Iowa state Sen.-elect Catelin Drey took the political world by storm after she won a victory in Iowa’s special election to fill the Sioux City-area seat of Republican state Sen. Rocky De Witt, who died in June from pancreatic cancer.
Pundits have billed the Democrat‘s win last month as a sign of the blue wave the party is pining for in 2026 in the wake of its crushing slate of 2024 electoral losses. In this, her first-ever campaign for office, Drey beat out her GOP opponent, Christoper Prosch, by 11 points, flipped a seat held by Republicans for 13 years and broke the GOP supermajority in the state Senate. And she did so in Woodbury County, which last year went for President Donald Trump by 60% to 37%.
But Drey said that, despite the 2024 breakdown and Iowa’s allegiance to Trump, her district is far more purple than the rest of the country expects. She can’t say exactly why or how she won over voters. What she does know, however, is that the majority of them are hurting for a politician who approaches outreach in ways younger voters can get behind (see: Drey’s trendy Instagram) and speaks with them — not at them — about their needs.
“There is just so much frustration with tariffs, with the high cost of living, with access to basic needs,” the 37-year-old founder of grassroots advocacy organization Moms for Iowa said, adding: “The takeaway is just speaking to voters as if they are human beings, and they’re not dumb.”
Drey, who will be sworn in on Sept. 15, spoke to Salon about pulling off her bid for state office in under 60 days, the problem with Democrats’ messaging to voters in right-leaning districts like hers, and the role the Midwest plays in shaping national politics.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
It’s been about two weeks since you took home that electoral victory. How did it feel to win the election after just a few months of campaigning, following the death of state Sen. Rocky De Witt, especially being in a deeply Republican district?
It was less than two months. We had 47 days from the day of nomination to Election Day, so that was a sprint. But in terms of how it felt to win, I think people outside of the district, especially nationally, are shocked and surprised. But we knew that this was possible.
I was still knocking doors on Election Day at like 7:30 p.m. Polls closed at 8 p.m., and I found two more votes. The last door that I knocked on was somebody who was like, “Oh, I forgot that was today.” And I was like, “Can you get to the poll?” She’s like, “Absolutely, we’re gonna go right now.” It was her and her husband, two more votes that, had we not been out knocking on Election Day, we wouldn’t have found.
But I had this peace around that time, where I knew that we had done everything we possibly could at that point to have a successful outcome. And I was just so proud of the effort that the volunteers put forward, that my family put forward. My husband was my unpaid intern-slash-communications advisor, and he was incredibly selfless with his time throughout those 47 days. I was so humbled and proud of the work that we had done to meet our neighbors and hear their concerns. It feels like a sigh of relief, almost. It also feels like a moment — to use a sports metaphor, which I’m not an athlete — that you’re lacing up your shoes. You’ve done the work, you’ve put the practice in at this point and now you’re ready to hit the court or the field to do actual work in the game of making good legislation.
Bouncing off of that, I know that you are the founder of Moms for Iowa, and clearly not new to advocacy work. But what motivated you to run for office?
You mentioned the district being deep red, and I would say we’re more purple. We have a state house rep., JD Scholten, who is also a Democrat, and this [next session] will be the end of his second full term.
I, through Moms for Iowa, had been attending forums and engaging with legislators in town halls and via email. The late senator was my senator. I live in his district and have for half of my whole life. There was a moment, I think, two years ago, that they were debating in the legislature whether or not to arm teachers — to give teachers the capability to carry guns in school as a means of protection. All of the research suggests that that is a bad idea, and I emailed my then-state senator and said, “This is not sound policy. This is dangerous. We can’t ask teachers and school staff to take this on in good conscience, not to mention the fact of who is going to insure these schools with guns on the premises.” We had already seen that play out; that was not a liability that insurance companies were willing to take on. But I found his response to be rude and dismissive and not based in any sound policy or fact. I had a thought at that time that was like, “Oh, I’m going to take your seat. I’m going to run for your seat because we deserve better representation than this.”
When I found out that he was dying of cancer — I don’t know him, or didn’t know him personally; that is heartbreaking and horrible. But the moment presented itself earlier than I had originally planned. The timing made sense, and it was kind of always bubbling in the back of my head.
You mentioned earlier that District One is more purple. Looking at the voting record in Woodbury County, which houses your district, [people] voted for Trump in the presidential election by 22 points over the Democratic candidate. You just won your district by around 11% in what was a low turnout race. I’m curious to know, how did you appeal to voters in your district?
I can’t say what it was exactly that turned people out without having that conversation. But I’ve lived here for 19 years and have been involved in other nonprofits, other community efforts. I worked for a nonprofit that supports our public schools and had an opportunity to be very visible in the community during that time. I think just having that historical relationship with the community was really important.
But the other thing was, without Trump at the top of the ticket, I think there’s much less motivation for people to vote for culture war talking points. My opponent tried to [raise] national issues, talking about immigration and border security, and those are not things that are controlled at the state level. That’s all federal policy. And those are not things that will make people’s day-to-day lives better or different on a small or day-to-day scale.
[My campaign] talked about the affordability crisis in Iowa. We are having a hard time affording homes and health care and child care at a time when wages are stagnant. Our minimum wage is still $7.25 an hour, and we’re surrounded on all sides by states with higher minimum wages. Policy coming out of Des Moines has not reflected a willingness to change that or improve lives for everyday Iowans. We’re legislating to benefit a very slim minority of people at the very top, and that frustration, I think, was born out in election results.
We need your help to stay independent
You just drew a comparison with your opponent focusing on those federal-level [policies], part of the culture wars issues as you described. I’ve also seen in other publications that you described your campaign as being a positive campaign. And in a recent interview, you said that you get joy and motivation from connecting with people. In that 47-day period, what did your campaign look like?
I mean, I’m really fortunate in that I live in a place where our county Democratic Party is well-organized and used to doing big things without a ton of support from anyone but ourselves. We really tapped into the grassroots, door-knocking efforts here, and I was out almost every day. I think I’ve lost track now in the excitement [and] sleep deprivation. We were out every day, knocking on doors and talking to our neighbors, and I think that resonated with people — that [showed] I wasn’t showing up to tear down our community. I believe strongly in the place that I live. I love my life here, and I want that enthusiasm to be something that other people can find and harness and latch onto for their own lives here; for people to say, “I know my state senator. I know she’s looking out for my interest because she showed up and knocked on my door, and we had a conversation.”
I had somebody comment on Instagram, [and] I wish I could find it and frame it because it was such a gorgeous reflection back on the work that we did. She’s like, “I didn’t know her. She knocked on my door. I didn’t vote for her because she was a Democrat. I voted because she showed up, and we had a 20-minute conversation, and she was funny and warm and compassionate.” That is such a compliment. The main goal that I had in going into this was I want to meet my neighbors. And it’s less common now for you to just knock on somebody’s door and say, “Hey, I live down the street. How are you?” So I had a really good excuse to meet my neighbors in the last 60 days.
You’ll be taking office at the start of next session in January. What can Iowans — especially your neighbors, the people who you really moved in this special election cycle — expect to see from you next?
The main priority for me heading into this session is making sure that we fund our public schools at a rate that keeps pace with or exceeds inflation. That has been an issue that goes back several years. We know that education is the number one predictor of economic mobility, and that when we support students and teachers, they do better. So that’s the main priority.
The other thing that I really want to prioritize, and I think where Democrats in general can do better, is educating constituents on how policy affects them and what it means to our health care system that Medicaid has been gutted, even if you’re not utilizing Medicaid. That’s the main priority in terms of constituent education just because we will see the effects of those federal cuts very quickly in a state that is already hurting for specialists and health care providers in general. Having that conversation about what does it look like to rely on a system that you’re not using immediately, but that benefits you indirectly, because providers need those reimbursement rates to be competitive and fully funded, [is a priority]. So public education and then constituent outreach and engagement, and [we] have some town halls in the works before session starts to continue meeting people if I didn’t get a chance to talk to them on the doors. I’m really excited about that stuff, too.
I’m from Ohio, and I find that it’s easy for people to discount Midwestern states, particularly the red states, entirely just because of the political leanings. But you don’t really get the breadth of thought, as you mentioned earlier, and the movability of the people who actually live in our region. Given what you were talking about, with your district being more purple even when Trump was at the top of the ticket, [and] you being able to break the Iowa Senate’s GOP supermajority, what lessons are you taking away from your election about the interests of Iowans or Midwestern voters and the value of the region in our nation’s politics?
What is so striking to me, and what we have to remember, is that voters are not dumb, and they are also exceptionally busy. They recognize when someone is speaking at them, as opposed to with them. They can tell when someone shows up and just has their memorized talking points, and they can tell when someone shows up to listen. I think, in order to break through in this very fractured media environment, we have to start reaching people in nontraditional ways, or what would be considered nontraditional, but for millennials and Gen Z, it’s the only way. We have to get online. We have to reach people through their phones, as opposed to over broadcast or at their mailbox. Those things are also still valuable, but there is a way that we can start to show up online and be authentic and say, “I’m here to listen. And here’s something you should know that I think will be really, really crucial as we go into the midterms.” I’m hopeful that more people across the Democratic Party spectrum will be willing to hear that message. It’s very easy to say, “Well, we’ve never done it that way.” And I would just say we’ve never been in this — gestures widely — kind of situation before. We have to try things that are maybe outside of the box.
At the end of the day, as motivated by altruism as I am, I don’t want to be Pollyannish about what voters’ expectations of themselves and their neighbors are. Unfortunately, right now we are very much in a moment that people think they must look out only for themselves. And so how do we say, “This policy benefits you while also benefiting your Black, white, brown, gay, woman neighbor and your boats are much more alike and will rise at high tide than legislating for that slim minority of people at the top.” Our message must be about top versus bottom, as opposed to left versus right, or black and white, or straight and gay, or whatever it is. All of us at the bottom have to find a way to work together in order to make that shift.
Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.
Reminds me of your classic retail politician with a populist message. In Ohio, that would be former Sen. Sherrod Brown.
Oh, I miss him so much. He’s running again, right? He’s coming back?
He is! And one thing that you said earlier that really struck me was that story of someone who posted on your Instagram. I’m thinking about that in contrast with the bevy of reports that have come out following your win, framing this as an early indicator of a potential blue wave for Democrats in the midterm elections next year. What do you think the nation should be taking away from your election … especially as it pertains to appealing to voters?
The takeaway has to be capitalizing on the frustration that’s being felt by everyone, really, except for the technocrat billionaire class. There is just so much frustration with tariffs, with the high cost of living, with access to basic needs, just in terms of, “Can I drink the water? Can I trust that I’m going to be able to get the health care that I want?” You know?
The takeaway is just speaking to voters as if they are human beings. They’re not dumb. We have to remember that voters are not stupid and reach them with a message that resonates about their everyday life. Unfortunately, the talk of, “We’re losing our democracy,” I don’t think resonates with people because they are so caught up in making sure that they can continue living their lives that it’s noisy to them. Framing that in a way like, “This power grab is affecting your everyday life, is affecting your ability to afford a good life.” That has to be the message.
That’s just not necessarily something we’re seeing from the Democratic Party nationally, in your view?
I get it. I understand that [the losing democracy message] has to be part of the conversation. But we saw that message tank just eight months ago, unfortunately, and all of those things are coming home now to roost. We’re seeing the results of the choices that were made in November, and for a lot of people, their day-to-day life hasn’t really changed. They’re still going to work. They’re still trying to figure out how to pay for their kids’ dentist appointments and get them picked up from soccer and make sure that their shoes fit, and all of those things while there’s also this noise in the background. Making the connection between the fall of democracy to people’s pocketbooks is going to have to be a straight line as we move to the midterms.
