Iowa Press; Crispus Nix, Ft Madison Penitentiary

I will press show number 922 Crispusniks, Dr. Huey, producer Braun Miller, taped 3-7-82. September 2, 1981, 1020 AM. A riot suddenly erupts in the cafeteria inside the walls of the Iowa State Penitentiary at Fort Madison, the end of the line in Iowa's prison system. He's all right, he just got released. 12 hours later, one inmate is dead, allegedly at the hands of other prisoners. Guards taken hostage are released unharmed, and almost a million and a half dollars worth of damage is inflicted on the almost 150-year-old facility. October 12, 1981, David Skur is out as Warden in Fort Madison and Crispusniks is in.

This is Iowa Press, a weekly news interview program for Sunday, March 7. This week, the Fort Madison Penitentiary and its Warden, Crispusniks. Here is Dean Borg. Good afternoon. The uprisings in Fort Madison last fall shocked state officials and citizens who hadn't seen a prison disturbance since 1971, when inmates at the Animosa Correctional Facility rioted in anticipation of a visit by Governor Robert Ray at that time. They renewed the focus of Iowans on their prison systems. They raised prisons as political issues in the Falls campaign, and they brought a chorus for someone to do something about the problems at the Fort.

The requests are directed at the prison's new Warden, Crispusniks, our guest today in Iowa Press. To see firsthand the job that he's done since he took over, Mark Braun visited Fort Madison earlier this past week, where he filed this report as the first reporter to be let inside the prison under Warden Nyx's administration. For some men who enter the Fort Madison Penitentiary, this steel door at the end of this corridor is the point of no return. Some say for Crispusniks, the facility's new Warden, Fort Madison is also a point of no return. It's been six months now since the riot here last summer, several months since Nyx took over as the new Warden. A lot of issues were raised at the time of the riot, and we came back six months later to see how those issues have been addressed. Fortunately, our camera was not allowed into the Penitentiary. However, I was able to tour the facility, along with a guard.

What I saw was a prison that seemed to be operating on a nearly normal basis, but scars on the old structure remain. For example, Building 51 set on fire by inmates, and which housed prisoners and the chapel is still in the reconstruction phase. One wing of Building 51 is unusable because of structural damage allegedly done during the riot. The chapel area is still a burned out hulk, but the upper floor of Building 51 has been rebuilt and administrative offices have been moved in. Cellhouse 20, which houses the most difficult to control prisoners, is in full operation, but a set of steel security doors ripped out by inmates during the disturbance still hasn't been replaced, much to the concern of prison guards. Two weeks after the September riot, the heavily damaged prison kitchen was back in operation, but it has taken six months to repair most of the damage. New machinery was required, and damage from small fires put out by a sprinkler system had to be repaired.

It was much more difficult to observe what steps have been taken in connection with allegations concerning prison operations. An audit by the state did, in fact, reveal irregularities in the prison's food service system. For one thing, Ford Madison food costs were much higher than costs at other institutions in Iowa, or for that matter, prisons and seven other states checked. A black market food operation inside the walls was uncovered, and state auditor Richard Johnson charged that the Department of Social Services failed to adequately monitor the prison's dietary department. Warden Nix has pledged to straighten out the mess, and, in fact, it appears as though tighter security measures have been adopted in the kitchen area of the prison. Off-camera telephone interviews with inmates, the only kind we were allowed to conduct, however, reveal continued dissatisfaction with food quality. We, the eyes of the babies yesterday, not yesterday, decided that it wasn't, it was gray. They don't throw no food away. I mean, you know, after a studio, okay, everybody has left over leading an arm home, but after certain time, they're not even left over some more. But they still just want to mix them again whenever they had it saying they'll again.

Charges of racism leveled against some inmates and guards also surfaced last summer. In fact, some black prisoners say the Ku Klux Klan is active inside the walls. A recent investigation conducted by prison officials failed to turn up any evidence of institutional racial discrimination. Although back in December, the Des Moines Tribune reported Warden Nix saying he had seen evidence that some guards had harassed black inmates because of their race. And inmates we talked with in preparation of this story still contend. Racial discrimination is a part of life at Fort Madison. Following the two incidents, prison guards at the Penitentiary threatened to strike unless more stringent security measures were adopted. Those guards, including Mark Mintke, head of the Security Officers Union, give Nix high marks in the area of security. Procedures have been tightened up, putting a new program started last week of feeding prisoners in shifts rather than all at once. And Nix has introduced a highly trained squad of guards chosen from the ranks of Fort Madison Security Officers to serve as a SWAT team in the event of another disturbance at the prison.

But most of the guards we talked with say it's really too early to tell just how effective Nix's new approaches will be. The one thing it's estimated by guards themselves that 15% of them are very displeased with the new Warden, objecting to his dress codes and exercise programs. Designed to in their view, turned the Penitentiary into a military operation like the one Nix administered at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas as a colonel in the Army. But by the same token, some inmates say Nix is tough but fair when it comes to discipline. Says one, you don't see Warden's pets around here like he used to. But inmates, perhaps in the interest of driving a wedge between the new Warden and the prison staff, claim some of the white guards object to working for Nix because he is black. Supposedly for security reasons, Nix has continued a sharp curtailment of many of the self-help programs like educational courses that used to be available to Fort Madison Prisoners. This, despite Nix's acknowledgement in an October 25, 1981 Waterloo Courier article that prison officials need to keep inmates busy to avoid disturbances.

