Tag: Blog for Iowa

Categories
Environment Living in Society

Algae and the Politics of Denial

Algae Bloom in Lake Erie, Oct. 5, 2011. Photo Credit – NASA Earth Observatory

During his July 8 speech on the environment, the president mentioned his administration’s fight with “toxic algae” in Florida 50 miles from his Mar-a-Lago resort.

Bruce Hrobak, a bait and tackle shop owner in Port St. Lucie, Fla. gave a testimonial at the event about the great job he thought the federal government did to help his business which was “devastated by toxic algae from Lake Okeechobee.” His praise was about more than the government.

“You jumping into this environment brings my heart to warmth, knowing that what you’re doing is going — is the truth,” Hrobak said. “It’s going wonderfully. My business in 2018 was so horrible, we — I own two stores — we closed several days a week because of, you know, the algae and people being frightened, if they were afraid to touch the water and everything. I have a marine mechanic — I just wanted to say really quickly — has a bad infection in his arm from the marine algae and stuff.”

Mr. Hrobak gushed about the attention his problem had received and mentioned his wife was yelling at him less because business was better this year. People laughed and applauded. Rhetorically anyway, Trump halted advance of the red tide.

Iowans are familiar with the problems of algal blooms. The nutrient-rich soup that comprises our lakes and streams has been a hindrance to public recreation. We’ve restricted access to public beaches and educated kayakers, swimmers and boaters about the dangers of exposure to blue-green algae and the microcystins they produce. Iowa’s response to the problem amounts to shrugging our shoulders.

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources doesn’t plan to follow new federal recommendations for beach water quality that could lead to more public warnings about toxins in the water, according to a June 20 Cedar Rapids Gazette article by Erin Jordan.

Instead of adopting federal standards for algal contamination, an Iowa Department of Natural Resources spokesperson told the Gazette, “The group does not agree with the formula and science used to develop the eight micrograms per liter for cyanotoxins microcystins standard.”

Arguing with science is the new normal for government doing what it wants. The other new normal is the president asserting he has addressed a problem when in fact he is ignoring it.

Mother Jones reported July 12 on a toxic algae problem not being adequately addressed by the administration:

In June, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration projected a Massachusetts-sized dead zone would alight upon the Gulf of Mexico, driven by a vast algae bloom fed by fertilizer runoff from the upper Midwest. As the bloom decays, it sucks oxygen out of the water. As a result, as NOAA puts it, “habitats that would normally be teeming with life become, essentially, biological deserts.”

And on Thursday, NOAA predicted that Lake Erie, which provides drinking water to 11 million people, will also experience a massive harmful algae bloom, starting in late July. The bloom is fed largely by phosphorus runoff in the Maumee River basin in Ohio, where the land is dominated by corn and soybean farms as well as massive indoor hog farms. Phosphorus is a key nutrient for plant growth, and farmers apply it to fields in the form of fertilizer (which comes mainly from phosphate mines in Florida) and hog manure.

People argue in social media that algae blooms are a naturally occurring phenomenon, that they are nothing to worry about. While that is partly true, they do occur naturally, they are fed to grow very large by agricultural runoff. For political reasons, government won’t connect the dots and take action on the much larger issue of nutrient runoff.

“Science is a fundamental part of the country that we are,” Neil deGrasse Tyson said. “But in this the 21st century, when it comes time to make decisions about science, it seems to me people have lost the ability to judge what is true and what is not… When you have people who don’t know much about science standing in denial of it and rising to power, that is a recipe for the complete dismantling of our informed democracy.”

The president is addressing red algae in his back yard. What has he done about blue-green algae for the rest of us? He denied us a solution and distracted us from the problem. This while his minions in the audience for the speech stood and applauded.

We’ve go to do something better.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society

Toward a Challenger for Joni Ernst

U.S. Senate Candidate Theresa Greenfield, Walker Homestead, Johnson County, Iowa. July 14, 2019

Two of three people running for the Democratic nomination to be U.S. Senator from Iowa spoke at State Senator Zach Wahls’ birthday fundraiser at Walker Homestead in Johnson County on Sunday.

