Questions have been raised about some goings on before and during the Iowa Democratic caucuses. The Iowa Democrats should lose their position as first in the nation to influence the presidential elections. The way they handle the caucuses and the result reporting is profoundly flawed and almost designed to be influenced by insiders. Democrats should rise up and insist that Iowa lose its first position or change the way they do things. How?
1) Coin tosses have to go. They are an affront to democracy. It would be simple to take the number of people in each tie and blend them together to come up with a fair way to split delegates.
2) Make voting numbers open and transparent. How many people voted for Hillary and how many people voted for Bernie? It's that simple. Will that show that the caucuses do or do not actually represent the intentions of the voters of Iowa.
3) Keep technology out of it. One of the great things about the Iowa caucus system is it does not use computerized or electronic voting, which can easily be rigged or fixed. Microsoft created an app that ended up being a problem for newly registered voters, failing to direct them where to go. USA Today
reported that the app, used to tally votes, failed in some areas.
5) require that a newly registered young person be made a co-caucus chair. The current system gives the influence and power to old, establishment Democrats. It's built-in top down influence that should not be.
6) Currently, the Iowa Democratic Caucus process is a privately run operation with no accountability. When there's discussion of a re-count or investigation, the head of the Democratic party haughtily declares it's not happening. The Caucus should be supervised by the secretary of state like most states do.
Was there misbehavior in the 2016 Iowa Democratic caucuses? Maybe. But the system is set up to obscure and hide such behavior. That is reason to stop allowing the current system to continue.
|The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.