Iowa Caucuses
The Iowa Democratic Party has proposed substantial changes to the way in which the 2020 Iowa caucuses will be conducted. The last day to submit public comments WAS March 13, 2019.
Please watch this video first...
The Iowa Democratic Party has made substantial changes to the manner in which the 2020 caucuses will operate. The purpose of this group is to...
1. Raise awareness of these changes.
2. Help everyone understand these changes.
3. Take action against the changes that are problematic.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS GROUP IS TO ENGAGE IN INTELLIGENT, INFORMED DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS VIDEO AND THE DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT ON THIS LINK:
DOWNLOAD THE OFFICIAL DELEGATE SELECTION PLAN: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/files/
THE FIRST THREE ITEMS SEEM TO CREATE A SECOND CLASS OF CAUCUS PARTICIPANT:
ITEM #1:
10% of delegates will be chosen by participants in the virtual caucus regardless of the number of participants.
PAGE 7
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/423874068422597/
ITEM #2:
The preferences of the participants in the virtual caucuses will be tabulated according to a different algorithm than the preferences of those who participate in-person. PAGES 7-8
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/423955361747801/
ITEM #3:
It seems that participants in the virtual caucuses will not have the opportunity to choose specific delegates to represent them at the district and state conventions. Instead, they will be represented by an "allotment" of delegates, that will be chosen by whom?
PAGE 7
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/423960868413917/
ITEM #4:
TECHNOLOGICAL CHOICES FOR VIRTUAL CAUCUSES
The specifics of the choice of technology to be used to facilitate the virtual caucuses has not yet been chosen. PLEASE COMMENT regarding the possibilities and the potential benefits and problems associated with different methods for the virtual caucuses.
PAGE 6
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/424860241657313/
ITEM #5:
EITHER VIRTUAL OR IN-PERSON, NOT BOTH.
People will (obviously) only be permitted to participate in EITHER the virtual or in-person caucuses (not both), but how will that actually work? How with the correct information get to the local in-person caucuses and what kind of difficulties might occur on the ground on Monday, February 3, 2019?
PLEASE COMMENT BELOW...
PAGE 6
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/424865588323445/
ITEM #6:
"AT THE DISCRETION OF THE STATE CHAIR"
Really?
PAGE 7
PLEASE COMMENT BELOW...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/424879598322044/
ITEM #7:
There seems to be NO discussion of a PERMANENTLY RECORDED paper trail for participants in the virtual caucuses.
DOES NOT EXIST
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425434624933208/
ITEM #8:
Temporary or long-term storage of voter records?
PAGE 8
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425446514932019/
ITEM #9:
How will the "Presidential Preference Cards" look, how will they function, and how will they be handled and stored, and why may they be destroyed so soon?
PAGE 2
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425450641598273/
ITEM #10:
CAUCUS results will be tabulated electronically and sent securely.
PAGE 8
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425457368264267/
ITEM #11:
Realign with other members to form a viable preference group.
Please tell me if I am wrong...
HERE IS A BRAIN BENDER OF AN EXAMPLE:
In a caucus location that is slated to choose 3 delegates, let's say that the leading candidate got 16%, so no candidate would be viable in the first round.
It appears that in the second round all 100% of the caucus goers could then align with "no preference" and so all 3 of the delegates would be unpledged. Or 100% could align with any of the candidates and that candidate would win all 3 delegates.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/430217994454871/
I do not profess to be a legal scholar, so I WELCOME any constructive criticism regarding the information presented in the video below or in any of the posts below. I only seek to expose the accurate facts of the situation regarding the Iowa Caucuses. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at 310-619-3055
1. Raise awareness of these changes.
2. Help everyone understand these changes.
3. Take action against the changes that are problematic.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS GROUP IS TO ENGAGE IN INTELLIGENT, INFORMED DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS VIDEO AND THE DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT ON THIS LINK:
DOWNLOAD THE OFFICIAL DELEGATE SELECTION PLAN: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/files/
THE FIRST THREE ITEMS SEEM TO CREATE A SECOND CLASS OF CAUCUS PARTICIPANT:
ITEM #1:
10% of delegates will be chosen by participants in the virtual caucus regardless of the number of participants.
PAGE 7
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/423874068422597/
ITEM #2:
The preferences of the participants in the virtual caucuses will be tabulated according to a different algorithm than the preferences of those who participate in-person. PAGES 7-8
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/423955361747801/
ITEM #3:
It seems that participants in the virtual caucuses will not have the opportunity to choose specific delegates to represent them at the district and state conventions. Instead, they will be represented by an "allotment" of delegates, that will be chosen by whom?
PAGE 7
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/423960868413917/
ITEM #4:
TECHNOLOGICAL CHOICES FOR VIRTUAL CAUCUSES
The specifics of the choice of technology to be used to facilitate the virtual caucuses has not yet been chosen. PLEASE COMMENT regarding the possibilities and the potential benefits and problems associated with different methods for the virtual caucuses.
