The Iowa Caucus Debacle: Now What?
The dumpster fire that was the 2020 Iowa Caucuses left us with a few questions. Was this whole debacle the fault of the Iowa Democratic Party (IDP)? Was this ordeal simply an oversight issue? Or does this spectacular failure reveal a greater issue with the very idea of caucuses themselves? Is it time for us to give up the caucus in favor of the more widely practiced primary election?
In case you hadn’t heard, the Iowa Caucuses on Monday night were a mess.
In the past, the IDP used a phone hotline for each precinct caucus leader to call in and report results. This year, the party decided to roll out an app to make reporting the results faster and easier. This decision majorly backfired for multiple reasons. First, the app was inadequately tested. App developers did not test it on a statewide scale, and the director of the Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity agency had said that “the mobile app had not been vetted or evaluated by the agency.” This led to multiple cybersecurity concerns as well as the practical issue of the app not being able to handle the massive traffic it received on caucus night. Because of app issues, many leaders resorted to calling in their results. In addition to the technical issues, the IDP failed to fully educate caucus leaders on how to use the app, prompting many leaders to opt to instead call-in results like they always had. But even the phone lines weren't reliable. Because the IDP had rolled out this app, their phone hotline service was not prepared for the number of calls they received, with many callers waiting for hours to get connected. All of this mess led to the release of the caucus results to be released later.
There has been a fascinating trend in the media coverage of the 2020 Iowa Caucuses. Instead of purely reporting on the results of the caucus and what it means for each candidate moving forward as well as the Democratic primary process as a whole, the discussion has centered around the caucuses themselves, specifically whose fault this mess was, and if we should still be having caucuses in the first place.
Many were quick to blame the IDP, citing the decision to use the app as the cause of the issue, but then heavily criticizing the time from the end of the caucuses to the reporting, and the incomplete and somewhat incorrect data reported as well. In a statement from IDP Chair Troy Price (found here), Price cites the issue as being with inconsistencies in data reporting, and the manual recounting of the results took time, hence the delay.
But once results were out (there’s still much debate over the true winner of the caucus), many opinion articles and op-eds began to surface questioning the legitimacy and value of the caucus, namely the question of “is it time to leave these in the past?” Many issues have been identified with the caucus system.
Many advocates of the caucuses argue that it is a great way to get involved with the democratic process, but for some working-class voters, they just simply do not have the time. Back on Capitol Hill, this very concern was present in the mind of Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill), concerned that the caucus “limits and restricts opportunities for people to vote.” Voters can’t just show up to a polling station during its open hours and spend 15 minutes to cast a ballot. “Participants must arrive by a fixed time in the evening and be prepared to stay for several hours as the process of alignment and realignment plays out.” The hyper-involvement of the caucuses also alienates those who are more moderate or undecided. It is easier to quickly cast a ballot then spend hours standing around in a sweaty gym for something you don’t care enough about. There are already statistics about the lack of involvement in primaries, and making it more difficult to have your voice heard is not the answer.
The caucuses also require candidates to spend much more time on the ground in these states interacting with voters. Advocates argue that it gives the candidates time to listen to real people and figure out exactly what they want. “But even in Iowa, there are questions about the prominence the state plays, given its demographics and small size.” The average citizen in Iowa (or Nevada, another state who still holds on to the caucus tradition), is highly unlikely to have a similar worldview or lifestyle to someone in San Francisco or Alabama.
Lastly, it is hard to guarantee an accurate and representative result, especially that without interference. “Election security experts have been insisting on backup paper ballots for votes everywhere.” When using electronic voting machines, and especially mobile apps like in the Iowa Caucus, the chance for the results getting altered by hackers or malware is very present. Both the incredible mess of Monday night and election experts everywhere have proved again that the easiest, safest, and ultimately the best way to have an election is through paper ballots.
Although there are many different opinions on the impact of the events of Monday night, in both the 2020 election cycle and beyond, one thing is for sure: the debate of “To Caucus or Not To Caucus” is not going anywhere anytime soon.
Sources: Iowa Caucus Live Reporting (WaPo), App Inadequately Tested (NYT), Statement from Chair of IDP (CNN), Democratic Race Is in Turmoil as Iowa Results Are Questioned (NYT), An epic breakdown in Iowa casts a spotlight on the caucus system (WaPo), The Iowa disaster makes it clear that we should stick to doing things the old fashioned way (WaPo), On Capitol Hill, questions about the caucus system (NYT), photos from Picturing Chaos at the Iowa Caucuses (NYT)
