Canada Geese finding open water as the lake re-freezes on Feb. 25, 2026.
When I began writing for Blog for Iowa in 2009, I covered individual political events like the state hall of fame ceremonies and the special election of Curt Hanson. In reading those old posts, I remembered I also wrote advocacy for nuclear weapons abolition and for improvement in the environment. Those kinds of posts remain viable and while I’m covering for Dave Bradley the next couple of months, I will revisit them from time to time.
At the same time there is a new politics around Iowans. So much of what we get from Republicans is vindictive. We feel that particularly well in Johnson County where I live. I mean, we need a law to force counties to follow the governor’s orders about flying the United States flag at half staff? HSB 634 does that and it cleared the first legislative funnel. The bill was in reaction to Johnson County Supervisor Jon Green defying the governor’s order to lower flags to half staff after the death of a conservative podcaster. Defending against Republican vindictiveness is a slippery slope. I, for one, decline to go there. Why slide down into the mud with them?
What is worth writing about? For me it is the several conversations I have each day with actual people about actual issues, regardless of our politics. Things like the ungodly amount of money our county spends transporting prisoners because there has not been public support enough to build a new jail. The presence of blue-green algae in the state park lake near where I live. The odor of concentrated animal feeding operations wafting over our homes on warm summer evenings. The covert work of fossil fuel money to kill one of the shining examples of what is good in Iowa: our support for electricity generated from wind turbines and solar arrays. These are things I hear from actual people and they will carry weight in how I pick my topics.
In a time of instant access to public media, the national news plays a role here. I wish it were buffered by distance, yet it clearly is not. We have a president and national media geared to dominating what we hear and see in public media. It would be dishonest to ignore all of those stories. So I will pick some.
I hope readers will stick with me. I hope to provide reasons why you should.
Those following the president’s public statements about Iran knew trouble was brewing when on Thursday, Feb. 26, after a meeting in Geneva, Switzerland between U.S. and Iranian envoys, mediated by Oman, and with the International Atomic Energy Agency present, the administration provided no readout to members of the press.
“The U.S. reticence is likely in order to give US President Trump maximum space to decide if he wants to continue pursuing diplomacy or, as a massive U.S. military buildup in the region portends, strike Iran in order to try to get a better deal,” wrote Laura Rozen from Diplomatic.
This morning, Israel and the United States bombed Iran.
On Feb. 20, the Arms Control Association issued this statement:
Another U.S. aerial military strike on Iran, as President Trump said on Friday he is considering, would not advance the goal of blocking Iran’s potential pathways to acquire nuclear weapons if its leaders were to decide to do so. Rather, a U.S. attack would undermine ongoing diplomacy between Iran and the United States and damage efforts to secure return international inspectors to sensitive sites that were bombed in 2025 by Israel and the United States. Even a “limited” U.S. military strike runs a serious risk of igniting a wider, more intense, and prolonged regional conflict, and such an attack would be inconsistent with the U.S. and international law.
This came from our local chapter of Veterans For Peace on Tuesday:
The U.S. is on the cusp of a war on Iran. Although the U.S. stands on the brink of what may be the most consequential military action in over two decades, there has been no public debate nor congressional briefing, let alone a vote to authorize it. What can peacemakers do? As of now, Feb 24th, war has not broken out. There is a Massie-Khanna effort in the House, and a Kaine-Paul effort in the Senate which would prohibit military action against Iran unless there is a declaration of war or specific authorization from Congress. So, #1, we need to encourage Iowa members and other members of Congress to support those resolutions. (Congress’ switchboard # 202 224-3121). #2 we need to bear witness before war breaks out. Will that stop war from breaking out? – most likely not. But I would submit that silence is not an option. SO, what shall we do?
Hit the streets with local activists to demand No War and Hands Off Iran. Where? When? Please, let us “reply to all” with suggestions and advice by Saturday, Feb 28th. Peace, Ed Flaherty
When will the Congress reign in the president on matters of war? Talks with Iran should continue before more combat.
