Don't Let Us Be Sick

 The late songwriter, Warren Zevon was on my mind yesterday, as I dreaded what I expected to be the darkest underbelly of politics on display in the CNN 'presidential' debate. Zevon wrote "Don't let us get sick, don't let us get old. Don't let us get stupid, all right? Just make us be brave and make us play nice and let us be together tonight." Anyone watching the debacle would be amazed that the usually curmudgeonly Zevon would be seen as the optimist in this unsettling setting. What I saw were two old men baring their teeth when this country likely needed them both to jointly agree to step aside due to apparent incapacitation and legal complications. Their joint belligerence and distaste toward each other would have been better served in a wrestling cage than as two trying to convince a skeptical nation that we would be served well by either of them. Add to it the nonsensical lies and self-serving rambling talking points; no one can say that it was time well spent.

I am done trying to defend to others that either party has the best interest of We the People in mind when they decide to cast their lot with these two old hickory nuts. Democracy is failing us at this moment if we can't stop this train from rolling into the station. I hope that clear-headed people on all sides are able to recognize the craziness of the moment and act on that information. Rage against the machine! Insist that the party conventions open themselves up to floor votes and put forward candidates that are reasonable or at least coherent. We have no other choice, if we hope to have a functioning and actually democratic country.

We can argue the relative merits of voting for the party over the candidate, but in the end, one of these men would be the leader and face of this country for the next four years and we would either be sweeping up after one of them or swept up in a net by one of them. Maybe we have a national COVID brain fog or something, but there is no healthy scenario that I can see if either Biden or especially Trump are sworn in again. As Zevon wrote, "I thought of my friends and the troubles they've had to keep me from thinking of mine." It is time to think about our friends. Please, don't let us be sick.

Welcome to Sh#tSt#rm V.2024

 

I seldom look back at the columns I've written before (and judging by the editing, maybe I should) but the promised sh#tst#rm happened in 2023 and it was worse than imagined. So, I told you so. But what will likely happen is a consolidation of power that will make any progressive person's head swim. Already the governor is rejecting federal programs that, get this, help living, breathing children so that they can be poorly served by underfunded state-run programs. Add the latest mass shooting in Perry and the business-as-usual approach of offering more support to the police than the victims (in addition to the requisite "thoughts and prayers") and the zero chance that anything substantive will happen to change the gun laws to address the fact that kids are dying at the hands of other kids who get guns at home (cue the cries for "parental rights"). Then add an election year and the shoving of an already unpopular agenda down the throats of all Iowans who reject much of what is being offered. For instance more tax cuts despite the need to pump money into childcare support, education, and inspection services for eldercare centers.

Democrats are pointing their fingers in the right direction but voters have limited options for change to actually occur. So many uncontested races that assure that conservative and decidedly more MAGA-interested senators and representatives will be ruling the roost for the foreseeable future. One party rule is never a good thing. Certainly, it hasn't helped in any country (Russia) or state (Alabama) to improve the lives of the average citizen. 

The Sh#$storm To Come

 2022 set another low bar year for the state of politics in Iowa. Not only were Democrats pushed further out of power in the state of Iowa, we managed to becoming unceremoniously dumped by Democrats for our formerly much vaunted 1st in the nation caucus status. It has been argued for years that caucuses are as undemocratic a process as has ever been invented, but it still sucks when it is your team pulling the plug. This means that Republicans will continue to have their caucuses while the Democrats figure out how to stop the hemorrhaging on a statewide level.  Meanwhile Republicans in this state are being looked at as how a party should be run with deep pocket out-of-state corporate and cultural causes running our state's legislative processes.

Fun times to be in Iowan, that's for sure, Hoss. In 2023, we can look forward to Republicans draining more money away from social safety net items in favor of depleting counties tax bases and to skim public education monies to fund charter schools and private/religious schools. Along the way, they will likely make it more unfriendly to be a member of the LGBTQA community and may take a stab at defining marriage in Iowa to be between a man and a woman while simultaneously enforces the most draconian abortion laws that can be legislated and defended in the courts. Add to this pro-ethanol legislation that will further decimate our already pathetic waterways, more handouts to agricultural adjacent business enterprises, and anti-labor legislation to keep our labor pool under-valued. Then, look forward as more investments are made in technical education and higher education looks for additional belt-tightening by letting faculty positions go and increasing adjunct professors while reducing research roles that don't pay for themselves.

With our re-elected governor gunning for a seat at the national table, you can be sure that immigration policy will be talked about while simultaneously ignoring the workforce that makes Big Ag in Iowa grow. There will be the rancorous cries of how Joe Biden is the chief cause of inflation and why Iowans can't have nice things. In other words, look out for the sh#$storm that will be rolling this way after the beginning of the new year. 

As for Democrats, you will have the opportunity to take a deep look inside and understand what is possible to do to move the dial in this state and what is not. The stranglehold that Big Ag has on this state is not to be under-estimated. A new mantra may have to be WWFBD? What Would the Farm Bureau Do? So far they have figured out a way to make farmland out of reach for the next generation of independent farmers, they have made the DNR as impotent a state agency as possible and have brain-washed a great number of rural Iowans that Republicans are the only party to vote for. And let's face it, they will run the legislature from now until doomsday unless they are seriously out of step in Iowa's mostly rural counties.

Democrats will need to recognize that unless our candidate pool gets better and the bench gets built up, we are going to be hard-pressed to keep or gain statewide offices. In this case, I want to point at the example of Rob Sand as a way forward. He showed that you can be a watchdog for Iowan's interests and keep your job. Tom Miller, a AG that has done more good for Iowan's was kicked to the curb because he was painted as being out of step with the conservative social agenda. The governor wanted her own AG and, guess what, she got her wish. It is the job of Democrats to show why this is a terrible thing for Iowans.

The GOPandemic that was ushered in November will be hard at work driving their agenda. It will be a difficult two-years, but it could also be the best two years Iowa Democrats have had in a while, if the sh#$storm is as bad as I suspect it will be. Iowans, we've had tornados, windstorms, polar vortices, and even a Derecho, but the 2023 sh#$storm is heading our way and it will leave a CAFO-like mess in its wake.

Yes, Things Suck But...

 Things do suck and they probably will continue to do so. Now, what are we going to do about it when people are telling you the real problems aren't the ones you face daily? For instance, when ads on TV tell you that left- or right-wing agendas are going to ruin "our democracy" what do you even do with that information? Our democracy is already ruined by those gatekeepers of government who depend on corporate interests to be elected and re-elected, to be recommended to judgeships, and to be named to important decision-making commissions. It is ruined by underfunding or undermining government protections of people and the environment. It is ruined by nationalism over globalism. So yes, things do suck, but not for the reasons that campaign ads that we are being drowned in say they do. Because mostly, they don't have much to do with the things we worry about on a daily basis.

A big reason that they suck is we no longer vote solely for issues that affect us, but for the perception that one party or person is the only true protector of our way of life. We are consumer tribalists. That is we are predisposed to thinking that one party or person is cool and the other is not. We are being sold imagery (homespun images of farms, flannel, and family or shady images of scary-looking people with bleak voice-overs telling us how they threaten our existence) and framed issues with talking points that are focus-grouped in a way that soon enough we repeat them aloud as if they were our own ideas.

When people say we are sheeple, they may not be wrong (though they may also be sheeple for repeating it because they heard it someplace on the internet). And maybe if we would embrace our sheeple-ness, we could do better. Sheep hang together, they frolic, and yes, they stray (but can be brought back into the fold with proper coaxing). We want to believe we are individualists because you guessed it, that has been the message we have gotten in choosing blue jeans, as well as what our history books mostly taught us. Sheep are social beings and so are we. I am pretty sure sheep don't do everything in lockstep and we don't have to either. Nonetheless, we do have to decide to stop the suck.

If things suck, it is because we are overwhelmed by the enormity of the problems we face. Who wants to figure out what to do about the overcrowding of the planet, the neverending diaspora of people, the lack of drinkable water, the escalating planetary temperatures, the limited arable land, the constant warring, etc. when we can boil elections down to how bad candidate a is and how great candidate b is at defending our freedoms? We have been told that freedom is the most important thing we can fight for, but not how awesome the responsibility of what we do with that freedom can be. We auction off the future of our offspring for the promise of the quick fix of the moment and somehow think that is the best use of our freedom?

Maybe we just suck? We suck because we want others to fix things for us or leave it to us to fix them ourselves. We suck because if it takes a village, someone has to want to build the village (and make sure everyone has a hut). We suck because we listen to the fearmongering voices and think, "hmm, maybe I am superior than the person who will cancel out my vote." We suck because we pretend that others are the cause of why things suck when it is actually a tautology of sucking. We suck because we suck.

But we don't have to suck. We do have to hold those we elect accountable for doing fewer things that suck for us all. We do have to vote, even when it sucks to do so. We do have to call bullshit when we see it, including on people who are choosing to be a posse that stops us from exercising our important freedoms (like voting and speaking up at public forums). We can actually research issues and be informed about what we are voting for or against. We can ask to be on commissions, run for school boards, and volunteer at polls. We don't have to believe in the inherent good or bad of people, we do have to act on our own hopes. At the end of the day, if things suck, it is because we allowed the suck to win. And nothing will ever suck harder than that.

The Big Lie Is Not Election Fraud

There is an old joke: How do you know a politician is lying to you? The answer: Their lips are moving. In Iowa, the Republican party has been on a "Freedom Tour" featuring the governor and her potential allies for attorney general, secretary of state, treasurer, and auditor. They showed up for a visit by none other than Doanld Trump who saidmechoing Kim Reynold's campaign ad, "The Iowa way of life is under siege."  Under siege from what, you may ask? Certainly Trump was not terribly concerned when the Capitol was really under siege, but how the crowd in Sioux City reacted was according to script. They accepted this lie as gospel and cheered him and later Reynolds, Grassley and others on.

But ask yourself this question, are you any more free now than you were four years ago in Iowa? The answer is likely no, particularly if you are an employee of a business or organization that was happy for you to work from home during the pandemic, but now requires you back on-site (even though productivity increased), a school teacher trying to do your job but facing mobs who demand schools curriculum to be "inclusive" of right-winged propaganda and cruel to non-binary conforming kids, or a woman wanting to exercise your reproductive rights with very few exceptions or trying to access services for child care when there is a drastic shortage of options, or a recent graduate saddled with debt and with a degree that was limited due to COVID protocols. 

It is unlikely that the Republicans will be able to push their agenda far in Washington, DC (though not through a lack of trying and likely to gum the works to make the case that Joe Biden isn't fit to lead because they will create distractions and posture about things that Biden would likely veto if he is the last line of defense) and that is precisely why voting in this mid-term election is so important on a local and state level. State legislatures like here in Iowa are likely to pass more legislation that constricts women's reproductive rights, continues to pull public funds away from public education and limit the scope of educational curriculums and supports, and continues to cut taxes and simultaneously making funding for state-supported social services including public health, mental health, child care, and alternatives to mandatory sentencing even more limited. In Iowa's case because of budget surpluses, there is no reason to rob Peter while simultaneously starving Paul, but it will likely happen because they are determined to showcase how awful government can be when you cave to special interests and stop it from doing the one basic thing government is supposed to do, support the people who need a leg up.

The majority of Republican leaders whose names aren't Cheney or Kinzinger, have told us that they are the thin red line between elections being fair and square, but what seems to be true is that they are just sour and sore losers. Even when their own tell them that elections have not been rigged, they "believe" they are and have right-winged disciples foment dissent. Their message seems to be we'll stop the step by stealing rights. In Iowa, you could vote early and be pretty sure your vote would be counted. Now, if you have a piece of handwritten information wrong on your early voting packet, your vote could be nullified. 

No, the big lie is that Republicans are going to make you freer by their policies that hurt women, blue and white collar workers, parents, and lower-income individuals (many of whom are of the white, Christian, evangelicals that are their own true-believing base). They are dogging Joe Biden because he has worked hard to provide opportunities to more Americans than his predecessors and during a time when the global supply chain is playing catch up due to unleashed demand post-Covid and with corporate interests raking in massive profits, especially those in the gas/oil industry. I get it. Whoever has the wheel is always faulted for whatever people are worried about in the moment. The difference here is that Republicans are not offering better ideas, just mean-spirited critique.

In Iowa, our current governor is counting on a landslide victory so that she may run the table and set herself up for future political mountain climbing. She hopes to have an Attorney General to due her bidding in suing the federal government over policies that she does not agree, she hopes to have a auditor who will look the other way while she uses state and federal funds at her personal discretion, and have a secretary of state who will continue to look for measures that make voting more difficult and support the party. The biggest lie of all is that any of this is a good idea. Iowa that would be in the control of only one party can look to places like Kansas to see how that experiment went.  Thankfully, even Kansas saw the error of its way and has surprised the nation in a good way recently.

Big lies are easy enough to pull off for a minute, but it takes a commitment from voters to reverse course. For the sake of Iowa, I hope that voters are committed to staunch the bleeding.

Iowa Attorney General Race: Why it Matters

 Iowans will have a decision on November 8th, stick with 10-term-serving Democrat Tom Miller as Attorney General or give Kim Reynolds her own AG by electing Republican Brenna Bird. Tom Miller has been a thorn in the side of Iowa governors, Branstad and Reynolds, by not supporting their politically-motivated initiatives. However, he has been effective in serving Iowans by accomplishing the following:

Miller led the roughly three-year-long multi-state negotiations in the effort to settle with several U.S. banks over alleged abuses and faulty documentation used in the seizure of homes since the crisis began in 2008. The deal was expected to give up to $40 billion to struggling homeowners, and an estimated "1 million U.S. homeowners who were "underwater" on their mortgages.

His office has helped hundreds of thousands of Iowans with complaints about wide-ranging topics, including "improper debt collection practices, telemarketing fraud and abuse, charity fraud, predatory lending, mortgage, and vehicle complaints.  His office's undercover telephone lines have helped reduce telemarketing crimes that cheat older Iowans and people all over the nation."  

He has also successfully taken on the tobacco industry and through the courts has caused them to pay billions in settlements across multiple states. He continues to work to reduce youth tobacco addiction.

Miller has also established "the nation’s first-ever farm division in an attorney general’s office". Since then, the division has had success in cases against agricultural chemical companies and has "consistently defended farmers against big agricultural companies," according to the Iowa Attorney General's website.

Miller also has "taken a lead in holding accountable the drug companies and others who contributed to the opioid crisis... will work to challenge corporate mergers that would potentially harm Iowa consumers and farmers and... looking into concentration in the fertilizer industry, which has led to high prices for farmers."

Further, Miller issued a report citing "overwhelming" incidents of abuse and "extensive" cover-up that spanned decades in detailing 50 complaints his office received about allegations of sexual impropriety by Catholic clergy, non-clergy or spiritual leaders — including 17 victims who had not previously come forward to report abuse to authorities.

Finally, Miller is a pro-choice and called the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade "a terrible mistake." He said, "I believe that women should essentially make this choice," he said. "That they should have the freedom from government intervention to make this decision with their family, if necessary, and, of course, with a doctor." Miller declined to defend the "fetal heartbeat" law, calling it "far, far too restrictive on women."

 In the wake of a measure passed in 2019 by the Republican-led Iowa Legislature that would have limited the attorney general’s powers to go after Trump administration policies, Miller and GOP Gov. Kim Reynolds agreed he would seek her permission before joining any multistate lawsuits. Under that agreement, she vetoed the bill. The Associated Press reported last year that Reynolds had subsequently denied two-thirds of Miller’s requests.

Miller said the current system works for choosing judges, but he opposes the Republican-backed law that gave the governor more power in choosing people to serve on the state judicial nominating commission.

Contrasting Miller with Brenna Bird, who is the current Guthrie County Attorney, Guthrie county has a population of 10,623 as of the 2020 census) was elected in 2018 and is president-elect of the Iowa County Attorneys Association. She previously worked for former Gov. Terry Branstad and former Congressman Steve King. She has been on record that she "would back our law enforcement, hold the Biden administration accountable and seek justice for victims of crimes." 

She is on record for supporting the 6-week abortion ban saying she would have defended a 2018 Iowa law that would ban most abortions as early as six weeks into pregnancy. “I’m 100 percent pro-life, and it will be my job as attorney general to defend the law that the legislature would pass,” Bird said. She has declined to say what kinds of abortion restrictions she might recommend to lawmakers.

Bird also has said she would like to "Give Biden the Bird" and sue the president over COVID requirements, water quality regulations and U.S.-Mexico border policies, key issues for Governor Reynolds who has potential aspirations for higher office and has been speculated as a potential GOP Vice-President nominee.

Bird's willingness to walk lock-step with the Governor has won her a ringing endorsement by Reynolds, but also of Donald Trump, though she accepts the results of the 2020 election, she said, “I do believe that Joe Biden is our president, I have a lot of concerns, though, about election integrity” while simultaneously praising Iowa's election laws.

Latest polling data shows Miller with a 16% lead over Bird, but polling for down ticket races is notoriously limited. If you are an Iowan who really believes our state motto, "Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain," it is clear that there are important differences between these to candidates and keeping Tom Miller as AG should be at the top of your ticket.

Let Us Count How Many Ways We Could Be Screwed By Apathy

 It is no secret that the Republicans hold the upper hand in this election cycle. Voters are locked into two camps and the edge usually goes to the party banging on the weaknesses of the economy. Worldwide, inflation is on the upswing, and the fact that people with idled money to burn pushed the supply chain to the edge of breaking as the pandemic began to subside. This has caused inflation to increase and may take a while longer to go down. Add to that record profits for oil companies while the financial markets act like a rickety rollercoaster at an amusement park. Yet the narrative the Republicans are going with is that it is Joe Biden's fault because he put environmental regulations back into place, hasn't opened up more. public lands to oil leases. Never mind that Biden has dipped into the strategic oil supply twice to offer some relief.  They do not accept any blame for not voting to support infrastructure and job initiatives that are putting Americans in a better financial place and making it easier for new businesses to have needed roads, broadband, and support for workers. However, they do show up for the ribbon-cutting ceremonies and take credit both at the national and state levels.

Republicans want you to worry about all the fentanyl that is being stopped at the border, all the immigrants who are being stopped by the border patrol. And they are being successful because of fear tactics that are packaged up and wrapped in a nationalistic wrapper. They have found the pain points for many people and are looking to reap their rewards. 

