History of the Iowa Caucuses

from the Des Moines Register
by David Yepsen

THE BEGINNING
Iowa's caucuses weren't always an early test of presidential candidate strength. They became important because, in 1968, the Democratic Party was torn apart by controversies over the Vietnam War. Demonstrations at the national convention in Chicago that year turned violent, and the party established a commission to open up party affairs to include more people.

The Democrats adopted a series of rules requiring that plenty of notice be given about county, district and state conventions - and that party members be given plenty of time to file and debate platform resolutions.

To accomplish this and still hold their state convention in June, Iowa Democratic leaders decided to hold their caucuses in late January. They also realized such a start would give Iowa the first contest that resulted in delegates to the party's national convention.

1972
A young campaign manager and an obscure presidential candidate decided to exploit the new rules. Gary Hart was running South Dakota Sen. George McGovern's anti-war presidential campaign, and the two were looking for a way to get some media attention before the important New Hampshire primary.

They thought the vote taken at the Iowa caucuses in 1972 would provide him with that attention. It worked.

McGovern organized in Iowa and finished close behind the front-runner, Maine Sen. Edmund Muskie. A handful of national political reporters, led by R.W. "Johnny" Apple of the New York Times, wrote stories about it. McGovern's strong second-place showing surprised them, and they gave McGovern the big boost of media attention he was seeking.

This was also the first early example of the so-called expectations game that candidates play. They hope to do better than reporters and politicians expect, which garners extensive media attention to their "surprise." A finish that is expected, or that was worse than expected, has sometimes proved harmful.

In 2008, as an example, Mitt Romney is widely expected to win the Iowa GOP caucuses. So if he does, it might not merit much attention. But if unknown Mike Huckabee comes close to Romney that would merit much notice.

1976
An unknown former Georgia governor, Jimmy Carter, expanded McGovern's strategy, campaigned extensively in Iowa and won. After he won the presidency, his Iowa strategy was quickly adopted by other candidates and has served as a template for many candidates ever since. Unknown or obscure candidates try to use a good showing in Iowa to slingshot themselves into national prominence.

Also in 1976, Iowa Republicans agreed to hold their caucuses on the same night as the Democrats, primarily to capture some of the media attention. President Gerald Ford's narrow victory over Ronald Reagan in a straw poll in sample precincts was later seen as an early sign of Ford's weakness as a candidate.

1980
Republican George H.W. Bush upset front-runner Ronald Reagan in Iowa's caucuses. Reagan and Bush fought a long battle for the GOP nomination. After Reagan won, he turned to Bush as his running mate to unify the party. Once again, Iowa was credited with giving Bush an early boost to national prominence.

On the Democratic side, President Carter used the contest to fight off a challenge from Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts. That divisive fight weakened Carter, who lost the November election to Reagan.

1984
The Democrats were looking for a candidate to challenge Reagan. Walter Mondale, from neighboring Minnesota, was a heavy favorite and won Iowa. A question facing the Democrats was whether any of the other candidates would emerge to challenge him for the nomination. Gary Hart, then a Colorado senator, finished second, and the surge from that finish helped him win the New Hampshire primary eight days later. Mondale narrowly won the nomination that year.

The results illustrated how front-running candidates can't afford to take Iowa for granted and how obscure candidates can parlay a good showing in Iowa into more good showings in subsequent contests. That template is driving the Democratic race this year as both front-runners and single-digit candidates pour resources into Iowa.

1988
Both parties were looking for nominees, and the parade of candidates to Iowa began in earnest shortly after the 1984 election. After the 1986 midterm elections, a presidential candidate was a regular feature somewhere in Iowa throughout 1987.

The 1980s saw hard economic times in rural America, and that played heavily on the outcome of the 1988 race. In both parties, caucus-goers went for candidates from neighboring states. Republicans chose Sen. Robert Dole of Kansas. Democrats gave the nod to Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt. The No. 2 Democratic finisher was another neighbor, Illinois Sen. Paul Simon.

The 1988 campaign also saw the growth of conservative and evangelical strength inside the Iowa GOP. Former Christian broadcasting executive Pat Robertson mounted an extensive grass-roots campaign in Iowa among Republican conservative and evangelical voters and beat then-Vice President George H.W. Bush for second place.

But Gephardt and Dole didn't last long. Both were defeated in the New Hampshire primary and ultimately did not win their party's nominations. Their defeats took some of the sheen off the caucuses, and many political observers predicted the 1992 caucuses would not be as important as they had once been.

1992
The caucuses were indeed less important in 1992, but for a different reason. Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin sought the Democratic presidential nomination. Harkin had hoped a big win in his home-state caucuses would give him a big boost of media attention and financial contributions.

Instead, Harkin's candidacy prompted the other Democratic contenders to bypass the Feb. 10 caucuses in favor of the Feb. 18 New Hampshire primary. While Harkin got 77 percent of the caucus vote, few observers were impressed. His candidacy faltered with a fourth-place showing in New Hampshire.

The Republicans were renominating Bush and had no caucus contest.

1996
The Iowa caucuses rebounded in significance. Eventually, eight GOP contenders campaigned hard in Iowa. While caucuses in Alaska and Louisiana were held ahead of Iowa's, those had much smaller turnouts.

Kansas Sen. Dole was the early front-runner but won a narrow victory. The caucuses played their traditional role of narrowing the field of candidates. Only the top three finishers in Iowa - Dole, commentator Patrick Buchanan and former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander - were viable contenders in New Hampshire.

2000
With President Clinton constitutionally unable to run for re-election, both parties had vigorous contests for their presidential nominations. Two Democratic candidates and six Republicans vied for votes in their respective caucuses.

Vice President Al Gore won a strong, 2-to-1 victory over former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley in the Democratic caucuses. Texas Gov. George W. Bush bested his challengers on the Republican side. Both victories helped the two front-runners cement their standings in their respective parties.

2004
President George W. Bush was unchallenged in the GOP caucuses, while a field of almost a dozen Democrats tested the waters. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry upset the front-runner, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who placed third behind North Carolina Sen. John Edwards. Gephardt placed fourth and dropped out. Kerry and Edwards went on to be the party's nominees for president and vice president.

Kerry's Iowa win boosted his chances in subsequent states, and he quickly wrapped up the Democratic nomination. His decision to bet everything on doing well in Iowa - and the fact his victory in Iowa led directly to the nomination - reignited criticism that Iowa has too much influence in the process. It also has prompted Democratic candidates in 2008 to bet much of their political futures on the state.

2008
The Democrats, smarting from losing the presidential race a second time, responded to complaints about lack of racial and geographic diversity in the early-voting states by inserting Nevada between the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary and placing South Carolina after New Hampshire.

Other states defied party leadership by leapfrogging those states. Florida and Michigan moved up their dates, forcing Iowa to hold the earliest caucuses ever - on Jan. 3 - in an effort to maintain first-in-the-nation status.

While Democrats are devoting considerable effort in Iowa, some Republican candidates are shifting more of their resources elsewhere. That shift may diminish Iowa significance in the future.

THE FUTURE?
Despite the national criticism of the influence of Iowa's caucuses and New Hampshire's primary, the two states might be able to retain their early roles in the future because critics and other states can't agree on an alternative plan.

It is also true that party leaders like the early contests because they help them resolve their nomination fights quickly and prepares the party for the main event earlier in the year. While that upsets those who want more Americans to have more say in picking presidents, the job of a party isn't civic participation - it's winning elections.

The caucuses have provided early signs of growing political movements, pointing toward the power of the anti-war movement in 1972 and the clout of social conservatives in 1988. This year's Democratic events are being watched to see if Illinois Sen. Barack Obama engages younger voters enough for them to become a factor in political campaigns. New York Sen. Hillary Clinton is the first woman to have a realistic chance to become president, and that is prompting many women to say they will participate. Republican Ron Paul is attracting younger anti-war libertarians.

IMPACT ON STATE
The caucuses have also had an impact on the rest of Iowa politics. Many politicians got their start helping a presidential candidate. Leaders in both parties consider the caucuses a vital party-building tool. Iowa also benefits from the media attention and money spent in the state.

Party leaders also believe caucus campaigning helped Iowa become a highly competitive two-party state. Between the Civil War and the 1970s, the state had been a fairly Republican one, but the intense organizing and campaigning surrounding the Democratic caucuse helped change that. Democrats have built a modern party that boasts more voter registrations than Republicans; has gained control of the governorship, the Iowa House and the Iowa Senate; and fills three of Iowa's five U.S. House seats.

Attendance figures at caucuses are hard to determine. In 1980, an estimated 115,000 Republicans and 100,000 Democrats turned out. The record was reportedly set in 1988, when 125,000 Democrats and 109,000 Republicans were said to have participated. Years later, Democratic party officials said their 1988 numbers may have been inflated. In 2004, about 122,000 Democrats participated, which may, in fact, have set the record.

In the 2008 campaign, the intense early campaigning in both parties for a White House contest that is wide open has many predicting another record turnout.

For better or worse, Iowa will again play an outsized role in picking the nation's next president.

DAVID YEPSEN can be reached at dyepsen@dmreg.com or (515) 284-8545.