Nuclear power has significant economic, health, and environmental costs and poses safety hazards that far exceed those of any other type of energy. Meanwhile, state and federal lawmakers are pushing policies to incentivize “new nuclear” and even bring back to life closed nuclear plants like Three Mile Island. Join us for a special symposium to learn why this is a poor investment for our country and a risk to our health and environment.
PSR National and our network of chapters invite you to this one-hour event featuring speakers Dr. Philip Landrigan, Dr. Benjamin Sovacool, and Dr. M.V. Ramana. Dr. Caren Solomon will be moderating. Read their bios and more details here: https://psr.org/event/nuclear-power-symposium/
I want to say something about artificial intelligence’s intrusion into life. Because the emerging technology is rapidly changing since public awareness of it increased a few years ago, whatever I might say seems unlikely to persist in relevance for long. For now, people I know reject it as something of value. Evidence is everywhere.
May commencements brought a share of public derision. Speakers were being booed after bringing up AI and touting its benefits, notably former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Gloria Caulfield, a real estate executive. Graduates face a difficult labor market, and a technology that could make it more difficult to find a job was neither welcome nor news.
There is a lot to hate about Schmidt, but who is Gloria Caulfield? She comes from the Lake Nona development world, a 17-square-mile, master-planned smart city and innovation hub in Orlando, Florida. To her, AI and related innovation represent modernization, economic growth, and future competitiveness. She thought her speech was relevant, yet graduates in media, arts, and communications heard another warning that the professions they trained for may become more unstable. No wonder they booed.
Among problems encountered by recent college graduates are that their work internships are not turning into jobs as employers don’t accept that as experience. The use of resume scanners instead of a human is off-putting. The struggle to talk to a human at a prospective employer creates uncertainty. In addition, there are fewer jobs out there. Entry level positions are viewed as most likely targets of AI-driven automation. These things put together create stress in graduating seniors. AI is simply one more thing.
When I’m working at my desk I have a Twitch stream on in the background. The community is more than five years old with a good group of regulars I’ve gotten to know, some of them in real life. To a person, they are not fans of artificial intelligence. When the chat turns to AI, rejection is immediate. There are reasons for that, although the discussion never gets to them.
In part, this cohort spent years adapting to unstable working conditions. They are well-versed in the digital world, and a bit weary of yet another technology purporting to make their lives better when so many new technologies did not fulfill their hype and promise. They lived through outsourcing, remote work transitions, automation, software churn, layoffs, and constant demands to retrain or rebrand themselves professionally. AI is yet another source of volatility in the job market, yet another skills race with no certain outcome, and one more way to jimmy-jack the job market to the advantage of business interests.
My Twitch cohort is mostly of digital natives likely to have played Oregon Trail in school computer labs, and first experienced the internet by loading a disk into their home computer to access by dial-up on a phone line. They have seen it all and the commercial nature of AI represents nothing special. They are tired of the next new thing.
Why don’t I like it? The theft, mainly.
In October 2025, my blog got a dramatic increase in number of views from a single source. By dramatic, I mean in September the view count was 2,800, and October was 51,335. Most of these views took place from Oct. 7-9, or roughly 12 views per minute on average. The views were of individual posts going back to the first still existing online. Obviously a machine was doing this “viewing.” To what end, I don’t know, but I suspect AI training.
A local used bookseller reported a surprising number of recent online purchases of obscure books, to the tune of 500 orders per week. They feared the worst, that the purchasing was algorithm driven to acquire the books, tear off the covers, scan the pages for AI, and then discard them. In aggregate, taking millions of used books out of the marketplace. The Washington Post recently ran a story about this operation. This is a clear intrusion into what many of us believe are social norms—people buy books to read and cherish them. It represents AI theft.
I use artificial intelligence almost daily, mostly through Google’s Gemini which is now embedded into the search function. I also use ChatGPT for more complex questions. Both provide responses quickly but I find half of them problematic, or more simply said, they are garbage. Crappy work product makes AI just one more suspect opinion in a society where there is a lot of that going around.
Likely a machine designed the rollout of artificial intelligence to more public use. As is typical, the machines missed the human factor, which is another reason to boo.
I get just as frustrated with the Democratic party as anyone, but more than that I am sick of everyone piling on like high school.
Democrats didn’t cause our current situation. If our party is guilty of anything it’s of underestimating the Republicans’ bad intent. We’re guilty of not being clear-eyed enough about them, about MAGA, about Trump in particular, about their propaganda, and now we are coming to understand we weren’t clear-eyed enough about our own Republicans in congress and in Des Moines.
