CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
April 29, 2008 – 5:43 p.m.
Four Michigan Dems Propose Compromise on Seating Delegation
By Marie Horrigan, CQ Staff
A negotiating team of top Michigan Democrats has come forward with a compromise plan to seat the state’s delegation to the national convention that would give New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton a slight advantage in the delegate count over Illinois Sen. Barack Obama .
The proposal comes about four months after the Democratic National Committee stripped Michigan of all its delegates because the state party advanced the date of its primary in violation of Democratic National Committee rules.
The authors of the plan, sent to Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer on Tuesday, said it essentially “splits the difference between the 73/55 position of the Clinton campaign and the 64/64 position of the Obama campaign.”
It would give Clinton 69 delegates to Obama’s 59, a 10-delegate advantage for Clinton that would be less than if the allocation was based entirely on the Jan. 15 primary, in which she won 55 percent of the popular vote. While Clinton won the primary, “uncommitted,” the option selected by supporters of candidates not on the ballot, received 40 percent of the vote. If the state’s 128 delegates were allocated according to those results, Clinton would receive 73 delegates and the “uncommitted” line, the majority of which likely would go to Obama, would receive 55 delegates. If the delegates were divided evenly each candidate would receive 64 delegates.
The four parties to the letter — Sen. Carl Levin , Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick , UAW President Ron Gettelfinger and DNC member Debbie Dingell — acknowledged that fashioning a compromise was complicated by the fact that Clinton was the only major party candidate left on the ballot for the Jan. 15 primary. Most other candidates, including Obama, had removed their name to honor the DNC’s sanction of the state.
In the letter, the four Michigan Democrats noted that none of them has endorsed a Democrat in the presidential contest. “Our focus is to ensure that Michigan’s delegation to the Democratic National Convention in August is seated with full voting rights, and that the nominating process is reformed for future elections,” the letter said.
Any plan must be approved by all parties: the Clinton and Obama campaigns, the DNC and the state party. The DNC did not have any comment on the letter or the proposed plan, which would not penalize Michigan for violating the national party’s rules, but DNC Chairman Howard Dean has said that the states should face some form of penalties but has not been specific. The Michigan Democratic party said it is studying the proposal.
Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said the letter “makes clear that the Michigan primary, where Senator Obama’s name did not appear on the ballot and the candidates did not campaign, should not be the basis for how the Michigan delegation is seated.” He added, “We look forward to working with Michigan Democrats and the DNC to find a solution.”
The Clinton campaign has not yet issued a response.
Despite ongoing negotiations between the parties, no resolution has yet been found either in Michigan or in Florida, the other state penalized by the DNC for moving up its primary. Challenges are pending from both states against the DNC’s decision. The Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic National Convention has set a meeting for Saturday, May 31, to consider these challenges, but the DNC did not have any comment on the letter to Brewer on Tuesday.
The letter said the plan’s proponents did not expect either candidate to explicitly embrace the plan, but called on the DNC to adopt it and the candidates to accept it “because it is fair and because it would resolve an impasse with which each passing day hurts our chances of carrying Michigan and winning the presidency.”
Democratic leaders in Michigan and Florida argue that the DNC’s presidential nominating system is unfair because it allows some states to hold contests ahead of the Feb. 5 cut-off it imposed but penalizes others.
“We see no justification for seating Michigan’s delegates with anything less than full voting rights,” the Michigan Democratic leaders said in their letter. Penalizing Michigan but not New Hampshire — which held its primary on Jan. 8 — “will hurt the party‘s chances of carrying Michigan in November.”
Four Michigan Dems Propose Compromise on Seating Delegation
Clinton’s win on April 22 in Pennsylvania’s presidential primary pushed her closer to Obama in the delegate count and brought the undecided status of delegates for Michigan and Florida back to the forefront.
Comments
No, no, no, no, no. He did not appear on the ballot. She should not get an extra 10 delegates. Just check out the polling they did in the state when there was talk about a do-over. They were tied 49-49. Currently electoral-vote.com has Obama doing better against McCain in Michigan. Clinton does not deserve those delegates, period. Personally I think Obama's 50/50 split is generous (well, not really in that it gets him closer to the magic number, but in terms of how Michigan people currently feel about both candidates, it's probably a generous offer.) Moreover, the Michigan leaders were the ones who put themselves in this situation in the first place. At least in Florida it was more the republicans' decision that the primary was early.
Michigan leaders were the decision makers in this political blunder! The fact that now they want to cry "foul" is disgusting. I, personally, did not vote because Obama's name was not on the ballot and I could not give Hillary my vote. Furthermore, how many others in Michigan chose not to vote because we were told ahead of time that our votes would not count???? I seem to recall that way back in January when the DNC said "no, no" to Michigan and told us that our delegates would not count, Hillary was "OK" with that decision because we had violated the rules! Hillary is a dishonest, power-hungry, pathetic excuse for an intelligent woman! And that is coming from a die-hard democrat who happens to a well-educated woman as well!!!! Either split the delegates down the middle, which is generous to Hillary, or move on to the next issue at hand......how to get a democrat in the white house!
