa Press.

 

 

Announcer

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.

Across Iowa, hundreds of neighborhood banks strive to serve their communities, provide jobs and help local businesses. Iowa banks are proud to back the life you build. Learn more at IowaBankers.com.

 

 

Announcer

For decades, Iowa Press has brought you political leaders and newsmakers from across Iowa and beyond. Celebrating more than 50 years on statewide Iowa PBS, this is the Friday, June 6th edition of Iowa Press. Here is Kay Henderson.

 

 

Kay Henderson

Our guest on this edition of Iowa Press is a former Wayne County supervisor. She was elected to the Iowa Senate in 2013. In November of 2022 her Republican colleagues in the Iowa Senate chose her to be the Senate president. Welcome back to Iowa Press, Amy Sinclair, Republican from Allerton.

 

 

Amy Sinclair

Thanks for having me.

 

 

Kay Henderson

Joining our conversation are Stephen Gruber-Miller of the Des Moines Register. And Erin Murphy of the Gazette in Cedar Rapids.

 

 

Erin Murphy

So, Senator Sinclair, on this program, very recently, Governor Reynolds said she plans to take a more active role in the discussion over property tax relief after a bill was unable to get past the Iowa legislature this session. Talking about it in the interim and ahead to next year's session. Do you think that's a positive development, in your view, to get the governor involved more involved in that?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

Yeah, I think any time you're involving stakeholders involving policymakers in that conversation, that's a good thing. We've tried really hard to include, as we're working through this process to include, those local electeds and those and those folks serving in local areas. I know I met multiple times with, Iowa County engineers, my own personal engineers in my district, as well as that broader county engineers association. Because a lot of the changes that we're making will impact those, those departments most. And so trying to make sure that the changes we're making don't adversely impact our infrastructure on a statewide basis. But having the governor step up and take a lead role on that I think will help give us some direction as a legislature to know that, yes, this is a priority. We know it is. The Iowa Senate had several different versions of property tax reform and relief that we tried to move forward this year. That just didn't mesh with what the house had in mind. So and I've always said I would rather do I would rather do public policy right than fast. And so, taking this interim and finding a way to, to make sure that we're getting a handle on what, frankly, is the largest issue for Iowans, that when I knock on doors, it's what they talk about. So getting a handle on local property taxes, whether that's cities, counties or schools and, and helping Iowans, especially those on fixed incomes, to be able to stay in their homes longer and, and own a home that's not cost prohibitive for them. I think it's a great step that the governor's getting involved in taking an active role with that.

 

 

Erin Murphy

You talked about all the stakeholders and all the people you discuss this with. Those kind of gets that to how complicated -

 

 

Amy Sinclair

It's a very complex issue.

 

 

Erin Murphy

Speaker Grassley on this program a few weeks back said in discussing this said that, you know, at the end of the day, it may come down to are you on the side of the taxpayer or are you on the side of local government? He said he didn't want to simplify it necessarily that way, but that may be the ultimate question because of how complicated this because of how many pots this dips its finger into. Can you come up with a bill that makes everyone happy, or is someone ultimately going to have to swallow a tough pill on this?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I mean, let's be honest, it's not easy when you're an elected official to tell people no. And so just as a legislator, the number of people who come into my office and say we would, we'd just like $1 million for this or $10 million for this or $30 million for this, and suddenly all of these millions pile up. It would be easy to say yes, because those in the scope of the overall budget are small numbers, but you add them all up and suddenly that's a lot of money. And I know as a former county supervisor, it is hard to say no to some tiny project that you have over here or as a school board member to say, well, we don't we'd like that program, but it's not necessary. The money isn't there for it. So, so picking winners and losers. I don't think that's what it's about. I think it's about prioritizing what the taxpayers want to purchase. And, and so making sure as local electeds that you're willing to make those tough decisions on what the taxpayer wants to purchase. I think it's a bigger thing. We do need to get a handle on the growth of local government. When you look at the expenditures made out of taxpayers, as well as the revenues coming in, the state's grown a little. The population has grown a little, personal income has grown a little. And then you have cities, counties and schools just skyrocketing well above that. We do need to get a handle on the growth of local government. What that looks like. I think we'll figure out over this interim.

 

 

Stephen Gruber-Miller

So the governor's Iowa DOGE Task Force has been looking at ways to reduce government spending. And one of the options that they've floated at a meeting this week was reducing the number of counties in Iowa from the current 99. We've been talking about your experience in county government. Is that a good idea?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I don't know that it's a bad idea. I don't want it to be a state mandated, top down sort of reorganization if it happens. I know that there are already - and I know this from the experience I had working in local government - there are 28E agreements for services amongst counties, cities already. I take ADLM, which is an amalgamation of local government services for Appanoose, Davis, Lucas and Monroe Counties down in southern Iowa. Those folks get together for their sanitation. They get together for their, for their homeland security. They they've organized and pooled a lot of services that they need to provide their folks. They're small enough counties. They don't need full time in every one of those counties. So they've come together and formed this governmental organization amongst the four of them. And it works. Now they all still have their own courthouses. They all still are able to do driver's licenses and take taxes at their own courthouses. But some of those services that are very large, cost eaters, if you will. They're able to combine those and provide those services across the region, rather than all of them doing it on their own. And it does save money. So being able to allow counties or counties and cities to do those partnerships. There are 28E agreements also in law enforcement. Take that for example where smaller towns they're required to have law enforcement. They can't afford to have full time law enforcement. So they contract with the county sheriff. I think that's a great way to reduce the size and scope of government, reduce costs to citizens, and still provide the same services.

 

 

Stephen Gruber-Miller

Are there certain services that folks in Allerton maybe don't want to have to drive a little further to Osceola, or Ottumwa to go get?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I'm sure there are. Convenience is always, is always, part of that factor, but at what cost? You know, I think most people would be willing to drive a little further if it meant their property taxes were low enough that my mom's 90. She's going to want to stay in her home for the rest of her life, I'm guessing. Part of doing that on a fixed income is making sure that she can pay those bills. And property taxes on a home for somebody who's lived there for 50 years. Those property taxes are probably the largest bill that they have related to owning their home. So we need to keep that in check. I'm sure that most people are willing to take a little inconvenience to make sure that they can keep their home and that they can afford to stay there.

 

 

Kay Henderson

How tough will this be? I remember several years ago the Chief justice of the Iowa Supreme Court suggested closing some county courthouses, and boy, that didn't happen.

 

 

Amy Sinclair

Absolutely it's going to be tough, Kay. That's why I say it's better to do a grassroots local reorganize what you need to reorganize, rather than the state coming in and mandating. That being said, we had state mandates related to our mental health system, and I promise you that the mental health system we have today is better than the mental health system we had 15 years ago, because we have a standard array of services providing what people need, regardless of where they live. Taking that funding mechanism and moving it to the state and providing for the needs of everyone, regardless of whether they're in a property rich or property poor area was an important shift for the state of Iowa, and it's one of those things that was a top down swing that made sense. I don't know that forcing a bunch of small counties to get their services just from Des Moines would be a welcome change. So we have to make sure that the, if we're doing this DOGE, if we're finding these efficiencies, that we're doing it in partnership with the local governments who are elected by the same people who elect me. And they want them there. And so we need to make sure we're partners with them rather than telling them how to do it.

 

 

Kay Henderson

The governor this week has signed legislation that was a priority for her last year and cleared the legislature this year that reduces the rate of the tax rate for businesses, which is paid into the state's unemployment trust fund. At the end of the legislative session in May, you said that was the legislature's top achievement. Why?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