Clutching a microphone in one hand and her hand-written speech notes in the other, Theresa Greenfield of Des Moines went second to last in a 90 minute series of speakers that included five presidential hopefuls.

Eddie Mauro of Des Moines had arrived early to the event and introduced himself to some of the more than 200 attendees. When he stepped onto the stage surrounded by straw bales, he was the last of twelve speakers.

Kimberly Graham, a Democrat from Indianola, was first to announce her bid to challenge U.S. Senator Joni Ernst. While she did not attend Wahls’ event, there was substantial press coverage of her May entry into the race.

Of the three candidates, Theresa Greenfield is said to be the front runner, however, there are challenges ahead for whoever is the party’s nominee. Joni Ernst won the 2014 general election with 52 percent of the vote and in a recent Ann Selzer poll, more than 57 percent of Iowans approve of the job she is doing. The goal for Democrats is to prevent Ernst from becoming an institution, making her a single term senator.

Democratic activists I know haven’t begun to dial into the U.S. Senate race yet, focusing more on the February 2020 presidential caucuses. Following are some links to information about the three Democratic candidates, including the verbatim about page from their websites.

Kimberly Graham

Launch video

Website

About Page:

I’m Kimberly Graham. I never thought in a million years I’d run for office. But it’s time for a government “by the people, for the people.”

Senator Joni Ernst campaigned on a promise to “make ’em squeal” in Washington D.C. and get rid of corruption, but the only people squealing are Iowans harmed by her votes.

Because our “By The People, For The People” campaign will be funded only by donors like you, and *never* by corporate PACS, the NRA or the Koch Brothers, I won’t be influenced by lobbyists and companies whose only interest is increasing their wealth. Instead, I’ll be representing the majority: you and Iowans who deserve better representation than you’ve been receiving.

What I’ve seen from Washington D.C. the last couple of years is the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer and the middle class shrinking. We need more people from working-class backgrounds serving in government, representing the majority of us and not mega-corporations. So I’m running for United States Senate.

I lived in rural Iowa longer than anyplace else, for 24 years. I chose to raise my son in Indianola.

My maternal great-great-grandfather had a farm in Zearing and my paternal grandmother was born in Mt. Ayr. My dad was one of 11 siblings born in Des Moines. He was a Marine, later a bridge-builder, and mom was a clerk at the phone company. Neither of them went to college but had good union jobs and worked hard to give my brother and me a solid working-class upbringing.

I’ve been working since I was 14: in a dry cleaner, as a waitress, store clerk, and housecleaner. I worked my way through college. I wanted to help people for a living so I went to law school, paying my own way and taking out student loans. I still have student loan debt. Now I work as an advocate for abused or neglected kids in court.

Living in rural Iowa and raising my son, I watched as the furniture, clothing, shoe stores, and other businesses on the square closed after fast-food chains and mega-stores moved in.

I’ve watched farmers struggle with increasing costs while being paid less for crops, with fewer companies from which to purchase seed and being treated unfairly as our current president enacts tariff after tariff, harming family farms. Iowans want and deserve a level playing field and a real chance at thriving small towns and thriving cities.

I’ve watched medical insurance premiums, mine included, rise to the point that families are paying more for medical insurance than for housing. Many simply can’t afford insurance anymore. Medical care costs of a serious illness are bankrupting families and forcing them to spend their life savings. It’s not right, that in the wealthiest nation on earth, this is happening.

In my work as the guardian ad litem and attorney for kids of participants in Family Treatment Court, I’ve watched the opioid and meth epidemics rip families apart and damage our communities. I’ve seen veterans return from service, experiencing trauma, and not receive services quickly or locally enough.

Iowans deserve better. As I mentioned above, Senator Ernst campaigned on a promise to “make ’em squeal” in Washington D.C. and get rid of corruption, but the only people squealing are Iowans harmed by her votes. I support major campaign finance reform and sweeping anti-corruption legislation to return our government to The People. We must get Big Money OUT of politics. No more politics as usual.

I’m running for U.S. Senate because the government should truly be “by the people, for the people.” It should work for the benefit of the majority, not the small number of wealthy. I’m not worried about them. They’ll be fine whether they have 50 million dollars a year income or 40 million. But I am worried about the rest of us.

We need Medicare for All, farmers to be treated fairly, good jobs all over the state and a level playing field so monopolies can’t destroy farms and small towns. Iowans need clean air and water, a justice system that treats everyone fairly and equally, and good public schools that provide the same high-quality education to all children, regardless of whether they live in Clive or Creston. We need representation in the U.S Senate that isn’t bought by corporations, drug companies or any special interests.

My goal is to be the best senator money *can’t* buy. Please join me in a movement For the People, By the People of Iowa.

Theresa Greenfield

Launch video

Website

About Page:

Theresa Greenfield grew up on a family farm, where she and her four siblings learned the value of hard work and self-reliance. Her father Derald encouraged his daughters to do everything the boys did on the Greenfield farm, and at 16, Theresa and her sister began helping with the family crop-dusting business, meeting with farmers to negotiate terms, and mark out fields while Derald was in the air lining up his plane for the next job.

When the farm crisis of the 1980s hit rural families like Theresa’s, she did not give up on her dream to attend college. With the help of financial aid and multiple part-time jobs, she put herself through school. Theresa married and as she and her husband were expecting their second child, he was killed in an accident at his job as a union electrical worker. Theresa set out on a path to provide for her two boys as a single mom.

Theresa worked as an urban planner and then joined Rottlund Homes, where she rose quickly through the ranks and soon moved to Des Moines to lead the company’s Iowa Division. Today, she serves as President of Colby Interests, one of Des Moines’ oldest family-held real estate and development companies. She lives with her husband Steve in Des Moines and together they have four grown children: Tanya, a media specialist; Nick, a horticulturist; Phil, a healthcare consultant; and Dane, a soldier in the U.S. Army.

Now, more than ever, Iowans need more leaders like Theresa in the U.S. Senate: a farm kid with farm kid values whose get-it-done attitude will help get things done for working families — from investing in education, to making it easier for small businesses to thrive, to cutting healthcare costs.

Eddie Mauro

Recent Video

Website

About Page:

Eddie J Mauro is a business owner, father, coach, community volunteer and former teacher who is committed to working hard to improve the performance of our government and empower people.

Additional links to resources about the candidates would be welcome in the comments.

UPDATE: On Monday, Aug. 26, Michael Franken announced his intent to run for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in Iowa. View his launch video here.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society

Can Democrats Change The ‘Roberts Five’ Majority?

U.S. Supreme Court

If Democrats hope to undo the conservative lean of the United States Supreme Court it won’t be as simple as Republicans had it in 2016.

Many said the 2016 general election was as much about the Supreme Court as it was about electing a president. It was a unique historical opportunity, where appointing two associate justices could impact the court for decades, with Iowa’s senior senator Chuck Grassley playing a key role as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

With the 2005 appointment of Chief Justice John Roberts and two recent associate justice appointments, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, Republicans have remade the high court in a way that consistently delivers opinions in favor of their interests.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) wrote about the Supreme Court and the “Roberts Five” majority in an April Issue Brief for the American Constitution Society:

It turns out that Republican appointees to the Supreme Court have, with remarkable consistency, delivered rulings that advantage the big corporate and special interests that are, in turn, the political lifeblood of the Republican Party. Several of these decisions have been particularly flagrant and notorious: Citizens United v. FEC, Shelby County v. Holder, and Janus v. AFCME. But there are many. Under Chief Justice Roberts’ tenure through the end of October Term 2017-2018, Republican appointees have delivered partisan rulings not three or four times, not even a dozen or two dozen times, but 73 times. Seventy-three decisions favored Republican interests, with no Democratic appointee joining the majority. On the way to this judicial romp, the “Roberts Five” were stunningly cavalier with any doctrine, precedent, or congressional finding that got in their way.

