10/01/26

We’re now only about five weeks out from Election Day 2026. Iowa voters may cast their ballots at their county auditor’s office starting Wednesday, October 14, about two weeks from now. 

If you’re not aware that the campaigns are in full swing, you’re living off the grid. Television programming is interrupted several dozen times a day by political ads, either favoring a candidate or against his or her opponent, or both. By now you might be able to recite the script of some of the ads.

Election years are Fat City for TV stations, even though recent legal alterations have likely reduced their potential income totals. 

Even running for an Iowa legislative seat costs plenty of bucks today. There’s no comparison with what a legislative candidate raised and spent, say, 35 years ago. Gene Blanshan, who represented Greene County in the Iowa House for about 10 years from the early 1980s to the early 1990s, tells me the most he ever raised for a competitive campaign was $10,000, and he gave about $2,000 of that to other local Democratic candidates.

In recent elections for area legislative seats in the legislature, competitive races have generated several hundred thousand dollars in contributions. If the political parties decide the race is competitive, they contribute very significant amounts to their candidate, and outside non-party money from various political action committees and organizations flows into the candidate’s coffers as well.

It’s a lot. But statewide and federal races, for governor, U.S. senator, or U.S. representative, dwarf the legislative campaign spending totals. The Iowa U.S. House 3rd District race between Sarah Trone-Garriott (D) and Zach Nunn (R) has raised, in total, about $4 million so far. And the U.S. Senate race in Iowa, for instance, had totaled more than $60 million in contributions as of last weekend.

Television ads and their preparation account for the biggest single cost category for most statewide and federal campaigns. And sadly, attack ads about an opponent seem more frequent than those touting the pluses for a candidate. Doesn’t speak particularly well for the candidate, nor for the voters, nor for democracy. When both candidates engage in negative campaigning, we’re being asked to decide which one’s less bad.

I may be mistaken (not unusual), but it seems to me that debates for top statewide and federal races used to play a more important role in the campaign cycle than they do now. There are probably several reasons for that. Candidates have an easier time now at campaigning in person throughout the state, and they have much more cash to buy TV time than formerly. And the internet gives them a campaign outlet they didn’t have before the 1990s. 

Nevertheless, debates have been scheduled for most of the top races. Iowa PBS will host a debate for the U.S. Senate contest on Wednesday, October 7, and another for the governor’s race on Wednesday, October 21, both at 7 p.m. A Senate debate will also originate from WHO-TV on Tuesday, October 13, at 9 p.m.

Candidates for the U.S. House Third District, which includes Greene County, are reportedly negotiating over the rules for a TV debate.

Both Iowa PBS and WHO-TV’s television group Nexstar are making a mistake by excluding Libertarian U.S. Senate candidate Thomas Laehn, Greene County Attorney, from the Senate debates. The TV stations’ debate rules are so stringent that Laehn doesn’t meet their requirements, even though he’s been nominated by the required number of Iowans’ signatures and will appear on the Iowa general election ballot as a certified candidate.

It doesn’t make sense to exclude Laehn from the debates because he’s a minor party candidate. Those of us who know him know he would be a formidable debate opponent for both Democrat Josh Turek and Republican Ashley Hinson, and would bring a perspective to the debate about the importance of constitutional balance. 

He’s not the usual third party candidate. The sponsoring TV outlets for the debates should reconsider their position on candidate eligibility. Laehn, a constitutional scholar and former political science professor with a highly successful record as a prosecuting county attorney, deserves a seat at the table, and voters should have the opportunity to see and hear him.