Inmates say the lack of activity beyond such busy work as sweeping floors is causing tension inside the walls to build. Tension that some inmates threatened could lead to another disturbance. There's too much idle time. You know, person can't go to college because they cut out the college courses. There's no weightlifting facilities. The hobby craft has been severely curtailed and people are sitting around with just idle time. There's a re-indication until it'll be a major riot in this summer. The inmates are going to take all over, have anything to lose. I'm Mark Burn. When he was appointed last October, Warden Nix was described by his boss, Social Services Commissioner Michael Regan, as a person with, quote, a low-key approach that has a lining of steel behind it. He'll be questioned about his approach to the problems at Fort Madison by our regular Iowa press panelists, Tom Wutowski of the Des Moines Tribune, David Yepsner of the Des Moines Register, and John McCormley with the Harris newspapers. Warden, I'd like to open our program this afternoon by asking you what are the biggest problems you face at Fort Madison?

Well, I think the biggest problem is to establish consistency, to get a highly effective trained force, to move the inmates in small groups. Because what we're talking about when we deal with this inmate population, we're dealing with a maximum security institution. And if it's a maximum security institution, then it should be run like other maximum security institutions throughout the country. We're thinking about going to Spitzschiff, you know, you talk about it on this. They were probably as odd as last summer as they are now. So when you talk about educational programs, there are other ways you can do it. You can probably do it when they are just about to be released within three years of the time of release. You can start all the educational program. Warden, I'm curious about one thing that we heard in our opening, and that was the prediction that the temperature is rising, so to speak, inside the institution and that additional violence is imminent. How do you respond to that?

Well, I don't think that anyone else can assure that violence will not occur. As a person in my background in experience, we're going to try to cut my losses as much as I possibly can. The inmates don't share any more view different about that than I do, but I'm going to try to be as prepared as I possibly can to deal with that particular operation. Warden, are there any problems at Fort Madison at our unique, the Fort Madison, or are we talking about problems of prisons in general? I would think that you would find rights that occur in Philadelphia, they have occurred in Texas, they occur in all over this country. Well, coming here as you did from the Federal Penitentiary at 11, do you find anything unique, anything special about Fort Madison? We all refer to it as the oldest prison in Michigan. I don't think that you would find, if you review a statistic, you'll find that rights occur in modern facilities. But I think what you have to do, you have to deal with those situations, inmates must understand that violence and destruction is an inappropriate method for institution of social change. And I think that's what we need to get across to them.

Colonel, I'd like to take you back six months when you walked into Fort Madison. What were the problems that confronted you there? What did you inherit when you walked in there? Well, I don't think we were very well united on where we were going. I wanted to, shall I say, sharp-tune that aspect of the institution. Were the books there? I looked like you were about to say that. I'm not trying to run the place trying. Inmates within the institution. I think many institutions over the country, when you have limited resources, you may have a pecking level among inmates. What I'm attempting to do at this particular time is to treat everybody the same, and there are no prima donners among them make population. Are you trying to break the clicks with that, which is... I'm attempting to treat everybody the same, whether that means breaking the clicks, if that's the thing, that's what I intend to do. What about the guards there? Were you well pleased with the status of the quality of the guards there when you got there? No, I think we are attempting to upgrade the appearance, attitude, and the professionalism of the guards.

And I own a point out why I feel that's important. A lot of people say about the exercise and obesity that I'm concerned about. If you can't control your own weight, then how you can control somebody else's life. If you don't weigh uniform properly, and if you don't have pride in yourself, then how you're going to have pride in the person that you're talking about. It has been my experience in dealing with people. If you don't weigh your hair properly, if you don't follow regulations as it pertains to dress code, you may not be following the other regulations. There's a correlation between that kind of person. And so what we are trying to do is to upgrade the appearance so that they can have some personal pride in themselves. But I don't want to take credit for that alone, because I want to say that the union and the middle management personnel were instrumental in me establishing the dress code that we have that today. Colonel Lex, I want to go back to what you said about treating everybody the same, and Tom asked you, does that break up the clicks? Really, what he's referring to is the governing structure that we understand goes on within the prison system among the prisoners themselves.

Is you treating everybody the same? Is that going to break up that governing structure? Well, I think that what you're saying, if you're talking about the government structure, there might have been inmates, may have been inmates, that were cited for violations that were not prosecuted. That's where I intend to prosecute both staff and guards to the fullest, it's none of the law. And so if that's breaking up the clicks and I hope that it does, then that's what I intend to do. Those inmates say, well, you know, there are inmates who think that they should not be dealt with in that respect, and that's not my philosophy. Do you allow any internal governing structure at all among the prisoners? I think we've met with inmates the other night. Yes, we're going to have each unit manager will have inmate counselors to make recommendations on how we should run the institution, and we'll accept suggestions. But that doesn't mean that the inmates will run the institution, and many inmates have come up with some good suggestions on how we can better run the facility.

Colonel, it appears to me, and I've been following this problem for a long time as a journalist. And in the last 30 years or so, there has been a trend in this country among people who are often called do-gooders, and I've probably been one of them. A trend that felt that well prisons have been putting nasty places, people usually come out of them worse than when they went in, and we need to do something about that. We need to try to make them better places, nicer places. We need to upgrade them. And I guess this philosophy has had a great influence on legislators, and I guess on the people who have run prisons. Has this been a mistake? Has this produced the kind of results that you're trying to change now? Did we let the inmates get too much in charge? I think you're worried too much about their belly aching. There are several things we can do to disrupt an effective operation of an institution.

As we can start the echelons of command, where inmates feel that they have to go around the warden system. And maybe sometime the warden and his staff are not responsive to the needs of an institution. We studied the history of the institution until the 19th century when we had the Warnett Street jail. The idea then was to bring buildings, big, medieval facilities, and bring the communities within the institutions. We had up in Massachusetts, I think, Howard Gill started the kind of trade. If you teach them a trade and a marketable skill and tweak the terminology, and I think we used the medical model. The medical model didn't work out as well as we thought it was going to work out. So, therefore, we could not predict how well the person would be as he returned to the society, how well he would function. And so, the people, the pendulum was swinging in the other direction. For many years, administrators did not look at the institution, and so the courts had to go in there.

So, I think that was good. Some of the things that are happening to Fort Madison are the results of the court decisions. But I think we need to have a balance here now that the activists on the part of prison must understand that the God that works in the day on a daily basis is intimidated and threatened and is working in a very stressful environment. And we must be concerned about that also, and not only be concerned about what the inmates do. We summit up by saying Colonel Nick, that you're trying to run a little tougher place down here that has been in the past. I think that everybody needs to understand where the orders are and comply with them. One thing that we've noticed, Colonel Nick, is that you're not allowing access by newsmen into Fort Madison as freely as it was before, if at all. Why is that? I think if you study the Shakespeare decision in Washington Post, if you study the KEDQ, a decision, court decision, I'm not doing anything but to comply with the court decision. I think the court says, and those decisions, and many others, a client in case, and several other court decisions, that the press has no more right to an interview with the inmates and the public, because there are so many other ways that you can deal with it.

There's no one is arguing about the legality of your stand on that. The question is, why not? It doesn't say you can't let. It doesn't say that you can't have all of the ministers you've had in that before. Why are you stricting it? If you continue to get intelligent reports that inmates are saying what they said before on the TV that the riot has come in, the hostage is going to be taken, I don't see any reason why we should increase our vulnerability in that particular way with the news press or anybody else. How long do you think it will be before you be able to open up? I don't know how long. When I get the intelligence report that then tell me what is telling me now, that may be next week, that may be next year. Do I understand there are other groups beside the press that you're blaming for? We have a maximum security institution, and we've got to make a decision on whether it's a maximum security institution or whether it's a minimum security institution. We cannot go on, and I think we worry about the people that are coming in there. We should not increase the vulnerability of anybody being taken to hostage, so that we have to deal with the inmates.

Do we have a problem here in Iowa that we are expecting too much of Fort Madison? You say quite quickly, it's a maximum security institution, but we don't really have a medium security institution. Are we expecting Fort Madison to be too many different things? I think that we really, a mind what made up what we're going to be. In the federal system we have Marion as a maximum security institution, it doesn't work like Fort Madison, it doesn't work like some of the other facilities, and you can't afford to do that. It's a really tough place for the really tough inmates that are very violent. But we need a place like that in Iowa that would segregate the extremely violent and get them away from the violent. We do have that, but we have the John Bennett Center, it's a medium facility that I run, a minimum facility for two forms, and an animal says another facility.

I'd like to turn now to some of your longer term goals, we've talked a lot about the immediate problems here. What do you have as your long term goals for Fort Madison? First, we are sending all of our people to the academy. We hope to intensify. Law enforcement academy? No, the criminal, the correctional academy, which just got it at Mount Pleasant last week, and that's 105 hours of training. So I think if we train people, they would treat people better. The units will be functioning as units. Each unit will have its own unit manager. Each unit will have on its own counselor. We wanted to make run a cost effective operation, that's part of my long term goal. What about staff treating? I just got through sand. Mount Pleasant, all of our people are going through the correctional academy, which just started last week, and I said 25 people there. Was that a big deficiency, though, is what I intend to ask? Was that a big deficiency when you arrived that you just didn't have guards that were adequately trained, were you bringing in riffraff to guard prisoners?

I'm sure that maybe the quality of people that we might have desired before the press economy started, we weren't getting that. But we didn't have any formalized training as we have known, and that's important. Have you made recommendations in legislature or two years of careers about increasing the pay scale so that you can attract more qualified staff? I think if you could, if you talk about pay, and compare the pay with other state institutions around, I pay is not that bad recently. You haven't made any specific recommendations. I think we're supposed to get a pay raise in the end of the future, and so I don't know where the pay is a problem. Maybe the fact that you're not close to metropolitan area that you can draw as many people as you want, because it's a full menace. I'd like to ask you if Iowa needs a new prison. I think I pointed out that you have disturbances and new facilities. For reasons of disturbances, just because that's a problem. I'm sure that obviously, yes, it's a pretty old institution, but I think that an institution in Fort Lemworth, which is a federal system, they're refurbishing it.

There are many institutions being refurbished throughout the country. Yes, if I would say have my choice between whether some old lady is freezing and whether I have a new prison, you know, that's a problem. We've got to say, well, what are we going to do? We could have a better prison, but I don't think that the refurbishing and the upgrading of physical structures, when you compare what other things are happening in this country, that's okay. I guess I'm specifically getting at the question, okay, you're the new guy in the block. They went out and they found someone who was top flight to come in and run a very troubled institution here in Iowa. And so what do you say to state legislators when they ask you, Colonel, do we need a new prison in Iowa? I would say, yes, I would like to have a new prison. If you're everything else, but I'm a reasonable person. You know, I would like to have a new house, you know. And I'm sure that the government would like to have more money. We have to put everything in its right perspective.

