Climate change elitists and their plans for us

Turning 50 years old felt no different than turning 40. This aging thing was a piece of cake.

Then 60 happened.

The day was commemorated with an enjoyable celebration with family and friends.

But the next day brought sore feet and a slight pain in my lower back. Being 60 years old does not feel the same as being 50. Although I’m currently in relatively good health, my body is telling me what its future plans are for me. Physically, I’m beginning the great, gradual decline.

Steve Magness, author of, “Do Hard Things,” tells us, “When we name something, we exert power and control over it. We are saying, ‘I know what you are and how to handle you.’”

Aging, I know you’re here and what I must do. Although I’ve been mindful over the years to enjoy life the best I can, I will strive even harder now to live to the fullest.

Naming something gives it immediate attention and is the first step toward correcting course. Too often, dealing with reality is something we choose to put off or not think about.

It happens in politics, too.

Climate change elitists are telling the average American what they’re going to do to us. Just a few years ago, some of these ideas were considered laughable. We didn’t spend too much time thinking about it. We didn’t name it.

And now, because these green rulers have infiltrated influential, non-governmental organizations, state governments, and the Biden administration, some of these ridiculous notions are being seriously considered.

The World Economic Forum is touting the benefits of eating insects. Crickets, it states, are dense in protein and calories. Production of cricket protein uses fewer resources of land, water, transportation fuel, and human labor. It is estimated that we’ll have 10 billion people on the planet by 2050 and that eating insects could be a good source of protein for many.

However, climate change elitists won’t be letting cows go extinct. They’ll save those T-bone steaks for themselves. For the rest of us—crickets.

I’d rather have a T-bone. Or at least, a juicy cheeseburger.

The push for electric vehicles is outpacing the production of charging stations throughout the country. Efficiency in charging just isn’t there yet, either. An electric vehicle might get us about 200 miles down the road before we have to pull over and charge the battery for an hour. And that’s best-case scenario. You may have to first wait in line before you can wait for your vehicle to charge. These challenges haven’t stopped California from requiring all new vehicles sold in its state to be electric by 2035.

That’s not mobility freedom. That’s a leash.

Meanwhile, the green royal class won’t be giving up their private jets. They have important things to do. Like figure out how to stop the common people from using too many resources.

And our homes will be subjected to all kinds of regulations. Government intrusions will dictate which appliances we can buy and use. If there’s one thing the Biden administration is prolific at, it’s relentlessly pushing its green agenda right through our front door.

Home ownership will start to feel more like playing house.

But climate change elitists, living in mansions, will have access to on-demand energy resources.

Food. Transportation. Our homes. They’re telling us what they’re going to do to us.

We’ll be allowed to exist. Sort of like pets.

But they’ll tell us what we can eat, where we can go, and what we can own.

Most of us do desire to protect the environment, but the approach must be reasonable and fair to all.

A society composed of royalty and its subjects is something we did away with in 1776. Nobody misses it.

Except elitists. If they’re successful with this clever form of class warfare, the country could experience a great, gradual decline.

But there’s still time to make a course correction.

Name it, vocally push back on it, and vote this type of thinking out of office.

Fathers and leaders, love and discipline

Parenting is tough for anyone. For those in the public eye, though, the parent – child relationship gets scrutinized. And it brings up questions.

Is it possible to be a father who has unconditional love for his children and at the same time be an effective leader—even president of the United States of America? At a time when loving fathers and competent leaders are both so greatly needed, it is hoped that the answer could easily and always be “yes.” It seems the two qualities would be complementary, not mutually exclusive.

It’s not so simple.

Unconditional love is not mere indulgence. It also provides discipline. Sometimes children—even adult children—need guidance, painful truth-telling, or just hearing the word, “no.”  

A nation that will soon be 247 years old is not so mature that it can go without a loving dose of discipline from its leaders, as well. It needs a balanced budget, law and order, and a secure border.

President Joe Biden excels at the first half of being a good father. He loves his family, and it seems as though he would do anything for them. But he must balance that unconditional love with being an effective leader of our nation. It requires delivering discipline.

Alleged Biden family corruption is staggering, especially where his son Hunter is involved. But the powerful are powerfully protected. The nation may never know the possible harm this family has done to the country. One thing we do know is that it would have been helpful if Biden had the ability to be both a good father and good leader by saying, “No, Hunter, it is not wise to receive millions of dollars as a board member for a Ukrainian energy company when you know nothing about energy and when it’s my position as (then) vice president to direct diplomatic ties with the country. No, Hunter, I will not threaten to withhold a U.S. loan guarantee to Ukraine, made possible and backed up by hard-working American taxpayers, unless Ukraine’s top prosecutor gets fired for investigating this energy board. No, Hunter, it is not a good idea to receive millions of dollars from entities in China because it will be perceived as influence peddling with our adversary.”

In 2019, the New Yorker ran a piece about whether or not Hunter’s escapades would jeopardize his father’s presidential campaign. The article states that Hunter pressured his father to make a public statement of support for his extramarital affair with his brother’s widow. Then candidate Biden stated, “Hunter, I don’t know if I should. But I’ll do whatever you want me to do.”

And he did.

And he still does. Biden lacks a father’s discipline. For his son. And for his country.

Government spending is out of control. Crime is rampant. Our border is not secure. These problems can never be solved by someone who lacks discipline.

Personally, Biden has been through a lot. Losing his first wife and a child in a car accident and then losing a second child to cancer are unthinkable tragedies. It’s understandable that the trauma would reshape him. Perhaps with his surviving children, he can only manage to indulge and no longer has the strength or desire to discipline.

The same may be true for how he runs the Oval Office.

For Christians, God is our heavenly father. He’s all-loving. But not just merely indulgent. He gave us the Ten Commandments. They are not suggestions. God provides both love and discipline.

Yes, it is possible for a father to have unconditional love for his child and at the same time be an effective leader by providing discipline. Lots of people do it.

It’s just not something that this president can do.

Broadcast journalism needs more news reporting and fewer discussion panels

I’m all paneled out.

One minute of news followed by ten minutes with a panel of analysts and commentators is wearing me down. It doesn’t matter if the source is traditional network news, cable news, or streaming services. They all do the same thing.

Perhaps the lead story is “Crisis at the Border.” An actual reporter at the border delivers the news. Which is helpful.

But then it’s followed by a discussion panel with experts. Each, in their own way, shares their belief that there’s a crisis at the border. Same information, talked about over and over again.    

I get it. Anyone who has ever been a graduate student and forced to participate in student online discussions about an assigned reading has been through the same scenario. One student arrives at the obvious conclusion and posts a comment. Then it’s followed by others, each in their own way, sharing their consensus.  

Useless.

The repetitiveness almost drives you to make an outlandish and provocative post, just to interject something new in the conversation.

Here’s the one time when panels of analysts and commentators can work. Bring a little humor to the conversation. Or at least something fresh to think about. The introduction of the news item already carried the meat of the topic. If we must now sit through a panel, bring the entertainment. After all, the average viewer has worked all day. And might be suffering from student online discussion post-traumatic stress disorder.

If the panel concept must be kept, inform and then entertain. Like “The Five,” and “Gutfeld!”  

But if we’re to truly be an informed citizenry, we need more information. The media doesn’t tell us what to think, but it does tell us what to think about. Big difference. Viewers are driven to think about a handful of sensational stories instead of being exposed to a news blitz of multiple events happening in the country and world.  

With the recent ousting of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, there’s an opportunity for a good old-fashioned news show to be plugged into that time slot. How about an hour of straight national and international news? No panels. No, “I think that too,” wasting of time. It could be called the “No Panel News Hour.” Run stories that we might not hear elsewhere in TV land: China’s increasing control of ports around the world, Democrats’ continued push for D.C. statehood, Turkey’s election progress, HSA contribution limits increasing for 2024, U.S. military falling behind Russia and China in developing hypersonic missiles.

There are stories out there. Lots of them. They would affect our vote. If we knew about them.

Perhaps stationing competent reporters around the country and world is more difficult and too costly. And maybe panels are cheap and easy.

But voters deserve better than the cheap and easy. Many times, the difficult thing is the right thing to do.  

Opinion and news analysis have its place. This, too, is an opinion piece. But broadcast journalism is tilting toward less news and more news analysis. Programming with pundits may be here to stay, but reserve a time slot or two for hard-core news reporting.

If it can’t happen, it may be time to cancel cable news subscriptions and completely rely on newspapers or other media sources.

There’s another election around the corner, and I just can’t look at Karl Rove’s whiteboard anymore.

Property rights are under siege

Americans are accumulators. Acquiring possessions—owning things—is part of the American dream.

The U.S. Census Bureau states that 65% in this country own a home. Many times, it’s the household’s greatest asset. An even greater percentage owns a vehicle. 

A home and a car—safety and freedom—are the bare minimum of what is worked for and hoped for by most in this country. Some want more, and their dreams evolve into owning a business and increasing wealth. Not everyone is willing to take that risk. But for those who do it successfully, a business is an additional, proud possession.

According to the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, there are six million firms with employees on payroll. Companies usually have storefronts or some type of commercial space. An additional 26.5 million are non-employer businesses or the self-employed who solely operate their business. Many of these entrepreneurs also have storefronts.

Homes, cars, and businesses. It’s a lot to protect, but it’s never been a problem.

Until now.  

Soft-on-crime policies have encouraged the destruction of storefronts, the theft of merchandise, the vandalism of homes, squatting, car jackings, car vandalism, robberies, muggings, and more.

Law-abiding citizens can’t even expect to keep their shoes on their feet.

A young couple was robbed of their phones and shoes during a recent teen violence spree in Chicago that included setting cars on fire and damaging property. And although Mayor-Elect Brandon Johnson did not condone the violence, he showed little empathy for the assault on property rights when he said, “…it is not constructive to demonize youth who have otherwise been starved of opportunities in their own communities. Our city must work together to create spaces for youth…”

It’s hard enough being a victim of property crime. Now, in a land of lawlessness, the homeowner, car owner, and business owner are ignored and excuses are made for the perpetrators.

Many elected officials, and others in government, do little to put a stop to the lawlessness. It’s beginning to feel like tyranny.

The Declaration of Independence states, “The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States.”

Replace the words, “King of Great Britain” with “lawlessness.” One can understand how the colonists felt.  

Several businesses in Chicago, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, New York City, and other areas are moving, at least in part, due to safety concerns.

When businesses flee, there’s a rush by crime deniers to put out statistics that don’t align with personal experiences. Some cities will state that crime is declining, but residents see something different.

And no spreadsheet is needed to observe that all or part of large corporations are moving out of high-crime areas: Citadel, Caterpillar, Boeing, Tyson Foods, Amazon and many more companies as well as lots of retail outlets and restaurants.

Taxes are an issue, but so is safety.

The founding fathers fought against and freed themselves from the tyranny of the King of Great Britain and established the United States of America. Now, property rights are again under siege. Our task is not as difficult as the colonists, and yet we accomplish less. We are not asked to pledge, “…our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor” in order to restore security of private property. Instead, citizens must simply pledge to vote for the law and order candidate.

Nothing will change until that happens.   

Or, we can vote for the progressive, soft-on-crime candidate and go without shoes.

Make term limits kick in when national debt climbs

Abraham Lincoln said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

Lincoln was speaking, in 1858, about those supporting or opposing slavery—the ultimate division in our land.

Today, our country is again divided. Cable news talking heads and politicians say it is Republicans versus Democrats, Conservatives versus Liberals, or as Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders has stated, normal versus crazy.

But those words mean less to the average American. Our country is built on families. It seems every extended family has Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, normal and even crazy people. Political identity may create some tension, but most still stick together as families.

The real division is—just as it was in 1858—an issue of justice. The house divided today is the average citizen’s expectation of fairness versus the powerful and elite’s flagrant disregard for fairness.     

Corruption is growing. It can be found within wasteful, trillion-dollar bills, bloated government bureaucracies, and “too big to fail” corporations bailed out by taxpayers.

There’s a lot of work to be done to reinstate fairness, and our elected representatives aren’t helping matters.

Think of the national debt as a corruption barometer. According to usdebtclock.org, the national debt is at 31 trillion. It’s a factual indicator of either complete incompetence or a clear abuse of power by the Beltway elites. What’s best for the country and its citizens takes a back seat to what is best for the politician and holding on to a powerful seat in Congress.  

