How Jim Leach Lost

Here is a letter to the editor of the Washington Post that gives the real reason why Jim Leach lost.

What's with the Eastern Establishment? Don't you trust us hayseeds to vote correctly for our representative in Congress?

Mark Shields [op-ed, Nov. 11] said we Iowans "inexplicably" defeated 15-term Rep. Jim Leach (R); then David S. Broder [op-ed, Nov. 30] put some of the blame on the Poker Players Alliance and the Christian Coalition -- both insidious forces -- for Mr. Leach's defeat. Hogwash!

Let's get a few facts straight: First, Mr. Leach showed how principled a moderate he was when, after the 2000 redistricting, he was given a chance to run in a Republican primary against right-wing conservative Rep. Jim Nussle. Instead, Mr. Leach moved to Iowa City to run in our district.

Second, yes, Mr. Leach voted against the Iraq war, but in the 2004 election he brought in one of the architects of the war, Vice President Cheney, to campaign for him.

Third, Mr. Leach has consistently voted to allow corporations to fire striking workers, and he favored tying a raise in the minimum wage to a cut in estate taxes.

I have been a political activist here for 27 years, and, believe me, it wasn't poker players or the Christian Coalition that finally beat Jim Leach. Nor was his loss inexplicable. The voters of this district decided we wanted a liberal activist Democrat, Dave Loebsack, to represent us in Congress, not a moderate who came through for the Republican Party when it counted.

GARY SANDERS

Iowa City