These cases fall into four categories according to Whitehouse.

(1) controlling the political process to benefit conservative candidates and policies;
(2) protecting corporations from liability and letting polluters pollute;
(3) restricting civil rights and condoning discrimination;
(4) advancing a far-right social agenda.

Even if a Democratic president returns to the White House in 2021, something far from assured, there may be only two opportunities to appoint associate justices when octogenarians Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer die, retire or otherwise move on. Such appointments wouldn’t impact the ideological balance of the high court. In fact, if justice were blind, would there even be an ideological balance to talk about?

No amount of liberal outrage will fix this Republican-made court. What’s a Democrat to do?

First, understanding what’s taking place in the Roberts Court should be a high priority. A beginning is to read Senator Whitehouse’s article here to understand the damage done since Roberts was appointed chief justice.

Second, the Republican strategy of holding judicial appointments open until a Republican president was elected was a multi-year, long-term strategy that worked. Whether or not politicizing the court system is a good idea, one has to ask, what is the Democratic plan to change the mix of justices? There may be one. If there is, how is it actionable for rank and file voters? I’m not sure chasing third tier Democratic presidential candidates around Iowa before the caucus is a positive contribution to the effort.

Finally, Democrats must do a better job of picking their battles. Outrageous behavior is a feature, not a bug of the Trump administration and Republican legislators. There will always be an outrage as long as Trump is president, because if nothing is going on, he will gin something up. When Republicans make us feel outraged, they also maintain control of public dialogue. In order to break their hold on voters we must work differently that we have recently. It begins by de-emphasizing social media and talking directly to friends and neighbors about how to resolve the issues society faces.

It’s not a flawless approach, however, we have to do something.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society

Can A Democrat Beat Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell?

Former Marine fighter pilot Amy McGrath announced she was running to beat Kentucky U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell in the Nov. 3, 2020 general election.

She raised $2.5 million during the first 24 hours after her announcement.

With 20 years in the United States Marine Corps and 89 combat missions under her belt, she demonstrated substantial courage and grit. If she can focus on one thing, beating McConnell, she may have a better path to election than any other recent challenger.

People are nit-picking her campaign apart after her July 9 announcement and it boils down to one thing: do Democrats want someone to take on McConnell or not? It won’t be easy for McGrath and it wouldn’t be easy for anyone. If there are better candidates out there, they should step forward.

What seems obvious from the blow back to McGrath’s campaign is we need a reminder of why Mitch McConnell has to go. Here’s Thom Hartmann interviewing Senator Jeff Merkley on that topic at Netroots Nation over the weekend.

It’s hard to tell whether anyone can beat Mitch McConnell in Kentucky. Democrats must step up and have Amy McGrath’s back if they are serious about taking the senate back.

Here’s McGrath’s biography from her campaign website:

Amy McGrath, a retired US Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel raised in Kentucky, is running for the US Senate to fix Washington and give Kentuckians back their voice.

Amy was born the youngest of three children to Donald and Marianne McGrath. Her father was a high school English teacher and her mother was one of the first women to graduate from the University of Kentucky medical school.

When Amy was 13 years old, she dreamed of becoming a fighter pilot, but women were not yet allowed to serve in combat roles in our military. So she wrote to her elected officials to ask them to change the law. She never heard back from her senator, Mitch McConnell.

Amy graduated from the US Naval Academy and overcame the odds to become the first woman in the Marine Corps to fly a combat mission in an F/A-18 fighter jet. She served 20 years in the Marines where she flew 89 combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, targeting al-Qaida and the Taliban, before retiring and moving back home to Kentucky to raise her family.

Amy lives in Georgetown, Kentucky, with her husband Erik, a retired Navy pilot and registered Republican, and her three children, Teddy (7), George (5), and Eleanor (3).

