Michigan, Florida: Hush

[JimGinPA]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-0310edit2mar10,0,7906548.story

March 10, 2008

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything."

-- Sen. Hillary Clinton, on New Hampshire Public Radio, dismissing the Jan. 15 Michigan presidential primary

There's no telling where the nomination race between Sens. Clinton and Barack Obama will lead. One place it shouldn't lead is to a Democratic National Convention floor fight on whether to seat delegations from Michigan and Florida.

State leaders in Michigan and Florida now are in a tizzy for fear that their bad choices could have bad consequences. They've had enough mood swings to qualify for therapy:

* Those leaders were smug and puffy-chested when they flouted the parties' rules and moved their primaries into January.

* They were pouty and disbelieving when Democratic officials responded by stripping them of delegates to this August's national convention. Republicans stripped those states of half their delegates.

* Now Democrats complain that if they truly are excluded -- if, that is, the Democratic National Committee does what its rules say it must do -- then millions of Michigan and Florida Democrats will be disenfranchised.

That's true. But we don't recall much public protest in Michigan and Florida back when lawmakers were boasting that early primaries would give voters in those states more clout in the nominating process.

Nor, for that matter, can we find evidence that representatives of Michigan and Florida did anything but support the strict calendar rules when they were approved in 2006 by the Democratic National Committee.

Having made their bed, though, Democrats in the two states don't want to sleep in it. (Florida Democrats complain that their legislature is Republican-controlled and thus they shouldn't be punished; they conveniently forget that Democratic legislators went along with their GOP colleagues in advancing Florida's primary date.)

Adding injury to insult: Democrats in both states who flouted national party rules now want their national party to pay for new primaries or other selection protocols.

Democratic Chairman Howard Dean speaks gamely of not wanting to change the rules in the middle of the process. But national Democrats, scared of angering voters in these two large states, may try to placate them.

National Republicans might be having the same conniptions if they hadn't settled on a candidate. They stripped half of the two states' convention delegates, just as their rules dictate. Of course, Republicans will go to their convention intent only on having a fun time and putting on a good show. GOP delegates from Michigan and Florida can do that with or without voting power. But the Democratic nomination quite possibly hangs on whether Sen. Clinton gets the boost she would anticipate if Michigan and Florida are permitted some sort of do-over.

We can't argue with Howard Dean's admonition that allowing Michigan and Florida to wiggle back onto the convention floor will cleave his party and destroy some people's faith in the integrity of its selection process.

Cutting favors for Michigan and Florida would cheat Democrats in all the other states who followed their national party's rules. We hope that doesn't happen, not because it would disadvantage Obama, but because picking presidents is serious business: People who defy rules they helped write should accept the consequences of their actions.

Hillary Clinton was correct in January: Michigan's primary should count for nothing. Florida's too. See you in 2012.

[Callie McAllie]

1. Do not kid yourself

the vast majority of Michigan democrats had nothing whatsoever to say about this idiocy. This is the work of a handful of egotistical party wonks who thought they could usurp the process without any negative consequence. As a result, the rest of us are being disenfranchised.

The candidate I wanted to vote for in the primary wasn't even on the ballot!

[Hippo_Tron]

4. Which is why I'm in favor of a re-vote

DC did this in the last election cycle, holding a beauty contest before Iowa and then having their real primary afterwards.

[MindMatter]

8. I'm also in favor of a re-vote in both states

It will not change the outcome, which is the nomination of Obama. But I want:

1) A chance to really fire up these two states with the same enthusiasm most other Democrats have experienced for Obama

2) To see the look on Clinton's face when she realizes that all this monkey business has blown up in her face.

[Lochloosa]

9. As a Floridian, I disagree that it will not change the vote count.

When I went to vote there were two truths.

My vote would not count and Edwards had no chance. I voted for Edwards.

If I knew my vote would have counted he would not have gotten my vote.

I will have no problem with our votes not counting. I have faith in the other 48 states to make the right choice.

[MindMatter]

19. I didn't say it wouldn't change the vote count.

I said it wouldn't change the outcome.

I expect Clinton would pick up a small handful of delegates in Florida, and Obama would do likewise in MI.

[Lochloosa]

24. Fair enough.

[JimGinPA]

6. Which Candidate Was That?

[progressoid]

10. Ummm....that's kinda how the process works in America.

If those "handful of egotistical party wonks" screwed it up, get rid of them.
Is the rest of the country expected to happily massage the rules to undo their greed? That would only enable them, and more like them, to take advantage of the system again in the future.

What's the point of having rules if we cave to a couple of bullies.

