WASHINGTON - After his poor
showing in Monday's Iowa Democratic caucuses, US
Congressman Richard Gephardt was expected to announce
his withdrawal from the race for his party's
presidential nomination. But why? What's the big deal
about Iowa, a rural state with a population of only
about 3 million?
The events in Iowa that saw
Senator John "Comeback" Kerry emerge victorious were the
start of the cyclical, once-in-four-years drama of the
United States presidential race. The presidential
election itself does not take place until November, and
the Republican Party's candidate, barring some
unforeseen event of cosmic proportions, is you-know-who.
This week, all eyes are on the Democratic Party. But
while those who understand the US electoral process may
find this initial period one of the more fascinating,
its nuances are a mystery to many non-Americans - and to
not a few Americans as well. In this article, which
kicks off Asia Times Online's ongoing analysis of US
Presidency 2004, we reveal all about caucuses and
primaries.
A logical system -
really Before the general election in November,
the two major parties must determine who their
candidates will be. This long process is an endurance
test for candidates, who must raise enough money and
stay interesting enough to a frequently overwhelmed and
often bored public. The result of this winnowing process
is a single candidate who represents the hope of the
entire party. This unique system can seem somewhat
bewildering to the uninitiated, but there is a logic to
it. To understand the nominating process, it helps to
understand how the parties choose their nominees.
It is a common misconception that, in the
nominating stage, the voters are choosing the candidate
directly. Voters are in reality selecting delegates who
in turn vote for the candidates at the party's national
convention. These delegates are members of the party
with an interest in the process that goes beyond casting
a ballot; they volunteer to serve and state publicly
which candidate they support. The publicized results for
candidates actually are derived from the votes for the
delegates. At the national convention, the delegates
dutifully cast their votes for their pledged candidate,
and the candidate with the most votes wins the
nomination.
The number of delegates each state
receives depends on the population of the state. It is
left up to the state party committees to determine how
the delegates will be selected. There are two basic
ways: caucuses and primaries. Primaries are elections,
and work almost the same as general elections. Caucuses,
which are party meetings, are a bit more nuanced.
This year almost 40 states will hold primaries,
and about 75 percent of the delegates to the national
conventions will be chosen in this way. Although there
are some minor procedural differences among the states,
the process is fairly straightforward. Primaries are
conducted by the state government, and state law
dictates when and where they will be held. The parties
establish the rules for how delegates are allocated to
the candidates.
In the Democratic Party, the
national party rules state that delegates are
distributed proportionally based on the results of the
primary election. For example, if New Hampshire has 10
delegates to the national convention, and Senator John
Kerry wins 60 percent of the primary, and Senators John
Edwards and Joe Lieberman win 20 percent each, Kerry
will receive six delegates, and Edwards and Lieberman
will get two each. The Democratic Party also has other
rules to ensure that the diversity of the party is
represented in the delegates that make up the national
convention.
The Republican Party, on the other
hand, leaves it up to the state party organizations to
decide whether delegates will be allocated to candidates
proportionally or in a winner-take-all manner. This is
reflective of the Republican tradition of states rights.
The Republicans also have far fewer delegates to their
national convention; there are 2,512 against the 4,315
at the Democratic National Convention.
The
caucus system, which is the original method of choosing
candidates, is slightly more complex and takes place in
stages. The term "caucus" in this case refers to a
meeting of party members and party officials. Though the
nature of the participants has changed through the
years, the structure has remained relatively constant.
The much-touted and watched Iowa caucus is
really the first in a series of meetings to determine
which of the candidates the state's delegates will vote
for at the national convention. Though the results of
the caucus indicate a general preference of voters, the
caucus participants are in reality choosing delegates
based on which candidate the delegate prefers. All of
the registered voters of the political party are
eligible to attend the caucus. In Iowa, the initial
caucus is at the precinct level, but in other states,
the initial caucus might be at the county level,
depending on state party rules, but it is always a local
gathering.
The state committee of the political
party announces the date, time and location of the
meeting. Potential delegates are identified as favorable
to specific candidates. After discussion and debate, the
participants indicate their preferred candidate, a count
is taken, and the delegates are selected, based on their
preference, to represent the precinct at the next level
of caucuses. In Iowa there are three levels of caucuses.
Precinct caucuses may be held in gymnasiums, lecture
halls, or other locations large enough to accommodate
the voters.
Caucuses require a bit more
commitment on the part of the voter than primaries,
because they last longer and are not secretive. The
caucus system also rewards the initiative of party
activists who encourage voters to attend.
The
early caucuses are most important for their symbolic
value. It is important to remember that the overwhelming
majority of delegates are chosen through primaries. The
Iowa caucus is covered widely because it is the first
true test for the candidates. After the precinct
caucuses, two levels of caucuses still remain in Iowa.
Once the precinct caucus totals are in, however, the
press will desert Iowa for another four years.
Small states, grand scheme Since Iowa
is a small state, the delegate totals are not that
important in the grand scheme of the nominating process.