In the meantime, they have made it harder through state efforts for voters to vote and for those votes to be counted without political interference. Certainly, the actions in states like Arizona where camo-clad, armed goons stand watch over ballot drop boxes with the blessing of the courts is a model that we can look forward to others emulating and add to the chaos that makes people believe their vote will not count.

Meanwhile, Democrats are raising the very real specter that women's reproductive rights will be at significant danger should the House and Senate flip. Regardless of the national agenda, the Republican leadership at the state level are already in the catbird seat to push this agenda through at the state level. In state's like Iowa, they are also pushing for an adrenalized version of the 2nd Amendment to be passed which will be tested in federal court due to the vague idea of "strict scrutiny" which basically makes any passed pro-gun legislation dare I say it, bulletproof. 

Then add the continual carving of taxes such that education, medical and mental health care are going to suffer and the social safety net will continue to shred. The public/private partnerships will endanger Social Security and likely Medicare and Medicaid. Drug prices will continue to increase for the most vulnerable. It is truly sad to think that the richest nation on earth would shortchange its younger and older generations on the tools they need to live productive lives.

Finally, there is foreign policy. Republicans have already said that Ukraine will not be able to depend on them to help them stave off Russia's onslaught. They will continue to undermine Biden's diplomatic strategies and sow seeds of dissent through House hearings on everything from Hunter Biden to the January 6th Committee. 

Let there be no mistake, there is a power struggle going on for our representative democracy and conservatives are pushing hard at the levers of control to make us more fearful, less democratic, and more likely to pit us against each other. 

The only way to stop this from happening is through our efforts at the polls and in the halls of power. People have got to not be cynical about their vote. It matters. If you want the economy to be better, as we all do, recognize that it is not the fault of a person or party, it is a result of coming through a really unusual period where demand was tamped down due to a global pandemic and market players are trying to make up for lost ground. This will pass, but giving power back to the very people who put us in the unenviable position we are in now is like pouring gasoline on a fire.

You have a voice in all this. In my congressional district in 2020, the House seat was won by 6 measly votes. Can you imagine what a difference it will make if turnout exceeds expectations and the vote is clear and unquestionable? As it stands, it is possible that parts of this country will go into a complete meltdown if there are numerous recounts and extended delays to the tallies. And do you think your staying home is going to make this better?

They say that peace is harder to maintain in places where people doubt they have a legitimate voice. The vote with all of its limitations is still a far better way to exist as a nation than giving in to might makes right thinking. We owe it to each other to fight our battles through the ballot box and I hope you will do your part by voting by or on November 8th.

Time to Put Chuck Grassley Out to Pasture

 Charles Grassley has been in politics only slightly less than I've been alive and I am sixty-four years old. Can you imagine a person doing the same thing year in and year out "representing" your interests? I cannot. In truth, Chuck Grassley has not represented the things I care the most about since I've lived in Iowa. He is pro-Big Ag/monoagriculture, and I am pro-small farm/diversity in crops. He is anti-regulatory and I am for reasonable regulation. He is pro-abortion, and I am pro-choice. He is Team Red, and I am Team Blue-Green. But these are not the primary reason I think it is his time to go into forced retirement. I feel his opponent is formidable this time and worthy of replacing him as he offers new ideas and, yet carries the concerns of our state with him.

Mike Franken checks a lot of boxes for me in terms of his stances on issues, but he also checks the most important box that any politician can check, he is authentic and he is likely to do what he says and say what he means. Not perfectly and not in all cases, I mean we are talking about politics where deals with the devil are made to get what you can. But when you consider Charles Grassley was famously known to be that independently-minded cuss, how far has he moved away from being that Chuck? Consider especially when he was in a position to dictate how things like Supreme

Court nominees would be vetted and how the budget would be appropriated or how taxes would work. In the past, he was unafraid to buck the party line, but under Trump (and since) he has toed it carefully.

Iowans are pragmatic people, they tend to give deference to household names like Chuck Grassley. However, when you consider the values that Mike Franken holds, which are deeply Iowan, it is understandable that voters would see this as a time to choose to put Grassley out to pasture on his 750-acre heritage farm in New Hartford. Franken, who grew up in rural Iowa, served his country in the Navy and, unlike, Grassley, chose to return to Iowa to continue his service as Iowa's next senator. Chuck Grassley loves to tout his 99 county forays but mostly holds them in places not open to the public he serves. Mike Franken will talk to anyone, anywhere. We want a senator who operates like Grassley used to, Mike Franken is an excellent choice for heir apparent.

Get It or Getting It

 

Today, President Biden announced a student loan program that will help ameliorate the student loan debt of individuals earning less than $125,000 or married couples earning a maximum of $250,000 which would shave $10,000 for private student loans and up to $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients. Pretty good news, but already the Republicans are  crying "unfair." You see when it comes to the Get and the Get Nots, both parties chose their dance partners carefully. Farmers get direct farm payments to the tune of $37 billion dollars a year (in 2020) while lower and middle-class families with student loans will save $30 billion a year over a ten-year period. So depending on who you are, it could seem 100% unfair if you are not farming or paying back college loans.

If you are wondering how much taxpayers spend to support so-called corporate welfare, the conservative Hoover Institute says it is about $100 billion a year. I can hear you say "I'm not a corporation, that's not fair!" How much do we spend on people's welfare programs? For 2021, it was a little over a trillion dollars. Fun fact, there are a lot more people than corporations, literally millions upon millions more. But, did you know that federal welfare is the same percentage (15%) as the amount spent on national defense? This is to say that the military gets as much as your Aunt Fanny. I haven't had a need for MRAP, but on occasion, yes I have needed supplemental food or unemployment insurance.

So, you have to ask who makes it possible for Peter to pay Paul? Democrats and Republicans whom we elect have their favorite "charities". And if you believe you are being gotten more than getting, you probably are. We all are, it is the product of democratic processes and the lobbies that lean it in their direction. We all are in the shape that old-time actor Danny Kaye describes in the movie 'White Christmas': "When what's left of you gets around to what's left to be gotten, what's left to be gotten won't be worth getting, whatever it is you've got left." Uncynically, we shouldn't worry so much about who is getting as what is being gotten and consider who is giving and who is getting ill-gotten gains. In the meanwhile, let's be happy with what have got.

