In final plea, Iowa Democrats make the case for first-in-the-nation caucuses to DNC committee
WASHINGTON — In a final plea to maintain Iowa’s prized first-in-the-nation caucuses, state Democratic officials on Thursday outlined extensive changes to the caucus process, touted Iowa’s pockets of diversity and argued the state provides a level playing field for every presidential candidate.
“It's essential that our potential presidential candidates be tested on their ability to communicate with rural voters across this entire population,” Iowa Democratic Party Chair Ross Wilburn said.
Wilburn, state House Democratic Leader Jennifer Konfrst and Des Moines attorney Scott Brennan made the case Thursday before a panel of the Democratic National Committee whose members are tasked with setting the 2024 presidential nominating calendar.
The DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee will hear from representatives of Iowa, Puerto Rico and 15 other states over several days in Washington, D.C. — each of whom believes their own state would be the best proving ground for presidential candidates.
Nevada, New Hampshire and Colorado presented to the committee Wednesday, 13 groups did do so Thursday and South Carolina is expected to conclude the presentations Friday.
More: Nevada, NH pitch DNC to supplant Iowa in presidential voting, shake up how Dems pick candidates
The committee has said it will weigh each state’s diversity, general election competitiveness and ability to hold an effective nominating contest as it considers setting the order of states.
Elaine Kamarck, a committee member who has been critical of Iowa's caucuses, said she plans to keep an open mind about whether Iowa deserves a place in the early window.
"I think they've done enough to be considered," Kamarck told the Des Moines Register. "No doubt about it, they've done enough to be considered."
Committee applauds changes, but questions remain
For five decades, Iowa has led off the process with its first-in-the-nation caucuses, and New Hampshire has followed closely behind with its first-in-the-nation primaries. In 2006, Nevada and South Carolina were added to the early window of voting, creating four regional contests that have defined the way presidential candidates campaign and the way America picks its presidents.
All four states have been exempted from DNC rules which have said no state can vote before the first Tuesday in March. But in April, the Rules and Bylaws Committee voted to start from scratch, opening an application process for any state that wants to be part of the early window.
Several committee members have made clear that Iowa is uniquely under pressure to prove it should continue holding the leadoff spot on the calendar.
Mo Elleithee, a member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee and the executive director of Georgetown’s Institute of Politics and Public Service, has been particularly critical. He said in a March meeting that New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina can make a case that they satisfy some of the committee’s criteria. But “I have a harder time seeing it with Iowa,” he said.
But after Iowa’s delegation laid out proposed changes to its caucus system, Eleithee and other members of the committee sounded notes of appreciation.
"I really applaud the Iowa delegation for a willingness to rethink the caucus process,” Eleithee said. “I've been fairly critical about Iowa. So I think that was a needed recognition."
He noted that committee members spent a lot of time drilling into the mechanics of the Iowa proposal. Many of their questions focused on the technical nature of the caucuses and how the state would award delegates to presidential candidates following their expression of presidential preference.
More: Iowa Democrats propose major changes to caucuses in bid to remain first-in-the-nation
“As always, when you're introducing something new it raises a lot of questions, and I think the committee showed today that they have a lot of questions and that there's still some confusion,” he said. “So, we'll need to, I think, learn a lot more.”
Instead of gathering in person at a specific time and place on caucus night, Iowa Democrats have proposed opening up a two- to three-week absentee process.
Democrats could submit written cards noting their presidential preferences at drop-off locations or through the mail. The Iowa Democratic Party would contract with vendors or state election officials to tally the results and announce them on caucus night.
Kamarck said she thinks Iowa's proposed changes are as good as the state could have come up with, though she still has hesitations.
"It still has the problem of not being in a state-run primary where there is an established mechanism for a recount," she said. "It's creative, and I think it's very good. But it's still not a state-run primary, and I think that's where the party has been headed, really since 2008."
Would Iowa's revamped caucus conflict with New Hampshire's primary?
But the Iowa changes also raised questions from the committee about how New Hampshire will react.
New Hampshire has a state law requiring its secretary of state to set its presidential primary before any other "similar" primary contest. Iowa's caucuses have traditionally been different enough from New Hampshire’s primaries that they do not conflict with the state law.
But should Iowa adopt a system that some Iowa Democrats have described as a party-run primary, it could trigger New Hampshire to try to jump in front of Iowa regardless of the order the DNC sets for the calendar.
Iowa’s delegation was careful to reflect that distinction in its presentation.
“So what you'll announce on caucus night is a result, essentially, of a fire-run primary,” noted Kamarck, referring to a type of primary that is hosted by a state political party rather than the state itself.
“It's a caucus,” Brennan said shortly, drawing laughter.
“The bottom line is that, like New Hampshire is constrained by its state law, we're constrained by Iowa Code section 43.4 and Nevada is apparently constrained by its state law,” Brennan said. “So we are focused on complying with our state law, which mandates we hold a caucus. And we believe that what we have proposed meets the requirements of Iowa Code section 43.4.”
In an interview with the Register, New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair Raymond Buckley declined to say whether he thinks Iowa’s proposed changes make it look too much like a primary, possibly triggering a conflict. He said that call will ultimately be up to the secretary of state.
“We've always been very supportive of all four early states, and we agree that we believe that the early state system has worked,” he said. “So we would work very closely with them to be supportive. But at the end of the day, it's really up to the secretary of state.”
New Hampshire’s longtime secretary of state and ardent defender of the state’s first-in-the-nation primary, Bill Gardner, recently retired. Buckley said it’s unclear how his successor will approach the situation.
Committee members appeared wary that supplanting New Hampshire’s primaries with another state’s could introduce a level of unnecessary “chaos” to the calendar process.
Democrats caution that Iowa GOP will still hold first-in-the-nation caucuses
Konfrst, Iowa’s state House Democratic leader, told the committee that keeping Iowa first would help to keep Iowa Democrats competitive up and down the ballot.
“The caucuses are a fundamental organizing tool that allows us to maintain competitiveness in a part of rural America our party has already ceded in other states,” she said.
She also drew a contrast with Iowa Republicans, who have already cemented their place at the front of their party’s presidential nominating calendar.
“Make no mistake, Republicans are holding their caucuses first in Iowa,” Konfrst said. “Every time a Republican candidate comes to Iowa and visits the district of one of my members or one of my candidates, they're building an organization on the other side, and they are building enthusiasm and engagement among voters.”
Brennan told the committee that Iowa’s tradition of hosting presidential candidates has created a sturdy foundation that supports candidates when they arrive to campaign.
“Fifty years of competitive Iowa caucuses created one of the nation's most well-organized networks of county party committees and activists who've dealt with candidates in all parts of Iowa and understand the challenging logistics of presidential campaigns,” he said.
More: Who won previous Democratic, Republican Iowa caucuses? See 2020, 2016 and earlier caucus results
Konfrst told reporters after the delegation’s presentation that Iowa’s focus on retail politics, on-the-ground organizing and diversity make Iowa the best choice for going first.
“At the end of the day, no matter how many states apply, no matter how many people come forward with a proposal, Iowa is still best positioned to hold early nominating contests,” she said.
USA Today Reporter Dylan Wells contributed to this report.
Brianne Pfannenstiel is the chief politics reporter for the Register. Reach her at bpfann@dmreg.com or 515-284-8244. Follow her on Twitter at @brianneDMR.
This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Iowa Democrats make final case for first-in-the-nation caucuses to DNC