Amy became a Marine combat pilot to fight and defend her country and now she is taking the fight to Washington to solve the problems Kentuckians face in their every-day lives. Amy was a registered independent for 12 years, so she always prioritizes practical solutions over partisan interests. She’s not running for Senate to get rich and join the Washington swamp. Amy is ready to take on career politicians like Mitch McConnell and bring accountability and leadership back to Kentucky.

To learn more go to amymcgrath.com.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society

Support for Rita Hart

Rita Hart Photo Credit – Candidate Facebook Page

I first heard Rita Hart, candidate for U.S. Congress in Iowa’s second district, speak on Friday, June 26, 2015, at Gil’s Restaurant, Ballroom and Limousine Service in Clinton at the Clinton County Democrats Hall of Fame Dinner. I have no recollection of what she said as the number of speakers was large, and my memory not as good as it used to be.

I’m supporting Hart for Congress for three reasons: she is a two-term former state senator, as our lieutenant governor candidate in 2018 she helped organize the second district for Democrats, and she has an education and farming background. I already sent a small donation.

Of the two announced Democratic candidates, I know the other better, Newman Abuissa of Iowa City. I like Abuissa a lot, and am aware of his contributions to Iowa Democratic politics and the peace and justice movement. However, this is his first campaign for elected office and we need an experienced campaigner to keep this seat Democratic. Hart has a D behind her name, won her two races for state senator, and has the bona fides of a campaigner to support it. That’s enough for this open race, one of many important ones in the 2020 general election.

What about policy, one might ask. I didn’t agree with every vote Dave Loebsack made during his tenure, and don’t expect I will like every vote Rita Hart makes. I no longer seek a perfect candidate and Dave Loebsack’s endorsement of Hart is what I needed to hear before putting a check mark next to her name on the primary ballot.

View Rita Hart’s Announcement video here.

View Rita Hart’s TED Talk titled Re-envisioning Education – Seeing Schools Differently here.

Donate to Rita Hart’s campaign here.

Follow Rita Hart on Facebook and Twitter.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society

We’ve Got to Do Something

U.S. Capitol, Washington, D.C.

Over the weekend Erin Murphy, a Lee Enterprises Des Moines based reporter, said it was quiet in Iowa’s congressional primary races.

“Perhaps in the coming weeks and months, some of these quieter primary races will become more crowded,” Murphy wrote in the Quad City Times. “For now, though, the fairly low level of interest from candidates has been surprising.”

Murphy recounted the five 2020 congressional delegation races, noted who was in each race, and which were conspicuous by the absence of a declared candidate from one party or the other (a Democrat in Iowa 4 and a Republican in Iowa 2*). It is a long time until the June 2020 primary election, so Murphy’s surprise seems premature, even if he acknowledged the 11 months in the article.

My sense, from talking to Democratic voters, is there is near universal belief “we have to do something.” By that, they mean overturn Republican control of the presidency, keep the U.S. House and retake the U.S. Senate, and win one or both chambers of the state legislature. People are dead serious about it and seem willing to devote resources to making it happen. They will be sure to show up to vote in the general election.

The disconnect, and maybe the premise for Murphy’s article, is between the “we have to do something” feeling and nominees produced by the party. Voters I talk to don’t care that much about who is nominated for Congress and U.S. Senate unless they are an incumbent. They just know what we have now isn’t working.

I know what that’s like. We had to do something toward the end of George W. Bush’s first term. My response was to pick a race, focus, donate money, and volunteer every chance I got. I felt long-time Congressman Jim Leach had to go. While the Democratic challenger Dave Franker wasn’t the best candidate, everyone who volunteered on his campaign worked hard toward his election. “It didn’t work out well,” I mentioned to Dave Loebsack via email when he established an exploratory committee for the Second District Congressional seat in March 2005.

I put 2004 behind me and re-started my effort to ouster the incumbent. Voters I spoke with on the telephone and in person had turned against the once popular Leach. It almost didn’t matter our candidate was Dave Loebsack, because the expressed need for change was so prevalent. We went into election night not knowing if we’d win but hopeful based on the large number of voters who’d had it with the incumbent. As we now know, Loebsack was successful in defeating him.

