Messy primary calendar could hurt Democrats in general election 

“Iowa Democrats have been grumbling about the caucus process for years,” he said. “Turnout is low, it takes forever, and a lot of areas don’t have a big enough space to hold it.” 

The mail-in vote was part of a proposal submitted by the state party to the DNC, but the proposal was vague on when the vote would be held and whether the results would be announced at the same time as the caucus, which would preserve the state’s lucrative first-in-the-nation status. The DNC rejected the plan as noncompliant — and could potentially punish the state by taking away some of its delegates — but it gave the state additional time to adjust its plan with a later date. 

Even if Iowa insists on holding its mail-in vote before South Carolina, it might still lose its first-out-of-the-gate position because New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan, a Republican, claims that a mail-in vote would be a primary, not a caucus, and New Hampshire would be legally obligated to schedule its primary first. 

The scheduling snafu could cost Iowa Democrats at the polls, Hagle observed, both in state elections and in the presidential contest. “Iowa has been trending red, but it voted for Obama twice, and independents swing elections. If it looks to independents like the party has abandoned the state, it could make a difference in the fall.” 

Republicans have been pouncing, with U.S. Senator Joni Ernst claiming that Democrats are giving Iowans “the middle finger.” 

Apart from prestige, Iowa’s lead-off caucuses have historically generated hundreds of millions of dollars in local advertising revenue, restaurant and hotel business, and positive exposure. 

In addition, the caucuses traditionally allowed unaffiliated voters to declare a party preference when they arrived so they could participate. Parties benefited as well from having these people be part of the process and adding them to their rolls so as to be able to communicate with them later, Hagle said. A mail-in vote would eliminate a lot of leaners who might otherwise join the Democrats. 

Iowa Democratic political leaders “are unhappy, but they’re not saying anything publicly,” according to Hagle.  

In New Hampshire, though, party officials are in open revolt. Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democratic U.S. senator, said she supports the Granite State going first. “I don’t care what the Democratic National Committee says,” she added. 

California Congressman Ro Khanna was invited last month to address a major state Democratic fundraiser in part because he publicly opposes the DNC’s plans. “It would be political malpractice” for the DNC to punish New Hampshire for going first, given that it’s a swing state in the fall, he said at the fundraiser, to rousing applause. 

If the DNC refuses to budge, then Biden would have to keep his name off the primary ballot in order to comply with party rules, ceding the state to Kennedy and self-help guru Marianne Williamson.  

In theory, a write-in campaign could be launched for Biden, but Scala said that could be “the worst of both worlds” for him. Write-in campaigns are notoriously difficult to pull off, he emphasized, and Biden would look even worse if he lost the primary than if he boycotted it.  

Scala also said that Biden “would be a gross hypocrite” if he didn’t squash a New Hampshire write-in campaign after demanding that South Carolina go first — which could potentially cost the party support in South Carolina. 

Either way, Democrats could suffer at the polls in New Hampshire for attacking one of the state’s signature honors. Scala doesn’t think the issue will hurt Biden much in the general election, although “a good number of Democrats are pretty sore at him,” and Smith predicts that the effect on the vote would be no more than a percent or two. But that could make all the difference — in 2016 Donald Trump lost the state by only three-tenths of a percentage point.  

As for why the DNC created such an avoidable controversy, Scala says it’s partly because the party has wanted for decades to increase the impact of minority voters and partly because Biden wants to repay South Carolina for saving his 2020 candidacy after he finished fourth in Iowa and fifth in New Hampshire.  

“He wants to reward his friends and punish his opponents,” Scala said — and it’s easier to make such a difficult change in a year where there’s little in the way of a nominating contest. 

Smith added: “Both parties have wanted to get rid of the primary process, or at least exert greater control over it, since the 1968 reforms. I think the DNC saw this year as a good opportunity to get rid of the New Hampshire and Iowa problem of not selecting the ‘right’ candidate — going all the way back to George McGovern and Jimmy Carter.”

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit