The NPR Politics Podcast - With Iowa No Longer First, Campaigns Will Have To Evolve

Episode Date: December 5, 2022

As Democrats plan for a presidential campaign season without Iowa at the top of the calendar, we look at the impact the decision could have on the state — and how the act of running for president itself may never be the same going forward. This episode: White House correspondent Tamara Keith, senior political editor & correspondent Ron Elving, and Iowa Public Radio's lead political reporter Clay Masters.This episode was produced and edited by Elena Moore and Casey Morell. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi. Research and fact-checking by Katherine Swartz.Unlock access to this and other bonus content by supporting The NPR Politics Podcast+. Sign up via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Connect:Email the show at [e-mail] the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook Group.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Hi, this is Kathy in Seattle, and I just got home from my daughter's school band concert. It had a rock and roll theme, and let me tell you, you haven't lived until you've heard a middle school band play a surprisingly good rendition of Enter Sandman, followed by Never Gonna Give You Up. This podcast was recorded at 1.13 p.m. on Monday, the 5th of December. Things may have changed by the time you hear this, but I will most likely still be humming Butter by BTS, the middle school band version, of course. Enjoy the show. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Tamara Keith. I cover the White House. And I'm Ron Elving, editor correspondent. There's a sign that we have in our part of the NPR newsroom that says, quote,

Iowa, for some reason, you have to come here to be president. It was made by the very funny Des Moines based shop called Ray Gunn. But it may not be so true anymore, at least not for Democrats. For many, many years, the Iowa caucuses have kicked off the nominating contests, and then the New Hampshire primaries followed right after that. But with that likely changing, there will be big repercussions for the way campaigns operate, not to mention what happens in both Iowa and New Hampshire. Our friend Clay Masters from Iowa Public Radio is here with us. Hey, Clay. Hey. And you are totally, completely unbiased about Iowa going first, right?

Oh, completely unbiased. No pride. So, Ron, I do want to start with you. Assuming this goes through, that the Democratic Party changes its calendar, this would scramble the way people campaign for president. Democrats want to start things off with South Carolina, then move to New Hampshire, Nevada, sharing a day, cross-country sharing. And those are three very different states. They are indeed, and they would emphasize different constituencies. They would be not only different places on the map, but different places in terms of their demography and in terms of where the

party's candidates need to place their emphasis in running for president. And some of the reasoning here is that the Democratic Party is a diverse party, and Iowa is not the most diverse state in the nation, Clay. No, it's not. Iowa is an overwhelmingly white state. And for years, I mean, as long as I've been covering politics in Iowa, the state has been dragged across the coals when it comes to it being an overwhelmingly white state, not representative of the rest of the country. The caucuses are not a primary election. These are run by the parties. I mean, I could recite the criticisms for Iowa in my sleep. And the way that this whole process went forward was the Democratic National

Committee at the beginning of the year said, we want to change things on this rules and bylaws committee. We want to change things, make it more representative of the rest of the country. Over the summer, I was out in D.C. covering these pitches that Iowa, 15 other states, and Puerto Rico made to this committee. They came forward out of this saying we were going to have a decision in the fall. They didn't. They kicked it past the midterm election. I guess it was still the fall technically. It was supposed to be in August or September. But it was just President Joe Biden put out this list that we've been talking about right ahead of that meeting and removed from that early window was the state of Iowa. And how is Iowa reacting? Well, there are a lot of, you know, part of the identity with Iowa is the caucuses.

For the last 50 years, it's been something that the rest of the country looks in on this state and sees a part of this country that we don't normally think about, right? It's a time when candidates come to Iowa, all the attention is here, and they get to talk to the candidates. People get to go to backyards and the living rooms. And Iowa, remember, is a small state, and that's what has made this such an interesting state to watch as these competitions among primary candidates move forward, is that you have a much smaller state where it doesn't cost as much for maybe an underdog candidate to run. Think of former President Barack Obama in 2008, or Bernie Sanders gave Hillary Clinton a run for her money in 2016 and in 2020 as well, although the results were

quite delayed and that's kind of what lit the fire for this change to take place. But what we're starting to see as these conversations move forward, especially when you're putting larger states in the mix earlier, is it's going to be really interesting to see if that kind of underdog candidate can perform well, which, I mean, this calendar looks very, very good for President Joe Biden in any kind of a reelection campaign. Yeah, Ron, I mean, South Carolina is the state that basically gave Biden the nomination. No question about it. He would have been out of the race had he not won South Carolina. He hadn't won anywhere else. He has finished no better than fourth in Iowa either time that he ran for president. So there's no sense here that Joe Biden owes Iowa. But he is not only trying to set himself a schedule that

makes more sense for a Joe Biden reelection campaign, which may or may not happen. He is also trying to set a schedule that he thinks would set the Democratic Party up better for the world of the 21st century as we go deeper into that century. It is a party that has emphasized its appeal to the metropolitan areas and to a more diverse audience. I want to go back to what this means in Iowa, if Iowa really is out in the cold, at least for the Democratic caucuses. Back to Reagan, Mike Draper is the owner of that business. He is probably the most quoted business owner in the state of Iowa. And he was quoted in the New York Times as saying, we've always joked if Iowa doesn't have the caucuses, are we Nebraska?