Well, and I think that part of it itself was not the top achievement. I think the work that we did three years ago was. I think revamping our unemployment system so that we facilitate and encourage people to get back into the workforce. The changes we made facilitated that. It made it happen. We essentially halved the number of people on unemployment benefits, and we halved the number of weeks that that they spent on unemployment. There is such value for the human soul in work. There's value in it. And by us giving resources to folks who are looking for employment and making the process for application easier for them by pooling those jobs together in one place and helping people find work that matches their skill set. We did that. It wasn't just a cutting of weeks. We helped them help themselves to get back into the workforce. The number one thing we talk about, the number one thing we hear about from employers is a skilled workforce. And so the work that we did three years ago to help folks limit the amount of time they're spending on unemployment, address the skilled workforce needs of our employers. What we did this year was just a result of that. The result of halving the number of people on unemployment and halving the number of weeks they spend there ended up with, with a huge balance in that trust fund, a balance that doesn't need to sit there, a balance that we need to get back to those employers who are who are taking advantage of that skilled workforce that exists, help them expand their operations, invest more in wages and benefits, getting that money back to them to get back into our economy and back in our communities, rather than just sitting in a trust fund not being used. It's the end result of the work we did three years ago. That's why it's the biggest thing we accomplished.

 

 

Kay Henderson

It didn't happen last year because business groups, among others, raised concerns that the tax rates might go up if the economy goes down and unemployment goes up. Are you concerned about that?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

Well, that would have happened anyway. Any time you have more people on unemployment and you lower the amount in that trust fund, it triggers using the different tables, which do increase the rates. That's going to happen whether we reduce the rates right now and change up those tables or not. So if the economy goes sideways, those tables will be replaced as more people are on the trust fund and lowering the amount that's in there.

 

 

Erin Murphy

The last week of the session, the Senate debated and -

 

 

Amy Sinclair

It was exciting. You enjoyed being there, didn’t you?

 

 

Erin Murphy

And yeah, and very compact and short and not at all drawn out. The…early in that last week, the Senate debated and passed legislation that deals with property rights, eminent domain, hazardous liquid pipelines. You were among the Senate Republicans opposed to that. There was a group of Senate Republicans who supported it to help it ultimately get passed. What have you talked, told the governor about whether she should sign that bill?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I haven't spoken to the governor at all about the bill. And just to be clear, the bill that was passed was not a property owners rights bill. That's a bill that's just going to facilitate activists. And there were so many problems with that. And ultimately, it will cost the state of Iowa money both in an economic impact as well as potential lawsuit. And I think we have to say those words out loud. There are problems with that bill that passed. So to say I was a person who opposed property rights, that's 100% false. We passed, we attempted to pass an amendment, which I voted for, that would end the use of eminent domain for carbon capture pipelines going forward. It doesn't, it wouldn't have impacted the ones that are being reviewed in the court system right now, because that's what's going to get us into legal trouble for liability issues related to the US Constitution and Article One, Section 10. The Contracts Clause we are violating with what we did in the ultimate bill that passed. We're violating the US Constitution. And that causes me great concern. But we did pass an amendment that would have that would have halted the use of eminent domain on those carbon capture pipelines moving into the future without impacting the ones that had already been duly permitted under current law. But in addition, we added in actual landowner protections for, you know, production, restoration if your tiles were damaged. We added in the ability to go outside of the notice corridor so that if somebody within that noticed corridor was just adamantly opposed, a project could choose to ask the neighbor who might want to participate in the pipeline. So, expanding out that notice corridor would be huge in a property rights win, because it would allow those people who are adamantly opposed to it to not have to even have a conversation about it. They would not have to participate because the project could go outside of that corridor. And it also included just some basic rights for that land restoration moving into the future and some additional liabilities there. I voted for that. I believe in that. If you, if the governor called me back in a special session and said, will you vote on this again, my answer would be yes. I'll be there whatever day you want me to be there. So to say that I voted against property rights is, it’s just, it's false. Because that bill, the bill that passed and went to the governor, is not a property rights bill. It is, it is just a power grab by environmentalists. And I will put my foot down in saying that. That being said, I have not spoken to the governor at all. I believe in a separation of powers and a separation of duties, and that is her job to determine whether or not that bill makes sense for Iowans. And I won't try to sway her opinion on that.

 

 

Erin Murphy

All right. So Speaker Grassley said on this program, it's his expectation that the governor will sign that bill into law. Do you have any expectation at all?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I have no knowledge that she won't. She hasn't, at time of recording, she has not signed that. But, I really have no expectation of what she will choose to do.

