Politically Rational

Category: Uncategorized

  • The Importance of Voting

    I invite civil, bipartisan discussion to this post.

    Most of the people who are reading this post probably do not need to be told the importance of voting.  However, in light of two special elections in Iowa since the 2024 election, along with a Supreme Court election in Wisconsin and special elections in Florida both on April 1st, I feel it remains a vitally important topic.

    There is one common refrain I have heard from a lot of people over the years, sometimes in person, in news articles, or interviews, and I am sure you have heard it too: My vote won’t make a difference.

    This can be a difficult narrative to break because on the surface, it is almost certainly true.  For example, in an election to the United States Senate, an entire state is voting for their preferred candidate making it relatively unlikely that any single voter is truly going to be the determining vote in that election.  On the other hand, the general sentiment that a vote won’t make a difference is likely to be shared among a population with other common attitudes and the apathy of entire voting blocs absolutely has the ability to swing elections.

    Moreover, voter turnout swings dramatically depending on the type and year of the election.  Many voters tend to think of voting specifically in major elections – voter turnout is far and away the highest in presidential election years with standard midterm elections in a distant second place.  In 2022 1.22 million voters cast a ballot in the gubernatorial race while 1.66 million cast a ballot for the presidential race in 2024.  According to the federal register, Iowa has a voting age population of nearly 2.5 million people, meaning over 30% of the eligible population did not vote in recent elections.

    Iowa had a special election in 2025 for the 35th Senate District as the incumbent resigned her position to become the Lieutenant Governor.  In the election on January 28th, Democrat Mike Zimmer won the seat by a margin of 52% – 48%, taking one seat in the Iowa Senate from Republican control.  As President Trump won the vote in that district just two months earlier with a 60% majority, this swing has been touted as a major flip in favor of Democrats.

    I want to take an opportunity to look more closely at this election result and see what we can conclude from this election result.

    In the most recent general election in Iowa 35th Senate District in November 2022, there were a total of 24,266 voters compared with only 9.308 voters in the special election in January 2025.  Although the headline numbers are striking – the seat was won by a Republican with 60% of the vote in 2022 and lost with only 48% of the vote in 2025 – the district also saw a decline in votes of 62%.  Voter apathy in special elections is strong, and this was no exception.

    According to the Iowa Legislature website, there are approximately 64,000 people in this senate district and according to the U.S. census, 77% of Iowa residents are over 18 years old meaning the voting age population in the district is approximately 49,000 people, yet even in the most recent general election, less than half of those eligible cast a vote.  Voter apathy even in a general mid-term election is high.

    So, what conclusions can be drawn from the recent elections in Iowa?  I do not believe we can make any proclamations about the general mood of the population from these recent special elections.  However, I believe we can firmly conclude that votes in special elections carry even more weight than those in a general election on account of the reduced voter turnout in those elections.  Voting in special elections is exceptionally important.

    With 435 representatives in the United States, each representative has a voting age population of about 575,000 people.  Interestingly, one of the biggest arguments against the Constitution during the Convention was the requirement that a district be no smaller 30,000 people; this was considered to be too few representatives to adequately serve their constituents.  If we had more representatives, each requiring fewer votes to win office, it may assuage the fear that our singular vote does not matter.

    Please always stay informed about elections on all levels and all times; those elected in Presidential Election cycles, mid-terms, and special elections all have the same power to affect change.

    Thank you.

     

     

    Sources:

    Federal Register :: Estimates of the Voting Age Population for 2021

    2024 United States presidential election in Iowa – Wikipedia

    2022 Iowa elections – Wikipedia

    1787: Centinel, Letter I (Pamphlet) | Online Library of Liberty

    State of Iowa – Canvass State

    Screenshot 2025-02-24 083359.png (2067×790)

    Iowa Democrats flip Senate seat in special election

    U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Iowa

    https://iowa-legis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html

  • Immigration and Border Security

    𝐈 𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐜𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥, 𝐛𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭.
    “𝐈 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐬𝐚𝐲, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐭.”
    This quote has long been attributed to Voltaire, but it seems to have first appeared in a book in the early 1900s. With the importance of free speech to democracy, I have always considered it a wonderful expression with the intention of inspiring open thought and truly hearing the viewpoint of others with the goal of understanding rather than disagreement.
    As long as I can remember, people in the United States have discussed the need for immigration reform and better enforcement at the southern border of the United States. Bill Clinton signed an immigration bill into law in 1996, George W. Bush discussed illegal immigration on numerous occasions including laying out a comprehensive plan in his 2007 State of the Union address, and Barack Obama signed an immigration reform bill in 2013. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐚 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐧𝐞𝐰.
    As Donald Trump has returned to office, he has taken aggressive steps against immigrants. However, many of this administration’s actions have been aimed at people who have entered this country legally, following the steps outlined by the federal government. It makes sense to tackle the real issues of illegal immigration, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐬𝐧𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫.
    This week, a student at Tufts University was detained by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. The video of her arrest can be easily found online and is rather disturbing; she was taken in by plain clothes ICE officers in masks, and she was immediately moved to a detention facility across the country. This student has committed no crime; she did not destroy property, she did not attack anyone, and she did not support any sanctioned international organizations.
    She was detained and had her legal immigrant status revoked for speaking in support of Palestinians; Secretary Rubio has suggested another 300 visas have been similarly revoked. The fact that she is here on a student visa should have no bearing on her constitutionally protected right to free speech. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐞𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦.
    Since the new Trump Administration has come back into the Executive Branch, there have been numerous reports of tourists being detained within the United States. This includes a German tourist who was detained for several weeks in San Diego, a Welsh backpacker who was detained at the border and held for nearly three weeks in Washington State, among others.
    As a result of these detentions of people in this country legally, numerous European governments are understandably updating their travel advisories related to the United States. 𝐎𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐞𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦.
    The Trump Administration has stripped hundreds of thousands of immigrants of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) that was granted by the Biden Administration. These immigrants came to the United States legally from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela as they faced hardships in their homelands.
    Whether the decision to grant TPS to these people was a good decision or not, they followed the protocol of the United States Federal Government and were admitted to under a legal pathway to residency. In addition to these countries, President Trump is reportedly also expected to revoke legal residency to Ukrainian refugees who have fled the Russian invasion of their country. 𝐍𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦.
    As I have mentioned before, Donald Trump’s executive order allowing ICE to conduct raids on schools is a troubling move. Schools now are being forced to consider their best, legal options for dealing with the possibility that immigration agents come to their schools to take away individuals on their grounds. Moreover, students will potentially witness another student, parent, or school employee be taken by force. With the Executive Branch revoking legal statuses at will, people taken away could have been here legally. 𝐀𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧, 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐧𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲.
    As we see these many immigration policies that work only to harm people who have worked to come into the United States on legal grounds provided directly by the federal government, I continue to question what exactly Congress has to say about these issues. Unfortunately, I hear almost nothing from my representation; I will write again today to my Senators and Representatives and 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐜𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭:
    𝐂𝐡𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐥𝐞𝐲 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟖-𝟏𝟏𝟒𝟓
    𝐉𝐨𝐧𝐢 𝐄𝐫𝐧𝐬𝐭 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟒-𝟒𝟓𝟕𝟒
    𝐙𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐍𝐮𝐧𝐧 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟒𝟎𝟎-𝟖𝟏𝟖𝟎
    Thank you for reading.
    Sources:

  • Campaigns of Coercion

    𝐈 𝐢𝐧𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐜𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥, 𝐛𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭.
    As I think many of you can tell, I put a lot of thought, time, and effort into each and every one of my posts here. I appreciate the thoughts, comments, reactions, and discussion I have had thus far and I still maintain hope that this evolves into a broader, bipartisan discussion regarding the current political environment. As you read the details I lay out today, please share more examples I may have missed. I will provide news sources in the comments.
    “𝐈𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐝, 𝐰𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐞𝐬, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐬.”
    The news coming out of Washington D.C. has been incredibly difficult to keep up with. News that would have majorly shaken politics in a normal cycle has been a weekly, if not daily, occurrence. However, despite frequent breaking news, we hear relative silence from Congress. The quote above is attributed to Martin Luther King Jr. While the quote was spoken with regards to civil rights in the 1960s, 𝐈 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐚𝐬 𝐰𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠.
    Today, I would like to talk again about the danger of the President freezing funding which has been authorized by Congress 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐝. I will also reiterate that if there is fraud or abuse found in government spending, it should be disclosed and prosecuted. However, we have seen wholesale, indiscriminate cuts to large swaths of the government; we can tell these cuts are not done meticulously as we often have errors and blatant lies in reporting from DOGE, as well as workers being rehired, including those who work with U.S. Nuclear Weapons.
    The President deciding unilaterally which 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 can be released, allows the President wide discretion to pressure his opponents to bend to his will; it is apparent that the President will pull any lever at his disposal, regardless if it is Constitutional.
    Shortly after taking office, Los Angeles was continuing to deal with wildfires in the area. Despite the obvious need for emergency funding, Donald Trump repeatedly stated he was inclined to withhold federal aid to the state if they did cave to his demands. Now, numerous states are suing the administration for withholding congressionally approved funding as he demands they stop projects that are designed to mitigate the impacts of climate change. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐧.
    Columbia University had $400 million in congressionally approved grants frozen by President Trump. In order to unfreeze these funds, which were unconstitutionally frozen by the President, Columbia University was required to come up with a plan to mitigate protests on campus; the protests themselves should easily be legal under the first amendment. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐧.
    On March 15th, President Trump aimed an Executive Order at the Paul Weiss law firm; the firm has a history of working with prominent Democrats and has worked on numerous high profile cases. The Executive Order signed by President Trump directly targeted this firm removing security clearances and banning them from all federal buildings. In order to stop this order from being enforced, the company agreed to a deal with the President, seemingly the President’s objective all along. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐧.
    After Pete Hegseth was nominated for Secretary of Defense, it was widely reported that Senator Joni Ernst was uncertain whether Hegseth should be confirmed. In order to sway Senator Ernst, the President’s allies embarked on a public campaign pressuring her to confirm the nominee or face the wrath of Trump voters in a primary campaign. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐧.
    Shortly after the 2024 election, President Trump sued CBS News over a ’60 Minutes’ interview claiming the program doctored footage of Kamala Harris. As reports swirl over a possible settlement from the parent company of CBS, Paramount Pictures, it seems President Trump is utilizing his position as head of the Executive Branch once again to coerce Paramount into submission. As Paramount looks to merge with Skydance, it will require FCC approval and President Trump will not allow the FCC to approve unless a settlement is reached. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐧.
    As we can see in the examples above, President Trump is using any possible power at his disposal to coerce Congress, constituents, companies, universities, and other organizations to bend to his will. While I largely believe that each of these groups should stand up for what is right and not give in to the pressure of the President, it seems they often relent. One of the biggest powers Donald Trump has at his disposal is funding that he has frozen 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬.
    I do not know exactly what keeps Congress silent while the tornado of this Trump Administration continues to tear through Washington D.C. However, I do know that I will continue to share my frustrations with my representation, and I ask you all do the same. Once again, here are the local phone numbers of my members of Congress:
    𝐂𝐡𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐥𝐞𝐲 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟖-𝟏𝟏𝟒𝟓
    𝐉𝐨𝐧𝐢 𝐄𝐫𝐧𝐬𝐭 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟒-𝟒𝟓𝟕𝟒
    𝐙𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐍𝐮𝐧𝐧 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟒𝟎𝟎-𝟖𝟏𝟖𝟎
    Thank you.
    Note: This was originally posted to Facebook on March 26th, 2025.

  • Freedom of Speech is a Bedrock of American Democracy

    𝐈 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐜𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥, 𝐛𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭. I will post sources for my thoughts in the comments. Once again, I have written far more than I set out to write; I hope you read to the end. I will also provide relevant sources in the comments.
    “Civil liberty, in all countries, hath been promoted by a free discussion of publick measures, and the conduct of publick men.
    The freedom of the press hath, in consequence thereof, been esteemed one of its safe guards. That freedom gives the right, at all times, to every citizen to lay his sentiments, in a decent manner, before the people.” – John DeWitt, November 1787
    The quote above is from an article published in the Boston American Herald as America debated the newly written Constitution. This argument, among others, led to the freedom of the press as one of the key amendments in the Bill of Rights. Since the ratification of the constitution, 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐨𝐦 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚 𝐟𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲; 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐝, 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲.
    President Trump has had immigration officers arrest a recent graduate of Columbia University, who is here legally, with a green card, over protests related to Palestine, admitting he had broken no laws, and is attempting to deport him – further stating this is the first of many to come. This arrest is an attempt to intimidate, to make dissent and protest a feared activity. In addition to the arrest, President Trump has pulled millions of dollars of funding for multiple universities tied to Palestinian protests. Regardless of whether you agree with a protest or not, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲.
    President Trump has stepped up attacks on journalists in America.  Starting with attacks on ‘fake news’, this week he spoke at the
    Department of Justice and claimed MSNBC and CNN are arms of the Democratic Party, calling their reporting “illegal”. Defining these actions as illegal is blatantly untrue and a further attempt to intimidate opposition, harming our free speech principles. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲.
    Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to use the FCC to revoke media licenses for media networks who he claims treated him unfairly. Once again, the President is attempting to coerce media networks to paint him in a positive light, threatening free speech in the United States. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲.
    According to Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, the funding that has been released after being frozen by the Executive Branch is concentrated in Republican districts, particularly those where the members of Congress have acquiesced to the demands of Donald Trump, despite all of this frozen funding having been legally appropriated by Congress. This is another mechanism to quell dissent and free speech – in this case amongst the very congress members who have the power to check the President. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲.
    Donald Trump has targeted law firms that have opposed him – signing an executive order to punish several law firms. This is a threat to other law firms, indicating executive action will be taken if a firm chooses to oppose the president. While I am a little uncertain if this is actually a first amendment violation, it is unequivocally immoral and an attempt to stifle dissenting legal opinions. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲.
    For many decades and through many Presidents, the White House Correspondents’ Association chose which journalists were able to be party to the Presidential pool. President Trump has taken over this control and is excluding many highly reputable news agencies on account of their coverage of the President and including media which are more closely aligned with his views. Excluding journalists is another way to push out dissenting opinions. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲.
    My entire life, I have heard politicians across the aisle, journalists, teachers, and friends discuss the incredible importance of free speech in democracy; truly, democracy cannot survive without a free press. For this reason, I cannot imagine any reason that republicans in Congress are silent.
    I write today to ask my representation, Senators Grassley and Ernst and Representative Nunn, to stand up for this important, unalienable right and demand that President Trump respect the right to free speech. 𝐈 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐬𝐤 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐨𝐮𝐭, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐥𝐨𝐮𝐝𝐥𝐲, 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭.
    𝐂𝐡𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐥𝐞𝐲 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟖-𝟏𝟏𝟒𝟓
    𝐉𝐨𝐧𝐢 𝐄𝐫𝐧𝐬𝐭 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟒-𝟒𝟓𝟕𝟒
    𝐙𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐍𝐮𝐧𝐧 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟒𝟎𝟎-𝟖𝟏𝟖𝟎
    Thank you for reading.
    Note: This was originally posted to Facebook on March 15th, 2025.

