A Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper
During Hitler’s reign and now under Putin, people were, and now are, encouraged to spy on their neighbors and colleagues at work and report them to the government. In Eastern Europe, during the Cold War before the Velvet Revolution, one of the only safe places to share government criticism with family or friends was a “weekend house.”
In Europe, weekend houses were often clusters of garden plots in the countryside, each with what appear to be garden sheds, where people could go to escape un-airconditioned, often polluted cities. Many ordinary citizens would spend a weekend tending their gardens and sharing time with family and friends. Such places in the countryside also could serve as safe havens where people could talk freely about government policies and abuses with less fear of surveillance by government informants.
In addition to nosey neighbors next door or on the street or in the next yard, a Communist government might plant listening devices or hidden cameras in or near one’s home or apartment. For instance, during the Communist regime, it was said that secret police were stationed in the stairway leading to the apartment of Vaclav Havel, who was considered a dissident and who later was elected president of Czechoslovakia.
Now, in Iowa, someone secretly recorded three university faculty members, who are now being investigated by the Iowa attorney general. It is chilling that Iowa has stepped this far backwards to having to look over our shoulders before questioning or criticizing government policies or laws, like those who lived under the nazis, communists and dictators.
Will Iowans be forced to search for safe places or ways to criticize government policies? Or must we seek advice from family or friends in a former autocratic country on how to live in a police state?
Dennis Naughton, Cedar Rapids
This is the final month for Governor Reynolds’ Healthy Kids Iowa program. Since June, the state has been providing a food box per school-age child each month — instead of putting funds directly on an electronic card (known as Summer EBT) that eligible families can use at local grocery stores.
Without a doubt, Reynolds’ program has been a poor replacement for Summer EBT. It has served about 15% of the families previously helped (35,000 kids under HKI vs 240,000 under Summer EBT). Its monthly pickup system is inconvenient for providers, difficult for families without transportation and limits participation by Iowa farmers. It seems designed not to work, but to avoid spending money on food-insecure Iowans.
When I visited the governor’s office with advocacy groups in late July, I mentioned a refugee family that lives 4.5 miles from the distribution site with no transportation. I was told about “Healthy Kids Direct,” a little-known program that mails shelf-stable food — not the fresh items provided at pickup sites. It’s not listed on the Department of Health and Human Services website, doesn’t meet federal guidelines, and is funded entirely by the state. DHHS staff told me it’s very small and unlikely to expand — perhaps by design.
Pair this with added work requirements, and the result is fewer families receiving help and more children going hungry. That’s the opposite of “Healthy Kids.”
Tom Rendon, Des Moines
Considering the state of the Storm Lake streets I can’t help wondering about what King’s Pointe is worth or costing. Has the original debt been paid off or has the millions for repair been added to that debt? Is the “profit” which it makes every year considered just after the expenses of the year are paid off or after the interest and part principal of the debt have been paid for the year? What is owed on King’s Pointe and what it is worth after that debt is considered?
Streets are in disrepair, our schools need more fund, and property taxes continue to rise. Is King’s Pointe worth “it?”
Koy Wolverton, Storm Lake
When facing the barrage of sound and fury “flooding the zone” creates, our recent history can become a blur. It’s easy to forget that in 2016 Trump promised to repeal and replace Obamacare with something magical and wonderful for all of us.
The best promise was that he would ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it. There would be NO CUTS to Medicaid, Medicare or Social Security. In addition, no one would “be worse off financially,” meaning no premiums would increase.
During Trump’s first term, he and Republicans tried repeatedly to kill Obamacare, and now Republicans have voted for doing the opposite of every Trump commitment.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that over the next eight years 11.8 million people will lose Medicaid. People face more paperwork requirements and no provisional eligibility is allowed while paperwork is processed. States can charge higher Medicaid copays. Much of the cost borne by the federal government for Medicaid is being shifted to states. A program to help low-income seniors with Medicare payments has been scrapped. And the loss of the premium tax credits that enabled many Obamacare recipients to afford the program is predicted to cause 4.2 million people to lose coverage.
And what purpose is served by the bill? By cutting these health-care costs, Republicans can justify maintaining and expanding new tax cuts for the very wealthy and large corporations. Adding insult to injury, they claim those tax cuts don’t increase the national debt.
Let’s not be fooled again.
Sue Ravenscroft, Ames
From the Storm Lake Times Pilot, I’ve clipped recipes, followed them; the cookie bars were buttery delicious, and the meat/bean bake I’ve now made twice is the best meat/ bean bake I’ve ever eaten.
Your opinion page — I’m so appreciative; I hope the following will convey how much I appreciate what you write and print, week after week.
From Aug. 8, pages 4B and 5B, your pieces reveal like clear water the frayed, unraveled, kicked around, stomped on, dereliction of duties, fawning, gamesmanship, authoritarian cruelty of American life:
“Subversives on the loose” (I’ve written about this);
“Tariffs hit home” (Jeez, where is the national coverage from mainstream journalism? “Brazil replaced the USA as China’s preferred soy provider. Iowa assiduously courted the Chinese for 50 years and Trump has blown it up.)”
“A cynical business” (Hurts my heart; makes me think of Martin Luther King and Gandhi. “These people are not criminals, they are victims of criminal governments.” “JBS is owned by a prominent family in Brazil, the Batistas.” This is me shouting: “Mainstream” status quo journalism, Brazil “owning” meatpacking in Iowa is strange to me; where is the in-depth reporting!