PAGE 6
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/424860241657313/
ITEM #5:
EITHER VIRTUAL OR IN-PERSON, NOT BOTH.
People will (obviously) only be permitted to participate in EITHER the virtual or in-person caucuses (not both), but how will that actually work? How with the correct information get to the local in-person caucuses and what kind of difficulties might occur on the ground on Monday, February 3, 2019?
PLEASE COMMENT BELOW...
PAGE 6
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/424865588323445/
ITEM #6:
"AT THE DISCRETION OF THE STATE CHAIR"
Really?
PAGE 7
PLEASE COMMENT BELOW...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/424879598322044/
ITEM #7:
There seems to be NO discussion of a PERMANENTLY RECORDED paper trail for participants in the virtual caucuses.
DOES NOT EXIST
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425434624933208/
ITEM #8:
Temporary or long-term storage of voter records?
PAGE 8
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425446514932019/
ITEM #9:
How will the "Presidential Preference Cards" look, how will they function, and how will they be handled and stored, and why may they be destroyed so soon?
PAGE 2
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425450641598273/
ITEM #10:
CAUCUS results will be tabulated electronically and sent securely.
PAGE 8
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/425457368264267/
ITEM #11:
Realign with other members to form a viable preference group.
Please tell me if I am wrong...
HERE IS A BRAIN BENDER OF AN EXAMPLE:
In a caucus location that is slated to choose 3 delegates, let's say that the leading candidate got 16%, so no candidate would be viable in the first round.
It appears that in the second round all 100% of the caucus goers could then align with "no preference" and so all 3 of the delegates would be unpledged. Or 100% could align with any of the candidates and that candidate would win all 3 delegates.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ElectionIntegrityIowa/permalink/430217994454871/
I do not profess to be a legal scholar, so I WELCOME any constructive criticism regarding the information presented in the video below or in any of the posts below. I only seek to expose the accurate facts of the situation regarding the Iowa Caucuses. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at 310-619-3055
| iowa_caucus_info_flyer.pdf |
On February 11, 2019, the Iowa Democratic Party published a public notice of the NEW rules that will govern the manner in which the Iowa caucuses will be conducted in the 2020 Presidential election. At the time of their announcement of these historical changes, a 30 day period began in which comments can be submitted to the party.
“We invite Iowans to look at these proposals and give us their feedback so that together we can make the 2020 Iowa Democratic Party caucuses the most successful yet,” said Iowa Democratic Party Chairperson Troy Price.
The last day for public comments was March 13, 2019. In their own words, the Iowa Democratic Party stated that the proposed changes would be "the most historic changes to the caucus process since its creation in 1972." These changes were included in the Iowa Democratic Party’s draft of the 2020 Iowa Delegate Selection Plan.
The current proposal is not a finished product. It may or may not pass muster with the DNC. On or before May 3, 2019 the Iowa Democratic party will submit both the draft plan and any comments collected from the public to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee for review. The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will then either approve the plan or request that changes be made.
What do you think of the proposed changes to the 2020 Iowa Caucuses?
Iowans Will Now Have the Opportunity to Participate in “Virtual Caucuses” – Giving More Iowans The Opportunity To Participate In the Caucuses Than Ever Before - WITH A FEW CAVEATS!
In Person Caucusing
The in person portion of the 2020 Iowa Caucuses will be held on Monday, February 3, 2020. The party will have to create a counting process where the votes coming into its 1,679 caucus sites are tabulated in an open and coordinated fashion with each round of voting in the caucus sites—where participants break off into groups for each candidate.
The in person portion of the 2020 Iowa Caucuses will be held on Monday, February 3, 2020. The party will have to create a counting process where the votes coming into its 1,679 caucus sites are tabulated in an open and coordinated fashion with each round of voting in the caucus sites—where participants break off into groups for each candidate.
Virtual Caucusing
One of the biggest complaints about the Iowa caucuses has been about accessibility. Caucusing takes a long time, especially for Democrats. It takes place in the evening, with no set duration, making it difficult for parents with young children or voters who work at night to participate.
Over the course of six days, registered Democrats who have signed up with the Iowa Democratic Party will be able to participate in one of six virtual caucuses by phone or smart device. There will be six virtual caucuses scheduled at different times and dates in the last week leading up to the caucus, including one that is simultaneous to the actual precinct caucuses. Virtual caucus-goers will be able to rank up to five choices for president. The total result of the six caucuses will account for 10% of Iowa’s caucus delegates. Ranked choice voting will be a component of the virtual caucuses. Virtual caucus-goers will submit their ranked preferences and the realignment process will commence and continue until preferences are sorted to candidates above the 15 percent viability threshold.