Democrats are on the right side of the issues and history while Trump tries to destroy everything. Our party has been guilty of not knowing how to cope with Republican money, media, power, aggressiveness and corruption. Seems like when the going gets tough we usually stand down and hope to survive the next contest. So many problems, so little cardboard…
Lately, Ken Martin, our current chair has been blasted for not releasing the report of mistakes made in 2024. The DNC under Ken Martin’s leadership is heading in the right direction, correcting the things that we have done wrong over time. Many have no idea what the DNC has been doing that is helping our campaigns since he became chair.
But it’s not that hard to find out. The DNC now has a weekly update from the DNC Grassroots team called the Blue Print and a YouTube channel. Find out for yourself what Dems are doing. Rita Hart has been talking about it. State party chairs are talking about it. Here is Jane Kleeb discussing investment in Democratic party infrastructure.
Ken Martin has acknowledged his mistake in not releasing the report. (Has anyone in the Republican party ever done that?) You can read Ken’s statement about it here on the Blue Print substack.
Btw, the false narrative that everyone in DC is a corrupt piece of shit is helpful to Republicans because they need us to believe everyone is as bad as they are.
Below is an excerpt from a piece published on The Hill balancing some of the one-sided crapping on Democrats that has been out there. You can read the entire piece here.
“Just look at what Martin is actually building. The DNC, in partnership with the Association of State Democratic Committees, is delivering more than $1 million every month to all 57 state and territorial parties — the largest sustained investment in state parties in our history.
And Red-state parties are receiving an additional $5,000 per month through the Red State Fund. State parties from Mississippi to Alaska are growing their staff and infrastructure for the first time in years. This is the strategy Howard Dean used to deliver the 2006 and 2008 wave elections. It works.
In other words, we spent three decades surrendering the map, and the math is now closing in on us. Population projections for the 2030 Census show between eight and 12 electoral votes shifting from blue states to red states ahead of the 2032 presidential election. If we keep writing off Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and the rest of the Sun Belt, we will lose the Electoral College permanently.
Martin understands this. His critics, evidently, do not.
Meanwhile, the actual results keep coming in. Democrats have won or at least over performed in hundreds of special elections under Martin’s leadership. We swept Virginia and New Jersey in November 2025. Grassroots fundraising hit record levels in his first months as chair — more than any DNC chair raised in his first four months, ever — and continues at an historic pace. Small-dollar donors are responding to the strategy because they understand what it is for: building Democratic power in places where Democrats have not shown up in a generation.”
Simon Rosenberg of Hopium Chronicles is one of my few paid memberships as one of the most reliable sources of information on the current electoral environment. He gave some advice to the Hopium community on his substack platform this week. I think it is realistic.
“This is going to be a brual election and we have to brace ourselves for it.
“Spend time watching the way they are attacking James Tavarico and come to a place of understanding about what we’re going to be up against this year everywhere in every single race.”
There’s going to be AI generated images of [candidates] having the equivalent of dinner with the devil, every day throughout the entire general election. Which is why we need to provide them the resources required to be able to anticipate all of this and get out ahead of it.
With Talarico they’ve signaled in the last 24 hours the way they’re going to play the game. It’s why we need candidates who can survive the unbelievably brutal kind of attacks that are going to come against them.”
Since this podcast aired, James Talarico won the Democratic primary in Texas. He will be the party’s nominee in the upcoming general election. Good conversation between Jennifer Rubin and Dan Pfeiffer. Iowa gets a mention. “Voters are getting sick of non-stop Republican leadership for the last fifteen years or so.”
Audio only but worth a listen. Rachel interviewed historian Steven J. Ross about his new book The Secret War Against Hate: American Resistance to Anti-Semitism and White Supremacy before a live audience Monday.
From our inbox an important message from Chris Jones –
Iowa is already experiencing a major water quality and serious public health emergency.
Now, trillion-dollar tech companies want to build massive AI data centers across our state that will consume enormous amounts of electricity, billions of gallons of water, and thousands of acres of farmland — all while receiving taxpayer subsidies and corporate tax breaks. Enough is enough.
Iowa is in crisis — adding new data centers without legal protections will only make this crisis worse.
Data centers have proven to be environmental and public health disasters across the country, while also driving a major spike in energy prices for local residents, with little or no concern about these impacts from the Silicon Valley billionaires who benefit at our expense.
Serious Concerns — The Explosion of New Data Centers Across Iowa
It’s time for Iowa’s elected officials to listen to the growing public concern.
Iowa’s data center footprint is exploding!
According to Iowa Public Radio, Iowa already has 65 major data centers in operation, with another 25 massive data centers in the planning stages across the state.
Iowans face rising cancer rates, and our state’s water quality is among the most polluted in the nation due to industrial agricultural runoff — with many communities struggling with dangerous nitrate contamination in their drinking water.
