Credentials Committee: 186 Members

I just noticed this Politico story about the DNC's credentials committee. I don't usually point out other reporters' typos, but one key fact is wrong, and since I fashion myself a bit obsessed with the delegate selection process, here goes:

There are 186 members of the committee, not 169. 25 are appointed by DNC chairman Howard Dean, and the rest -- an additional 169 -- are chosen by the campaigns themselves according to a complex formula. The size of the committee will not be reduced even though Florida and Michigan are not participating as delegate-producing bodies, according to a DNC spokesperson. Florida and Michigan WILL be represented on the credentials committee.

As I've written before, Barack Obama is likely to have a working plurality on the committee if you assume that most of the Dean-appointed members will enforce the rules strictly and decide not to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations as is. Clinton will have plenty of votes for a "minority report."

Comments

169 + 25 = 194.

Posted by Anonymous | April 1, 2008 4:11 PM

Appendix D to the Call to Convention sets out the allocation of delegates to the states but Florida and Michigan are allocated 0. So the allocation only adds up to 144.

How is the remainder to be allocated?

Posted by maryb2004 | April 1, 2008 4:15 PM

The DNC website says there are 161, not 169, delegates chosen by the campaigns:

http://www.demconvention.com/dnc-elects-standing-committee-leadership-for-2008-democratic-national-convention-2/

. . .for a total of 186, as you say.

Posted by T-Rock | April 1, 2008 4:17 PM

I should be clear there are 147 members allocated for 144 votes.

There are supposed to be 161 members for 158 votes but that is subject to the Delegate Selection Rules. I assumed that because MI and Fl didn't comply with the rules the committee size would be automatically reduced, but you say the DNC says it will NOT be reduced.

So how are those other member positions to be allocated?

Posted by maryb2004 | April 1, 2008 4:22 PM

Hillary,

first, let's talk about your tax returns

Posted by mick | April 1, 2008 4:33 PM

Fine. But I'm not sure it really matters. Obama is likely to have a strong majority and Dean's guy are going to enforce the DNC rules agreed upon last year.

This doesn't change the basic dynamic: that Obama is going to win this thing and that you can stick a fork in Clinton---Pennslyvania and Kentucky notwithstanding.

Posted by dragnet | April 1, 2008 4:41 PM

mick,

Didn't you hear? Hillbilly filed for an automatic extension to August 15.

Posted by D | April 1, 2008 4:45 PM

yes, you had previously referred to the "fact" that MI and FL will be represented on the Credentials Committee, which you gleaned from a "DNC spokesperson." But I think you'll have to give us chapter and verse on this one. How is it that states that have no recognized delegation can nevertheless elect members to the standing committees? Does the spokesperson point to specific DNC rules which allow this to happen?

Posted by along | April 1, 2008 5:30 PM

"Florida and Michigan WILL be represented on the credentials committee."

And HOW will that representation be divided between the Clinton and Obama campaigns? Florida has 8 members, and Michigan has 6. The only fair solution is 4/4 and 3/3. Kinda lucky each state has an even number of seats, huh.

Posted by along | April 1, 2008 5:34 PM

169+25=196, not 186, if that's how you're calculating.

Posted by Dan | April 1, 2008 5:45 PM

Whoops, that's 194. See how easy it is to screw up math? And I notice now that I was beaten to it.

Posted by Dan | April 1, 2008 5:47 PM

The rules regarding size of Committee, and allocation between the states of members of the Committee, is subject to Section 20.C of the Delegate Selection rules. Under 20.C the rules committe could take whatever action they want towards a state in violation of the primary rules, including reducing in part or in whole the State's temporary and permanent members to the Standing Committees.

This is the section under which Florida and Michigan were stripped of their delgates. Maybe the Rules committee didn't reduce their membership on the Committee but when the Call was issued the DNC just allocated them 0 for the time being? I couldn't find any formal finding or resolution of the Rules Committee but I find the DNC site hard to navigate.

In any event, if FL and MI were allowed on the committee then under the rules they can’t vote on the matter (See the 2008 Call, Appendix A Section 9 H) A member of the Credentials Committee elected by a state delegation shall not vote on a challenge arising in that state). In addition, under Section J.3 (and Appendix A Section 11) of the Call, they aren’t allowed to be included in the 20% necessary for a minority report. (No member elected to a committee by a state delegation may join in such a request as to a proposed minority report relating to a credentials challenge to any delegate or alternate from his or her state.)

Posted by maryb2004 | April 1, 2008 6:01 PM

maryb: as far as I can tell, Appendix D in the Call (final page of the PDF) is where the states are allocated slots on the Standing Committees, and FL and MI are there, with 8 and 6 respectively.

In the most recent update (3/17/08) to Appendix B, which is the state Delegate Allocation (page 48), FL and MI are listed as 0 across the board. I think this is what you are looking at.

Given your research on Rule 20.C, it seems that the Rules Committee can allow a state to send members to the standing committees, regardless of that state delegation's current disposition.

Posted by along | April 1, 2008 6:28 PM

This is the copy of the Call I'm looking at - dated in February. Appendix D shows 0 for FL and MI. (warning PDF).

If there was an update I didn't find it. (The DNC certainly doesn't make this easy.)

Posted by maryb2004 | April 1, 2008 7:36 PM

hi maryb: that link isn't working. The version of The Call I have is from democrats.org:

http://www.democrats.org/a/convention_2008/delegate/

here's the link to what I beleive is the most recent pdf version of the Call:
http://www.democrats.org/page/-/pdf/FINAL2008CalltotheConvention.pdf

looking at the document properties, it was created on March 17, 2008.

It does say on the title page that it was adopted by the DNC on Feb. 2, 2007, but (as I know you are aware) several parts of the Call have been updated since then.

In this version, Appendix D was amended on January 29, 2008. It includes the 8 members for Florida and 6 for Michigan.

(Note: This latest PDF also includes previous versions of all the Appendices.)

I can't find an Appendix D that lists the Standing Committee members for FL and MI as zero.

Posted by along | April 1, 2008 8:11 PM

Yours must be the right version since it's on the DNC website.

I'm not sure why my link didn't work but here it is again. Call to Convention

It still has a Feb. 8 2007 Appendix D but not the same Feb. 8 2007 Appendix D as the prior draft on the DNC website. Weird.

But yours must be the right one -- since it's on the DNC site. I looked back and the version I found was out of a footnote from wikipedia's entry on the 2008 convention. That will teach me - I know better than to rely on wikipedia. But I have no idea where they got it.

Well least there is an answer to the question as to how MI and FL are allocated. I suspect other people are looking at the wrong version too.

Posted by maryb2004 | April 1, 2008 8:50 PM

Face it: No one knows how many people are on the Rules Committee.

Or robots. What if there are darpa robot delegates and the DNC Rules Committee is step one in their plan for world domination?

Posted by Deborah | April 1, 2008 8:53 PM

ah, mystery solved. good work maryb.

Posted by along | April 1, 2008 9:14 PM

"Hillary,

first, let's talk about your tax returns

Posted by mick"

Did ya finish looking through those thousands of pages of Hillary's schedules already? Anyway happy panty sniffing.

Posted by hadenough | April 1, 2008 11:34 PM