So instead of taking an initial vote, determining “nonviable” candidates, and redistributing their support to others via physical grouping in the room, as occurs in the traditional caucus, participants in “virtual caucuses” will rank their five presidential favorites and a mechanical process of ranked-choice voting will redistribute votes for nonviable candidates.
One detail that is troublesome is that 10 percent of the “state delegate equivalents” — the official measurement of winners and losers in the caucus — will be reserved for “virtual caucus” participants. That arbitrary number means that votes cast in the virtual caucuses would be weighted differently than the in-person caucuses, accounting for roughly 10 percent of the overall total delegates. The delegates are to be awarded by the congressional district of the participant.
Voters cannot participate in both the in-person and the virtual caucus. They must cast their votes by one or the other method. Participants in the virtual caucuses must pre-register to participate and will not be eligible to participate in person at a precinct caucus. The caucuses will either be tele-caucuses or other on-line mechanism.
Each of the virtual caucuses will use preferential voting (i.e. the participants will rank their candidate preference — giving at least her top five candidates — including uncommitted). These preferences will be used to allocate an additional pool of delegates (representing 10% of the delegate totals at the district and state conventions). The first choice preference for each candidate will be counted and (starting at the bottom) the votes for non-viable candidates will be reallocated until only viable candidates remain. At that point, the pool of delegates for the district and state conventions will be allocated with the campaigns designating individuals to serve in those delegate positions. Viability will be determined by congressional district.
Despite what it states below (screen shot from the official document) voters must register to participate in the virtual caucuses by December 31, 2019.
One of the biggest complaints about the Iowa caucuses has been about accessibility. Caucusing takes a long time, especially for Democrats. It takes place in the evening, with no set duration, making it difficult for parents with young children or voters who work at night to participate.
Over the course of six days, registered Democrats who have signed up with the Iowa Democratic Party will be able to participate in one of six virtual caucuses by phone or smart device. There will be six virtual caucuses scheduled at different times and dates in the last week leading up to the caucus, including one that is simultaneous to the actual precinct caucuses. Virtual caucus-goers will be able to rank up to five choices for president. The total result of the six caucuses will account for 10% of Iowa’s caucus delegates. Ranked choice voting will be a component of the virtual caucuses. Virtual caucus-goers will submit their ranked preferences and the realignment process will commence and continue until preferences are sorted to candidates above the 15 percent viability threshold.
So instead of taking an initial vote, determining “nonviable” candidates, and redistributing their support to others via physical grouping in the room, as occurs in the traditional caucus, participants in “virtual caucuses” will rank their five presidential favorites and a mechanical process of ranked-choice voting will redistribute votes for nonviable candidates.
One detail that is troublesome is that 10 percent of the “state delegate equivalents” — the official measurement of winners and losers in the caucus — will be reserved for “virtual caucus” participants. That arbitrary number means that votes cast in the virtual caucuses would be weighted differently than the in-person caucuses, accounting for roughly 10 percent of the overall total delegates. The delegates are to be awarded by the congressional district of the participant.
Voters cannot participate in both the in-person and the virtual caucus. They must cast their votes by one or the other method. Participants in the virtual caucuses must pre-register to participate and will not be eligible to participate in person at a precinct caucus. The caucuses will either be tele-caucuses or other on-line mechanism.
Each of the virtual caucuses will use preferential voting (i.e. the participants will rank their candidate preference — giving at least her top five candidates — including uncommitted). These preferences will be used to allocate an additional pool of delegates (representing 10% of the delegate totals at the district and state conventions). The first choice preference for each candidate will be counted and (starting at the bottom) the votes for non-viable candidates will be reallocated until only viable candidates remain. At that point, the pool of delegates for the district and state conventions will be allocated with the campaigns designating individuals to serve in those delegate positions. Viability will be determined by congressional district.
Despite what it states below (screen shot from the official document) voters must register to participate in the virtual caucuses by December 31, 2019.
Streamlined Realignment
Under the Iowa Democratic Party proposal, only members of non-viable groups will be allowed to realign in their precinct caucuses. For viable preference groups, their first alignment numbers will be locked and can only increase if members of non-viable groups choose to join.
Under the Iowa Democratic Party proposal, only members of non-viable groups will be allowed to realign in their precinct caucuses. For viable preference groups, their first alignment numbers will be locked and can only increase if members of non-viable groups choose to join.
Recount/Recanvass
Presidential campaigns will be able to ask for a recount of the caucus results either by congressional district or statewide if they can show that the result could affect the allocation of delegates to the national convention. There will also be a paper trail added. Not only will caucus-goers walk the room as they have traditionally done, but they will additionally express their preference on paper as well to aid in any recounts that may become necessary. To aid in this effort, presidential preference cards will be used to record what happens in each precinct caucus, while virtual caucus preferences will be recorded electronically and preserved.
Candidates can ask for a review/recount of the results from an individual precinct (i.e. for miscalculation of the allocation of delegates or mistakenly determining viability threshold) or at the district or state-wide levels (mis-adding the results from the precincts). Any request must be made shortly after the caucuses (by February 7) with the final result to be issued by the end of the month.
Presidential campaigns will be able to ask for a recount of the caucus results either by congressional district or statewide if they can show that the result could affect the allocation of delegates to the national convention. There will also be a paper trail added. Not only will caucus-goers walk the room as they have traditionally done, but they will additionally express their preference on paper as well to aid in any recounts that may become necessary. To aid in this effort, presidential preference cards will be used to record what happens in each precinct caucus, while virtual caucus preferences will be recorded electronically and preserved.
Candidates can ask for a review/recount of the results from an individual precinct (i.e. for miscalculation of the allocation of delegates or mistakenly determining viability threshold) or at the district or state-wide levels (mis-adding the results from the precincts). Any request must be made shortly after the caucuses (by February 7) with the final result to be issued by the end of the month.
Caucus Night Results are Locked
The allocation of national delegates will now be determined by the results on caucus night, not as a result of the convention process. This means that once the precinct round is complete, the delegate allocation is complete. Once the initial caucuses have occurred, there can be no more changes on the margins as realignment based on viability occurs at the county, district and state conventions. The selection of actual people to fill those delegate slots may be affected but the candidate to who delegates are pledged will not.
In prior years, the candidates received a proportional number of county convention delegates, and "state delegate equivalents." The exact delegate selection then continued at the county and state conventions later in the year, before the nominating convention, and generally reflected the presidential preference vote. In 2020, each viable candidate will receive a proportional number of Iowa's delegates based on the final results of the preference vote.
The DNC rules require the Iowa Democratic Party to release more than just the state delegate equivalents on caucus night. Rather, the Iowa Democratic Party will now release the raw voter counts on the first alignment, the raw voter counts on the second alignment, and the state delegate equivalents earned by each campaign, AND, TO BE CLEAR: the apportionment of national convention delegates will be based ONLY on the state delegate equivalents earned on caucus night. THIS WILL DRAMATICALLY ALTER THE IMPACT OF THE SUBSEQUENT COUNTY AND STATE CONVENTIONS.
The allocation of national delegates will now be determined by the results on caucus night, not as a result of the convention process. This means that once the precinct round is complete, the delegate allocation is complete. Once the initial caucuses have occurred, there can be no more changes on the margins as realignment based on viability occurs at the county, district and state conventions. The selection of actual people to fill those delegate slots may be affected but the candidate to who delegates are pledged will not.
In prior years, the candidates received a proportional number of county convention delegates, and "state delegate equivalents." The exact delegate selection then continued at the county and state conventions later in the year, before the nominating convention, and generally reflected the presidential preference vote. In 2020, each viable candidate will receive a proportional number of Iowa's delegates based on the final results of the preference vote.
The DNC rules require the Iowa Democratic Party to release more than just the state delegate equivalents on caucus night. Rather, the Iowa Democratic Party will now release the raw voter counts on the first alignment, the raw voter counts on the second alignment, and the state delegate equivalents earned by each campaign, AND, TO BE CLEAR: the apportionment of national convention delegates will be based ONLY on the state delegate equivalents earned on caucus night. THIS WILL DRAMATICALLY ALTER THE IMPACT OF THE SUBSEQUENT COUNTY AND STATE CONVENTIONS.
More Information Released
The Iowa Democratic Party plans to release the raw totals from the first alignment, final alignment and the state delegate equivalents earned by each presidential preference group. State delegate equivalents will be used to determine the allocation of national delegates.
The Iowa Democratic Party plans to release the raw totals from the first alignment, final alignment and the state delegate equivalents earned by each presidential preference group. State delegate equivalents will be used to determine the allocation of national delegates.
A lot of work must be done to make these proposals a reality before the 2020 caucuses begin.
The following excerpts are from this TruthDig article.
The biggest challenge is not what will likely draw the early headlines: that Iowa likely will be conducting online voting in 2020’s caucuses. Nor will it concern what online technology, vendor, security and authentication would be used. Instead, the party will have to create a counting process where the votes coming into its 1,679 caucus sites are electronically tabulated in an open and coordinated fashion with each round of voting in the caucus sites—where participants break off into groups for each candidate.
Under Iowa’s caucus rules, presidential candidates with less than 15 percent of the votes are excluded from subsequent voting rounds. The caucus ends when all of the remaining contenders are above that threshold. In a typical caucus, supporters of the apparently marginal candidates realign with others, literally by moving across the room to join other groups as the voting continues. To keep this event’s spirit alive, which the Iowa party and DNC say is crucial, the participation and tabulation of voting has to be sequential, coordinated, transparent and verifiable.
