Amid the excitement of a new decade, the unresolved issues of 2009 and other years past are becoming more irksome and in need of solutions.

The Road to Recovery … or Not

The entire country watched in June 2008 as flood waters savaged downtown Cedar Rapids. The videos and pictures of the Cedar River overtaking downtown structures, destroying businesses and displacing residents were simultaneously heartbreaking and striking. Yet for every headline garnered by Cedar Rapids, another smaller Iowa town was left to cope with its own slow and tedious recovery without the benefit of national news crews.

Veterans Memorial Coliseum is shown drenched by flood waters on June 11, 2008. (file photo: Lynda Waddington/The Iowa Independent)

State officials have argued that all that could be done was done. They tout Iowa’s swift recovery, comparing the progress here to natural disaster recovery in other parts of the country. Yet even now families remain displaced, businesses are shuttered and Iowans, long known as America’s most politically intense residents, are becoming more and more disenchanted with government as a whole.

The few times that national cameras panned away from downtown Cedar Rapids, national viewers glimpsed thousands of working family homes drenched to their rooftops. Urban viewers were enchanted by footage of cows, herded onto a Vinton resident’s deck for protection from flood waters. Large portions of the residential area in the small town of Creston were damaged as a result of basement and ground-level flooding. No one can forget the images of a leveled Parkersburg following a May 2008 tornado. Many of the aftermath stories remain on public display at the state’s I-JOBS page, and much remains unfunded.

But once it is understood that the working class — farmers, nurses, shift workers, teachers and others — bore the brunt of Iowa’s disasters, it is much more easy to understand the state’s following economic downturn. Working class Iowans pay a disproportionate share of their income in state and local taxes, according to research by the Iowa Fiscal Partnership. This means that the very economic foundation of the state has been rattled by tornadoes, pounded by flood waters and then mostly left with empty platitudes of progress to bolster its continued support.

Those set aside in favor of corporate bailouts and unable to surf the tides of promised change remain disillusioned, confused and, at times, angry. Their way of life has not only been threatened, but, in many instances, decimated. Their long-held beliefs in the value of hard work, helping neighbors and self-reliance have been shaken and, for some, shattered. They no longer relate to a government that appears uncaring, and they no longer believe in political parties that provide soundbites that would be offensive if they weren’t so tired and humorous.

Iowa politics in 2010, despite being the vehicle by which reform and recovery could happen, have been regulated by those outside of Des Moines’ affluent circles to an oddity or, worse yet, a distasteful fairgrounds freak show. For when economic reality becomes too horrible, it is sometimes easier to grasp the nearest unfathomable boogyman than to confront the true monster on your doorstep.

It is in front of this backdrop of dismay and disconnect that Iowa politics will play in 2010, and it will factor into every facet of the state.

The Right to Love and Marry

Several participants in April's Tea Party protest at the state capitol advocated for legislators to allow a vote on same-sex marriage (file photo).

In April, same-sex marriage was legalized in Iowa. As some state politicians rallied against the Iowa Supreme Court decision and others praised it, most Iowans quietly pointed to increased farm supply costs and skyrocketing health care payments.

But groups have galvanized on both sides of the issue and are preparing to continue the battles begun last year at the statehouse.

Same-sex marriage, depending on which group’s advisories you read, is either proof of society’s inevitable enlightenment or the complete downfall of all held dear. And while there are distinct minorities of Iowans on both sides of the issue who are ready to do whatever it takes to ensure that such marriages are the keystone of all action within the 2010 state legislature, many more residents are afraid that the battle over certain couples’ right to marry will overshadow the business that must take place if the state as a whole is to stand on firmer economic ground come summer.

But once your home has been washed away by flood waters, or blown apart by tornadoes, it is difficult to surmount a fight against another struggling family, traditional or non-traditional. By that same token, difficulties paying for needed prescriptions and sleepless nights worried about mortgage payments aren’t often precursors to a rising up against any perceived discrimination. It is hard to fight for anyone else, hard to stand on even preached moral principals, when the very ground beneath one’s feet remains the consistency of sand.

As a result, those who stand to lose the most by having the legislature dominated by political grandstanding on same-sex marriage could be the people who stay home, shaking their heads at a spectacle created and honed in 2010 election madness. Those who stand to gain the most — specifically, those who are paying more attention to November ballots than first quarter earnings statements — will be those who rejoice and revel in the folly.

Renewed Faith in Antitrust

Producing the nation’s food supply has always been a precarious occupation. Natural disasters, weather fluctuations and simple bad luck have historically plagued Iowa’s crop and livestock producers. It is part of the territory, and farmers have come to understand the roller coaster ride that often determines if their seasons will be profitable.

The past few years, however, a new unknown has emerged that many producers view as more threatening than those they’ve previously faced: Market concentration. Within each of the nation’s agricultural industries a few, large corporations have emerged that dominate the sector and, some producers have argued, use collusive and exclusionary tactics to drive independent and smaller operations out of business. The large corporations, on the other hand, argue that their market dominance and sheer size allow them to develop innovative techniques for smaller producers as well as lobby all farm interests before Congress.

While U.S. Supreme Court rulings and national policy have played a significant role in the changing landscape of America’s and Iowa’s agricultural sector, most producers believe the largest culprit to the woes they’re facing is lax government oversight of existing antitrust laws. And, in a move unprecedented in American history, federal agencies appear to be, if not actually siding with producers, at least willing to listen.

Throughout 2010, the U.S. departments of Justice and Agriculture will hold a series of workshops for discussions on possible anti-competitiveness in several key sectors — seed, poultry, dairy and other livestock. The first, which will focus on the seed industry, will take place in Ankeny this March. The workshops mark a significant change from “hands off” life under the George W. Bush administration, when the the U.S. Department of Justice oversaw and approved mergers between Smithfield Foods and Premium Standard Farms (2007) to create the country’s largest hog processor, between Dean Foods Co. and Suiza Foods Corp. (2002) to create the largest milk processor and between JBS and Smithfield Beef (2008) to make one of the nation’s largest cattle feeders.

The U.S. Justice Department, which appears to be making good on then-U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s pledge for more scrutiny of American agriculture, has brought in Christine Varney, a woman who built a trust-busting reputation within the Clinton administration, to lead its antitrust division. This Justice Department, unlike all of its predecessors, isn’t sitting back and waiting on an anti-trust complaint. It is willfully and meticulously investigating possibilities before formal complaints arrive.

Exactly what this means to Iowa, which maintains critical economic interest in agriculture, remains unclear. Although Iowa has fared better than other states in supporting and maintaining family farms, and has recently found the benefit of promoting smaller organic operations, the state also has strong ties to the large corporations that have now fallen under scrutiny.

Immigrating to Jobs, Congress

Census figures estimate that roughly 450,000 people over the age of 65 live in Iowa, comprising about 15 percent of the state’s total population. By the year 2030, the percentage is expected to blossom to 22.5 percent of the state’s population, or more than 650,000 Iowans over the age of 65.

It is widely known that due to Iowa’s out-migration of younger (and often brighter) residents, as well as its traditionally slow birth and immigration rate, the state is poised to lose a U.S. congressional district following the 2010 census.

What is less discussed, however, is the fact that Iowa’s rural counties are aging more rapidly than urban areas. As of the 2000 census, individuals age 65 and over comprised 20 percent or more of the population in 30 of the state’s 99 counties. Not only are all the impacted counties from 2000 rural, but the U.S. Census Bureau believes that trend will encompass 88 of the state’s counties by 2030, affecting the most rural first. At that time Iowa is expected to be the 12th oldest state in the union.

