CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
April 25, 2008 – 9:58 a.m.
Clinton Rebound in Pa. Pushes Focus Back to Fla., Mich Controversy
By Marie Horrigan, CQ Staff
The victory that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton scored in Pennsylvania’s presidential primary this week kept her candidacy alive, but it has also pushed back to the forefront the contentious question with which Democrats are wrestling - what to do about the Florida and Michigan delegate controversy.
The issue has particular urgency for Clinton because she trails Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in both the delegate count and the popular vote. The popular vote side of that equation would flip, though, if the results of the January primaries that she won in Michigan and Florida — and which have been vacated by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) because of a scheduling dispute — were added back in.
A restoration of the vote outcome in those states would boost Clinton into the lead over Obama in the cumulative primary vote by a margin of 122,000 votes, according to Real Clear Politics. That, in turn, would help Clinton to better make her case to unpledged superdelegates, who are now likely to hold the balance of power in the nominating fight, that she is the party’s stronger and more electable choice to take on the presumed Republican nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain .
Both Michigan and Florida have been stripped of their delegates by the Democratic National Committee for violating party rules by moving up the dates of their primaries in violation of party rules.
Both campaigns and Democratic Party officials have said they are committed to finding a solution, but the sticking point is that any agreement has to be acceptable to all parties. Clinton’s campaign has called for the delegates to be allocated according to the results of the primaries. Obama’s campaign says the only fair solution is a 50-50 split of delegates. The state parties say their voters must not be disenfranchised, but the DNC says the states need to face some kind of penalty for violating the national party’s rules.
In a conference call for the Clinton campaign on Wednesday, Florida Sen. Bill Nelson said Florida’s vote was integral to the overall vote totals. “Every one of those votes was cast legally and that is a certified election,” he said. Nelson added that the state’s voters “are not taking too kindly to the fact that they’re being stiff-armed and not being considered a part of the process.”
Nelson has been active on the issue. He and Florida Rep. Alcee L. Hastings on Monday released a letter they sent to the co-chairs of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee asking them to release what they said were “secret” recommendations on appeals to restore at least a portion of Florida’s delegates.
“If the Rules and Bylaws Committee does not proactively and openly resolve the issue of how to honor Florida’s primary and seat the state’s delegates, the entire nominating process will continue to unfold under a cloud,” they said in the correspondence.
The two Florida Democrats earlier had unsuccessfully sued the DNC to try to force the party to recognize the Florida primary. Both states also considered compromise proposals to hold “re-votes” of their primaries in June, but these initiatives were deemed unworkable and failed.
Speaking on the Clinton conference call Wednesday, Michigan Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm called for the DNC to recognize the votes of the 600,000 Democrats who participated in that state’s primary.
Granholm said that Clinton would lead the popular vote if Michigan’s votes were included. “That to me — that to all of us — should be a sign to superdelegates that she in fact is the strongest candidate to win the general election in November,” she said.
DNC Chairman Howard Dean has called on undecided superdelegates to make up their minds by the end of June so that the party can settle on a nominee before the late August national convention in Denver. He also has said the national party is dedicated to finding a way to seat the delegations from Michigan and Florida, but called for a fair solution especially given the fact that both states violated DNC rules.
“We’re going to have a meeting later on in this process that’s designed to figure out a way to seat Florida and Michigan in a fair way, that’s fair to the 48 states that did follow the rules and also fair to the people of Michigan and Florida and fair to both candidates, because when you do change the rules in the middle of the game you’ve got to be fair to both candidates,” he said Tuesday on MSNBC.
Clinton Rebound in Pa. Pushes Focus Back to Fla., Mich Controversy
Dean has not weighed in on what solution would meet those criteria.
Both state parties have moved forward with electing their delegates to the national convention. The Michigan Democratic Party on March 29 held the second step of the party’s three-step process for selecting delegates. The final step is scheduled for May 17.
“We’re moving ahead with the process, but we’re still in negotiation about what exactly the allocation of delegates will be,” said Michigan Democratic Party spokeswoman Liz Kerr.
Florida’s Democratic Party maintains the delegates should be seated according to the primary results from Jan. 29. Spokesman Alejandro Miyar said the state party was waiting for the DNC and the campaigns to take action.
“While all of this happens outside of us we’re moving ahead with getting the delegation settled, getting all the people on board, and that’s about it. That’s about all we can do,” he said.
Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said Wednesday her campaign hoped the DNC would consider the pending challenges.
“That’s where things stand right now. We’re waiting for the DNC to act on these and consider them and render a verdict,” he said.
Tobe Berkovitz, interim dean of Boston University’s College of Communication, said he did not see how any solution could be accepted by both Obama and Clinton. “He played by the what the Democratic Party said are the rules and it seems that Clinton sort of hedged her bet and tried to play it both ways,” he said.
Berkovitz added that the larger issue was the conflict among the Democrats between the national party and the state parties in Michigan and Florida, which flouted its rules. “Now the Democrats are just in a quagmire and the only way it gets solved is if one candidate or the other manages to have enough delegates for the nomination and then it becomes a somewhat moot point,” he said.
There are key differences between the contests in Michigan and Florida. All the candidates agreed not to campaign in both states because those January primaries violated the national party rules. In Michigan most of the candidates — including Obama — went a step further and withdrew their names from the ballot. Clinton remained on the ballot and received 55 percent of the vote while “uncommitted” received 40 percent of the vote. State party Chairman Mark Brewer had urged supporters of candidates not on the ballot to use the “uncommitted” line.
David Dulio, an assistant professor of political science at Oakland University in Rochester, Mich., said Michigan voters felt differently about their contest than Florida in part because the candidates voluntarily withdrew from the ballot.
“It does make a difference because [it’s] not a true contest here in Michigan, but I don’t think voters in Michigan are going to get caught up in that. I think they want their delegates seated and I think that there could be a backlash if they’re not,” Dulio said.
Susan MacManus, a professor of government at the University of South Florida, said voters are “getting angrier by the day” about the issue, and only one solution will placate them. “There’s nothing that’s going to be good enough except for counting everything,” she said.
Clinton Rebound in Pa. Pushes Focus Back to Fla., Mich Controversy
“It’s a mess. Democrats in Florida are not only angry, they’re beginning to feel a little downtrodden that that’s not good either, because this is always a state that ponies up a lot of money,” MacManus said.
Curtis Gans, director of the Center for the Study of the American Electorate at American University in Washington, D.C., said that since both states acted in clear violation of the rules he expected the national party would try to seat the delegates in a way that was neutral for the campaigns.
“The fact that Senator Clinton left herself on the Michigan ballot does not entail a right to claim a disproportionate share of those delegates,” he said. “Essentially I think the party will try to get Florida people and Michigan people seated, but only under a rubric that gives neither candidate an advantage.”
Comments
Everyone should read the DNC rules to verify what they are being told about who is in violation of what. It appears that the DNC rules do not, themselves, state that the penalty for violation of the timing of a primary is that all of the delegates will not be seated. As my teenager often says, "The problem is that people don't check!" I have no doubt that the DNC is familiar with its own rules. What, then, explains the discrepancy between their rules and what they are telling the voters? Google the 2008 delegate selection rules for download & perusal.
I think the best solution is to do what the Republicans did (probably the only time I'll ever say that, lol) and seat half the delegates from both states according to how they voted. This way, the DNC can say that the states were punished for violating the rules, but Florida and Michigan can't say the Republicans treated them better. I realize neither Sen. Obama nor Sen. Clinton's campaign will be totally happy, but they need to realize this compromise would be in the best interest of the Democratic Party and that it will be much harder to win the general election withouth winning AT LEAST one of these states.
