Do parents have a right to control the upbringing of their children, especially when it comes to what their children should be exposed to in terms of sexual practices and intimate relationships?

That question goes to the heart of the battle being played out in school districts and courts across America right now over parental rights and whether parents essentially forfeit those rights when they send their children to a public school. On one side of the debate are those who believe, as the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, that "the child is not the mere creature of the state" and that the right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children is a fundamental liberty interest protected by the U.S. Constitution. On the other side are government officials who not only believe, as the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Fields V. Palmdale School District PSD (2005), that "[s]chools cannot be expected to accommodate the personal, moral, or religious concerns of every parent," but go so far as to insist that parents' rights do "not extend beyond the threshold of the school door."

A recent incident in Fitchburg, Massachusetts, clearly illustrates this growing tension over whether young people, especially those in the public schools, are wards of the state, to do with as government officials deem appropriate, in defiance of the children's constitutional rights and those of their parents. On two separate occasions this year, students at Memorial Middle School in Fitchburg were administered surveys at school asking overtly intimate and sexually suggestive questions without their parents' knowledge or consent. Students were required to complete the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) at school, a survey that asks questions such as "Have you ever tried to kill yourself?", "Have you ever sniffed glue, or breathed the contents of spray cans, or inhaled any paints?", and "With how many people have you had sexual intercourse?" Older students were also given the Youth Program Survey, which asks true/false questions about a student's beliefs about contraception ("I feel comfortable talking with any partner I have about using a condom") and sexual activity ("I have had oral sex at some point in my life").

With the economy the way it is, just about every state in the country is frantically scrambling to keep its local corporations from leaving or attracting new jobs by doling out huge government incentives.

Illinois, of course, is a special case, which means it'll probably cost us lots more to keep and attract jobs than just about any other state.

Our years-long political civil war between former Governor Rod Blagojevich and House Speaker Mike Madigan during the worst international economic crisis since the Great Depression saddled the state with migraines for years to come. No problems were solved or even addressed while everything was collapsing around them during their fight to the death. By the time Blagojevich was finally arrested, impeached, and removed from office, the state found itself with a $9-billion hole in its budget.

Every four years, we citizens of Iowa must endure a bevy of presidential hopefuls presenting tax proposals. These proposals have a few things in common: (1) They're long, complex, and full of details; (2) Pundits attack the details; (3) Iowa voters don't read the details; and (4) They never become law as written.

Perhaps this cycle will be different. Perhaps, rather than long and complex proposals, the candidates will simply articulate their fundamental beliefs of what a tax policy should be. Then if elected, these principles can be the foundation on which the tax code is written.

Will this happen? It's doubtful, but in a triumph of hope over experience, let me offer the following five tax-policy principles as a guide.

The Iowa House on Tuesday night voted 58-40 along party lines for a sweeping property-tax-relief plan that could cost as much as $1 billion, despite repeated warnings from Democrats that the bill would give tax breaks to businesses while increasing taxes for Iowa homeowners and farmers.

"Do you really believe we should raise taxes on our parents, our children, our farmers in order to give a 40-percent tax cut to Wal-Mart?" asked state Representative Jerry Kearns, D-Keokuk, who also is a staff representative for the United Steelworkers Union. "I don't believe so."

Senate File 522, as approved by the House, includes a rollback on commercial and industrial property taxes from 100 percent to 60 percent of valuation over five years. To make up the lost revenue, the state eventually would provide $250 million a year to local governments. The bill limits residential and agricultural property-tax increases to 2 percent, rather than the current 4 percent. It also increases state aid to schools at a cost of up to $555 million by Fiscal Year 2019.

Rahm EmanuelRahm Emanuel will be sworn in as Chicago's new mayor on May 16, just 15 days before the end of the state legislative session. So while Emanuel has more than enough on his plate dealing with the first Chicago mayoral transition in 22 years, he and his team appear well aware that they will have precious few days to get what they want out of the Statehouse after he's inaugurated.

Emanuel's transition team hired a Statehouse emissary several weeks ago. They're not calling him a "lobbyist," however. He's more of an "observer," they say. And they decided not to call attention to themselves by choosing any of the well-known, Chicago-connected contract lobbyists in town. Instead, they hired Mike Ruemmler, who ran Emanuel's campaign advance team. Born and raised in southern Illinois' Mt. Vernon, Ruemmler is not your typical city lobbyist. Ruemmler ran a campaign for state Senator Michael Frerichs, so he has some Statehouse connections.

