In Defense of the Iowa Caucuses

• Publication year: 2022

54 Creighton L. Rev. 359. IN DEFENSE OF THE IOWA CAUCUSES

IN DEFENSE OF THE IOWA CAUCUSES

CHAD G. MARZEN ^[D1]

I. INTRODUCTION ................................... 359

II. THE IOWA CAUCUSES IN FOCUS ................. 362

A. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE IOWA CAUCUSES ........ 362

B. AN OVERVIEW OF THE RULES OF THE IOWA REPUBLICAN PARTY CAUCUSES AND THE IOWA DEMOCRATIC PARTY CAUCUSES ................... 364

C. THE 2020 IOWA CAUCUSES: THE FALLOUT ......... 366

III. ARGUMENT: IOWA SHOULD RETAIN ITS FIRST-IN-NATION CAUCUS STATUS .............. 367

A. THE IOWA CAUCUSES PROMOTE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY ................ 367

B. THE IOWA CAUCUSES PROMOTE A PERSONAL TOUCH TO POLITICS .............................. 368

C. IOWANS TAKE THE CAUCUS PROCESS SERIOUSLY ... 369

D. THE IOWA CAUCUSES ARE GOOD FOR DEMOCRACY ..................................... 370

E. THE IOWA CAUCUSES PROMOTE UNDERDOG CANDIDATES ..................................... 372

1. President Jimmy Carter ...................... 372

2. President Barack Obama ..................... 373

3. Senator Rick Santorum ...................... 374

4. Pete Buttigieg ................................ 374

5. Senator Amy Klobuchar ...................... 375

IV. THE FUTURE OF THE IOWA CAUCUSES: SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORM ..................... 376

A. MOVE CAUCUSES TO A WEEKEND EVENING ........ 376

B. ELIMINATE VIABILITY THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT IN PRECINCTS .................................... 377

C. IMPLEMENT SECRET VOTING ...................... 378

V. CONCLUSION ..................................... 379

I. INTRODUCTION

Every four years during presidential campaign election years, the national political spotlight falls on the state of Iowa and the Iowa caucuses. Iowa's first-in-the-nation caucuses have in essence become a tradition in American politics, alongside New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary. ^[1] On February 3, 2020, Iowa's first-in-the-nation caucuses took place with a contested Democratic field headlined by Senator Bernie Sanders, ^[2] Pete Buttigieg, ^[3] Senator Elizabeth Warren, ^[4] former Vice President Joe Biden, ^[5] and Senator Amy Klobuchar. ^[6] The Republican caucuses were largely uncontested with President Donald Trump ^[7] only facing nominal opposition from former Governor Bill Weld ^[8] and former Congressman Joe Walsh. ^[9]

As the evening progressed, the Iowa Democratic Party announced that caucus results would be delayed. ^[10] Then, as time went on, it became clear that something was very wrong as the Iowa Democratic Party announced "inconsistencies" with the reporting of data. ^[11] The following day, February 4, ended with no results from the Democratic caucuses' reporting. ^[12] At the center of the delay in results were issues with a smartphone app utilized by precincts for reporting to the Iowa Democratic Party. ^[13] The chaotic situation on caucus night frustrated a number of the Democratic presidential campaigns. ^[14]

With the difficulties in timely reporting the Democratic caucus results, the future of Iowa's first-in-the-nation caucuses remaining first-in-the-nation is in serious jeopardy. Commentators have recently labeled the Iowa caucuses as "disastrous," ^[15] a "fiasco," ^[16] an "epic fiasco," ^[17] a "meltdown," ^[18] and a "debacle." ^[19] Academic scholars have also criticized Iowa's caucus system ^[20] and one commentator has contended that the process contains inequities in that white male voters have disproportionate influence in choosing presidential nominees compared to African-American and women voters. ^[21] It has even been argued that the caucuses are "undemocratic." ^[22]

Despite these criticisms, this Article contends the Iowa caucuses are a positive process for American democracy. Contrary to the critics of the Iowa caucuses, this Article proffers five primary arguments why Iowa should retain its first-in-the-nation caucus status: (1) the Iowa caucuses promote civic engagement and civic responsibility; (2) the Iowa caucuses promote a personal touch to politics; (3) Iowans take the caucus process seriously; (4) the Iowa caucuses are healthy for democracy; and (5) the Iowa caucuses promote underdog candidates. This Article offers several possible suggestions for future reforms of the Iowa caucus process moving forward and advocates retention of Iowa's caucuses.

