I too canceled a ski vacation with my family when the date of the caucus was moved up. But I’m paid to cover the Iowa caucuses. These folks aren’t even volunteers or political activists, just voters. That “just” is inaccurate in a democracy where, as Harry Truman put it, “the highest office in the land is that of citizen.” But it also doesn’t do justice to the unique role of Iowans and New Hampshirites. For half a century they’ve played the role once reserved for party bosses in smoke-filled rooms: picking the “best” candidate to nominate for president.
The question they wrestle with is, what does “best” mean? Most qualified or most electable? The bosses of old worried only about the latter, but Iowans make a more complex selection.
I caught up with Boss Schwarte at a Hillary Clinton event in Nevada, Iowa (the only town that manages to combine the names of two early caucus/primary states). Schwarte has also recently seen Barack Obama speak, and like a lot of Iowa Democrats she is undecided between the two of them. For her, it’s E. vs. E.—electability versus experience.
In the 2004 caucuses Schwarte voted for John Edwards, who finished second behind John Kerry that year before joining him on the losing Democratic ticket. This time she still likes Edwards, especially his focus on poverty, but says “he had his chance and lost.” She is entirely unsentimental about candidates, a trait I’ve noticed in other pragmatic caucus-goers.
“We really do listen to what they say about the issues, and not just wonder who we’d like to invite over for supper,” says Schwarte. “I’m not voting for someone to be my best friend.”
Clinton impressed her at this event. She “knows the pitfalls,” has “learned how to navigate D.C.” and is “more of a proven commodity” than Obama. Schwarte thought Hillary was knowledgeable on the issues, though she says Clinton’s attack on Obama for opposing a mandate forcing people to get health insurance makes no sense to her. “It isn’t logical to force people to sign up if they don’t have the money to do it,” she says.
(I had a slightly different problem with Hillary’s position. I asked her in Perry, Iowa, how she could criticize Obama’s refusal to endorse a mandate when she wouldn’t specify how her mandate would work and whether she would penalize those who didn’t enroll—as Massachusetts is about to do, to the tune of $1,000 per uncooperative person. She wouldn’t answer, instead launching a withering—and somewhat convincing—critique of the practicality of Obama’s health insurance plan. “It’s like saying that paying the payroll tax that funds Medicare should be voluntary,” Clinton said. “It won’t work.” As for how her mandate would work, she went the same route as she has on bolstering Social Security: leave the difficult details until after the election.)
Schwarte’s problems with Hillary have nothing to do with issues. She’s just not sure Clinton can win in November. When she heard Clinton say, “I am by far the most electable because I know exactly what I’m getting into,” Schwarte was unpersuaded. She is worried that Hillary will spend too much time dealing with the garbage being thrown at her. And she brought up, unprompted, polls that show Hillary faring less well than Obama among independents who, like her, find the Illinois senator inspirational.
When I asked which was more important to her—electability or experience—Schwarte said she didn’t know yet; she wants to do more research on the issues. In the old days that would require a trip to the library, or waiting for newspapers and magazines to spell it out. Now she can find what she needs with a few keystrokes—cutting out the media, which never did a very good job covering the issues anyway.
In 2004 Iowa Democrats propelled John Kerry to the nomination not because they loved him but because they thought that his Vietnam War record would make him the most electable candidate against President Bush. We’ll never know if Edwards or another candidate could have beaten Bush.
In a little over a month the responsible party elders of our time will go into smokeless rooms all over Iowa. Their caucus system is cumbersome, unfair to anyone employed at night, and destructive of family vacations. But it’s not a bad way to begin sorting through the age-old question of E. vs. E.