“That’s a big challenge, and I think you are further ahead in thinking about this than most people who are caucus participants,” Iowa Democratic Party executive director Kevin Geiken told this reporter. “Certainly not further ahead than we are of thinking about the problems that we have to solve. I don’t know what the actual answer will be with how this manifests on February 3 or earlier, if we start the [remote] participation process earlier. But those are the considerations we are putting into this.”
Geiken cited one example of the details associated with caucusing online.
“Let’s say we do a tele-caucus or an online caucus and we have it available starting the week before February 3. Just as an example here,” he said. “In order for us to feel comfortable going down that path, we would have to make sure there is a provider out there, a vendor out there, that can do that in a way that allows pre-registration, so we can see who is planning to participate on February 1, for example, at 7 p.m., versus February 1, at noon.”
Geiken said the process has to screen for people trying to vote more than once, keep track of who may have participated in early voting, make sure no one who participates is a Republican (unless they join the Democratic Party) and make sure the technology is secure. “That it is an unhackable” process, he said, “and I don’t know if there’s ever anything that’s unhackable.”
The biggest challenge is not what will likely draw the early headlines: that Iowa likely will be conducting online voting in 2020’s caucuses. Nor will it concern what online technology, vendor, security and authentication would be used. Instead, the party will have to create a counting process where the votes coming into its 1,679 caucus sites are electronically tabulated in an open and coordinated fashion with each round of voting in the caucus sites—where participants break off into groups for each candidate.
Under Iowa’s caucus rules, presidential candidates with less than 15 percent of the votes are excluded from subsequent voting rounds. The caucus ends when all of the remaining contenders are above that threshold. In a typical caucus, supporters of the apparently marginal candidates realign with others, literally by moving across the room to join other groups as the voting continues. To keep this event’s spirit alive, which the Iowa party and DNC say is crucial, the participation and tabulation of voting has to be sequential, coordinated, transparent and verifiable.
“That’s a big challenge, and I think you are further ahead in thinking about this than most people who are caucus participants,” Iowa Democratic Party executive director Kevin Geiken told this reporter. “Certainly not further ahead than we are of thinking about the problems that we have to solve. I don’t know what the actual answer will be with how this manifests on February 3 or earlier, if we start the [remote] participation process earlier. But those are the considerations we are putting into this.”
Geiken cited one example of the details associated with caucusing online.
“Let’s say we do a tele-caucus or an online caucus and we have it available starting the week before February 3. Just as an example here,” he said. “In order for us to feel comfortable going down that path, we would have to make sure there is a provider out there, a vendor out there, that can do that in a way that allows pre-registration, so we can see who is planning to participate on February 1, for example, at 7 p.m., versus February 1, at noon.”
Geiken said the process has to screen for people trying to vote more than once, keep track of who may have participated in early voting, make sure no one who participates is a Republican (unless they join the Democratic Party) and make sure the technology is secure. “That it is an unhackable” process, he said, “and I don’t know if there’s ever anything that’s unhackable.”
And all of these details are preludes to tabulating the votes, including what’s likely to be untold thousands of first-time caucus participants.
The Iowa party will have to design some kind of ballot or an interactive template for remote participants. That design, in an Iowa-style caucus, would likely resemble ranked-choice voting, several officials said. The DNC rules also leave to state parties to orchestrate the counting, which, in a modernized caucus, could involve multiple voting systems. The rules also require a capacity to audit and undertake recounts.
While the DNC is bullish about their 2020 reforms, government officials with experience administering elections are skeptical that so many changes can be well executed the first time they are introduced. A Florida election supervisor—now retired after decades of running elections in that state’s capital county—had a one-word reply when asked what could go wrong: “Everything!” he said. The first concern cited by a former state election director from a blue state was “authentication,” which refers to confirming voter identity and is part of the foundation for ballot security and custody.
While there are many coordination issues to be worked out surrounding authentication of voters, the sequencing of votes, tabulation and balloting records (for transparency and recounts), it was becoming clear that some version of an online interface offered the most flexibility for users and party officials —and that interactivity matches the pace and caucus process.
While there are many critics of online voting, there is one central feature in caucuses that makes the security challenges somewhat more manageable and akin to online banking. That key feature is Iowa’s caucus participants are not casting anonymous votes—unlike the November election. Thus, there are many tools available to confirm a voter’s identity and track online voting choices while guarding against electronic ballot box stuffing.
However, integrating the online tabulations with the rounds of physical voting at every caucus site will be challenging—requiring a sophisticated infrastructure. In election administration, generally speaking, new systems are not first deployed in the most high-profile and high-stakes races, because unintended errors are inevitable.
Iowa’s Democratic Party doesn’t have any comparable contest for test runs, a technical expert with Iowa’s Secretary of State office said. (That office is currently in GOP hands and does not have a history of assisting the state Democratic Party in administering caucuses.)
