A Delegate-Sharing Proposal From Florida

This comes from the ranking Democrat in the State Senate, Steven Geller (who hasn't endorsed anyone), and State Sen. Jeremy Ring.

Half the delegates would be awarded on the basis of the Jan. 29 primary; the rest would allocated according to any number of scenarios, including an even split, a split reflecting the national popular vote, a split reflecting the national earned delegate count.

To work, it would require both campaigns to sign on, and would require the DNC's credentials committee to approve it, a process that would not really begin until July.

Comments

so Clinton gets an advantage from this proposal right from the start and Obama still has to jump through hoops. Sound like the same typical arrogant thinking that had her proposing he be her vice presidential running mate even though he's beating her. Make it simple: 50/50 split; January primary counts for nothing.

Posted by KFS | March 20, 2008 9:39 AM

Requirement #1 for any Florida/Michigan plan: No super-delegates at the convention!

The super-delegates from these states were the people who decided to break the rules. And there's no argument on the basis of "disenfranchising" voters, either.

Posted by TH | March 20, 2008 9:51 AM

Why should Obama ever accept the results of a straw poll where he didn't get to campaign and many of his supporters didn't vote because they knew it wouldn't count? Virtually every state where he has campaigned he has shrunk Clinton's original double digit lead substantially if not surpassed her. A 50/50 split of all Florida's delegates might be accepted, but I can't see him going for anything that gives Clinton even a small advantage based on the January fake election.

Posted by Ron | March 20, 2008 10:08 AM

I'm with KFS. If the primaries don't count, as everyone was assured at the time, they don't count.

TH, I think FL and MI might be happy with that, but the rules will work against it.

Posted by Deborah | March 20, 2008 11:49 AM

Obama has no reason to deal with this until August. Hillary only has her supporters Granholm and Nelson to blame.

Here's how it will play out:

Assuming the current superdelegate 253-217 holds till June 3rd, Obama will be about 120 (out of about 340 remaining) superdelegates short to 2024 or 2025 whichever it ends up being.

Unless superdelegates tie their endorsements of Obama to his acceptance of some rules on FL & MI Obama has no reason to deal with this issue till August.

Obama and party leaders will push for a convention of superdelegates immediately after June where Obama and Hillary will make their case. The Democrats simply do not have the time to wait and launch a national operation after August.

In fact June is probably too late already... Pelosi, Dean, Rendell, Richardson, Gore, Edwards all know this.

Posted by yiannis | March 20, 2008 1:09 PM

The delegates should be based solely on the actual votes cast by Florida Democrats and NOT on some arbitrary, misrepresentational 50/50 split. If the ultimate compromise/balancing act between punishing FL for violating the date rule, yet not disenfranchising millions of innocent voters is to only seat half of our (Florida voters') delegates, then so be it. That seems fair to this Florida Democrat. But what seems like the absolute worst idea of all (and that includes the idea of not seating ANY delegates) is to split any or all of the delegates 50/50, which would have zero to do with representing the Florida voters. The whole point of delegates is to represent the voters. An arbitrary split is worse than no representation because it is MIS-representation. It is a total subversion of the election process and of democracy!!! It is something only being proposed by Obama supporters, as far as I can tell, as their candidate would then get delegates that he did not earn. Is that the "new politics" they talk about? If so, I'll stick with democracy, thanks.

Posted by Edna | March 20, 2008 1:32 PM

"Is that the "new politics" they talk about? If so, I'll stick with democracy, thanks."

Holding a primary under the premise that it doesn't count and then, only later, deciding that it will isn't exactly democracy either. If one of my professors told me that I had a test coming up and it would be based on material that we wouldn't study in class, but that our grade ultimately wouldn't count, I might be inclined to take a pass and devote my time to something else - I'd be pretty pissed off if he came back later and said, "You know what? That test is going to count after all." FL voters didn't get to study the candidates and they were told the results were not going to be valid - I'm sure a good number skipped the polls all together or made arrangements to vote in the Republican primary. Counting the delegates based on this vote is no more representative of democracy than splitting them 50/50 (which, by the way, I am also against).

Posted by Tom in Raleigh | March 20, 2008 2:16 PM

I'm a Florida voter and I assure you that I had plenty of time and means to study all of the candidates on the ballot. We have C-SPAN, cable news, broadcast news, the internet, newspapers, the whole nine yards. All we missed out on were slick TV ads (although Obama broke the daft "pledge" and did air one ad on cable, apparently) and the candidate appearing here in person. My vote was very, very informed, as were those of the 1.7 other Democrats who turned out in historic mass to cast our ballots. We, as well as all the candidates, knew that the delegate issue was far from settled and was being challenged legally. Our state party has been trying to find a way to get the DNC to come to its senses and seat our delegates from the moment Howard Dean first made his insane decision to remove them, and on the FL Democratic website they urged all of us rank and file Democrats to vote and "make it count". And we did.

