Conservatives happier than liberals? Register readers weigh in.

It’s obvious that conservatives are happier than liberals

I was glad to read a fresh and inspiring guest essay June 26 by Nicole Russell about how conservatives are happier than liberals.

The piece explains what the majority of your readers have known for a long time.

Jeff Luke, Des Moines

Liberals are distinguished by frequent anger

I have always felt that a major difference between conservatives and liberals was the ability of Republicans to discuss politics with Democrats without becoming angry.

The June 26 opinion piece by Nicole Russell (“Study from 2022 shows conservatives happier…”) bolstered my perspective. I have many friends who are liberal. Without exception, when conversations turn to politics, these friends’ voices increase in volume and facial expressions change from friendly to confrontational.

The analysis presented by Russell revealed several results of the study (60,000 Americans surveyed) including mental health, happiness, and strong views of meritocracy. Conservatives scored much higher in those categories, and the analysts of the study concluded the disparity was a direct link to the anger and happiness issues owned by liberals.

One has only to turn on the news to watch both the protesters and politicians waving their fists, screaming obscenities, and destroying property.

Stu Bassman, West Des Moines

Feeling happy is easier if you don’t care about other people

Nicole Russell’s June 26 column about conservatives being happier than liberals didn’t make much sense to me — and then it did. Russell explains that conservatives are happier than liberals based on the correlate with happiness that was studied by social psychologist Jaime Napier. Napier proposes that the correlate to happiness is the belief in a meritocracy where anybody who works hard can make it — no matter what your background. Napier claims that correlate aligns with conservative thinking.

Russell goes on to explain that her view of liberal beliefs is that life is unfair and it’s the government’s job to make people happy. I think that’s an incredibly inaccurate, narrow and biased view, but, for the sake of the point I want to make, I’ll go along with it.

I could see that, yes, one might be happier if they believe that everyone can be successful (no matter their circumstances) and the government has no responsibility to support others who have challenging circumstances. It would be a relief to believe that one did not need to think about or act on complex societal problems. It’s simple, just work hard.

On the other hand, one might be unhappy if they recognize that not everyone has the same starting point in life, some people have significant barriers and they believe that government has a role to play in creating a society that supports others in removing barriers. One might be unhappy when they recognize that the solutions are complex.

If feeling discomfort/unhappiness is the price for recognizing that we live in a complex society where there are individuals who, for many reasons, cannot be successful without supports and that government shares some responsibility for solutions, I’ll keep my liberal outlook and pay the price.

Cynthia Erickson, Des Moines

More: Rob Sand needs to speak about water | Letters

‘Fair share’ doesn’t mean anything without a number

The June 22 Opinion section included a letter writer’s assertion that the “rich” need to pay their fair share in income taxes. That statement gets stated frequently. It is hard to argue with that statement.  However, I have asked several times in letters for someone to state what the income tax rate should be for rich people. No one ever does. I would like to ask again for someone to state what the numeric income tax rate should be for rich people.

Doug Gulling, Urbandale

Trump rejects the responsibility that came with his privilege

I am a proud American, and there was a time when I felt an even deeper pride in our country. Like many people, I didn’t always appreciate paying taxes — especially when the difference between gross and net pay is so noticeable. But as I matured, I came to understand the critical importance of the essential services our taxes fund.

I received a solid education at a public school where I was taught civics and the role taxes play in keeping our government running. I spent most of my career as a registered nurse caring for veterans — men and women who served this country honorably. The funding that supported my work came largely from taxpayer dollars through Medicare, Medicaid and VA benefits. I also benefited personally from Pell Grants and scholarships that helped me pursue my education. I am deeply grateful for the opportunities I’ve had to serve, contribute, and live a meaningful, productive life.

Of course, no system is perfect. I support reforms that make our government more efficient and responsive. Continuous improvement should be a shared goal, regardless of political affiliation.

What I cannot support is the glorification of those who manipulate the system to avoid paying their fair share — particularly individuals like Donald Trump, who proudly claims it’s “smart” to avoid taxes. That mindset is not patriotic. It’s not leadership. It’s self-serving. Trump was born into wealth and has repeatedly demonstrated a disregard for the responsibilities that come with privilege. His behavior does not reflect the values of hard work, sacrifice, and shared duty that truly make America great.

We need leaders who invest in this country, not just themselves. We deserve better.

Kelli McCreary, Toledo

Taxpayers clean up Big Ag’s messes

Remember the old parable “Upstream” or the “River Story”? Iowans across the state are drowning in nitrates, pesticides and manure as they come down our rivers suffering from the ill health effects of these pollutants.

The Des Moines Water Works and other municipal water treatment systems are tasked with cleaning up the rivers and our health care industry is burdened with caring for these Iowans who are getting sick and dying of cancer. We all know by now that Iowa is second in the nation in cancer incidence. But who’s at the top of the rivers? Who’s upstream? It’s the Big Ag operators that encompass a combination of leading cooperatives like Landus and Titan Pro, large agribusiness firms such as Corteva Agriscience and Dairy Farmers of America, and the Iowa Farm Bureau.

Iowa taxpayers are spending millions of dollars to clean up our water while Big Ag operators seem quite willing to let us do so. I wonder if they believe it is less expensive to clean up the water (for them) than it is for them to clean up the water (for all of us). Maybe it’s time we heard from them; otherwise we might think they have no shame.

