Branstad says Iowa's straw poll 'outlived its usefulness,' but Paul's fans support it. Iowa GOP takeover: The implications

DES MOINES, Iowa — Establishment forces officially wrested control of the Iowa Republican Party from supporters of Rand Paul on Saturday, a development the victors said would help save the state’s first-in-the-nation presidential caucus from being marginalized and possibly spell the demise of the Ames Straw Poll.

The transfer of power to those loyal to Gov. Terry Branstad — which has been in the works for months but was completed on Saturday — increases the likelihood that center-right GOP candidates, such as Chris Christie or Jeb Bush, will choose to compete in the caucus. It also jeopardizes next year’s straw poll: Branstad said the annual ritual has “outlived its usefulness,” and other critics say it’s become a spectacle that raises a lot of money for the party but has little significance politically. Pro-Paul forces, however, enthusiastically support the event and want to keep it going.


For all the attention showered on the Iowa caucuses in the presidential sweepstakes, they suffer from a credibility crisis. It is fueled by the perception that the competition favors the most conservative candidates in the field or forces more moderate contenders to the right, damaging their prospects in the general election. Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee won in 2012 and 2008, respectively, only to lose the nomination.

( Also on POLITICO: Paul: Moderates aren't GOP's future)

The battle for control of the party was primarily an effort by Branstad to reestablish himself as the undisputed leader of Republican affairs in Iowa — perhaps most critically the future of the caucuses.

After the 2012 results, Ron Paul supporters mobilized at district-level conventions to take over the party — despite the fact he finished third on caucus night — and wound up controlling the delegation to the national convention.

Branstad, cruising to an unprecedented sixth term as governor, has spent the better part of the past two years sparring with A.J. Spiker, a co-chair of Ron Paul’s Iowa campaign who defeated the governor’s preferred pick to lead the state party in 2012. As chairman of the party, Spiker was publicly critical of Branstad’s legislative agenda. Establishment-minded donors refused to contribute to the state party as long as Paul people were in charge.

Their rivalry came to a head earlier this year.

( Also on POLITICO: Paul, Rubio differ on Iraq action)

At local conventions starting in January and continuing through April, the governor’s machine successfully mobilized supporters to elect a slate of 16 people to the GOP central committee, including a few loyal holdovers. This group, essentially the party’s board of directors, took over Saturday night. There is no longer a single Paul-aligned, libertarian on the central committee.

What it means for Paul

Part of the fear has been that the caucuses will be permanently damaged, and possibly even leap-frogged or ignored in 2020, if the Kentucky senator wins and then, like Huckabee and Santorum, goes on to lose the nomination or the general election.

But the more pressing concern has been that Paul supporters organizing the straw poll or setting the rules for the caucuses would tilt them in the senator’s favor and create an excuse for other Republican candidates to skip Iowa and focus on New Hampshire’s primary.

“They’re going to work hard to make sure that all candidates feel welcome,” Branstad said of the new central committee in an interview.

( Get the latest 2016 polling results from POLITICO's Polling Center)

The pro-Paul forces say they did not put up a concerted fight to stay in power because they want to focus on building an organization explicitly for Paul. Only three libertarians sought reelection at April district conventions, and all lost.

Twenty months out from the 2016 caucuses, the Kentucky senator is arguably the frontrunner in Iowa. His main opponents concede privately that the Hawkeye State is Paul’s to lose. And there is an argument — even some of his supporters are making it — that it’s actually a good thing for Paul that his team no longer controls the state party.

If they had, the argument goes, it would be much easier for opponents to claim the caucuses are rigged in Paul’s favor. The Branstad takeover, ironically, could legitimize a Paul win.

“It’s a huge benefit to Rand not to have us running the party,” said one Paul ally.

( Also on POLITICO: Dave Brat, accidental tea party leader)

Others see that as wishful thinking, saying controlling the GOP would be an obvious boon to Paul’s organizational efforts in 2016. They think Paul could be at a disadvantage if he does not have people inside the committee advocating for his best interests during discussions about everything from debates to party rules.

“It’s a power play,” said Drew Ivers, a co-chair of Ron Paul’s 2012 campaign in Iowa who stepped down as the state GOP finance chair when Spiker left. He complained that the establishment is maneuvering to help its own. “Unfortunately, this is about control and them wanting control.”

The governor’s allies counter that all the moves stem less from a desire to suppress Paul than a yearning to improve the party’s standing.

“We need to let people know that when candidates come to Iowa, they have a fair shake,” said David Chung, a member of the central committee who is staying on and plans to remain neutral again in 2016.

As the establishment forces gained traction in local meetings, the 34-year-old Spiker resigned in March and became a senior adviser to RAND PAC. The party’s central committee, still controlled by a pro-Paul alliance, chose to replace Spiker with Danny Carroll, a lobbyist for a Christian evangelical group who opposed Branstad in the 2010 Republican primary.

The new group is poised to replace Carroll as chairman in the next few weeks with someone closer to Branstad, according to multiple sources.

“If the new committee decides on another chair, then that’s the way it goes,” Carroll said when asked about the rumblings.

The new slate controlling the state GOP has the backing of a wide range of party leaders. Steve King, the congressman from northwest Iowa, stressed that it hurts the party’s image when one faction is in total control. He said there are strong social conservatives in the new cohort.

“That was the biggest driving force: to level the playing field,” said King.

In a report to the 1,442 delegates at Hy-Vee Hall, Republican National Committeeman Steve Scheffler touted work he’s done at the national level on rules to stiffen penalties for states like Florida that try to vote early. He said these new rules should allow Iowa to schedule its caucuses for February 2016, as opposed to January in 2012. This, he said, means that the Christmas holidays will not be interrupted again by campaigning.

“We are going to set the tone on who our next nominee is,” said Scheffler.

Branstad and Paul insisted publicly on Saturday that they have a good relationship.

“Every time I’ve come here, Gov. Branstad has been very gracious to me,” Paul said, downplaying the purge.

Privately, though, Paul supporters complain that Branstad has always said he prefers governors over senators as presidential candidates.

Asked about this, Branstad said he wants to be “a very good host governor,” suggesting that he is again likely to stay neutral through the primary.

“I’m focused on 2014,” he said. “I think Rand Paul can be helpful. I think he gave a great speech.”

Fate of the Ames straw poll

The big question now is what happens to the straw poll, a ritual that dates back to 1979. The next one would happen only a year from now, in August.

Right after Romney’s loss in 2012, Branstad announced that he did not think there should be a straw poll in 2016. “It has been a great fundraiser for the party but I think its days are over,” he said then.

The remark drew an immediate rebuke from Spiker, who said the party would go ahead with it.

In 2011, Rep. Michele Bachmann won the straw poll before flaming out and finishing sixth in the caucus. Romney, meanwhile, had invested heavily to win the 2007 version but decided to skip it altogether that year – and then went on to win the nomination.

The feeling is that the straw poll empowers the most ardent activists and thus elevates candidates who could not win in a general election. Iowa political hands say it is hard to imagine someone like Christie, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) or Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker winning at Ames, though George W. Bush prevailed in 1999.

Doing away with the straw poll might hurt Paul and Ted Cruz. The Texas senator would like be able to both raise enough money to bus people in and could demonstrate the intensity of his grassroots support.

Still, even within Team Branstad, there are differing opinions. The straw poll is a huge fundraiser for the state party, and it’s a fun time for those who go. Reporters love to cover it because it’s colorful and offers an early read on the GOP horse race.

Several substitute options are being discussed, such as a cattle call in each of the four congressional districts or another big event in Ames, but with no balloting. It’s also possible that the straw poll will go on just as it has before.

Paul allies argue that scrapping the straw poll would only create a vacuum that outside groups will move to fill. A socially conservative group or a super PAC might try to sponsor a replacement.

Even if the party cannot get rid of the straw poll, it’s easy to imagine more people skipping.

Santorum, who has been sharply critical of Paul and welcomed Branstad’s new central committee, did not make an effort to win in the straw poll last time and doesn’t plan to in 2016.

“I didn’t have a lot of money, and I just didn’t think that was a wise expenditure,” Santorum said in an interview. “If they have a straw poll, will I participate? I’ll probably show up and have a good time and get around and see people, but I’m not going to do anything different than last time.”