I haven’t started door knocking or calling voters in 2019. As I mentioned, “we have to do something,” and that’s similar to 2006 which was the beginning of a Democratic wave that culminated in a national trifecta in 2008.

Why is it so quiet in the congressional races in July? I’m not sure that’s an accurate statement. Maybe there are less candidates running, however, the noise, if there is any, is more among rank and file Democrats, particularly those who are normally less active, taking it all in and discussing politics with friends and family. They need space to consider candidates in lives that don’t normally revolve around partisan politics. Outside the presidential preference at the February caucus, most don’t really care who nominees are as long as there is a D behind their name and candidates act like it. People are making room for politics in busy lives, but it hasn’t the high priority that will drive a more exciting race of the kind Murphy was expecting.

Resolved not to let Trump and the Republican policies stand, people seem hunkered down trying to make a go of it in an economy that favors the wealthy and where corporations strive to squeeze regular people out of every last dime. Maintaining the type of resolve needed to change our government takes energy, just a different kind than what’s represented in an active, multi-candidate primary.

People say an open primary and debate between multiple candidates is good for the party. I don’t know about that. Rank and file view it differently and people seem to take stock before declaring candidacy, realizing the financial investment in one of these five races will be significant. Maybe what you see is what you get and others don’t want to run of office.

July 2019 may be the quiet before a political storm that’s brewing next year.

* On July 8, Erin Murphy reported that Bobby Schilling filed paperwork with the Federal Elections Commission to run for Congress in Iowa’s second district as a Republican.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society Social Commentary Writing

Independence Day 2019

Flags at Oakland Cemetery -2012

Happy Independence Day… reluctantly.

I’ve not been a fan of the Independence Day holiday since military service. It’s not that I paid much attention to it previously. As a military officer I had time to reflect on the meaning of independence while stationed far from home among strangers.

People celebrate the Declaration of Independence and its grievances against the King of England. I don’t mind. While I’m as glad as anyone Elizabeth is not our queen, and Prince Charles will never be our king, Columbus’ “discovery” of the Americas was an affront to human society. 284 years later the damage had been done and the founders were formalizing a relationship with the King as the hegemony of natives had been diminished by disease and warfare.

Few things point out the advancement of pre-Columbian society, and what was lost, as much as the recent book, 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus by Charles C. Mann.

The premise of Mann’s book is there were societies in the Americas that were as sophisticated as any on the globe. They endured for multiple millennia, coming and going over time before Columbus arrived, cultures unknown to Europeans. The Declaration of Independence was an insider deal among participants who had no standing to occupy and exploit the Americas. Yet they did.

It was not unusual for Americans to side with natives at the time of independence, especially when compared to living under English rule. I side with Frederick Douglass who said,

Your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants, brass-fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy-a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages.

If I celebrate anything this day it is the renewed opportunity to get along with neighbors and friends, something I believe is critical to healing our broken Democracy. While we may not agree about the meaning of Independence Day, it is better to find common ground every way we can. We’ll need that in the Anthropocene Age.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Sustainability

Iran Deal Update

Photo Credit: Des Moines Register

Except for the president and members of his administration, the world supports the Iran Deal negotiated by the Obama administration with key allies and Iran.

On June 28, Austria, Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden, which are not party to the agreement, issued a statement supporting the Iran Deal:

“(We) attach the utmost importance to the preservation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed by Iran and unanimously endorsed by the UN Security Council, as a key instrument for the non-proliferation regime and a major contribution to stability in the region.”

The purpose of the agreement was to restrict Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear weapon. The United States, under President Donald Trump, chose to violate the JCPOA because the chief executive thought it was a “bad deal.”

Last week the president authorized new sanctions against Iran, but they already felt economic pain from previous ones. What this round of sanctions tells Iran and the rest of the world is the U.S. is running out of options, according to Jarrett Blanc at Politico,

With Iranian oil sales down to 300,000 barrels per day (from 2.5 million before sanctions were reapplied) and Iran’s economy suffering, the United States has effectively cut Iran out of international commerce already. The real signal Iran will take from the new sanctions is that the Trump administration either does not understand this reality or cannot come up with a more effective option to improve upon it.

Iran recently announced it would exceed the 300-kilogram limit on low-enriched uranium required by the Iran Deal. They did exceed it, which was widely reported on Monday. Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association made this June 27 press release with Kelsey Davenport, ACA director for nonproliferation policy, which summarizes where we stand regarding the Iran Deal (emphasis mine):

(Washington, DC)—Iran’s announcement that it may soon breach the 300-kilogram limit on low-enriched uranium set by the 2015 nuclear deal is an expected but troubling response to the Trump administration’s reckless and ill-conceived pressure campaign to kill the 2015 nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

It is critical that President Donald Trump does not overreact to this breach and further escalate tensions.

Any violation of the deal is a serious concern but, in and of itself, an increase in Iran’s low-enriched uranium stockpile above the 300-kilogram limit of 3.67 percent enriched uranium does not pose a near-term proliferation risk.

Iran would need to produce roughly 1,050 kilograms of uranium enriched at that level, further enrich it to weapons grade (greater than 90 percent uranium-235), and then weaponize it. Intrusive International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections would provide early warning of any further moves by Iran to violate the deal.

Tehran is not racing toward the bomb but rather, Iran’s leaders are seeking leverage to counter the U.S. pressure campaign, which has systematically denied Iran any benefits of complying with the deal. Despite Iran’s understandable frustration with the U.S. re-imposition of sanctions, it remains in Tehran’s interest to fully comply with the agreement’s limits and refrain from further actions that violate the accord.

If Iran follows through on its threat to resume higher levels of enrichment July 7, that would pose a more serious proliferation risk. Stockpiling uranium enriched to a higher level would shorten the time it would take Iran to produce enough nuclear material for a bomb–a timeline that currently stands at 12 months as a result of the nuclear deal’s restrictions.

The Trump administration’s failed Iran policy is on the brink of manufacturing a new nuclear crisis, but there is still a window to salvage the deal and deescalate tensions.

The Joint Commission, which is comprised of the parties to the deal (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and Iran) and oversees implementation of JCPOA, will meet June 28. The meeting is a critical opportunity for the state parties to press Iran to fully comply with the nuclear deal and commit to redouble efforts to deliver on sanctions-relief obligations.

For its part, the White House needs to avoid steps that further escalate tensions with Iran. Trump must cease making vague military threats and refrain from taking actions such as revoking waivers for key nuclear cooperation projects that actually benefit U.S. nonproliferation priorities.

If Trump does not change course, he risks collapsing the nuclear deal and igniting a conflict in the region.

If interested in following the progress of the Iran Deal, discussions with North Korea, and potential extension of the New START Treaty between Russia and the United States, follow Daryl Kimball on twitter @DarylGKimball.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa. Paul Deaton is, among other things, a member of the Arms Control Association.

Categories
Reviews

Summer Reading 2019

Lake Macbride

For the next five weeks I’ll be covering weekdays for our editor Trish Nelson who is on summer break. This is my seventh year to provide summer posts, and more than ten years since I began posting at Blog for Iowa.

Regular readers know my topics: politics, foreign affairs, the climate crisis, the Iowa legislature and nuclear abolition. I’ll contribute those types of posts and more as I compete to gain your interest in a busy media landscape.

While Iowa lakes struggle to maintain safe water quality for summer activities like boating, low impact water sports, and swimming, Lake Macbride experienced its first-ever public health warnings about microcystins produced by blue-green algae. Department of Natural Resources staff recommended people not swim in the lake because of high levels of toxins in the water. While the swimming ban was lifted, there is another traditional summer activity for those skeptical about the water’s suitability: reading a book. Following is a list of books readers might consider for summer reading.

I know the 720-page Mueller Report published by The Washington Post sounds like a lot and maybe a straight through reading isn’t for everyone. However, read ten pages per day and it can be finished in 2.4 months.

Willard “Sandy” Boyd, the fifteenth president of the University of Iowa, published a memoir this year, A Life on the Middle West’s Never-ending Frontier. He was university president when I was an undergraduate and graduate student. Boyd remains active as Rawlings/Miller professor of Law at the university and is president emeritus. The memoir offers his views of the role of a public university and how it evolved since he first worked at the University of Iowa in 1954. I picked it for my personal connection to Boyd, but there is a lot more to the memoir, especially if your interest is in higher education.

If folks haven’t read a history of the great migration of black citizens fleeing the south in the 20th Century in search of a better life, The Warmth of Other Suns: The Epic Story of America’s Great Migration by Isabel Wilkerson offers an option. After fifteen years of research and writing, Wilkerson published the book in 2010. It “examines the three geographic routes that were commonly used by African Americans leaving the southern states between 1915 and the 1970s, illustrated through the personal stories of people who took those routes,” according to her Wikipedia page. Knowing the history of the Great migration is essential to maintaining progressive values.

What is a single book to better understand the climate crisis? I found an answer in The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming by David Wallace-Wells. Fair warning: there is not much good news within these 310 pages. What the book does do is present a broad array of the effects of the climate crisis and how they impact us now and near term. Wallace-Wells seeks to address denial that climate change poses immediate consequences that are both ever-changing and happening in front of us. Required reading for anyone advocating a sustainable life on Earth. That should include almost everyone.

Democrats expecting a fair fight in the 2020 election aren’t playing by the same rules as Republicans. When we consider how progressive values might again gain dominance in American culture it is important to learn how we arrived at this Trump moment. Two books highlight how we got here and are worth reading: Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right (2016) by Jane Mayer, and Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for America (2017) by Nancy MacLean. When people talk about getting money out of politics they are just flapping their gums if they don’t understand how it got in. These two books provide that insight and are essential progressive reading.

It seems like yesterday I was having a cup of coffee with Kurt Michael Friese in Iowa City. It’s hard to believe he’s gone. In A Cook’s Journey: Slow Food in the Heartland Friese offers a guided tour of the slow food movement in the Midwest around 2008. While a little dated, the book is worth reading for the landscape of Midwestern local food it presents and people in the local food movement. It’s also a way to remember his work as a chef.

That’s what’s on my summer reading list. Feel free to share what’s on yours in the comments.

~ Written for Blog for Iowa

Categories
Living in Society

Iowa’s Medicaid Toothache

I worked as an admissions clerk at the University of Iowa Dental Clinic after graduate school. We saw patients from all around Iowa — wealthy patients with private insurance, indigents with limited means, and everyone in between. Anyone who came to my desk was accepted for treatment. What I knew then seems poised for change.

Cuts to regents university budgets combined with an Iowa Medicaid administrative disaster led the university to cut off new dental patients on Iowa Medicaid because of difficulty collecting fees and complicated new rules.

“The dispute pits state administrators at the university against their counterparts at the Iowa Department of Human Services,” Des Moines Register reporter Tony Leys wrote last Saturday. “It is the latest skirmish in the bitter controversy over whether Iowa should have private companies run its $5 billion Medicaid program.”

Over 600,000 poor and disabled Iowans are eligible for Medicaid and most adults are covered by its “Dental Wellness Plan,” according to the article. Existing patients will continue to receive treatment. People with pain or swelling will receive emergency treatment at the clinic. As for the rest, the future is uncertain. Read Leys’ article for more details.

The University of Iowa Dental School likely changed since I worked there. What hasn’t changed is Iowa’s poor and indigent populations need our help. Under Republican governance the state is creating obstacles to limited, reasonable dental care offered under Medicaid.

Governor Kim Reynolds is looking into the situation, according to the article. Since she’s all-in on Medicaid privatization, it may be a case of what you see is what you get.

~ First posted on Blog for Iowa, July 5, 2018