How can you possibly "count" the Michigan election toward the popular vote? OBAMA GOT *ZERO* VOTES IN MICHIGAN BECAUSE HE PLAYED BY THE RULES. I'll say that again -- Clinton got 100% of the vote; Obama 0%. There is no plausible argument that Clinton's votes should count in determining who is winning the overall popular vote, and shame on you for not making that clear right up front.
PA has absolutely nothing to do with MI and FL. MI and FL violated rules, neither candidate got to campaign which pitted the lessor know Obama against the Clinton machine and Obama wasn't even on the ballot in MI. Any relagation of delagates in these states based on election returns would be extremely unfair. Stick to the rules that both candidates agreed to prior to the primaries.
I'm all in favor of doing the half seat system with Florida, but Michigen didn't have any of the major canidates on the ballot save Clinton, as such I don't think you can call any reaction other then dumping michagen's votes out the window fair. sure it sucks for the voters, but hey.. lynch the party orginizaers who decided to break the party rules so their votes would "count" in ironicly one of the few party primaries where every vote counts.
After reading the first page of this article and still not seeing any mention that Obama's name was not even on the Michigan ballot I am stunned. The author must not feel that to be important. Wow. I wonder how many erroneous opinions I have formed, and falsehoods I believe to be facts, based on articles like this one that leave out critical pieces of information. Why does the media have to be so much less than what a democratic society demands?
Count the votes in Florida as cast. Give Obama ALL the uncommitted votes in Michigan even though John Edwards was still in the race. Howard Dean caused this fiasco and if he were a strong DNC chairman he would have stepped up to the plate long ago and resolved it. We cannot disenfranchise three million voters. The voters did not make the silly decision - Howard Dean and the DNC did.
No, no, no. Don't count the "uncommitted" votes in Michigan for Obama. They weren't for Obama, they were by people who hadn't made up their minds who to vote for, so they shouldn't count for anyone. It would be disenfranchising those Michigan voters to count their votes for Obama. Their right to say they didn't know who they wanted to vote for should be respected. I know there are enthusiastic Hillary supporters who have made good arguments about counting those uncommitted votes for Hillary -- after all, most of the people in Michigan voted for Hillary -- but one or two of them might have wanted some other candidate, so not counting the uncommitted vote is the fairest solution.
I think the DNC will have a real problem, all 50 states need to speak, before we go to super delegates. Clinton, supporters have a real case she won both states, and as usual Obama, people said vote uncommited in MI, in FL although BO had ads, Clinton, won. Everyday Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid, find a way to dienfranchise the Democratic Party, what about New Hampshire, they moved there election up no penalty. The dems will have a hard time against McCain especially if Obama, is given the nomination. We will vote in force for McCain in November, all I see is a bunch of delegates against the people, we want play along!! I don't want the radical Obama, and his idiots running America. I am an African American for Hillary!!!
The only fair thing to do is split Florida votes 50/50 and same for Michigan. Far more people knew Hillary at the time those elections were held. Obama votes come from people who have gotten to know him. Not campaigning in Florida, he did not get a chance to show his sincerity and his honesty. People tend to vote for candidates they are familiar with. This process needs to be changed so that this never happens again. People need a chance to get to know their candidates. That is why they have campaigned for a year now. Florida never got that chance, nor did Michigan.
The most important thing is that the votes of the voters are counted. I don't think the ordinary voters made the rules. I feel Hillary should have the votes of the people that voted for her. The undecided votes could be counted for Obama accordingly. Hillary was calling on something to be done about Florida and Michigan votes and Obama did not speak out for anything to be done. I think the voters choices should be heard; and esspecially so, so the delegate counts can be used in November for the General Election. I do believe that the Democrats want to beat the Republicans. This matter needs to be settled sooner rather than later so it is not something that is being dwelt over after the state primaries are finished.....Thoughts of a Texas Democrat Voter, Rutha Larison
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: