The 2020 election cycle got off to a rocky start, to say the least. The ineffective leadership on display among Democrats in Iowa brought up a lot of serious questions. Who actually won the most votes, and why wasn’t he the winner? What does an effective nomination process look like? And why does Iowa get to go first?
Conservatives may not seem to have much at stake in this current contest, but they cannot allow this last question to gain any traction. The first state to hold primaries or caucuses has an incredibly important role in narrowing down the number of candidates and setting the tone for what’s to come. If we want faith-based voters to have a voice, we must fight to keep Iowa in its prized place.
In Iowa, 77% identify as Christians and 28% evangelical Protestant — a far cry from a coastal state such as California (63% Christian, 20% evangelical) or Massachusetts (58% Christian, 9% evangelical Protestant). By putting Iowa first, we give voters who are guided by their faith a unique platform to speak their minds and shape the course of the nomination process. Giving this opportunity to another state would lessen the impact these voters have and likely skew the nomination process toward more secular candidates who don’t share American values.
South Carolina plays a similar role in this respect. It boasts an even higher percentage of faith-based voters: More than 75% of the population identify as Christian and 35% percent identify as evangelical. And like Iowa, it is one of the few states that holds its primary before Super Tuesday. If we cede demands to reorder the primaries, we’ll lose out on not just one but two opportunities for faith-based voters to have their say.
Rural voters will also lose out big time. Overlooked in the mainstream media and sneered at by political elites, the nearly 20% of Americans who live outside the cities and suburbs often aren’t given a chance to express their preferences. By putting Iowa and South Carolina at the top of the batting order, we’re empowering these voters to make a difference.
It might be easy for faith-based voters to overlook calls for reordering the primaries this year since the Republican nomination will go to President Trump. But by focusing exclusively on the immediate future (that is, keeping the president in office), we risk letting a matter of great importance slide through our hands. If the Democrats succeed in reordering the primaries, they’ll have successfully silenced the voices of faith-based voters. No longer will states where faith is a guiding value lead the way. Instead, we’ll be left with a confused jumble of voices and values that don’t reflect the hope and promise of our nation.
As conservatives, we are lucky to have in office a president who defends the faith-based values that made our country great. Not only does Trump have a remarkable record on pro-life policy, but he also has led the way on criminal justice reform and created an economy where millions of Americans can create jobs and realize their dreams.
And part of the reason Trump sits where he does today is because of the votes cast for him by faith-based voters in the Iowa caucuses and South Carolina primaries in 2016. In Iowa, he came in just behind Sen. Ted Cruz, securing 24.3% of the vote while Cruz secured 27.6%. In South Carolina, Trump won by a landslide, bringing in 32.5% of the vote — a full 10 percentage points ahead of Marco Rubio, who came in second. The influence of faith-based voters in these states went on to shape not only the outcome of the Republican primary but also the outcome of one of the most important elections of modern times.
I urge faith-based voters to show up at the polls come November. But in the meantime, I urge them to speak out against any attempts to change the order of the caucuses and primaries. This system works, and it has worked well for a long time. By sticking to it, we can amplify the voices of faith-based voters and keep our republic faithful to the beliefs that made it great to begin with.
Timothy Head is the executive director of the Faith and Freedom Coalition.
