A Civics Project explainer: Why Iowa carries outsized importance in US elections.

Q. Why does Iowa matter so much in the presidential nomination battle?

A. Iowa gets outsized attention primarily because it has been the first caucus in the nation. Its significance is based on timing, since as a smaller state, Iowa provides a relatively small number of the delegates needed to win the nomination for either party. However, it tends to be an early indicator of the strength of the candidate.

The reason Iowa has gone first, is just an accident of history. After the tumultuous Democratic Convention in 1968, where Hubert Humphrey would go on to win the Democratic nomination over George McGovern and Eugene McCarthy despite not winning a single primary, there was a significant call for reform. The McGovern-Fraser Commission was established to create a new set of rules for the process and one of the major reforms was making sure the voters had a larger and more direct say in who the nominee would be. State party leaders were forced to give notice and encourage full participation in their selection process.

Which brings us to Iowa. Iowa has a remarkably complex process that involves four major elements including the caucuses and a series of conventions at the county, district, and state levels. To encourage participation and make sure voters had notice, the decision was made to push back the start date which also had the effect of making Iowa’s Caucuses the earliest in the nation.

The value of having the earliest contest became clear almost immediately. In 1976, Jimmy Cater’s campaign was having difficulty getting attention and traction with voters around the nation. However, the Carter campaign proved to be very effective in Iowa and his victory there raised Carter’s profile and launched his campaign, which resulted in the winning of the nomination and the Presidency. Thus began the myth of Iowa as the selector of Presidents.

In truth, the value of the Iowa result in predicting the nominee is at best mixed. Just looking over the last few election cycles, Iowa has been a poor bellwether measure. In 2008, John McCain won the Republican nomination but fared poorly in Iowa finishing a distant 4th to Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Mitt Romney (R-UT) was beaten by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in 2012 but won the Republican nomination. Cruz also defeated Donald Trump in Iowa in 2016 but lost decisively just about everywhere else.

Democrats have had better success after winning Iowa. In 2008, Barack Obama used Iowa to launch his campaign and Hillary Clinton (2016), Al Gore (2000) and John Kerry (2004) all won Iowa before winning the nomination. However, Joe Biden finished in fourth place behind Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders in 2020 and that did not stop him from winning the Democratic nomination and the presidency. President Biden has led efforts to change the order, and the current plan from the Democratic Party put South Carolina first. However, for Republicans, Iowa will again lead off the process.

Kevin Wagner is a noted constitutional scholar and political science professor at Florida Atlantic University. The answers provided do not necessarily represent the views of the university. If you have a question about how American government and politics work, email him at kwagne15@fau.edu or reach him on Twitter or (X) @kevinwagnerphd.

This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Is Iowa's first-in-nation caucus a good predictor of US elections?