The election was most assuredly valid and real. The question of whether to seat the delegates is a fair argument. However, there is NO question that the results of the election itself are valid. Even though Obama's official campaign mouthpiece, John Kerry, proclaimed our election to be an "illegitimate fabrication" on election night as the polls were closing, we know that it most assuredly was a very valid election yielding very valid results. Whether to count those results in light of the primary date setting rule violation is the ONLY thing in question, contrary to how the Obama campaign continually tries to spin this.

Posted by Edna | March 20, 2008 3:34 PM

P.S. And, btw, since Obama doesn't want my illegitimate fabrication (a.k.a., my vote) to count towards the primary selection of a candidate, then he definitely will not be getting my illegitimate fabrication in November. I have never in my life NOT voted in an election. I've never not lined up behind the Democratic nominee. But you and your campaign keep telling a Florida Democratic voter and a Gore supporter like me, who lived through 2000, that her vote shouldn't count enough times and you say it dismissively enough and you further refer to the election results as an illegitimate fabrication, and you (Obama/Obama campaign) render her (me) literally incapable of casting my ballot for you. NEVER tell a Florida Democrat, post-2000, that her vote shouldn't count. BAD move, Obama campaign. Not seeing the much-self-touted judgement that you allegedly sport.

Posted by Edna | March 20, 2008 3:40 PM

What must they be thinking in other nations around the world when they pick up their morning paper and read that the Americans are actually having a serious discussion about counting the votes in an election where the candidates and the voters were told specifically and beforehand that the votes would not count?

WTF?

Posted by fred | March 20, 2008 4:26 PM

I doubt that any of the various delegate allocation schemes could withstand a court challenge. The Democratic Party isn't going to get away with announcing that the results of an election will not count, and then say, "Whoops, we've decided to count those votes after all."

That won't fly.

Posted by guido sarducci | March 20, 2008 4:29 PM

If anyone thinks this load of crap can or would stand up in or court or under any degree real examination needs professional help! Seating delegates without changing the total number of delegates needed to secure the nomination is complete total and utter nonsense...

Posted by SC Rose | March 20, 2008 4:59 PM

Even if Obama wins without FL. (my vote won't count). He will not win the general election. He doesn't want my vote to count now, I'm not going to give it to him in Nov. I want someone who's going to fight for everyone's rights, not just for his own benefit! I'd rather vote McCain!

Posted by Gene in FL | March 20, 2008 5:02 PM

Obama has no reason to deal with this until August. Hillary only has her supporters Granholm and Nelson to blame.

Here's how it will play out:

Assuming the current superdelegate 253-217 holds till June 3rd, Obama will be about 120 (out of about 340 remaining) superdelegates short to 2024 or 2025 whichever it ends up being.

Unless superdelegates tie their endorsements of Obama to his acceptance of some rules on FL & MI Obama has no reason to deal with this issue till August.

Obama and party leaders will push for a convention of superdelegates immediately after June where Obama and Hillary will make their case. The Democrats simply do not have the time to wait and launch a national operation after August.

In fact June is probably too late already... Pelosi, Dean, Rendell, Richardson, Gore, Edwards all know this.

Posted by yiannis | March 20, 2008 1:09 PM

You have stated my opinion exactly. Every day that goes by is another day that McCain is spending getting ready for the big show down in November.

Those extra two months very well could be the difference between winning and losing in November at this point.

Posted by SC Rose | March 20, 2008 5:08 PM

I'm so sick of hearing Florida Democrats whine about how their votes "aren't going to count." Do you want your votes to count? Then tell your elected representatives who chose to move your primary forward in violation of the DNC rules!

By the way - Sen. Clinton also agreed that your votes weren't going to count. I guarantee you that had the election gone differently, she wouldn't by crying out to seat your delegates right now. She is doing what is best for her political career, not your state.

Rules are rules. The DNC warned you, Floridians, that if you moved your primary elections forward, you would be stripped of your delegates at the convention. Your state party leaders knew this, and yet they voted overwhelmingly to flout the system.

Actions have consequences. Deal with it.

Posted by Trigger | March 20, 2008 5:12 PM

Fred said, and I quote: "What must they be thinking in other nations around the world when they pick up their morning paper and read that the Americans are actually having a serious discussion about counting the votes in an election where the candidates and the voters were told specifically and beforehand that the votes would not count? WTF?" Well, Fred, let me enlighten you: One would hope that what they must be thinking is, oh, good, there are still good, sane citizens in America who understand what democracy is all about and who are willing to fight an unfair decision like that rendered by one Howard Dean. The day millions of innocent registered voters sit back calmly when told that our votes are being taken away is the day that the rest of the world should truly be concerned for America.

Thus, we will fight all the way to the convention floor for our delegations to be seated and seated representing what the voters actually voted.

No delegates, no peace.

Posted by Edna | March 25, 2008 3:10 PM