Politics
Column: How the Vietnam War, political protests and a mimeograph machine birthed today's Iowa caucuses
When Iowa’s brave and hardy Republicans venture Monday night into the arctic cold to cast the first presidential ballots of 2024, Richard Bender will be watching with special interest and a twinge of regret.
Bender, 78, has been called the godfather of the Iowa caucuses, in recognition of his role more than 50 years ago in creating one of the most closely watched and idiosyncratic events in American politics.
He was a young Iowa Democratic Party staffer at the time, an ardent foe of the Vietnam War and an architect seeking to build bridges between the party’s old guard and anti-establishment wings.
Today, Bender is retired from a career on Capitol Hill, living in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., and sorry to see his party shun Iowa — at President Biden’s behest — in favor of later contests in South Carolina and Nevada.
“It was good for my state,” Bender said of the caucuses that both major parties relied on for decades to begin choosing their presidential nominees. “I think we really did have an impact on national politics. I suspect Jimmy Carter and [Barack] Obama” — who used strong Iowa showings to launch themselves to the White House — “would agree with me on that.”
“And frankly, I had a personal pride in it,” Bender said. “So I wasn’t very happy to see it go by the wayside.”
As Bender is the first to attest, no one imagined the caucuses would turn into today’s internationally watched spectacle and crucial early test of political strength. Their timing, as the first event on the presidential calendar, began as pure coincidence.
Iowa had long chosen its delegates in a series of gatherings beginning at the precinct level — those are the caucuses being held Monday night — and concluding at a statewide convention. But those meetings, typically held in the spring, were largely the province of party bosses and political insiders who anointed their chosen candidates.
After the maelstrom of the 1968 Democratic National Convention, when party chiefs picked the presidential nominee and blood ran in the streets of Chicago, there was a strong push to overhaul the process and give voters more say.
In Iowa, the party was headed by Clif Larson, who’d backed Eugene McCarthy’s 1968 antiwar candidacy. He tasked Bender with leading an effort to devise a new, more open system for choosing the state’s presidential delegates.
Among the changes were the elimination of the winner-take-all rule, allowing candidates to receive a portion of delegates based on their grassroots support, and a requirement for public notification before each step of the nominating process.
The party’s straitened circumstances led to Iowa’s serendipitous place at the head of the political calendar.
Democrats were essentially broke ahead of the 1972 campaign and dependent on an old mimeograph machine. Counting back from the state convention on May 20, and allowing for printing and mailing materials out before each of four rounds, the party came up with Jan. 24 for the initial, precinct-level balloting — making it the first vote in the country.
Thus was born an institution.
A modest contingent of national political reporters showed up in Iowa to chronicle that first January caucus. Four years later, interest exploded when Carter, a little-known former Georgia governor, surged from nowhere and outpolled a field of Democratic heavyweights to catalyze his underdog campaign.
(Carter actually finished second in the caucuses, behind “uncommitted,” but his 28% showing exceeded expectations, which has become the measure of success.)
By 1976, Republicans were on board with the early vote, and for years Iowa and its rituals — kaffeeklatsches, state fairs, pandering to farmers and agricultural interests — were an indelible part of presidential politics.
Mindful of their privileged role, “Iowans really started to care and feel responsible,” said Bender, in a corned-beef-thick accent he retains from his native New York. (He moved to Iowa in 1967 to study biochemistry at Iowa State.)
“They became a very sophisticated, careful electorate,” Bender said. “Knowledgeable. Thoughtful.”
Richard Bender has been called the godfather of the Iowa caucuses.
(Courtesy of Richard Bender)
But as Iowa’s clout grew, so did resentment.
Politicians in big states like California griped about Iowa’s outsized influence. Others complained the state was too white and too rural, making Iowa unrepresentative of the country at large and the Democratic Party in particular.
When Iowa Democrats bungled the 2020 caucuses — taking days to declare a winner — it provided all the more reason to strip the state of its prime spot. (It also didn’t help that Biden, who was twice a candidate in Iowa, never finished better than fourth in the caucuses.)
This year, Democrats have officially bypassed both Iowa and New Hampshire, which has long hosted the nation’s first primary and also been criticized as too white and rural. The party will begin awarding it delegates Feb. 3 in South Carolina.
Republicans have had their own Iowa foul-ups.
On caucus night in 2012, Mitt Romney was declared the winner by a mere 8 votes. The state GOP then backed off that call, and more than a week later announced that former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum had, in fact, finished first. By then the campaign had long since moved on.
