Jennifer Jacobs

The Des Moines Register

Santorum declared 2012 winner after initial count favored Romney

GOP officials expect changes to be made this spring

Summer straw poll also drawing criticism

DES MOINES, Iowa -- No remedies have yet been put in place to heal the Iowa GOP's black eye from the vote-count embarrassment that unfolded after the 2012 Iowa presidential caucuses.

Two years ago Sunday, Rick Santorum was announced as the official winner based on a certified vote, reversing Mitt Romney's eight-vote win announced after 1 a.m. on caucus night.

Both Republican and Democratic leaders say Iowa's leadoff spot in presidential voting is assured for the 2016 cycle, but beyond then, its privileged position remains precarious. The 2012 GOP debacle escalated ever-present criticism, and other states constantly maneuver in an attempt to grab the leadoff voting prize.

Iowa Republican officials say changes in caucus procedures will be made this spring. They've been carefully weighing options, working in concert with the national party, Iowa GOP Chairman A.J. Spiker said.

Another reason for the wait: Changes to the party constitution can happen only at the state convention, which happens every two years in June. And there will be some turnover in party board members and delegates by then, Spiker said.

"We didn't want any whiplash changes ... and sometimes that means you're a little slower," he said. "There are benefits to getting plenty of buy-in."

Criticism of caucuses

Meanwhile, the national reputation of the Iowa caucuses remains a mixed bag. Negative opinions tend to be based more on ideology or concerns about polarization, but there's also some distrust of the vote-counting process, strategists say.

On the Republican side, hard conservatives believe Iowa is critical to their candidates' successes. They don't think any other state on the map would vet the Republican field in their favor quite like Iowa, according to interviews with national strategists.

Center-right Republicans are conflicted. Some still see Iowa as a necessary hurdle; others don't.

And some want practical changes, such as a rule that would limit Iowa to one contest — the winter caucuses. They want to force a halt to the summer Iowa Straw Poll, which raises funds for the state party, and any possible copycat events.

The Democratic caucuses have shouldered criticism, too, for determining the winner with a math formula that calculates how many state convention delegates were won by only those candidates who got more than 15 percent of the vote.

The reluctance to do a raw body count harkens to 1983, when Iowa reached its political detente with New Hampshire: Iowa gets the first caucus. New Hampshire gets the first primary. It was understood that Iowa Democrats wouldn't make the caucuses look like primaries by reporting body counts, as is done in a primary, but New Hampshire Democratic officials have since said they're not worried about that.

There are calls for reform from both parties, like these observations from Larry Grisolano, an Iowa native who was director of paid media for the Barack Obama campaign in 2008 and 2012.

"Iowa will be better positioned," Grisolano said, "if the Iowa parties can show very real reforms that convince their national decision-makers that untoward fundraising schemes will be policed, broad participation will be encouraged over ideological domination and that election night reporting procedures will be in place that instill confidence in the outcome."

Grisolano sounds a louder alarm than most top strategists.

"The contemporary threats to the caucuses could prove fatal," he said.

The latest shadow over the legitimacy of the caucuses stemmed from an exceptionally tight 2012 GOP race and what appeared to some politics watchers to be an inadequate or irresponsible voting night reporting process.

Romney was told he'd won Iowa by eight votes out of 121,503 cast, but that victory shifted 15 days later. When most of the vote-counting paperwork was turned in (eight precincts were missing), Santorum was ahead by 34 votes.

But the count snafus aren't what really bug Katie Packer Gage, who was Romney's deputy campaign manager.

"In the last couple of cycles, a few things have happened," Gage said. "One, the straw poll has proven to be a time and money sponge which has no real meaning in terms of the outcome of the nominating process.

The straw poll, a GOP fundraising event that takes place in Ames during the summer before the presidential caucuses, has come under increasing fire for being nothing but an expensive sideshow. Campaigns see who can bus the most supporters to Ames, but the event doesn't add much to the candidate vetting process or help predict who will become the nominee.

"Two, the caucuses have not proven to be any indicator of success for its winner when it comes to subsequent primary contests.

"And three, candidates competing in these contests are forced to focus an unusual amount of attention on social issues, which is not where most candidates believe they should be focusing their attention in the general election."

Other Republicans point to benefits from Iowa's role.

Romney strategist Kevin Madden said Iowa tests GOP candidates' ability to compete among base conservatives while also uniting the party with moderates and independents.

"If you skip Iowa, it's an admission that your candidacy has a structural deficiency," Madden said.

Caucus veterans can become boosters

Charlie Cook, the venerable nonpartisan elections analyst, said last month that after coming to every contested Iowa straw poll and caucus for the last 25 years, he now thinks the straw poll has jumped the shark. It imperils the caucuses, which he said aren't much better, given their history of unreliable results and encouragement of fringe candidates.

Republican Doug Stafford thinks the disdainful view of the caucuses is the outlier.

"Close elections like the 2012 caucus can cause issues, but that is true anywhere," said Stafford, executive director of RAND PAC, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul's political action committee.

Some political operatives contacted by the Register voiced misgivings about the caucuses — and many didn't want to go on the record. But a greater number are Iowa boosters, partly because they worked on a campaign here or intend to in 2016.

"The Iowa caucuses have a remarkable ability to win converts among those who have done a tour of duty in the Iowa precinct trenches," Grisolano said. "This is particularly true among Obama operatives."

Frank Luntz, a communications guru who does focus groups with national voters before major elections, said despite Iowa's flaws, he doesn't think Americans can imagine moving the caucuses.

"I love that people come together, say hello to their neighbors, and some parents bring their kids so they can see the process," Luntz said. "There is nothing like it."