Term limits legislation could take care of this problem, but it takes legislators to pass it. That won’t happen. And the argument that citizens can institute term limits through voting doesn’t always work that simply. Incumbents have name recognition and access to financial support that makes it difficult for them to be unseated.

But there may be another way—tie term limits to the national debt.

Start with a generous term limit of 18 years—three terms for a senator and nine for a representative. Then tie national debt performance to it after that. If debt is less than it was when the politician originally took office, an additional term will be allowed. And continued to be allowed as long as the debt continues to fall.  

Call it “qualifying term limits.” Make politicians qualify for the right to run for additional terms beyond 18 years.   

It would be an embarrassment for any candidate to refuse the idea of qualifying term limits. Wanting to hang on to a job after 18 years in which the national debt only increased—is just plain whining.  

Something more interesting could happen, though. Votes may no longer fall strictly along party lines. If qualifying term limits were in place, second thoughts might be given to recklessly spending trillions.  

Never underestimate a politician’s need for self-preservation.

When our national debt returns to zero, qualifying term limits would no longer apply. Politicians could stay for as many terms as they can get re-elected. It’s called a bonus for doing a good job.

Some will say that emergencies require policies that increase the national debt. But Americans know that most emergencies are greatly exaggerated by lawmakers.

It wouldn’t even take legislation to make qualifying term limits happen. Every member of Congress has an official website. Challengers running for office have websites, as well. During the next campaign season, pressure each candidate to make a public statement of support or opposition to qualifying term limits and to permanently post it on the website. It will make a difference to voters who expect fairness.  

Lincoln went on to state, “I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved. I do not expect the house to fall, but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other.”

This nation cannot endure with the average citizen seeking fairness and a land it is proud to pass on to the next generation while the powerful and elite seek personal gain at the destruction of it.

Let our beloved house stand for fairness.

The missing leg of retirement’s three-legged stool

A history page from the Social Security Administration website states that, “Social Security benefits were said to be one leg of a three-legged stool consisting of Social Security, private pension and savings and investments.”

But perhaps a better way to think about the three-legged stool is forced contributions to Social Security and Medicare through payroll taxes, all voluntary efforts to increase retirement wealth, and answering the question of, “Then what?” after reaching retirement age.

The Social Security Act was signed into law in 1935. Medicare payroll taxes were added in 1965. Between Social Security and Medicare, employees contribute 7.65% of every paycheck to fund these two programs. Employers match and add 7.65% for every employee. Between the employee and employer, a total tax of 15.3% is tagged for that worker’s benefit at the time of retirement.

Paychecks were different before these forced contributions. Employees could keep an additional 7.65% of their paycheck. Employers weren’t matching 7.65% for every employee either and were free to use that money in ways that benefited the business—perhaps even providing raises with it.

Before 1935, the first leg of the three-legged stool was to voluntarily create your own nest egg—by spending less and saving and investing more. That’s how our ancestors did it.

The second leg of the three-legged stool is now Social Security income and Medicare insurance.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that Social Security and Medicare will become insolvent in about 10 years. If Social Security is still around when you’re ready to retire, though, there are decisions to make.

The longer you put off retirement, the higher the monthly Social Security payment becomes. You may also have a job that you enjoy and is helping you build that alternative retirement account.

On the other hand, you can’t get something from nothing. If Social Security funds are dwindling quickly, you might want to consider drawing earlier rather than later—even if it means the monthly payment will be lower.

This option is only possible, though, if you’ve done a good job with the first leg of your retirement plan—creating wealth that is sufficient and independent of Social Security.

Total income taxes are another consideration. Run the numbers to see what makes the most sense.

And now we’ve arrived at the missing third leg of the three-legged stool.

When Social Security was created, it made work a nasty, four-letter word. It created a society that just couldn’t wait to retire and do nothing.

As we age, we might not have the stamina, physical health, or even desire to continue knocking out a 40-hour work week.

But it’s important to remain a productive member of society. Everyone has something to offer.

