Good Luck With That

Steve Buttry makes the case for taking away Iowa's first in the nation status in the Presidential race.  A sample:

The caucus system exaggerates the influence of small pockets of highly motivated extremists, such as the Iowa Republicans who gave Pat Robertson legitimacy in 1992, when he edged the elder Bush for second behind Bob Dole. Our nation is not well-served by a process that encourages extremists.
Iowans weave an illusion of democracy around the caucuses. But caucuses really are an undemocratic process. Far fewer people turn out for caucuses than for primaries. Iowans serving out of state in the military can't caucus. Homebound elderly and disabled people who could vote by absentee ballot in primaries can't participate in caucuses. Primary polls are open long enough for any working Iowans to vote, but if you have to work the evening of the caucuses, your vote doesn't count. Arcane rules, ad-hoc alliances and outright deal-making exaggerate candidates' advantages and weaknesses in a process that doesn't use the secret ballot. Iowa-caucus advocates claim some kind of virtue to the commitment required to go out on a cold January night to spend a couple hours arguing politics. But the fact is that participation is low and bizarre.
If you're not an Iowan, you can probably add a few more reasons: ethanol subsidies, farm subsidies in general, too much attention to the Iowa State Fair and the butter cow.

Ah, the Iowa State Fair and the butter cow.  Heck, the pictures of Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry eating corn dogs are enough to decide to drop the caucuses.  Anyway, the man is right, there is no real reason for the Iowa caucuses to be the first step in the nomination for the President.  But I'll make a sizable wager that we'll be looking to the Iowa caucuses as the first step to the nomination in 2016, whether they are ridiculous or not.