[Johnny__Motown]

21. Yep, I had to vote Uncommitted, but let's remember. When they moved it up HRC was inevitable

The "wonks" assumed that it wouldn't matter because Hillary had it all locked up. The plan (as described on Flashpoint) was to accept the punishment this time around and to then establish our right to have an early primary that would count the next time around.

It didn't work. Grandholm is just a Hillary wanna-be who screwed up badly and now wants to not pay the price.

[snappyturtle]

2. K&R Excellent! n/t

[stray cat]

3. Nothing like rewarding bad behavior

MI and FL may be the most important primary states this election

[doublethink]

5. Hillary flip flops .....

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything."

-- Sen. Hillary Clinton, on New Hampshire Public Radio, dismissing the Jan. 15 Michigan presidential primary

[redqueen]

11. That was before she thought she'd need the votes.

Remember, she was sure she had it all sewn up back in December.

Now she sees that's not the case, so...

[Carolina]

7. K&R

[spoony]

12. You are a smarmy fucker

What an obscenely condescending OP. Talk about destroying people's faith in elections? Like throwing them out of the process doesn't do that? You and your idiot buddies that love the idea of disenfranchising some of the most loyal Dems in the country continue to lie through your teeth to justify it, then you sit on your sweaty arses with your lips curled in snears, because hey, your vote counted. Fuck everyone else. I trust you were in FL in 2000 too screaming for a halt to recounts because, after all, with those dangling chads they didn't vote properly so they shouldn't be counted.

[mkultra]

15. stupid is as stupid does

Dont break the rules next time.

[TheDoorbellRang]

13. Chicago Tribune gets it. The state parties in FL and MI

are the ones who screwed the pooch, and the voters in each of those states should throw their state officials out on their sorry rumps.

[WilyWondr]

14. Yep. Have u heard of any recall elections?

I would think if their state representatives were not representing them when they changed the primary date they could get them out of office without a problem..

I have heard of no recall elections.

[TheDoorbellRang]

22. No recalls that I know of

And I'm not even sure that the general populace in Florida or Michigan are that aware of what caused this whole SNAFU. The news coverage on this hasn't necessarily been illuminating. If you get a chance, you should check out madfloridian's journal on the genesis of this mess. She's kept us all informed on just whose fault this all is.

[TheDoorbellRang]

23. Delete - Dupe

(So that's how duplicate posts happen!)

[stillcool]

16. March 21, 2007

Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Story last updated at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Florida House votes for earlier presidential primary
http://www.jacksonville.com/apnews/stories/032107/D8O0PVN02.shtm
By STEPHEN MAJORS
Associated Press Writer

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - Florida voters would choose their presidential nominees as early as January under a plan the state House of Representatives resoundingly passed Wednesday.

The Sunshine State's primary would move to Feb. 5 or seven days after the New Hampshire primary, whichever comes first. The plan could push Florida past a handful of other states that have already scheduled a Feb. 5 primary; more than a dozen other stares are also considering a Feb. 5 vote.

But the Florida Senate, which has not yet chosen a new primary date or moved a bill out of committee, stands in the way of giving the state more relevance than its current March primary brings.
---------------------------------------------------
Florida lawmakers believe the state's demographic and political diversity merit a greater say in the selection of nominees. They're tired of candidates treating the fourth-largest state as a fundraising ATM, only to take the money to campaign in small states like Iowa and New Hampshire. And they say they are
willing to call the bluffs of the national parties, which have threatened to take away delegates the state parties send to the nominating conventions.

National Democratic Party rules could even punish candidates who campaign in states that move their primaries earlier than Feb. 5 by essentially not recognizing the state's delegates.

"The state can move its primary date but there are automatic sanctions," said Luis Miranda, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee. "The rules have been adopted and we will enforce the rules."
----------------------------------------

But some, like state Rep. Jack Seiler, a Wilton Manors Democrat who was the only House member to vote against the bill, believe Florida's earlier primary will hurt underdog candidates who don't have enough money to compete in large media markets at an early stage. He's been impressed with former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, but hasn't yet endorsed anyone.

"You're essentially going to make this into a straight money race," Seiler said, benefiting "whomever comes out of 2007 with the most money to prepare for these large states."

The Florida Senate is waiting to see what happens in other states before moving forward with a date, said Sen. Jeremy Ring, D-Margate, who is leading the effort in that chamber.

"It gives us a chance to really watch the landscape," Ring said. "When we're done Florida will be relevant."

[Strawman]

17. As I understand it, holding a MI and/or FL caucus is within the rules

The rules allow us to have a primary or caucus on or after Super Tuesday. A new caucus would not violate the rules. The beauty contest held on Jan. 15 does. In effect, it is as if the Jan 15 primary never happened. This is what the DNC wanted us to do all along.