The portion of my autobiography after leaving a transportation and logistics career looks a lot like the ice in this photograph. Parts of it are smooth, yet thin, because only recently it was open water. Parts have frozen and thawed so many times it is difficult to determine where the surface could support a human. This morning, I stood on the bridge to where the boat docks will go this summer and felt I didn’t know what I was writing.
I haven’t given up. I’m deep in 2010, which was a pivotal year across my life in writing, politics, home ownership, work, and family life changes. I felt economic pressure from leaving a regular paycheck combined with depletion of savings. In my life, however, money was never anything to fret about.
The backlash to the election of Barack Obama was severe that year. It took less than a year, yet Republicans demonstrated they viewed little about Obama’s election as permanent, including the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which was signed into law that year. They reorganized themselves around right-wing figures while blocking and undoing the good things Obama did. That struggle continues.
I held a job trying to get U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley’s vote for the New START treaty, something D.C. lobbyists for nuclear abolition thought possible. When the Senate ratified the treaty on Dec. 22, 2010, we had not won Grassley’s vote.
There was a long automobile trip west to the high plains with a lifelong friend. Upon my return, I helped organize a 40th year high school class reunion which put me in touch with people I hadn’t thought of for decades. These were both positive and re-established my roots. I had a lot of material originating in 2010 and crammed as much as I could into a single draft chapter. Perhaps that was not a wise tactic.
The best approach to this revision may be to not work at all. Let everything sit for a few days. Focus on other projects and forget about writing. For this book to be any good, there is no deadline, even if I still want to finish by the end of this year.
I set it aside, thinking, maybe I could use a nap. I read in David Morrell’s book about writing, shaved, showered and re-started my day. I already feel the better for it.
Two Canada Geese swimming in a sliver of open water on Feb. 19, 2026.
It snowed enough Friday morning to shovel the driveway. That 40 minutes of exercise substituted for trail walking yet I got this photo the day before. Ambient temperatures the next couple of days are forecast to be in the teens, so geese swimming in open water may have to find something else to do. I have plenty to do indoors.
I’m working on a new project with tentative title, “Food Algorithms.” The idea is to describe steps in the process of creating food from seed to table. My first step is creating a series of six or so posts that experiment with the language of this. If that goes well, a book-length text will be next in queue after I finish my autobiography. Stay tuned.
When I published my first book, I was in a big yank to finish and print it. It was imperfect, and I expected that. This time, I learned a lot about writing prose, and it shows in the text I shared with key readers. As a result of this learning I know what I want the text to look like, which things to cut, and which to enhance. I guess I am becoming more of a writer. Nine more chapters to re-work on this pass.
Another short post today while I get back to editing. The cooler weather suits me for now.
Short post today. I haven’t considered my early days on Blogger and WordPress until now. They were outlets for all kinds of writing.
Been working on a chapter about the early years of social media and blogging. This paragraph needs work yet it captures one way I used the platforms in those early blogging days.
When I began blogging in 2007, I had no idea where it would go. I wrote more than 5,600 posts since the beginning. For a long time, it was the only writing I did each day. It became a writer’s workbench to test ideas and how to express them. Some days the posts were cringe worthy. Some days I touched the sky. Part of me would like to return to handwriting paper journals the way I did before 2007. Part of me does not.
I also re-wrote the first paragraph of the chapter. Next I will re-do the rest.
I also mention social media in it. I was active on half a dozen platforms and joined Facebook in March 2008, after which made this brief post:
Tonight I joined Facebook. Yikes! Facebook connects us to people we have not thought of in years. In some cases we haven’t made contact in over a quarter of a century. All within a couple of hours. From moment to moment, the number of “friends” builds. What to say on the site? What elements to show? What pictures to place? How much time to spend? When a friend accepts the invitation, it feels good. The wave has broken, now I’ll ride it in.