The direct and indirect impacts to the state, the tax base, local workforces and wider rural geographic health are far too complex for adequate recount in this short discussion of interest areas for 2010 and the next decade. Just in the realm of ongoing federal health reform, for instance, the implications of Iowa communities with 40 percent or more of their populations over the age of 65 — Littleport, Elk Horn, Berkley, Athelstan and Beaconsfield during the 2000 census — makes it clear that providing insurance alone won’t be nearly enough. As The Iowa Independent has documented throughout 2009 in a series of articles on rural health, those residing in rural areas are more likely to be living at or below poverty levels, with more chronic conditions, without sufficient nursing and physician access and lacking critical infrastructure needed for advances in tele- or distance-medicine that might alleviate existing inadequacies.

The 11 Iowa counties projected to maintain a percentage of older residents below 20 percent in 2030 also tell a story. The population centers in Polk, Linn, Johnson, Black Hawk, Pottawattamie, Story, Woodbury and Dallas counties are included among them. The other three — Marshall, Muscatine and Wapello — are all considered rural counties with one big difference from the rest of the state’s other rural areas. Each is home to significant immigrant populations.

At the time of the 2000 census, 12.5 percent of the populations in Marshall, Muscatine and Wapello self-identified as being either Hispanic or Latino. The latest estimates for each of the counties now lists that population demographic at above 15 percent. While this percentage compared to other states would not be considered significant, it stands out in Iowa, a state with an overall estimated percentage of persons of Hispanic and Latino origin at roughly 4 percent.

Iowans, who continue to express both outrage and compassion in the aftermath of a massive immigration raid at a Postville meatpacking plant, are only now starting to come to terms with their desire for maintaining the status quo in rural areas and the true need for a larger and younger workforce. Stephen Bloom, a journalism professor at the University of Iowa and author of a book on Postville, spoke candidly with The Iowa Independent seven months after the raid, noting that the move of slaughterhouses out of cities and into rural areas as well as mechanical advancements in the process has changed the face of rural America.

“The industry now requires a revolving door of employees because the wages are, if not minimum, then very low,” Bloom said. “The locals in these rural pockets don’t want to work for that kind of salary. The plants have this voracious appetite for hiring more and more people because a slaughterhouse worker who works for a year at the same plant is working for an extraordinary amount of time. The turnover in a year is nearly 100 percent.”

Workforce challenges in rural areas, however, are not only limited to meatpacking plants and other large factories. Iowa’s stalwart economic industry, the one most closely associated with rural life, is also beginning to feel the crunch.

At a congressional listening post in October, Clinton County dairy farmer Ben Blanchard discussed both his operation’s need for long-term younger workers and the nation’s need for comprehensive immigration reform.

“The way I feel, and I know that others may not feel the same way, but there needs to be legislation to allow [immigrants} to come over and not just on a work permit or whatever for six months,” Blanchard said, noting that short-term immigration solutions do not allow for farm knowledge and animal consistency.

Called “An Evening of Politics In The Park,” the event will begin at 4:30 p.m. and the program will start at 5 p.m. at Arnolds Park, 243 W. Broadway St., Spirit Lake. Tickets for the event cost $100.

In a release, Huckabee said, “I’ve called Bob Vander Plaats ‘the next governor of Iowa’ on many occasions and I’ve done it deliberately and with good reason.”

This marks the first high-profile endorsement of the 2010 GOP primary, although Huckabee’s announcement comes as no surprise. Vander Plaats served as state chair for his caucus campaign and recently appeared on Huckabee’s Fox News program to discuss same-sex marriage.

Sioux City Journal political reporter Bret Hayworth wonders if the event will also serve as Vander Plaats’ “official” campaign kick-off. Vander Plaats has been unofficially running for governor since January, when he announced his intentions on WHO-AM’s Jan Mickelson.

The trip also marks Huckabee’s second visit to Iowa since November’s election, rekindling rumors he is interested in a second presidential run in 2012.

Who should the GOP nominate? Yepsen suggests state Rep. Jodi Tymeson of Winterset.

She’s a retired brigadier general in the Iowa Army National Guard, is from a county-seat town and is a licensed teacher.