You know, if you say they are unitizing the facilities, it would be ideal to have a new prison all over the country, and there would be a lot of, you know, you could have that. And I'm not saying that that isn't so, but I don't think that if we do what we are doing and develop programs, you see, cement and walls don't make prison. Is the kind of treatment and how you treat people and the kind of food and the kind of caring and the kind of concern that you have about the inmates there? Along that line, I'd like to follow up. What other changes do you see that Iowans need to make in their philosophy and attitudes towards prisons? We talked about summer today, but we talked about a new prison. Any other changes in attitudes we need to have in this state? I don't know, I don't want to speak for what they need in the rest of the part of the state, but I think what I would like to see, I would certainly like to see the warden have the capability of whatever cynicism they would come out with, whether it was mandatory and interming with what? We'd be able to give inmates some kind of a basement time, a good conduct time for their privileged levels, something for the skill levels and that would be a better management too.

I think what I find that foot medicinal was that everybody was getting the same thing and there was no really positive reason for behaving properly. The way that you have described your philosophy on penal systems, does that run counter to what I always seems to be moving toward and that is a greater emphasis on community-based corrections? You see, when you talk about community-based correction, what do you really mean? If you're talking about bringing the community in, that can be community-based correction. I think that's more the philosophy. So I think that what we're talking about, and as I view it, that we're going to try to program when the inmate is going back to the community so we can reintegrate him into the society, and maybe he would go out to the Bennett Center, and then he would go to the forums, and then he would go to the halfway house, and progressively reintegrate him into the system. Before we get to that point, back before he comes to Fort Magic World, do you think right now, what do you have? 600 people down there?

Approximately. That there are some people that don't need to be there that shouldn't have been sent there. The classification system that they're currently working on will give numbers to the kind of offenses, the previous offenses, the history of that inmate, and I think that that will... You think you have people there right now that ought to be happy? I'm sure that if the classification system that is in the current consideration, you will find some inmates that at Fort Madison, that would not normally be there in the new system. I think when all of this is put together, I think we'll have a better system, but I don't want anybody to feel today that we won't have a disturbance because it affects the system. Colonel, next with a few minutes we have left. I'd like to ask you one question. Governor Ray's leaving office, he's been an adamant opponent of capital punishment. It could become a political issue. Do you think that this state should have capital punishment? I really... I came from a system where they had capital punishment in the service, and we had several people down there, because I didn't have no problem with that. Here we don't have... Did you ever follow in order for killing of a prisoner?

No, that wasn't really the warden's responsibility. In the military, you just say, you send us to death that doesn't say how you die. But let me address that death... Please think that the inmate's violent negative behavior can have more influence on whether the death penalty is reinstituted in this state than any legislated or politician is running. Why is that? Because of the fact that the protagonists of the people, if you talk to the people throughout the state, they will tell you that they are leaning more towards dealing with those people who feel the violence they're doing. What if I did not agree with it? And what influence if I did? If I said that we talk about... And what I'm attempting to point out to you, I hear about it saying whether you agree with the death penalty or not, I wish somebody would be concerned about the people that are dying both guards and inmates. In that institution, so we won't worry about whether the death penalty becomes a reality. Let's assume that I did think that we had the death penalty. There are more people killed by inmates on inmates and staff than they have been executed in the last ten years.

So why don't we address the issue that's facing us rather than go off and say, well, we've got a death penalty? You know, we ought to deal with the issues that's facing the country. Most of the people down there in Fort Madison now will get out sometime, a few will die in there, but most will get out. Are you confident with the programs you're working on now that most of them are going to get out better than they were when they went in? And what specifically do you have in mind if you try to make that happen? If we progress, if we have some way of reintegrate them in an orderly fashion, hopefully they will be better. I think we still have an education program on board. It's not at the same level that we're talking about. You see, we use the term in correction warehousing. But if you say warehousing, if a guy is a good warehouseman, he doesn't let his products fall. So we haven't been too good in that. So there's plenty of rooms to improve whether you talk about rehabilitation, or alteration, or resocialization. But in those times you want to use, there's a lot of work for us to do.

Ordinary different times independent groups come in and study correctional systems. And we certainly have had studies in Iowa. But do we need another one? Do we need an outside group to come in and look at the whole area of corrections in Iowa and give the state a new plan? I don't know whether that's necessary or not. And I've seen studies made. We've had studies made in the military, and it really hadn't changed our problem that much. The federal system has studies. I think what we have to do is, I don't think any of us really know what to do with the inmate population that we have confined the day. And studies probably would be just as bad then as they were, and the Fed is talking about the clinical approach. I'm sorry, Colonel. We're out of time. Thank you very much for being our guest today in Iowa Press. For those of you who saw our program on the governor's decision not to seek re-election and broadcast two weeks ago, we want to point out that we erred when we said that the state's $50 million tax rebate occurred in 1978. It did not. That rebate was made in March of 1979, and we very much regret that error. Next week, we'll talk politics again this time with Ed Campbell, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for governor.

Until then, for our panelists today, Dave Yupsin, Tom Matosky, John McCormley. I'm Dean Borg. Thanks for joining us and have a good week. Is he? I hear. Thank you. I will press for show number one thousand two atomic topic brands dead.

Major funding for this program was provided by a grant from Friends of IPBN. Wednesday, October 13th, as we approach this election, we find that that dream is in many ways threatened.

19 days out, and the rhetoric escalates in the race for governor. We have a choice in Iowa to continue to move forward on a steady course of progress with stability, living within our means and paying as we go, or we have a choice to embark in a totally different direction. We can't talk seriously about economic revitalization unless the state is willing to play its appropriate role in the public-private partnership. It's an approach that was outlined last week in the heat of the closing month of the campaign. The cost of this proposal amounts to about $11 per person per year, pennies a day. I'd like to contrast that with what I offer the voters of this state. Iowa Press, a weekly news interview program for Sunday, October 17th.