If there was excitement at first, when our child stopped posting there I lost interest. It took a while yet in 2025 I deactivated my account. My problem was the contrast between lots of activity and the loneliness I felt as a result of being increasingly away from the real world. There is a kind of relationship on social media, I determined it was not a good one.
The purpose of the chapter is to figure out the meaning of all this. Maybe I will.
Writing space at Five Points in Davenport, Iowa, 1980.
Ambient temperature was to climb to 60 degrees Fahrenheit on Sunday. It made it to 61. Spring is in the air, even if that thought is not rational given the calendar. I sat down and outlined the path to finalizing my book.
I finished the initial draft on Jan. 5, and am 37 chapters into the first pass of revisions. What are reasonable next steps toward publication? I laid them out.
It will take two to four weeks to finish this pass of the remaining 12 chapters. After our child leaves Iowa after college in the story, the chapters have a different focus. I wrote them quickly, now I must revise them slowly. Given three to four hours of early morning darkness, that should be doable. With each passing day, I lose darkness, yet I will persevere.
After this pass, I plan a structural review. The purpose here is to ensure the book has continuity, that it is going somewhere with intent. I laid out a sheet of 8×11 paper with a chapter title on each, and arranged them in the current order. On each sheet I will define where the chapter starts, where it ends, and then summarize in a sentence or two what story movement is included. I already see some order-switching at hand.
Once structural concerns are addressed, it’s time for a reality check. Is the book saying what I want? Is it meaningful? Once those questions are adequately addressed, it is time for a second pass with re-writing, if needed.
This pass leads to proofreading and getting the book formatted for a local printing in either spiral or comb binding. I will pick the printer and make a dozen or so copies for early readers.
If everything comes together, by Memorial Day, manuscripts have been distributed to a small group of trusted readers whose screening process answered the questions: Did they read the first book when delivered? Did they provide meaningful comments? I have a couple of new readers in mind, with whom I’ve had conversations about my book, yet haven’t read it yet. While I will be in a hurry at this point, the book then becomes potential summer reading for this group.
The next goal is to collect feedback as it comes, in whatever format it is. No later than Labor Day I enter a decision table: Do I print privately as in the first book, or take steps to use a printing service to make the book into various formats: eBook, paper book, and audio book and distribute more broadly? The answer to this question is not made and I would be happy with either outcome.
The three to four hours of writing each day leaves plenty of time for a life. In my eighth decade, every bit of life is important.
Here is the draft preface from my autobiography in progress, with working title, A Working Life: A Memoir. It is a record of lived participation in work, place, institutions, and time. The book will be as good as I can make it, and with diligence, finished this year.
PREFACE
My story resumes after returning from visiting friends in the American South to Iowa City where I would work as a writer. I just finished my master’s degree and had enough resources to get started.
The first book, An Iowa Life: A Memoir, reflects an extended childhood and education. Next, I began writing.
I take you with me as our family moved to Cedar Rapids, then to Indiana and finally back to our present home. When our child left home, and then left Iowa, the story breaks loose into individual essays about ways I lived, worked, and engaged in society.
When I began work at CRST, Inc. I had no career plan. What I learned though my work in transportation and logistics was the country was changing. Industries repeatedly restructured and I spent years listening to thousands of people explain what had just been taken from them. The experience changed me.
To indicate passages drawn from journals, notes, and my public writing, I use italics.
I have limited names and altered identifying details for those who are not public figures.
Despite issues with our current political and social environment, I must press toward completion of my book. Mine has been a life of delayed gratification, and in my eighth decade, I am running out of time to finish this work.
As I write, the administration announced repeal of the Endangerment Finding. Commentators are commenting about it, and I don’t have anything unique to say. Why wouldn’t we want to reduce and control pollutants entering the atmosphere? No one asked me.