Geiken said the manpower and training challenges present an opportunity, because large numbers of Iowa Democrats are uniquely dedicated to their presidential caucuses. But that is further down the road. The next stage of this planning process—after the state party formally decides what remote voting pathway to take—is working with vendors to customize the needed technology.
The DNC has set goals and the state [party] must meet them, he said.
“That’s exactly where we are,” Geiken said. “But it is the right thing to increase participation.”
Even James Roosevelt III, who has been DNC Rules Committee co-chair for more than two decades, said the 2020 rules were “uncharted territory.” The DNC hasn’t been talking to private vendors or technical consultants, he said, because that is up to the states—as Iowa will soon do.
“We have not really talked to those people because it is up to the states to explore what methods they want to use,” Roosevelt said. “I would say that we are in somewhat uncharted territory here. We might end up for the next cycle having best practices that we have learned from various states in this issue. It’s probably true that Iowa is going to be the test of this, one way or another, since they are the truest caucus operation. I know that they are thinking actively on how to do this.”
Roosevelt said the DNC would encourage caucus states to do test runs, but elections, despite the best of intentions, inevitably have hiccups. However, there are few contests in the American political world that are as high profile and have as high stakes as the Iowa presidential caucuses.
“We did test runs on electronic voting when we chose the DNC chair two years ago. The test runs were all great. When we got to it [the actual vote], we had to go to paper ballots because the electronic system didn’t work when everybody was online,” he said, then laughing.
“We know, from all IT [information technology], we’ll get to a point where there’s a version that really works the way we envisioned it. But it probably isn’t 1.0 or 2.0.”
SOURCE:
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/radical-changes-are-coming-to-the-iowa-caucuses/
What do you think of the proposed changes to the 2020 Iowa Caucuses?
Iowa will have fewer delegates to the national convention in 2020 than they had in 2016.
According to the draft proposal, Iowa Democrats will have a total of 49 delegates apportioned to the state for 2020. That is three delegates fewer than the 52 total delegates the party had in 2016. As in 2016, there will be eight superdelegates in 2020 in the Iowa delegation, leaving 41 delegates at stake on caucus night next year. Of those 41 pledged delegates, there will be nine at-large delegates, 27 congressional district delegates and five party leader and elected official (PLEO) delegates.
The rules still seem to be slanted in favor of the leading candidate(s).
"A candidate who receives 15-17% of the first preference raw vote in a district (or state-wide) will probably get 20% in some precincts (including potentially in the district-wide vote after second preferences are included) but 12% in other precincts. As a result, such candidates who would win delegates based on the raw vote numbers, may find themselves with only 10-11% of the state delegate equivalents and thereby win no delegates. In past caucuses, there have been some candidates who were strong enough to win delegates in some precincts with several notable candidates breaking 10% in state delegate equivalents but not the 15% needed to actually win national convention delegates (Birch Bayh in 1976, George McGovern in 1984, and Dick Gephardt in 2004). Particularly, if there were a 10+ candidate field, I could see the top two candidates getting in the low 20s by raw vote but getting near 40% in state delegate equivalents as the third, fourth, and fifth place candidates only manage to break the 15% threshold in some precincts even while breaking or nearing that level in the state-wide raw vote."
SOURCE:
http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/6932/
SOURCE:
http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/6932/
Voters who participate in the virtual caucuses may or may not enjoy equal representation as those who participate in person.
The allocation of delegate equivalents is weighted heavily in favor of the precinct caucuses over the virtual caucuses. Giving the virtual caucuses only 10% of the delegate slots at the state convention still seems to give the participants in the virtual caucuses less weight than they should have.
The 10% additional delegates to be assigned to the virtual caucuses is not guaranteed to translate equally to delegates relative to the delegate ratio in the regular, in person caucuses.
The Iowa Democratic Party expects around ten percent or so of the total caucus-goers to participate via these new channels. But that may or may not be right. Frankly, it is merely a guess.
Example:
Let's say that the same number of people (171,000 ) caucus in person as they did in 2016. But now let's say that an additional 20% of voters (34,200) participate in the 2020 virtual caucuses. How is it fair that those 20% additional voters generate only 10% more delegates. What is only an additional 5% of voters participate in the virtual caucuses, but generate 10% more delegates. How is it fair that those 5% virtual participants are over-represented?
The 10% additional delegates to be assigned to the virtual caucuses is not guaranteed to translate equally to delegates relative to the delegate ratio in the regular, in person caucuses.
The Iowa Democratic Party expects around ten percent or so of the total caucus-goers to participate via these new channels. But that may or may not be right. Frankly, it is merely a guess.
