Letters graphic

USMCA benefits Iowa

Iowa’s economy needs free trade to continue to grow and prosper as a leading state in agriculture, and the approval of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) by Congress will ensure this continues to be the case.

Many farmers and manufacturers are suffering from current trade disputes and are in need of a solution, fast. According to the USDA, over 86,000 jobs in Iowa are supported by agricultural exports, making the approval of the USMCA crucial to all Iowans.

In a recent article, Senator Chuck Grassley and Senator Joni Ernst shared their support for the USMCA. Senators Grassley and Ernst and Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds are continuously pushing Congress to approve the new trade deal on behalf of their constituents here in Iowa.

Our congresswoman, Representative Cindy Axne, ran as a pro-business and agriculture Democrat. In order to fulfill those promises, I ask her to support the USMCA, as it is beneficial to many of her constituents. Council Bluffs, one of the largest cities in the congresswoman’s district, relies heavily on agriculture and manufacturing jobs that the USMCA supports.

Iowa’s workers will benefit greatly from the approval of the USMCA, and I strongly urge Congresswoman Axne and the rest of Iowa’s congressional delegation to push for a ratification vote on this important trade agreement sooner rather than later.

Naomi Corrie

Council Bluffs

The people voted ‘no confidence’

About four years ago, out of the 250 million or so eligible voters in America, around 138 million voted. Out of those 138 million, just about 63 million voted for one Donald Trump and the other 66 million voted for Hillary Clinton. I am not here to complain about how Hillary should have won (she should have) and how the electoral college is an outdated concept that is actually destructive to a functioning democracy (it is).

I only wanted to point out that both of the major candidates only acquired (approximately) 25% of the total votes that were eligible to be cast in the United States. So, where did that other 50% of the votes end up? Stein? Johnson? No. they ended up at home, on the couch, shaking their heads at another worthless display of misguided human ambition.

These people voted no confidence.

It is time we added a (true) third option to the presidential election: No confidence. This would be a physical choice at the ballot box, and if any eligible voter decides, due to lack of interest or other ideological reasons, to stay home on election day, that vote is automatically counted as No Confidence. Their voice, as apathetic and cynical as it may be, will finally be heard.

And what, exactly, would happen if the NCV were to prevail over the other candidates? What good is a government no one respects? What authority can they have if they are believed to not be working towards the will of the people they claim to represent?

The people will have chosen to govern themselves. The people will finally have a check over the rampant misuse of governmental power to oppress and abuse our will and trust. They will be forced to, instead of bickering and finger pointing, actually work together for fear of losing not just their jobs but the whole of the government. Call it the nuclear option. Call it mutually assured destruction.

It is taking the toy away from the brats before they break it.

Sign up for The Daily Nonpareil Newsletter

Receive stories like this everyday to your email. Sign up for our daily newsletters here.

Erik Thompson


Look at the facts about Russia

Ever the inveterate narcissistic egoist, Trump’s claim that “I got me elected. Russia didn’t help me at all” falls flat on its face following his previous slip-of-the-tweet in which he clearly acknowledges Russian assistance in getting him elected when he states that he had “nothing to do with Russia helping me get elected.”

That Russia helped is fact. How much it helped is open to debate. What is irrefutable is that the electoral college gave Trump the presidency. The voting public did not. Mrs. Clinton surpassed Trump by 2.87 million popular votes, a margin of 2.1%, which is the largest margin ever for a candidate who lost the electoral college.

And this was after James Comey’s unintended but consequential blunder of his Oct. 28 letter to Congress, indicating that newly found documents might warrant a renewed investigation into allegations of misuse by Clinton of a private E-mail server for federal business. Comey’s retraction on Nov. 6 did nothing to repair the earlier damage he inflicted on the Clinton campaign.

Yet, even with intentional assistance from Russia and unintentional assistance from Comey, Trump still lost the popular vote. And that is also fact.

Steven Pokorny


(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.