This week, the race for governor with Republican Terry Brandstad. Here is Dean Borg. Good evening. Nearly everywhere they go, they talk about jobs and tout their solutions to put Iowa back to work. Democrat Roxanne Conlon pushes a $300 million bond proposal that she calls Invest in Iowa. A public works program designed to provide jobs for those currently unemployed, while making the state's infrastructure more attractive for future industrial development. Republican Terry Brandstad pushes back. Ten days ago, he called Conlon's proposal, quote, unconstitutional, a sham on Iowa taxpayers. The Lake Mills Republican claims the state can create 180,000 new jobs in the next five years if it first creates a private fund to provide loans to businesses, opens a trade-off as in Asia, and if its governor personally sells Iowa as a place for business to grow. Mr. Brass would be questioned about those promises this week, and others he's made in his campaign for governor, by David Yebsen with the Des Moines Register.

And by Pamela Drum, State House reporter for Public Radio in Ames. Mr. Brandstad, I'd like to open our discussion this afternoon with a topic besides jobs. We'll get to that a little bit later. Some of the other issues in the campaign are deal with the public's perception of you and Mrs. Conlon. One of those is reflected in some poll data that's been done that shows that people don't think you're as smart or as intelligent as she is. How do you respond to that? I think you're talking about the Iowa poll that showed that I was ahead in experience, that I was more capable of handling the state in terms of crisis situation, and I was ahead in every category, and so the people that supported her had to have some reason why they wanted to support her, and so they said that they thought she was intelligent. I agree. She is intelligent, but she doesn't have the experience or the understanding or the ability to handle the tough job as governor that I have. Do you think that perception that she's more intelligent than you is going to be a major factor in the election?

No, I don't think so. We're both graduates of law school. I have the benefit of a little more down-to-earth experience, because I'm involved in a farming operation, and I'm involved in a small business in a small town. I have the benefit of 10 years experience in elected public office, and I think that experience in elected office, so I have the practical approach and the realism of what can be accomplished. I think that's much more important than some academic idea about things. Why is that so important to Bob Ray had never served in elected public office before he became governor? Harold Hughes was just a commerce commissioner. Neither of them served in the legislature. What's the big deal on having legislative experience? Well, Governor Ray, before he served as governor, was Republican State Chairman. He also served as a reading clerk in the Senate, and was very involved with the legislative process in State Chairman. He was up there working with the Republicans, offering the Republican alternatives during that period of time, so he had been Republican State Chairman.

So he had that kind of a background going into the job. Harold Hughes served on the Commerce Commission back when the Commerce Commission was elected, and the Commerce Commission is a very controversial area, and they had to make a lot of tough decisions. My opponent, on the other hand, has never served in elected office. I have, I've served as a lieutenant governor. I've helped pass the majority of the governor's program. I've initiated things on my own, like eliminating inheritance tax between spouses, strengthening our criminal code, and correcting the abuses that were going on in our unemployment compensation system. These are things that I've done, and I've initiated on my own, and I've got that experience, not only in the legislature, but in the second highest executive office in the state of Iowa. I've served as acting governor in the time of emergency, when we had problems at Algonan Manson with the tornado, Governor Ray was gone. I went in and conducted the on-site inspection, and signed the order, signed the request, asking the president to declare several counties, the disaster council. But the experience was just one aspect, of course, of that Iowa poll, back to the question of intelligence. Is this perception intensified by certain remarks that you've made in particular, the one about thinking about using the inaugural celebration to raise money for opponents of abortion?

Well, I think that's been misunderstood. In response to a question, I said that I'd like to see the inauguration be to help people in need, elderly, women with problem pregnancies, handicapped, but I also feel it's inappropriate to talk about the inauguration until after the election. But you have already brought it up. I didn't bring it up. I merely said that I hope that it could be an event that would help bring people together. Nothing that would be used for a partisan or lobbying purpose, but merely to help people in need. And I think I ones want to see that, and it's just an idea that I hope can be worked out by the people involved in the inaugural committee after the election. I covered that speech, and one of the things that you said was that you just consider this idea. This is probably the largest group of people you're going to speak to between now and the rest of the campaign. I've talked to a lot of groups much bigger than that. No, no, I'm talking about our audience here this evening. I wonder if you've thought enough about this idea that perhaps now you're not convinced it's so good.

There's been quite a lot of controversy that's surrounded the whole notion of raising money for anybody. I don't think it should be used to raise money for anybody. I think it strictly should be to help people in need. And I think it should be up to the inaugural committee to determine what they want to do. But again, as I say, I think it's important that we talk about the issues in the campaign and not what we can do to help people after the election. So you're not willing to back away from that idea here this evening. I'm saying it should be up. It should be decided after the election, and it strictly should be to help people in need. You're still considering the idea then, is that it? Well, unfortunately, people have misconstrued what I said. What I said is, it will not be used for any partisan or lobbying purpose, not for any group that takes sides on a partisan issue. But to help groups, handicapped and elderly people that are hurting, that can't afford to go to the inauguration. These are the people that I'm concerned about. And I think we all, all islands are caring and compassionate people. They want to help people in need and...

