An Open Letter To Fellow Iowa Democrats

To: Johnson County Democratic Legislative delegation, Johnson County Democrats Executive Board, IDP Chair Rita Hart, and anyone reading this.

The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee met today and voted on the early state calendar. While this is not final, it is important to note that Iowa did not receive even a single vote from the committee for the midwest slot in the early states, let alone for First In The Nation.

The likely order appears to be:

• South Carolina
• Nevada
• New Hampshire
• Michigan
• New Mexico
• Virginia

I am mostly satisfied with this, except for New Hampshire. As you remember, when we lost our place in the early states for 2024, we followed both the state law and the DNC calendar by having an early caucus for party business only, followed by a later mail in vote for presidential preference. In contrast, New Hampshire defied the DNC and scheduled a rogue First primary after being assigned the third slot. They should have faced consequences for that.

I ask each of you to join me in publicly accepting this outcome. It is long past time for Iowa Democrats to let go of the idea that we will get "the caucuses" as we knew them back.

To our legislators: I encourage you to publicly state that First As We Knew It is over, and to introduce and support legislation for an Iowa presidential primary, as our JCDems platform has supported in 2024 and 2026. (A thank you to Dave Jacoby for introducing a primary bill in 2025.) I also urge you to fight hard against any Republican legislation that would prevent us from complying with the DNC calendar and having our national delegation seated, or that would keep us from using absentee ballots in our nomination process.

To my fellow JCDems: I urge you to continue to share the nightmare of our attendance crisis with your friends in other counties. Johnson County is always happy to help other counties, but we need help from the rest of the Democrats in the state on this. No matter what our schedule is for 2028, we MUST have a system to reduce our oversized crowds, by getting the people who only want to vote for president out of the rooms. That will make the caucuses once again the neighborly and deliberative meeting that it was long ago.

To Chair Hart: I ask you to accept this outcome and say so in public, to encourage our statewide candidates to do the same, and to stand firm against the forces in our party who want to defy the DNC. The penalties are strict and severe enough that, even if we do schedule a rogue early contest, the candidates will not come to Iowa. That will both defeat the purpose and will cost us our seats at the national convention. 

I hope this distraction will soon be behind us and we can focus on the more immediate task of winning this year. Thank you all for your support and friendship.

John Deeth

Caucus To Convention Chair, Johnson County Democrats

Caucus 2028: Just One Ask

I'm trying hard to keep my eyes on the prize for 2026 - though, to be 100% honest, my enthusiasm level is somewhat lower than it would have been had a couple primaries turned out differently.

But we all know that my biggest job within the party is caucus season, and despite the greater urgency of 2026, 2028 isn't far from people's minds.

A number of Iowa Dems are already pointing to visits by potential 2028 candidates Pete Buttigeig and Mark Kelly as a sign that "the caucuses are not going away." (By "the caucuses," they really mean the excitement of the First In The Nation year before, not the actual caucus meeting night.)

I'm glad that big names are coming in now to help our candidates. But there is no 2028 nomination calendar yet. Things will change once 1) there is a calendar and 2) if Iowa Democrats, as many in the party are pushing, decide to violate that calendar.

I've long made my thoughts clear: we should let go of First once and for all, comply with whatever calendar the Democratic National Committee determines, end caucuses and have a primary, and build a new organizing model that does not depend on outside speakers, organizers, and money.

But that doesn't appear to be a majority opinion yet within the Iowa Democratic Party, and the top of the ticket disagrees with me, so for today I'm going to make just one ask: Whatever nomination process we have for 2028, whether we follow the calendar or break it, we absolutely need unrestricted absentee ballots, counted at equal weight to in-person votes. We need that for the caucuses to function, even if that means we are Second and not Absolute First.

I shouldn't be wasting time on this just 104 days from Election Day 2026. But this conversation is likely to heat up again soon. The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee is meeting again this weekend and may be taking a preliminary vote in the 2028 calendar as soon as Friday. Calendar expert and RBC watcher Josh Putnam writes: "it is unlikely that the RBC reverses course on the Iowa's caucuses. Again, that is not really a surprise." 

(Putnam knows this stuff even better than me. he is my only paid subscription and well worth it.)

The penalties for states and candidates that break the rules are automatic, more severe than ever before, and unlike the era before 2024, the DNC seems likely to actually enforce them.  I hope that will be enough to make cooler heads prevail. If not, we will likely be in a situation of "we can build it, but they won't come." 

The Screw The DNC And Go First Anyway crowd denies this, and that just becomes a Duck Season-Wabbit Season dialogue, so for the sake of the rest of my argument I will set that aside and work from a premise that a rogue First In The Nation Iowa will get the same level of voter interest that we saw in The Good Old Days.

