Michigan Democratic leaders ask for full seating of their delegates with 69/59 split

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Several Michigan Democratic leaders sent a letter to the chairs of the RBC last week requesting that the Michigan delegation be fully seated in August.
Here's the key section:

As a result, we recommended to the Michigan Democratic Party that the pledged delegates be apportioned 69 to Senator Clinton and 59 to Senator Obama. That approach splits the difference between the 73/55 position of the Clinton campaign and the 64/64 position of the Obama campaign. Our recommendation was based on our belief that both candidates have legitimate arguments about the Michigan primary.

This 69/59 approach was overwhelmingly adopted by the Executive Committee of the Michigan Democratic Party – which like the Rules and Bylaws Committee has members who are strong advocates for both candidates – as a position that can unify our party and put this issue behind us.

To that end, both of our presidential candidates have made clear that they want Michigan’s delegates to be seated without penalty.

You can see what the results would be in our Florida & Michigan by the numbers post.
And the letter in it's entirety:

May 22, 2008

Honorable Alexis Herman
Mr. James Roosevelt, Jr.
Co-Chairs, Rules and Bylaws Committee
Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol St., SE
Washington, DC 20004

Dear Co-Chairs Herman and Roosevelt:

We are writing to urge the Rules and Bylaws Committee to support the request of the Michigan Democratic Party that the entire 157-member Michigan delegation to the 2008 Democratic National Convention be seated with full voting strength.

The members of the Rules and Bylaws Committee are familiar with the sequence of events that have brought us to the present situation.

As a result of the hard-fought deliberations and recommendations of the Commission on Presidential Nomination Timing and Scheduling, in August of 2006 the Democratic National Committee adopted a new rule on sequencing presidential primaries and caucuses. Under this rule, the so-called pre-window states could each hold their presidential primary or caucus in January 2008, with the rest of the states following in February or later. The rule dictated that the pre-window states hold their primaries in a specific order — with New Hampshire coming third — and no earlier than designated dates between January 14 and 29.

While Michigan Democrats were disappointed that our state was not selected for one of the pre-window contests, we appreciated the new rule for adding a bit of much-needed diversity to the early nominating process, and as a first step toward breaking the Iowa-New Hampshire lock on the process. We notified the DNC that we would abide by the new calendar and its sequence provided that other states did the same. To be clear – the key issue which the new rule resolved was the sequence of the pre-window states, not just the number of pre-window states.

But at a press conference in Dover, New Hampshire last August 9, the New Hampshire Secretary of State indicated he was going to schedule his state’s primary before the date specified in the DNC rule, clearly defying the sequence and timing the Rules and Bylaws Committee had set. Michigan Democratic leaders wrote to Governor Dean asking if the DNC intended to enforce the rule against New Hampshire, but the DNC refused to act or even to answer our letters for months.

The Democratic National Committee then proceeded to selectively enforce its calendar rule. On December 3, the Rules and Bylaws Committee voted to give New Hampshire a waiver to move from third to second place in the sequence. Michigan requested a waiver and was denied. When the Rules and Bylaws Committee itself decided not to follow its own newly adopted, hard-fought for rules and granted a waiver to New Hampshire, it set the stage for the present situation.

How do we move forward and put all of our energy into winning the White House in November? We all agree that winning Michigan is crucial to that goal.

At the request of the Governor of Michigan, the four of us have worked to find a solution for many months. We looked at a number of options to “redo” Michigan’s primary vote, including a privately-funded state-run primary; a party-run primary; and even a vote-by-mail primary. We had extensive discussions with the Clinton and Obama campaign organizations and with the DNC staff in the course of considering these options. Unfortunately, for differing reasons, none of the “redo” options came to pass.

So we developed the following settlement recommendation to the Michigan Democratic Party.

The Clinton campaign has taken the position that the results of Michigan’s January 15 primary should be honored and that Senator Clinton should receive 73 pledged delegates in accordance with the vote she received. The Obama campaign has taken the position that the January 15 primary results should be ignored and that Michigan’s 128 pledged delegates should be seated but evenly divided 64/64 between the two candidates.

Both candidates have a basis for their argument. The January 15 primary result was flawed because Senator Obama took his name off the ballot. He interpreted the DNC injunction and his pledge to New Hampshire that he would not campaign in Michigan to require him to take that affirmative step. As a result, we did not totally agree with the Clinton campaign’s position that the pledged delegates should be apportioned 73/55 (Clinton/Obama) in strict accordance with the outcome of the primary.

