I supported and encouraged others to vote for Dave Loebsack in Iowa's 2nd District in 2006. It was my sense then that he would be a better voice for progressive issues and he ran a strong populist campaign. However, in 2008, his record tells me that he is more comfortable to be part of the status quo and not the "change" that is plastered on his campaign signs. He voted for the financial bailout (both the original and the "sweetened" extra-expensive version), has voted for the elongation of the war in Iraq (ALTHOUGH, TO HIS CREDIT WITH A TIMELINE)and is willing to fund to keep it going in Afghanistan. To his credit he has been a constant supporter of 13 separate veteran support bills. Too often he has gone along with the House leadership without carving a niche of independence in voting for the best interests of the district. His views as recorded by Project Vote Smart can be found here.
When Project Vote Smart asked him to "explain in a total of 100 words or less, your top two or three priorities if elected. If they require additional funding for implementation, please explain how you would obtain this funding," his response was
Maybe it is the pragmatism that comes from wanting to have a career in politics or maybe it is that he is waiting for a Democrat to be president before finding his progressive voice. However, I'm not willing to vote for possibility, I did that in 2006.
Meanwhile, I believe the Green Party's Wendy Barth has the most to offer the 2nd District. She is consistently for peace, has some great ideas to make the US more energy independent, and would not have voted for the bailout without the folks on Main Street's concerns not being addressed. I trust her to be consistent in what she tells voters and what she does as a legislator. I feel comfortable in splitting my ticket and supporting both Wendy and Barack Obama.