Cash cows are kicking dents in Iowa's caucuses

We like to think of our presidential caucuses as residing on Main Street, Iowa. But it might be Shakedown Avenue.

This week, The Iowa Republican.com's publisher, Craig Robinson, dropped a pair of hefty bombshells, reporting that allies of state Sen. Kent Sorenson, R-Milo, sought payment for him in exchange for backing Ron Paul's presidential bid weeks before the 2012 caucuses. Sorenson's abrupt jump to Paul from Michele Bachmann's camp made headlines, and sparked claims that he had been paid to switch. Those charges now have gained considerable weight, although Sorenson denies being paid.

Sorenson already faces charges that he broke Senate ethics rules by being paid to back Bachmann, a claim Sorenson also denies. But the ethics rules seem sketchy on the question of whether lawmakers can be paid by campaigns. Robinson's site does its best work revealing the internal functions and dysfunctions of the Iowa GOP, but it's also been highly critical of the pro-Paul forces that now run the state party. We'll see if this story holds up and how this tangled web unravels.

And it's pretty darn tangled. I strongly encourage you to read Robinson's reports in full.

Also this week, Bob Vander Plaats, leader of the rightward-marching Family Leader, said his group would love to hold an August presidential straw poll-like event if the state GOP decides to mothball its big, phony vote. Party leaders insist no one is pulling the plug just yet.

Gov. Terry Branstad has smartly argued that the overhyped vote-buying carnival has tarnished the actual precinct caucuses. He's on the money, but there's also a load of money to be spun from all that straw. So the circus likely will come back to town.

Iowa's claim to its lofty role on the road to the White House rests on the notion that thoughtful, everyday Iowans take this thing seriously. This is the kind of stuff that puts serious dents in that notion. This is the kind of stuff that makes people think it's really more about grabbing some serious influence and cash.

Leaders of both parties in Iowa, where the caucuses traditionally have been a bipartisan partnership, must decide whether the primary objective here is to sustain and nurture Iowa's coveted leadoff role in picking the next president or to fatten a herd of homegrown political cash cows.

Nobody's saying that the caucuses are detached or immune from the allure of big money politics. Hardly.

But there's no way state lawmakers should be paid for endorsements. If current sketchy rules allow that possibility, those rules must be changed and clarified. No fake votes should overshadow or alter the real caucuses, so the straw poll must go. If it doesn't, campaigns should skip it. And at the very least, campaigns should quit mortgaging the farm to try and win the silly thing.

After the botched, embarassing GOP caucus vote count in 2012, Iowa's traditional proving ground now resides on shakier ground. Shoring it up means turning back toward Main Street, and sacrificing some of those cows.