DUBUQUE, Iowa — October 21, 2026

Scott Nelson Incumbent

Candidate Steve Drahozal
DUBUQUE, Iowa — October 21, 2026

Voters deciding the Dubuque County Attorney race on November 3, 2026, are choosing between two experienced lawyers with very different résumés: Republican incumbent Scott J. Nelson, who has run the office for four years, and Democratic challenger Steve Drahozal, a Dubuque attorney with 25 years in private practice. Both men laid out their cases in candidate questionnaires published this week by the Dyersville Commercial and Cascade Pioneer. Here is how they compare on the core work of the office — prosecution — and on the question neither has fully answered: plea bargaining.

The candidates

Nelson came to the job after six years in the U.S. Navy and six in the Army National Guard, a bachelor’s degree from Buena Vista, and a law degree from the University of Iowa. He counts 35 years of criminal and civil trial practice. He won the office four years ago arguing it was, in his word, dysfunctional, and says he used military leadership to rebuild it into a team that works closely with law enforcement.

Drahozal also earned his law degree at the University of Iowa and has practiced in Dubuque for 25 years. He describes himself as a criminal law specialist with extensive civil experience, is a past president of the Dubuque County Bar Association, and teaches continuing legal education seminars around Iowa. His criminal trial work, though, has come in private practice — he has never served as a prosecutor, and his campaign makes up for that with a promise: that he will personally carry an active caseload, arguing the county needs a head prosecutor who actually prosecutes.

On prosecution

Nelson’s pitch is focus and continuity. He says the county attorney has nothing to do with policy — that belongs to the Board of Supervisors — and that the job is public safety: vigorously prosecuting violent crime and gun crime, standing up for victims, and mentoring the assistant county attorneys so the whole office tries cases better. His closing argument is that morale, organization, and results have all improved on his watch and that he wants to take the office to a higher level.

Drahozal’s pitch is process and breadth. He promises evidence-based prosecutions, a stronger focus on victims’ rights, support and training for the office’s prosecutors so that violent charges — he names sexual abuse and domestic violence — end in just convictions, and quarterly public reports on the office’s work. He also ventures where Nelson won’t: Drahozal says he would work with the supervisors to write a county data-center ordinance built to survive a legal challenge, and he would chase grant money to fund prosecutor training instead of leaning on taxpayers.

On plea bargaining: the unanswered question

Here is the honest gap in this race: neither candidate has laid out a plea-bargaining philosophy in his public answers. That matters, because plea bargaining is how the overwhelming majority of criminal cases in Dubuque County actually end. Trials make headlines; negotiated pleas fill the docket.

The current office’s practice under Nelson is visible in this month’s cases. Andrew Heiar pleaded guilty to two of five counts — first-degree burglary and assault with intent to commit sexual abuse — in exchange for dismissal of the other three, and received 30 years in prison. In the Darrell Moore theft case, prosecutors negotiated a plea that recommended two years of probation; a judge rejected that recommendation and imposed 10 years, and the Iowa Supreme Court has now ordered Moore resentenced by a different judge after finding the sentence rested on an unproven dollar figure. Whatever voters think of those outcomes, they show an office willing to bargain hard cases to a certain conviction while reserving its toughest posture for violent crime.

Drahozal has criticized none of this specifically. His pledges — evidence-based prosecution, just convictions, transparency — suggest he would not bargain cases away cheaply, but until he says how he would handle the daily trade-offs of the plea table, voters are taking that on faith.

The bottom line: who is most qualified?

On qualifications for this specific job, Nelson holds the clearer edge. He is the only candidate who has actually done it: four years running the office, 35 years of trial practice behind that, and a team of prosecutors he has trained and can point to. His definition of the job — prosecution and public safety, not policy — also matches what a county attorney actually controls.

Drahozal is a credible, seasoned litigator, and his transparency and training ideas would not hurt the office. But he asks voters to hand the county’s prosecution office to someone who has never prosecuted a case in it, and his sharpest differences with Nelson are about things — data-center ordinances, grant hunting — that sit at the edges of the job. Voters who want a proven prosecutor’s office will find the safer bet in the incumbent; voters who want a change in style and priorities have a qualified lawyer asking for the chance. On paper, though, the qualification gap in prosecution itself belongs to Nelson.

---