(Updated) Talk of a split caucus date, which surfaced last week, was kicked up several notches this morning with David Yepsen's column calling for the Republicans to meet on Jan. 3 and the Democrats on Jan. 5. The GOP first talk seems to be coming from the Romney camp, as state leader Doug Gross is the one out front on it.
But this afternoon, Iowa Democratic Party spokeswoman Carrie Giddins talked down the chances of a split date. "We are working with our Republican counterparts for a mutual caucus date," said Giddins, who took pains to note that both parties still have the caucuses scheduled for the night of Jan. 14 and any other talk is just "speculation."
"Yepsen's wrong," University of Iowa political science professor David Redlawsk told Iowa Independent. "The media is one of the things that keeps Iowa in the spotlight. They certainly won't want to gear up for TWO caucus nights, even if they are only two days apart. The logistics of caucus night for the media is pretty complex -- and like everyone else they'll be really tired of it all by January."
"Yepsen completely ignores the potential for mischief that having caucuses on different days presents," Redlawsk added.
Johnson County Supervisor Rod Sullivan agreed. "I think it's critical that there be a single caucus time for both parties," he said.
But Yepsen dismissed the mischief potential. "You might get some crossovers but we don't have a tradition of people messing around in the other party's affairs in Iowa," he told Iowa Independent. "We've often had caucus years in which one party didn't have a meaningful caucus because they had an incumbent president. You didn't see Democrats trying to pack GOP caucuses in 1996, or Republicans messing around on the Democratic side in 2004 or 1984."
"Also, these are neighborhood meetings and people know one another," Yepsen said. "If a bunch of (Republicans) show up at a Democratic caucus, I imagine people there will say 'hey, what's going on here' and challenge the interloper."
Sullivan, who chaired the Johnson County Democratic Party from 2000 to 2003, was more concerned about mischief than Yepsen. "There's clearly a couple groups -- Ron Paul supporters and people who are very strongly anti-war -- and I can see both groups trying to participate in both caucuses," he said.
Yepsen said such groups do not have enough organization in Iowa to make much impact. "If someone were organizing a widespread effort like that, we'd all hear about it and report it," he said.
Sullivan thinks the effort doesn't have to be widespread to damage the caucuses. "You'll have a couple people who will brag to the press," he told Iowa Independent. "That's all the ammunition (Michigan Sen.) Carl Levin and others need to say, 'look, the Iowa Caucuses don't work.'"
"Good for him," was the first reaction of Johnson County Auditor Tom Slockett, when told of Yepsen's column. (Disclosure: Slockett is my boss at my day job.) Though the political parties, not county auditors, are responsible for running the caucuses, Slockett has been an active caucus attendee since the 1960s.
His concern is with space needs. "There simply are not enough physical facilities to hold large turnouts in both parties simultaneously," Slockett said. "In the past we've had an incumbent in one of the parties, resulting in lower turnout, and that party could be put in a smaller room."
Sullivan thinks the size of the caucuses may already have outgrown the available rooms. "If you've got 500 people in the Lincoln School gym, that's supposed to hold 150, it's not going to make any difference if the Republicans are there too," he said. "There's no room either way."
Slockett doesn't think double-caucusing will be a problem. "Iowans basically believe in clean elections and they're honest," he said. "If both parties ask people not to double-vote, most people would comply."
Yepsen believes the parties will have time to print lists of registered voters for each precinct to check registrations, or they can go on line to do so.
"That's logistically a little challenging," Giddins told Iowa Independent. As the Democrats would go second under Yepsen's scenario, they'd be the ones faced with the burden of weeding GOP caucus goers from their lists in less than 48 hours. "These are neighborhood caucuses, and we're going to have to take that chance that people are being honest."
In the event that someone isn't, Giddins said, Iowa law covers the double caucus situation that hasn't been an issue since Republicans first joined Democrats on caucus night in 1976. Giddins said attorneys for the IDP have reviewed the law and determined:
Iowa Code 39A.2 makes it a felony to vote more than once in the same "election." Election is defined as including a "primary election." Though the term "caucus" only appears sporadically throughout the Iowa Code and is not included in any of the definition sections, the definition of primary election that would apply specifically includes an election held pursuant to Iowa Code 43, which includes both primary election and caucus procedures.
In other caucus date news:
Congressional Quarterly argues that the Sunshine State has slim odds, citing the 1981 case Democratic Party of U.S. v. Wisconsin which gave parties broad power to set their own nomination rules. At issue then was a DNC rule that only Democrats could participate in the nomination process, which was at odds with Wisconsin's tradition of no party registration and an open, choose your party in the privacy of the booth primary. The DNC won that battle and made Wisconsin hold a one time only caucus in 1984. Then, having proven their point, they agreed to grant Wisconsin an exception.
In Iowa, of course, you can change affiliation any time and as often as you want. Say, for example, on the evening of Jan. 3, 2008, then again on the afternoon of Jan. 5.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder