DNC Tries to Settle Florida, Michigan Delegate Problem
March 6, 2008
The Democratic National Committee decided that delegates from Florida and Michigan would not be seated at this year’s Democratic National Convention because the two states broke party rules by holding their election contests before February 5. Now, though, there is concern that alienating the two states’ voters could hurt the party in November. But the solution is not a simple one. With the race between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama so close in the delegate count, if (and how) delegates from the two states are counted could determine which candidate gets the party’s nomination.
Senator Clinton wants the delegates to be seated. All of the Democratic candidates agreed not to campaign in either state to honor the party rules, but Clinton kept her name on the ballots, whereas the other major candidates did not*. She won both states, and would gain a significant number of delegates if they are seated. Her supporters in both states, as well as their governors, want their votes to count.
However, voters who supported Barack Obama (or any other candidate at the time) argue that they did not vote because they thought it wouldn’t count. They, along with Senator Obama, do not want the delegates seated because they feel it would give Clinton an unfair advantage. They argue that Florida and Michigan knew the rules and chose to break them anyway.
DNC Chairman Howard Dean made his position clear on CNN’s American Morning: “The rules were set a year and a half ago. Florida and Michigan voted for them and then decided that they didn’t need to abide by the rules. When you’re in a contest you do need to abide by the rules. You can not violate the rules of the process and then expect to get forgiven for it.”
This situation puts the DNC between a rock and a hard place. The first problem is that not seating the delegates could have a negative impact on their candidate in the general election in November. If voters from Florida and Michigan feel that the Democratic Party disenfranchised them, they may not be willing to turn out to vote for the Democratic candidate – a serious problem especially in Florida, a state rich with electoral votes. The second problem is that they do not want to simply “forgive” the two states for fear that party rules will not be adhered to in the future. They are also concerned about unfairly tipping the nomination process in one candidate’s favor.
There is more than one option, however. The Republicans faced a similar problem, but already have a solution. Candidates stayed on the ballots, but the states’ numbers of delegates will be cut in half. This solution would pose problems with the Democrats, though, since Clinton was the only major candidate to stay on the ballot in those states.
The most popular option for Democrats involves a compromise – a do-over: “DNC officials have suggested to both Michigan and Florida that holding another presidential contest of some kind would be one way to get the delegates seated” (CBS). The governors of both states (one of whom is a Republican, the other a Democrat) have so far not been welcoming to the idea, calling it too expensive. However, if no other option is seen as fair or viable by all concerned, it may be the only way to go.
Comments (with poll)
*Correction: Senator Obama was on the ballot in Florida, but he was not on the ballot in Michigan.
