On the Campaign Trail with Ed Tibbetts

Davenport Alderman Shawn Hamerlinck, 2nd Ward, said today that he’s running for the state Senate seat in District 42, which encompasses a slice of west Davenport and large parts of rural Scott and Clinton counties.

Sen. Frank Wood, D-Eldridge, holds the seat now. Hamerlinck’s running as a Republican.

Here’s my story on the Times web site.

Hamerlinck says he has a three-year record of fiscal responsibility at City Hall. And, when asked how a city alderman can connect to the mostly rural district, he points to his childhood on a cattle farm in Scott County.

“You can never take the cattle out of the cattleman,” says Hamerlinck.

Rep. Bruce Braley’s been picked to co-chair a committee that tries to move Republican congressional seats to the Democratic column.

Braley, a freshman representing Iowa’s 1st District, is one of three co-chairs picked for the “Red to Blue” program, which is run by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Braley, who won a seat in 2006 that had been in GOP hands for nearly 30 years, proved himself a prodigious fundraiser, especially among lawyers. And, says Jeff Giertz, his spokesman, there are some Midwest seats that are promising targets this cycle.

Roll Call, which reported the appointment today, quotes the DCCC as saying Braley’s knowledge of the Midwest will be helpful. Also picked as co-chairs: Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida and Art Davis of Alabama.

(10:05 a.m.) Phyllis Thede confirms she’s going to run for Rep. Jamie Van Fossen’s seat in Iowa House District 81.

“That is absolutely true,” she told me yesterday.

Thede stunned some folks in a losing bid against Sen. David Hartsuch, R-Bettendorf, in 2006. She wasn’t given much chance, yet lost by only 436 votes out of 22,000 cast in a decidedly Republican district.

Hartsuch, recall, had knocked off longtime incumbent Maggie Tinsman in the GOP primary.

Thede is going to make an announcement, and she stepped up fundraising toward the end of the year, according to reports filed this month. Thede has raised $1,145 since October.

Incumbent Rep. Jamie Van Fossen, R-Davenport, hasn’t announced whether he’s running for re-election.

UPDATE: Actually, Van Fossen emailed that he’s going to run again. Should be a good race.  

(10:20 a.m.) Interesting exchange between former President Clinton and a California TV reporter over the Nevada caucuses on Wednesday.

Clinton, while campaigning in Oakland, said that Nevada’s caucus system is giving some voters far greater weight than others.

“This is a one man/one vote country,” he said. “You should be offended by this.”

Here’s what’s at issue — and why it matters to Iowa:

The Nevada Democratic Party has set up at-large precincts at some casinos on the Strip so workers who can’t get to their home precincts can still participate in the caucuses on Saturday.

That’s prompted a lawsuit by the state teacher’s union, and the battle is seen in many quarters as a proxy fight between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Some of the top officials in the teacher’s union who filed the lawsuit are backing Clinton, while the at-large precincts are seen as a way to get more casino workers to the caucuses. Their union is backing Obama.

Anyway, the exchange between Clinton and the TV reporter (which you can find here) is an insight into the Clinton(s?) thinking about the caucus process. It’s also good theater.

Clinton is claiming that this system will give some voters five times the power as others (a claim that some media analysts are dismissing as exaggerated). 

There is no dispute, though, that he’s right the system strays from the one-person/one-vote concept.

That’s where Iowa comes in.

Not completely sure of the rules in Nevada, but in Iowa rural people have for years tended to carry greater weight than urban dwellers in the Democratic caucuses. That’s because the number of delegates parceled out to precincts is essentially tied to their support of Democratic candidates in the preceding gubernatorial and presidential elections. However, the proportion of people who show up at rural caucuses tends to lag behind turnout in urban areas. Thus, the relatively few rural people carry greater weight than their urban neighbors in the awarding of delegates.

I know, it’s confusing. But the idea is to reward precincts with strong Democratic performance. In fact, people who helped design the system say it’s not just rural people who carry greater weight, but also the poor who tend to turn out in lesser numbers, too.

The losers are people who live in counties with colleges, where turnout is relatively highest.

This isn’t really new. People who know the caucuses have known it for a long time. And you can argue all day about whether it’s right or not.

What’s interesting about the ex-president’s reaction, though, is how vehemently he is speaking out.

This may just reflect the politics of the day. Nevada is just a couple days away and this is a tight presidential contest. Or maybe Clinton’s comments are just more evidence of the long-term thinking about the value of the caucus system in the Clinton camp.

(9:30 a.m.) Can’t help but wonder how many Iowans are watching what’s going on in Nevada, Michigan and South Carolina and feeling a bit of longing.

The caucuses have been over for less than two weeks. The presidentials have moved on, and the race is just getting interesting.

In both parties.

The above mentioned states are weighing in, and they’ll be followed by nearly two dozen more on Feb. 5. And, yet, this thing could still be up in the air on Feb. 6.

This, from the Iowa perspective, can’t help but be a good thing. After all, it’s not in Iowa’s long term interests for the state to be seen as ”picking” the nominees. We essentially did that in 2004, and it looked — until New Hampshire — like Iowans might do it again in the Democratic Party this cycle.

Then came the upset — and for the first time in a long time we’re talking about who’s going to win the most delegates, not whose momentum will clear the field.

Reminds me of the 1976 GOP race between Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford that went all the way to the convention. It was a great race I followed, while in high school, like a pennant race.

If more states get a say then there’s going to be less rationale for people like Carl Levin and other Iowa-despisers to upset the current system. Doesn’t mean they won’t try, but this race will give them less ammunition.

That said, it’s an interesting thing to be watching a debate like last night’s Demo forum in Nevada from the sidelines.

There’s less pressure to watch the whole thing, to listen intently for the differences in nuance, to debate the results with friends.

Less pressure. But less relevance, too. Kind of an odd feeling, I think.

This isn’t a complaint. Iowans had the candidates mostly to themselves for months. If it were a Thanksgiving dinner, we’d have had second and third helpings. Now, the rest of the country is being served, too.

After the 2000 and 2004, the dinner was over not long after we were served and a lot of other folks were left wanting.

What’s happening now is a great thing for Iowa. But, more importantly, for the rest of the country.

(9:45 a.m.) Hillary Clinton continues to worry about the caucus system disenfranchising people. Eloise Harper on the ABC News blog reports here that while in Las Vegas yesterday the New York senator expressed concern about military people get left out in the cold.

“You have a limited period of time on one day to have your voices heard,” Clinton, D-N.Y., said. “That is troubling to me. You know in a situation of a caucus, people who work during that time — they’re disenfranchised. People who can’t be in the state or who are in the military, like the son of the woman who was here who is serving in the Air Force, they cannot be present.”

Nevada, like Iowa, has a caucus system.

This isn’t all that much different than what Clinton said in Iowa in the closing days before the Jan. 3 caucuses.

It should, however, be a sign to Iowans that if Clinton wins the presidency there’s going to be more than just her loss here to contend with when trying to renew the present system for 2012.

Iowans are cheering the big jump in participation – especially on the Democratic side – but there’s going to be enormous pressure to revamp the system. And in wartime, the idea that military are disenfranchised in one of the country’s most important nominating contests is going to be a hard thing to overcome.