There are two occasions when women have a certain “glow.” The first is pregnancy. The second is when a bad marriage finally ends in divorce. The vows that are spoken, “for better or worse; in sickness and in health; ‘til death do us part’” are a serious commitment. But when only one party honors those vows, the vows have been essentially voided. The relationship is unhealthy and should come to an end.
A prime example is the current crumbling marriage between the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Iowa Democratic Party (IDP). There had been a nurturing and productive relationship during the many years of Iowa being the first in the nation to hold its caucuses. Iowans embraced the role that slowly developed into a statewide system of vetting presidential hopefuls. This enabled any candidate, some from very diverse backgrounds to launch a successful campaign. But caucuses are much more than simply showing support for candidates. It’s a way for community members to gather and connect over problems and concerns; to work developing platforms based in current issues; and select delegates to bring these concerns from the local level, to the regional, state and national level. It is grassroots; therefore, it naturally evolves and cannot be corrupted or controlled.
It may be hard to believe, but the Iowa Caucuses have been around since the late 1800s. In the past, caucuses were held to select candidates for local offices. It wasn’t until 1968 that Iowa’s Democratic leadership (Gov. Harold Hughes) changed the format to select delegates to conventions based upon an elector’s personal preference for President.
The first two caucuses after the procedural changes, 1972 and 1974, resulted in “uncommitted” as the winner of the Iowa Democratic Caucuses in its debut and sequel. The media was not yet a major player in the nomination process in Iowa. Theoretically, presidential candidates took note and realized that Iowa voters want more meat from campaigns. Spinning the usual political rhetoric wouldn’t work in Iowa. Candidates toured the state and met future constituents in small venues like coffee houses, town halls or even living rooms, and were put on the spot for where they honestly stood on issues. It was a grueling method that brought national attention to candidates that wouldn’t have made it out of the gate.
During those first eight years of the caucuses, little attention was given to the uniqueness of the process. Although Edmund Muskie was declared the winner, he “won with 35.5% of the vote. But 35.8% of Iowa voters signaled that they were uncommitted. Unlike what many think of the caucus results of the past, Jimmy Carter did not come out in front at the Iowa Caucuses in 1974. He came in second after “uncommitted,” 37% to 28%.
Over time, Iowa Democrats developed a pattern of choosing minorities, such as the first black President, Obama; a strong woman candidate, like Hilary Clinton; and the first openly gay man to run, Pete Buttigieg. The DNC wanted to control who was selected, for example, white, male career politicians like Joe Biden. He came in fifth in Iowa, so like a jealous, frustrated spouse, the DNC plotted its elimination campaign. Afterall, wasn’t Iowa just a “fly-over state” not worthy of the attention and focus? It was time to search for a trophy wife.
More than 90 percent of Iowa caucus-goers are white, according to entrance polls” conducted in 2020. DNC leadership wanted to begin the process of electing a Democratic candidate for president “in states that are less white, especially given the importance of Black voters as Democrats’ most loyal electoral base.” Wait a minute! Organized Labor was the Democrats most loyal base. Oh, that’s right, Labor, like Iowa, cannot be controlled. So, the DNC moved on to an attractive southern belle that welcomed and submitted to the will of the DNC. South Carolina was courted and dubbed the DNC new lead off.
Iowa, like many spouses before her, worked hard to make the marriage work. Even agreeing to use an app during the final lead-off Democratic Caucus in 2020. There wasn’t time to test the app or do the necessary statewide training needed for it to be a success. It was a failure before it even launched. It was also an opportunity for the DNC to paint Iowa as an archaic, backwards, state that is no longer worthy of its historic, political influence.
The DNC isn’t the first spouse to go through a mid-life crisis; making poor decisions to prove its vitality. Today, a (former) DNC vice-president recently resigned after an idea to “court” new candidates to run against incumbents – disloyalty. The Party is having financial problems and may need to take out a line of credit. One donor quipped: “The thing that’s clear to a lot of us is that the party never really learned its lesson in 2016. They worked off the same playbook and the same ineffective strategies and to what end?”
It’s time for Iowa to get its glow on. Even if the DNC doesn’t understand or appreciate the value of the grassroots political process, it’s what this country desperately needs. Neighbors gathering together to support and build communities. Iowa needs to do what countless underappreciated spouses have done in the pass. Kick the bum out and build a strong, healthy future.
This article first appeared in the July 2025 issue of The Prairie Progressive
***
Please help Fawkes-Lee & Ryan maintain this website by donating $10, $20, $30, $50, $100, or more.
Your support is appreciated.
Subscribe (It’s FREE): Email mrtyryn@gmail.com with “Subscribe” in the Subject Line.
Fawkes-Lee & Ryan
2516 Lynner Dr.
Des Moines, IA 50310
Copyright (c) 2025. Fawkes-Lee & Ryan. All rights reserved.