The real story is how the candidates fare, as analysts
scramble to make predictions for the rest of the primary
season. In Iowa the delegates selected at the precinct
caucus will meet at a regional caucus. Here there will
be more debate, and delegates will be chosen for the
state caucus, which in turn will determine the delegates
for the national convention. The final delegation from
Iowa can differ slightly from the picture emerging from
the precinct caucus because some candidates may exit the
race - as it appears Gephardt will now do - freeing any
delegates they have won to support other candidates.
The nominating calendar changes from election to
election, but the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary
are always the first meaningful events of the primary
season. New Hampshire, thanks to state law, has been the
first primary since 1952, and receives a number of
benefits from this position. Before the Iowa and New
Hampshire events, the press and the candidates focus
tremendous resources on those states, resulting in free
publicity and an economic boon. These states also
receive disproportionate federal spending owing to their
disproportionate influence on the primary process. Iowa
and New Hampshire are able to retain their positions out
of tradition and deferential treatment from the national
party committees.
One week after the New
Hampshire primary will be Super Tuesday, in which five
states will hold primaries and three others will hold
caucuses. Super Tuesday originated in 1988 as "SuperBowl
Tuesday", a nickname bestowed by the media when several
states scheduled their events together to counteract the
influence of the New Hampshire and Iowa contests. The
date of primaries and caucuses has a big influence on
the nominating process and affects candidates' campaign
strategies.
The results of the Iowa caucus are a
barometer of how the candidate is doing in Iowa, but it
also affects financing and media coverage. A poor
showing in Iowa and New Hampshire can be a disaster to
struggling candidates, as the results are a national
story. Thus the winner of the Iowa caucus becomes a
national winner, rather that merely the winner of a
local caucus. Furthermore, poor results affect the
decision of donors to give money to the campaign.
Candidates who fare strongly in Iowa and New Hampshire
experience a windfall of media attention, and reassure
potential donors of their staying power.
The
early contests are also very important because of their
geography. For example, Gephardt, who won Iowa in 1988,
needed Iowa this time to prove his strength. He was
popular there because he is from neighboring Missouri.
Gephardt, who had the endorsement of many unions, needed
an early triumph, as several of the next few primaries
and caucuses are in southern states, where unions are
not as strong and where Gephardt's support is weaker.
Thus an Iowa victory would have been a shot in the arm
and might have persuaded on-the-fence voters to rally
behind him. As it turned out, however, disappointing
results in Iowa were particularly damaging to the
Gephardt campaign. The same holds true for Howard Dean
in New Hampshire; Vermont, his home state, is right next
door, and so Dean is the expected favorite there.
Evolving process The nominating
process is an evolving one, undergoing periodic reforms
to deal with perceived shortcomings. Primary elections
themselves are a populist reform effort originating in
the beginning of the 20th century to mitigate the
influence of party bosses and machines on the nominating
process. By 1912, 12 states were using some form of
primary. These early primaries usually were mixed
systems in which party officials still had considerable
influence.
In the 1960s and 1970s, in an effort
to increase minority representation and make the process
fairer to outsiders, the Democratic Party initiated
several rounds of reforms. These reforms reduced the
influence of party officials in the process. After
president Jimmy Carter was defeated in 1980, however,
the Hunt Commission within the Democratic Party decided
that the role of elected officials and party elites had
been decreased too much, and introduced "superdelegates"
to the National Convention. Superdelegates are automatic
delegates to the convention, and the spots, accounting
for 15-20 percent of all delegates, are allocated to
Democratic governors, congressmen and party officials.
The idea was to rein in and balance the influence of the
democratically elected delegates, which could run in
favor of insurgent candidates. In reality the
superdelegates are usually irrelevant, as the nominee is
usually decided before the convention, and rather than
wasting political capital, the superdelegates cast their
votes for the winner.
The Republican Party has
had fewer reform efforts, and has no superdelegates. The
Republican Party also has no mandate that 50 percent of
the delegates must be women.
The media have
become an important part of the process, publicizing the
results from the early contests and increasing the
fundraising and organizational demands on the candidate.
In addition, media coverage has placed pressure on
individual states to remain relevant. This alters the
face of the nominating process; since more and more
primaries and caucuses have moved to the beginning of
the nominating season, the nominee is usually determined
by March or April, long before the national conventions,
or even before all of the state primaries and caucuses
have taken place.
Though the national
conventions still have a role (the vice-presidential
nominee is determined there and the party platform is
formed), the Iowa and New Hampshire contests have taken
on special significance as pundits race to divine the
direction of the nominating process. Thus the period
beginning with the Iowa caucus until March or April is
the most exciting time in the campaign, even though all
voters are not represented.
(Copyright 2004 Asia
Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication policies.)
Jan 21, 2004
No
material from Asia Times Online may be republished in any form without written
permission.
Copyright
2003, Asia Times Online, 4305 Far East Finance Centre, 16 Harcourt Rd,
Central, Hong Kong
Why oh why Iowa?
