Letters to the Editor: Why should we subsidize nuke plants and giant data centers?

Ronald Reagan once said: “If you want more of something, subsidize it; if you want less of something, tax it.” If this simple principle still holds true, state lawmakers are telling us we need: 1) more nuclear power plants that are costly and produce long-lasting radioactive waste and 2) more giant data centers that gobble up our energy and water resources. Why?

According to news reports, legislators want to pass a sales tax exemption (House File 2757) that could cost taxpayers $65 million for the restart of Iowa’s only nuclear power plant — the Duane Arnold Energy Center near Cedar Rapids that was shut down six years ago. 

Duane Arnold’s majority owner is NextEra Energy Resources, a Florida-based company with a net worth of $196 billion. NextEra wants to restart Duane Arnold, in large part, to sell lots of electricity to hyperscale data centers owned by Google, and possibly other Big Tech giants. 

So the tax break that helps NextEra get its nuke plant up and running also helps Google. For what it’s worth, Google’s parent company (Alphabet) has a net worth of $3.8 trillion.

Why should we subsidize nuke plants and giant data centers that are flush with cash? It doesn’t make a lick of sense to me.

Hugh Espey, Des Moines

Trump’s insult to Christians

In posts he personally approved and shared, Donald Trump circulated images depicting himself as a miracle worker — laying hands on the sick — and standing shoulder to shoulder with Jesus in a posture suggesting spiritual intimacy and authority. These are not casual visuals; they deliberately frame a political figure in overtly sacred terms, inviting viewers to see him through a religious lens rather than a civic one.

Christianity centers on humility, repentance, and the clear distinction between the divine and the human. Images that blur that line — casting a politician as healer or positioning him alongside Jesus in a way that suggests shared stature — risk trivializing core beliefs. Faith isn’t a campaign aesthetic, and Christ isn’t a prop. When politics co-opts sacred imagery, it doesn’t elevate leadership; it diminishes the faith being borrowed.

Supporters may see these images as expressions of admiration or hope. But admiration becomes distortion when it elevates a person beyond their proper place. Christians, in particular, should be wary of any movement that substitutes devotion to a leader for devotion to God. If anything, these images should prompt a serious question: where is the line between faith and idolatry — and who benefits when it’s erased?

James Anderson, Pocahontas

Dress for success

I enjoyed reading (John Cullen’s “Fillers”) on appropriate dress a couple weeks ago, and could not agree more with you.

I was an attorney and judged Mock Trial for most of the last 40 years. In later years we had both grade and high school contests, not at the same time, though.

Besides critiquing the students, I usually made a comment on their dress and focus on it as much as any other comments. I always quote Nick Price’s comment: “When you get to the top, dress like you belong.”

I usually would award a best tie as well, and several years ago I told one of the students that I would give him $100 for his tie. He said his dad would kill him as it was his favorite.

Now that I am retired I rarely “dress up” anymore, only when appropriate. It’s still nice to do so for special events.

Keep up the good work. I read all the columns and letters to the editor, many of which have good thought content. I never lived in Storm Lake and know only Dan Connell and Ed McKenna, so I just skim the news.

Philip Garland, Omaha, Neb.

The refunds not talked about

The tax break on tips has received major coverage this week.

First Trump staged a phony DoorDash delivery and said the worker saved $11,000 in taxes. Turns out she didn’t actually save that much. Instead, her tips amounted to $11,000, and we don’t know how much, if anything, she actually saved. On Fox later she mentioned she was working to help pay her husband’s medical bills, but no one on Fox pointed out that the Big Ugly Bill, which provided the tax break on tips, also involved large cuts to medical care.

In a similar vein, Zach Nunn had a cheer-leading article in the Des Moines Register article enthusing about the generous refunds hard-working Iowa people are receiving, emphasizing untaxed tips and overtime, and the enhanced senior deduction. He didn’t mention the three breaks are temporary and end (coincidentally?) right after our next presidential election.

For all the boasting, the actual average increase in individual refunds is about $350, which is nice but not life-changing, especially when Trump tariffs and the Iran war are both causing price increases that greatly exceed $350 for the average family.

Meanwhile other tax breaks in the Big Ugly Bill are not temporary and provide far greater benefits. For instance, Tesla profits were $5.7 billion last year but federal income taxes were zero. And Tesla is not unique. The Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy reports that so far this tax season 88 corporations with reported profits totalling $105 BILLION paid no federal income taxes; in fact they received a combined $4.7 billion in tax rebates.

Interesting neither Trump nor Nunn is telling us about those refunds.

Sue Ravenscroft, Ames