Do I need to mention she’s a woman? Women form the majority of the Iowa electorate, and she just might attract a few of their votes. Lots of people would like to see Iowa elect its first woman to the governorship, yet Democrats are never going to do it fielding rich, urban liberals. Maybe a small-town conservative legislator with executive experience in the military could do it.

There is one problem, though. Tymeson is already involved in the 2010 campaign to unseat Culver – as state chair for the only official GOP candidate at the moment, Bob Vander Plaats.

Maybe Yepsen’s correct in his assumption that Tymeson would make a great candidate, but the likelihood that she would jump ship and challenge her own candidate seems remote at best. Or maybe this is his subtle attempt at telling Vander Plaats that his third attempt at the governorship is ill-advised.

But subtley is not usually something Yepsen bothers with, so most likley he simply was not aware that his candidate of choice is already spoken for.

Sioux City businessman and GOP gubernatorial hopeful Bob Vander Plaats.

The Sioux City Republican told the Iowa Independent that it was overspending during Gov. Chet Culver’s first two years in office that led the state into the budget crisis, and that budget reductions will right the ship.

“Everybody is running around like the sky is falling, which points to a true lack of leadership and focus on our priorities,” Vander Plaats said.

Vander Plaats, who previously ran for governor in 2002 and 2006, said the state budget presented in January by Culver is $900 million larger than it was in 2007. So instead of increasing taxes or borrowing to fix a projected budget shortfall, the state could feasibly cut everything that is not a priority.

“Schools are a priority. Roads are a priority. Courts are a priority. Public safety is a priority. Those who need special assistance would be a priority,” he said. “What I would like to see Gov. Culver do is say that these are our priorities. This is how we are going to fund them and this is how we’re going to live within our means. There is no reason the sky should be falling.”

Culver’s $700 million bonding plan, which the governor said is the best way to repair infrastructure in desperate need of attention due to neglect and last summer’s flooding, is just an invitation for more gambling to be introduced to the state, Vander Plaats said. The governor has said he will secure the bonds with $56 million a year in gambling revenue.

“So when you have a $700 million bond issue that is being paid for on the back of the gambling industry, Iowans read into it that you’re expanding gambling because the money the industry is producing is already committed to other things,” he said. “So either tell me what you’re going to cut or tell me what casino you’re going to add in Iowa.”

One area where Vander Plaats and his Democratic rival do agree is on the gas tax. Legislators have proposed increasing the tax Iowans pay per gallon of gasoline 8 cents over the next two years. Culver has said it isn’t prudent to raise any taxes during an economic downturn, a sentiment Vander Plaats shares.

It was on the subject of the gas tax increase where Vander Plaats fired what some could consider the first shot of the campaign for his party’s nomination for governor. Several conservative groups, like the Iowa Farm Bureau and local chambers of commerce, have supported the idea of increasing the gas tax to fund infrastructure repair. Joining them is state Agriculture Secretary Bill Northey, who said last month he is considering running for governor himself.

Northey told the Iowa Independent earlier this month that the condition of Iowa’s roads and the impact that could have on the agriculture economy have people who would normally oppose any tax increase, himself included, willing to give the gas tax a chance.

“I think generally with [agriculture] folks, a pay-as-you-go gas tax makes the most sense to address those road concerns,” Northey said. “I think everyone has been looking around for other options and there is no magic pot of money sitting around to do those things.”

Vander Plaats said he is not surprised some Republicans and conservative groups support the gas tax, “but it should be an indicator of a real problem.

“What I mean is these groups and individuals are so caught up in the ‘system think’ that they need to get outside the box and think of a different way,” he said, later adding: “Iowans have had it with the increased taxes. They’ve had it with the increase in government. They’ve had it with having their lives controlled. They want someone who will lead the state of Iowa, not just grow the size of government.”

Vander Plaats hopes that the network of supporters he has built in his two previous gubernatorial campaigns, along with his work as state chair for Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee’s successful Iowa caucus campaign, will finally push him past the primaries and into the general election.