Acclaimed journalist, Morley Safer, worked in broadcast journalism right up to his death at 84. He slowed down and did less. But he still did something. His last story aired on 60 Minutes, just two months before his death.

He lived a life of productivity.

The Bible speaks to taking a day of rest every week. But nowhere in the Bible does it talk about doing nothing fruitful during your golden years. There’s no 11th commandment that states you shall have the right to play golf for the last 20 years of your life. King David was a warrior to the end.    

If your health allows it, the missing leg of retirement’s three-legged stool is to not fully retire.

Before retirement age, work, save and invest. If Social Security is still around when you hit your 60s, wisely consider your options. And at post-retirement age, find a way to continue to be a productive member of society.   

Do more. Need less.

If the federal government knew how to do this—work hard and spend less than it takes in, consider options wisely to keep programs afloat, and remain continuously productive—there would be no need for the Social Security talk.

Ten-year adventure with Facebook ends

People have a tough time doing what they know needs to be done.

Congress won’t balance a budget. The federal government won’t secure our borders. Mainstream media won’t provide objective reporting.

Is it any wonder that the average American also has difficulties doing tough things? Our job is to build, work at, or create a better life. If each of us does that, whatever it looks like for every individual, we will together honor and strengthen our country.

But sometimes we won’t. And don’t. Even in small matters.

Recently, I celebrated a ten-year anniversary with Facebook.

Facebook hasn’t always made me happy during that time.

There are the usual grievances:

Too much scrolling time. The intention is to spend a few minutes with the app. But often, I’m still scrolling 20 or 30 minutes later. And that’s just with Facebook. Most also have YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, Twitter and LinkedIn. That sounds quite exhausting.

Too many ads popping up. I instruct Facebook, through account settings, to stop showing the most annoying ads. But for every ad you get rid of, Facebook has two or three new ones that it pushes on you.

Too many inappropriate posts. This one is subjective, but you know it when you see it because you find yourself thinking, “I wish I hadn’t looked at that.” 

Too many scammers trying to hack into accounts. Getting your Facebook account hacked is like hitting a deer with your car. It’s not if it will happen, but when. Danger is constantly lurking. 

Too much consistent failure trying to be present to hundreds of people. It’s just not feasible.

There are issues with Facebook. But it’s a social norm to be on social media, so you hang in there.

The flip side is that it’s fun to share part of your life with posts. And friends and family have warmed my heart over the years by tagging me with their shared photos and thoughts. They also made me laugh out loud at times with their photos, links and articles and thoughtfully challenged my thinking on some topics. (I know this to be true because I just saved 334 photos from my Facebook account to my smart phone. The collection is going to make a stunning Shutterfly memory book—my best of Facebook.)

If I were 20, 30 or 40 years old, I wouldn’t be giving this another thought. But there’s something about being 59. When there are fewer years ahead of you than behind you, you start to get a little protective of your time and how it’s spent.

For many people my age or any age, Facebook is a perfect way to spend their time and provides a ton of enjoyment. If it’s creating a better life for you, stick with it.

For me, though, it’s time to move on. I’m a “ten-year girl.” After about ten years, I tend to get bored with stuff and want to try something new.   

It would be a lot easier to just keep the account and carry on. And on and on and on. But I’m not Congress, the federal government, or the mainstream media. I think, reflect and act.  

Soon, I’ll be deactivating my Facebook account. I hope to see my family and friends in other places and spaces. I am on Snapchat and Twitter, although I don’t know if I can really say I’m “on” those platforms if I don’t actually send personal snaps or political tweets. I’m going to work on that.

See. That’s what’s exciting. Doing something new.

For ten years, I walked through the forest of Facebook. It hasn’t been enough of an enchanted wonderland to make me want to stay. It’s time to head for the clearing.

Peace out.

Rural Iowans’ wish list

San Francisco 49ers quarterback, Brock Purdy, got the challenge—which means opportunity—of a lifetime. His first professional football start was against arguably the greatest of all time. Tom Brady and his Tampa Bay Buccaneers were in town. “Mr. Irrelevant,” the last pick of the 2022 NFL draft, didn’t request this script. He was ready, though, to flip it. Purdy, and a great supporting team, defeated Tampa Bay 35 – 7.   

Turns out Purdy was never irrelevant. Just someone who was given a chance and then did something with it.

Rural communities in Iowa have challenges, too. Despite that, they want the ball and the opportunity to show what they can do with it. Give them a fair chance. They’ll take it from there.   

Fairness, though, isn’t always a given. Rural Iowans know when the playing field isn’t level.

Start with Iowa roadways.

According to 2020 census data, about half of Iowa’s population live in 90 counties that are primarily or moderately rural. It’s not unusual for those living in rural communities to travel 20, 40, 60 miles or more, round trip, to get to their job, the grocery store or the doctor. That’s a lot of trips to the gas pump, and gas taxes are what pays for roads. Good roads are also necessary for economic development in small towns. It’s almost impossible to lure an industry, and the jobs it brings with it, without good infrastructure. Without jobs, small towns die.

According to the Iowa Department of Transportation, it plans to build or improve about 1,250 miles of roadways from 2022 – 2026. Most of these improvements are planned in or around metro areas with limited road projects going to rural counties. For example, the 10-county rural region of Northeast Iowa is slated to receive about 65 miles of road improvements or about five percent of budgeted projects.

Rural Iowans pay for a lot of roads with long-commute gas taxes. They just have to drive to metro areas to enjoy them.

Secondly, many small towns in Iowa didn’t have access to high-speed, fiber optic internet services until recently. Small towns—just like cities—depend on technology to grow businesses and compete efficiently. The Empower Rural Iowa Broadband Grant Program helped deliver needed broadband services to finally make that happen. These businesses aren’t guaranteed success, but at least they now have a fairer chance to compete. 

But while connectivity is improving in small towns, there are still many rural residences without access to high-speed internet. It’s a quality-of-life issue, especially for younger generations. The countryside will continue to empty out without it.  

Lastly, rural counties and local communities are struggling to provide adequate emergency health care and ambulance services.

A greater percentage of the elderly live in rural communities compared to urban areas, and they are primary consumers of health care. The Iowa Department of Public Health projected that by year 2030, 22% of the state’s total population will be over the age of 65 and living in rural areas. Needs will grow. Services may not be able to grow with it.

A few states provide some type of supplemental financial assistance to emergency medical and ambulance services. Iowa is not one of them.

There are only so many taxpayer dollars to go around. But the harder it is to obtain ambulance services, the more rural Iowans will question wasteful spending by the state. When allocating resources, every legislator should be asking the question, “Is this more important than leaving rural communities without access to ambulance services?”  

Rural Iowans pay a ton of gas taxes. They’re still waiting for more blanketed broadband coverage. And they have higher elderly populations that require access to emergency health care and ambulance services.

But they’re also like every other community in Iowa, whether it’s rural, urban or suburban. They just want a chance to succeed and to show that they’re not irrelevant.

Allocate resources fairly, and rural Iowans will put up the points.

Election night must be reclaimed

It feels like the voters’ ownership of elections is slipping away.

There aren’t too many events or competitions where we get to be active participants.

For most of us, we don’t have the skill set required to be a professional football or basketball player. No college was ever interested in signing us for our athletic ability. We can’t sing or dance well enough to draw adoring crowds on Broadway. No concert venue will sell out with our name headlining it. Hollywood doesn’t know who we are.

We appreciate those who ascend to the highest level of providing the masses with entertainment. Those ball players, singers, dancers and actors provide us with a little relief from the work week. Sometimes, diversion is good. And necessary.

But we fully understand that we’re only spectators during those events.

Elections are different. The Super Bowl of politics gives equal playing time to 150 million voters. We’re active participants. We vote on or before Election Day and are glued to a media source to watch or listen to results come in that night. Forget about whether it’s a red wave or trickle. A blue win or loss. The excitement of Election Day is a hallmark of a vibrant, participatory democracy. Voters are the ones bringing the game to an exciting finale.   

That’s our past glory. Things have changed.

Nobody ever used the word “patience” on Election Day until recently. Now, it’s becoming the awful, new norm. Voters are told to have patience for election results, and that it could take an additional day, week or month before we see the final score.

It doesn’t need to be this way.