“Farmers like green” (Offers hope).
“Scratch where it itches” (In the category of “you can’t make this stuff up).” Grassley gets put in the trash, the Trumpster fire. My heart doesn’t hurt for Grassley; should I worry?
Thank you for strengthening my mind and being a light in the darkness. I clearly don’t need “mainstream” or status quo journalism as long as you stay in print.
Gretchen Reeh-Robinson, Mount Vernon
These so called smart people who deny climate change say it’s just a cycle. Is it the same smart people who say we must go to Mars because we’re going to be hit by an asteroid? I ask these smart people when did Mars become immune to asteroids? Who do you think really pays for those rockets? They deny climate change because they don't want regulations on polluting.
It’s always about the money, “greed.” They'd rather pay off politicians than spend on pollution control. And people are too dumb to vote them out. They don’t care about the future of Mother Earth and worse, the future of their kids. Young people will have to deal with all the coming disasters. The solution is voting for people who care about the earth more than money. Nature can live without us, but we can’t live without nature.
Dave Haynes, Duncombe
The Aug. 8 op ed page was filled with great writing. My paper arrived on Tuesday but I didn’t read until next morning. On Tuesday I had an encounter with Senator Grassley which enforced the idea that his feelings were hurt. He actually gave me an opportunity to ask him a question while on his way from one back door to another in an alley in Dunlap. He was there to check off his Harrison County visit with an invite-only appearance at city hall and a brief stop at the community pharmacy in town.
I asked him why he was supporting the man trying to take the country backwards. He said he had been “chastised” by the president for not changing the way something was being done in the Senate. “That’s none of his business,” Grassley said, “we run the Senate.” When I said I wished for more of that kind of pushback, he continued his back alley walk.
I admit he caught me off guard by offering to take a question when the sign I was holding said “The potus is corrupt, and you are complicit.”
Anyway, when I read your column that was focused on him and has so many truths about him so soon after being able to record his feelings about his treatment at the hands of Trump, I was even more happy to have had the brief encounter.
Thank you again for all your excellent work, and giving others the place to do the same.
Mary Mikels, Portsmouth
Notwithstanding the public bluster, inch by inch, Putin is getting what he wants; we don’t know what the U.S. has given up.
Notwithstanding that most Israeli citizens and much of the Jewish representation in the U.S. disagree with what Bibi Netanyahu and the I.D.F. is doing in Gaza.
Why is the U.S. continuing to support this activity?
Pr. Norman E Porath, Denton, Neb.
What do Donald Trump, Cher, Dolly Parton and John Mishler all have in common? Answer: We will all be 79 years old in 2025. A problem? Well, some 13 months ago, there was a “national obsession with respect to the age of both our presidential candidates [Joe Biden and DonaldTrump]” (“Use your moral compass to vote,” Portland Press Herald, 29 June 2024], and so “age” then was a valid topic of concern and discussion, namely — how old is too old to meaningfully discharge high-order functions? Should older citizens simply be tolerated, or is “age” not relevant when it reflects one’s overall contribution to society in some shape or form?
If the question is of “some shape or form,” what about the Rolling Stones band — “aged” men still producing music with a flair. What about myself, an “aged” individual who still possesses the energy and imagination to create art? Given our current obsession with everything new and young, is that at all possible? Yes. In fact, four of my original artworks were recently utilized for the covers of a vinyl album and gatefold CD titled — “Enigma” — by the Bath, Maine-based band “Human Moods” (Chris Muccino and Sheridan, Facebook, Instagram at @humanmoodsmusic). Said album and CD was released on April 12 (www.bullmoose.com/engima/human moods). Our joint collaboration was based solely on friendship and trust. My “age" was never a factor, only my creativity was valued (www.jamsphere.com /newreleases,“Human Moods Releases the Intricately Woven Tapestry of ‘Enigma:’ A Journey Through Sound and Emotion, 21 April 2025).
Therefore, what is the insightful moral of this story? Simply stated, Dolly (still singing), Cher (writing her memoirs), and the Rolling Stones (performing live) are still creating, pushing boundaries and providing new perspectives on life with gusto. From my own mature viewpoint, it appears “age” is simply a number, not a one-way ticket to the glue factory. Senior citizens, in America, and especially in Iowa, with large “numbers” possess a treasure trove of wisdom, novel insights, and common sense. So, age is just a milestone, a number, not a superficial assumption!
John M. Mishler, Harpswell, Maine
Trump’s meeting with Putin in Alaska was an orchestrated farce from the beginning, a publicity stunt.
Neither world leader had any expectation or intention of ending the war in Ukraine, any more than Netanyahu or Hamas have wanted to end hostilities in Gaza at any time over the dozens of times they have entered into negotiations.
Illegitimate leaders want illegitimate wars to go on forever, because war glorifies leaders politically and periodic negotiations convince gullible citizens that the war is on the brink of ending.
Trump wanted to salvage some of the credibility he lost by promising to end the Ukraine war on “day one,” and Putin wanted to drum up capitalist investment in his country to save it from its horribly declining economy. They won. The people lost.
Kimball Shinkoskey, Woods Cross, Utah
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here