My big concern is the overcrowding problem. To address that we need to talk about the absentee problem, which means we have to talk about the New Hampshire problem.

From the 1980s through 2020, Iowa and New Hampshire had an uneasy truce. Each state leaned on its First (what if 48 other states passed the same law) and split the difference. Iowa had the first caucus, followed by New Hampshire holding the first primary.

New Hampshire has historically held that absentee ballots turn a caucus into a primary, and if someone holds a "primary" before them, the New Hampshire Secretary of State has unique powers to move the date at the last minute. That's what they did in 2024, when they voted first, in defiance of the DNC. (Kinda sorta. It wasn't widely reported, but in order to get their national delegates seated, New Hampshire Democrats had to bend the knee to the DNC and hold a do-over party-run primary in April.)

For that reason, Iowa always resisted absentees - because First was considered more important than making sure everyone could vote. Other caucus states had absentees - but other caucus states were after New Hampshire, so New Hampshire didn't care. Only Iowans were left with zero early voting options. And no one in the Go First Anyway crowd has yet described an absentee process that will pass muster with New Hampshire.

Iowa's First In The Nation law does not actually say we vote for president first. It only requires that we elect precinct level party officers before other states vote for president. So Iowa Democrats were able to thread the needle in 2024 with a plan (first proposed in public by yours truly) that complied with both the DNC calendar and the actual wording of state law. We had an early caucus for party business only, followed by a mail-in party-run primary that was compliant with the DNC calendar. That's the approach I favor for 2028 - again, I would prefer a real, auditor-run primary, but that's only a long range goal as long as Republicans are in charge of any branch of state government.

Beginning with 2020, DNC rules have required an absentee voting process in presidential nominating contests. Iowa Democrats struggled with this in 2020. We invested months of planning in a phone-in "virtual caucus" system that was shot down by the DNC at the last minute, then we threw together a "satellite caucus" plan that still required attendance at an in-person meeting.

But in a 2028 scenario where we are already breaking the BIG rule about the date, will Iowa Democrats really have any qualms about breaking the rule requiring absentees?

The difference between the parties on absentee ballots for the caucuses is: Republicans pretty openly don't care if people who can't attend an in-person meeting get to vote. Democrats will say they care, but when it comes down to a choice between First and making sure everyone is able to vote, they will inevitably choose First and then pretend to feel bad about the voters who are excluded, saying things like "there's always next cycle."

It should go without saying - but too often doesn't - that making sure everyone can vote is more important than voting first or seeing presidential candidates in person. But let's again set that aside as I finally get to my real point.

In a scenario where we would have a caucus with the level of interest we have historically seen, absentee voting will be absolutely essential to making the caucuses in large precincts function.

I have written at great length about the overcrowding crisis in the past and don't need to repeat myself. And no, it is not "a good problem to have," as we are often told by activists from other counties. Once you get above about 200 people in the room, organization and deliberation is impossible.

Switching to an Iowa GOP style straw ballot vote, which seems to be a given at this point (absolutely no one wants to keep realignment and caucus math) would only make the Black Hole Of Calcutta a briefer experience. You would still need the gigantic rooms, you would just need them for a shorter time. You would still have to park just as far away and walk just as far - that is, if you're able to walk that far.

Saying it is only Johnson County's problem is both inaccurate - the problem is worst here, sure, but there are mega-precincts in at least a dozen counties - and does not solve the problem. 

This year has been all about the rural counties need to be seen and heard and shown up in. Well, this big blue county has some needs too. We need help with this. We are already using the largest physical spaces that exist in most precincts, often at great expense, and the rooms are still not big enough. And there are not more rooms available for splitting the largest precincts (the only idea anyone has offered us that, while it wouldn't work, at least acknowledges problem). The only way to fix the problem is to get a lot of the people who ONLY want to vote for president (roughly 90% of attendees) out of the room and at home with an absentee ballot. It'll make them happier and it'll make the handful of people who show up for the platform less miserable too.

My fear is that, in the pursuit of the bright shiny object of Absolute First, Iowa Democrats will once again throw the people who can't or don't want to attend in person under the bus, will cave to the Republicans and to New Hampshire, and once again require in person attendance to vote.

And at that point my community is not being treated as a team player, so I won't be an enabler anymore.

So, friends in the Screw The DNC camp, please at least give us early ballots, even if that means Screw The DNC And Go Second. I still believe we will get punished hard and that candidates won't come, but at least us volunteers on the ground will be able to run a functional event.

Now, can we get back to 2026 please?