 

 

Erin Murphy

Do you have, real quick before we move on, because so many topics we want to get to. I mentioned that debate in the Senate. And there was a, again, a portion of Senate Republicans who did support that bill. That debate got a little more heated than us as observers are used to seeing, and

 

 

Amy Sinclair

Felt like real debate, didn’t it?

 

 

Erin Murphy

Yeah. Especially with, you know, members of the same party. Do you have, will that have fractured the Senate Republican caucus looking ahead to next year in any way that concerns you…

 

 

Amy Sinclair

So there. So there were those 12 Republicans who were a part of that coalition that worked to get that bill passed. I have spoken with, since session ended, every one of them, with the exception of maybe Senator Taylor, just because I haven't had occasion to reach out to him on anything. Does it fracture my ability to work with those folks? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. 99.9% of the time we agree on how to move forward on most of these issues. Am I going to work with the entirety of my caucus, all 34 members, to make sure we're passing the public policy that Iowans want, whether that's property tax rights or parental rights or take your pick of conservative issues that you've seen us work on. I will continue to work with my entire caucus. No, I don't believe that there's an irreparable fracture that will keep us from working together for the good of Iowans.

 

 

Kay Henderson

Why is there such a division between the Senate Republicans approach to this issue and the approach House Republicans have taken? You've said this was a bill that would aid the environmental activists. You have House Republicans who disagree.

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I won't, I won't make the statement I made in the press gaggle that I made before regarding the opinions that they hold. They can have those opinions. They absolutely can. We can agree with an end result without agreeing on the way to get there. And I think that's healthy in a representative democracy to be able to discuss different alternatives to finding a solution to problems for Iowans.

 

 

Kay Henderson

Stephen.

 

 

Stephen Gruber-Miller

I have a feeling we could talk about this all day, but I'm going to move us along to another bill that the governor, at the time of recording, has yet to sign, which is about pharmacy benefit managers. There are a lot of pharmacists in the state who would like the governor to sign these new regulations on what are known as PBMs. They say it will help prevent pharmacy closures, but business groups are saying it would cost patients more money in their health care plans. Tell us what your thoughts are on that bill.

 

 

Amy Sinclair

It is an incredibly complicated issue. I mean, it's, I don't know if you've read through those bills or if you've looked at the structure of PBMs or any of that. It is one of those issues that I knew nothing about as we started diving into this, to be frank. PBMs, pharmacy benefit managers, and those contracts that they negotiate for drug pricing and all of those things, that is an interstate commerce issue. This should be handled at the federal level. The fact that it isn’t is the only reason that the state of Iowa is stepping in and trying to get some resolution. Because there's so much, there's such a lack of transparency in what they even do and how it even works. I represent a rural district, super rural. Probably the most rural district, right? My pharmacists are the ones that are being hit by this. And yet my pharmacists are also some of the primary care providers when we're talking about health care in rural areas. The last immunization I got, I got in my local Hy-Vee at the pharmacy. For us to lose pharmacies because PBMs are negotiating prices that are so low that they are not being reimbursed even the amount that they're having to pay out to get that prescription into their pharmacy. I'm sympathetic to a pharmacist losing money on nearly every prescription. They write off the top based on a negotiated contract that they had no, virtually no say in. So I'm sympathetic to this process, which is why, here we are doing this. The bill ultimately included a dispensing fee, which could have the, that consequence of potentially increasing costs to employers on their health plans. It could. It could. I don't believe it will ultimately, because there are also transparency pieces that are built into that PBM bill that should be a driving factor in reducing costs as well. Is it Kentucky or West Virginia passed essentially the same language we've passed. They haven't seen skyrocketing prices for their drug, for their insurance plans, for those drug plans for employers. I don't know. It honestly, I don't know where it's going to end up. But I do know that we need to keep pharmacies in rural places. We need those pharmacists to talk to our elderly patients about how their drugs interact with each other. We need that connection for those folks who live in the places where you don't have a CVS or a Walgreens on every corner, and that is sometimes your only access to a health care provider at the time of day you're trying to get an answer.