At the same time, we also did not accept the position of the Obama campaign that the primary should be totally ignored and the pledged delegates should be evenly apportioned 64/64 between the two candidates, given the fact that almost 600,000 Democrats voted in the January 15 primary, 55% of whom voted for Senator Clinton and 45% of whom voted for Uncommitted or other candidates.

As a result, we recommended to the Michigan Democratic Party that the pledged delegates be apportioned 69 to Senator Clinton and 59 to Senator Obama. That approach splits the difference between the 73/55 position of the Clinton campaign and the 64/64 position of the Obama campaign. Our recommendation was based on our belief that both candidates have legitimate arguments about the Michigan primary.

This 69/59 approach was overwhelmingly adopted by the Executive Committee of the Michigan Democratic Party – which like the Rules and Bylaws Committee has members who are strong advocates for both candidates – as a position that can unify our party and put this issue behind us.

To that end, both of our presidential candidates have made clear that they want Michigan’s delegates to be seated without penalty.

Senator Obama recently said, “If I am fortunate enough to be the Democratic nominee, I can guarantee you that the Michigan delegation will be seated and they’ll have a full voice at the convention.” Senator Clinton said just this week, “If we care about winning [Michigan and Florida] in November, we need to count your votes now. If Democrats send the message that we don’t fully value your votes, we know that Senator McCain and the Republicans will be more than happy to have them.”

Senator Clinton and Senator Obama understand that penalizing Michigan would needlessly and pointlessly wound their candidacy. If you vote to penalize Michigan, you will keep this issue alive, distracting from the real issues in the campaign. You would also be penalizing our candidates and our party, and ultimately our nation, because you would be weakening our nominee’s chances of winning Michigan, a state that is critical to our winning the White House in November.

We believe that the Michigan Democratic Party’s consensus proposal can unify our party and allow us to move forward. We urge the Rules and Bylaws Committee to adopt it. To penalize Michigan would legitimize the selective enforcement of our party rules, would fly in the face of the statements of both candidates, and would jeopardize our chances of carrying Michigan and winning the Presidency. For all of these reasons, we must insist on Michigan’s full delegation being seated at the Democratic National Convention with full voting rights.

Sincerely,

Senator Carl Levin Representative Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick

UAW President Ron Gettelfinger DNC Member Debbie Dingell

cc: Members of the Rules and ByLaws Committee
Governor Howard Dean
Senator Hillary Clinton
Senator Barack Obama

The big question is will the RBC be willing to fully seat Michigan? DNC lawyers told the RBC that they can't seat more than half of each delegation?

Michigan delegate update

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

As we've noted, Florida has been stripped of its delegates due its early primary. Michigan's situation, however, is a little more complicated:

As Iowa voters gear up for Thursday’s caucuses, Michigan Democrats have just a few days to change their scheduled Jan. 15 presidential primary or lose all their delegates to the Democratic National Convention in August. The conflict began when Michigan’s legislature set the Jan. 15 primary so voters could exercise greater influence over the selection of the party nominees for the 2008 presidential race, but Michigan Democrats appear likely to end up with no delegates at all and thus little clout at the national party convention in Denver.

The rule-making division of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) recommended on Dec. 1 that the party strip the Michigan Democratic Party of its 156 delegates because of the state’s non-compliance with national party rules. The DNC set Feb. 5 as the earliest date states can schedule their nominating contests [outside of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada]].
...
At the Dec. 1 meeting, the Rules and Bylaws Committee gave the state party 30 days to get into compliance with national regulations before the committee’s recommendation became final and Michigan lost its delegates. The clock started ticking Dec. 5, when the Michigan Democratic Party received the DNC’s official notice. So unless the state party takes action by Saturday to return to its DNC-approved plan to hold a Feb. 9 state party-run caucus, it will lose its delegates. The Michigan Democratic Party has done nothing to indicate it intends to change from the Jan. 15 primary and party Chairman Mark Brewer has said there are no plans to do so.

Assuming Michigan does not change its date, given that Edwards and Obama are not on the Michigan ballot, if the media uses Michigan's delegates in their summaries, that will be a big psychologist boost for Clinton.

Update: Jerome Armstrong over at MyDD has more on Michigan:

For some reason I never got to the bottom of, Obama & Edwards both made the bone-headed idea of dropping out of the Michigan primary-- why, does anyone know?

But as with Florida, the delegates will likely get restored:

The net effect of the DNC's banning Michigan's 156 delegates from participating in next summer's presidential nomination process will be a penalty that is not enforced:

"I don't think it'll affect much of anything. All of the nominees said they'd seat delegates. We'll have delegates in August. (The exclusion) is not expected to be enforced," DeRoche said, noting it would reflect poorly on the candidates during the presidential election in November if they were not to allow the votes of two states as sizable as Michigan and Florida during the primary process.

Yes, it would be a disaster. Since all the candidates are apparently already on the record for allowing Michigan's delegates to the convention, that makes the Jan 15th contest there much more than a "beauty contest" as there are going to be 156 delegates that are chosen.

If the media counts Michigan, Michigan's delegates almost guarantee Clinton a delegate lead going into Super Tuesday. And I don't think the DNC can do anything about it.

In surprise move, DNC says MI and FL will be seated on standing committees

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Surprising a number of folks, the DNC announced that Florida and Michigan's representatives to the standing Credentials Committee will be seated, regardless of whether their delegates are ultimately seated at the convention.

Why is this important? Because the Credentials Committee will be the one that ultimately decides whether the state delegations are seated at the convention, especially if the situation remains unresolved going all the way up to August. While each state will be barred from voting on the seating of their own delegates, they can vote on each other's, creating some interesting opportunities for horse-trading votes.

The article at Politico quotes a number of folks as being confused as to how MI and FL can be included in the standing committee if their delegates cannot be seated:
Allan Katz, the lone member of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee to vote against sanctioning Florida in August 2007, said the DNC’s current position “strikes me as odd.”

Katz, a Florida superdelegate who supports Obama, added that, “it doesn’t make any sense to presume that a full cadre of representatives from Florida and Michigan could serve on these committees absent there being a delegation.”

Katz, like all those interviewed, was also quick to offer the benefit of the doubt to DNC leadership. But, he said, “there is a lack of structural sense to this. I think people are confused.”

Marc Ambinder over at The Atlantic agrees with the DNC, stating that any sanctions that affect a state's membership on the standing committee's is a separate sanction that has to be adopted independently, and this was not done for either Florida or Michigan.

My own analysis of the Democratic Party's National Call to Convention also supports the DNC view.

Rule 7.A.1 and 3 states that:

Base: A base of 161 members, casting 158 votes, allocated to the states and territories in accordance with the same distribution formula used to allocate
delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

3. Delegate Status: Members of the standing committees need not be delegates or alternates to the Democratic National Convention.

What may cause some difficulty is that the allocation of each state's delegation to the standing committees must match the results of that state's presidential preferences (Rule 7.C.1) . How this would work in Michigan, where Obama wasn't even on the ballot, is currently unknown.

According to the Politico article, neither Obama nor Clinton have a majority of votes on the Credentials Committee to sway it either way should a challenge reach them. It is believed that by including Florida and Michigan on the committee, it would benefit Clinton as the states will have the ability to press their state's case and vote on the other's status. Combined the two states have 14 votes (8 for Florida and 6 for Michigan - Appendix D of the Call to Convention).

Assuming that the issue still doesn't get resolved at the Credentials Committee, Clinton's last hope would be for a "Minority Report" from the Credentials Committee to be adopted and passed to the full convention delegates. When the proposal to adopt the Credentials Committee report is introduced, Clinton can hope that a majority of delegates vote to reject the report without Florida and Michigan added, forcing the Committee to re-convene and bring up a new proposal for adoption. The Convention would then be stuck until a final Credentials Report could be adopted (Rule 7.C.1). Only a 20% vote would be required to include a Minority Report to the full convention.

But that's getting way ahead of ourselves. For now, it increases the drama and pressure for a solution prior to the convention in August.

Update from Matt: The Michigan Primary is still dead:

A re-vote in Michigan is likely dead on arrival after Michigan Democratic Party leaders conceded "it is not practical to conduct" a primary or caucus re-vote. The Obama campaign has now called for a 50-50 split of the Michigan delegates. The Clinton campaign, however, says Michigan "votes cannot be ignored" and is circulating a petition to still count votes and delegates from Michigan and Florida

Will Michigan matter?

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

We've been making fun of the Michigan delegation's lack of hotel rooms at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, but with the Michigan primary two days away, it's time to get serious. Michigan was stripped of all its delegates (both elected and superdelegates) because they violated the DNC's rules on frontloading of primaries. The DNC had good intentions - trying to bring some order to the mad rush to move each state's primary earlier and earlier in order to have an effect on the nomination - and they used the only power they had - stripping of delegates.

So where does that leave us? With a primary on Tuesday with technically no delegates at stake, and even stranger, only Hillary Clinton in the ballot. How did this happen?:

It started within the Obama camp, and they would only pull themselves off of the Michigan ballot if Edwards also agreed to pull his name from the ballot. They also got some other candidates to go along with the move. Let me be clear, for those candidates, it wasn't a request by Obama's team, but a ultimatum-- 'we will only pull out if you will too.'

I don't know the strategy behind what the Obama team thought they would achieve by pulling out of Michigan. My guess is that they thought they could bully Clinton into also withdrawing.

So Clinton is on the ballot, and Obama and Edwards are not. So Clinton's a lock to win, right? Not necessarily. Uncommitted delegates are about to have their biggest day in the Democratic sun since Jimmy Carter placed second to Uncommitted in the 1976 Iowa caucuses:

Top Michigan Democrats made another plea Wednesday to coax supporters of presidential candidates Barack Obama and John Edwards to vote "uncommitted" in Tuesday's Michigan primary, rather than staying home or crossing over to vote in the Republican contest.
...
U.S. Sen. Carl Levin and state Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer said Michigan Dems can still have an indirect say in the nominating process if they check the "uncommitted" box on the ballot. State law prohibits write-ins for candidates who have not authorized write-in campaigns; Obama, Edwards and Richardson have not.

If "uncommitted" draws at least 15 percent of the vote in a congressional district, delegates not bound to any candidate could be sent to the national convention, possibly enabling Obama and Edwards supporters to play a role in the nomination.

And of course, we have a poll: Hillary Clinton with 48%, "Uncommitted" with 28%.

So Clinton is likely going to win most of the delegates. But will it have any effect? We asked in December, Will the Media Count Florida and Michigan? And the answer is pretty clear now, and it's NO. No major media delegate counting site I've seen is counting the Michigan delegates or including them in their overall numbers. Not CNN, not CBS, and not the AP. So while Clinton may win the lion's share of delegates, and while these delegates may even eventually be seated at the convention, they will not help her to achieve a bigger delegate majority than she already has. And that is a victory for the Obama team.

FL & MI By The Numbers

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Please see the newest FL & MI By the Numbers post.

There are all sorts of scenarios concerning Florida and Michigan, and the latest one is proposal by Michigan Dems propose 69-59 split. We've taken five of the most likely and interesting ones and run the numbers.

The scenarios are:

1. Do not seat Florida or Michigan. Current Official DNC rules
2. Seat Michigan based on new Michigan Democratic Party Proposal of 69-59 split with full vote for superdelegates, but not Florida.
3. Seat Florida, based on January election, but not Michigan. FL Pledged delegates get ½ vote, superdelegate get a full vote.
4. Combine scenario 2 and scenario 3. FL 1/2 vote, MI 69-59 split and Super full vote.
5. Seat FL & MI based on the elections that have taken place. (Obama does not gets MI 55 uncommitted). This scenario is in the left sidebar.

We are not endorsing any of these scenarios. We're just providing information so our readers can judge how each scenario will affect the race.

List of Florida and Michigan superdelegates.

FL & MI SCENARIOS
Scenario 1: Do not seat Florida or Michigan. Current Official DNC rules
Delegates Available: 4049		Nomination: 2025.0			PD majority: 1627.0
	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Others(1)	NYA(2)	YTV(3)	Total
Pledged Delegates(GP)	1656.5	1501.5	9	--	--	86	3253
Needed for PD majority	Clinched!	--	--	--	--	--	--
Superdelegates (DCW)	306.5	278.5	--	211	--	--	796
Total Delegates	1963.0	1780.0	9	211	--	86	4049
Delegates Lead	183.0	--	--	--	--	--	--
Needed to win Nomination	62.0	245.0	--	--	--	Left	297
Scenario 2: Seat Michigan based on new the proposal 69-59 split, but not Florida.
Delegates Available: 4206.0		Nomination: 2103.5			PD majority: 1691.0
	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Others(1)	NYA(2)	YTV(3)	Total
Pledged Delegates(GP)	1656.5	1501.5	9	0	--	86	3253
MI Pledged Delegates	59	69	0	0	--	0	128
Needed for PD majority	Clinched!	--	--	--	--	--	--
Superdelegates (DCW)	306.5	278.5	--	211	--	--	796
MI Superdelegates	5	7	--	17	--	--	29
Total Delegates	2027.0	1856.0	9	228	--	86	4206
Delegates Lead	171.0	--	--	--	--	--	--
Delegates needed to win Nomination	76.5	247.5	--	--	--	Left	314
Scenario 3: Seat Florida, based on January election, but not Michigan. FL Pledged get ½ votes, superdelegates get full vote.
Delegates Available: 4167.5		Nomination: 2084.0			PD majority: 1673.0
	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Others(1)	NYA(2)	YTV(3)	Total
Pledged Delegates(GP)	1656.5	1501.5	9	0	--	86	3253
FL 1/2 Pledged Delegates(GP)	34.5	52.5.5	5.5	0	--	0	92.5
Needed for PD majority	Clinched!	--	--	--	--	--	--
Superdelegates (DCW)	306.5	278.5	--	211	--	--	796
FL Superdelegates	5	8	--	13	--	--	26
Total Delegates	1997.5	1832.5	14.5	224	--	86	4167.5
Delegates Lead	165.0	--	--	--	--	--	--
Delegates needed to win Nomination	86.5	251.5	--	--	--	Left	310
Scenario 4: Combine scenario 2 and scenario 3. FL 1/2 vote, MI 69-59 split and Super full vote.
Delegates Available: 4324.5		Nomination: 2162.5			PD majority: 1737.0
	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Others(1)	NYA(2)	YTV(3)	Total
Pledged Delegates(GP)	1656.5	1501.5	9	0	--	86	3253
MI Pledged Delegates	59	69	--	--	--	--	128
FL Pledged Delegates	34.5	52.5	5.5	--	--	--	92.5
Needed for PD majority	Clinched!	--	--	--	--	--	--
Superdelegates (DCW)	306.5	278.5	--	211	--	--	796
MI Superdelegates	5	7	--	17	--	--	29
FL Superdelegates	5	8	--	13	--	--	26
Total Delegates	2056.5	1901.5	14.5	241	--	86	4324.5
Delegates Lead	155.0	--	--	--	--	--	--
Delegates needed to win Nomination	106.0	261.0	--	--	--	Left	327
Scenario 5: Seat FL & MI based on the elections that have taken place. (Obama does not get MI 55 uncommitted).
Delegates Available: 4417.0		Nomination: 2209.0			PD majority: 1783.5
	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Others(1)	NYA(2)	YTV(3)	Total
Pledged Delegates(GP)	1725.5	1679.5	20	55	--	86	3566
Needed for PD majority	58.0	104.0	--	--	--	--	--
Superdelegates (DCW)	316.5	293.5	--	241	--	--	851
Total Delegates	2042.0	1973.0	20	296	--	86	4417
Delegates Lead	69.0	--	--	--	--	--	--
Delegates needed to win Nomination	167.0	236.0	--	--	--	Left	382
Last Updated: 05/21/2008 4:00 PM(EST)

Notes: The scenarios and table are sorted from the highest candidate's lead to the lowest.

Others(1): Include Unknown, Uncommitted & No endorsements yet
NYA(2): Not Yet Assigned.
YTV(3): Not Yet Voted.

DNC Still Unsure On Issue Of Seating Florida Delegates

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

On Tuesday night, Florida's nine congressmen voted to oppose a mail-in vote proposition put forth by Florida Democratic State Chairman, Karen Thurman. Thurman has urged the national and state party, as well as both Senators Clinton and Obama to consider a combined vote-by-mail/in-person plan to serve as a re-do of Florida's premature January 29th presidential primary. This is just the latest news in the ongoing struggle the DNC faces in figuring out how to get the Florida and Michigan delegates seated in August.

First, an introduction:
As this is my first contribution to this site, my friends at 2008 Democratic Convention Watch encouraged me to say hello. My name is Anthony Timperman, and amongst certain other duties, I am the publisher of Waxpolitic.blogspot.com . I will be contributing regularly here at DCW up to and after the Convention. I hope you will stop by and join in our forum at Wax Politic from time to time as well. There... hello. Back to Florida.

Thurman's plan calls for all of Florida's 4.1 million Democrats to be mailed a ballot. They could send it back or cast a ballot in one of 50 regional voting centers. The election would end June 3rd, a week before a Democratic National Committee deadline to name delegates. Price to Florida voters? $10 to 12 million to be exact. Asked how she felt about the chances of her proposal being actualized State Party Chair Thurman replied,

I have a feeling that this is probably closer to not, than yes.

So what needs to get done at the national level for Florida and Michigan to seat their delegates?

In Michigan the DNC and state party leaders who include Governor Jennifer Granholm, a Clinton supporter, are working to get on the same page. The stumbling block is how to pass legislation that would agree on spending privately raised funds for a re-do. If this happens, it looks likely that an early June vote is possible.

In Florida, it may take a more novel approach. One idea would seat Florida's existing delegates at the convention with half a vote each. Florida's superdelegates would then be given a vote in Denver. (Senator Bill Nelson is floating this idea also). A curious proposition, but one that seems to make more sense logistically for those legislators in Florida who contend that a mail-in re-do is far more involved than some would like to think. They're using Oregon, whose mail-in ballot process took years to iron out, as evidence. Talk from DNC headquarters makes obvious the fact that no one wants this dragging out until the National Convention in August.

The best option is whatever we can get the candidates to agree with, which puts a vote back in the hands of the people of Florida and Michigan. And that's going to be not so easy to do. - DNC Chairman Howard Dean

The Clinton and Obama camps have different stances but each continues to publicly assuage fears that they would interfere with the rules the DNC laid out. Senator Clinton, having won both Florida and Michigan (although she was the only major candidate on the Michigan ballot), is hopeful that these two states' delegations will swing a hotly contentious race in her favor. Obama strategists have publicly called into question the timing of Senator Clinton's heightened focus on the issue.

We'll keep on top of this in the coming days to find out how party leaders in Florida and Michigan will sort through all of the political jockeying and logistical hurdles.

Update (from Matt): The DNC is playing hardball with Florida:

Florida Democrats got a stern warning Friday from the co-chairman of a group that will determine whether the state gets a say in the presidential race: Hold a re-vote, or risk not getting seated at the party convention to pick a nominee.

"It's the responsibility of the state Democratic Party to come up with a [re-vote] proposal that complies with the rules and has the support and the planning that's needed within the state," James Roosevelt, who runs the Democratic National Committee's credentials committee, told the South Florida Sun-Sentinel.

Florida's Democratic leaders had floated the idea of a June 3 redo election to comply with national party rules, which the state violated with its Jan. 29 primary. But the re-vote plan was opposed by Florida's congressional delegation and faces many logistic obstacles.

The DNC's credentials committee, which has two other co-chairmen and about 200 members, most of whom are still to be named by the presidential candidates, has the power to decide whether Florida and Michigan get a say at the nominating convention. The two states were punished for moving up their primary dates in violation of national party rules.

A re-vote "seems to be moving forward in Michigan; it seems to be a little bit stalled in Florida," said Roosevelt, a former official in Bill Clinton's administration appointed to his party post by DNC Chairman Howard Dean. "If they can do it in Michigan, I don't see why they couldn't do it in Florida."

Roosevelt's comments drew a swift rebuke from Florida Senate Democratic leader Steve Geller, who said the national party is flirting with disaster by threatening to snub Florida.

"What the DNC fails to understand is that not only are they giving away the presidency, we're apparently heading toward a Democratic National Convention that is a repeat of Chicago in 1968," said Geller, D-Cooper City, referring to the most chaotic Democratic convention in modern history.

There's been some talk that the Credentials Committee would be pro-Clinton because of the Clinton ties of the three heads. I think the above makes it clear that the person pulling the strings of the Credentials Committee will be Howard Dean.

Michigan Primary today... Democratic Debate in Nevada tonight

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Matt asked last week Will Michigan Matter? We probably won't find that out today but we will find out what the disenfranchised Michigan Democratic voters decide to do.

I've seen several different proposals on what we may see today. The first is very low voter turnout on the Democratic side. This is pretty much a given as any votes made for the Democrats will be ignored as far as delegates are concerned.

With only Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel on the ballot will people give a token vote to Kucinich? Will Hillary win in a landslide? Any write-ins for Obama or Edwards will automatically be thrown out so what will their supporters do?

Another option is to vote "Uncommitted" If 15% of the vote goes to Uncommitted some of the delegates will be divided between the candidates not on the ballot.

And last but not least, Markos Moulitsas from Daily Kos has an interesting idea.... vote for Mitt Romney.

With a history of meddling in our primaries, why don't we try and return the favor. Next Tuesday, January 15th, Michigan will hold its primary. Michigan Democrats should vote for Mitt Romney, because if Mitt wins, Democrats win. How so?

For Michigan Democrats, the Democratic primary is meaningless since the DNC stripped the state of all its delegates (at least temporarily) for violating party rules. Hillary Clinton is alone on the ballot.

But on the GOP side, this primary will be fiercely contested. John McCain is currently enjoying the afterglow of media love since his New Hamsphire victory, while Iowa winner Mike Huckabee is poised to do well in South Carolina.

Meanwhile, poor Mitt Romney, who’s suffered back-to-back losses in the last week, desperately needs to win Michigan in order to keep his campaign afloat. Bottom line, if Romney loses Michigan, he's out. If he wins, he stays in.

And we want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us. We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan.

The Democratic Debate from Nevada can be seen at 9pm Eastern on MSNBC

The debate, which is cosponsored by the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, IMPACTO, 100 Black Men of America, the African American Democratic Leadership Council and the College of Southern Nevada, will include issues important to communities of color and will be telecast live by MSNBC at the Cashman Center in Las Vegas on Tuesday, January 15th from 6:00 ­ 8:00 pm Pacific Standard Time.

Nevada, the second state in the nation to hold a presidential caucus and the first in the West to host an early window nominating contest, was chosen as an early state in part because 40 percent of its population is minority.

Obama clinches non-MI/FL pledged delegate majority (and most MI/FL scenarios also)

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Sen. Barack Obama tonight clinched a majority of the pledged delegates as currently defined, not counting Michigan and Florida. Under the current rules there are 3,253 pledged delegates, a majority is 1,627, and according to the DCW numbers, based on The Green Papers and estimates of tonight delegate allocations, Obama will have more than 1,627 delegates when the night is over.

Is this important? Officially, no, but symbolically, it could be in the minds of the only people that matter at this point, the remaining uncommitted superdelegates. A few of them, in our Pelosi Club, have explicitly said they would vote for the pledged delegate leader, and many others have hinted at it.. If they define the pledged delegate count as not including Michigan and Florida, we may see a large number of superdelegates endorse Obama in the next few days.

However, most everyone thinks that the delegates of Michigan and Florida will be seated in some form. Even the Obama campaign has said they want the Michigan and Florida delegations seated (although not according to the votes that already happened). But given that we don't know in what form the Michigan and Florida delegations will be seated, we have to look at the different scenarios to see how Obama fares under each one.

Option 1: No FL & MI: Pledged Delegate Majority (PDM) Clinched with the Oregon polls closed.
Option 2: Seat MI as 69-59. PDM Clinched with the Oregon polls closed.
Option 3: Seat FL with 1/2 votes (supers get full vote). No Michigan delegates. PDM Clinched with the Oregon polls closed.
Option 4: FL 1/2 vote, MI 69-59 split. PDM Clinched with the Oregon polls closed.
Option 5: Seat FL & MI based on the elections that have taken place. Not clinched tonight.

This is the only option under which Obama will not clinch the PDM tonight. Going into tonight he needed 102 pledged delegates to clinch the PDM. Now some of our blogging brethren say, lets give Obama the 55 Uncommitted pledged delegates in Michigan. But that's difficult to do. First, 19 of the delegates haven't even been picked yet - they don't get chosen until mid-June. Second, estimates of the 36 which have been picked range from 26-35 for Obama. But these are not Obama pledged delegates, and major media organizations are not recognizing that these delegates have endorsed Obama. And you certainly won't see the Obama campaign show these endorsements, as they don't recognize the validity of the Michigan election at all.

So until the Michigan and Florida situation is resolved, there will be some room for debate on this issue.

Understand, though, it doesn't really matter what I think. It matters what the superdelegates think, and it will be very interesting to see how Nancy Pelosi, Jimmy Carter, and especially Clinton endorser Maria Cantwell and others respond this week.

Michigan and Florida Update

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

First, let me introduce myself. My name is Charlie Anthe, and I'm excited to be the newest contributing member to DCW! I've been blogging about both national politics and more regional issues of the Pacific Northwest from my blog The Foghorn, and I've been a long time listener, first time poster of DCW up until today. Please feel free to send me any feedback/ideas, of either my posts here or on my regular blog.

The current situation: Both state delegations remain ineligible to be seated at the national convention. Earlier attempts to broker some kind of "re-do" primary in both states have fallen through, mostly over two main issues: 1. Who would pay for a new election? and 2. Would a state election funded by out-of-state parties even be legal, and how could the results be validated as fair?