It's still a possibility then, in your mind. I think that the governor should try to be helping people win ever and however possible, yes. How would it get to tax shelters now? That's been another topic of conversation, mostly to the detriment of Mrs. Conlon in this campaign. But I'm just wondering, is there a difference in your mind in tax shelters? In other words, what's the difference between you investing in farmland and Mrs. Conlon and her husband investing in apartment houses? There's a major difference in the federal government has now defined tax shelters for the first time. They had not done so until recently. They have defined tax shelters, and I think it's a very accurate definition, as when an investment is made for the primary purpose of avoiding paying tax, that's a tax shelter. On the other hand, those of us that are involved in farming are not there trying to lose money to avoid paying taxes. We're trying to make money. We've been the victim, unfortunately, of grain embargoes and low farm prices.

But we're there not to try to lose money or to shelter other income, but we're in the business of trying to make a living in agriculture, and as a result of unfortunate situation beyond our control, we may on one year or another lose money. I lost money last year, but the year before I made money, and I've disclosed all of that. I've disclosed my tax returns for the last three years. So there is a significant difference. If your primary purpose is strictly to avoid paying taxes, that's a shelter. But you could get into farming just to lose money too. That is up to the personal objective of the person. You have another income on their farmers, of course, are there to make money because that is their livelihood. I live on a farm. I've lived on a farm all my life, and our family farm has been in the family for 99 years. I want my children to have a chance to be involved in agriculture, as I have, and my father, and my grandfather, and so I'm involved in farming to give my children a chance someday to farm that land and to keep it in the family. What about the, you say they avoid paying taxes? They pay a couple hundred thousand dollars in property taxes, and that supports schools and government at all levels.

Anybody that owns property has to pay property tax. The point of tax shelters is, as defined by the Internal Revenue Code, is to invest in something with the primary purpose of avoiding paying taxes. That's what's wrong. Wealthy millionaires that get out of paying any tax by strictly investing in something that will shelter their income. Iowans think that's wrong, and we have already done something about that. We've passed a minimum tax in this state on people that use tax shelters to avoid paying tax. For the first time in 1982, we have a minimum tax on the state level, and the Congress is beefing up that minimum tax. So we intend to beef up our state minimum tax, and that's going to bring in more money, and it's going to close some of these loopholes. And I think that's what Iowans want, and I'm very strongly supportive of that. Mrs. Conlon, of course, has also mentioned the minimum tax. She says the- I'm glad she's for it.

She says the voters have forgiven her for not paying state income taxes last year. She has been catching up in the polls. Has she been forgiven? Well, they may have forgiven her for not paying taxes, but I don't think they're going to forgive her for what she said. She said, and this is, I think, worse than what she did. She said at the Democratic Convention, she pointed the finger at me and the Republicans. She called us the party of privilege. She said, your tax shelters can't shelter, your bankroll can't buy it. And that is the hypocrisy that Governor Ray pointed out. Here's a millionaire that didn't pay any tax last year calling the rest of us. But I think- The party of privilege. She has ten times the bankroll I have. The point is, well, Pam's question, though, Mr. Branstad, is whether or not the closing of the gap now in the polls indicates that maybe Iowans are forgetting and forgiving. I think that's true of Iowans. Iowans are caring and compassionate people, and they will forgive, but I don't think they will forget what she said. And that, I think, is more significant.

But the fact is, we in Iowa take pride in the fact that we have an equitable tax system, and when we see a problem, we adjust it, and we correct it. And we in 1982, long before her problem, ever arose, saw a problem. And I'm proud to say that it's present in the Senate. In the Senate, we passed the minimum tax and included not only individuals, but corporations and fiduciaries as well. Mr. Branstad, they accuse you of being hypocritical on your voting record of a record of flip-flopping. Specifically, you voted against a state equal rights amendment. You say you're for equal rights for women. You voted against creation of the Department of Transportation. Now you say it's fine. You voted against a collective bargaining for public employees. Now you say you support it. You can understand where people change their minds on issues or how time changes, facts a little bit. But how do you expect us to know just what you'll do as governor with that kind of a record in the Iowa House? Well, of course, what the Democrats have done, what you have done here is pulled about three votes out of context. And I've cast over 4,500 votes, failed to mention some of the things I've initiated, like the phase out of the inheritance tax, like productivity for farmland, the new system we have to help children with handicaps and learning disabilities through our area education agencies.

But those are very important issues in terms of philosophically where you are on the questions of equal rights, collective bargaining for public employees. On my record, let's take them out of context and let's just slam out here. Let's talk about equal rights. I helped and was a co-sponsor of the bill that corrected the unfair treatment of widows under the inheritance tax law so that women would be treated equally. We said that all the joint tenancy property instead of being included in the husbands and state would be half in the wisest half state, half in the husbands and state. We corrected discrimination in the area of credit. We said that you could not discriminate, school boards could not discriminate. We also, I supported and supported the ongoing study that's going on by the commission on the status of women to review all our laws to correct discrimination in the way they're applied. And so we have an excellent record on that. And I, Mrs. Collins says she wrote many of those bills. Is that true?

No, that's not true. They were drafted by the individual legislators and the legislative service bureau. She lobbied for some of those matters, but she did not write any of that legislation. Either individual legislators or the service bureau does. But it is a fair statement to say that during your public career you have, if not changed your position, modified it some. Well, certainly anybody that's in public office gains experience is going to grow with it and gain. That's the benefit. See, I've had the benefit to learn and gain experience. Ten years, I've served as a state representative. I represented a small rural district in northern Iowa. For the last four years as a lieutenant governor, I represented the whole state of Iowa. And I've learned the problems in Dubuque and in Council Bluffs and Des Moines are a little different. Maybe that could be expected. Perhaps that's expected to know where you're going to come down on something four years from now. Well, I think my record has been well established over the last four years as a lieutenant governor. I've consistently supported keeping a balanced budget, keeping Iowa moving forward, not going into a big debt. But building on a steady course of progress was stability and living within our meetings. That's as consistent and steady record. And I think that's exactly what the people of Iowa want for our next governor.

