Inside D.C.

You gotta love Iowa…

National pollsters hate trying to handicap the Iowa caucuses – they almost always get the end result wrong – but you have to hand it to the folks in Iowa because their caucuses never fail to surprise.  The first-in-the-nation February 1 candidate confabs were no exception, boasting record turnout – an estimated 350,000 participated – and 40% of the folks sitting in high school gyms, rec centers and living rooms were first-time caucus-ers.

When the dust settled in the wee hours of February 2, Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I, VT) pretty much split the pot, though former Secretary Clinton “won” the day in what experts say is the closest race in Iowa Democrat caucus history.  Clinton won just under 49.9% of the votes cast to Sanders’ 49.6%, with one lonely Des Moines precinct still to report.

On the Republican side, pundits were calling a two-candidate race – Donald Trump versus Sen. Ted Cruz (R, TX) battling for the hearts, minds and votes of conservative and evangelical caucus goers.  It’s now officially a three-man race.  Sen. Marco Rubio (R, FL), previously consigned to a “distant third place finish,” did what the pollsters hate, finishing significantly stronger than polling suggested or the other two candidates preferred.

On a percentage basis, Cruz won with 27.6%, Trump garnered 24.3%, and Rubio racked up 23.1% — less than 5% separating the top three vote-getters and only a single point or so difference between Trump and Cruz.  In a lot of polling, that’s pretty much the margin of error.

Another Iowa surprise was Cruz’s win in the face of massive opposition from ethanol interests. The Texan won most of Iowa’s biggest corn-producing counties despite his vocal and steadfast opposition to the ethanol Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), the federal program mandating how much biofuel is mixed with gasoline each year.   America’s Renewable Future (ARF) the pro-ethanol coalition which dogged Cruz throughout his campaign, rates Cruz as “bad” on ethanol/RFS, and all other frontrunners as “good.”  While Cruz pledges to “tear down that blendwall,” sunsetting the RFS after five years, Rubio says he’d take down the RFS in seven years.  Trump, Clinton and Sanders are 100% on board with the retaining the ethanol RFS.

RFS opponents claim the Cruz win is the death knell for the RFS ethanol mandate, but that obituary is being written way too early.  While RFS bashers smell blood in the water, and may take their first shot during this week’s Senate floor action on a bipartisan energy bill, it’s more likely Iowa voters, rather than demonstrating indifference to ethanol in the nation’s number one biofuel state, voted bigger priorities, including national and personal security, the economy and an end to Washington regulatory “overreach.”

What the caucuses didn’t do was narrow the candidate field in a major way.  Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley finished such a distant third among Democrats he was formally declared under caucus rules “unviable.”  He then formally suspended his campaign.  The fourth-place Republican – Dr. Ben Carson – was 10% behind Rubio.  He and other GOP contenders should be in serious soul-searching mode over continuing to raise and spend money on a race they can’t win.  So far, only former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee says he’s hanging up his running shoes.  That’s one down, seven to go.

Iowa in February is now behind the candidates, and it’s on to New Hampshire and its February 9 primary.  Will New Hampshire voters “repeal” the Iowa vote or will they affirm what the wise folks in Iowa decided?  Only time and polling will tell.