(CNN) At first glance, you might not think this headline from Friday morning is much of a big deal: "DNC planning to reject Iowa virtual caucus over security concerns."

But you'd be wrong. Let me tell you why.

What the Democratic National Committee's decision means, in the most basic of terms, is that Iowa's plan to hold "virtual" caucuses by phone -- a move aimed at expanding the number of people who can participate -- won't work. Why? Because of concerns, particularly in the wake of the 2016 Russian hacking of the DNC's email servers, that phoning it in, literally, could create the very real possibility of vote-tampering. (Iowa proposed the virtual caucus in order to meet the DNC's requirement that every state that holds a a caucus to implement some sort o f absentee voting process to allow people who can't show up in person to participate .)

Take one step back. The key difference between a caucus (like Iowa) and a primary (like New Hampshire) is this: In a caucus, people are required to show up at a designated place, group themselves by which candidate they prefer and then lobby others whose candidates don't have enough support to matter. In a primary, you go to your designated voting place, cast a ballot and leave.

The caucus is WAY more time-consuming. And that time commitment functions as a high barrier for entry for people who might not be able to get the time off from work or are not physically able to make it to a caucus.

Read More