What about how you feel about the equal rights amendment getting the inequalities out of the law? What about this civil recent civil rights commission study that says women in state jobs are clustered in the low paying jobs? I think we need to work hard to try to change that situation. Governor Ray has set a good example and we have more women appointed by the governor to boards and commissions in the other state, 35% of the appointments. I've said a goal I'd like to see that equal to the number of women in Iowa, so it'd be slightly over 50%. In terms of the promotions and the positions within government, I think we need to review to see that in application, as well as in hiring, equality is there. In my own staff, the chief fundraiser is a woman, the person in charge of communication with the media is a woman, and they are paid, commensurate with their responsibilities. And I think that's the way it ought to be in state government, as well.

Okay, we're on jobs. The big issue, of course, is jobs. You say Mrs. Conlon's $300 million bonding plan will take at least two years to work. What is it about your plan that will make your plan work a great deal faster? Well, we don't have to go through four steps. Hers has to be passed by the legislature, a vote of the people at a general election and the next general election is not until 1984, and then it has to be tested for legality and constitutionality in the courts, and then you've got to go out and sell the bonds. Let's talk about that. On the other hand, my plan on the other hand, we can begin right away by establishing an Iowa fund, which is a private investment fund that Iowans can begin investing in. And that money would be used as equity capital, invested by a board of directors of some of the top business leaders in Iowa that I would select to put this program together. We would go out and sell. People would invest in it, and it could immediately begin to be invested in the Iowa economy. My plan also calls for implementing the recommendations of the high technology task force and authorizing the use of industrial revenue bonds for research facilities, opening an Asian Office of the Iowa Development Commission, putting more into travel and recreation, taxing profit rather than taxing investment, and encouraging companies to come to Iowa and put people to work here in the private sector. What I put to take time too. Well, sure, that's why I said, 180,000 jobs over five years, but we begin immediately. We start right away. We don't have to wait to pass the legislature, pass the vote of the people, test it in the courts, and then sell the bonds. We start right away.

So the jobs are going to be created over a five-year period of time, but we begin immediately. And that's what my approach makes a lot more sense. It's well thought out. I've had the benefit of economic advisors that have served on the Iowa Development Commission, that have been involved in business, that have brought industries to Iowa, and I intend to personally get involved, as Governor Janklow has in South Dakota, in calling on prospects to come to our state. That's how we're going to bring jobs to Iowa. One by one, one company by one, effort by effort. She calls that public relations gimmicks, Governor flying around the country calling on us. It's brought industry to other states. Well, you've got one example of the South Dakota. It's worked, and I'm looking at proven techniques, and what she has done is taken a go for broke technique that really won't work. The classic Democratic pump priming, I mean, you borrow money, and you hire people to do public works jobs. It's how the country got out of a depression in part.

Okay, let's go back and look at that. The last time we had high unemployment was 1940, and we had 14.6 percent unemployed after all the public works programs. Public works program 25 percent, if I recall my history, right, when Franklin Roosevelt implemented that. I'd say that reduced unemployment by half. Now, I don't know what the unemployment from the history books I read at the University of Iowa unemployment did not go down during that period. He did help restore confidence, and that's important. And we need a governor that will work with the private sector and bring real jobs to Iowa. I don't rule out some public works projects, but I think they should be well thought out, and I think they should be implemented at the local level. How would a government do that? The local level of cities and counties have the authority to make decisions like this. But where were they get the money? They're scrapped right now. They get the money the same as the state does from the taxpayers. That's why my approach of private investments and an Iowa fund where people will invest their own money makes a lot more sense.

Let me ask about that source. Aren't you really taking from one pocket and putting it in the other, you're pulling money from Iowa banks, savings and loan institutions into this invest in Iowa fund? Okay, but you know where that money is going today? It's going into money market certificates and mutual funds and stocks that are leaving the state. Why is this your idea going to be a better investment as an investor, looking for the best return on the investment? Why would your investment fund be a better investment than an Eastern money market? Well, it may not be a better return, but I'm confident that if Iowans can get a fairly comparable return for money that will create jobs and help businesses, small businesses expand. In this state, they will choose... You're counting on a bit of patriotism then. That's right, and I know Iowans well enough to know that when given an opportunity to do something for themselves, they'll do it. They've demonstrated that time and time again. The Iowa Shares program is a classic example of how if you give Iowans a way that they can help themselves, they can help other people in our state, they're carrying in compassionate, they're ruling to do it. On that compassion, many Iowans right now are unemployed and the unemployment trust fund is... let's just say it, broke.

How are you going to... you've got a lot of people unemployed. If you're elected, they still will be unemployed as you take office. What are you going to do to rejuvenate that trust fund? Well, first of all, thank goodness I had the foresight when I was elected Lieutenant Governor to push for and took a lot of heat to do it. Reform the system and correct abuses. We had people guilty of stealing and misconduct that were drawing benefits out of that fund. We had others were making more money working part-time and drawing partial benefits and if they were fully employed. By reforming that system, we saved $150 million and so, instead of being $150 million in debt today, we're not. Unfortunately, a national recession and high unemployment has hurt our state and now we're in a position of borrowing money from the federal government. I think that was a wise decision in the short run. In the long run, we have to bring it back into solvency and making some minor sacrifices on both sides in the future by both the claimants and employers, I think, is the best way to end it. If that's a wise decision to borrow from the federal government, would Mrs. Con in the short run, but would Mrs. Conlon's idea go ahead?