Emanuel has tried hard not to step on Mayor Daley's toes, using the "one mayor at a time" phrase over and over. While that philosophy has extended to Springfield, it doesn't mean Emanuel is completely uninvolved. He sat down with House Speaker Michael Madigan, Senate President John Cullerton, and Senator Kimberly Lightford before the final school-reform deal was made. His staff also worked on behalf of Lightford's bill, and Emanuel has since pledged to make sure the House passes it.

The 2011 session of the Iowa legislature will go on for weeks if not months, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal said Thursday.

"This is going to take a while," said Gronstal (D-Council Bluffs).

A budget agreement between Republican Governor Terry Branstad, the Republican-controlled House, and the Democrat-led Senate is needed by June 30, the end of the fiscal year, to avert a government shutdown. House Speaker Kraig Paulsen predicted that an agreement would be reached by then.

"House Republicans are not going to let government shut down," said Paulsen (R-Hiawatha). "I think that would be unacceptable."

This year's situation is similar to one in 1992, when Branstad, who also was governor at that time, and the Democrat-controlled legislature were also deadlocked on the state budget and tax policy. A compromise was eventually reached on June 25, in a second special session.

In two distinct moves toward adjournment of the Iowa legislature despite a lack of agreement, Statehouse Republicans on Tuesday decided upon the size of the budget pie while the Democratic-led Senate pushed ahead with what's usually the final bill of the year before adjourning for the week.

"This starts our movement to hopefully adjourn the session," said Senate Appropriations Chair Bob Dvorsky (D-Coralville). "We don't have any more bills to do anything with."

Iowa's state general-fund budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1 will be less than $6 billion, according to an agreement reached Tuesday by Republicans in the Iowa House and Senate and Governor Terry Branstad.

The move represents one step toward agreement and eventual adjournment of the 2011 legislative session. However, no Democrats were at the table in determining the size of the budget pie, and they control the Iowa Senate.

Following Jeff Terronez's resignation as Rock Island County state's attorney and his guilty plea last week, I was waiting for the Quad Cities' daily newspapers to forcefully and directly raise a simple question: Why didn't he resign sooner?

More relevant at this point: Why didn't the county's Democratic leaders strongly encourage his resignation long before he agreed to a plea deal?

Alas, the closest the newspapers got was the Quad-City Times' April 27 editorial: "Terronez ... has decimated the credibility of his office, his former colleagues, and every Democrat who stood by silently as this crime was covered up for at least six months. That's how long Terronez dodged specific questions from us and others about this crime. ... If, as Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan claimed, police found only enough to charge him with providing the alcohol [to a minor], Terronez could have cleared that up with an honest answer in October."

But the "honest answer" the Times said Terronez should have provided is far different from his resignation. And both the Times and Rock Island Argus/Moline Dispatch seem more concerned with getting full details of the Illinois State Police investigation.

As if it isn't complicated enough to pass a workers-compensation reform bill - what with unions, trial lawyers, and the medical community so far allied together against major changes - there's also a noticeable schism within the business lobby about what to do and how far to go.

This schism isn't new. In one way or another, the major business groups compete against each other for members and, therefore, tend to tout themselves as the true leaders over the others. That sometimes-friendly, sometimes-not rivalry intensified a bit since the Democrats won complete power in 2002.

Skies above Iowa, north of Waterloo, March 1, 2011.

Take a second look the next time you see jet-streams way up in the atmosphere. Are they lingering for a long time? Do you see a pattern or grids forming? These are not commercial airlines creating these trails in the sky.

Geo-engineering programs that claim to prevent global warming by spraying toxins into our atmosphere are commonly referred to as "chemtrails." Most people assume the white, fluffy trails being emitted from some jets as they fly across the sky are condensation trails from exhaust, or "contrails." But common sense informs us that contrails do not occur in crisscross grids across the sky, remain overhead long after the plane(s) have left the sky, or continue to expand throughout the day, culminating in a veil of fog that eventually falls to the earth.

Chemtrails have become a common occurrence both nationwide and around the world, delivering massive doses of toxic materials over not just our farmlands and homesteads but also over some of the planet's most pristine environments, including Mount Shasta in California and remote areas of the Hawaiian islands.

Pages