National Democratic leaders have drafted a proposal that could significantly reshape the party’s presidential nominating process and put an end to Iowa’s prized first-in-the-nation caucuses — be still my heart. Please, oh please be true! If I never again hear the words “Iowa Caucus” it will be too soon.
The Des Moines Register reports, National Democratic leaders draft proposal to reshape presidential calendar, threatening Iowa caucuses:
A draft resolution, obtained and corroborated by the Des Moines Register, would set new criteria for early-voting states that favor primaries over caucuses and diversity over tradition.
If the proposal advances, it would upend the party’s presidential nominating calendar by requiring states to apply to hold their nominating contests before the rest of the country and expanding the number of early voting states to as many as five. Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, which currently lead off the process, would not necessarily be given preferential consideration over other states that apply.
The Democratic National Committee is holding its annual winter meetings in Washington, D.C., this week, and the panel that sets the nominating calendar, the Rules and Bylaws Committee, is scheduled to take up the issue Friday evening.
It will be “a broad discussion not reaching, as far as I expect, any final conclusions,” Committee Co-Chair James Roosevelt Jr. told the Register.
The conversation follows disastrous 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses in which technological and logistical failures coalesced, preventing the party from declaring a timely winner. The caucuses’ ugly conclusion undermined more than a year’s worth of organizing and campaigning that preceded it, stoking renewed calls to move the nation toward primaries and replace Iowa as the first state to cast its presidential preferences.
Iowa and national Democrats remain at odds over which division of the party was most at fault. An audit commissioned by the Iowa Democratic Party found the national Democratic Party “aggressively interjected itself” into the 2020 caucuses, slowing and complicating the process on caucus night. DNC staff members declined to be interviewed for that audit. [A self serving report: “I didn’t do it, you did it!“]
What would change under draft proposal?
Currently, the DNC’s rules say that no state can hold a presidential primary or caucus before the first Tuesday in March. Iowa has long been exempted from that practice, holding its contest up to 29 days before other states. Iowa is followed by New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, which also are exempted as part of the early window of voting.
Under the draft proposal, all four states — and any others interested in jumping before the rest — would need to seek new waivers to hold an early nominating contest. Up to five states would receive waivers, though the proposal does not say whether the states would all vote on the same day or whether their votes would be staggered as they are now.
If the resolution passes, it wouldn’t prevent Iowa from applying for a waiver; nor would it directly eliminate caucuses. However, it would make the “ability to run (a) fair, transparent and inclusive primary” one of its core considerations in the waiver process. Iowa is required by state law to hold presidential caucuses.
Other considerations would be a state’s diversity, “including ethnic, geographic (and) union representation,” as well as the state’s general election competitiveness.
Ninety percent of Iowa’s population is white, and a Republican, former President Donald Trump, carried the state by 8 percentage points in 2020. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 6.5% of Iowans are members of unions.
Buh-bye, Iowa … your lilly white and ruby red state is out!
Mo Elleithee, a member of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, outlined those same priorities during the group’s January meeting. “Three of the four current early window states satisfy at least two of those criteria,” he said then. “One does not satisfy any of them, at least in recent years.”
Though Elleithee did not directly name Iowa, the subtext of his comments was clear.
According to the draft proposal, the DNC’s rules committee would outline the application rules and procedures for state parties by April 15, 2022, and it would give them at least 28 days to complete and submit applications to win a place at the start of the calendar. A subset of state parties would be invited to make public presentations to the committee.
The proposal also calls for the committee to hold at least three virtual public hearings so party members could share their views on the primary process. The committee would “announce the results of its evaluation” within six weeks of the application deadline.
The draft resolution states that the committee “will execute this process in the most transparent, open and fair manner feasible and commits to providing adequate, clear and timely notice on major milestones and requirements.”
Caucuses have been core to Iowa’s political identity
Iowa has been the first state to weigh in on presidential contenders ever since it convened a series of living room meetings across the state in January 1972.
The status is more than symbolic. [It is a cottage industry from which Iowa’s media company’s, including the Des Moines Register, profit handsomely from ad buys every four years. Iowa is not deserving of a monopoly on “first in the nation.] Standing alone as the first arbiter of presidential aspirants ensures presidential candidates of every persuasion travel to the state in droves, trying to woo supporters. For a solid year, Iowa becomes the center of the political universe, and Iowans — who often withhold their coveted support until the final hours of the contest — become the most influential people in politics. [Time to put an end to the provincialism of Iowa over the primary process.]