Arizona: Why 2 Ks?

 Arizona's primaries ended with Katie Hobbs (D), the current Secretary of State of Arizona and Kari Lake (R), a University of Iowa graduate and conservative journalist as their respective party gubernatorial candidates. In what will likely be a battle for the hearts and minds of Arizonians for what is falsely called a stolen election, these two candidates are the "poster children" for their party's viewpoints. 

                       Kari Lake (R)                                                Katie Hobbs (D)

Katie Hobbs, born and raised in Arizona, was elected as Secretary of State in 2019 which makes her the second in line to the sitting Governor (who at the moment is a Republican). As Secretary of State, she was the sane voice when the coordinated effort to "Stop the Steal" was going on. Like Joe Biden, she won her race in 2019 in a squeaker that took some time to call due to absentee and mail-in ballots. Prior to that, Hobbs was the minority leader in the Arizona Senate. Solid credentials to lead a state like Arizona. Her campaign site indicates she will:

- Make government more transparent and cut red tape for small businesses

- Ensure voters rights through election security and improved ballot access

- Make the state more inclusive including protecting civil and health care rights

- Make Arizona more affordable by lowering the costs of families with children among other things

Her opponent, Kari Lake, a former Hawkeye, has never been elected to anything but after stints as a weatherperson, was a Fox news anchor for 22 years in Phoenix, the state's largest city. Like a lot of midwest transplants, her politics have shifted dramatically since being a Kerry and Obama Democrat. She is embracing her connection to Donald Trump and his allies like Mike Lindell. Her policies according to her campaign website said she will:

-Finish President Trump’s Wall 

-Blow Up Cartel Drug Tunnels 

-Shoot Down Cartel Drones AND pledge to deploy troops to STOP Illegals from entering.

If there ever was a contrast of priorities, this pairing is as bi-polar as it gets. A hardworking former social worker with plans to get things done that improve people's day-to-day situations even as her own life has been threatened is challenging a talking head with an agenda that is popular with a significant amount of conservative voters.

In the battle of the two Ks, there is a really good chance that Arizona will end up on the short-sighted end of the stick if moderates stay home. Fortunately, it seems that Katie Hobbs is giving them a great reason to jump in--to support their families, keep jobs and businesses thriving, and most of all, to make sure that hate-mongering seed sowers are defeated at that most democratic of places--the ballot box.

The Problem with Radicalism

It is never easy to talk about radicalism without everyone wanting to say what it is, but let's start with a dictionary definition:

 Radicalism: The state or character of being radical; the holding or carrying out of extreme principles on any subject; specifically, extreme political liberalism; the doctrine or principle of uncompromising reform in government; the system or methods advocated by the political Radicals of a country.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

Why is radicalism a problem? It depends who you ask, but since I am writing this, it is a problem for me because radicalism and its ideas take time to become mainstream ideas, for instance, the abolition of slavery (at the time a radical idea) took a civil war to become the law and 100+ years to successfully implement civil rights for all. Radicalism operates with the mindset that we don't have time to wait to act on the things we believe are wrong. Sadly, since we can't all share that belief, at the same time already we are in conflict. Secondly, because we are living in a representative democracy within a republic, it requires enough votes for change. Since elections are on two, four, and six-year cycles, fast change is almost impossible to legislate and enact.

And, that is perhaps the strength and weakness of our governance that has intentional checks and balances, nothing moves at the speed of those who are in the need of fairness, justice, or equity. Nonetheless, firebrands are always storming the castle with ideas that we must enact asap. Even when a hurricane devastated a community, we are not able to fix everything good-as-new immediately. Change takes time and persistence. 

This does not minimize the need for those who embrace radicalism. I will argue that radicals are as necessary to good governance as rain is to a field of wheat. Without rain, no wheat. Without radicals, no change. It is fair to say that helpful radical ideas do get absorbed into the mainstream, presuming they are credible ideas in the first place. 

Now the weird part of radicalism. Radicalism is not just a bunch of people screaming in the streets about an issue, radicalism may come from any sphere and dress in a business suit. When it comes in dress clothes, we have a different view of it, like it is somehow more reasonable than when it comes in bare feet. The difference, as you've likely surmised is the packaging and presenters. In the old TV westerns, when TV was in black and white, it was important to distinguish the good guys from the bad ones. How it was done was with black and white hats. We picked sides that way and we do where radicalism is concerned.

Some radicals use flag-waving jargon to make their case. "Texas should secede" scream secessionists, while corporate radicals want to drown the government in a bathtub for freedom from taxes, and leftie radicals want Medicare for all as a basic human right. So there is another problem with radicalism, it takes the shape of its ideologues. But the devil of it is that we don't recognize some things as radicalism. For instance pride in our country is seen as an honorable/good thing and, therefore, nationalism is not universally seen as radical, just a logical extension of democracy. In the same way, we don't label capitalism as radical, because it is our primary economic model. But surely even if you love capitalism, you have to agree it was a radical idea that some people would benefit from it much more than others and often at the other's expense.

So, this brings us to the last problem of radicalism, by necessity it leads to anarchy. Without having an anchor on a boat, the boat will drift. Radicalism wants to burn the mother down for change to happen and so does anarchy forming a vacuum of leadership. Most people are ill-prepared for the sudden change that comes from radicalism, let alone the void of governance.

Radicalism is a problem and governance is a clumsy way to codify a way for things to change and this clunkiness means that nothing happens as fast as those who need it to change need (enter human suffering). Is radicalism a big problem as compared to other disrupting forces at play? I don't think it is, but it is the most visible form of dissension and because, at its core, it is intent on aiding the public good, it is hard to be mad at those who advocate for radical change (unless you are the mother that has been burned down). And radicals are right! We need things to change ASAP. But they won't, at least not without creating a deeper mess that history has shown us time and again can be disastrous (e.g., life in Haiti, the madcap adventures of the former Soviet Union). 

I say that we embrace our radical tendencies, but moderate our expectations in terms of deliverables. The one thing the radical right has shown us is if you have an agenda and you are relentless with it, you'll get things done.

News Desertion

 Ever since CNN became the first 24-hour news network, it has been difficult for news to report just the facts. After all, in 24 hours how much news rises to the level of consequential except to those who are involved? Nonetheless, the news is now an endangered species on the local level as newspapers are either gobbled up by conglomerates or shuttering up in less populous areas. On the TV front, it is much the same as local channels are bought up by companies like Gray Television or Sinclair Broadcast Group. With the consolidation of news media on the local level, there are fewer eyeballs on the ways that government officials fail us or how business interests expand their influence, and frankly, even fewer human interest stories that remind us that there is good going on as well.

Democracy thrives by factual information being widely available for all who care to know it. Today's media is more marketing than it is news. Hence to attract a certain demographic, you have right- and left-leaning flamethrowers like Tucker Carlson or Michael Moore and then form stories that conform to a prospective. Other than Reuters or the AP, most news is preferential to the way it treats stories. Of course, there is a long history of this. And somehow democracy has survived the disparity between what is true and what people believe.

However, with the evolution of social media, the blurring of fact and fiction is widening; to the point ere at one time Jon Stewart was the most trusted news anchor in America. I'm not dissing Jon Stewart, as we have seen recently comedians can come across as very credible (see:  Volodymyr Zelenskyy), but clearly, people are struggling with understanding their world and the bipolarity of how news is reported. With the ability to pick and choose your sources on social media, we are rapidly submerging into a gray area where it is not shared or even common knowledge on anything and the barn door is wide open for out-and-out propaganda to pose as news.

So, I am left with this question: Did the news desert us or did we desert the news? A case for both can be made and particularly when people stopped paying for reliable news sources via transitioning away from newspapers and magazines and even network news in favor of web-based sources which have, up to now, been harder to monetize around. At the same time, the consolidation of news media is the egg in the chicken and the egg analogy. 

It may be argued that this is a temporary problem and that the marketplace will eventually solve it as people seek out reliable sources. I don't see that happening. Using a different analogy, people know that there are healthier food choices, but we lean into salty, sugary junk food because it tastes so good. And like junk food, sometimes we feel bad about it, but we go back to it. News as we've known it is dead and its replacement is partisan news--not as healthy for us, but we can't seem to get enough of it.   

Gimme Back My Freedom of Rest

  Iowa lost its mind in 2017 when Terry Branstad signed into law and allowied category 2 fireworks to be sold legally in the state (category 1 are things like sparklers and the like). This past year, the  governing Republican triumverate went a step further and said that cities have little say where they can be sold (even though cities and counties may continue to bar them from being set off in incorporated areas). Needless to say, the jury is back and has had enough, as places like my neighborhood sound like eastern Ukraine with explosions that can wake a sane person out of a night's sleep and cause pets to run for cover before, during, and after the 11 pm curfew for unincorporated areas. Also, there is no telling what effect it may have on the PTSD-suffering among us. 

And I am not against fireworks, I know that all the cities of any size have wonderful displays of them annually and it is a, pardon the pun, blast to see them. But, seriously, unless you are a pyromaniac or have a death wish, you are as likely to end up in the hospital, lose some degree of hearing, and/or make some poor decisions if you are blowing off firecrackers for the fun of it.  There were an estimated 11,500 emergency room-treated injuries involving fireworks in 2021. (down from 15,600 in 2020, when many public shows were canceled due to the pandemic). But the types of accidents seen ranged from burns, demolished eardrums, and, loss of limbs (e.g., hands, fingers).

From a story from today

At least three people — including a child — died and more were injured in fireworks accidents across America over the July 4 holiday.

In Montebello, California, police reportedly found a severely injured man unconscious and not breathing around 6:30 p.m. Monday. He died at a hospital and reportedly used illegal fireworks.

In Mount Vernon, Indiana, 11-year-old Camrynn Ray McMichael died in a firework accident Sunday night. Police were investigating his death.

Look, if you are in the highest-risk category, typically men between the ages of 20-24, and you want to do something fun with explosives, study, and become a professional demolitionist or pyrotechnician, heck even take up amateur or professional rocketry. But for the sake of those who value our freedom (of sleep), do us a solid and curb your enthusiasm. And to state lawmakers who thought it was a good idea to make it possible for others to profit from others' misery, you really can't call yourself a public servant can you?

In Iowa, if you want to let key legislators know what you think of the Senate File 2285 signed into law, here are a couple of folks to communicate with besides your own district's Representative and Senator:

Floor manager Mike Kelmish who also is on the Appropriations Subcommittee for Health and Human Services and the Legislative Council for Health Policy Oversight Committee

Legislative Email: mike.klimesh@legis.iowa.gov

Home Email: mike@graphicsinc.biz

In the House, it was floor managed by Brent Siegrist who sits on the local government committee:

Legislative Email: Brent.Siegrist@legis.iowa.gov

Home Email: siegrists1@cox.net

Also, since she signed the bill, you might also want to send a shoutout to Governor Kim Reynolds.

I'm tired of being tired and from June 1 to July 8th and late December, I have no right to sleep. Until I do, these leaders should be awakened to what they've created.

Considering Independence Day 2022

 In 1776, when the Declaration of Independence was written. Thomas Jefferson enumerated why the original thirteen colonies found it necessary to seek independence from the British Crown. In it, he listed the following "injuries and usurpations": 

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

Clearly, these were excellent reasons to seek freedom and independence. However, in 2022, how are we doing with our independence in terms of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and self-rule? Some might say that we traded in one kind of authoritarianism for another where the executive, judiciary and the legislative bodies in states have outsized power over the day-to-day existence of women, people of color, and those lacking financial means to influence. It would seem that the "checks and balances" are failing many and therefore our self-governance is being usurped. Thankfully, our form of government does have an essential safeguard, the power of the electorate to vote for change and this has likely kept us from entering into a second civil war. However, when the halls of Congress are largely occupied by self-serving interests and wedge issue wars are being promulgated by monied interests to prop up economic interests who largely do not represent the vast majority of us, it is right to ask how will we continue to make this experiment in representative democracy work? For too long the interests that guide our state are largely economic and the welfare of the residents has taken a back seat to those interests that fuel the economic engine. This is not a new phenomenon, but it has become outsized and power has been consolidated along the way. 

With each gerrymandering of a district or removal of authority of a city or county, local law has been reduced and therefore the freedom of those impacted by the law. In a way, we are being micro-managed by power-grabbing entities that have formed an unholy alliance--such as church and state, industry and state, parties and supporters. Freedom shouldn't be this hard, but it has been made so by professionalizing politics and underlying bureaucracies, pitting neighbor against neighbor by militarizing the public sphere, and creating an environment of chaos by undervaluing and encouraging propaganda over education. And on top of all this, we have allowed a hellscape to be carved out of our environment such that massive effort will need to be undertaken to support the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of people living not only in this country, but around the world.

Paraphrasing Meridith Willson, we've got trouble, right here in the US of A. Without a coming to grips with how we got here and working together to change the dynamics in place, I fear the state of the union looks quite bleak. So here is an exercise I would like us all to consider, if you were responsible for writing the 2022 version of a declaration of independence, what might you say?

Decisions, Decisions: How The Supreme Court Is Decimating Our Democracy One Decision At A Time

 Today, The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Clean Air Act didn't apply to carbon dioxide and therefore can't be regulated by the EPA. “Hard on the heels of snatching away fundamental liberties, the right-wing activist court just curtailed vital climate action,” Jason Rylander, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, responded in a press statement Thursday. The court ruled that only Congress can make laws regarding the level of CO2 emissions. Interestingly the case came to the court due to then-president Trump trying to relax the guidelines which a federal court put a hold on. The result of this ruling is likely to create a free-for-all among states who want to loosen the law versus those who wish to strengthen it. In the meanwhile, global climate change continues and temperatures and sea levels are rising. “Today, the court strips the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power Congress gave it to respond to the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the minority joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor in her dissent.

The decision is impactful to the EPA's ability to do its job. Whether it is limiting emissions from power plants to operating the existing cap-and-trade carbon offset policy, it may also give a peek into other backward steps the court and its conservative majority likely will take. “Congress did not grant EPA in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion, which was joined by the five other conservative justices. Further, he added, “On EPA’s view of Section 111(d), Congress implicitly tasked it, and it alone, with balancing the many vital considerations of national policy implicated in the basic regulation of how Americans get their energy,” Roberts wrote. “There is little reason to think Congress did so.” In instances like this, he said, “[a] decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body.” 

Regardless of this decision, the Environmental Protection Agency was formed to serve as the watchdog over the nation's environment and enact policies to preserve it, but you would think that this was some kind of fly-by-night operation that requires Congress to hold its hand to do its job. Also, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are a little difficult to maintain when the court is treating people like the frogs in the warm water experiment. Suffice to say, with the slew of recent decisions that have been handed down by this court, democracy as we know it is likely to fail us. It would seem like nobody can wrestle the steering wheel away from these unelected lifers, but the court could be expanded to lessen their impact.

A Tough "Roe" to Hoe

 With the US Supreme Court decision now official, people now are right to question what will a post-Roe world look like. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 26 states are likely or certain to ban abortions leaving 24 and the District of Columbia as places where it may remain legal. In Iowa, with a Republican stranglehold in all the key places, our state legislature is likely to either limit the window of abortion or ban it outright in the next legislative session. In addition, there may be an amendment offered to our state constitution banning abortions permanently, though that would require a majority of Iowans to vote for it.

Currently, Iowa ranks 20th in quality of life for children according to MSN and a high degree of maltreatment of children (65.6 children of 1000 in reported cases of abuse or neglect).  

All of this leads to a simple decision, do Iowans truly prize their liberties and choose to maintain their rights, like the state motto says or do we revert back to a place where women's life and healthcare decisions are limited by the draconian state they live in? We already know where our governor stands on this and her party leaders. The line that prevents them to exert their will is dotted by the November 2022 election which strongly favors them. If ever there was a time to get involved in state politics, this would be it. Support those candidates who support you and the things you believe in.

A Government "Shutdown" of a Different Kind

What a week it has been and not a whole lot to be supercharged about. SCOTUS has said that you can pretty much carry a gun anywhere you want except near their homes and other "sensitive" areas. You realize that justice is not blind, but is being blinded by the Six Stooges that are the majority opinion of the aforementioned case. 

At about the same time that Congress takes action on sensible gun laws, the courts decide to become activists for gun rights. Is this coincidental or a way to allow the Republicans to say "Well, at least I tried--but the SCOTUS knows better, I guess"? This political impotence is dangerous to democracy and having a religiously-bent, free-market-leaning Supreme Court just exacerbated this. 

Add to it the circus of Congressional hearings that will likely not lead to anybody being convicted of anything and at the least, opens the window for profiting from decidedly criminal behavior, particularly if the mid-term elections are the bloodbath that is being "predicted" by the media and pollsters.

Then stir in profiteers who are making money and flaming inflation in their wakes and whose campaign contributions make it difficult to go after for ripping all of us off. Even the Federal Reserve Bank admits that hoisting interest rates won't help us out on gas and groceries, but will likely keep people out of housing that they are already having a hard time affording. So there's that.

So what do we have to look forward to? Essentially a government "shutdown" by being made impotent through greed, power grabs, and flagging belief in it as an institution by a weary public. And this is the tip of the proverbial iceberg as other rights will likely be dissembled by the social architects in judges' robes (the next being Roe V. Wade). In so doing, the patriarchs and oligarchs win and democracy fails unless we stop rewarding the corrupt by throwing the wrong "bums" out. Mid-term elections are not glamorous, but they are important nonetheless. Hold the line while we still have a line to hold.

Before We Leave Town

 Politicians are notoriously brave when they are a) retiring b) when they are in the minority c) actually believe in what they are fighting for d) know they will be defeated/choose to retire, so you have to ask: why do they wait so long? This leads me to the current bipartisan gun legislation. Of the 10 Republicans involved, 4 are retiring at the end of their terms. Not having to worry about the NRA or Second Amendment or Die folks, certainly frees them up to vote their conscience and have a meaningful legacy. For the other 6, their re-election cycles are far enough off that they feel they can do "something" as people have been asking them to do (also most are at an age where retirement is not out of the question). 

