The Rules and Bylaws Committee of the DNC met in DC today to discuss seating Florida and Michigan delegates. A recap of the emotional day follows.
First on the agenda was a discussion of Florida.
Jon Ausman basically made an argument to give full seating to Florida's 23 superdelegates and half-seating of the 185 pledged delegates. He argues that the superdelegates are not subject to the primary timing rules and therefore should be fully seated, if the intent of the committee is to follow the rules. In his final comment Ausman made a powerful point that Florida Democrats have suffered enough at the hands of Republicans. That is certainly hard to argue with!
Sen. Bill Nelson and Florida State Senator Arthenia Joyner made compelling arguments for counting all the votes. Both talked about the large turnout in the state -- 1.75 million Florida Democrats. And both talked about disenfranchisement Florida voters have faced in the past and how important the state will be for Democrats in November.
Wexler said that in supporting the Ausman petition, Obama is making a major concession in the interests of party unity and looking toward November. Is he kidding? How is it a "major concession" to ask the committee to consider following long-standing rules? It also doesn't at all take into consideration the unique position Florida Democrats were placed in by their Republican state legislature and Governor.
Both Tina Flourmoy and Alice Huffman asked Wexler how, if the committee made the decision to reinstating all of Florida's delegates, that would lead to party disunity rather than unity?
HUFFMAN: Some of us here might truly believe that the Democrats were not at fault for what happened in Florida. What I'm confused about -- I'm interested in the voters -- why would seating them all be disunity rather than unity?
WEXLER: I wish you had asked that question last year.
HUFFMAN: I couldn't for see such a primary a year ago, so forgive me for not being able to see that crystal ball. I've gotten thousands of letters and emails from people requesting that they have their votes counted.
WEXLER: Nobody cares more about having every vote count more than me.
Wexler clearly decided to dodge the question, instead of answer it, and to instead became confrontational. How does that jive with "Mr. Unity"?
The committee then focused its attention on Michigan.
Mark Brewer, MI Democratic Party Chair, is asking that all delegates be seated, saying that if they are not it would hurt the parties chances to take the state in November. He is presenting what seems like kind of a convoluted proposal on how the delegates should be allocated. The Clinton camp wants them allocated 73-55 in accordance with the election results. The Obama camp wants them split equally between the two candidates.
Brewer is proposing a "compromise", to allocated 69 delegates to Sen. Clinton and 59 delegates to Sen. Obama. He has presented a formula that includes exit polls and write-in votes in determining that number.
Sen. Carl Levin then outline for everyone how Michigan came to be in this position. I won't rehash the whole thing, but it seems like he is basically upset that Iowa and New Hampshire are always allowed to go first and second, and that the RBC reneged on a promise to MI after the 2004 election. He contends that NH was given a waiver, allowing them to "break the rules" -- while his state was punished by having all the delegates taken away.
It seems like a fair point.
It must be noted is that many of Obama's supporters seemed to be arguing not for the rights of the voters in FL and MI, but for the rights of the people who didn't come out to vote. Donna Brazil made a particularly impassioned comment about this, which drew boo's from the audience. I just found it an odd argument.
After an extended lunch, presumably to work out some sort of agreement, the committee returned to consider motions regarding the two challenges.
The Florida decision: Seat all the delegates, pledged and superdelegates, with one half vote. Not what the Florida representatives in the audience wanted, but the only vote that would pass the committee. Alice Huffman should be commended for her heartfelt presentation on behalf of the committee members who wanted to seat all the delegates, with full voting representation. The Huffman motion recognized that the decision to move the primary date was outside the control of Florida voters and state elected officials. Sadly, 15 members of the committee didn't see it that way.
The Michigan decision: Seat all the delegates, give each delegate half a vote, and allocate the votes as follows: 69 for Senator Clinton and 59 for Senator Obama. Harold Ickes commented that the motion would "hijack" 4 delegates from Sen. Clinton, overturning the judgement of 600,000 voters in Michigan. The vote, 19 in favor of the motion and 8 votes against, is essentially the MDP's position -- which has no basis whatsoever in the rules.
The decision not only takes four delegates from Clinton, but it gives 59 delegates to Obama that he didn't earn. What came through loud and clear today is that the Obama campaign was absolutely unwilling to compromise at all.
The new delegate total needed to secure the nomination is now 2118. The Associate Press reports the decision today gives Obama 2,052 delegates and Clinton 1,877.
Florida and Michigan will have some representation in Denver, but I don't see how the decisions today
will bring the results party leaders were hoping for. With the Obama camp so unwilling to compromise, how can there be party unity?
