Clinton runs against history in a key state

October 11, 2007 | 11:40 am

Sit down with any ranking member of Hillary Clinton's campaign brain trust, and almost instantly you will hear an impassioned discourse about the enthusiasm and excitement she sparks among vast swaths of women voters. Her prospects of becoming the first female president -- and the fervor with which many women of varying ages and economic status respond to that -- will be one of the waves she rides into the White House, the Clinton aides argue.

But if the time has arrived for shattering the glass ceiling at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., Clinton may first have to overcome a reluctance toward supporting women candidates shown by voters in one of the states that looms above others in presidential politics.

Nedra Pickler of the Associated Press notes in a recent story that Iowa -- all-important, showered-with-attention, site-of-the-opening-caucus Iowa -- is one of only two states that have never sent a woman to the Senate, the House or the governor's office.

It shares that dubious distinction with ... Mississippi.

Perhaps it's simply a fluke that female contenders for Congress or governor are 0-for-forever in the Hawkeye State. The AP story, however, reports that Democrat Roxanne Conlin, who lost a governor's race in 1982 (and who, intriguingly, is co-chair of the John Edwards campaign in Iowa), blames her gender for her defeat.

"Iowa is in some significant ways a very traditional state," Conlin told the AP.

Iowa is also a state where, in the 2000 census, Latinos amounted to 3% of the population, blacks 2% and Asians 1%. It's a state where, on the night of the much-anticipated caucuses, turnout is minuscule -- 10% or so of eligible voters, even when one or both of the parties are having intense fights for their presidential nomination. And an inordinate percentage of those who do show up are in their 50s or 60s or 70s -- meaning that issues of importance to younger generations, such as improving public schools, may be given short shrift.

Remind us again who decreed that Iowa should play such a crucial role in picking our presidents and why any attempt to alter that process should be thwarted?

-- Don Frederick