FAREWELL TO IOWA?

This week’s Iowa caucuses may well have been the last that lead off presidential voting,

at least in the Democratic Party. Loud objections to their first-contest-in-the-nation status have been out there for a long time. This year’s vote counting debacle may push them off the cliff. We see good reason for such a demise, but offer one caution we’ll get to shortly. History reminds of the need for being careful what you ask for sometimes.

We should point out some of the reasons Iowa acquired this position in the first place. New Hampshire has had the first primary spot since 1920. It even has a law mandating it

remain first.  Iowa, craving national political attention, designed its caucus so it’s not really a primary – no secret ballot, held at night over two or three hours, delegates awarded by a complicated alignment and realignment process. The momentum Jimmy Carter, for example, took

out of Iowa in 1976 encouraged candidates to practically move there in the year before the election. Barack  Obama, as we’ll get to, probably wouldn’t have been president without the gigantic push he got by winning Iowa in 2008. Over time, however, more people have realized how problematic Iowa’s first-in-the-process status is.

The Complaints

In this week’s caucus, entrance polls indicated  over 90 % of those participating were white. For a party that depends on black and brown votes, that’s a problem. Since Iowa often serves the function of winnowing the field and providing momentum for successful candidates, Iowa’s nearly all-white composition seems especially troubling. With similarly white New Hampshire next on the program, Iowa’s unrepresentativeness takes

Source: US Census Population Estimates 2018

on even greater significance. Several cycles ago, Democrats advanced more diverse Nevada and South Carolina on the schedule, but the out-sized influence of Iowa and New Hampshire remain. This year, for example, former Vice President Joe Biden’s poor showing in Iowa – and he may not do better in New Hampshire – leaves his candidacy totally dependent on winning South Carolina on February 29 and doing very well in Nevada a week earlier.

 

In the wake of Iowa this year we heard one national commentator suggest Democrats

start their primary campaign in Michigan. He argued  that state much better represents the kind of electorate a Democrat must attract in running for president. It has big cities with large minority group populations, suburbs, farming communities, and plenty of union members. The idea resonates with us, though we acknowledge we can only guess about how much different the results would have been, if at all.

A second complaint about Iowa has been the  structure of the caucus itself. Not everybody,

the argument goes, can take three hours on a week night for standing in lines and gathering in groups in high school and college gymnasiums. Without a doubt, the process limits participation. 

Finally, voters and political scientists have found the public nature of caucuses unnerving. Revealing one’s electoral choices before friends, neighbors, and strangers doesn’t comport with notions many Americans have about democracy. That characteristic may also depress participation.

We get the complaints about Iowa. They’re all valid. This week’s vote counting debacle may provide the impetus for moving Iowa to a later

spot on the calendar and perhaps entice the Iowa Democratic Party to scrap the caucus format for a primary.  All that is four or eight years down the road, depending on the outcome of this year’s general election and other factors. Right now, we doubt things will stay exactly the same.

The Obama Caveat

One bit of irony remains that no one should forget, especially given the complaints about Iowa’s demographics. The truth is that the boost Barack Obama got from Iowa’s nearly all-white electorate probably gave the United States its first president of color. In late 2007,

Obama & Clinton - the race for presidency 2008

Obama  trailed Hillary Clinton by 16 points in the polls in black-vote-rich South Carolina. Then Obama won a stunning victory in Iowa. He might not have pulled that off in a primary state (he lost to Clinton the next week in New Hampshire’s primary). Iowa’s caucus format puts a premium on field organization, something at which Obama’s campaign excelled. 

Because Obama won Iowa, black voters in South Carolina, previously skeptical of an African American’s chances of winning with white voters, changed their minds and rallied behind Obama.  He won the South Carolina primary by almost 30 points and never looked back. 

 

The demographic coin, therefore, has two sides. One wonders now if history might

repeat itself with former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Could his top-of-the-line showing in  Iowa (we won’t have the final results for another week) alleviate skepticism about the viability of an openly gay candidate who publicly expresses his affection for his husband? Time will tell but we can’t say it won’t happen.

Pete Bittgieg and Husband

Lots of reasons exist for getting rid of the Iowa caucuses as the first exercise in the presidential campaign process.  History, and maybe the present, counsel at least a measure of caution.