Michigan, Florida Delegate Proposal to Be Heard by DNC
WASHINGTON — A plan to award half-delegates for the disputed Michigan and Florida Democratic presidential primaries will get a hearing before party leaders.
The co-chairs of the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws committee sent members a memo Friday announcing a meeting May 31 to consider the idea.
The committee stripped Michigan and Florida of their national convention delegates because they held primaries too early. DNC members in Michigan and Florida have filed challenges to restore the delegates.
Under the challenges, all superdelegates from both states would get to vote. The pledged delegates would only count for half votes.
Hillary Rodham Clinton won both contests and has been pushing for the delegates to be seated.
Her rival Barack Obama has said it isn’t fair to award delegates based on the votes because all the candidates agreed to boycott the contests and his name wasn’t on Michigan’s ballot. Most of the Democratic candidates had their names removed, but Clinton left hers on. Forty percent of Michigan voters chose “uncommitted” rather than vote for Clinton.
Obama’s supporters have suggested splitting the delegates evenly would be a fair way to handle it, since all sides want to see delegates from the two important swing states participate in the convention.
Both states, knowing the potential penalty, held their primaries earlier than party rules allowed to try have more influence in the nominating process that long has been dominated by early voters in Iowa and New Hampshire. Few figured the campaign would last as long as it has, and now that Clinton and Obama are so close in the delegate race, both states want to help choose the nominee.
Michigan lost 128 pledged delegates and 28 superdelegates, for a total of 156.
Florida lost 185 pledged and 25 superdelegates, or a total of 210.
If it were valid, Florida’s election would have given Clinton 105 delegates to Obama’s 73. Michigan’s would have given Clinton 73 delegates, while 55 were uncommitted. That means awarding half-delegates would give Clinton 89 more delegates and Obama 33.5, with 27.5 uncommitted.
The plan would narrow Obama’s lead among the pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses. But Clinton still would not catch him in the remaining primaries.
Obama has a 154-delegate lead among pledged delegates.
The challenges were presented by DNC members Joel Ferguson of Michigan and Jon Ausman of Florida, who also are superdelegates because of their positions with the party. Ferguson supports Clinton, Ausman is uncommitted.
Ferguson and Ausman said in telephone interviews that they think half-delegates should be seated based on the outcome of the state’s primary elections. That is not spelled out in their challenges and the Rules and Bylaws Committee could determine how many delegates each campaign is awarded.
“I think the allocation should be solely based on the returns on January 29,” Ausman said.
Michigan’s case is trickier, since Obama didn’t get any votes in the state’s Jan. 15 primary. Ferguson said all the uncommitted votes should count for Obama.
“The only thing that hurts my challenge is that I declared that I’m for Clinton, but this has nothing to do with Clinton,” Ferguson said. “This has to do with making common sense.”
He said it’s only fair that the superdelegates be fully restored since they aren’t bound by election results any way. The challenges argue that the party doesn’t have the authority to strip superdelegates of their votes.
Ausman said as for the pledged delegates, it would be acceptable for the committee either to strip half of Florida’s pledged delegates and send the other half to the convention, or to send all and give them half-votes.
The Convention Credentials Committee resolves issues about the seating of delegates, but doesn’t meet until later in the summer after all the state nominating contests are over.
The co-chairs of the Rules and Bylaws Committee did not respond to messages left at their offices Friday. Party officials said it’s unclear whether they will make a decision and vote on the challenges at the May 31 meeting or just discuss them.
The Clinton and Obama campaigns did not respond to requests for comment.
I feel the media and the DNC have favored Barack Obama from early on. If they felt Obama would have done well in Michigan and Florida, then the DNC would have resolved Michigan and Florida’s request before the elections happened.
Rules can and should change. There was plenty of time before the elections and I feel the states had legitimate reasons. Not counting these votes/ delegates is like ‘taxation without representation’. I’m quite dissapointed, but if I were from one of those states, I’d be very angry my vote meant nothing. Nevertheless, if their votes are not counted by June, I will be defecting from the Democratic party.
In the meantime, shame on the DNC for alienating voters and trying to stack the cards.
Kind regards… Guy R. Lipof
We are a nation of laws. Laws exist to insure the freedom for the country as a whole. If we elect to be a part of a poltical party we agree to adhere to the rules of that organization. It is a choice we make, not one forced upon us. The States of Florida and Michigan Democratic parties elected to be a part of the Democratic National Party. They were not blindsided by the rules and regulations. Why is it that they did not elect leave the party when they did not get permission to move up the primaries? Why didn’t they choose to convene a hearing and get the backing of other states to change the party rules? Why did they wait until a critical election year to be heard? I am tired of this kind of politics. Under no circumstances should the candidates that choose to be on the ballots in full knowledge of the consquences profit. True it angered people to not be counted in the presidential primary of the century, but they have a choice of changing the political party laws or changing political parties. I choose to become an Independent and vote for the candidate that KEPT HIS WORD to campaign by the rules.
Michigander for Obama
DNC members Joel Ferguson of Michigan and Jon Ausman of Florida both have posited sensible solutions. My only concern is the late date of the meeting to decide/discuss this issue. There will be maneuvering in the interim to make any decision moot. That is not fair - to the candidates or to the voters. The votes have been cast, and any decision that will be made should be made on the merits. The merits will not change - they are absolute. The decision should be made sooner rather than later.
God Bless
Peace and Love,
Nathan Wales Belding
If both states are not counted that is just a shame because florida and michigan make up something like 9 percent of the US population, if that much of the population doesn’t get their vote in it is a huge problem. Hilary won both contests, she should be awarded her delegates. at-least in florida she should definitely get her delegates, in michigan their should be a legitement revote. I do not believe they should wait until one has 2025 then make the changes beacuse then there is still no point. i think it should have been solved already and since it wasnt it should be now. either revote in both states or counting florida and revoting in michigan or giving the uncommitted in michigan to barrack would all be fare ideas. splitting it 50-50 is not a good idea because that is just throwing fake delegates at the candidates. I think Hilary is not being treated fairly in this situation, she won both states and is getting her delegates!
The votes should count 100%. For Florida delegates should be split accordingly to the votes since both were on the ballot. For Mich. give Hillary her votes and give the uncommited to Omama. Let’s face it: Obama is not electable in the general election. He claims to be a uniter but I thnk his actions show him to be a divider. Regardless of who would be the democratic nominee, I think the democratic party should do what’s’s right and live up to its name - be a democratic institution. Howard Dean needs a back bone - really fast! LOOK at the mess the party is in. I am changing from democrat to independent. I’m sick of this mess.
I think there is only one way to get out of this situation.
First we have to look whether one of the candidates will reach the majority of delegates without the florida and michigan delegates. If someone get the 2025 delegates without the delegates of both states everything is fine.
If both candidates will miss the required majority of 2025 delegates there must be new elections in both states.
Counting only half of the votes, sending only half of the deleagtes, splitting the delages (and ignore the people votes) or ignoring the fact that some people haven’t voted at all (because they thought it wouldn’t count) can’t be a solution in a democratic country.
Niether state should get their delegates back.
If the DNC cannot figure out this nomination with thier “legit” delegates, then they have bigger problems than Florida’s inability to run an election.
States cannot be encouraged to front-load. Those rules exist for a reason- to prevent a national primary date. If the DNC is really interested in preserving democracy, they cannot give either state back thier delegates just to secure Clinton the nomination.
Yes, ideally every voice would be heard in a democracy. But democracy cannot exist without a certain semblance of rule and reason, and deviating from primary rules does not offer either.