In Florida, legislative solutions were dim from the start. Both the Legislature and the Governor's mansion are controlled by Republicans, and they seem more than eager to watch the Democratic mess in their state continue while they sit back and share the popcorn. The Florida House Speaker was pretty emphatic about the issue:

"The state of Florida should not be involved in certifying or mediating intraparty squabbles," said House Speaker Marco Rubio. "The state did what its job is. We held a presidential preferential primary Jan. 29. It was legal, it was accurate, it was fair, it was open."

Further attempts to force the Florida delegation to be seated through the judiciary have also been nixed. Recently a federal appeals court upheld an earlier decision to not get involved.

In Michigan, while Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm had expressed interest in a re-do primary on June 3rd, the Michigan legislature recently adjourned without taking up the issue, making it impossible to implement. Most of the objections revolved around logistical concerns of setting up a new election in such a short period of time, as well as funding when the state is facing a $250 million shortfall it its upcoming FY 2009 budget forecast.

Earlier discussions of holding a caucus to apportion Michigan's delegates seem to be dead as well, or at least not mentioned at all by the governor in her statement after the legislature adjourned without approving the primary:

“I believe Senator Levin, Congresswoman Kilpatrick, National Committeewoman Debbie Dingell and U.A.W. President Ron Gettelfinger identified the fairest way for Michigan voters to have a voice in seating a delegation in Denver. They recommended to the Democratic National Committee (D.N.C.) that Michigan hold a state-run, privately funded primary.

I supported their recommendation, as did the D.N.C., and I am deeply disappointed that it is no longer a possibility. Now that the Legislature has decided not to act, we will turn our attention to other options. There is no road to the White House that does not go through Michigan, so it is essential that Michigan voters have a voice in who will be our party’s nominee and, ultimately, the next president of the United States.”

DNC Chairman Howard Dean has repeatedly stated that any solution would have to come with the agreement of both candidates:

"When you change the rules in the middle of the game, which is what's being proposed here, you've got to do it in a way that both campaigns agree is fair," he said.

Given that a re-do now looks increasingly impossible, the possibility of any negotiated solution also seems unlikely. Several solutions have been proposed by the various candidates, depending on how it favors them:

• Split the delegations 50/50 between Clinton and Obama. This solution is favored by the Obama camp, since it maintains their current delegate lead. As Clinton believes she would gain ground in these states (and based on the results in Florida is probably correct, Michigan is unknown given that Obama's name wasn't on the ballot), she is against this solution.


• Seat the delegations based on the existing primary results. Obviously, the Clinton campaign favors this solution as it would greatly benefit her, and the Obama campaign is heavily against it, stating that to do so would render the DNC rules useless.


• Some other solution as proposed by the state Democratic parties to the DNC Rules Committee (as permitted in the bylaws) that can be approved.

In Michigan, where Obama removed his name from the ballot after the state was stripped of their delegates, Clinton won 80 of 128 potential delegates. "Uncommitted", which Obama supporters encouraged voters to vote for in lieu of Obama's name won 55 delegates, but could support either candidate at the convention.

In Florida, Clinton beat Obama in pledged delegates by 113-71 (with 13 Edwards delegates) of 211 available.

All told, if Michigan and Florida were seated as-is, Clinton would receive a net gain of 122 pledged delegates (with 55 uncommitted and 13 Edwards). Also, each state's superdelegates would come into play, allowing Clinton to push her and Bill's connections through the party to gain more ground.

One other effect of adding both states back into the delegate picture would be to push the total number of delegates back up to 4,415, requiring 2,208 to win the nomination.

So where does this leave everything? Generally in one big royal mess. The do-over option now appears to be DOA in both states. Unless a brokered compromise can be agreed upon between the campaigns and submitted to the DNC in time, there are only a couple more possible options:

• A solution imposed through the judiciary. This is highly unlikely as Supreme Court decisions in the past have granted wide leeway to the parties to determine on their own how to select their own candidates.


• The issue continues up until the convention and lands in the hands of the Convention Credentials Committee. The Committee is the final authority in the seating of delegates and can establish its own solution as it sees fit that fall within the Call to Convention and the Rules and Bylaws of the Democratic Party.


• One of the remaining candidates drops out prior to the convention. In this case, most likely the presumptive nominee will drop their objection to the delegations being seated so the party can unite behind the nominee with all 50 states included.

It's unfortunate that this issue is distracting the party and is being used as a political hot potato between the two candidates' campaigns. (I posted my thoughts on this topic a week ago.) Unless we see a clear nominee prior to the convention, expect this issue to survive and turn up the heat up until August in Denver.