Last night, February 3, 2020, the debacle known as the Iowa caucus,
again showed why this farce should never happen again. Twenty-four
hours after the caucuses closed and there is still no definitive winner.
Only 61% of the precincts have reported in with totals.
In a previous article (08/13/2019) I discussed the ridiculousness of
having Iowa, a state that doesn't even remotely resemble the nation as
a whole, be the first state to hold a primary. The rules governing how
a caucus is to be conducted make the game of Go seem like child's play.
I don't believe many of the actual caucus goers understand them completely.
Many of the would-be caucus participants are not able to attend the caucuses.
Those who work second-shift would be eliminated. Those with physical
handicaps, trouble walking or driving, are also eliminated. Where is the
ADA when you really need them? The rules specify that the doors to the
caucus be open for a short, definite time, after that they are closed to any
late comer. Rather than a secret ballot, caucus participants must state
their preference for a candidate and physically join the candidate's group.
Thus declaring oneself in front of one's friends, neighbors, and relatives.
That may make the next church pot-luck dinner a bit dicey.
Iowa has been using the caucus system to select delegates to the Democratic
and Republican conventions since the 1800's. In 1916, they held an election
but returned to the caucus system in 1917 due to the cost. The people of
Iowa say they have their finger on the pulse of the nation, - except for that
woman who requested her ballot back because she just found out Mayor
Pete was gay- that they are open and forward thinking and can select a
candidate based on integrity, and ability and one who will go on to lead the
country, as long as they are not gay. Hmmm, let's look at the results of the
past caucuses, the success rate for Iowan selections are; 55% for the
Democrats and 43% for the Republicans. I don't know about you, but I
wouldn't bet those odds.
After all these shenanigans, and millions of dollars spent, the result of the
Iowa primary is 41 delegates, yup you read that right, 41 delegates to the
convention in Milwaukee in July. That is less than 1% of the nationwide
total of 3979 delegates to be chosen, and less than 2% of the 1990 delegates
needed to win the Democratic nomination. And for this pittance, twenty
hopefuls began scouring the state since last August, with the hope of
currying the favor of a handful of farmers. Ten of them were driven out
of the race because they could no longer spend the money required. I am
sure some of them were viable candidates whom you would have liked to
have voted for. I know I really liked one or two.
But we didn't get that opportunity, and coming out of Iowa there may be
even fewer than the ten candidates going in. The world loves a winner even
if the prize is nothing more than bragging rights, that is if you really wanted
to brag about garnering 10 whole delegates - that probably amounts to
$100,000.00 apiece. Is it really worth it? You bet it is to Iowa, every
election cycle, the state racks-up millions of dollars in revenue, without
which Iowa would dry-up like the corn before harvest.
So what is to be done? The Democratic Committee, the DNC, can change
the rules. They have done so many times, most lately when they allowed
Nevada and South Carolina to join Iowa and New Hampshire in early
primaries. All the rest of the states must wait until after the first Tuesday
in March to hold elections, which this year comes early, March 3rd. After
that date each state may choose the date of it's primary. California moved
it's primary up to 'Super Tuesday' to exert a greater influence on the selection
of a candidate.
If Iowa doesn't agree to cede its early primary date to another state, say
Illinois, which is much more diverse and more in line with the demographics
of the country, the DNC can strip Iowa of its delegates. Wow, that means a
candidate could lose 10 delegates. Not hardly the deterrent needed to keep
those running out of the state. The DNC could front-load the primary dates
with more states. That would be a problem for candidates of where to spend
their time and money to get the biggest bang for their buck. It would drive
more small underfunded candidates out of the race even sooner, setting the
stage for a few wealthy individuals to buy the election.
Or, and the most desirable in my opinion, is to have a national primary.
That way we all get to vote for our favorite candidate, big or small war
chest. Gone are the days when a candidate had no other way to reach
out to voters except by train or later by plane. Today, the media choices
are endless, besides the televised debates, there is a myriad of social media
sites; Facebook, Twitter, text, where a candidate can reach out to millions
of voters on a daily basis.
Unfortunately, there is no control over these sites, voluntarily or regulated.
The greed that they show is unconscionable, and yes, I am calling it greed,
pure and simple. They don't care about presenting a fair and truthful account
of a candidate, they only care about how much money they can raise in
advertising. They will tell us that the internet is free and open and they wish
to keep it that way. No, they wish to keep the money coming in. Newspapers
and television must abide by certain rules of libel, slander, and truth, not
so Facebook and Twitter.
Perhaps the next president and Congress could examine that issue more closely.
Or perhaps the courts would allow libel cases to go forward against the social
media that posted the libelous statements. Something to think about, after we
solve the problem of Iowa. After all it's all about the money.
I'm just sayin'.
No comments:
Post a Comment