“What I’m trying to point out is the organization I built in 2002 and have continued to build ever since is as solid and savvy an organization as you’re going to find anywhere for a Republican in Iowa, and that organization is ready to perform in 2010,” he said.

The five-term Republican said “converstations are taking place” about what his campaign team might look like and who is likely to support him. However, he does not have a timetable for making his decision.

“I think I bring a different kind of philosophy as a candidate, one that might separate me from others and would be helpful to the Republican party now,” Roberts said. The party has “distinct points of view of the values of the Republican party and the direction it should take.”

“A campaign for governor should be more about leadership than about issues, about who is capable of leading not just the party, but the state,” he said.

Sioux City businessman Bob Vander Plaats officially entered the race last week. Other Republicans, like state Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey, state Auditor David Vaudt and businessman Bruce Rastetter have also said they are interested in challenging incumbent Gov. Chet Culver in 2010.

No one is sure how vulnerable Gov. Chet Culver will be in 2010, when he will likely run for reelection, but this week, we have a better picture of which Republican political figures might challenge him.

There’s Bob Vanderplaats, a well-connected social conservative who was 2006 GOP gubernatorial nominee Jim Nussle’s running-mate.  Vanderplaats formally launched an exploratory committee yesterday because, well, he did not already have a committee that could raise money for his statewide campaign.  His biggest challenge?  Prove to GOP primary voters that he’s more than a single-issue candidate, that he is a serious, electable candidate statewide.

Then there are Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey and State Auditor David Vaudt, two Republicans who have proven they can win statewide.  In recent interviews, neither would rule out challenging Culver in 2010.  You can take them at their word that they haven’t decided whether to run yet, but it’s a safe bet that they’d be happy to accept contributions to their already-existing campaign committees if you’d like to get in on the ground floor…  Their biggest challenges?  Balancing the desire to wait and see how vulnerable Culver is with the need to enter the race early to sew up the GOP nomination.

Will both Northey and Vaudt run?

Not likely.  They would have to decline to run for reelection to their current offices before getting very far in the gubernatorial race.  Why would both of them give up their jobs just so one of them could lose in a messy primary and have nothing?  Both of them stand very good chances of being reelected in their current jobs if they want to keep them.  The only way I see them both running is as a ticket, which, now that I mention it, is an interesting possibility, but I have no actual evidence that a deal is in the works.

How vulnerable is the governor?

The easy answer is that we’re too far from November 2010 to know.  But we do know a few things.  Midterm elections are typically bad for the political party that controls the White House, so there is some thought that Culver will be vulnerable in 2010 for that reason alone.  Some also believe that in times of economic uncertainty, voters tend to blame the party that’s in power.  Of course, there is also the conventional wisdom that says that voters tend to trust Democrats more than Republicans when they are worried most about making ends meet.  Many questions remain.

“Humor was the only way I could write this story,” Satrapi told over 700 people gathered at the Iowa Memorial Union on the University of Iowa campus to hear her lecture April 6. “I use humor to fight cynicism. We cry for the same reasons, but we don’t always laugh for the same reasons. To understand why someone is laughing, you really have to understand their spirit in order to connect to them.”

To illustrate her point, Satrapi used her experiences when she first came to America and tried to understand American humor. “I didn’t understand American jokes at first and wondered why people were laughing at what I thought were crap jokes,” Satrapi said. “But nobody laughed at my jokes either, and it wasn’t until I understood American jokes that I really felt connected to the people.”

Satrapi made two things very clear at the beginning of her lecture: First, she would have to take a five-minute smoke break between the lecture and book signing; second, she prefers “comics” to “graphic novels” when talking about her work. “When I think of graphic novels, I think of ‘Lady Chatterly’s Lover,’” she said. “It’s so bourgeois.”

Satrapi theorized that the “graphic novel” was created by publishers so adults would not be ashamed reading comics. “I prefer comics, because comics come from popular art and everyone can understand it.”

However, Satrapi did not always harbor a love of comics, despite their vast availability in Iran during the ’70s. Her interest wasn’t sparked until she turned 24, when she received a copy of Art Spiegelman’s graphic novel, “Maus,” which used mice to depict the Holocaust in Germany.

As fate would have it, Satrapi befriended Spiegelman after “Persepolis” was first published in America in 2003. Critics hailed “Persepolis” as the new “Maus,” which took Satrapi by surprise. “I was very shy and being compared to my master didn’t make much sense to me,” she said. “I called him and told him that I wasn’t making these comparisons but the journalists, who don’t have much imagination.”

There’s a reason why Satrapi didn’t become interested in comics until her 20s. She was scarred by an experience when she was 7, which involved her younger cousin and the comic book “Dracula.” Despite her limited English, Satrapi rendered her own interpretation of the comic, which involved eating raw chicken to keep from becoming Dracula. The rest of the summer was spent stealing small pieces of raw chicken, resulting in a case of worms. “So it was worms that turned me off to comics,” she said.

Satrapi’s notoriety has grown exponentially with the recent award-winning film adaptation of “Persepolis.” The animated film, released in the United States in December, has garnered huge international acclaim and won the Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival; this year it was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Animated Feature Film and won two Cesar Awards (the French version of the Oscars) for Best First Film and Best Adaptation.

“Persepolis” Film Trailer

Satrapi claims the movie idea was not hers at all, and when the propositions kept coming from Hollywood, she kept making lots of demands, thinking they wouldn’t be agreed to. And when they were met, she said, “Shit, now I have to make movie.”

The biggest challenge adapting the comic book to film, Satrapi said, was trying to blend the two different mediums without losing the book’s meaning. “It was like working with two different languages,” she said. “When reading comics, you have to actively use your imagination, especially between frames, but watching a movie is passive. Everything is there and you don’t have to do anything.”

Another challenge for Satrapi was having to collaborate with a lot of people as opposed to working alone. “At first I remember wanting to kill all of these people,” she confessed.

During the latter part of the lecture, Satrapi shared her experiences growing up in Iran, her exile to France and her perceptions of the current conflicts involving Iran. Before her parents helped her escape to Austria from what they called the oppressive regime of Iran in the early ’80s, Satrapi had already endured four years of the new government.

“In the ’80s Iran was the image of evil, and I could not escape this when I left the country. And now Iran is only a part of the ‘Axis of Evil,’ so things are improving,” Satrapi kidded.

Satrapi said that the first time she left Iran in ‘84, she had to explain everything about her past to satisfy any suspicions. Knowing her audience, Satrapi used this moment to take a subtle jab at President George W. Bush. “Every time left Iran, I had to explain everything about my past,” she said. “I had to keep reminding people that in a democracy, the leaders of are not representative of all the people in the country. You know about that, right?”

“When I first left Iran, I was very angry and wanted revenge,” Satrapi said. “I needed some distance from my experiences to write the book how I thought it needed to be written. I needed time to offer myself some luxury, and during this time, I came to realize that when I was angry and full of hate, I was no different than my oppressors.”

During this incubation period, Satrapi drew distinctions between individuals and groups of people and how the abstraction of groups depersonalizes the human experience. “In my work I try to humanize people, despite the dehumanizing of people in Iran,” Satrapi said. “We call groups Middle Easterners, terrorists and fanatics, instead of talking about them as human beings anymore. If we talk about people as human beings, it makes it more difficult to go out and bomb them. If 50 or 60 people die, who cares? since they are not human beings anymore but an abstract.”

In the post-9/11 era, Satrapi says that our leaders make us believe that democracy is a color in which we can paint the world, and worse, that democracy is a gift we can give by bombing and killing people.

“When I first came to America in 1999, I came here believing and wanting to believe that Americans were the worst people in the world. This is how I raised,” she said “However, the first time I came to America, it was a big slap in the face, because I met a lot of wonderful people. The second time a bigger slap, and slaps got bigger with each visit thereafter.”

Satrapi ended her lecture by sharing the one single thing she believes in: Education and Culture. “It is always better to be less stupid than more stupid.”