Caucuses Bring Power Only to Some in Iowa [not troops]

Source: nytimes

January 2, 2008
Caucuses Bring Power Only to Some in Iowa
By JODI KANTOR

DES MOINES — Jason Huffman has lived in Iowa his whole life. Lately he has been watching presidential debates on the Internet, discussing what he sees with friends and relatives. But when fellow Iowans choose among presidential candidates on Thursday night, he will not be able to vote, because he is serving with the National Guard in western Afghanistan.

“Shouldn’t we at least have as much influence in this as any other citizen?” Captain Huffman wrote in an e-mail interview.

He is far from the only Iowan who will not be able to participate. Because the caucuses, held in the early evening, do not allow absentee voting, they tend to leave out nearly entire categories of voters: the infirm, soldiers on active duty, medical personnel who cannot leave their patients, parents who do not have baby sitters, restaurant employees on the dinner shift, and many others who work in retail, at gas stations and in other jobs that require evening duty.

As in years past, voters must present themselves in person, at a specified hour, and stay for as long as two. And if these caucuses are anything like prior ones, only a tiny percentage of Iowans will participate. In 2000, the last year in which both parties held caucuses, 59,000 Democrats and 87,000 Republicans voted, in a state with 2.9 million people. In 2004, when the Republicans did not caucus, 124,000 people turned out for the Democratic caucuses.

The rules are so demanding that even Ray Hoffman, chairman of the Iowa Republican Party and a resident of Sioux City, cannot caucus on Thursday night, because he has to be in Des Moines on party business. ............

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/us/politics/02vote.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

I heard a discussion on CSPAN the other day with representatives of most of the Dem campaigns and one of the panelists brooght this up. There should be a way for people to vote absentee.

However, they'd be unable to change to another candidate, which can be done in person.

Pick your top 3 choices--ought to be sufficient. Or rate the entire list by order of preference. It's not rocket science. People are just too defensive of "we've always done it this way", even when it no longer serves the ostensible purpose, but only allows those with the levers to game the system and leaves the general population out in the cold...

shakes head sadly.

Of course, so is the New Hampshire primary. Two events given consideration all out of proportion to their actual reflection of the nation's mood, priorities, and so forth. But because the media (and let's face it, us too) give it such outsize attention, the candidates have no choice but to buy into the hype and hysteria.

that is, the white (upper) middle class and rich voters. No poor or infirm.

There are a LOT of troops who don't know how to use an absentee ballot in General Elections, either. I think it's sad that Iowan soldiers that are deployed or stationed away from Iowa do not get a say in the Primary.

Meanwhile, the MSM make sure that the voting public know as little as possible about the roots and consequences of war.