print | email

This study group will be led by David Yepsen, political columnist for the Des Moines
Register who has covered the early stages of U.S. presidential campaigns in Iowa since
1976. We will examine controversies in the presidential nominating processes - the
calendar, debates, money - and discuss proposed changes to these elements.

Throughout the conversation, we will ask ourselves if there aren’t better ways of doing
this and the unintended consequences of making changes. Participants are encouraged to
bring their own ideas for changing these processes for discussion in the group. The
conversation is timely since the country is in the midst of the 2008 presidential
nominating campaign. Also, if alterations are to be made for the 2012 process, many of
those changes will begin with rules changes debates this summer at the national political
conventions.

Each week, we’ll begin our session by asking ourselves and our guests to review the past
week’s campaign developments and what they see coming in the days ahead. At the end
of each session, all guests will be asked to give a little career advice to aspiring politicians
in the group. People who want to be President of the United States should attend this
study group.

(Note: New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has been invited to attend the study group and
his office has said he will do so if his schedule permits. If so, the following schedule may
be adjusted - or we¹ll just call an extra study group someday.)

February 14: Overview.

David Yepsen. How has the presidential nominating system evolved in recent years? We’ll talk about the three elements of the group: the calendar, money and debates. Isn’t the candidate more important than party rules? What’s happened to party bosses? Who are the new bosses of the process today and what role do they play? How does a party’s desire to get the nomination fight over with early cheat many American voters of a meaningful say in who the candidates are?

February 21: A Republican View

Ron Kaufman, long-time member of the Republican National Committee from Massachusetts and a Washington, D.C. public affairs consultant. He was one of the key architects of President George H.W. Bush’s 1980 campaign presidential campaign. Most recently he was a senior behind-the-scenes advisor to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. He is a veteran of many GOP campaigns has been around Republican politics and rules fights for over 30 years.

Mr. Kaufman will also comment on the three focus-areas of the group – how the GOP nominating calendar works, the role of debates in the party’s contests and money. Why do Democrats seem to have most of the rules fights over their nominating process? I’d also like him to address the role of religious faith in GOP presidential politics and the effect Romney’s faith had on his candidacy.

February 28: A Democratic View

Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack brings us a number of unique perspectives. He served as governor of the leadoff caucus state for 8 years, got active in statewide caucus politics in 1987 as a volunteer for Joseph Biden’s campaign and was a presidential candidate himself last year. He is now a leader in Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. He will touch on the Democratic calendar fights, debates and money. Also, what changes does he expect to see made - or like to be made - to the 2012 nominating rules?

I’ll ask Gov. Vilsack to give special attention to the early money primary. Was this presidential race over before anyone cast a ballot? Money has always been a factor in election campaigns but has it become too great? How should the country fix it?

March 6: Future of the Republican Process

Sara Taylor served President George W. Bush as Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Political Affairs at the White House until last year. She will discuss how the 2008 GOP nominating calendar affected the outcome of the current race and the impact of the presidential debates.

She will discuss the changes, if any, she sees to the Republican nominating calendar for 2012. The states and national parties are finding it impossible to agree upon and enforce rules governing the selection process. Some are suggesting Congress and the next president craft a law dictating the schedule. Is this a good idea?

I’ve also asked her to comment two other factors in this campaign: The role of money in the GOP campaign and why Democrats are out-raising GOP candidates this cycle. Also, the growing numbers of younger voters and their tendency to vote in the Democratic contest.

Mar. 13: Democratic Rules

Elaine Kamarck is a lecturer in public policy at the Kennedy School. She is also one of the nation’s leading experts on the Democratic party’s nominating rules.

How did Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada come to have such an important role? What is their impact? Is it good or bad? What are the alternatives to these leadoff states? Rotating the starting states? Regional primaries? What role did states like Michigan, Florida play this year?

How can more Americans be given a meaningful say in the nominating process? Isn’t there an inherent conflict between the desire of the two parties to get their nominees quickly and the desire of all Americans to have more say in who gets nominated? How can the parties enforce their rules when states want to do something else?

Mar. 20 and 27 - No study groups

April 3: Future of the Democratic Process

Terry McAuliffe is a former chair of the Democratic National Committee and is the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Both roles have required him to raise large sums of money. I’ve asked him to discuss the role of money in politics and the prospects for any changes to the campaign finance system and rules.

Also, what was the effect of having the first woman, first African-American and first

Latino with credible chances of winning in this contest? What role has race and gender played and will it play in the fall campaign? And are national conventions still needed? Or is this the year when they mean something? What’s an alternative? Could conventions be changed to make them more useful to parties and voters? What is the prospect for making changes to the 2012 Democratic nomination calendar at the conventions?

April 10: The Process, Debates and the Media

Ken Bode is uniquely qualified to be a guest because of the various hats he’s worn. He’s now the Pulliam Professor of Journalism at DePauw University and was the Dean of the Medill School of Journalism. He was politics editor of the New Republic, a correspondent for NBC News, CNN and moderator of Washington Week In Review. Before his career in journalism, he served as research director for the McGovern Commission which established new rules to democratize the primary and caucus system for presidential nominations.

Can we find a better nominating calendar? Are all these debates a good idea? Who should be included in primary and caucus debates and how should they be selected? A commission tries to govern the format of general election debates. Should that group expand its mission into primary, caucus and pre-convention debates?

What should the nation’s news organizations do to improve coverage of the nominating process? What is the role of Internet technologies like blogs and social networking sites? Should the U.S. require more from broadcasters who use public airwaves?

April 17: Wrapping Up

David Yepsen. (This could be a back-up date for a guest speaker) We’ll also review the state of the presidential race and discuss our ideas for reforming the processes. As with other sessions, we’ll discuss my thoughts for things budding politicians and journalists should be doing with their lives now to prepare for those careers.