  • America Alone – Part 2

    𝐈 𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐜𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥, 𝐛𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭.
    Over the past week, we have seen significant changes to American foreign policy under the guise of America First, or claiming to do what is best for America. As I mentioned in the post I am re-sharing here, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐀𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞.
    In the weeks that have followed that post, we have seen considerably more moves that threaten the status of America as a cooperative partner for our allies. Just this week we have seen:
    • Donald Trump has again threatened tariffs on our allies, implementing some and rescinding others. Even the tariffs that get cancelled create chaos and uncertainty, driving away partners who prefer stability. 𝐈𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐲, 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐝𝐚 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐬, 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐡𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲, 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐰𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐲. 𝐌𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐜𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐮𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐯𝐚𝐥 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐞.
    • In addition to military aid, Donald Trump has stopped intelligence sharing with Ukraine, giving a major boost to one of the biggest American adversaries internationally, Vladimir Putin’s Russia. 𝐈𝐧 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐭 𝐧𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐑𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐚. 𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐨𝐩 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭, 𝐃𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐝 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐝𝐥𝐲 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐔𝐤𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬. 𝐈𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐲, 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬 – 𝐄𝐮𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐔.𝐊. 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐧 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬.
    • Donald Trump has threatened the use of the military on Mexico’s Cartels which would invade the sovereignty of a major trade partner. 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐈 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐥𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐌𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐜𝐨 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐩 𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐬, 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚 𝐦𝐚𝐣𝐨𝐫 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐌𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐜𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝.
    • Donald Trump has made major cuts to USAID, even ignoring several court orders to restore some of that aid, which helps fund health and food assistance programs around the world. As this aid is given primarily by funding American companies and farmers to provide that aid, this will significantly harm the American economy. 𝐈𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐲, 𝐰𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝. 𝐈𝐧 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭, 𝐰𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬 𝐟𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐞𝐫, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐬 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐚 𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐜, 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬.
    As Representative Zach Nunn said (before Trump became President):
    “Standing up to Russia is in America’s best interest because an unchecked autocrat in Russia today empowers the Chinese Communist Party in Taiwan or state-sponsors of terrorism in Iran against Israel. Because we live in an ever-increasingly connected world, 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐮𝐩 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐝.” I agree Zach, so please stand up for our national interests abroad.
    Please join me in reaching out to your members of Congress to stand up for American interests and encourage Senators Grassley and Ernst, along with Representative Nunn to remember their past comments and stand up against this President and demand he 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐩 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞.
    Again, here are the Des Moines office phone numbers of my congressional representation, please reach out to yours.
    𝐂𝐡𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐥𝐞𝐲 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟖-𝟏𝟏𝟒𝟓
    𝐉𝐨𝐧𝐢 𝐄𝐫𝐧𝐬𝐭 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟐𝟖𝟒-𝟒𝟓𝟕𝟒
    𝐙𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐍𝐮𝐧𝐧 – (𝟓𝟏𝟓) 𝟒𝟎𝟎-𝟖𝟏𝟖𝟎
    Thank you for reading.
    Note: This was originally posted to Facebook on March 6th, 2025.