admin
State Rep. Josh Turek’s attendance record in the Iowa House is the latest campaign slugfest feeding the 2026 Iowa Senate race. A Fox News review of roll-call records found Turek missed roughly 261 votes — nearly 60% of the floor votes during the early months of the legislative session — while collecting about $20,100 in legislative per diem. Republicans and allied groups have rushed to blast the Democratic nominee, and the pings from political ads are only going to get louder.
The numbers that matter
The raw numbers are hard to wave away. The report says Turek was absent for about 261 roll-call votes and took thousands in per diem during that stretch. Some of those absences line up with campaign trips outside Iowa to raise money in Washington and Southern California. Among the missed votes cited are measures tied to veterans funding, rural health and medical licensing, and education standards. At one point he reportedly missed a long string of consecutive votes — a detail Republicans are using to paint a picture of chronic absenteeism.
Campaign pushback and political spin
Turek’s campaign insists the pattern is typical for lawmakers running statewide and points to a record of bipartisan work. That’s a defensible point in theory, but it’s an uphill sell when voters see the per diem checks and fundraising hotel receipts. Rep. Ashley Hinson’s team, meanwhile, notes her near-perfect voting record since 2020 and lists several high-profile votes Turek missed. Expect both campaigns — and outside groups like the NRSC — to crank this into ads and talking points for the stretch run.
Why Iowa voters should care
This isn’t just political theater. Voters deserve to know whether someone seeking the U.S. Senate treats their current job like a priority or like a part-time gig. Collecting taxpayer-funded per diem while missing votes raises legitimate questions about judgment, priorities and transparency. Running a statewide campaign means travel is necessary, but it doesn’t excuse a pattern that looks like putting fundraising ahead of representing constituents. If you’re asking Iowans to entrust you with a Senate seat, you ought to be able to explain when and why you were absent.
What comes next
Call it what it is: a new campaign issue that will define part of the contrast voters see between the candidates. The easy next step is simple: release the House roll-call logs and per-diem records and explain each absence plainly — travel, illness, committee duty, whatever. If Turek can show valid reasons, fine. If not, expect Republicans to keep hammering the absentee label. Either way, this story is a reminder that in a tight Iowa Senate race, accountability matters, and voters will remember who showed up when it counted.