Patsy Shors, Des Moines

Celebrate Title IX by protecting female-only sports

Fifty-three years ago, the United States implemented the Education Amendments of 1972. We know it as Title IX. June 23 was the anniversary of Title IX. What benefits do girls and women enjoy from this landmark amendment? Title IX gives female high school and college athletes equal opportunities in athletics and athletic scholarships.

My grandmother played high school basketball in rural Iowa over 100 years ago. Iowa has consistently led the nation as a state that values equal rights for women. I am proud to be surrounded by people who value our rights as women.

I participated in high school women's golf. I didn't know this was a fairly new right for young women. In the years since my graduation, women participating in high school athletics has risen from 500,000 to over 3 million!

Title IX significantly expanded opportunities for women and girls. Today, nearly 40% of women hold college degrees, in part due to the availability of athletic scholarships.

Realize that these rights are entirely dependent upon our knowledge and support. If we ignore recent obstacles in schools permitting males identifying as females into women's athletics, Title IX benefits disappear.

Biologically male athletes who identify as women or girls are receiving women’s scholarships, using women’s locker rooms, breaking women’s records, and winning local, state, and national championships in women’s athletics in some states.

As the legislative liaison for Concerned Women for America of Iowa, alongside our state director, Tamara Scott, we will defend female-only sports in Iowa if threatened.

We appreciate the legislators who had the foresight to write and the courage to vote for Title IX 53 years ago. Happy anniversary, Title IX!

Laura Carlson, Story City, legislative liaison for Concerned Women for America of Iowa

Pick your poison

Yes, “we’re all going to die” someday — but in Iowa, our odds are rising faster than most. We’re now the second-highest state in the nation for cancer rates, and they continue to climb. If you’re blaming alcohol, consider this: Most beers and wines now contain glyphosate.

Pick your poison. In just two centuries, Iowa’s deep-rooted prairie has been replaced by an intensive two-crop agriculture system. The result? Some of the nation’s highest levels of nitrates, neonicotinoids, glyphosate, along with other toxic chemicals in our waterways. Add millions of confined pigs, chickens, and other livestock, and we’ve created a toxic recipe that’s poisoning our land, our people, and our future.

This isn’t just Iowa’s problem — it impacts communities downstream as well. We’re all connected through the Mississippi River Watershed, and Iowa is a major contributor to the dead zone in the Gulf of America.

Why does greed and short-term thinking keep winning over the common good — and the health of ALL life?

Christine Curry, West Des Moines

More: Nitrates are pummeling Des Moines. We can't farm Iowa this way any more. | Opinion

Marijuana has high potential for abuse

Russell Saffell in his June 19 piece ‘Veterans deserve change. US should reschedule cannabis now' says that ‘it is not only scientifically outdated, but also morally indefensible' for marijuana to remain on Schedule I.

Why? Because Schedule I is for drugs with ‘with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.'

But that’s precisely what marijuana is. Let’s be clear: A ‘currently accepted medical use' isn’t based on whether people are already using it widely.

Or even if state legislatures say it’s medicine: Voting that red is green doesn’t make it so.

Currently accepted medical use is designated based on evidence. And that’s one thing that is absent with marijuana. Chronic pain is one of the primary conditions it allegedly ‘treats.' Yes, one study suggested it might help, but many, many more studies since then have not backed up that finding.

And that’s to say nothing of the terrible side effects it has.

Saffell is a veteran and state adjutant of VFW in Iowa. Does he know that, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs, of all veterans who died by suicide in 2022, almost 9% were diagnosed with CUD (cannabis use disorder)? Seems like a ‘high potential for abuse' to me — with tragic consequences.

Rescheduling marijuana will send the message that all of this is not such a big deal.

The Biden White House once publicly agreed with the correct idea that marijuana is a dangerous drug. Then it made a 180-degree turn and went on to recommend rescheduling. That was a bad call.

If the Trump administration follows suit and makes rescheduling real, it will be an even worse one.

Leslie Carpenter, co-founder, Iowa Mental Health Advocacy

Supporting Republicans is inescapably supporting Trump

I know that there are some Republicans who are not happy with President Donald Trump. They won't vote for him but do vote for the rest of the Republican ticket. I also know that many people say they don't vote for the party, they vote for the person.

Party members in Congress vote with their party 90% of the time or more. There is even a position called a “whip” whose job it is to keep party members in line, even if it takes threats.

In our current situation, this means that a vote for any Republican is support for Trump and his policies.  Something to think about.

Frank McCammond, Redfield

Bill aids rich Americans, hurts poor Americans

Republicans call it the Big Beautiful Bill (H.R.1), but it’s really a Billionaire Tax Scam — and it doesn’t just hurt the nation; it hurts working families right here at home, while handing out breaks to the ultra-rich.

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, over 80% of the bill’s benefits would go to the richest 5% of Americans. Meanwhile, the bottom 10% would see their costs rise by $1,600, while the wealthiest 10% get a $12,000 giveaway.

This bill would cut health insurance for 16 million people, slash food assistance for millions — including up to 18 million poor children — and raise costs for nearly 80 million low- and middle-income households. That means higher prices for everyday essentials like health care, utilities, and college tuition.

At a time when so many families are already struggling to keep up, this plan does the unthinkable: takes from those with the least and gives even more to the ultra-wealthy and big corporations.

Working Iowans shouldn’t be footing the bill for tax breaks for billionaires. We deserve better. Call Sen. Chuck Grassley (319-232-6657) and Sen. Joni Ernst (319-365-4504) and tell them to stand with families — not the ultra-wealthy.

Judy Stiers, Cedar Falls

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Celebrate Title IX by protecting female-only sports | Letters