However people want to portray their loved ones in a newspaper obituary is fine by me. It is great people continue to use obituaries as a form of expression. I understand the cult followings people have: for a sports team, a political party, a brand of consumer products, and the like. Want your recently deceased loved one in a photo of them wearing a Busch Light logo on a ball cap? You be you. Anymore, anything goes in an obituary.
It is okay to run an obituary in the newspaper without a photo. In fact, that may be the best practice. I’m not big on fakery in presenting a self-image. I have a hard enough time determining what is my own personality, let alone how that should be represented in an obituary photo. It was only the growing number of men donning ball caps in their obituary photos that got me thinking about this.
I own a lot of ball caps. If my survivors print a photo of me in the newspaper with my obituary, I hope it is not one with me wearing one of them. First of all, which one would they choose? I would likely prefer the one from a portrait of my Sears and Roebuck little league baseball team. I suppose people would recognize me. It would speak to the potential of youth.
A current hat wouldn’t be good as I wear them in the yard to absorb sweat while gardening or doing yard work. My current fave is a commemorative cap from when we moved the Standard Oil and Amoco paper archives from Chicago to a salt mine in Oklahoma. That project was a really big deal, yet I wear the cap because it has ventilation for heat from my head to escape. It is not a statement of anything.
I wrote the obituary for my survivors to use. It is 210 words with the briefest of traditional items. There is a sentence about my education, one about military service, one about marriage, and one about my formal career. I wrote a sentence about retirement. Just the facts in tightly written prose. One omission is a photo. I must remedy that so my death is hassle-free for those who survive me, yet am loathe to do so.
The easiest thing would be to visit a professional photographer and have them take a head shot. Maybe fancy it up with a white background so it shows well in a black and white newspaper. The issue causing delay is that living on a pension finds more interesting things on which to spend my limited funds. For example, I could buy a new hoe… something I could actually use. An obituary photo hasn’t even made it to my to-do list. If I do visit a photographer, I won’t be taking any ball caps.
Like clockwork, the American Civil Liberties Union, along with other groups and individuals, sued in federal court over Senate File 2340, one of the worst, most far-reaching immigration laws ever passed in the state of Iowa. They said the law is unconstitutional. It is common sense the state has no primary role in policing immigration. I expect the ACLU will prevail and the governor has to know it.
Maybe if the Iowa delegation to The U.S. Congress had done their job on immigration this year, things would be different. Instead we have this crappy law and civil rights groups are not going to let it stand.
While states can pass legislation to deal with federal immigration concerns, if the U.S. Supreme Court has a shred of honesty in jurisprudence left, they will reject these state laws when they trickle up to the high court.
I made the post below, called “Rain and Immigration Reform,” on Jan. 29, 2013. It shows in eleven years the country has gotten exactly nowhere on immigration reform.
LAKE MACBRIDE— The sound of rain tapping against the bedroom window woke me this morning. At 4:30 a.m. it was 55 degrees. This broke the record high temperature of 53 degrees set in 1919. According to weather.com, today’s forecast is to hit a high of 60 degrees around 11 a.m. this morning, then temperatures start to fall to below freezing in the next 24 hours. Today is more temperate than the heat last summer, however, it is a variation on a theme of being freaked out because of our changing climate and dealing with adaptation.
Equally freaky was yesterday’s public statement by a bipartisan group of eight U.S. senators in an effort to find common ground on how the country should move forward on immigration reform. They said in a written statement,
We recognize that our immigration system is broken. And while border security has improved significantly over the last two Administrations, we still don’t have a functioning immigration system. This has created a situation where up to 11 million undocumented immigrants are living in the shadows. Our legislation acknowledges these realities by finally committing the resources needed to secure the border, modernize and streamline our current legal immigration system, while creating a tough but fair legalization program for individuals who are currently here. We will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not need to be revisited.
I have written a lot about immigration reform. Dealing with the 11 million undocumented people who live in the United States, many of whom have been here for decades, is a long standing problem and political lightning rod. That the senate’s bipartisan framework calls for a path to citizenship for these long-term residents, and an effective employment verification system, gets to core problems. Particularly, recent history has shown that if there is available employment in the U.S., undocumented people will come to fill those jobs. If the path to getting a job is restricted by better verification of applicant status, the number of people crossing our borders will be reduced.
Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have attempted to reform immigration, but met resistance. What has changed?
The demographics of the 2012 electorate are now known and President Obama won 70 percent of the so-called Hispanic vote. Hispanics accounted for 10 percent of the votes cast for president. It is a political reality that Republicans cannot walk away from this large and growing segment of the population if they want to remain relevant. Immigration reform is a key issue for Hispanic voters.
Senator John McCain was featured in corporate media sound-bites, reading these three sentences from a press statement yesterday,
What is going on now is not acceptable. In reality, what has been created is a defacto amnesty. We, the American people, have been too content for too long to allow individuals to mow our lawn, serve us food, clean our homes and even watch our children while not affording them any of the benefits that make our country so great.
If the political component of immigration reform was the focus yesterday, there is another issue, related to agriculture. Undocumented immigrants and legal guest workers provide low-cost agricultural labor that natives seem reluctant to offer. In his Jan. 5, 1967 inaugural address as governor of California, Ronald Reagan set the theme on immigration that would follow him through to his presidency, “restrictive labor policies should never again be the cause of crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters.” Reagan advocated for and signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which was intended to permanently address immigration reform.
Any immigration reform faces an uphill battle in the Congress. That’s why nothing has been done since 1986. That states like Iowa are taking matters into their own hands is laughable. It is also am injustice to immigrants who have been here for years. It is cynical political posturing by which Republicans hope to cement their power in government. Will the problem continue unaddressed for ten more years? Something has to give and the states cannot be the driving force in immigration reform.
Editor’s Note: This was posted on May 22, 2008 while the author served on the county board of health. Working with migrant communities was part of our public health outreach.
Each year 2,500 or more migrant workers come to Iowa to detassel seed corn, walk the beans, prune plants and trees and pick melons, apples and strawberries. This has been going on for as long as I can remember. Today, I saw the public health aspect of this cultural phenomenon.
In places like Conesville, Williamsburg, and Laurel, migrant families come to work in the fields, living in dormitories, motels and converted buildings. The hourly wages are about $9.00, often paid in cash. If anyone is impoverished, these people are. It turns out about 60% of them also seek medical treatment while they are here.
The list of health issues sounds like those of many Americans. 50 percent of patients are treated for obesity. In descending order of frequency, hypertension, diabetes, acute upper respiratory ailments and foot fungus are also treated. Women have a higher frequency of dehydration than men. The medical treatment is part of the culture as there are many patients who seek treatment year after year.
It is clear that many of these workers are not documented, and from a public health perspective, that doesn’t matter much. Would the Immigration and Naturalization Service come in and raid the quarters of these folks? Probably not.
Yet, who should be responsible for the health care of these 2,500 workers? On $9.00 per hour, they could not afford it. The employers would say they could not afford it either. Some would argue that the small budget of the agency should not go to undocumented migrant workers at all. It is a key issue in public health.
The life of migrant workers seems much like the life of birds living in the wetlands. Following the receding water line, they eke out a living that comes naturally, but is in delicate balance between shore and water…it hardly seems permanent. Social change around the immigration issue, a slight change in law enforcement or a change in funding for the agency could change migrant workers’ lives dramatically. At the same time, my sense is that they can adapt to change and do what it takes to create a society that lives along the recurring procession of the agricultural season.
In this way, migrant workers are like us: living each day in its delicate balance.¨
Trail walking between rain showers on May 9, 2024.