This second book is going to be better written than the first. Maybe I am learning how to shut the world out and focus on craft. That is necessary not only in creative work, but in many aspects of our lives. While my writing space encompasses the entire world, at this stage of the work, close focus is critical. I can only consider one idea at a time, one sentence at a time, the way an air traffic controller lands airplanes. Hopefully the book will make a safe landing.
It was Bill Gates while at Microsoft who said when he had a major project, he stored relevant stuff away and didn’t look at it. Then, when it was time, he focused all attention on that task and saw it through to completion. The benefit of the approach was loose ends tended to get sorted out in the waiting period. While busy for a short duration, the process made less work in the end. This was my approach to preparing for my role as a site manager in the 2026 Democratic Precinct Caucuses. The caucus was last night and I began preparation the day before. It was plenty of time.
I’m no Bill Gates and in some ways, that’s a good thing. This technique can work well when properly applied. Especially in politics, it is difficult to distinguish the signal from the noise, and time and calmness can help clarify that.
We had a good group of caucus volunteers. It made things go smoothly.
What characterized the 2008 presidential election for Democrats was the systematic use of nearly every procedural, legal, organizational, and technological lever within the electoral process to bring people to the polls that were previously infrequent voters. The Obama campaign innovated within the existing electoral system, integrating policy, organizational structure, data analytics, and ground tactics into one single, continuous outreach to voters. The results speak for themselves. Obama won — decisively.
I have living memory of that campaign, and it is worth examining how the underlying process has changed since then. In 2008, the focus was on persuading people to vote and vote for Obama and other Democrats. In the years since, a series of Republican-led changes in election law shifted the challenge away from persuasion and toward altering how voters participate in elections. These shifts in process are making a difference, particularly for the kinds of turnout strategies used by the Democratic campaign in 2008.
In Iowa, these changes took concrete form in the voting restrictions enacted by Republicans in 2021. The law signed by Governor Kim Reynolds redefined key elements of the electoral process in ways that made voting more difficult. I list the provisions of the law here in full because this post is intended as a reference. Taken together, these changes make campaigns like the one Obama ran in 2008 significantly harder to execute. The new laws must be followed, and campaign leaders have adjusted accordingly.
According to the Iowa State Association of County Auditors, the law required the following changes:
Voters must register to vote 15 days or more before the election to appear on the voter register on election day (formerly 11 days, and 10 days for general elections). Voters may still register to vote on election day, or when voting absentee in person, with both proof of identity andproof of residence.
A voter who has moved and has therefore been sent mail by the County Auditor to inquire of their proper address, andwho did not vote in the most recent general election (formerly the last two general elections), shall be marked inactive (unless they were not 18 years old at the time of the most recent general election). Registrations of inactive voters will not be cancelled until two more general elections pass with no voter activity.
Polls close at 8:00 pm for all elections (formerly 9:00 pm for primary and general elections).
When a registered voter is attesting to the identity and residency of a voter unable to present required forms of identification, the attesting voter must present his/her own required form of identification.
For a provisional ballot to be counted, the voter must either provide the necessary identification at the polling place before it closes at 8:00 pm, or provide it at the Auditor’s Office by noon on the following Monday. If the canvass by the Board of Supervisors will be held earlier than the following Monday (for cities with possible runoff elections), the identification must be provided before the canvass. (The post-election deadline was previously unclear.)
Employers must allow employees two consecutive hours to vote on election day, if they do not already have two consecutive hours off during the time the polls are open (formerly three hours).
The first day to submit an absentee ballot request form to your County Auditor is 70 days before an election (formerly 120 days).
The first day County Auditors may mail absentee ballots to voters is 20 days before an election (formerly 29 days).
The first day to vote absentee in person at the Auditor’s Office is 20 days before an election (formerly 29 days). (If you have requested a ballot by mail prior to this, your ballot will go out in the mail on this date.)
The first day to vote absentee in person at a satellite location is 20 days before the election (formerly 29 days), and satellite voting locations may only be established by a public petition with a minimum of 100 signatures (formerly County Auditors could establish satellite locations on their own motion). To learn how to request one, click here.
