Friday, April 25, 2008

DNC to hear MI and FL challenges on May 31st

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at

From Marc Ambinder

TO: DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee Members

FROM: Alexis Herman & Jim Roosevelt, Jr., Co-Chairs

DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC)

SUBJECT: Meeting Announcement–May 31, 2008

DATE: April 25, 2008

Realizing that members have very busy schedules, we wanted to notify you as soon as possible that the RBC will meet on Saturday, May 31, 2008 in Washington, D.C. We are asking members to arrive on Friday, May 30, 2008 in time for a private informal dinner with us. While we expect the RBC meeting to last most of the day on Saturday, we are asking members not to make their departure plans until Sunday.

The main item of business on the Committee’s agenda will be the consideration of two pending challenges.

We hope you are able to attend this very important RBC meeting. Further information, including meeting agenda and meeting logistics, will be forwarded to you in the near future.

Please note that this is an official meeting of the RBC. Therefore, we would like to remind members of the attendance requirement established in the Bylaws (Article Two, Section 10.(g)). Members who miss three consecutive RBC meetings are deemed to have resigned from the Committee. Registering a proxy, while important for establishing a quorum and assuring your vote is represented, does not count for the purpose of attendance at a meeting.
First Read's take:
Members of the RBC could potentially come to the meeting with an agreed-upon solution that would quash the issue. But if that doesn’t happen -- something that has seemed a near impossibility so far -- the committee would take up the complaints and possibly vote on them. If those challenges are voted down, then any further appeals would have to be made to that Credentials Committee.
Update: The Regulations of the Rules and Bylaws Committee


Yamaka said...

Will this Meeting resolve the most important question of whether the FL and MI delegates will be seated as per the Primary votes?

Or this is something different?

Cheers. :-) :-)

Amot said...

The answer is no! They will first consider if they will seat ANY delegate at all and after that how those delegates will be seated. And if they go by current schedule only - that will not be the end of the drama, just the next phase!
If new challenge(s) is(are) filed before May 31st it doesn't mean they will discuss it because that's not the procedure. However if there is agreement with both campaigns by May 31st that can be the end of the story, but such agreement is highly unlikely given the current situation!

Lydia Logue said...

I have several friends and relatives in Michigan, who didn't vote in the primary, because they were told their vote wouldn't be counted. So if the DNC changes its mind, it should have a new election or caucus. Otherwise the DNC is still not letting everyones vote count. It is apparent though that the Republicans want to run against Hillary, because they know how much it will help get republicans and others to support to McCain.

page in Jax said...

It's just silly for someone to say their vote didn’t count when they chose not to vote! In Michigan there was powerful message to BO supporters to vote uncommitted. 230,000 democrats voted uncommitted, why would they do that if "someone" told them their votes wouldn't count? Check out what was really happening:

I am a Florida Democrat and I knew about the DNC "punishment", but I also felt that somehow my vote would eventually count and this primary was not the only item on the ballot in Florida. I felt it was important for the nation to know who the Democrats in Florida wanted as the nominee.

Obama will lose to McCain:

Clinton will beat McCain:

The DNC should reconsider their punishment, since Obama violated his agreement not to campaign in either state and because the DNC allowed other states to move their primary/caucus dates, in violations of the rules, without punishment. Dean and the rules committee are on an extreme power trip. They should let the will of the voters stand! In MI, BO should be awarded no more that two-thirds of the uncommitted votes, since Edwards was campaigning for those votes too.

The Fat Admin said...

...and picked John Kerry for the 2004 election, so don't go with what's said there.

Anyway, Jax, your supposition that Obama campaigned in FLA is probability based on the CNN ad, since you don't specify what you're referring to. But keep in mind that Clinton also campaigned and was physically present at campaign events in both states (unlike Obama). She also did not receive any punishment.

It is just too bad that the DNC fell for the GOP's trick to cause confusion and chaos in FLA by moving the primary. Now Clinton is playing right into their hands. The members of the FLA DNC made their bed, now they should lie in it.

Gil said...

would someone let me know if these proceedings will be on TV?

Matt said...

If Congress is not in session, I would imagine CSPAN might cover them, although not necessarily live.

ocnus said...

It was bad enough when the Republican's tore up my ballot in 2000 (Palm Beach County absentee). Now the Democrats are doing the same to me. Is there a parety who will count my vote?

Jacky said...

How in the world can the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee consider giving Hillary extra votes other than OUTRIGHT RACISM? The DNC made a ruling and everyone, including Hillary, agreed to it. Now, the Clintons are making a FARCE of the DNC and the entire DEMOCRATIC PROCESS.
Hillary can come up with all the states and maps that she wants, but SHE CANNOT PROVE A HYPOTHETICAL. I am sure that the Clintons had similar maps that "proved" she could beat Barack, but she didn't, did she? And, we all know that OPERATION CHAOS had a lot to do with Hillary's "wins"; this same group will NOT SUPPORT HER in the Fall expecially if McCain runs against someone like Barr who at least has 1/2 a grain of sense.
I can say with assuredly that if Californians were to vote again, we would put Barack over the top, now that we have had a chance to learn all about him and sense his great ethics and extreme intelligence. And, what about the millions of voters in Florida and Michigan who would have voted for Barack had we thought it would have counted ... had we thought we could have come back and try to strong-arm the DNC as the Clintons are attempting to do?
Unfortunately, what had started out to be a beautiful democratic campaign whereby Barack has energized millions of new and previously disenchanted voters of all races, creed, color, sexual origin to get involved is now starting to stink like "America as Usual".

Buddy1 said...

Barack Obama, George Bush Jr. and Ralph Nader have something in common. They are extremely arrogant and it offends me to consider having another arrogant politician in the White House. As a life long Democrat I will NOT vote for Obama; the racism comes from the Blacks 90% vote for him doesn't fit 90% of all blacks really have the same political views? Not. I will sit out this election if Obama is the Democratic nominee. Too much arrogance is dangerous to our Democracy.


Dan said...

I am a 63 year old retired military man from Tennessee and I have been voting strictly for democrates for more than 40 years.

If the democratic party does not count all of the deligate votes from Florida and Michigan, I will register as an independant, vote for John McCain in November, and never vote for another democrate.

I can not support a party that does not feel they need to obide by the US Constitution and allow all citizens the right to vote.

Dan Lewis