Affordability is the missing measure of economic success
The economy is often declared “strong” when jobs are plentiful and growth is steady. Yet for millions of Americans, especially younger ones, those metrics feel disconnected from reality. The real problem isn’t the price of groceries or gas—it’s the rising cost of building a stable, middle-class life.
That problem has a name: affordability. Though the term may be new to the president’s vocabulary, the economic strain it describes is not. Affordability reflects the soaring price of big-ticket necessities—buying a home, paying for child care, affording college and health care, and saving for retirement. These are not luxuries. They are the foundations of economic security, and for many families, they now feel out of reach.
Polling by The New York Times and Siena College shows this clearly. A majority of voters identify housing, health care, education, or raising children as their primary economic concern: 51% cite one of these middle-class essentials, compared with just 23% who name monthly bills like groceries, utilities, or gas. Economic anxiety today is about access and opportunity, not consumption.
This disconnect helps explain why traditional measures of economic strength fall short. Housing and health care are among the largest sectors of the economy, yet affordability in these areas is rarely treated as a central indicator of success. Policies can reduce inflation or boost growth without lowering the cost of a home, a college degree, or medical care.
The challenge is not new. The cost of core middle-class necessities has been rising for decades, even during periods of low inflation. What has changed is the cumulative burden—and who bears it. Housing, health care, and higher education all have inelastic supply and demand. People need them regardless of economic cycles, and they take years to expand. Higher interest rates can even worsen affordability, raising the cost of mortgages and student loans without fully showing up in standard inflation measures.
Young Americans feel this most acutely. A majority of voters under 45 say the cost of having a family has become unaffordable. Only 24 percent of those ages 18 to 29 believe they can afford the life they think they should be able to afford, compared with 63 percent of voters over 65. Housing dominates their concerns: about half say affording a home worries them more than retirement, health care, education, or everyday expenses combined.
If economic success is measured only by jobs and growth, policymakers will continue to miss what matters most to families. Affordability must be treated as a core economic issue—not a secondary one. Until the cost of building a middle-class life is within reach again, claims of a “strong economy” will ring hollow for the very people it is meant to serve.
Linda SchreiberIowa City
Free people read freely
I come to this conversation because, for generations, Iowans of all walks of life have sent up a righteous cry: Free people read freely.That principle is not abstract in our state. Iowa has more libraries per capita than any other state in the nation. Nearly 70 percent of Iowans hold at least one library card. Eighty-eight years ago, in Des Moines, an Iowan drafted the Library Bill of Rights which is a document that has shaped the ethical foundation of library service across the country. Libraries are not peripheral to Iowa’s identity. They are central to it.Again and again, Iowans have entreated their elected officials from the quiet places of our small towns and vibrant cities alike. They have traveled at personal sacrifice to the marble halls of the Capitol, not to ask for the chains of micro-governance, but to ask for leadership that marches toward a prosperous tomorrow.House File 2309 represents a retreat into the shadows of suspicion.This legislation seeks to transform our sanctuaries of learning and literacy into sites of surveillance. It places librarians, who are often volunteers and undersourced, who are often the caring weavers of a community’s dreams, under the threat of criminal penalties and significant financial liability. This financial liability extends to our communities too.
It suggests that the professionals entrusted daily with guiding children, supporting families, assisting seniors, and protecting patron privacy cannot be relied upon without the heavy hand of state intervention.We must recognize what is truly at stake.A threat to the freedom of the local library is a threat to the freedom of the local soul.Libraries are not state propaganda centers. They are locally governed institutions, accountable to their communities. They reflect the needs, values, and priorities of the towns they serve. When the state dictates the contents of shelves from the heights of the Capitol, it does not strengthen families but rather erodes the very foundation of local trust and community conscience.Iowans are conscientious people. We know how to raise our families. We know how to guide our children.
Parents and guardians already have the authority and responsibility to make decisions for their own households.
Librarians partner with families every day, offering tools, information, and choices rather than abstract mandates.House File 2309 relies on the vague and expansive concept of “presumptive harm,” language that will almost certainly invite costly litigation. We have already seen how similar measures strain local budgets and divert taxpayer dollars into courtrooms rather than classrooms and community services. At a time when we should be investing in literacy, broadband access, workforce development, and civic engagement, we risk spending precious resources defending ambiguous statutory language.This is not prudent governance.As leaders, lawmakers should set aside the divisiveness of state-mandated walls. They should resist policies rooted in fear and instead affirm policies grounded in trust, local control, and constitutional principles.You cannot build a Great State on the quicksand of fear, control, and censorship.Libraries are among the most trusted public institutions in our communities. They serve readers and students, job seekers and entrepreneurs, seniors and newcomers. They provide access to information across the political, religious, and cultural spectrum. They protect patron privacy. They uphold intellectual freedom. They do this work every single day, quietly and professionally.Let us refuse to be an Iowa that polices the mind. Let us instead be a state that empowers the spirit.Give our library communities the breadth of support, not the chokehold of legislation that undermines their mission and autonomy.I urge lawmakers to vote “No” on House File 2309 and to stand firmly on Iowa’s proud legacy of literacy, local control, and liberty.Respectfully,Sam Helmick is the community & access services coordinator with the Iowa City Public Library.
Miller-Meeks refuses to respond to veterans
On Nov. 18, six members of Congress, all military veterans, posted a video reminding military service members that they need not and must not follow illegal orders. Days later, President Trump called them traitors, accusing them of seditious behavior and suggested they be arrested.
In the following week, 11 military veterans, all residents in an assisted living facility, signed and sent a letter to Representative Miller-Meeks, asking her if she “supports presidential threats against those who encourage adherence to the law? Do you support the troops’ commitment to defend the Constitution?”
It has been over two months, and despite repeated attempts to contact her, no response has been received.
I believe that all 11 of us veterans anticipated little more than a vacuous response from her.
However, we are surprised and disappointed that we apparently did not even deserve a response.
Ed Flaherty
Iowa City
This article originally appeared on Ames Tribune: Free people read freely | Letters
Reporting by Ames Tribune / Ames Tribune
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