Even so, with no incumbent dictating the 2024 presidential calendar, Republicans kept Iowa first.
Watching from afar, Bender acknowledged that the caucuses are considerably removed from their humble origin. Thousands of journalists now descend on the state to chronicle its presidential campaigns, which have turned into multiyear extravaganzas fueling a multimillion-dollar industry.
The time has seemingly passed when a candidate can win Carter-style by slogging from small town to small town, bunking with local families and spending years meeting voters a handful at a time.
Trump, who made a splash in 2015 giving kiddie rides on his helicopter, has shown up relatively few times this election cycle — and is still the heavy favorite to win.
“He was an extreme example of what’s been happening for a long time,” Bender said, as TV, radio and, more recently, social media have come to matter more than the one-on-one campaigning that gave the caucuses their intimacy and charm.
Still, Bender holds out hope — optimistically? naively? — that once Biden departs, Iowa may regain its prominence in Democratic politics.
It remains a place where voters can approach most presidential hopefuls and get a question or two across. “And I think that’s really useful,” Bender said, “as opposed to [candidates] creating five 30-second ads to represent what they are.”
It’s also still relatively easy and inexpensive to campaign across Iowa, where plenty of people are willing to give a political unknown a careful listen.
“It’d be the Jimmy Carter situation,” Bender said, envisioning a Democratic caucus renaissance.
He built it. He hopes his party will come, again.
Politics
Video: President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order
new video loaded: President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order
transcript
transcript
President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order
Marijuana was downgraded from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug on Thursday. The reclassification does not legalize cannabis, but it does ease restrictions on the substance and allows for more research.
-
Today, I’m pleased to announce that I will be signing an executive order to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III controlled substance with legitimate medical uses. We have people begging for me to do this. I want to emphasize that the order I am about to sign is not the legalization or it doesn’t legalize marijuana in any way, shape, or form, and in no way sanctions its use as a recreational drug — has nothing to do with that.
December 18, 2025
Politics
Trump quietly signs sweeping $901B defense bill after bipartisan Senate passage
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Trump signed into law a nearly $1 trillion defense policy bill Thursday and approved what looks to be the largest military spending package in U.S. history.
The fiscal 2026 National Defense Authorization Act authorizes $901 billion in military spending, roughly $8 billion more than the administration requested, according to Reuters.
It also delivers a nearly 4 percent pay raise for troops, provides new funding for Ukraine and the Baltic States, and includes measures designed to scale back security commitments abroad.
In a release shared online, Rep. Rick Allen said: “With President Trump’s signature, the FY2026 NDAA officially delivers on our peace-through-strength agenda with a generational investment in our national defense.”
TRUMP ADMIN ANNOUNCES $11B TAIWAN ARMS SALES DEAL
U.S. President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. December 11, 2025. (Al Drago/Reuters)
“Not only does this bipartisan bill ensure America’s warfighters are the most lethal and capable fighting force in the world, but it also improves the quality of life for our service members in the 12th District and nationwide,” he added.
As previously reported by Fox News Digital, the Senate passed the NDAA on Wednesday, sending the compromise bill approved with bipartisan support to the president’s desk.
Trump signed it quietly Thursday evening, according to Reuters.
The NDAA includes $800 million for Ukraine over the next two years as part of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which pays US firms for weapons for Ukraine’s military.
It also includes $175 million for the Baltic Security Initiative, which supports Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.
TRUMP TOUTS BRINGING COUNTRY BACK FROM ‘BRINK OF RUIN’
President Donald Trump announced his proposal for a ‘Golden Dome’ missile defense system in the United States on May 20, 2025. (Reuters/Leah Millis/File Photo; Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
The bill prohibits reducing U.S. troop levels in Europe below 76,000 for more than 45 days without formal certification by Congress.
The legislation also restricts the administration from reducing U.S. forces in South Korea below 28,500 troops.
Trump ultimately backed the bill in part because it codifies some of his executive orders, including funding the Golden Dome missile defense system and getting rid of diversity, equity and inclusion programs, per Reuters.
TRUMP TO HAND OUT $2.6B IN ‘WARRIOR DIVIDENDS’ — AND THE SURPRISING POT HE’S PULLING THE MONEY FROM
The seal of the Department of War is displayed inside the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. (elal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)
“Under President Trump, the U.S. is rebuilding strength, restoring deterrence, and proving America will not back down. President Trump and Republicans promised peace through strength. The FY26 NDAA delivers it,” House Speaker Mike Johnson had said in a statement Dec. 7 on the new measures.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.