While walking past the boat docks between rain showers, a neighbor hailed me and asked, “Is the drought over?” I replied, “With the rain we’ve had in the last ten days, I hope so.” Because I was on the association board for so long, many know me by name, although I have to ask them theirs. I don’t mind asking.
I took this photograph during my Thursday trail walk. I’ve been trying to take a decent photo of this barn for 30 years. This one isn’t it. I’ll try again.
I turned on my bird identification app and in 30 seconds, it identified eight different birds. Halfway into spring that seems about right. Fish continue to spawn near the foot bridge. Joggers, dog-walkers, bicyclists, and walkers were out on the trail in the couple hour period between morning rain and afternoon showers. I’m glad to have made it outdoors when I could.
While my vegan spouse has been away I’m fixing dinners she can’t eat. Tonight it is lasagna with home grown spring onions and ricotta cheese. I’ve been thinking about this dish for a week. It is baking while I write.
I counted seedlings in the portable greenhouse. There are 750. It seems like a lot, and if I had to buy them at the store it would be a substantial investment. I check on them multiple times a day.
My idea of a garden is to grow as much as I can for the kitchen and give the rest away. The food bank always needs donations. Neighbors welcome fresh vegetables in season. If the rain would let up, I could start transplanting more to the garden. Thursday was a bust day for gardening. Friday is looking better.
We should know when my spouse is returning home today. I hope it is soon.
Hiroshima, Japan after U.S. Nuclear Attack. Photo Credit: The Telegraph
George Will’s May 6, “Voters, think about the menace of nuclear annihilation,” makes me wonder what Gazette editors are up to when they select outside articles for re-publication. Will wrote, “Talk of ‘banning the bomb’ is pointless. These weapons are here forever.” Good grief! Hath a citizen no agency to effect change? The editors must just want to stir things up.
The optimist in me would say “nuts” to Will and engage in the effort to step back from the brink of nuclear annihilation. 83 nations are already on board with such an effort, which calls on the US to acknowledge that the continued existence of nuclear weapons isthe greatest security threat we face and to actively pursue their elimination. In addition, nuclear weapons-armed states already agreed to eliminate nuclear weapons in Article 6 of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. A simple, missed truth is most of the world’s nuclear weapons have already been dismantled. All that remains is to finish the job.
Is seeing George Will in the Gazette a blessing or a curse? I had not heard of Annie Jacobsen’s book before reading about it here. However, Will represents a Cold War mentality when he wrote, “Humanity’s survival depends on statesmanship and luck–as much the latter as the former.” When we adopt that view, our luck will run out sooner than we think. We can and will do better.
~ Published on May 7, 2024 as a letter to the editor of the Cedar Rapids Gazette.
War has always been devastating yet the devastation of the Israel-Hamas war is unprecedented. What makes this war different is it is occurring in the ever-present media-influenced eyes of a populace unfamiliar with the long relationship between Israel and Palestine. People young and old are being activated by this public war: donating money to relief funds, protesting, and more. There are a lot of moving parts.
That said, I don’t know what else to say, other than there should be an immediate, permanent ceasefire; humanitarian aid should have unfettered access to the Palestinians; and both sides should release any hostages or unlawful detainees. At yesterday’s Democratic district convention, we passed a resolution saying those things.
Some friends with family ties in Palestine were present at the convention. One spoke during debate over the resolution. He pointed out the plight of children in the war zone. What heartless fool could not be affected by this?
I read about the use of artificial intelligence in generating military targets. Computers find targets, which may or may not be reviewed by a human before striking. What algorithms often find is the best place to target someone is in the evening when they are at home. Often the whole family is present when the bombs hit.
On-campus protests have drawn an undue amount of attention. The varying responses by school administrations and law enforcement has been both appalling and comforting. The temptation is to compare it with my own campus protests over the Vietnam War in 1970-1973. That is the wrong impulse. Things have changed on campus in more than 50 years.
Another temptation is to blame the U.S. administration for the war. President Joe Biden is an easy scapegoat. While exerting public pressure for him to change tactics is acceptable in a democracy, it is of itself, no solution. When it comes to the Mideast, there will unlikely be consensus in an approach to peace-making.
It feels hopeless some days. I contribute to relief funds as I can, write my congressional representatives, and pray for resolution. There is no assurance there will be a resolution in the Mideast, and that’s part of the problem.
Absent live performances during the coronavirus pandemic, the comedy troupe The Capitol Steps, whose periodic radio shows were called “politics takes a holiday,” turned off the lights and folded. It turned out they could not survive without live performances, and as many believed, no one wanted to attend a live performance if one of the side effects was infection with the coronavirus. We learned politics never takes a holiday during a pandemic as Republicans dominated the elections in Iowa.
On Wednesday, I participated in a video conference with about 35 others with former Congressman Dave Loebsack asking First Congressional District Democratic candidate Christina Bohannan a series of softball questions. It was an okay hour, yet we’ve heard almost everything Bohannan said before. Democrats need new ideas, new approaches. Considering the alternative, I’ll support Bohannan with my time and financial resources.
Like with the now defunct Capitol Steps, live performance is everything in politics. A candidate cannot win elections without in person live events. What does that mean?
A county supervisor candidate sent an email this week, asking for help. Specifically, they asked for help doing things related to voters: door knocking, making phone calls, and placing yard signs. They also asked for a financial contribution. The primary election is four weeks away, so their needs are pressing. I’m supporting other candidates for supervisor, so the request fell on deaf ears.
Just before Bohannan’s event I received a text message from the Democratic National Committee asking me to participate in video conference training on how to be more active in the national campaign. If all politics is local, why would I work under direction from the national party? I wouldn’t.
Another contact that day was a telephone call from a local county party organizer. They have a short regimen of door knocking work to reach out to voters and see where they are. To me, door knocking is about one thing: identifying which voters will support a given candidate, then getting them to cast a ballot. I declined the opportunity to take a shift.
All of this is expected, and as you can see I rejected it out of hand. In the meanwhile, incumbent Republicans shape how the general election will proceed. Since they are in power, they have a strong platform to frame the debate. They are framing it. It will be difficult to avoid becoming enmeshed in their verbal construct.
I accepted an invitation to help our state house candidate organize for the election. About a dozen of us were invited. He has no primary competition so we can focus on the general election. He’s new to politics so we can begin with a fresh slate and build upon our core competencies. I’m looking forward to the possibilities of such a campaign.
Our state senate candidate is also new to politics. He is the chief financial officer of the Mount Pleasant school district, and hasn’t run a campaign before. As he organizes, there will be possibilities to get involved with what I hope is a unique and vibrant campaign full of new energy.
Saturday is the district convention, precursor to the state and national conventions. I’m a delegate and will use the time to explore possibilities for organizing with other attendees. Since there is only one statewide candidate this cycle, 2024 will be a cycle of local politics, focused on my state house representation. Hopefully those campaigns will roll out in an unexpected way.
A decent history of American politics in the post-Obama era has yet to be written. One can’t rely upon any of the conservative principals to author one, because they have been drinking at the well of minority rule for too long. A Trump autobiography? He didn’t even write The Art of the Deal.
Enter Ari Berman’s new book, Minority Rule: The Right-Wing Attack on the Will of the People–and the Fight to Resist It, published in April. It provides a well-researched and relatable history of an issue that has been at the heart of modern conservatism since Pat Buchanan worked in the Nixon White House.
In a 1995 National Press Club address, Buchanan, then a presidential candidate, said, “If present trends hold, white Americans will be a minority by 2050.” This underlying fear mongering became endemic to Republican politics and drove the ascendancy of the 45th president. Irrational fears the United States would transform from a First World Power to Third World status drove conservative voters to the ballot box.
In my reading of books about the rise of Donald Trump as president, Berman is the first author to tell a clear, coherent, and relatable story of that time. Minority rule is at the heart of current Republican policy and behavior and Berman lays it all out for the reader.
While the 1965 Voting Rights Act broadened access to the ballot, conservative white folks were aghast and feared they would become a racial and political minority. During the Johnson administration, an emphasis on immigration of whites was transformed to a broader band of global populations. Enter Trump to both fan the racist, anti-immigrant flames, and get elected as a supposed fire fighter for the fires he started.
Berman outlines the constitutional and legal structure that enables minority rule in the United States. The conduct of the U.S. Census, having two U.S. Senators per state regardless of population, the growth of the filibuster, the electoral college, and drawing political districts in a way that disenfranchises non-white voters, all play a part in enabling minority rule, according to Berman.
While it may sound easy to keep the U.S. Census above politics, it was politicized during the 2020 census by the administration. Having two U.S. Senators, combined with the filibuster enables senators representing a minority of the population to set policy and block majority-favored laws they don’t like. Political gerrymandering, especially in states like Wisconsin and Michigan entrenched minority rule and blocked attempts for political districts to represent the people in the state. There is no magic bullet to fix any of these issues. Entrenched, minority rule makes it more difficult.
In Minority Rule, Berman outlines the role of The Heritage Foundation’s sister organization, Heritage Action, in our politics. Heritage Action is a 501(c)4 nonprofit conservative policy advocacy organization founded in 2010. The Heritage Foundation was restricted from advocating policy, so they created this offshoot, which has become one of the most powerful political lobbying groups in the nation. Iowa is one of the states where these dark money groups have been active.
Ari Berman gets a thumbs up for this book, and I recommend you read it yourself. Minority rule is endemic to the problems of politics in 2024. Berman helps us get a grip on it. He also provides hope the electorate can address the problem and embolden democracy going forward. He presents evidence such a movement has already started.
April is ending with rain showers. As hot as the atmosphere and ocean have been, I expect an abundance of rain in 2024. Our local newspaper wrote there will be “bouts of record-challenging high temperatures throughout the nation and the possibility of the hottest summer ever observed.” Call it the climate crisis, call it a lot of rain, call it whatever you will yet these are crazy times and the weather became crazy along with it.
A friend and I organized a political meet and greet at the public library so voters could meet candidates before the June 4 primary election. As mentioned yesterday, the primary election may as well be the November general election for county supervisors: The county electorate is liberal compared to many Iowa counties and Republicans on the November ballot don’t stand a chance.
It is no surprise there is discontent among the electorate. That is the county Democratic resting happy face. Two new candidates challenged three incumbents for county supervisor. I spent time at our event with each of the five, including the ones I am just getting to know. They are all good people with a set of manners one expects from a candidate for public office. Incumbency is difficult to overcome unless someone did something terribly wrong. There is no evidence of that among these incumbents.
The state house races are just beginning and neither the state senate nor representative candidate was ready with campaign literature or yard signs. April politics is a parade gathering in a field waiting for the grand marshal’s signal to start. There is a lot of milling about. All eight candidates at the event, including the county sheriff, are solid.
Inside the front entrance to the library is a stone wall with the chiseled names of original donors who built it. Our public library used to be under the bandstand in a city park, then moved to the former fire station. Both spaces were incredibly small for a library in a city and surrounding community of more than 10,000 people. Many take for granted having a well-built library with a robust staff. Not every small community can afford it. The original community donations, in money and sweat equity, set the path for a great local resource we use for our political meetings and many other things.
Morning sunlight is drying the driveway as I type these words. No rain is forecast so it should be a decent day of outdoors work. Soon it will be time to get cabbages in the ground.
U.S. Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C. Photo Credit – U.S. Supreme Court Website.
When the U.S. Supreme Court decided Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on June 22, 2022, it was a matter of time before abortion would have another hearing in the high court. On Wednesday this week justices heard oral arguments on whether the State of Idaho’s abortion ban is constitutional in Moyle vs. United States. Alice Miranda Ollstein and Josh Gerstein reported on Politico:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday will consider — for the first time since it overturned Roe v. Wade —whether an individual state’s abortion ban is constitutional.