II. THE IOWA CAUCUSES IN FOCUS

A. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE IOWA CAUCUSES

Christopher Hull has defined caucuses as "lengthy local party meetings used to conduct party business and select delegates to further regional conventions, which ultimately decide how the state's presidential delegates will be allocated." ^[23] Iowa, admitted to the Union in 1846, ^[24] has utilized caucuses in every presidential election with the exception of 1916. ^[25] The Iowa caucuses did not receive much attention until the presidential election of 1976. ^[26]

Prior to the Iowa caucuses of 1976, both the Republican Party of Iowa and Iowa Democratic Party agreed to hold their caucus on the same date and to move the caucuses to the first caucus on the campaign calendar. ^[27] Jimmy Carter, then a one-term former governor of Georgia, made the decision in the 1976 presidential campaign to invest his campaign's limited resources in Iowa in the hope that it would propel increased coverage in the media for the later primaries and caucuses. ^[28] In the Democratic race that year, Carter won the most delegates of active candidates. ^[29] The momentum from the Iowa caucuses lifted Carter to a massive surge toward the Democratic nomination in 1976 ^[30] and a victory in the 1976 presidential election over President Gerald Ford. ^[31]

Since the 1976 Iowa caucuses, a number of caucus winners have gone on to win their party's presidential nomination. These candidates include Walter Mondale in 1984, ^[32] Bob Dole in 1996, ^[33] George W. Bush in 2000 ^[34] (who won the presidency in 2000), ^[35] John Kerry in 2004, ^[36] and Barack Obama in 2008 ^[37] (who won the presidency in 2008). ^[38]

Even before the reporting difficulties with the 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses, controversy has surrounded the caucuses in two other recent caucuses: the 2012 Iowa Republican caucuses as well as the 2016 Iowa Democratic caucuses. On caucus night in 2012, Mitt Romney appeared to have won the Iowa caucuses by a very slim margin of only eight votes over Rick Santorum. ^[39] However, controversy ensued when results from eight precincts went completely missing. ^[40] Just over two weeks later, the final certified results from the Iowa Republican Party actually gave the victory to Rick Santorum by just thirtyfour votes. ^[41] The true winner of the Iowa caucuses will never be known due to the missing ballots. ^[42]

The 2016 Iowa Democratic caucuses featured controversy as well. In that year, Hillary Clinton narrowly beat Bernie Sanders in the caucuses. ^[43] However, both campaigns raised an issue with precinct-level coin flips which were being utilized to allocate delegates to the county conventions. ^[44] Sanders suggested there was a possibility that he may have won the popular vote in Iowa despite not carrying the most state delegate equivalents. ^[45] The results of the 2016 election led to reforms in which the Iowa Democratic Party agreed to release three sets of results: the initial vote count, the final vote total after realignment, and then the totals of the state delegate equivalents. ^[46] While the reforms were intended to increase transparency, ironically, they complicated the release of the 2020 results. ^[47]

B. AN OVERVIEW OF THE RULES OF THE IOWA REPUBLICAN PARTY CAUCUSES AND THE IOWA DEMOCRATIC PARTY CAUCUSES

Both the Republican Party of Iowa and Iowa Democratic Party have separate caucus rules. For the Republican caucuses, the caucus locations are determined by the party chair of each county. ^[48] After the caucus is convened, typically supporters of each presidential candidate are allowed to address the gathering. ^[49] Voting for presidential preferences then occurs by secret ballot. ^[50] After the results of each precinct are announced, they are then reported to the Republican Party of Iowa headquarters. ^[51]

The Democratic Party caucuses have a different voting system than the Republican caucuses. At the beginning of each of the Democratic precinct caucuses, a temporary chair calls the caucus to order. ^[52] After the caucus is called to order, the first order of business is to elect a permanent chair as well as permanent secretary of the caucus. ^[53] Then the presidential preference part of the caucus, the primary reason many participants attend, begins. ^[54] Representatives of the candidates then address the caucus and advocate for their respective candidates ^[55] -and sometimes, an actual candidate may address a caucus. ^[56]

After the presentations, the first preference vote is held and the participants gather with other supporters of their chosen candidate. ^[57] As part of the first preference alignment, candidates must reach a viability threshold before proceeding to final realignment ^[58] (with the exception of caucuses where only one delegate is selected). ^[59] In caucuses with two delegates selected, the viability threshold is 25%; with three delegates, 16.66%; and caucuses with four or more delegates, 15%. ^[60] An uncommitted group is allowed for the first...