Water quality and cancer rates have emerged as critical issues in Iowa’s political landscape, influencing debates, campaign events, and advertisements across both major parties this election season. This focus comes amid the state’s ongoing budget deficit, high living costs, and agricultural challenges arising from trade disputes affecting farmers.
For years, concerns surrounding water quality and health impacts have been politically sensitive, primarily due to the influence of Iowa’s powerful agricultural sector, which is a leading producer of corn, soybeans, and hogs. Excess nutrients from fertilizers and animal waste often run off into waterways, raising tension between urban areas that depend on these sources for drinking water and the predominantly rural regions engaged in agriculture.
Recently, political attention has intensified due to consecutive years of water use restrictions in the Des Moines area, alongside a growing movement in rural communities advocating for better health and environmental outcomes. Iowa currently ranks second in the nation for newly diagnosed cancers, with certain types—including prostate, breast, and lung cancer—growing at rates higher than the national average.
Research funded by the state at the University of Iowa suggests that while many of the elevated cancer cases can be attributed to demographic and lifestyle factors, including smoking and binge drinking, environmental contributors like nitrate levels are still under investigation.
“The real issue is the water and the nitrates,” said Josh Turek, a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, during a recent conversation with cancer patients. He emphasized the need for clean drinking water, stating, “Every Iowan deserves when they turn on the tap to ensure that their water is clean and not giving them cancer.”
Although some studies suggest a correlation between nitrate levels in drinking water and specific diseases, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency does not classify nitrates as a cancer risk. The agency’s review of this classification, initiated in 2017, has faced delays under several administrations.
Ashley Hinson, a Republican congresswoman challenging Turek, convened a meeting with farmers and researchers to discuss Iowa’s water challenges. She advocates for investments in water infrastructure and monitoring, insisting that treated tap water complies with federal standards. “We all know that we have some challenges here in Iowa,” Hinson remarked, highlighting that water quality should not be a partisan issue.
In the past decade, the water utility in the Des Moines area has faced substantial costs in treating water tainted by nitrates, previously seeking legal assistance to address upstream pollution sources. Recently, state leadership committed an additional $320 million towards improving water infrastructure and conservation initiatives, with Governor Kim Reynolds asserting that water quality is a non-negotiable concern.
Critics, including candidates running against Reynolds, argue that the state must better prioritize these water quality issues. Both Republican Zach Lahn and Democrat Rob Sand have noted the urgent need to address the correlation between contaminated water and health problems. Lahn, in particular, has acknowledged the role of agrochemicals in Iowa’s cancer rates, stating that while these chemicals have benefits, water quality issues must be addressed seriously.
Recent measures have shown the gravity of the situation, with Central Iowa Water Works running its nitrate treatment facilities for a record 193 consecutive days and managing nitrate levels around eight to nine milligrams per liter during peak summer months.
The topic of water quality is becoming increasingly central to campaigns, as candidates from both parties are recognizing its importance to Iowans. As the election approaches, the conversation continues to evolve, signaling a shifting political landscape regarding health and environmental issues in the state.
