The World v. Obama On Michigan

The DNC now weighs in.

MEMORANDUM

TO: DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee Members
FROM: Alexis Herman & James Roosevelt, Jr., Co-Chairs DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee
RE: Update on Proposed Michigan Legislation
DATE: March 19, 2008

We have recently been asked whether the legislation as proposed by Michigan would fit within the framework of the National Party’s Delegate Selection Rules. Our review of this legislation indicates that it would, in fact, fit within the framework of the Rules if, it were, passed by the state legislature and used by the Michigan State Democratic Party as the basis of drafting a formal Delegate Selection Plan. If a formal Delegate Selection Plan is received we will convene a meeting of the RBC to consider such a Plan.

We look forward to talking with you soon

.

Comments

Hillary only shows leadership when her butt is on the line. She looks out for #1 like no other (besides her husband).

Obama isn't responsible for fixing the major mistake these state parties made.

Go Obama.

Posted by Joe Justice | March 19, 2008 1:57 PM

What a stupid headline.

Since the DNC has approved it so does Obama. Obama has never been against a revote in MI.

Clinton however, up until this past week has been against a revote. Just last week both Penn and Wolfson stated they did not want and would not agree to a revote, the only thing they would accept was a sitting of the delegates based upon the first (illegitimate) election.

Only since the Wright episode, feeling it would help their chances to have a blowout victory (dubious) have they suddenly wanted a revote.

Look, I am an Obama supporter, so you can say I have a bias. But I have stated on many threads at many sites at many times that I would welcome a revote.

But this type of headline is ridiculous. And, I might add, very unprofessional. It is the thype of thing I would expect to see at Faux news.

Posted by john m | March 19, 2008 2:01 PM

I think Michigan is a diversion. The Clinton camp is only pushing a Michigan re-vote in order to increase pressure to get the Florida results admitted.

Posted by baudelairien | March 19, 2008 2:13 PM

Marc,

As you know, there are not going to be do-overs in Michigan unless the vote-killers at DoJ greenlight it first.

Because of past "voting irregularities" and attempts to disenfranchise black voters in Michigan, any revote plan in Michigan has to be approved by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Specifically, any revote in Michigan has to be approved by Alabama lawyer Hans A. von Spakovsky who's permanent appointment to the Federal Election Commission was opposed by the Democrats after six career DoJ staffers came forward saying he had made the FEC overly partisan.

In their letter, these DoJ staffers note that Spakovsky was one of the architects of a transformation in the voting rights section from its "historic mission to enforce the nation's civil rights laws without regard to politics, to pursuing an agenda which placed the highest priority on the partisan political goals of the political appointees who supervised the Section," and the authors named him as the "point person for undermining the Civil Rights Division's mandate to protect voting rights."

The former career DoJ staffers were joined by the Leadership Council on Civil Rights in opposing Spakovsky's nomination. See >> http://www.civilrights.org/assets/pdfs/lccr-von-spakovsky-oppo-letter-to-sen-rules-comm.pdf

It should also be noted that Spakovsky has also been implicated in the dismissal of U.S. Attorneys controversy and, more specifically, with supporting policies intended to disenfranchise minority voters through trumped-up charges of voter fraud. As Slate put it, "[E]ven a brief poke at his résumé shows a man who has dedicated his professional career to a single objective: turning a partisan myth about voters who cast multiple ballots under fake names (always for Democrats!) into a national snipe hunt for vote fraud." See >> http://www.slate.com/id/2174680/nav/tap3/

Do you really think the Democrats are going to allow this fellow to have power over anything?

And then, to muddy the water a little more, there is the little matter of disenfranchising Democrats who voted Republican when they were told their primary did not count, as well as the prospect of "Rush Limbaugh-Clinton voters" who did not vote in the GOP primary.

Bottom line: this cannot be done, and it won't be.

P.

Posted by PBurns | March 19, 2008 2:22 PM

Marc,

As you know, there are not going to be do-overs in Michigan unless the vote-killers at DoJ greenlight it first.

Because of past "voting irregularities" and attempts to disenfranchise black voters in Michigan, any revote plan in Michigan has to be approved by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Specifically, any revote in Michigan has to be approved by Alabama lawyer Hans A. von Spakovsky who's permanent appointment to the Federal Election Commission was opposed by the Democrats after six career DoJ staffers came forward saying he had made the FEC overly partisan.

In their letter, these DoJ staffers note that Spakovsky was one of the architects of a transformation in the voting rights section from its "historic mission to enforce the nation's civil rights laws without regard to politics, to pursuing an agenda which placed the highest priority on the partisan political goals of the political appointees who supervised the Section," and the authors named him as the "point person for undermining the Civil Rights Division's mandate to protect voting rights."

The former career DoJ staffers were joined by the Leadership Council on Civil Rights in opposing Spakovsky's nomination. See >> http://www.civilrights.org/assets/pdfs/lccr-von-spakovsky-oppo-letter-to-sen-rules-comm.pdf

It should also be noted that Spakovsky has also been implicated in the dismissal of U.S. Attorneys controversy and, more specifically, with supporting policies intended to disenfranchise minority voters through trumped-up charges of voter fraud. As Slate put it, "[E]ven a brief poke at his résumé shows a man who has dedicated his professional career to a single objective: turning a partisan myth about voters who cast multiple ballots under fake names (always for Democrats!) into a national snipe hunt for vote fraud." See >> http://www.slate.com/id/2174680/nav/tap3/

Do you really think the Democrats are going to allow this fellow to have power over anything?

And then, to muddy the water a little more, there is the little matter of disenfranchising Democrats who voted Republican when they were told their primary did not count, as well as the prospect of "Rush Limbaugh-Clinton voters" who did not vote in the GOP primary.

Bottom line: this cannot be done, and it won't be.

P.

Posted by PBurns | March 19, 2008 2:28 PM

Please make the posts more infrequent, especially if they're just regurgitations with misleading titles,

Posted by norbizness | March 19, 2008 2:35 PM

Mark Halperin says: state lawmakers unwilling to back a new primary.
Michigan State lawmakers = Barack Obama? I don´t think so.

Posted by concerned | March 19, 2008 2:47 PM

It's worth remembering, in the context of today's news about FL and MI, that getting the delegates for these two states to count is the linchpin of HRC's strategy, as expressed to her major donors in DC a week or so ago. If the revotes don't go forward, we should ask her for an update.

Posted by alex | March 19, 2008 2:54 PM

The headline here is very misleading. That a re-vote is acceptable to the DNC does not answer whether it comports with the constitution and laws; pointing out the obvious legal problems does not amount to obstructing the primary. I realize the press has a vested interest in trumping up suspense about the nomination, and keeping it rolling all the way to Denver -- but, come on. This show's about over.

Posted by TKD | March 19, 2008 3:13 PM

The HYPOCRITICAL LIAR campaign has always been STONEWALLING THE VOTE IN MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA.

With ample help from the Loony Left, led by that short, fat, Elmer Fuddish Chairman of the DNC, and the crazy eyed, vampirish, California love child of Bella Lugosi.

Posted by robert ethan | March 19, 2008 3:16 PM

Regardless of any political motivation, the Obama camp is correct. And as others have pointed out, Hillary is also politically motivated.

I am sick and tired of some people acting as if having an election is some simply thing to whip up and ensure it goes fairly. To do this on the fly is very dangerous.

The presence of a election does not in any way guarantee a fair outcome. There are plenty of elections in Cuba, Russia, Iran, etc. that do more to harm the cause of democracy than further it.

Posted by cm | March 19, 2008 8:22 PM