The justices will hear arguments on whether federal law requires emergency room physicians in Idaho to perform abortions to stabilize pregnant patients experiencing a medical crisis despite the state’s near-total prohibition on the procedure, which only allows doctors to end a pregnancy when the mother’s life is in danger.
It’s the second major abortion case of the term, following last month’s arguments over the FDA’s regulation of the widely used abortion pill mifepristone, and the latest example of how overturning Roe and returning abortion rights to the states did not keep the courts out of the fray, as some justices had hoped. Decisions in both cases are expected in June.
The Idaho case homes in on the clash between red states’ desire to ban nearly all abortions and President Joe Biden administration’s efforts to preserve some access to the procedure, and the arguments come amid a roiling national debate on the issue. And it comes as doctors around the country plead for clarity on the parameters of the medical emergency exemptions to state bans, warning that vague definitions of “life-threatening” and the prospect of criminal charges are creating a chilling effect that deters them from providing needed care in patients’ most vulnerable moments.
5 questions about the Supreme Court’s next major abortion case by Alice Miranda Ollstein and Josh Gerstein, April 24, 2024.
Read the entire article here. I recommend following Alice Miranda Ollstein’s work at Politico.
The irony in 2024 is that Roe Vs. Wade was the compromise on what was then, and continues to be, the controversial issue of abortion. It is unlikely times have changed in that regard since Jan. 22, 1973, when Roe was decided (7-2). Despite talk about “letting the states decide” on abortion, given diversity of opinion among the states, combined with Republican efforts to have government control women’s bodies and health care, SCOTUS will inevitably have to re-decide Roe or something like it. When that will be is anyone’s guess, yet I submit, that day is coming.
Based on the boiling-over outrage I heard from three female justices during oral arguments on Wednesday, Idaho seems unlikely to prevail in this case. I mean, if one is arguing a case before the Supreme Court in support of your state’s extreme abortion ban, you might need Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett on your side. Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern explained on Slate:
Justice Amy Coney Barrett famously provided the crucial fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022. So if you are arguing in favor of an abortion ban, you probably don’t want to alienate Barrett—by, say, condescendingly dismissing her concerns when she points out that your legal theory doesn’t make any sense. Yet that is what Joshua Turner did on Wednesday while defending Idaho’s draconian abortion restrictions, and much to Barrett’s evident irritation. Turner—who represented the Idaho solicitor general’s office in the second major abortion case to come before the high court after it promised us in its Dobbs opinion that the court was out of the abortion business in 2022—might just have lost his case by repeatedly mansplaining his self-contradictory position to Barrett and the other three women justices. In his toneless, dispassionate telling, his entirely incomprehensible position was just too complex for them to understand. And so he just kept repeating it, over and over. These justices, including Barrett, sounded increasingly fed up with his chin-stroking dissembling on an issue that’s literally life-or-death for pregnant women in red states.
The Lawyer Defending Idaho’s Abortion Ban Irritated the One Justice He Needed on His Sideby Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern,Slate, April 24, 2024.
Read the rest of the article here. You can’t go wrong reading Dahlia Lithwick. How the case is decided is anyone’s guess after oral arguments.
Democratic Congressional Candidate Christina Bohannan held a round table discussion about abortion on March 26 in Iowa City. 10 people were in attendance to share their personal experiences and thoughts on the state of abortion rights in Iowa, according to the Daily Iowan. Citing a Des Moines Register poll, “61 percent of adults in Iowa believe abortion should be legal in all or most situations, and 35 percent believe abortions should be illegal in most or all situations.” A lot is at stake in the post-Dobbs era. It will take election of Democrats to turn the Republican tide that favors government intrusion into a woman’s health care.
Journey Home 
You must be logged in to post a comment.