Politics
State regulators vote to keep utility profits high, angering customers across California
Despite complaints from customers about rising electric bills, the California Public Utilities Commission voted 4 to 1 on Thursday to keep profits at Southern California Edison and the state’s other big investor-owned utilities at a level that consumer groups say has long been inflated.
The commission vote will slightly decrease the profit margins of Edison and three other big utilities beginning next year. Edison’s rate will fall to 10.03% from 10.3%.
Customers will see little impact in their bills from the decision. Because the utilities are continuing to spend more on wires and other infrastructure — capital costs that they earn profit on — that portion of customer bills is expected to continue to rise.
The vote angered consumer groups that had detailed in filings and hearings at the commission how the utilities’ return on equity — which sets the profit rate that the companies’ shareholders receive — had long been too high.
Among those testifying on behalf of consumers was Mark Ellis, the former chief economist for Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Gas. Ellis estimated that the companies’ profit margin should be closer to 6%.
He argued in a filing that the California commission had for years authorized the utilities to earn an excessive return on equity, resulting in an “unnecessary and unearned wealth transfer” from customers to the companies.
Cutting the return on equity to a little more than 6% would give Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric, SDG&E and SoCalGas a fair return, Ellis said, while saving their customers $6.1 billion a year.
The four commissioners who voted to keep the return on equity at about 10% — the percentage varies slightly for each company — said they believed they had found a balance between the 11% or higher rate that the four utilities had requested and the affordability concerns of utility customers.
Alice Reynolds, the commission’s president, said before the vote that she believed the decision “accurately reflects the evidence.”
Commissioner Darcie Houck disagreed and voted against the proposal. In her remarks, she detailed how California ratepayers were struggling to pay their bills.
“We have a duty to consider the consumer interest in determining what is a just and reasonable rate,” she said.
Consumer groups criticized the commission’s vote.
“For too long, utility companies have been extracting unreasonable profits from Californians just trying to heat or cool their homes or keep the lights on,” said Jenn Engstrom at CALPIRG. “As long as CPUC allows such lofty rates of return, it incentivizes power companies to overspend, increasing energy bills for everyone.”
California now has the nation’s second-highest electric rates after Hawaii.
Edison’s electric rates have risen by more than 40% in the last three years, according to a November analysis by the commission’s Public Advocates Office. More than 830,000 Edison customers are behind in paying their electric bills, the office said, each owing a balance of $835 on average.
The commission’s vote Thursday was in response to a March request from Edison and the three other big for-profit utilities. The companies pointed to the January wildfires in Los Angeles County, saying they needed to provide their shareholders with more profit to get them to continue to invest in their stock because of the threat of utility-caused fires in California.
In its filing, Edison asked for a return on equity of 11.75%, saying that it faced “elevated business risks,” including “the risk of extreme wildfires.”
The company told the commission that its stock had declined after the Jan. 7 Eaton fire and it needed the higher return on equity to attract investors to provide it with money for “wildfire mitigation and supporting California’s clean energy transition.”
Edison is facing hundreds of lawsuits filed by victims of the fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes in Altadena. The company has said the fire may have been sparked by its 100-year-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon, which it kept in place even though it hadn’t served customers since 1971.
Return on equity is crucial for utilities because it determines how much they and their shareholders earn each year on the electric lines, substations, pipelines and the rest of the system they build to serve customers.
Under the state’s system for setting electric rates, investors provide part of the money needed to build the infrastructure and then earn an annual return on that investment over the assets’ life, which can be 30 or 40 years.
In a January report, state legislative analyst Gabriel Petek detailed how electric rates at Edison and the state’s two other biggest investor-owned electric utilities were more than 60% higher than those charged by public utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. The public utilities don’t have investors or charge customers extra for profit.
Before the vote, dozens of utility customers from across the state wrote to the commission’s five members, who were appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, asking them to lower the utilities’ return on equity.
“A profit margin of 10% on infrastructure improvements is far too high and will only continue to increase the cost of living in California,” wrote James Ward, a Rancho Santa Margarita resident. “I just wish I could get a guaranteed profit margin of 10% on my investments.”
-
Iowa4 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Washington1 week agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa6 days agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine3 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland4 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota5 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Nebraska1 week agoNebraska lands commitment from DL Jayden Travers adding to early Top 5 recruiting class