Absentee ballot requests for voting by mail must be received by 15 days before the election (formerly 11 days, and 10 days for general elections). Exception: If a voter is admitted to a health care facility, dementia-specific assisted living program, or hospital 14 or fewer days before the election, the voter may request an absentee ballot by telephone no later than 4 p.m. on election day.
Absentee ballots must be received by the county auditor by 8:00 pm on election day.(Previously, ballots were valid if postmarked before Election Day and received by the Monday following the election.) Postmarks or bar codes printed on ballot envelopes will no longer make a ballot received after election day valid, except in these cases:
Ballots from participants in the Safe at Home program received by the Secretary of State in time to be transmitted to the County Auditor by noon on the Monday following the election.
Ballots from uniformed and overseas citizens received by noon on the Monday following the election.
If an absentee ballot affidavit envelope is not signed by the voter, the County Auditor shall contact the voter, who may then:
Request a replacement ballot and return it by 8:00 pm on election day (changed from postmarked the day before the election or earlier).
Vote at the polls on election day.
Sign the affidavit in person at the county auditor’s office by 8:00 pm on election day (changed from 5:00 pm the day before the election).
Absentee ballot requests for voting by mail must be received by the County Auditor 15 days before the election (see exceptions above).
Must include the date the request is signed.
May not be sent to voters by County Auditors unless a voter requests one.
May not be sent to voters by the Secretary of State unless directed to do so by the state legislature in the event of a public health disaster declared by the governor.
May be sent to voters by candidates, political groups, and other private organizations, but no fields on the request form may be prefilled except for type and date of election.
The only people who may return a voted absentee ballot other than the voter are:
Someone living in the voter’s household
An immediate family member
The two special precinct election officials who deliver a ballot to the resident of a health care facility, dementia-specific assisted living program, or hospital
Voters unable to return a ballot due to blindness or other disability may use a “delivery agent” to deliver their ballots
Absentee ballots may be returned via designated ballot drop boxes (unless returned by a “delivery agent”), which if available must be located on the grounds of or within the building where the County Auditor conducts in-person absentee voting. (Auditors are not required to provide drop boxes.)
In the case of a voter unable to return a ballot due to blindness or other disability, the voter may ask a “delivery agent” to deliver their ballot. “Delivery agent” is defined as follows:
If a voter with a disability designates a delivery agent, the voter must complete and sign a designation form prescribed by the Secretary of State.
A delivery agent shall return no more than two absentee ballots per election.
The delivery agent shall fill out a receipt in a form prescribed by the Secretary of State and shall leave it with the voter.
The delivery agent shall collect the voter’s designation form at the same time as collecting the ballot, and shall deliver the ballot and designation form to the County Auditor at the same time. The delivery agent must:
Deliver the ballot in person to the County Auditor, not by mail or drop box.
Provide to the County Auditor the same identification as a voter at the polls.
Provide the following on a form prescribed by the Secretary of State:
Full legal name
Residential address
Phone number
Email address, if applicable
Sign a statement (prescribed in the law) certifying under penalty of perjury that the delivery agent has complied with the law.
The following was sent to U.S. Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst, and to U.S. Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks.
I watched the videos of the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. Major news media verified what I saw are real footage that depicts the killing of two U.S. Citizens who were no threat to federal agents. Good and Pretti were exercising their constitutional rights when federal agents killed them.
This can’t go on.
As our U.S. Senator I expect you to do something to prevent additional killings like this. I don’t presume to tell you how to go about that. The measure of whether you succeed will be the de-escalation of tension in states where federal agents have landed to address the administration’s concerns about immigration, including Minnesota and Maine.
As a U.S. Army veteran I am appalled by the apparent lack of training and control of these federal agents. Now is the time to put your experience in politics to work and do something most everyone can agree is the right thing to de-escalate these tensions.
