Yes, let’s have a “do-over” for Florida and Michigan
The Democratic Party primaries in Florida and Michigan earlier this year did not count. Now many people, including Democratic Party officials, are discussing the prospect of scheduling new primaries or caucuses in Florida and Michigan.
Referee whistle: against the Democratic National Committee, illegal block, 10 yards.
Yes, let’s have a “do-over” for Florida and Michigan.
The Democratic Party punished Florida and Michigan for moving their states’ primary dates to dates before Super Tuesday. The punishment was that these states would not have delegates at the convention.
For more background information on this mess, read the Florida and Michigan section in A Quick Guide to the Democratic Party Rule Book.
This is such a mess that it is probably impossible to have a definitively fair approach.
Some people have said that a “do-over” is a violation of the rules or changing the rules after the process has started. The rules are so confusing and the Florida/Michigan mess is exceptional. The original decision to take away all delegates from Florida and Michigan was short-sighted. I doubt that the rules cover (or forbid) the idea of reversing this type of decision. If you actually know, please post a link to a reliable source.
I think the Democratic Party rules do not sufficiently address this situation. It is fair to say that a “do-over” is really “making the rules as you go along.” Democracy itself is based on this premise. We have rule of law. Everyone must follow rules and laws. This is the bedrock of democracy, even more fundamental than voting. We also face new situations not covered by existing rules and laws. So, yes, it is necessary to make up rules as you go along. Democracy is more complicated and important than football.
When in doubt, let the people decide!
The voters from Florida and Michigan have been locked out of this historic decision to decide the Democratic Party’s 2008 presidential nominee.
The Clinton campaign would simply like to have the January primaries held in Florida and Michigan to count. I do not criticize them for raising this, but this idea is definitely not fair. Voters in those states were told that their votes would not count. The candidates agreed to not campaign in these states. Having these votes count now would be changing the rules.
The Obama campaign would like the Democratic Party to schedule special caucuses in these states. That solution would be a step forward, but they want caucuses because Obama has been especially strong in the caucus format.
I have heard a few Obama supporters oppose the “do-over” idea. I think their opposition is strictly political rather than based on principle. Some Obama supporters may worry that Clinton may win Florida and Michigan.
The Democratic National Committee messed up Florida and Michigan once already. They should do the right thing and schedule new primaries in these states. Primaries are more democratic than caucuses. Give voters in these states a voice in this election and delegates to the convention.
This is a great opportunity for Clinton and Obama to demonstrate leadership and prove their ability to work together to the benefit of the disenfranchised voters of Florida and Michigan. Or will this be politics as usual?
Loading …
Comment by Nathaniel Cerf
Posted on March 6, 2008 at 6:53 pm
title=”You Made Your Bed…”
I am horribly disturbed by this talk of redoing or reruling on the Michigan and Florida Democratic primaries.
The rules of this election were in place before the election began, it is unfair to all of the players involved to suddenly go back and change the rules mid-way through the process.
If Michigan and Florida voters are upset about the way their votes were sacrificed in the effort to circumvent election rules, then they must blame their leaders and make the appropriate changes in leadership to make sure this doesn’t happen again.
The current campaigners laid their strategies and have played them according to those rules in place. The die is cast, as it were. Would it be fair to Edwards, who might have won Florida or Michigan had they been in play? His campaign is shot now, but if he won one of those states when they proposed going, maybe he’d be in the running still.
We don’t changed the rules of football at half time during the Super Bowl just because things didn’t go the way someone wanted. Why should we changes the rules of this Super Bowl of politics halfway through the election cycle.
Comment by April
Posted on March 8, 2008 at 2:56 pm
There should be a national primary that weeds out everyone but the top 2 from each party. A month later, there should be a second national primary to decide who the nominees will be.
No more tiny states deciding who we get to vote for.