Iowa Caucuses

Tonight, 200,000 Iowans will affect the outcome of the November Presidential election. In 2004, only six percent of eligible voters participated! Why should this small group of people have such a major impact on determining the president of the United States, just because they are the first to vote? This does not make any sense at all and although winning the Iowa caucus does not guarantee becoming president, it does have a large effect on it. This is just one state, and should not have such an important role. The few Iowan voters get so much media coverage, just because they vote first. This is definitely not the smartest way to elect the next president.

Also, the people who do partake in this Iowan tradition tend to be older white people who represent the extremes of each party (Reuters.com.) Not all political views are expressed in this ritual which is not fair to more politically conservative people. The media spreads these extreme opinions and more conservative people may conform to these reports. This enables the president to be determined not on what citizens actually think, but on what they are pushed to think.

This process should be done in every state simultaneously. This way, everyone expresses their opinion at the same time and no one affects anyone else’s opinion. The media will have to cover every state at the same time and will report on the national view instead of on just one state’s view.


This is an op-ed because it expresses an opinion on an upcoming event. It states what is wrong with the Iowa caucus and explains why. The opinion is backed up with facts and a solution is proposed to solve the problem. This article belongs in a newspaper like The New York Times or The Bergen Record. These newspapers definately cover the caucuses and will include editorials about them. It will have ones that support the caucuses and ones that are against them, such as this one above.