Citing the 2020 Democratic primary, the “total trajectory of the race changed when people that looked like me were able to be a part of the process,” said Yvette Lewis, the Maryland Democratic Party chair and a member of the committee, who is a Black woman. “Any time the trajectory of the race changes so significantly by the time you get to South Carolina, it means we need to look at what’s happening.”
Following the meeting, even Iowans could see their state could be in trouble. One longtime Iowa strategist watching the shellacking unfold said, “That was f—ing painful.”
Any change to the nominating calendar is far from certain. Numerous DNC members have expressed reservations about engaging in a divisive, intraparty calendar dispute amid an already-difficult midterm election year, with some suggesting the party could put off altering the calendar until 2028. If Joe Biden runs for reelection, as he has said he plans to do, the Democratic primary in 2024 will not be competitive.
The White House, which will hold enormous sway over the decision, has not yet weighed in.
Reordering the nominating contests is also a logistical nightmare, tangled up by state law and partisan legislatures, which often vote to set the date of their respective elections.
“The notion that it can be done in four years may be a little much,” said one committee member, granted anonymity to discuss the issue candidly. “It has everything to do with the hard work that is required at the state legislative level at each of these states.”
Even so, interest in changing the calendar and the process was evident. Mo Elleithee, a longtime Democratic strategist and RBC member, urged the committee to “open a very real discussion about whether there needs to be some changes to the ordering” of the states, “not to penalize any one particular state, but to have a calendar that reflects our values.”
Molly Magarik, another member, said “there’s a lot of nostalgia and there’s a lot of ‘this is how we do things,’” but that “social norms are switching around what people feel comfortable going to. A caucus is incredibly intimidating to people.”
“I can almost guarantee South Carolina and Nevada are not going to move, so they’ll stay in the early state window,” the RBC member, granted anonymity, said. “New Hampshire may have to by fiat of their legislature, so the real question is, what happens with Iowa?”
Iowa and New Hampshire have both been beset by complaints from Democratic activists that their demographics are not representative of the party’s electorate. Biden finished fourth in Iowa and fifth in New Hampshire, before going on to win the nomination.
But New Hampshire, by virtue of holding a primary — not an Iowa-style caucus —largely escaped the level of scrutiny that Iowa came in for on Saturday. Democratic Party activists have long complained that the caucus system employed by some states, including Iowa, reduces opportunities for elderly people, people with disabilities and those who work at night or on weekends to participate.
In 2020, several states that had previously held caucuses, instead shifted to primaries. But a handful of states and territories still currently hold caucuses, including American Samoa, North Dakota, Wyoming, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Notably, Nevada’s Democratic-controlled legislature voted last year to change its system from a caucus to a primary.
In Iowa, Democrats have long defended their caucus system, arguing that a small state with a caucus system rewards candidates with a strength in retail politics over campaign cash.
Scott Brennan, a former Iowa state party chair who sits on the Rules & Bylaws Committee, said after the meeting on Saturday that “it is clear that we have work to do as Iowa Democrats.”
He said, “We obviously need to educate the new and holdover members of the RBC as to the value of the Iowa caucuses, which are unique because of the level of engagement and activity from everyday Iowans.”
