This isn’t the first election cycle that Iowans have balanced politics and health risks, and with the state holding the second-highest cancer rates in the country, it won’t be the last. Throughout the long, grueling gubernatorial race, cancer and other health risks have dominated headlines in the state. Both parties’ candidates claim cancer is a core issue for their campaigns, both in debates and in campaign materials.
Cancer Takes Center Stage
Not long ago, it would have been unthinkable that the state’s rising cancer rates would be a headline campaign topic. Agriculture is a huge business in Iowa, with roughly 1 in 4 jobs directly or indirectly supported by farming. That kept criticism of the industry’s poor environmental record out of public discourse.
In 2026, however, it’s been a recurring talking point for both candidates. Democrat Rob Sand and Republican Zach Lahn have both referred to cancer related to environmental factors, primarily exposure to pesticides and fertilizers, as a public health crisis. Both have pledged to clean up Iowa’s water and enforce regulation on agricultural chemicals.
More than 100 campaign ads mention cancer, funded by roughly $30 million in ad spend; in 2022, one ad mentioned cancer and cost less than $200,000.
Beyond the “Big Ag” Problem
While cleaning up Iowa’s heavily polluted water and soil is a start, the state’s cancer issue goes beyond chemical exposure. The state has obesity, alcohol, and smoking rates above the national average. Other issues, like diet and exercise, as well as access to health care, also affect many Iowans.
It’s About Trust, Earned and Lost
Ultimately, voters have to choose which party they believe they can trust. Republicans have swarmed to back Lahn, a MAHA supporter and backer of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. That MAHA relationship is a big reason chemicals like glyphosate are in the headlines, causing a split between farmers and some MAHA supporters who claim the chemical causes cancer.
On the positive side, the fact that these discussions are even happening among Republican voters is a sign of progress. Historically, any mention of pollution and accountability would have been anathema to the party; environmentalism was strictly the stuff of “tree-hugging liberals”. Still, there’s a large gap between discussion and action, and Republicans and Democrats alike are deeply suspicious of Lahn’s real commitment to cleaning up polluted water and soil across Iowa.
He’s certainly not addressing the human side of the issue. Lahn voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill, which cut funding for cancer research, and has supported banning mRNA research, which may help improve cancer treatment.
Regardless of which candidate wins, any legislation to reduce chemical exposure from agriculture faces significant challenges from a well-funded Iowa lobbying body with decades of experience and millions of dollars to spend. That doesn’t mean it’s not worth the fight - or the vote.
Support Less Cancer and Make Prevention the Priority
Less Cancer is a nationally recognized nonprofit committed to making cancer prevention a public health priority. Through programming, advocacy, and education, we’ve helped drive the conversation toward healthcare access, nutrition, and lifestyle changes that keep American households healthy. You can support Less Cancer today by making a donation - thank you for making a difference!