Report of Recommendations to the Office of Secretary of State, June 30, 2004

State Audit Reports

Report of Recommendations to the State University of Iowa, June 30, 2004

State University Audit Report

How Much “Safety” Is Available under the U.S. Proposal to the WTO?, November 2005

Critics of the U.S. proposal to the World Trade Organization (WTO) made in October 2005 are correct when they argue that adoption of the proposal would significantly reduce available support under the current farm program structure. Using historical prices and yields from 1980 to 2004, we estimate that loan rates would have to drop by 9 percent and target prices would have to drop by 10 percent in order to meet the proposed aggregate Amber Box and Blue Box limits. While this finding should cheer those who think that reform of U.S. farm programs is long overdue, it alarms those who want to maintain a strong safety net for U.S. agriculture. The dilemma of needing to reform farm programs while maintaining a strong safety net could be resolved by redesigning programs so that they target revenue rather than price. Building on a base of 70 percent Green Box income insurance, a program that provides a crop-specific revenue guarantee equal to 98 percent of the product of the current effective target price and expected county yield would fit into the proposed aggregate Amber and Blue Box limits. Payments would be triggered whenever the product of the season-average price and county average yield fell below this 98 percent revenue guarantee. Adding the proposed crop-specific constraints lowers the coverage level to 95 percent. Moving from programs that target price to ones that target revenue would eliminate the rationale for ad hoc disaster payments. Program payments would automatically arrive whenever significant crop losses or economic losses caused by low prices occurred. Also, much of the need for the complicated mechanism (the Standard Reinsurance Agreement) that transfers most risk of the U.S. crop insurance to the federal government would be eliminated because the federal government would directly assume the risk through farm programs. Changing the focus of federal farm programs from price targeting to revenue targeting would not be easy. Farmers have long relied on price supports and the knowledge that crop losses are often adequately covered by heavily subsidized crop insurance or by ad hoc disaster payments. Farmers and their leaders would only be willing to support a change to revenue targeting if they see that the current system is untenable in an era of tight federal budgets and WTO limits.

Report of Recommendations to the State University of Iowa on the Review of Selected General and Application Controls over the University's Human Resources Information System, June 7, 2005-July 29, 2005

Other Audit Reports - Regent Institutions

Report of Recommendations to the Office of Secretary of State, June 30, 2005

State Audit Reports

Report of Recommendation to the Board of Regents, State of Iowa, June 30, 2005

State Audit Reports

Report of Recommendations to the Iowa State University of Science and Technology, June 30, 2005

State University Audit Report

Report on recommendations to the Office of Treasurer of State for the year ended June 30, 2006

Audit report on the Office of Treasurer of State for the year ended June 30, 2006

Report of Recommendations to the State University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2007

Report on the State University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2007

Agriculture and Environment Task Force Report To the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission, August 2008

The Rebuild Iowa Agriculture and Environment Task Force respectfully submits its report to the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission (RIAC) for consideration of the impacts of the tornadoes, storms, high winds, and flooding affecting Iowa’s agriculture sector and environment. The Task Force was required to address very complex and multi-faceted issues. Understanding that there were a broad range of immediate concerns, as well as critical issues that need to be addressed in the future, the Task Force structured its work in two sessions. To better address the issues and priorities of the Task Force, this report categorizes the issues as agriculture, conservation, environment, and livestock.

TIME-21 Funding Analysis A report to the Iowa Legislature, per Section 26, Senate File 2420, 82nd General Assembly

The 82nd General Assembly of the Iowa legislature, in Section 26 of Senate File 2420, required the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) to conduct an analysis of TIME-21 funding. Specifically the legislation requires the following: “The department of transportation shall conduct an analysis of the additional revenues necessary to provide at least two hundred million dollars annually to the TIME-21 fund by FY 2011-2012. The analysis shall include but is not limited to the amount of excise tax levied on motor fuel and adjustments that might be made to various fees collected by the department in order to create an appropriate balance of taxes and fees paid by Iowa drivers and out-of-state drivers. The department shall submit a report to the governor and the general assembly on or before December 31, 2008, regarding its analysis.” As a starting point to this analysis, a reassessment of long-range needs and revenues (including the estimated $200 million most critical annual unmet needs) was made. This was done by assessing changing trends in roadway conditions, revenue and construction costs since the original Study of Iowa’s Current Road Use Tax Funds (RUTF) and Future Road Maintenance and Construction Needs was completed December 2006.

TIME-21 Funding Analysis A report to the Iowa Legislature, per Section 26, Senate File 2420, 82nd General Assembly

The 82nd General Assembly of the Iowa legislature, in Section 26 of Senate File 2420, required the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) to conduct an analysis of TIME-21 funding. Specifically the legislation requires the following: “The department of transportation shall conduct an analysis of the additional revenues necessary to provide at least two hundred million dollars annually to the TIME-21 fund by FY 2011-2012. The analysis shall include but is not limited to the amount of excise tax levied on motor fuel and adjustments that might be made to various fees collected by the department in order to create an appropriate balance of taxes and fees paid by Iowa drivers and out-of-state drivers. The department shall submit a report to the governor and the general assembly on or before December 31, 2008, regarding its analysis.” As a starting point to this analysis, a reassessment of long-range needs and revenues (including the estimated $200 million most critical annual unmet needs) was made. This was done by assessing changing trends in roadway conditions, revenue and construction costs since the original Study of Iowa’s Current Road Use Tax Funds (RUTF) and Future Road Maintenance and Construction Needs was completed December 2006.

Report of Recommendations to the State University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2008

Report on the State University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2008