Example:
Let's say that the same number of people (171,000 ) caucus in person as they did in 2016. But now let's say that an additional 20% of voters (34,200) participate in the 2020 virtual caucuses. How is it fair that those 20% additional voters generate only 10% more delegates. What is only an additional 5% of voters participate in the virtual caucuses, but generate 10% more delegates. How is it fair that those 5% virtual participants are over-represented?
Voter representation (delegate count) will vary from precinct to precinct
Most significantly, the rules are still based on equivalent delegates won on caucus night (or in the virtual caucuses.) Raw vote (either initial preference or final preference) still does not matter. Thus, voters in precincts that have low attendance per state delegate equivalent will have a bigger impact than voters in precincts with high attendance per state delegate equivalent.
Campaigns will still need to focus on in person caucusing.
The campaigns are going to have to be careful in promoting the virtual caucuses. If they choose to push too many voters in that direction rather than typical caucus participation, then their virtual support may not efficiently translate into delegates during the next stage of the process.
Some observations and suggestions:
The virtual caucus won’t necessarily increase access for a lot of groups who have trouble making it to the live caucus. For example, the elderly, disabled, low income. Many of these people do not have access to the technology that will allow them to vote online and may not even have a smart device or internet access. A mail-in paper ballot would be more accessible and secure for all. They can tabulate the numbers ahead of time and add them in to the live caucus totals for each round.
Documents:
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/Caucus-Updates-_-Virtual-Caucus.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/Caucus-Updates-_-Precinct-Caucuses.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/Copy-of-Caucus-Updates-_-Recount.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/2020-more-caucus-documents/
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Caucus-to-Convention-Plan-toplines.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-Delegate-Selection-Plan-Attachment-2-District-Level-National-Delegate-petition.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-DSP-Attachment-1-AA-Committee-Members.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-DSP-Attachment-3-Iowa-Code.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-DSP-Attachment-4-Media-Plan.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/Caucus-Updates-_-Precinct-Caucuses.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/Copy-of-Caucus-Updates-_-Recount.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/2020-more-caucus-documents/
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Caucus-to-Convention-Plan-toplines.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-Delegate-Selection-Plan-Attachment-2-District-Level-National-Delegate-petition.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-DSP-Attachment-1-AA-Committee-Members.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-DSP-Attachment-3-Iowa-Code.pdf
https://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/2020-Iowa-DSP-Attachment-4-Media-Plan.pdf
Iowa Democratic Party
5661 Fleur Drive
Des Moines, Iowa 50321
515-244-7292
info@iowademocrats.org
5661 Fleur Drive
Des Moines, Iowa 50321
515-244-7292
info@iowademocrats.org
The most credible reporting on this topic has been done by:
STEVEN ROSENFELD
Steven Rosenfeld is a senior writing fellow and the editor and chief correspondent of Voting Booth, a project of the Independent Media Institute. He is a national political reporter focusing on democracy issues. He has reported for nationwide public radio networks, websites, and newspapers and produced talk radio and music podcasts. He has written five books, including profiles of campaigns, voter suppression, voting rights guides and a WWII survival story currently being made into a film. His latest book is Democracy Betrayed: How Superdelegates, Redistricting, Party Insiders, and the Electoral College Rigged the 2016 Election(Hot Books, March 2018).
MORE FROM STEVEN ROSENFELD
STEVEN ROSENFELD
Steven Rosenfeld is a senior writing fellow and the editor and chief correspondent of Voting Booth, a project of the Independent Media Institute. He is a national political reporter focusing on democracy issues. He has reported for nationwide public radio networks, websites, and newspapers and produced talk radio and music podcasts. He has written five books, including profiles of campaigns, voter suppression, voting rights guides and a WWII survival story currently being made into a film. His latest book is Democracy Betrayed: How Superdelegates, Redistricting, Party Insiders, and the Electoral College Rigged the 2016 Election(Hot Books, March 2018).