And plenty of Dems were worried about this gambit in MI (as if the lack of "public protest" warrants disenfranchising MI Democrats) back before Jan. 15. If anyone ought to be punished it isn't the rank and file Democratic voters, it is our state party leaders. And there is plenty of sentiment for that among the rank and file...check out the DU Michigan forum for a taste.

A new caucus would hardly be a "favor." It would be a successful effort at forcing compliance with the rules. Other state parties held legit primaries and caucuses. There would be no basis for new ones in those states.

Opposing a redo is wrong in principle, and it's bad strategy for Obama (whom I support). In MI at least, he will do better than "uncommitted" did and it will give him a chance to campaign and organize in a key battleground state. Hillary had trouble with uncommitted in that contest. In a two way race with Obama in a MI, she would no doubt do even worse. She is only agreeing to a revote because 1) there is no way those delegates chosen in that fraud of a primary should or would be seated (her first choice that she hypocritically tried pressing), 2) she needs to roll the dice because the delegate math gives her no other options at this point.

See you in a month or so. I'll be here in MI making sure all the Dems I know mail in their caucus votes for Obama.

[MindMatter]

20. Dean has been unusually vague about this

I take his comments to mean that nothing is acceptable until a plan is submitted. In other words, all states have to submit a plan to the Party before the election season begins. I think Dean is saying that the states could submit a plan for a caucus and if was seen to be fair, the Party would accept that.

Hard to say for sure because he has been so vague.

Given the number of caucuses that have been permitted, I don't see why that would be a problem, as long as they give the candidates, say, 6 weeks to organize the compete.

If it goes much later than that, it could become moot. Each week, Obama is getting closer to the point of guaranteeing that he will end with more than 50% of the pledged delegates. Once he reaches that point, a big load of superdelegates will declare for him -- maybe enough to end it regardless of the FL or MI outcome.

[stillcool]

18. Septmeber 26, 2007

Nelson set to sue DNC over Florida’s primary
By Aaron Blake
Posted: 09/26/07 08:23 PM
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) upped the ante in the battle over the Democratic presidential primary calendar on Tuesday, saying he is moving forward with legal action against his party to fight for the state’s right to hold a binding Jan. 29 primary.“Now there is no choice,” Nelson said. “I’m preparing a
lawsuit.”

In a letter Nelson received late Monday, Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Howard Dean rebuffed his plea for leniency and reaffirmed that Florida Democrats have until Saturday to either change their primary plans or lose all their delegates to the national convention.

Dean said none of Nelson’s proposed compromises were acceptable because they contravene DNC rules, which allow contests prior to Feb. 5 in only four states: Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

“We’re disappointed in Gov. Dean’s response,” Nelson said. DNC spokeswoman Stacie Paxton said the committee worked closely with the state party to come to an agreement that complied with DNC rules.“We’re disappointed that they chose not to pursue these options, but we’re moving forward,” Paxton said. “Unfortunately, Sen. Nelson did not offer any compromises that worked within the rules."

The state party made clear over the weekend that it would not bow to the national party’s threatened sanctions, declaring its primary binding and rolling out a campaign to encourage voters to head to the polls on Jan. 29.

Nelson and Rep. Alcee Hastings, the Democratic chairman of the state’s congressional delegation, sent Dean a letter on Friday suggesting they would file suit if he declined to lift the sanctions.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Victor DiMaio, a member of the Hillsborough County Democratic Executive Committee, is suing the state and national parties, saying that their disagreement over the primary date threatens to disenfranchise voters.
His suit asks the courts to force the national party to seat the delegates or, failing that, to instruct the state to conduct an alternative process to select its delegates.

The DNC sought to dismiss the case on Tuesday. In its response to the suit, it maintains “a constitutionally protected right to determine the method of selection of delegates to national nominating conventions,” citing the case Cousins v. Wigoda.

The same rationale would likely be employed in a legal battle with Nelson. DiMaio said he expects his case, which he filed nearly a month ago, to stay first in line. He said Nelson and others are welcome to file briefs or join the case.“My case is the one that’s going to make the history,” DiMaio said. “Not Sen. Nelson or anybody else.”
------------------------------------------------.

The DNC emphasizes that its rules were adopted by hundreds of DNC representatives from all 50 states. It also cites Democratic Party of the United States v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette, which says national parties do not need to recognize the results of a primary in allocating delegates, and that a state can
refuse to seat delegates from a primary that violates its rules.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/nelson-set-to-sue-dnc-over-floridas-primary-2007-09-26.html