Dodd Endorsed By Non-Firefighter!

Chris Dodd’s campaign announced that it had received the endorsement of State Rep Ray Zirkelbach today. Zirkelbach served two years in Iraq with the National Guard (and is the second Iraq veteran in the Iowa Legislature to make an endorsement in two days.) However, while Dodd’s campaign found an endorsement by an influential young Democrat in North East Iowa to be valuable in and of itself. It has added value, it’s one of the few Iowa endorsements that Dodd has received by a non-firefighter.

Dodd has been endorsed nationally by the International Association of Firefighters (or IAFF), which provided his only real major boost of the campaign. The only two Iowa legislators who endorsed Dodd previously, State Senators Jeff Danielson and Tom Hancock were firefighters and, of Dodd’s statewide leadership team that was announced this summer, a third of its members were affiliated with the IAFF. Dodd had IAFF-affiliated county chairs in seven of the ten counties that make up half of the caucus delegates and in four of the top five counties.

While Zirkelbach isn’t a firefighter, (he works at the prison at Anamosa), it’s still of concern for Dodd that his campaign’s leadership still has not expanded very far beyond its base labor support and that an endorsement by a non-firefighter is of note. With competition increasingly fierce even among the “second tier” candidates, Dodd is not going to get very far on caucus night if most of his supporters are just firefighters loyal to their International.

1 comment October 12th, 2007

A (Partial) Defense of the Iowa Caucuses

I know, I live in Iowa, so a defense of the caucuses that comes from me is just going to seem like I’m greedy.  I should say that before I moved to Iowa for college four years ago, I shared the opinion that the importance of the caucuses is unjustifiable, and that a national primary would be more democratic.  Then I experienced the caucuses (in 2004), and I changed my mind.

Over on MyDD, desmoinesdem published the second part of her diary series, “How the Iowa caucuses work.”  She echoes concerns that we brought up here about inequalities in the caucus system based on delegate assignment, demonstrating that it takes more caucus-goers to elect a delegate in precincts with higher concentrations of activist Democrats who have free evenings than in precincts with lower concentrations of said activists.  (E.g., it took about 70 caucus-goers to elect one delegate in the Poweshiek County, where I caucused in 2004, while in less-Democratic and less-populous Fremont County, it only took 22 caucus-goers to elect one delegate.)

The conclusion of all of this?  The caucus system (according to our own Geraldine) “favors the old over the young, the rural over the urban, Western Iowa over Eastern Iowa.”

Why is this wrong?  Well, while the caucus system seems to create inequalities on the surface, it can compensate for deeper inequalities.  Many have complained, here and elsewhere, that the Iowa Caucuses are unfair to families with young children, workers who have evening shifts, handicapped persons, and, generally, people with busy schedules, because it requires them to take several hours out of a weekday night to argue with their neighbors about politics.  Not everyone can do that, and it’s understandable.

That is why precincts are assigned delegates before caucus night: if a disproportionate number of Democrats in X precinct have to work the night shift or have young children (or even if there’s a blizzard), the system currently in place ensures that their precinct will still be important.  And precincts are the smallest geographic unit our election officials recognize for general elections, so it is assumed that others in your precinct likely represent similar interests to yours.  Think of it as a much more geographically specific version of the electoral college.  (Maybe you have your problems with that system, too, but at least this caucus math has a constitutional precedent.)

Aside from that, though, here’s a question nobody has asked: what is the harm in giving Iowa’s downtrodden rural hamlets and agricultural areas a little attention from the rest of the country every four years?  It isn’t like John Edwards is going to spend the last week before the caucuses camped out in Keokuk and Grundy Counties just because each caucus-goer is worth more there.  At the end of the day, Keokuk and Grundy still represent a tiny fraction of the total delegates needed to win, and putting on events and doing GOTV work is easier and far more efficient in urban areas like Des Moines and Cedar Rapids.

While disparities in caucus-goer to delegate ratios from county to county may seem a little alarming, the truth is that urban areas are still immensely important, and that a candidate can win the caucuses without putting practically any resources into the less populous half of Iowa’s 99 counties.  A campaign will hire more than 10 full-time field organizers for Polk County before they will hire a single full-time organizer for Grundy County.  And most importantly, I don’t know a single Iowa Democrat who will argue that Polk County (Des Moines area) Democrats don’t have enough influence on state politics, the state party, or the caucuses.

I hope this will be the start of a series of posts written here as a defense of the Iowa Caucuses.  Toward that end, I’m looking for more arguments to respond to.  So, dear readers, please participate: What arguments against the Iowa Caucuses do you find most compelling? 

7 comments March 6th, 2007

Caucus Correction

In January, we posted the complete list of how many caucus delegates each county would be apportioned in the caucuses. However, as Drew points out on Bleeding Heartland, the IDP has reduced the total number of delegates from 3000 to 2500. As a result, the number of delegates from each county at the State Convention has been reduced accordingly. Here’s the corrected list:

County Delegate
1 Polk 357.0258199
2 Linn 202.1855356
3 Scott 141.5583295
4 Johnson 136.9502264
5 Black Hawk 116.9633193
6 Dubuque 89.53813553
7 Story 76.49680278
8 Woodbury 67.55177384
9 Pottawattamie 54.72432734
10 Clinton 45.83467967
11 Cerro Gordo 45.67426497
12 Des Moines 41.19029231
13 Dallas 38.58355352
14 Warren 37.41290819
15 Jasper 34.56172796
16 Lee 33.74437689
17 Webster 32.34265801
18 Marshall 31.88624001
19 Muscatine 31.4431899
20 Wapello 31.08798593
21 Boone 23.89606044
22 Benton 22.94694017
23 Marion 22.52298704
24 Bremer 21.24157918
25 Jackson 19.54385699
26 Buchanan 19.5419473
27 Fayette 18.29109462
28 Jones 17.68190071
29 Winneshiek 17.52339572
30 Poweshiek 17.42982048
31 Cedar 16.1751484
32 Clayton 16.14459322
33 Tama 15.73209829
34 Carroll 15.66525884
35 Washington 15.62897456
36 Floyd 15.49147625
37 Jefferson 15.05224554
38 Delaware 14.68367368
39 Dickinson 14.21770718
40 Henry 14.12604164
41 Hardin 14.09357677
42 Kossuth 14.01718882
43 Hamilton 13.64288786
44 Plymouth 13.45764708
45 Iowa 13.36980094
46 Winnebago 13.11390131
47 Chickasaw 12.86945987
48 Mahaska 12.80834951
49 Buena Vista 12.30227934
50 Madison 12.0521088
51 Clay 11.7446473
52 Allamakee 11.61860719
53 Butler 10.81271432
54 Appanoose 10.55872438
55 Crawford 10.28181806
56 Wright 10.12331307
57 Harrison 10.01636994
58 Cherokee 9.55422284
59 Mitchell 9.525577359
60 Cass 9.145547308
61 Union 8.914473759
62 Guthrie 8.876279784
63 Howard 8.845724604
64 Hancock 8.773156052
65 Palo Alto 8.377848411
66 Grundy 8.366390218
67 Greene 8.290002268
68 Clarke 8.032192937
69 Worth 8.005457155
70 Calhoun 7.925249807
71 Shelby 7.923340109
72 Keokuk 7.881326736
73 Louisa 7.864139447
74 Franklin 7.818306677
75 Monona 7.659801681
76 Sioux 7.465012409
77 Page 7.457373614
78 Mills 7.428728133
79 Humboldt 7.405811748
80 O’Brien 7.331333497
81 Sac 7.23393886
82 Lucas 7.014323504
83 Emmet 6.808076039
84 Adair 6.491066047
85 Monroe 6.483427252
86 Decatur 6.45669147
87 Davis 6.187423946
88 Montgomery 6.007912264
89 Pocahontas 6.002183167
90 Audubon 5.4942033
91 Van Buren 5.41781535
92 Fremont 5.140909032
93 Wayne 4.678761934
94 Taylor 4.648206754
95 Ida 4.556541215
96 Ringgold 4.537444227
97 Lyon 4.275815498
98 Adams 3.439367447
99 Osceola 3.082253781

1 comment March 1st, 2007

The Inequalities Of The Iowa Caucus

In this post on MyDD by DesMoinesDem that we mentioned before, the way that an Iowa Precinct Caucus works is explained. The post takes care to differentiate the type of party building activity is from a more traditional one-man-one-vote primary. Using data from the Des Moines Register, we did a breakdown of what counties benefited and what counties were hurt by the caucus system in 2004.

In 2004, 122,193 people attended the Democratic Precinct Caucuses to elect 3000 delegates to the State Convention. This averages out to just under 41 caucusgoers per delegate elected. However, this average wildly differed in every county. In Johnson County, home of the University of Iowa and the most Democratic county in the state, it took nearly 80 caucusgoers to elect one delegate. However, in tiny Fremont County located in the heart of Republican Western Iowa, it only took 22 caucusgoers. When one looks at the number of caucusgoers that it takes to elect a delegate in each county, there is a clear pattern. Caucusgoers in small, rural, Republican counties wield disproportionate power compared to those in more urban Democratic counties. In fact, the people who are most disadvantaged by this are students. Of the four counties where it required the most caucusgoers to elect a delegate, three of them had significant student populations: Johnson, Poweshiek and Story. It is a system that favors the old over the young, the rural over the urban, Western Iowa over Eastern Iowa. It is a method that of selecting a candidate that has a clear bias and to be successful, presidential candidates have to spend a disproportionate amount of energy on less populous rural areas. The full breakdown is below the fold:

1 JOHNSON 79.21276596
2 POWESHIEK 69.8
3 JEFFERSON 68.46153846
4 STORY 65.97674419
5 DECATUR 54.625
6 WARREN 52.19148936
7 POLK 50.74651163
8 WINNESHIEK 49.6
9 DALLAS 49.09302326
10 MADISON 45.4
11 CEDAR 42.55555556
12 JASPER 42.45454545
13 MARSHALL 42.4
14 DAVIS 41.25
15 MAHASKA 40.5
16 WOODBURY 40.18518519
17 MUSCATINE 40.11428571
18 BOONE 40
19 MARION 40
20 BUCHANAN 39.47826087
21 IOWA 39.46666667
22 GREENE 39.41666667
23 WAPELLO 39.3902439
24 CLAY 39.33333333
25 ADAIR 39
26 BREMER 38.65217391
27 PALO ALTO 38.54545455
28 LINN 38.22807018
29 WAYNE 38
30 MONROE 37.875
31 HARDIN 37.63157895
32 WEBSTER 37.34146341
33 HAMILTON 37.29411765
34 LOUISA 37.1
35 WASHINGTON 36.89473684
36 DES MOINES 36.84313725
37 BUENA VISTA 36.8125
38 APPANOOSE 36.76923077
39 SIOUX 36.18181818
40 UNION 35.69230769
41 DUBUQUE 35.60952381
42 ADAMS 35.4
43 KOSSUTH 34.9
44 SCOTT 34.57142857
45 HARRISON 34.5
46 MONONA 34.5
47 KEOKUK 34.4
48 POTTAWATTAMIE 34.27941176
49 JACKSON 34.19047619
50 MILLS 33.3
51 TAMA 33.26315789
52 CLAYTON 33.15
53 RINGGOLD 32.83333333
54 BLACK HAWK 32.72058824
55 GUTHRIE 32.66666667
56 PLYMOUTH 32.47058824
57 VAN BUREN 32.33333333
58 FAYETTE 32.18181818
59 SHELBY 32.11111111
60 IDA 32
61 HENRY 31.84210526
62 CASS 31.75
63 BENTON 31.74074074
64 CHICKASAW 31.5
65 PAGE 30.6
66 CARROLL 30.23809524
67 AUDUBON 30.125
68 HOWARD 30
69 FRANKLIN 29.81818182
70 GRUNDY 29.8
71 WRIGHT 29.69230769
72 CRAWFORD 29.58333333
73 FLOYD 29.16666667
74 CERRO GORDO 28.83636364
75 LUCAS 28.44444444
76 O’BRIEN 28.1
77 JONES 28.04545455
78 CLARKE 28
79 ALLAMAKEE 27.69230769
80 BUTLER 27.23076923
81 DELAWARE 27.16666667
82 WINNEBAGO 26.91666667
83 SAC 26.8
84 LEE 26.51111111
85 DICKINSON 26.5
86 HUMBOLDT 26.5
87 POCAHONTAS 26.5
88 LYON 26.33333333
89 CALHOUN 26.09090909
90 OSCEOLA 25.75
91 MONTGOMERY 25.375
92 TAYLOR 24.83333333
93 WORTH 24.8
94 MITCHELL 23.16666667
95 HANCOCK 23.09090909
96 EMMET 23
97 CHEROKEE 22.69230769
98 CLINTON 22.47457627
99 FREMONT 22.28571429

6 comments February 27th, 2007

Tom Vilsack Is Winning Mt. Pleasant

Tom Vilsack yesterday annouced the names of 1,159 caucusgoers who will definitely support him in the 2008 caucuses. However, his support is not very broad. Over 13% of those supporters were from Mt. Pleasant, Vilsack’s hometown (whereas the ratio of Mt. Pleasant residents to all Iowans is 0.3%). The list also includes the wives of Vilsack’s Iowa Field Director, Jesse Harris and his Iowa State Director, Dusky Terry.

There are obvious reasons for such a large number of his supporters to be friends and neighbors. Like the money Vilsack raised in the last quarter, these are all of his “gimmes.” If you serve as Governor of your state for eight years, there should be at least 1,100 people in your state who will automatically support you for President. Unfortunately for Vilsack, who has been prone to bad luck throughout his run, he seems to be relying almost as much on the people who automatically support you for President if you serve as Mayor of their town. This means that Vilsack’s support is highly geographically concentrated, which isn’t good. He’ll have an easy time winning Henry County’s 17 delegates at the State Convention but he still needs to win some of the remaining 2983 delegates.

To be fair to Vilsack, the list has quite a few elected officials and key activists but they are mostly longtime allies, some of whom have supported him since his 1998 Gubernatorial primary against Mark McCormick. Releasing this list is a nice way to hide ugly poll numbers but the ugly poll numbers will keep on coming out and the lists of new supporters by the hundreds won’t.

1 comment February 10th, 2007

Not Everyone In Mt. Pleasant Supports Tom Vilsack

Although Tom Vilsack may have been the Mayor of Mt. Pleasant, Iowa (population 8,751), he doesn’t have the support of the entire town. Not because he did something wrong as Mayor, as State Senator or even as Governor but because Barack Obama’s political director is also from Mt. Pleasant. When Obama hired former Senate Caucus Director Emily Parcell as political director, he hired another Mount Pleasantonian. This means that one small Iowa town will be very much in the thick of things during the caucus. Although Henry County may only be the 40th most important county in terms of delegates, it certainly seems to be more important when it comes to who makes the decisions on Presidential campaigns.

Add comment January 27th, 2007

Who Has The Power In The Iowa Caucuses?

The Iowa Caucuses aren’t democratic. In fact, they are so undemocratic, they make the Electoral College seem like a triumph for those who believe in “one man, one vote.” Caucusgoers aren’t voting for Obama, or Hillary or John Edwards. They vote for delegates to a county convention who then go on to vote for delegates to the State Convention who then go on to vote for delegates to the National Convention. Delegates are apportioned to each county and each precinct within the county by the combined number votes cast for the President and the Governor in the two previous General Elections. So, for example if more people in County X voted for the combination of John Kerry and Chet Culver in 2004 and 2006 than voted for the combination of Al Gore and Tom Vilsack in 2000 and 2002, County X will get more representation than it did in the 2004 caucuses. If less people voted for the top of the ticket, County X will get less representation. There are 3000 delegates at the State Convention and each county gets an appropriate share and the results for the caucuses are computed by factoring approximately what percent of the delegates a candidate will get at the State Convention. (Here are the 2004 results for an example)

So what has changed since 2004? Well of the big five counties in Iowa (Polk, Linn, Scott, Black Hawk and Johnson), all but Polk have gained delegates. In fact,  Johnson has shown the largest net gain of any county, going from 141 to 164 delegates. Linn also made a big leap from 228 to 242 delegates. Scott jumped from 161 to 170 and Black Hawk creeped up from 136 to 140. In contrast, Polk had a small dip of two delegates but still makes up nearly 15% of the total number of delegates with 428. The biggest leap in terms of perecentage was made by Jefferson County which is going from 13 to 18 delegates while the biggest fall in percentage was Ida County, which goes from 7 to a paltry 5 delegates. For us in Poweshiek County, we gained an extra delegate to go to 21. Statewide totals (which are rough because they haven’t been rounded) for 2008 are below the fold and the totals for 2004 can be found here.

4 comments January 18th, 2007

John Edwards’s first endorsement?

As Chris at Political Forecast points out, Ed Fallon was an active volunteer at  John Edwards’ event in Des Moines this weekend. In addition, Denise O’Brien showed up as well. It seems judging from this, Edwards may have an early advantage with the hardcore lefties in the caucuses this year. Considering Edwards was endorsed by Dennis Kucinich for all intents and purposes in 2004, it looks like Edwards will get a lot of support from the Fallon/O’Brien wing of the party this time around. (Not to mention that Kucinich might fall short of the one percent of county convention delegates he received in 2004 this time.)

 Although it’s questionable how much pull Fallon actually has,  (his “Don’t Write Me In” campaign was astonishingly successful in the General Election), he still received the support of nearly 40,000 voters in the 2006 Gubernatorial primary. And quite a few of those voters were highly enthusastic about him. It’s doubtful whether Fallon’s endorsement has any real weight outside of Fairfield and certain precincts of Iowa City but it doesn’t mean his endorsement’s useless. When Barack Obama attacks John Edwards on his vote in support of the Iraq War, John Edwards will have Fallon to back up his lefty street cred among caucus goers. It’s not the type of endorsement that actually will bring a lot of votes (like that of a major union like AFSCME) but one that’s important because it reassures voters. To paraphrase Thomas Callahan III, it offers a guarantee of lefty credentials that will help keep many prospective Edwards supporters feeling all warm and toasty inside.

7 comments December 29th, 2006