MORE FROM STEVEN ROSENFELD
The information above was compiled by: James Roguski
310-619-3055
James.Roguski@gmail.com
Published March 4, 2019
310-619-3055
James.Roguski@gmail.com
Published March 4, 2019
ARTICLES:
https://iowademocrats.org/iowa-democratic-party-proposes-historic-changes-2020-iowa-caucuses/
https://iowademocrats.org/2020-caucuses/
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2017/12/09/major-reform-2020-iowa-caucuses-include-absentee-voting-public-vote-totals/934913001/
https://siouxcityjournal.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/iowa-democrats-looking-to-boost-caucus-participation/article_386e3eb9-18af-537f-88ed-9504e929a363.html
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/radical-changes-are-coming-to-the-iowa-caucuses/
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/01/14/big-changes-are-coming-iowas-2020-caucuses
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/01/radical-changes-iowas-2020-caucuses-major-consequences-democrats/
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/01/16/dnc-rules-chair-how-2020-caucuses-could-change
https://frontloading.blogspot.com/2019/01/invisibleprimary-visible-devils-in.html
https://www.salon.com/2019/01/30/why-the-2020-iowa-democratic-caucuses-could-become-a-definitive-showcase-for-online-voting_partner/
https://www.salon.com/2019/03/06/why-an-overlooked-digital-election-theft-controversy-offers-important-lessons-for-democrats_partner/
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/11/politics/iowa-democratic-caucus-changes/index.html
https://www.local10.com/news/politics/iowa-democrats-announce-sweeping-changes-to-2020-caucus-process
https://www.weareiowa.com/election/your-local-election/iowa-democrats-want-to-create-virtual-caucuses/1774189242
https://frontloading.blogspot.com/2019/02/iowa-democrats-release-draft-delegate.html
https://www.voanews.com/a/iowa-democrats-propose-virtual-caucuses-in-2020/4782832.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iowa-caucuses-2020-iowa-democratic-party-adds-six-virtual-caucuses/
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/theres-a-new-improved-iowa-democratic-caucus.html
http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/6932/
https://iowademocrats.org/2020-caucuses/
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2017/12/09/major-reform-2020-iowa-caucuses-include-absentee-voting-public-vote-totals/934913001/
https://siouxcityjournal.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/iowa-democrats-looking-to-boost-caucus-participation/article_386e3eb9-18af-537f-88ed-9504e929a363.html
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/radical-changes-are-coming-to-the-iowa-caucuses/
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/01/14/big-changes-are-coming-iowas-2020-caucuses
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/01/radical-changes-iowas-2020-caucuses-major-consequences-democrats/
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/01/16/dnc-rules-chair-how-2020-caucuses-could-change
https://frontloading.blogspot.com/2019/01/invisibleprimary-visible-devils-in.html
https://www.salon.com/2019/01/30/why-the-2020-iowa-democratic-caucuses-could-become-a-definitive-showcase-for-online-voting_partner/
https://www.salon.com/2019/03/06/why-an-overlooked-digital-election-theft-controversy-offers-important-lessons-for-democrats_partner/
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/11/politics/iowa-democratic-caucus-changes/index.html
https://www.local10.com/news/politics/iowa-democrats-announce-sweeping-changes-to-2020-caucus-process
https://www.weareiowa.com/election/your-local-election/iowa-democrats-want-to-create-virtual-caucuses/1774189242
https://frontloading.blogspot.com/2019/02/iowa-democrats-release-draft-delegate.html
https://www.voanews.com/a/iowa-democrats-propose-virtual-caucuses-in-2020/4782832.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iowa-caucuses-2020-iowa-democratic-party-adds-six-virtual-caucuses/
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/theres-a-new-improved-iowa-democratic-caucus.html
http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/6932/
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
In response to new rules for the 2020 election that were published by the Democratic National Committee in August 2018, the Iowa Democratic Party has put forth a proposal for the way in which the Iowa caucuses will operate in 2020.
According to the Iowa Democratic Party, these are some of the most substantial changes to the caucus procedures since they began in 1972.
Due to the fact that the Iowa primaries have a powerful impact on the Presidential elections, any changes to the Iowa caucuses also has a powerful impact upon the entire United States.
The Iowa Democratic Party has set a 30 day period within which they will accept public comments on their proposed changes. The deadline for public comments is March 13, 2019.
As a public service I have compiled a summary of the proposed changes and all of the pertinent official documents on the following web page:
http://www.PresidentTulsiGabbard.org/IowaCaucuses
Regardless of which Presidential candidate any individual voter may currently support, I encourage everyone take advantage of the convenient source of information provided by our grassroots support network in order to become more aware of the changes that are occurring in Iowa.
James Roguski
310-619-3055
James.Roguski@gmail.com
PLEASE REALIZE THE TRUTH:
Primary elections to select a party nominee are NOT what you think they are.
Rather than reflecting on the consternation everyday voters are having over the conduct of the Democratic presidential primary, the Democratic National Committee is doubling down on the assertion that the primary election belongs to the people who control the party — not voters.
The court recognized that the DNC treated voters unfairly, but ruled that the DNC is a private corporation; therefore, voters cannot protect their rights by turning to the courts:
“To the extent Plaintiffs wish to air their general grievances with the DNC or its candidate selection process, their redress is through the ballot box, the DNC’s internal workings, or their right of free speech — not through the judiciary.”
The court recognized that the DNC treated voters unfairly, but ruled that the DNC is a private corporation; therefore, voters cannot protect their rights by turning to the courts:
“To the extent Plaintiffs wish to air their general grievances with the DNC or its candidate selection process, their redress is through the ballot box, the DNC’s internal workings, or their right of free speech — not through the judiciary.”
In an attempt to raise awareness about the changes to the 2020 Iowa caucuses BEFORE the March 13, deadline I produced and circulated the videos below
(to no avail).
(to no avail).
or listen to this audio
(same info)