Only after Iowans have winnowed the field do candidates move on to New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and beyond.
It’s unclear how Iowa Democrats will respond if the resolution advances. Some state party members have said it’s time for the state to let go of its hold on the process, while others say they can fight to hold first-in-the-nation caucuses even without the DNC’s blessing.
The Iowa Republican and Democratic parties have long worked in tandem to hold their separate nominating contests on the same night. Iowa Republicans have been vocal supporters of their Democratic counterparts when it comes to the caucuses. But they’ve also made clear they intend to hold their first-in-the-nation caucuses in 2024, even if Iowa Democrats do not.
I don’t care what the Republicans do, they have made it clear they are committed to the personality cult of Donald Trump, and in a cult there can be no oppostion to “Dear Leader.” Whatever they call it, it is not a primary.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
UPDATE: The Des Moines Register reports, “‘Status quo is not an option’, Democrats discuss changes to calendar that could leave Iowa caucuses out”, https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2022/03/11/dnc-democrats-resolve-diversify-presidential-nominating-calendar-iowa-first-caucus-2024/6996178001/
Democrats tasked with setting the presidential primary calendar appeared intent on diversifying the process — either by removing Iowa from its first-in-the-nation position or adding other states into the mix — at a Friday meeting.
No formal proposal was made, but a panel of the Democratic National Committee discussed a broad framework its members hoped would govern which states are selected to lead off the process.
Mo Elleithee, a member of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, has been an outspoken proponent of changing that early window in a way that favors primaries over caucuses and emphasizes diverse states and battleground states that will help Democrats win in general election contests.
[O]n Friday, he was direct, arguing that New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina could all make a case that they deserve to remain among the early-voting states.
“I have a harder time seeing it with Iowa,” he said. “But Iowa should have the right to make that case to us. Prove me wrong.”
The framework he discussed matches one described in a draft proposal obtained and corroborated by the Des Moines Register which would require states to seek waivers to hold early primary contests and expand the number from four to five states. That draft proposal suggested states should make a case to the Rules and Bylaws Committee that their process matches the philosophical direction of the party in order to receive a waiver.
That draft was controversial at the meeting, and DNC Chair Jaime Harrison began the gathering by endorsing the committee’s leadership and calling for calm amid “rumors.” He said the committee will hold three listening sessions to allow members of the party across the country to weigh in on the primary process.
“Our party is best when we reflect the people we are trying to serve, and it’s just as plain as that,” he said. “This process will be guided by that North Star. It will be open. It will be accessible. And it will reflect the diverse voices that make our party strong.”
[T]hough the draft proposal was not unveiled to the committee, many members seemed open to discussing it. Committee member Elaine Kamarck, who wrote a book on the presidential primary process, said that expanding the early voting window in 2006 to include Nevada and South Carolina sets a similar precedent.
Iowa’s representative to the committee, Scott Brennan, was the lone defender of Iowa, and he said the four-state early voting process works.
Artie Blanco, the representative from Nevada, said the four-state process has worked “to test future presidential candidates.” But she also made the case that Nevada stands alone.
“At the end of the day, Nevada really does check off every step of that process,” she said. “Our voters are diverse, and not only in race and economic diversity. We both have urban and rural communities that participate in our process. We have really opened up the ballot to reach everyone.”
Minnesota’s representative to the committee, Ken Martin, said the party shouldn’t overlook Midwestern states and rural voters as it considers reconstructing its primary calendar.
[T]he committee members said it plans to hold monthly or twice-monthly meetings through the summer to take action on the calendar and other items. Many of the members who spoke said they wanted to make changes this year.
“The status quo is not an option,” said committee member Lee Saunders. “That status quo is unacceptable,”
The conversation follows disastrous 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses in which technological and logistical failures coalesced, preventing the party from declaring a timely winner. The caucuses’ ugly conclusion undermined more than a year’s worth of organizing and campaigning that preceded it, stoking renewed calls to move the nation toward primaries and replace Iowa as the first state to cast its presidential preferences.
But he and other committee members insisted the proposed changes are not “punitive,” but are intended to make the primary process better reflect the party’s values.
“We have a moment to take stock of where we are today as a country, where we are today as a party and put together a process that reflects our values and who we want the world to see, who we want the rest of the Democratic Party to see and who we want general election voters to see,” said Elleithee.
Democrats adjourned their winter meeting series Saturday without taking formal action on Iowa’s place or the caucuses, though leaders pledged transparency as the conversation advances.