The caucus system differs markedly from primaries, where voters cast a secret ballot. Under the caucus system, voters gather in a town-hall meeting format, where they talk about the platforms and issues of each candidate. When the voting begins, attendees divide themselves into groups depending on which candidate they support. Supporters of the other candidates then try to woo undecided voters to their side. The candidates win the precincts where more of their supporters turn up.
Critics of the caucus process, including the Clinton campaign, have argued that the system does not accurately reflect the will of the voters, since Democratic Party activists, rather than general voters, are more likely to participate in a deliberative caucus process. They argue that primaries have a longer voting window and allow for absentee ballots, unlike a caucus that is held at a set time.
On NBC’s “Meet the Press” this month, Rendell cited those arguments in claiming that the caucuses are “undemocratic.”
“We want primaries — that’s the way we elect presidents,” Rendell said. “We don’t have caucuses to elect presidents in the fall.”
Just prior to the Wyoming caucuses — which Obama won — Clinton told an audience in Cheyenne that “it isn’t any secret that a lot of people who vote for me have never caucused for me,” according to The New York Times. “It’s not an election.”
Supporters of the Clinton campaign have sought legal action to prevent some caucuses from going forward in Nevada.
A Clinton campaign spokesman did not respond to an inquiry seeking comment.
Some state parties are discussing ways to encourage more participation in the caucus system, but supporters say the caucuses award candidates who are the best organized, which is critical in the general election. They also say the process helps facilitate discussion over the issues facing candidates and energize their supporters far more than simply pulling a lever at a ballot box.
“A vote is different — you cast your ballot behind a couple of curtains,” said Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), a supporter of Obama, who won his state’s caucuses. “Caucuses are a social event and they breed enthusiasm in the party.”
In Iowa, where Democrats take perhaps the most pride in the caucus process, given its role in kicking off the presidential nominating season, 239,000 people participated this year. That broke the previous record, set in 2004, of 124,000 attendees, according to the state’s Democratic Party.
“I think the criticism this cycle of the caucus system is probably predicated on how you finished,” said uncommitted superdelegate Richard Machacek, a Democratic National Committee member and farmer in Winthrop, Iowa. Lawmakers have responded similarly.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), one of the most influential uncommitted superdelegates remaining, said his state’s January caucuses — in which Clinton won fewer delegates than Obama despite receiving a majority of the popular vote — represented a “tremendous sea change” and unprecedented participation in Nevada politics.
“If we’re going to change any of the rules it has to be [in the] next election,” Reid said to reporters earlier this month.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who is uncommitted in the race, said the process has its pluses and minuses, and added that Obama’s strong win in her state’s caucuses was “very impressive and will be a significant factor” in awarding her endorsement.
J. Taylor Rushing contributed to this article.
|