First, properly prepare. The pandemic supercharged the mail-in ballot option in 2020. The Pew Research Center states that about 75 percent voted in person before Election Day or voted by mail. Sheer volume overwhelmed many unprepared election officials in 2020. But if that option is here to stay and will be widely used, it can’t keep being a surprise to administrators during subsequent elections. We all know the definition of insanity.

Next, impose a hard deadline of Election Day as the day that mail-in ballots must be received by election officials—not postmarked by Election Day and certainly not any days after that. One of the driving forces behind mail-in ballots is the convenience factor. If voting by mail is truly more convenient, nobody needs to wait until the last second to get a ballot in the mail. Citizens can either conveniently vote at their local precinct or conveniently postmark their mail-in ballot in plenty of time for it to arrive by Election Day.    

We will always need the mail-in ballot option for our military stationed overseas, for the elderly, for those traveling, and for other good reasons. All those ballots can be received by Election Day.    

Lastly, follow the Bipartisan Policy Center recommendation that election administrators should be permitted to process early in-person votes and vote-by-mail ballots beginning at least seven days prior to Election Day. Processing means preparing ballots and then running them through tabulators. Tabulating machines can be set to restrict availability of the results of these ballots to anyone, including election administrators, until the close of polls on Election Day.

The work gets done ahead of time. Hard copies of ballots are securely stored using strict chain of custody protocols. The secrecy of the ballot remains intact.

Timely results are important to participants. If the score card is habitually withheld from the ones playing the game—the voters exerting the effort—they may lose interest. Maybe that’s the real and sinister goal of some, to turn citizens into passive spectators instead of active participants.    

Our elections must not devolve into a spectacle. Now is the time to ask your state legislators and election officials what they are doing to ensure that winners and losers will be confidently announced on Nov. 5, 2024.

It’s voters’ game day. We want it back.   

Be like Clete and the boys

There’s a photo collage that draws me in every time I see it.

It’s of my Uncle Clete and his three boys. All are in military uniform. Each in a different one.

Clete, now passed, served in the Air Force. Jim served in the Navy and now lives in Michigan. Darrell was a Marine and resides in Virginia. Bob served in the Army Reserves and now calls Indiana his home.   

Many branches, but one mission—to love and defend our nation.

Some families have a proud tradition of generations joining the same branch of the military and serving. That is so good.

But I love the “same, but different” message that emanates from this photo. All loved their country and served, but each was independent-minded enough to go his own way.

It provides the first teachable moment—think for yourself.

The election season is upon us. No one political party has all the answers. Or, maybe a better way to say it is that political parties try to have too many answers. Very few would be willing to sign their name to all that their party professes on its state platform. The 2022 Iowa Democratic Party Platform has 560 statements of support or opposition to particular issues. That’s a lot of red lines. Republicans are capable of churning out quite a few planks too.

If the average Iowa voter isn’t going to be in full agreement on these hundreds of items, it makes extreme party loyalty unnecessary. Instead, consider what’s most important this election cycle and then determine which candidate is best suited to deliver.

Think. And then vote for individuals who can also think for themselves.    

The collage of Clete and the boys are typical basic training photos. They show confidence and determination. They didn’t have their whole life planned out at the moment. They didn’t need to. All they had to do was the next, right thing. And the next. And the next.

It’s not always easy to do the next, right thing. That’s called courage.

Most have moderate political voices. It can be a little overwhelming to simply hang on to that voice when louder voices attempt to silence it.  But take on cancel culture anyway, and don’t give up on finding reasonable, common-sense solutions to needs. Do it today and the next. And the next.

Have courage. Vote for others who have courage.

Lastly, remember that we’re on the same team.

I put three kids through school who were all active in high school sports. We didn’t always win. On nights when we were getting clobbered, though, I would look at the opposing team and think about how at least some of these kids would likely go on to join the military. Then, they would be on my team. Team USA.

The world seems to spin out of control when the United States doesn’t show leadership or display economic and military strength. Our team needs to win.

Always.

Vote for the candidate who will put our country first.  

This election, Clete and the boys don’t expect us to don uniforms in order to love and defend our nation. But let us think for ourselves, be courageous with our beliefs, and put our country first.

And vote for people like that too.