Our state is already crowded with over 10,000 factory farms and 41 ethanol plants, which have placed a massive burden on our water quality, creating over 7,000 contaminated private wells in rural counties. We can’t afford to become Silicon Valley’s new dumping ground for AI data centers that will only add to this burden.
Communities are fighting back.
In communities across the state, everyday Iowans are organizing to protect their basic rights and environment in the face of this new growing threat. Every day Iowans are standing up.
From Cedar Rapids and Dubuque to Mason City and Dickinson County, residents across the state are being forced to fight to protect their communities from unwanted data centers being pushed into their backyards without meaningful input or consent.
These are not distant or abstract threats. People are showing up at local zoning meetings, school board halls, and county supervisors’ offices — demanding answers about water use, noise, energy costs, and the long-term impact on their land and way of life. Their courage is why we need statewide action now.
Add your name today and share with your friends to show our state’s elected officials that data centers need public approval to make sure that clean water, environmental, and economic policies must be based on science and public health, not political convenience.
Joe Trippi and Alex discuss Nebraska, Dan Osborn, Iowa, Alabama, and why strong candidates are changing the map in places Republicans thought were safe. Joe argues Trump’s approval collapse is accelerating — and Republicans cannot redistrict fast enough to catch up.
00:00 Nebraska Democrats make a surprising move 00:34 Why Dan Osborn is such a strong candidate 01:05 The candidates changing red-state politics 01:32 Iowa’s Senate and governor races heat up 02:12 Four Iowa House seats may now be in play 02:48 Trump goes underwater in Alabama 03:32 Trump’s Iowa collapse accelerates 04:03 Why Republicans can’t redistrict fast enough 04:24 Joe Trippi: “There’s no reason to panic”
I wrote at length in 2020 about Pattison Sand wanting to mine the Jordan Aquifer and ship the water out west. They persist in needing water, and Iowa DNR sent me this email about their current permit request on Tuesday.
You are receiving this email because you previously expressed interest in or commented on Pattison Sand Company’s Water Use Permit Application.
For a quick recap: Pattison Sand Company requested additional water last year for their quarry facility near Clayton, IA. In response to comments received during the public notice period for the current modification, the Water Use Program held a public hearing, a public meeting, and gathered additional public comments on the proposed permit modification.
Since the last meeting, the Iowa Geological Survey completed a Hydrologic Investigation and the Water Use Program evaluated options for environmental safeguards and permit conditions. We’d like to share those findings with you at an upcoming meeting:
When: Tuesday, June 9th, 2026 | 1:00–6:00 PM
Where: Garnavillo Community Center, 106 W Niagara St, Garnavillo, Iowa
Staff from the Water Use Program, Iowa DNR Field Office, and Iowa Geological Survey will present on permit conditions, local geology and hydrology, environmental impacts, and timeline. Feel free to drop in at any time during the event. There will be presentations at the beginning (1pm) and end (5pm) of the event.
We hope to see you there.
This looks to be an excellent meeting.
For background information, here is an excerpt from my 2020 post on Pattison Sand:
Mining the Jordan Aquifer
News on Friday, Feb. 28, 2020, was Pattison Sand Company of Clayton sought to extract 34 million gallons of water per year over a ten-year period from the Jordan Aquifer, according to Perry Beeman of Iowa Capitol Dispatch. The water would be shipped by rail to arid regions in the American west, potentially to New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Nevada, Utah, Arizona or California. The Jordan Aquifer is also the source of municipal water for the city of Marion which lies within Liz Mathis’ senate district.
Earlier this month Pattison proposed to extract 2 billion gallons per year from the Jordan Aquifer using wells they drilled to support their frack sand mining operation. This proposal was rejected by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources.
The problem with tapping the Jordan Aquifer is it is prehistoric water, in other words, it has been there a long time. The aquifer does not recharge at the same rate as the Silurian Aquifer which lies on top of it. Once the Jordan Aquifer is drained, the water will be gone and communities that currently rely upon it could be left without a reliable water source.
The climate crisis is evident in the American west. Demand for water exceeds the region’s capacity to produce it through rainfall, snow melt, and underground aquifers. Something’s got to give for people who settled there to survive. Mining and shipping water from Eastern Iowa is not a good idea because what may be abundant to meet our current needs will be diminished by the extraction proposed by Pattison and others. It is easy to see how a discussion over water rights could escalate into regional conflict over this basic human need.
If we look at history, humans have continued to exploit natural resources until they are gone, in many cases leading to the collapse of societies. Our brains are not wired to perceive the threat shipping billions of gallons of water from Iowa to the west could have. We have to pay attention, and the role of government is to look out for the common good.
It is hard to image an overall plan to resolve the climate crisis at its root causes. Further exploitation of natural resources doesn’t solve anything and could potentially make matters worse. At least we were discussing it and in doing so raising awareness on a sunny morning in Ely over kolaches.
The primary season has been a prelude to an important election in the history of our state. Since Republicans gained majorities in the Iowa House and Senate in 2016, along with the governorship, they have been hammering away at our freedoms. Energy is building to reverse policies created since then. 2026 may be a decisive year.
Rob Sand has been the sole Democratic candidate for governor since filing day, March 13. He has had the luxury of preparing for the general election instead of expending resources on a primary fight. He has been making the most of it. Due to hard work and political savvy, Sand’s outlook has been positive, with strong fundraising, favorable early polling, growing national attention, and a race increasingly viewed as genuinely competitive despite Iowa’s recent Republican dominance.
Democrats fielded an entire slate of statewide candidates, although none of them is operating at the scale of Sand in name recognition and fundraising. Of the group, attorney general candidate Nate Willems stands out, having raised $1.25 million according to the reporting period ending this week. The remainder are strong candidates with individual strengths, yet none has broken out like Sand or Willems. They all depend on Sand pursuing the governorship at a high level and, in doing so, motivating Democrats and no-party voters to turn out for the Democratic ticket.
Sand is well positioned to do this. He is the only Democrat currently holding statewide office in Iowa. He has significantly more money than the other Democratic candidates and substantially higher name recognition. Polling on the other statewide candidates is sparse, and Sand is the only Democrat currently showing consistent competitiveness in public polling against a top Republican opponent. To the extent they matter, national Democratic groups appear to view Sand as the party’s best chance to make Iowa competitive again. These are the reasons I say Rob Sand has been using the time before the June 2 primary well.
The Johnson County Democrats pointed out the obvious in their May 13 newsletter: “We’re heading into one of the busiest and most exciting seasons of the year, with parades, fundraisers, and community events filling our spring and summer calendar. These moments are more than just celebrations. They’re opportunities to connect, organize, and build the momentum we need for the months ahead.” At the county party Hall of Fame event on May 16, unductees mentioned the need for Democrats to come together after the primary and work toward November as a team.
As primary candidates jockey for position, last week was relatively quiet. We hope it was the quiet before the storm that brings new leadership to Des Moines and the state.
From the June 2026 edition ofThe Prairie Progressive, Iowa’s oldest progressive newsletter. The PP is funded entirely by reader subscription, available in hard copy for $15/yr. Send check to PP, Box 1945, Iowa City 52244. Click here for archived issues
by Pam Mackey Taylor
In November, Iowa voters will decide if they want to enshrine in the state constitution limitations on raising income taxes.
The constitutional amendment would require a two-thirds majority of both chambers of the legislature to pass any income tax increases. Interestingly, the legislation would not require a similar super-majority to reduce income taxes.
This is a high hurdle to jump in the event that the state needs to increase revenue. A simple majority should be adequate to pass an income tax increase. A two-thirds majority requirement would allow a minority of legislators to control the tax policy of the state, instead of the majority of legislators.
We have been dealing with two years of billion-dollar budget deficits. The state is using one-time money in the taxpayer relief fund to make up the difference. It is precarious to use the reserve funds for on-going expenses. At the current rate, the taxpayer relief fund will soon run short of funds, perhaps within a couple of years. That time will be a day of reckoning – cutting budgets, laying off people, cutting programs and services, or raising revenue.
This constitutional amendment would effectively tie the hands of future legislatures in how they are going to handle the state’s finances when the revenues are not meeting the expenses, when the reserve funds are drained, and when the public expects the services that they are getting, wanting, or needing from state government to be met and cannot be paid for with existing revenues.
With respect to raising revenues, the choices are limited—income tax, sales tax, fees for services. Income tax may be the best choice since it can target those who are most able to pay with a graduated income tax or with a surcharge. Sales tax is under pressure every year from entities who want to be exempted from collection of the tax. Further, sales tax is regressive in that it has a greater adverse impact on lower income families and working families.
When voters read and think about this proposed constitutional amendment, they should also see bright flashing red lights that say stop, beware, tread carefully. And they should vote no at the polls in November.
This constitutional amendment is not needed. It does not move our state forward. It does not fix things that are broken. But it could significantly break things should Iowa face a shortfall in revenue and no way to fund services Iowans expect and need. Now it is up to the voters to decide in November.
—Pam Mackey Taylor is the lobbyist and Director of the Iowa Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Governor Kim Keynolds: (515) 281-5211 U.S. Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121 Iowa Members of Congress - Rep. Randy Feenstra (R) - Rep. Ashley Hinson (R) - Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R) - Rep. Zach Nunn (R) Iowa US Senators - Senator Joni Ernst (R) - Senator Charles Grassley (R)
I get just as frustrated with the Democratic party as anyone, but more than that I am sick of everyone piling on like high school.
Blog For Iowa 