Being in Iowa during caucus season is incredible. Presidential candidates are all over the place, and every now and again, it feels like the world around me actually revolves around politics (like it usually does in my mind). The people around me are engaged, yard signs are everywhere, and there's a collective sense that, for the most part, we all really care.
For a political junkie like me, it's amazing. But also... it's not.
As much as I love the attention Iowa gets for being the first state to caucus, it's also a bit unsettling to me. I've had numerous conversations with others and inner debates with myself about whether or not Iowa is "actually a swing state," and whether or not Iowa deserves to go first.
To put it briefly, my inclination is that the answer to both of those questions is probably "not really."
I'll start this with a disclaimer that yes, Iowa is, at least at first glance, a swing state. When it comes to the general election and Iowa is tasked with simply picking the Democratic or the Republican candidate, the state is pretty liable to go either way. When the choice has been narrowed down, Iowa swings.
That said, this could be because of the influence Iowa holds on the primary elections. Since they have a much bigger say in who gets a party's nomination, the final candidates are more likely to be favorable by Iowans. Because of this, the state can swing either way in the general. Yet, if Iowa didn't have so much power in the primaries, I imagine it probably wouldn't swing as much.
As David Leonhardt pointed out today in an opinion piece on the New York Times (linked below), the demographics of Iowa make it unrepresentative of the rest of the United States. Importantly, Iowa as a whole is much more white and much older as compared to the rest of the nation. This plays a big role in which candidates are successful here.
For example, as Leonhardt pointed out, in early polls of states that are more diverse and more representative of the United States as a whole, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker were doing as well or better than Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg, both of whom still have considerable support here in Iowa. Even after those two candidates of color dropped out, and the race became... well... white, Joe Biden, who "leads among two large groups of Democratic voters: African Americans and Latinos" (Leonhardt), doesn't do as well in Iowa as Bernie Sanders (who maintains vast white support). Basically, the lack of diversity in Iowa seriously influences which candidates do well here, and by way of that, which candidates do well in general.
It's because of this that I'm not totally convinced that Iowa is a swing state. Making some assumptions, states with more large cities and more diversity would probably push the Democratic Party a bit further to the left. (Whereas more moderate democrats, at least in my experience, appear to do better here in Iowa.) So, if other states went first and gave advantage to candidates with younger and more diverse support, Iowa would be less inclined to vote blue in the general election. If moderate democratic candidates were replaced by progressive and diverse candidates, I think it would be less common for the state to swing.
(It's likely many Iowans would argue this with "But we elected Obama." That's true, but it also sounds a little too much like the "I'm not racist because I have a black friend" argument, which also doesn't really hold up. Racism didn't end when Obama was elected, and polling data show that Iowa continues to skew white.)
All of this leads me to my next conclusion, which is that Iowa doesn't really deserve to go first anymore. I feel scandalous saying this in the week leading up to caucus night, but really, what case can Iowa make for continuing to go first? Sure, the people here are invested in politics, but it's because the candidates invest their time and money here (and they do that because we go first). If presidential candidates were to spend as much time in other smaller states, I guarantee the people there would be similarly engaged. And, although there of course will never be a "perfect" first state, this shouldn't prevent us from trying to do better.
Leonhardt proposes a rotating system in which small states like Rhode Island, Mississippi, or New Mexico, all of which are more diverse and more representative of the American populace than Iowa, take turns going first. Maybe we just don't have a singular first, but a first few or five states to diffuse influence. I think there are plenty of options to do better.
So yeah, caucus season is pretty cool in Iowa. I literally went to a free Portugal. The Man concert tonight, which was part of a Bernie Sanders rally.
Still, even though it pains me a little bit to say it, it's time for us to look past the free concerts and buttons and candidate meet & greets to acknowledge that Iowan influence is not representative of the many types of diversity that make the United States so great. The nation deserves the legitimate chance to choose a candidate which represents everyone, which is why I say, with a heavy heart, that it's time for Iowa to pass the baton.
*I recommend reading Leonhardt's article here, which is a quick but very thought-provoking read.