Well, I am a Michigan voter too and I say the proposal is fair. As for how Michigan would go if there was a re-vote.... we will never know. And, why is that? Because Democratic Michigan State Senators (like Tupac Hunter) who support Obama and, Obama himself, have blocked any chance for a re-vote in Michigan. What are they afriad of?
This is so ludacris and they know it. How can you split the delegates in Clinton's favor when Sen. Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot in the State of Michigan. Where is justice and fairness?????
How is it fair to give more delegates to Hillary Clinton when Obama wasn't even on the ballot because he did play by the rules? So they're in effect suggesting that Obama be punished for doing the right thing and Michigan be rewarded for doing the wrong thing. Great message to send the electorate. Listen to the insulting tone (had to be Debbie Dingell) of their letter: "Our focus is to ensure that Michigan's delegation to the Democratic National Convention in August is seated with full voting rights, and that the nominating process is reformed for future elections." The process would have worked just fine if Michigan and Florida hadn't messed things up. And what are Debbie Dingell's qualifications to change Michigan's primary schedule? Take your time answering that one. There's no good answer. Sleep in the bed you made Debbie.
The reason Obama did not leave his name on the ballot was he was polls showed he would lose but he did have his volunteers and staff out in force asking people to vote for the uncommitted. MI voters should have their say. Many of the uncommitted were for Edwards. The compromise plan is overly generous to Obama.
stay with the rules that were set by the dem. partybefore the election
My suggestion: In the interest of Michigan feeling involved and having bodies at the convention, take this proposal as to numbers of delegates, but cut all votes for all the delegates in half, to protect the DNC authority. Also, for Obama to make even this concession, there should be assurances that the party will ignore any attempt to consider the "popular vote" in Michigan.
How about this: Apportion the delegates in the same percentages as current pledged delegates are apportioned nationwide. Shafting the candidate who played by the rules is what the GOP-packed Supreme Court did in 2000. Emulating the disgrace the Court brought to jurisprudence will split the Party in two. By the way, I am a 67 year old Democrat. I've always voted Democrat.
Obama broke the DNC rules by running ads before time.There fore ad DNC rules state if you run any ads before the date they are to be ran then delegates will be striped -o- delegates obama he broke the rules.and he made his own choice to take his name off the ballot after he lost Florida.
Clinton will probably hyjack the nomination any way she can. Clinton is still fighting because she doesn't know when to realize it's over. She's a power freak that will do anything she can to get in office. Clinton has kept Michigan and Florida as her ace in the hole in case she needed it to get her out of a jam at some point. Get ready, she will surpirse everyone with what she is going to pull.
How stupid an idea is that? To essentiailly split the delagates half and half is tantamount to doing nothing! redo the vote!!
Obama had a choice, the rules did not say he had to take his name off the ballot..It said they were not to campaign or advertise, byt the way he did for 1 week and Hillary did not...Sof he chose to take his m=name off and because of inexerience, he will have to live with his choice, just like the rest of us.I know he thinks he just fell from heavon and doing everyone a favor, but no Michigan Hillary won fair and Obama should get the delegates that he deserve with the original vote counted. Hillary did not campaign not even for a week, she just left her name on the ballot because she wanted the people to have thier say..Its Obama's problem..we can not continue covering for this man that will only bring us to desparity. Florida should be counted and both names were there and Hillary should get what is coming to her. If this is stolen from her..People that support Hillary should not vote for Obama! everyone should unite..If it were the other way around Obama would be wanting to count these two states.. Dems can not win without Michigan and Florida!!
How stupid is this? To arbitrarily assign delegates that is roughly half and half is useless. DO A REVOTE !
states should be allowed to hold there primary whenever they want. why should the same states be allowed to vote first everytime and give certain candidates momentom. rotate the dates and give every state a fair turn and there wouldn't be this problem
okay get the stories straight Michigan vote count http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/MI-D.phtml Florida vote count http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/FL-D.phtml The plan is overly generous to Obama. He pulled his because he know he would lose and agreed to the plan because it would remove a very large number of delegates from her delegates. This was voter suppression at it's most obvious. Edwards was not on the Michigan ballot either an just look at the Florida numbers and you will notice Edwards pulled 14% of the vote, like his percentage would have run close tho this also. To entirely fair delegates should be given to Clinton, Obama and Edwards. Obam's percentage probably runs close to 25%. The obama campaign still can't win in Michigan and that's why they have turned down any type of recount option.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: