Not much happened in the Iowa Legislature last week - not just on our issues, but on any issues. The House adjourned on Wednesday afternoon for the week. Apparently the House and Senate are at an impasse on crucial budget items that will need to be worked out by the leaders before work can continue.

That gives us an opportunity to be sure our voice is heard on our priority issues. One of those is our K-12 tobacco-nicotine-free schools language, which we hope will remain in the education reform bill and become law. That is now up to the conference committee negotiating differences between the House and Senate on the bill. We sent out an Action Alert on this last week and have generated 68 e-mails to the 10 members of the conference committee. It is not too late to be heard! If you have not had a chance to respond, please do so now. I would love to see 150 e-mails on this subject. That will make it very hard for conferees to ignore!

Unfortunately things look quite a bit less rosy for adjournment than they did a week ago.  The House and the Senate remain far apart on several big issues and this week did not show many signs of wanting to compromise.

And as always, feel free to contact me directly with any questions or concerns - peggy.huppert@cancer.org.

Pvt. Austin Schwab, an infantryman with B Troop, 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, Fort Lewis, Wash., looks back for instructions while pulling security duty during a combat mission in Didar, southern Afghanistan, April 13. Of Rock Island, Ill., the 20-year-old is deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom since January.

COMBAT OUTPOST KOLK, Afghanistan - Pfc. Austin Schwab woke up cold. He'd spent the majority of the previous day marching through the thick marshes of southern Afghanistan. Later that night, when the platoon in which he serves took over a compound, Schwab spent the majority of the night sleeping on the ground, his rifle next to his side. The early-rising Afghanistan sun woke him. The soldier quickly threw on his protective gear and equipment, and in a matter of seconds, climbed on a ladder toward the compound's roof to provide security over-watch. He is just 20.

While his friends are busying themselves in college with political and international theories about Afghanistan, the Rock Island, Ill., native is living it. While others see Operation Enduring Freedom through the tidbits of information on the evening news, Schwab sees it through his own two eyes.

"I've always wanted to be in the military," said Schwab, who was in elementary school when the first bombs dropped on the insurgents in Afghanistan. "I wanted to join at 18, but I was working and didn't join until I was 20."

War is different through the eyes of a 20-year-old, and especially as an infantryman, Schwab is the prime example. While others wrestle with philosophical questions about the meanings of war and life, Schwab said he is just happy to be in the infantry. What's more, his experiences, despite being harsher than experiences others have endured, made him more disciplined and allowed him to embrace, rather than push away, the experience of war.

"People ask me what it's like being over here, and I tell them that there are just no words for it," he said. "It's a lot more intense than it is back home - being in the middle of a war zone is a lot different than being home in America."

One of those differences, said Schwab, is the freedom and autonomy to do whatever he would like. When stationed at a tiny combat operating outpost without so much as indoor plumbing, hot showers become a luxury for soldiers.

"Hygiene - not being able to shower whenever you want, that's one of the challenges," he said. "And not being able to talk to my family whenever I want. You could go to the MWR and find out the Internet is down or something."

Yet, the lack of Internet service and hot showers are the least of his worries. As an infantryman, Schwab is stationed in one of Afghanistan's most "kinetic" areas - a term soldiers often use to describe the amount of physical threats they face. On any particular day, whether patrolling villages in combat vehicles or on foot, it is unusual for Schwab and the soldiers in his squad to not have contact with the insurgents, he said.

Like many other firsts, Schwab still remembers the first time his squad was shot at. They'd just left the outpost, headed west, when bullets came whizzing by, hitting the dirt around them.

"We just saw dust clouds and heard the cracking of the bullets," he said, recalling the event. "It was our first and only contact that day, but I remember it."

Then, there was the time he was involved in a firefight that lasted nearly two hours.

"It was pretty intense," he said. "It was our first big firefight - I just went through my training, scanned my sector and when they told me to shoot, I took well-placed shots."

In war, there is no time to think, and it's no different for Schwab. In that firefight, for example, he fought back based only on instinct; it was only afterward when they were safely back in the protected confines of the tiny outpost did he start to think about the inherent danger of his actions, Schwab said.

"I just went through my training," he said. "It was only after the firefight that I thought about it.

"My family, they're scared for me," he continued. "But they know I am doing what I love and they think it's really good for me."

The ability to do what he loves while still earning a living from it, said Schwab, is what fuels his affinity for the infantry.

"The money is nice, but I just enjoy doing this," he said. "The infantry is one of the tougher jobs in the Army and when I joined, I told myself I wanted to push myself to the limits. I plan on going to the Rangers after I get back."

Another added benefit to the infantry, is the camaraderie he has experienced, Schwab said.

"One of the things I've learned here is that everyone has their ups and downs," he said. "But in the middle of a firefight, everyone's got your back -it's a different kind of brotherhood.

"I love being in the infantry," he added. "It's exactly what I thought it would be."

Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa today made the following statement on his inquiry of the Federal Communications Commission's handling of the LightSquared wireless project.  Today is the one-year anniversary of Grassley's first letter to the agency on its decision-making regarding the project.

"Exactly one year ago today, I wrote my first letter to the FCC on LightSquared.  At that time, headlines were describing interference concerns between LightSquared and Global Positioning System devices.  LightSquared's primary backer was in the news over having attracted the Securities and Exchange Commission's attention.  I wondered why the FCC had given expedited preliminary approval to a project led by someone under SEC investigation and with seemingly serious interference concerns.  I began seeking the FCC's insight into its decision-making on this project.  The agency turned out to be among the least responsive I've ever come across in 30 years of conducting constitutional oversight of the executive branch of government.  The commission suggested my staff go through the Freedom of Information Act and said it would take two years to get a response.  The commissioner told me the commission responds only to the chairmen of the two House and Senate committees of jurisdiction.  In effect, that leaves 99.6 percent of Congress out of luck if we have questions about the agency's decision-making.

"As I began my investigation, facts came to light that raised more questions about the FCC's actions.  E-mails showed that LightSquared's CEO sought meetings with the White House while mentioning attendance at fundraisers for President Obama.  Then, news reports showed the White House pressured a four-star general to downplay the threat LightSquared posed to GPS.

"I continued to seek the information on the general principle that the public's business ought to be public.  The FCC continued to stonewall, so I placed a hold on two FCC commissioner nominees in an effort to get the information I requested.  Still, the agency stonewalled.

"House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans made a comprehensive document request of the FCC on LightSquared and are giving me access to the documents as the agency provides them.  I appreciate the access.

"At first, the documents were evasively superficial.  The submissions contained thousands of pages of already public information, including news clips.  The FCC played games to inflate its page count, which is not the mark of a responsive agency.  Gradually, the document submissions began to include some substantive information.

"So far, the documents I have seen begin to give some answers about why the FCC gave such fast preliminary approval to LightSquared.  The documents show that rather than being an objective arbiter, the commission appeared to be enthusiastic about the LightSquared project and wanted to see it materialize.  The prospect of a new broadband provider that could challenge current providers was appealing to the FCC, according to the documents.  It's impossible to draw a complete picture of the FCC's considerations in green-lighting LightSquared because the documents available so far do not offer a comprehensive view.  However, it appears the FCC wanted LightSquared to succeed.

"It may be that the FCC was so intrigued by the prospect of a new broadband provider that it overlooked technical concerns or the financial implications if the project's chief investor were to undergo SEC sanctions.  I can't say for sure because I don't have enough information to make a determination.

"However, the documents raise an important question.  Is the FCC a neutral arbiter weighing all public interests in each case, or is it a cheerleader for favored projects?  If it is a cheerleader, which is inappropriate, why was such an obviously flawed project selected?

"The documents I've seen so far raise more questions than I had before.  However, since there is now a process in place to obtain all of the relevant documents from the FCC, I intend to lift my hold on the two FCC nominees.  But my inquiry is not over.  I'm told there are 11,000 more pages of documents from the FCC on LightSquared that will be forthcoming to the House Energy and Commerce Committee.  I look forward to receiving access to those documents.

"The public deserves definitive answers on why the FCC handled LightSquared the way it did.  Ultimately, the agency decided the GPS interference concerns were too great and withdrew LightSquared's waiver.  LightSquared's primary investor continues to receive intense scrutiny from the SEC.  Now, LightSquared might sue the government.  Investment is lost, and future investors might be reluctant to approach the FCC with projects.

"The FCC badly mishandled LightSquared.  Finding out exactly what went wrong is key toward preventing future debacles.  I hope the pending nominees, and the rest of the commission, will use the LightSquared situation as a case study in what not to do.

Washington, D.C. - Congressman Dave Loebsack today released the following statement after the House voted on Republican-led legislation, which the President has already stated he will veto, to try and look as if they are concerned about college accessibility.

"Today's vote is a shining example of how low Republicans will go to further their political games instead of actually accomplishing anything for Iowa families.  Just last week Republicans voted en mass to allow the student loan interest rates to double, and now hide behind a vote on a bill they know is going nowhere.  Iowa families can't afford these games.  Unfortunately, it looks as if Republicans want to push students to the edge, just like they did with the economy. As much as Republicans would like, they can't have their cake and eat it too.

"As someone who has helped craft and pass legislation to expand access to college, it is sickening to watch this unfold.  Congress should not be building more hurdles for young people to get the education and skills they need to thrive, and they should not be making it even harder for Iowa families to afford to send their kids to college.  I personally know what it is like to work hard and rely on financial aid to pay for tuition.  No student should be turned away from attending college because he or she cannot afford it and no student should have to face a Republican-made roadblock, which is exactly what today's vote creates."

Loebsack is a cosponsor of two pieces of legislation, H.R. 4816 and H.R. 3826, which would ensure the increase does not occur.  As a member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, he has also championed numerous pieces of legislation to increase access to higher education, including:

·         College Cost Reduction and Access Act (CCRAA) Loebsack helped craft and pass this legislation, which makes college more affordable and accessible for all Iowans by increasing the maximum Pell Grant scholarship and expanding eligibility;

·         Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, H.R. 3221 Loebsack was a cosponsor of this bill, which will save American taxpayers $61 billion by making the student loan process more efficient.  The bill further expanded the maximum Pell Grant available from $5,550 in 2010 to $5,975 in 2017, granting Iowa students more than $291 million for higher education. This bill was the largest single investment in student aid in America's history, and will make college more accessible, transform the way student loan programs operate and strengthen community colleges.

Loebsack has urged the House Speaker and the Chairman of the Education and the Workforce Committee to move forward a bill that will actually stop the increase.  A copy of the letter can be found here.