Well, first of all, we brought from the federal government in the short run and we put together an additional tax to pay for the interest. But this is a short term thing and the reason why we did it, we didn't want to increase tax on Iowa employers in the depth of recession. But you're borrowing from the federal government to give a check to a person who really isn't being productive. Mrs. Conlon wants to borrow, pay interest on the bonds, yes, but she's going to create productivity by doing it. Well, she doesn't because it's way down the road and it's not going to create any jobs. That's the cruel hoax about her plan, because it tells him it's going to be a job and it's not going to be for three or four years. That's, I guess, the worst part about that proposal. But the thing about our trust fund is in Iowa, we're in so much better shape than our neighbor, Villanoia or Michigan or so many of these other states that have not been as careful as we should. We haven't been specific on the original question. What are you going to do? You said it's a short run to borrow from the federal government. What are you going to do to rejuvenate it? Well, a modest increase in employer contributions and the employers are paying the money now that they're borrowing in their federal taxes.

So the money that they're, we're getting back is money that Iowa employers have paid into the federal money. Well, I as a tax paying citizen also have to contribute more. No, this would be employers of the state of Iowa a slight increase plus reinstating a one-week waiting period, which all but nine out of the states have. Moving out by that statement of surtax on employee. Well, only three, only three states have a tax on employee wages. Those states are Alabama, Alaska and New Jersey. And of course, I served on the labor committee and this is an area I have a great deal of. But you're ruling out putting a surtax on. I'm not ruling it totally out, but I don't think it's a very realistic alternative. Let's talk about it. You know, that's the benefit of having been involved in government for 10 years. I can tell you that it's not realistic and it doesn't have a chance of passing the legislature. It doesn't have any more chance of passing than Mrs. Conlon's bond proposal. It's running out of time. I want you to tell us right now you wouldn't do it. I don't intend to do it.

What about taxes in general? You've said that only as a last resort would you be willing to raise taxes. Tell us what you mean by last resort. How much would you cut out of state aid to education before you felt you'd reached bone and work cutting fat? What, give us a number where you'll start. What Governor Terry Brandstead would propose a tax increase? First of all, I want to say that we're very proud of our educational system in Iowa and that when I came to the legislature, total state aid was only $250 million. This school year, it's up to $648 million. We want to build and improve our educational system. I'm committed to going to 80% funding of the school aid foundation plan. Presently we're at 77%. I feel confident we can meet that as our jobs program goes into place and we put people to work as we do a better job of selling our grain in the world market. And we have farm income going up and this is an agricultural state. We will have the money and the comptroller feels with our, even our modest budget growth for this year, we'll be able to meet our obligation. But let's assume for a minute that with $1.75 corn, you're not going to have that.

My question is, where is that threshold? You said you'll raise taxes as a last resort. Tell us where, what that last resort is. If we have to start making substantial cuts in programs like- What do you mean by substantial? Well, I don't think you can put an exact figure on that and I think it's very unfair to try to pin somebody down to the point of being so inflexible. I think you have to adjust to the circumstances. Governor Ray has been very careful to keep his options open and make the least drastic alternative necessary to meet the needs of our people. And that's exactly the way I intend to manage the state government as governor, not locking myself into an unrealistic approach, but looking at all the options and taking the one that is in the best interest of the citizens of our state. Let's take a look at teacher salaries, local school districts. They're trying to be realistic as they face life on their salaries. There's a shortage of math and science teachers. What about teacher salaries? Is there a level of discontent out there that it's- Well, they're always. Teachers like everyone else would like to see higher wages, but a lot of people today are accepting wage freezes or even cuts in their salaries in order to keep their job.

We in Iowa are increasing our funding for education. The school aid formula next year, the allowable growth will be 6.1%. It'll actually be less than that for a lot of schools. Yes, if your enrollment is declining, it could be less than that, so it might be less, but if you had a stable enrollment district, it could be 6.1%. It's up to the local school board to set the salary levels and negotiate with their employees. I think the state's responsibility is to see that we continue to increase our commitment, as I mentioned, my commitment to go to the 80% funding on the school aid formula. I think it's part of that commitment to see that adequate resources are given to education and that education remains our top priority. Soil conservation is a very important issue and reporters are paid to get specifics from politicians. How much additional money will you spend for state cost share programs in the first fiscal year budget of years? David, it's impossible to say the exact amount of additional money.

I have said that additional money for soil conservation is a top priority with me. We were the first aid in the nation. I'll tell us how much. Well, because we don't know how much revenue we're going to have over the next year yet. We won't know that until we've got the revenue projections in January. At this point, it's impossible to yield a predict to the exact dollar. One thing we do have quantitative is the amount of time we have. It's gone. That's right. Thank you very much, Mr. Branstad, for being our guest this week in Iowa Press. And that wraps up this week's edition. Next week, we'll be back with the Democrats' standard bear, Roxanne Conlon of Des Moines. And we'll remind you, too, that on Tuesday night at 9, we'll examine the races for Congress in Iowa's first and second congressional districts in the third of our special reports on campaign 82. For our panelists today, Dave Jepsen and Pamela Drum, I'm Dean Borg. And thank you for joining us and have a good week. Your funding for this program was provided by a grant from Friends of IPBN.

Thank you.