The Democratic National Committee has approached my office twice in the last four years, requesting any evidence of wrongdoing by Iowa’s Republican governor, Kim Reynolds. However, we steadfastly refused to provide them with any information whatsoever.
Iowa law mandates that the Auditor’s Office maintains the confidentiality of misconduct allegations and any information acquired during an audit. This protection applies irrespective of the intentions behind the request, whether it is to expose the wrongdoer or to identify the informant who provided the tip.
Confidentiality was deemed paramount by the individuals responsible for enacting this legislation. In fact, the Iowa Code explicitly states that employees of the Auditor’s Office can be terminated for violating this principle. We must reassure these informants, some of whom may be hesitant to come forward against influential entities, that we will safeguard their anonymity. By doing so, we create an environment where they can provide valuable information without the fear of facing any consequences.
I was incredibly frustrated when the Auditor’s Office faced a lawsuit for simply fulfilling our duty to protect confidential records and not betray potential whistleblowers. This legal action was a result of an open records request made by a conservative individual who had previously asserted that if I were elected, I would be legally obligated to be impeached. In response to this request, we followed our standard procedure of disclosing the records we were able to while withholding those protected by the law.
The initial ruling by the first judge determined that we had complied with the law. However, upon appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court ordered a retrial, citing insufficient evidence to reach a decision. The case was sent back to the lower court for further proceedings. It is important to note that the Supreme Court did not find us guilty of breaking the law. Unfortunately, the GOP took advantage of this situation, issuing a news release falsely claiming our wrongdoing and making a spectacle of it in front of the media. Regrettably, the media fell for their deception. We are grateful for the corrections issued by two Iowa media entities. Nevertheless, in today’s interconnected world, misinformation can quickly spread while the truth struggles to catch up.
There is another aspect to the suit that needs to be considered. It revolves around the question of whether or not we should have handed over an email that was sent from a private account. The email in question discussed information that was already publicly available and was already in the possession of the person who initiated the lawsuit. One might argue that it seems rather unnecessary to file a lawsuit simply to obtain a copy of something that is already in your possession. However, it’s important to note that certain lawsuits are driven by political motivations.
We will soon present our argument in another court to explain why it was necessary for us to withhold those records, including the emails from our office and the accusations against the governor, in accordance with the law. Additionally, I will continue my efforts to safeguard the rights of whistleblowers. Furthermore, because the truth is not afraid of scrutiny, I will be hosting a town hall event in your community in the upcoming months. You can find the dates, times, and locations of all 100 town halls on our website. Feel free to attend and share your thoughts, whether they are complimentary, critical, or involve providing a confidential tip. If you have reached this point, you can trust us to keep any information you share confidential.