But what will that something look like? It certainly does not look like raising the age of people owning semi-automatic assault-like rifles or banning those weapons again (as happened in 1994) is part of the agenda. On the other hand, enhanced background checks for buyers under the age of 21 and measures to close the so-called "boyfriend loophole," which would prevent domestic abusers from owning guns are likely to be helpful. Still, if we are trying to reduce gun violence in schools and items in the House-passed bill, the "Protecting Our Kids Act," which includes the prohibition of the sale or transfer of semi-automatic firearms to people aged under 21, a federal statutory framework to regulate ghost guns and new federal criminal offenses for gun trafficking, were met with widespread opposition by the GOP.

So it would seem that bipartisan also means the bill with the least resistance to pass--which also means that the parts that are not terribly helpful. For instance, arming teachers or putting armed guards in schools will be seen as wins by gun lovers, but another loss of freedom for school kids. And this is what frustrates the public, our leaders have power, and choose to use it to address the periphery, but not the problem of too many guns in the hands of people who believe they are justified in using them. This is the elephant in the room and it isn't leaving.

Same Old Song and Dance

 Nineteen elementary school-aged children were murdered in a classroom along with two teachers and an additional 15 people were injured when an 18-year-old gunman entered an elementary school in Uvalde, TX with a newly purchased semi-automatic weapon. As parents mourned and struggled to understand, politicians sent out the usual thoughts and prayers and President Biden asked rhetorically, "Why do  we let this keep happening?"

Why, indeed? Why should schoolchildren be targeted in this way? Why should guns that can shoot thirty rounds at a time be legally sold? Why should politicians pray for the dead while doing so little to keep people alive?

The outrage that 4th-grade children should so easily be mowed down in a town of 16,000 is horrendous. The fact that the gun used in the killings was able to be purchased by a kid without so much as a lesson, a license, or parental permission is hard to fathom. Also, where were the police? Why did it take an hour for a tactical unit with the tools/equipment to be assembled and show up at the school? 

Now, here we are two days later and already the handwringing is subsiding. Already we are being told that legislation will take a while. In the meantime, people in Uvalde are burying their young, including the gunman, and trying to make sense out of the nonsensical. And sure, we can keep pointing that the fact that gun violence in the US is so wildly out of control compared to our western nation neighbors. And sure, we can point at the gun lobby and their outsized power over the political leaders in our states and country and how their money is paying for the deaths of innocent people most every day. And sure, we can point at ourselves and the frustration that we have both for those who think the 2nd Amendment means that everybody should be toting a gun and those who think there should be very strict requirements for possessing them. But, if we really do believe in the sanctity of life, we have to decide how that is going to coexist with a culture that celebrates guns and violence.

In the meanwhile, the National Rifle Association will still be holding its convention today in Houston, three days after the shooting in Uvalde. The governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, was supposed to be there in person but will now provide a video welcome. His opponent, Beto O'Rourke, who was at Abbott's press conference pressed him the day after the shooting on taking action to deter future massacres. The governor was mute while O'Rourke said, “The time to stop the next shooting is right now and you are doing nothing. This is on you, until you choose to do something different. This will continue to happen. Somebody needs to stand up for the children of this state or they will continue to be killed, just like they were killed in Uvalde yesterday."  Also in the US Senate, “Is Texas the tipping point? Is this what we’ve been waiting for?” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said on CNN, hours before the Senate was to vote on whether to advance the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022. The answer was a resounding no as the bill was not passed by the 60 votes needed. Indeed, it is the same old song and dance.

All Politics Are "Yokel"

Rural Johnson County Road Sign via Flicker

 The title of this is intentionally facetious and is from the late long-time leader of the House of Representatives, Tip O'Neill who famously said "all politics are local." Iowa is swept up in a sea of red at the statewide level. As a rural state with a handful of urban outposts, the prospects for Iowa to bask in a blue wave are somewhat limited. Part of the reason is messaging and the other is authenticity in the redder parts of our state. 

Rural Iowa currently does not love Democrats, and why should they? Look at the signs along the farm fields, in the small towns and you will see how effective Republican, Christian right, pro-life and business issue-pushers have been to date. Let's face it, it is a tough row to hoe to change the minds of people whose own politics embrace keeping things the same (or turning back the clock to the "better days").

Nonetheless, there are truly independent and more center-leaning voters in these red counties who are not walking lock-step with their neighbors and Democrats will need to cultivate them, as they are likely to stay at home otherwise. But to get out this group of voters, Democrats need to meet them where they are and tell them why their vote matters. Also, as these voters may not be as progressive as their city cousins, the message has to be genuine and to the heart of the matter. Democrats cannot plow these Iowans, they have to be willing to go slower and easier to build trust with these voters. No small task for a party whose left flank is pushing hard for decisive change which centrists have to warm to.

It would be a good start to post signs that challenge the notions, such as the one pictured here. As we know, Republicans have down a fair share of taxing the poor more and spending on subsidies for the wealthy and connected. Why don't the Democrats invest in better messages for the less indoctrinated? 

Also, as we have seen in my county, it is possible to be both a rural Iowan and progressive. Jon Green, the County Supervisor and the former mayor from Lone Tree, and Seth Zimmermann, a candidate from Solon, are competing for a couple of seats this June and neither of them is Iowa Farm Bureau supported. But both want to make sure rural land is conserved, the water supply is clean, and pesticides are limited.  And neither of them might otherwise stand a chance in a county that is highly non-rural except that this is an area of rapid growth and they have a vested interest in how that growth goes, as do their neighbors and those who recreate away from the towns. Their knowledge of the rural area gives them both credibility and authenticity and sways some of the more right-leaning folks to vote for them. I am aware of other candidates, such as Kevin Kinney who is a state senator and farmer who also represents a more rural district and is up for re-election. He refers to himself as a "Dirt Road Democrat" and he walks that walk authentically by growing corn and soybeans, raising cattle, as well as fighting for better pay for Iowa's teachers.

Iowans deserve better than laws and policies that harm the very fabric that the state is created from. Democrats can be fuller-throated in supporting policies that preserve the land and water, help teachers to teach, and take care of the family farm. If Iowa is to ever have a Harold Hughes or a Tom Vilsack acolyte as governor, Democrats are going to have to convince rural Iowans that they also have their backs.