And as someone who has taken my family on vacation to Iowa to go to the Iowa State Fair and see presidential candidates, I don't know why I did that. I mean, what does this mean for business? Well, I can say first off as being a native Nebraskan, Iowa is going to be all right. I mean, I grew up in that state, so it's not going to be that big of a deal. But I mean, it is. It's part of the DNA of this state. And if you really think about the worst business this is for is for the Iowa Democratic Party. I mean, you think about the amount of money that

came to this state for different Senate races, competitive races in the past. We didn't see any of that in 2022 come to Iowa. There was a gubernatorial race and there was also a U.S. Senate race. And the National Party, they have a budget and they didn't play in Iowa. Ten years ago, former President Obama was reelected here after winning in 2008 in Iowa. I mean, that's the example that so many Iowa Democrats like to point to. But in that, there's a lot of activity that goes on within campaigns that helps build activists in the state. And without that attention, I mean, the worst business this is going to be for is for the Iowa Democratic Party, whereas the Republicans, I mean, they're still operating as status quo.

I do want to go back to something, too, is that Ron had mentioned that this sets it up good for the Democratic Party moving forward, nationally, that is. But there's also a thought in the Rules and Bylaws Committee that this is something that they're going to re-examine every four years. I mean, that just makes my head swim when I think about the calendar changing every election cycle. And will you see the sitting president have that much sway every single time we start talking about a primary calendar. It's a lot to uncover. All right. Well, we're going to take a quick break and we'll have more in just a second. And we're back. And Ron, remind us, how did we get to a place where Iowa had this outsized importance? Like why are we doing an entire podcast and probably not just one about the

great state of Iowa? That is such a good question. That is such a good question, Tam. Iowa's been having caucuses of one kind or another for more than a century. But for the first half of that time, hardly anyone noticed. Then came the big upheaval. It was in the Vietnam War era, and the Democrats made big changes to their presidential nominating process in an effort to put power in the hands of ordinary voters, power to the people, people who would turn out for primaries and caucuses in their home states and actually choose the delegates to the convention who would choose the nominee. And right from the jump, in the first round of those new populist caucuses and primaries, a senator named George McGovern from South Dakota noticed these caucuses right over

there in Iowa. People were having them already. He went in and finished behind the uncommitted slate. He had fewer than 30 percent of the vote. And he was suddenly newsworthy. He changed the media narrative about himself and his candidacy. And that has been the special Iowa magic ever since. Iowa creates or alters the media narrative for the campaign that follows. And it worked for George McGovern. It worked for Jimmy Carter. Big, big example. It worked for Gary Hart, who didn't make it all the way to the nomination. And it did work for John Kerry in 2004 and for Barack Obama in 2008. And another thing, too, about about Iowa being an early state. I mean, you hear it time and time again that Iowa doesn't pick the president. It winnows the field. And so there's a lot of criticism that's like, well, they haven't picked a nominee in X amount of years. Well, the point of it is that candidates come here.

They can get around the state pretty easily. They can be in small towns and bigger sized cities in the state and they can make a name for themselves. I mean, you think of Ted Cruz, who was spending a lot of time in Iowa and won in 2016 on the Republican side. I mean, it's a way to kind of it, the goal was also to prioritize states that would be competitive, like swing states, purple states that would matter in November, that would matter in the general election. So that if the candidates are building this ground game and spending all this money and investing in these states, then that is an investment that would pay dividends later in the year. But South Carolina is a deep red state. So why would they start with a deep red state that won't be competitive later in the year? Well, for the reasons that we have said, that they are talking about something other strictly than states.

For example, Iowa, since Barack Obama was president, has not been particularly friendly to Democratic candidates at any level. They were certainly not with Joe Biden in 2020. They were not with Hillary Clinton in 2016. And there is a sense that if you're just going to go around looking at the blue states, just asking, let's say, Minnesota or New York or California, whom they would like to nominate, that's going to engender an entirely different kind of criticism. I suppose you could make a case for saying, let's look at the five or six states that are closest in any given election. The Nevadas and Nevada is in the mix here.

Arizona, perhaps Georgia, Pennsylvania. Maybe these are the states where the primaries should be held if the criterion is to go to states that are going to be swing in the November election. Though I guess in this case there are a couple of key South Carolinians that are involved in the Democratic Party. You know, you have Congressman Clyburn, who was a big, important endorsement for Biden when he was running last time. And you also have Jamie Harrison, who is the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Absolutely. South Carolinians both. So this is clearly people looking to their own sense of where the party should be, where it is, and how they can reward the people that have been their people. So, Clay, you alluded to this before.

This is, according to the letter from President Biden to the Democratic Party, to the DNC, this is something he would like the party to revisit every four years. So like this isn't a new calendar that is being carved into stone. This is a calendar that could change again and again and again and again. What does that mean for the primary process or the caucus primary process? Well, it's mostly a primary process. There aren't very many states like Iowa. But to me, it just means that campaigns are going to have to figure out a different plan every time. I mean, there's just so many dynamics within this calendar that's been proposed. And if we continue to see new calendars come forward every four years or every eight years,

it's going to be something that campaigns are going to have to adapt to and figure out. Ron, this is going to be a very big change. It's a change that many in the Democratic Party have been wanting to make for a long time, or at least they've bemoaned some of the early states not being representative. Why is it happening now? We are in an era of evolution in terms of voting in general, where there's much more awareness of voting procedures and processes. People are asking, why are things the way they are? And usually the answer is because something happened a long time ago and it all built on that. And that is where we are in terms of the nominating process. A lot of

it was happenstance and historical accident. People are examining that. People are looking at voting by mail. People are looking at all different kinds of questions about voting. And there is a significant movement in the country to cast doubt on the results of elections. All of those things are contributing to a ferment in which change seems timely, if not always natural, it does seem increasingly imperative. All right, well, let's leave it there for today. Clay Masters of Iowa Public Radio, thank you. Always a pleasure. Thanks. I'm Tamara Keith. I cover the White House. And I'm Ron Elbing, editor correspondent. And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.