By David Manshiem
It may be political heresy not to support Iowa’s first-in-the-nation- caucus status, but I believe it is time to move to a presidential primary, even if that means, as it most certainly will, not being first in the nation.
The Democratic National Committee is currently questioning the process that puts a small state that is unrepresentative of the country as a whole in the driver’s seat.
Iowa has undoubtedly been the beneficiary of the national attention and the money spent here. But now is the time to reexamine what is workable, what is democratic, what is not and recognize that what is good for Iowa may not be good for the country.
Democratic caucuses over the 54 years that I have chaired them have become too complex, with a Rube Gold-berg set of rules. They depend on over 1,900 precinct locations that need to be Americans With Disabilities Act-compliant and internet-accessible. They are chaired by volunteers with various degrees of training and with shaky technological skills and equipment.
What started out years ago as polite living room discussion over coffee and cake turned into ever-larger gatherings that now need a bullhorn. Political parties simply do not have the machinery, workers, or money to conduct a massive statewide election, but the government does. Our statewide county auditor system of running elections works quite well and it should be running primaries.
Caucuses are inherently undemocratic because of the barriers to participation caused by work, child care, travel, weather, and a specific meeting time. Democrats in particular should be for the most democratic solution; after all, it is our DNA, it is in our name.
The caucus process is not even wanted by most of the participants. Ninety percent want to just vote their choice of presidential candidates and leave. Instead, they are made to stand in line to register, then stand in a corner to be counted again and again amid the chaos and confusion over delegate math. The most touted reason for keeping the caucus is for party building, but there are other ways to do that, just like primary states do.
The caucuses turn a lot of people off after their first exposure to party politics, so the process can be counter-productive to party building. Few people will stay to conduct party business like electing precinct committee people. It is impossible to reverse the order of business and make them eat their spinach before they get dessert because they are there mainly to register their presidential preference. The Democratic Party should abandon the caucus process in all of the few remaining states that have them. Primaries can be rotated around the country in small groups to lessen the advantage of moneyed candidates buying media instead of spending face time with voters.
This change will not be welcomed by activists who wield an outsized influence over caucus results. In the Democratic Party it is left-of-center activists who show up, and in the Republican Party, it is right-of-center activists. A primary would lessen the influence of extremes on both sides and, depending on how it is set up, could moderate the extreme partisan divide in our country.
___
This editorial first appeared in The Des Moines Register on April 3, 2022. David Mansheim is a retired lawyer, educator and businessman living in Parkersburg.