 

 

Kay Henderson

Over the past couple of years, the Senate has passed a bill that would grant some liability protection to Bayer, which makes roundup. And it has never cleared the House. The governor on this program last month said she would like to sign that bill into law because it's never passed the House. Are there discussions for making perhaps some changes in that bill to get it to the final destination?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

Honestly Kay, I’d be open to making whatever changes need to be made. The problem comes down to this. That bill wouldn't prevent a single person from suing a chemical company if that chemical company actually caused them harm. If there was evidence that they were injured by that product. Those abilities to sue would still exist, whether the bill was passed as it is and the governor signed it, or whether there were changes made to it. What that bill did was, said that if a company was following all prescribed labeling requirements for the federal, that the federal government provides for them, that they can't be sued for failure to warn because they are told what they can put on that label, that they can't add additional items to that label, or they can't sell the product. And to be clear, glyphosate is the number one product that has allowed us to feed the 8 billion people that are alive on the world today. We've been able to increase yields to the degree that it's unfathomable the yields that we have today. In 1950, nobody would have thought we could we could see 200 bushel to the acre corn, right? So the bill doesn't prevent lawsuits for actual damages. It prevents lawsuits when a company is following the letter of the law as prescribed by the EPA and the federal government. And I think that makes sense. You don't want to be sued for causing someone harm if you're following the law when you do it. You know, if you're driving 55 in a 55 mile an hour speed limit and somebody jumps out in front of your car and you hit them because you didn't see them coming, you were following the law, and you shouldn't be punished for that. And that's what we see with Bayer. They're following the law, and yet they're being punished for the work that they're doing.

 

 

Erin Murphy

We're reaching our last few minutes. I wanted to ask you, about a year ago now it's been, Senate Majority Leader Whitver announced that he had been diagnosed with a brain tumor. He has said since that, fortunately, treatments are going well. Will Senator Whitver be the Senate majority leader next session?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

You know, I can't answer that. When we have those leadership elections, they're essentially for the General Assembly. So, unless he chooses to step down or unless somebody calls for additional elections for that role, then he is the Senate majority leader. And it's not my call to make whether or not he will continue to be. It's, it's, it's a tough situation, and we do nothing but pray for Senator Whitver and his family every day. I, you know, it touches my heart just a little bit. Jack isn't just my Senate majority leader. He's my friend. He's watched. My kid’s in studio here with me today. He was his senior class president. So he spoke at his commencement, and he quoted Jack Whitver. Jack's such a part of who I've been as a senator. That the conversation is a tough one. So he's led us through some big situations, and I'm going to give him the respect of letting him make those choices on his own.

 

 

Stephen Gruber-Miller

Got about a minute and a half left. I want to really briefly ask you about just the political landscape in 2026. The governor announced she's not running for reelection. That's upended a lot of people's plans. Do you have plans to run for any office in 2026?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I think I do a pretty phenomenal job serving as the Iowa Senate president. I currently have no plans that are in place. I'm, I've never completely shut doors, ever. I don't know if you've ever heard me speak or heard me say. I speak to groups all the time. And one of the themes that I talk about is being willing to say yes to the things that make you uncomfortable, that life is better lived in the yes. That being said, I don't feel like I've been asked to say yes to anything. And so, at this point, my plans are to stay right where I am.

 

 

Kay Henderson

Just half a minute left. You didn't ask for this, but when Adam Gregg resigned, you became sort of Iowa's acting lieutenant governor. Can you tell us anything that happened that we don't know about? Any duty that you performed during that?

 

 

Amy Sinclair

I spoke to the Iowa Business Council. That was, that was my role as lieutenant governor. And I didn't die. Okay. That was about it. Okay.

 

 

Kay Henderson

Well, that's about it for this conversation. Thank you for being here on this Iowa Press. You can watch every edition of Iowa Press at IowaPBS.org. For everyone here at Iowa PBS, thanks for watching today.

 

 

Announcer

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.

Across Iowa, hundreds of neighborhood banks strive to serve their communities, provide jobs and help local businesses. Iowa banks are proud to back the life you build. Learn more at Iowa bankers dot com.