Rita Hart and the Rock Hounds
Iowa Democrats Make a Bid for Irrelevance
Seldom have I read anything more demoralizing than Iowa Democratic Party Chair Rita Hart’s interview with Todd Dorman in the Cedar Rapids Gazette this past weekend. While Hart yet again wanted to wax nostalgic about her compelling experiences gathering rocks on an eastern Iowa farm, Dorman deftly put her between a rock and a hard place by asking about Iowa water quality within the context of corn grown for ethanol. Around 20% of Iowa’s land area is used to grow corn for fuel ethanol, a significant driver of water pollution in our state. Hart’s response:
“Our economy depends so much on agriculture, and these are not easy solutions to come by. You know, you’re talking to a farmer here. I think, again, you know, the Democratic Party is a big tent and, and there's lots of room for lots of different opinions on how to go about this.”
Translation: Ethanol > Water Quality.
One solution that would be easier (in my opinion) than what politicians want to admit is regulation of the pollution. You know, the way we regulate the pollution from pretty much every other industry in the U.S. Hart on that:
“Regulation is possible, but only if done “in cooperation.”
Presumably “in cooperation” means with Republicans, who, last time I checked, are about as fond of regulation as me listening to another sad, sappy ballad from Rita and the Rock Hounds. So anyway, easy out on regulation for Rita and the rest of the lionhearted minority under the golden dome. Nicely done, Rita.
I’ve said many times that you don’t exterminate the entirety of nature in a state without the complicity of both political parties. Their positions on water pollution (and agriculture in general) are certainly similar; the major differences are in the messaging. Republicans proudly flaunt their environmental policies as if they were Randy Bobandy’s beer gut on the Trailer Park Boys. Democrats like Hart, however, knowing their voters are repulsed by such vulgar exhibitionism, try to be a little more subtle about it.
I just don’t get democrats on water quality and other environmental issues. Ethanol. Carbon Pipeline. Water Quality. Do you ever hear them talk about these issues with anything resembling a passionate voice? Do you ever hear them talk about them at all? Do they ever challenge Secretary Status Quo, Tom Vilsack? Sure, a few have picked up on the cancer stories, but is that what it takes, human bodies on the curb? It’s disgraceful (and immoral, in my view) that we can’t act on pollution until it comes to that. Watch how many of them will take Big Ag donor money in the upcoming election.
I’m still doing a lot of programs for groups, including county level Democratic gatherings. While talking about these issues—ethanol must die, we need more parks, regulate agriculture, ect., audience heads eagerly nod up and down like a kindergarten class at a yoyo demonstration. But I’ve had to listen more than once afterward to an elected Rock Hound or somebody from the donor class tell me that I need to tone down my rhetoric, or that my ideas are unrealistic, or some other cowardly bullshit that makes me wonder what the hell is going on.
I also tell people at these events not to think voting the ‘correct’ way will somehow, someday, solve our environmental problems. In his classic book Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985), Neil Postman wrote “You may cast a ballot for someone who claims to have some plans, as well as the power to act. But this you can do only once every two or four years by giving up one hour of your time. Voting, we might even say, is the next to last refuge of the politically impotent. The last refuge is, of course, giving your opinion to a pollster.”
Voting, we might even say, is the next to last refuge of the politically impotent. The last refuge is, of course, giving your opinion to a pollster.”-Neil Postman
You know who isn’t politically impotent? Farmers and agribusiness. Rita Hart and a large portion of the Democratic party trip over themselves just for a chance to brush up against King Farmer’s royal robes. The electoral math of this just doesn’t add up to me. There are about 85,000 farmers in Iowa, and assuming 70% of them vote, they comprised about 3.8% of the total Iowa vote in the 2020 election. Considering the demographics of farming (old, wealthy, white, male) these are not people likely to vote democratic under any circumstance, unless of course their daughter and son-in-law are trying to conceive by IVF. And even then, it’s a long shot. Joe Biden could’ve gotten EVERY farmer vote in 2020 and still would have lost Iowa, by a lot. Why oh why this Democratic political preoccupation with farmers? Why are farmer votes more valuable to them, than say, a nurse or a waitperson or a student or a hairdresser who wants to take his/her family to a state park beach on a summer weekend, but can’t because the contaminated beach is closed? I just don’t get it.
Since 1932 the Democratic party has tried to position itself as the party of the middle class, and a long-time electoral strategy has been to expand the middle class, however it might be defined. This has meant an embrace of people of color, women, LGBTQ, Jews, and others, and rightfully so. I submit to you that issues of environment—clean water, fresh air, clean and abundant parks, and other similar outdoor amenities, are middle class issues. Greasing the skids so billionaire businessmen can lay pipe for government handouts, and so millionaire farmers aren’t annoyed by reasonable regulation, are not. Last time I checked, there were plenty of advocates on the R side, at least in Iowa, to help with that stuff.
About six weeks ago, I was a speaker at a fundraiser for the Nahant Marsh, a 305-acre ecological feature in Davenport. I must tell you I was shocked by the (large) amount of money people were willing to donate so they could enjoy nature close to home. Really shocked. Since the dawn of civilization, people have craved communion with the natural world, and this craving has always been, for obvious reasons, more intense for people living in cities. I am bewildered how our political leaders, and especially those on the left, leave this ripe peach hanging on the tree. What can they be thinking? What am I missing here? Are they really that obtuse, or are they privy to super-secret polling data from some D.C. consulting firm telling them they need to kiss farmer ass?
I want to finish up by circling back to the Dorman/Hart interview; in particular the Hart comment “You know, you’re talking to a farmer here.” Of course, I can’t know the complete context or the tone associated with the comment. But if Rita Hart were sitting here next to me, I would say “You know, you’re talking to a non-farmer here. And my vote and my rights and my dignity are every bit as important as the farmers you and the rest of the Democratic Party desperately swoon over.” But hey, who am I.
Enjoy your irrelevance, Rita.
Thank you for that brillant piece of information! I live in a rural community of a little less than 4,000. We are struggling to find the money to build a new wastewater treatment plant, The price tag is in excess of 23 million and the city had bonded for an extra 5 million for likely cost over runs that are expected. We, as citizens of a small town, are suppose to carry this load to reduce nitrates and other poisons in our rivers and streams. We don't generate the vast majority of this pollution. While farmers pay fewer taxes on agriculture land and expect us to cover them with our waste water treatment plants! The "Family Farm" no longer exsists; these are family corporations not unlike the the Walmart Family Organization. I have a few questions for my Democratic leadership. Is sucking on the Agribiz teat the reason the Democratic party is in such a sad shape in Iowa? Obviously the Republicans are crazy for anything that will turn state government into a fascist organization! Neither can answer for how is a town of 4,000 going to pay for pollution control with no tax money ? The Federal Government forks over trillions for CO2 pipeline construction for ethanol operations, the amount of nitrogen fertilizer being used sky rockets and with no control of keeping that nitrogen where plants can use, it continues to be flushed into our rivers and streams. Drain tile, often considered the cheapest form of soil conservation, partially paid for with tax dollars, delivers it to our streams! How the hell is this sustainable? Food costs are rising, large amounts of land are becoming "oil fields". While our drinking water for humans and our animals is being poisoned with nitrates and farm chemicals that never will dissipate. All to profit a few at the expense of the rest!
Yes, 1,000 percent. Cannot understand why Iowa Dems don’t make clean water and public dollars for public schools their two main issues.