Thank you for your service and for reading my note.
Should they respond, I will post the response below.
On Thursday, Feb. 5, Senator Joni Ernst emailed the following response to my letter. It is posted in its entirety.
Dear Mr. Deaton,
Thank you for contacting me about federal immigration enforcement. It is important for me to hear from folks in Iowa on matters like this.
No doubt Americans have firm disagreements on immigration, but it is essential for all of us, regardless of our political beliefs, to remain united behind a shared desire for the best future of our country. While I support Americans’ right to protest peacefully, no disagreement justifies violence.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) data show Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) law enforcement officers have faced a dramatic rise in violent incidents and threats while carrying out their duties over the past year. Reported figures include a 3,200 percent increase in vehicle-ramming incidents, an 8,000 percent increase in death threats, and a 1,300 percent increase in assaults against officers.
These alarming trends underscore the critical importance of enforcing existing laws intended to secure the border and preserve the integrity of our immigration system. During prior administrations, ICE encountered fewer violent confrontations, in part due to many apprehensions occurring within the controlled environment of local jails after criminal aliens had been detained by local authorities, enabling safer ICE transfers. In the last several years, however, cities including Portland, Oregon, and Minneapolis, Minnesota, have adopted “sanctuary policies” directing local law enforcement to disregard ICE detainer requests and decline arrests involving individuals otherwise eligible for removal. Sanctuary policies have complicated federal enforcement efforts and, according to DHS data, coincide with a sharp rise in threats and attacks targeting immigration officers.
As you know, federal immigration officers in Minneapolis, Minnesota, fatally shot Renee Good and Alex Pretti. While the U.S. Senate lacks jurisdiction over any pending investigations involving the actions of individual ICE or U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel, please know I appreciate you taking the time to share your perspective. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is currently leading the investigation into the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti.
Following these incidents, White House Border Czar Tom Homan reaffirmed the administration will keep immigration enforcement efforts targeted, prioritizing public safety and national security threats in our communities. In Minnesota, federal officials have been working with state and local partners to improve coordination, strengthening the safety and efficiency of immigration operations for law enforcement officers, community interactions, and detainees.
I recognize folks have strong feelings about these incidents, and I understand the emotions these tragedies evoke, as any loss of American life carries immense grief for families and communities. As a member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I have the opportunity to engage with my colleagues on these topics. On February 12, the committee will hold a public hearing with leadership from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, CBP, and ICE. This hearing is available at https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/hearings/ .
Should legislation on related issues come up for a vote, I will keep your thoughts in mind. I also welcome any additional insights or concerns you may have, as I always enjoy hearing from Iowans.
Sincerely,
Joni K. Ernst United States Senator
On Tuesday, Feb. 24, Senator Chuck Grassley emailed the following response to my letter. It is posted in its entirety.
Dear Paul:
Thank you for taking the time to contact me. As your senator, it is important that I hear from you. I know from your correspondence this is an issue you care deeply about.
I appreciate hearing of your concerns regarding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) presence in Minneapolis, Minnesota. I understand that there are ongoing investigations concerning the recent shootings in Minneapolis. We ought to let the investigation play out before making any judgments. Let me be clear, one death is too many and I will be watching the investigation closely.
Additionally, I was encouraged to hear that President Trump and Governor Walz spoke by phone as well as Mayor Frey. I sincerely hope Minnesota and federal law enforcement can reach an understanding so our federal immigration laws can be enforced safely.
Law enforcement continues to face a record number of threats in the course of their duties. When any incidents occur, potential misconduct is investigated; such is the case for the incident you referenced. I want to be clear though that our officers should never be threatened or harmed while enforcing our laws.
To that end, I believe there is a clear difference between the conduct protected by the First Amendment and unlawful obstruction.
I am continuing to monitor ICE’s operations and appreciate you sharing your comments.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.
Journey Home 
You must be logged in to post a comment.