BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Mark Karlin, Editor and Publisher, BuzzFlash.com

January 5, 2008

BuzzFlash has come across quite a bit of commentary on the blogosphere critical of the Iowa caucuses.  There are many reasons people cite for their disenchantment with the quadrennial emphasis on Iowa as the first "testing ground" for presidential candidates.

Among the top two are these:

• The candidates and the media overplay the importance of a small percentage of the voting population of one small state annointing a "winner" who then sets the pace for the presidential race, at least until New Hampshire.
• Iowa with its nearly homogenous white population is a Midwest agricultural state that does not represent the true "face" of the voting American public.

There is no question that the second point is factually correct, but does it really matter? 

What is probably more significant, and a valid point, is that the voters in the Iowa caucuses tend to lean conservative/evangelical on the Republican side and liberal/progressive on the Democratic side.  That may or may not be representative of all potential voters for a party's nominee (as the number of independents and lapsed Republicans drawn to this year's caucuses indicates), but Iowa voters -- based on party affiliation -- do basically represent the base of both parties to a large extent in terms of outlook.  Furthermore, the caucus attendees are the ones almost certain to vote in November. They are the committed voters.

But that caveat aside, it is fair to say that Iowa as a state (even though it's a swing state and has a populist Democratic Senator, Tom Harkin, and a Democratic Governor) is indeed not representative of America, but what state is?

Why does BuzzFlash believe that the Iowa caucuses are a positive force in the election process?

We'll cite two big reasons:

• Iowa is retail politics at its best.  This is a campaign won in living rooms, school auditoriums, church chapels and diners.  Big Media may magnify the race to jumbo-screen proportions, but Big Media does not decide the election as it does in a state like California or Florida.  Even advertising doesn't generally have the impact in Iowa (just ask Mitt Romney) it has elsewhere. Why? Because many caucus voters make decisions based on actually hearing or seeing the candidates, or hearing from their campaigns via phone calls or house visits.  Iowa isn't the Big Media test for presidential candidates; it's the town hall test.  And that's good for democracy.
• Voting is transparent in Iowa.  With all the threats electronic voting machines and GOP tactics at voter suppression pose to democracy, Iowa represents the vision of our founders at its most ideal.  What could be more inclusive than allowing just about anyone registered to vote to show up at either party caucus and openly and visibly declare themselves for a candidate.  Where else does one's body represent one's vote? There is no electronic voting machine, not even a paper ballot; everyone's body is their ballot.  There is no secret selection, no secret counting.  This is as open and public and as basic an exercise in democracy as one can imagine.

So, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but to the editor of BuzzFlash, Mark Karlin, the Iowa caucuses are a role model for democracy.  If the first caucus or primary were in a big state, the campaign would be waged through the television tube, and the vote would probably be tabulated on an electronic machine.

Does it serve democracy well to have such a small state in America's heartland play such a big role in the presidential selection process (and the importance of the Iowa caucuses has only developed over the last three decades)?

Yes, as long as a person's body is their vote, counting is public, and personal encounters with candidates and campaign organizational ability trumps television and media "brand packaging."

We may lament the concept of the political horse race, but that is our political process.  There is only one winner in every election for a specific office.  Voters have to make their decisions somehow, and the retail politics of Iowa and the voting process are about as ideal as it gets; maximizing the power of the voter and minimizing the impact of "boob tube electioneering."

You can't ask for much more than that. 

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Bookmark/Search this post with:

buzzflash [1] | delicious [2] | digg [3] | yahoo [4] | technorati [5]