Todd Prichard is a former Iowa House minority leader and the last elected rural Democrat to serve in the Iowa House. He currently lives in Charles City and serves as the Floyd County Attorney. Ann Prichard teaches fifth grade in the Charles City Public School District.
Iowa’s Democratic Party is at a critical crossroads. Do Iowa Democrats throw in the towel and concede the first-in-the-nation caucuses, or do we unite to regain our rightful place in the political calendar? We argue that we fight to maintain our status for both the health of the Iowa Democratic Party and for the electability of Democratic presidential candidates.
Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucus is a good fit for both the state and the nation. Iowa Democrats have a rich history of picking qualified progressive candidates. We take this responsibility seriously, showing the candidates Iowa Nice with a healthy dose of Midwest skepticism. This makes Iowa an ideal place for nationwide candidates to test messages and learn about rural issues.
As important as it is for the nation, the caucus is also vital for the Iowa Democratic Party. We benefit from the enthusiasm and civic engagement that national campaigns bring. At its core, the caucus is gritty local retail politics that forces candidates to organize their respective parties and engage with voters; it is the type of small “d” democratic political engagement that the Founding Fathers would be proud of.
For Iowa Democrats, the caucus keeps us in the game. The state party needs the organizing manpower and resources that come with the presidential campaign’s journey throughout the state. We need the discussions, activity, and energy that the caucuses bring to balance the Republican Party Caucus, which will continue to be first in the nation.
We have heard two arguments against fighting for the first caucuses. The first criticism is that everyone must attend in person. However, just as we have made accommodations for voters with mobility issues, we can make the caucuses more inclusive through mail-in ballots and remote participation.
The second argument is that caucuses take attention away from local races. This couldn’t be further from the truth: attention to national campaigns increases voter turnout.
The Democratic National Committee has made it abundantly clear that they are not interested in Iowa’s first-in-the-nation status. After Joe Biden finished in fourth in Iowa in 2020, the first nominating contest for 2024 was given to South Carolina. More recently, Iowa lost its seat on the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee.
Calling out the DNC does not mean that we are distancing ourselves from the Democratic Party and its rich history of serving as the nation’s conscience. It is with that thought in mind that we must defy the national party to do what is right for both the state and the country. Not field testing nationwide presidential hopefuls will result in candidates with limited appeal. That in turn will make the electoral college map harder for Democrats. A competitive candidate in Iowa should also be competitive in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina.
This leads to our final point: to quote a former presidential candidate who later went on to win, “It’s the economy, stupid,” not the identity politics designed to appeal to elite donors. We witnessed a disturbing trend in Democratic circles while Todd was in the Iowa legislature, and now as we travel the state and country: Democratic Party activists are no longer engaging with working-class voters. This needs to change, and the Iowa caucuses are the ideal mechanism to focus candidates on the pocketbook issues people care about. After all, the caucuses are the grassiest of any grassroots politics.
It is time for Iowa Democrats to stick up for ourselves. We need candidates to come to Iowa, sharpen their messages with the help of engaged activists and audiences, and develop candidate platforms that have broad appeal. That is how they will win.
If you have an opinion on this issue, take the survey (which will be available online through November 15, 2025), and tell the Iowa Democratic Party that Iowa needs to be first again.
Editor’s note: Bleeding Heartland welcomes guest commentaries on the future of the Iowa Democratic caucuses. Please reach out to Laura Belin if you are interested in writing.
7 Comments
It's Time to Move On
I agree with Todd and Ann that the Democratic Party must improve its message to better speak to the concerns of working Americans.
In Iowa it must focus its resources on organizing . . . being active in all 99 counties, recruiting candidates for all races and registering voters.
I don’t see a meaningful role for the Iowa caucus in the 21st century. The on-going debate over this issue diverts time and resources from the grassroots organizing needed to win elections.
I enjoyed attending the Iowa caucus for over 40 years as well as all the hubbub that went with them. I’m as nostalgic as anyone.
But I’m also pragmatic. After 2008, the Iowa caucus lost its magic. It’s long overdue for Iowa Democrats to move on.
Bill Bumgarner Wed 3 Sep 9:57 AM
there are more rural people
in states like NY and CA then there are in Iowa, and southern states (SC has something like 1.7 million) also have many rural people, including many rural folks from racial/ethnic minorities. Demographically Iowa isn’t representative of the kind of pluralistic democracy that we hope is the future of the governance of our country and let’s be real about how up close and personal presidential campaigns get in the modern era. As for the old system being a boost to Iowa Dem politics one would be hard pressed to point to much in the way of winning, no?
Any evidence for this really odd claim “not the identity politics designed to appeal to elite donors”
cuz most of the “elite” donors to campaigns that I know of are pushing for their own financial interests and could care less about social justice issues, especially at our state level, unless you just mean people with college degrees or minorities….
dirkiniowacity Wed 3 Sep 2:40 PM
"working class"
Iowa Caucus is in the rearview mirror. Need to focus on winning one federal election in 2026. Agree with “It’s the economy, stupid”, as its time to prioritize working class instead of every fringe “social justice” lament.
union50702 Wed 3 Sep 4:54 PM
In recent-past Iowa caucuses...
…the media coverage has indicated that “learn about rural issues” has most prominently translated to “force presidential candidates to genuflect before The Almighty Corn Deity Known As Ethanol.” I’m on Team Rod Sullivan, per the earlier BH post on the topic of the caucuses.
PrairieFan Wed 3 Sep 5:23 PM
Caucus is just peer pressure in action
Many years ago the Democratic party caucus in my tiny hometown proposed forwarding a suggestion on to the state party to ban all abortions. While I’m sure I wasn’t the only dissenter in the room, my loud and proud “NAY” sure was. I’d still do it again, but imagine how many don’t.
Put a stake through the heart of the effing caucus.
MantenoLorax Thu 4 Sep 8:26 AM
Caucus is an organizing tool
Every state needs to work on party strength. Todd and Ann’s line below resonate with me. “…vital for the Iowa Democratic Party. We benefit from the enthusiasm and civic engagement that national campaigns bring. At its core, the caucus is gritty local retail politics that forces candidates to organize their respective parties and engage with voters; it is the type of small “d” democratic political engagement that the Founding Fathers would be proud of.”
Is there a way to achieve the party building w/o the caucus? I will be 83 so personally limited, but (if no caucus) I’d like people to explain how the goals T & A want can be achieved alternatively.
Gerald Ott Thu 4 Sep 1:04 PM
Republicans continue to caucus first and grab national spotlight
We know the Republican’s Iowa Caucus is still first in nation and will gather lots of media attention and the national spotlight. Even though I miss the IDP going first, I just don’t see Iowa pulling a “New Hampshire’ and claiming via state law we will go first regardless of the DNC consequences. The state party just isn’t that strong at this point in time. If we were going to do that we should have already used that card. Ideally, we can win a House seat and perhaps the governorship in 2026 and slowly start becoming a “two party” state again. I do miss going first and having all of the candidates here. Sadly, those days are past.
ModerateDem Thu 4 Sep 3:10 PM