Opinion
Put foot down on Florida, Michigan
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Robert Phansalkar:
- Breathalyzers at prom uncalled for (April 22, 2008)
- Seat on high court should be based on merit (April 1, 2008)
- Put foot down on Florida, Michigan (March 11, 2008)
- Voting day switch misses needed fix (February 19, 2008)
- Don't snuff out state smoking ban (February 5, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
It appears all that “liberal coddling” has gone a bit too far. Yes, the party that refuses to stand up for itself has done it to us again — and this time, it’s presidential.
The Democratic National Committee and its chairman Howard Dean appear to be caving to pressure from Florida and Michigan to let their votes in, even though they broke the rules and paid the consequences.
Now, by giving in, Democrats will be proving once again that they lack the backbone to do what is right and stand up for the system we have in place, because it’s there for a reason.
States across the union, since the beginning of the primaries, have sought to increase their say in the final outcome of who gets the dubious honor of representing their respective parties in the final election. Their solution: Move their primaries and caucuses forward on the calendar to get one of the first shots at electing who will be the future president.
After all, why should Iowa and New Hampshire get all the attention? The earlier your election is, the more say you get in who is elected. In fact, Iowa and New Hampshire have this nasty habit of making their selections the ones the country at-large gets to enjoy come fall — that is, if you can call listening to 10 months of John Kerry ads “enjoyable.”
So when Florida and Michigan decided it would be a great idea to move their primary elections forward without the green light of the DNC and with full knowledge that it was against their wishes, Mr. Dean responded the only way that seemed fair.
He stripped the states of their delegates. It may seem like rough censure for these two starry-eyed states, but Mr. Dean’s actions were deliberate and, more importantly, final.
Whoops. Now, as The Associated Press reported, it looks like Mr. Dean and the Democrats are going to make some concessions, including mail-in votes, to allow these two delegate-laden states come into the fold — as if this election couldn’t drag out any longer.
Except there is one minor problem: We’re giving them precisely what they wanted in the first place.
With the race as tight as it is and more than 360 delegates up for grabs in these two states, their role would be undeniably large in determining who inevitably wins the Democratic ticket. As analysts project, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will fall short of the necessary 2,024 delegates, and both states could put either of them over the top to win the ticket. But inflexibility on this requisite figure is no justification for allowing Florida and Michigan to vote now, given the consequences external to this decision.
It certainly isn’t easy to tell people they can vote but it doesn’t count, but the truth is that when you break the rules, there are consequences. But with Democrats, that’s no guarantee. They are giving all appearances they’re going to back off their otherwise strong words and making Florida and Michigan not just matter but play a downright decisive role in who will represent the party.
Although not having candidates reach the threshold is a reality of this dilemma, not drawing a line in the sand now, when states are utterly abusing the primary system, would be far worse.
Democrats have this system of primary elections because it allows them to assess a candidate’s strength over time. With primaries spread out through various regions of the country at various times, Democrats get to know their candidates and see their strength, or weakness, in action. But with states moving their primary elections forward to get a larger piece of the pie, they subvert the actual process Democrats intended in the first place.
Having the functional equivalent of a single day of voting signifies nothing less than an assessment of a candidate’s popularity on that particular day, as opposed to a lengthy electoral process, which makes the Democratic response to this issue all the more important.
States like Wisconsin, Texas and Ohio, all of whom played by the rules and earned their spot in the limelight through simple perseverance, will have even less incentive to hang around until late February and early March. If Democrats let in Florida and Michigan, expect these states to move their elections forward until we have one massive “Super Tuesday,” essentially foregoing the process we have now.
Democrats are hardly without options here — though the system will likely yield to what super delegates say, it will have to be the consequence of not having taken this stand earlier. Democrats need to defend this system — if they believe in it at all — by making this principled stance at a difficult time for the party.
Otherwise Democrats will find themselves stuck in a situation in which only these words will suffice: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”
Robert Phansalkar (rphansalkar@badgerherald.com) is a first-year law student.
17 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
LANGDON AREA Housing: Studios through five bedrooms available 8/16/2010. All apartments offer lake/pier access. Most units include heat. Call 257-7368.
1318 RANDALL Court: Huge five bedroom house located near Camp Randall. $2500/mo. Call 257-7368.
720 CLARK Court: 3 bedroom house + den. You can easily fit 4 people people in this awesome house! $1750 Call 257-7368.
I hope that the Dems hold on tight. Otherwise, we move to a national primary in January 2009 that doesn’t allow for a thorough vetting process for candidates of either party.
There’s one thing Howard Dean does well: lose campaigns. Yeeeeaaaarrgggghhhh!
Millions upon million of innocent, long-suffering Democratic voters in the state of Florida and also in the state of Michigan are the only ones being “punished” here, so only a Republican would even remotely think that is the just, fair thing to do! It was the Republican state legislature of Florida that pushed through the primary date change, even though the Florida Democrats objected and tried to get the date moved to after 2/5, but the Republican governor vetoed it. So, tell me again, slowly so that maybe I will have a prayer of understanding it this time: why is it that the DNC should “stand up” to us millions of voters in Florida and Michigan again, who want nothing more than to have our votes COUNT?
What is really disgusting are the Obama supporters who are against counting our votes or doing a “re-do”. Obama talks about “inclusion” but he wants to EXCLUDE millions of Democrats from having a vote in picking our nominee? NICE. We’ll certainly remember that come November. Great “judgement” you are displaying there, Obama, in dissing millions of voters you will need in the general shrug.
As for the writer of this article, you need to clue in massively: Howard Dean’s “punishment”, i.e., OPTING to yank away ALL of Florida and Michigan’s delegates is: 1.) WAY over the top, draconian and thus the punishment does not fit the crime; and 2.) directed at the WRONG people: millions of voters of his own party, whom he is CHOOSING to disenfranchise. Only a Republican could say “right on” to that. Disgusting.
P.S. We should move to a fair system for the next presidential election cycle rotating, regional primaries!
the whole system is garbage..the only thing more frustrating than Iowa and NH having so much influence on races is the thought of every state moving their dates up. We need a national, single-day primary.
Why should Iowa and NH get such a big say in the presidential race?
11:19,
Obama is waiting for the process to play out and has repeatedly said he wants Florida and Michigan to have their delegates seated. Right now that looks like a re-vote. Seating them as is would be a complete sham.
The DNC also offered the state Dems in Florida enough money to move just their primary back and they turned it down, so your claim that it was the Republicans fault is just blatantly false.
Finally, Dean’s punishment was right on. They broke the rules and needed to be punished. It sucks that the voters in Florida and Michigan got caught in the middle, but that’s just the way it goes.
Somebody needs to keep Stephanie Biese away from the Badger Herald online commenting system.
No offense, 11:19, but when you say that Florida’s vote as it occurred should count, you are clearly coming from the perspective of a Hillary supporter. Ok, perhaps the Democratic voters of Florida and Minnesota shouldn’t be punished. But should Obama be punished for following the rules as the DNC laid them out, when Hillary did not? Hillary clearly violated the agreed upon rules by campaigning in Florida and Michigan, while Obama did not. Hillary supporters want that exact vote, an unfair vote in the eyes of many Americans, to count just because it will assist their candidate. Obama supporters, on the other hand, are saying that if an election should count it should be a truly fair one, where both candidates agree to run in the states in question.
You don’t want a fair election. You want the election that you won because your candidate violated an agreement and the DNC rules, because it gets your candidate elected. So stop being a hypocrite.
I’d rather see a fair system of rotating, regional primaries than one single “national primary day”, as some suggest. Why? Because a one-day primary would mean that candidates with tons of money would have a huge advantage, as they could simply blanket the major media markets with ads. It would be all about advertising. I still favor the “old-fashioned”, quaint American system of candidates trudging through the snow to a little diner and listening to the voters, and giving the voters an opportunity to get to know them, whether they (the candidates) have a ton of money or not. However, the current system is unfair and should be changed to a rotating system of regional primaries. Peace out!
It’s very simple…
What is the worse crime-
A dumb decision by local party elites to somewhat further complicate an already byzantine and illogical nominating process,
or disenfranchising all voters in two of our most populous states because of a stupid decision made by their state party elites?
Phansalkar commits a crucial attribution error when he says that “Florida and Michigan decided it would be a great idea to move their primary elections forward” when it was actually the STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY of Florida and Michigan.
Who here typically has any idea what the Democratic Party of Wisconsin is up to?
It would be a travesty for the people in those states to be deprived of the vote, and it is only Mr. Phansalkar’s undoubtedly fervent support of Sen. Obama that clouds his vision here.
Robert,
I don’t think the Democrats are interested in losing Florida and Michigan in the general election. I’d rather have Democrats “lack backbone” and have Hillary or Barack in the White House than “stand up for” themselves and throw the election to McCain. I admire your idealism, but, to quote Hillary Clinton, “let’s get real here.”
Correction to one thing that has been said in the comments section: In Florida, it was NOT the FL Democratic Party that moved up the primary date, it was the REPUBLICAN-controlled state legislature. The Dems even tried to get it moved back to 2/5/08, but the governor vetoed that attempt. So, the state’s primary date was indeed set for a whopping 7 days before the earliest date allowed in the party rules. I say, get over it, DNC and SEAT OUR DELEGATES!!!
Okay, this is IMPORTANT, guys (and gals):
I am SO compelled to respond to this inaccurate, mischaracterizing quote, but really my response is to everyone in this discussion, here and elsewhere on the net, not just to the person I’m responding to. The quote is: “No offense, 11:19, but when you say that Florida’s vote as it occurred should count, you are clearly coming from the perspective of a Hillary supporter.”
WRONG. I want to say something to everyone in this discussion, because I am very, very saddened by something: This whole argument seems to be breaking down along lines of which candidate people support, when really it has NOTHING to do with Clinton or Obama. I personally have been OUTRAGED about Dean’s decision from the moment he made it. At that time, all the candidates were on all the ballots and the election was wide open. For me, and for anyone concerned about voting rights, fairness and democracy, the issue is clear and has NOTHING to do with the candidates!!! It pains me when, each time I say my position on this, someone responds with “Oh, typical Clinton supporter, just wants to win at any cost” or whatever. WHAT? This has NOTHING to do with who I support. Frankly, Clinton and Obama were the LAST two out of the field I would have ever picked! But yes, at this point, I do come down between the two for Clinton. But that has NOTHING to do with me being passionate about seating the FL & MI delegates. I was already just as outraged and passionate about it waaaaaaaaay back when I was supporting Edwards and still shell-shocked that my beloved Al Gore had really chosen not to run. The entire issue is about VOTING RIGHTS. Can’t we all get behind that? I know, I know, a rule was broken. But the voters didn’t break it. Why should they (we) be the ones disenfranchised?
P.S. AND, fyi to all the Obama supporters reading this: I would be just as outraged about Dean’s decision and just as committed to getting the FL delegates seated had Obama won by a landslide. It isn’t about the candidates. It is about the VOTERS. The voters of Florida and Michigan number in the millions. Should our party leave us out of the process?
1:15, you say:
“Obama is waiting for the process to play out and has repeatedly said he wants Florida and Michigan to have their delegates seated.”
Really? When? All I’ve heard is when he had his mouthpiece, John Kerry, say in an official statement “from the Obama campaign” on the evening of our state primary, before the polls even closed, as a record 1.7 million were voting, that our votes were “illegimate” and, my personal favorite, a “fabrication”. He has also said that “any six-year old” would realize that the delegates should not be seated. I could go on and on quoting his snearing, dismissive comments about Florida and Michigan but I will spare you. I have never once heard him say our votes should count.
“The DNC also offered the state Dems in Florida enough money to move just their primary back and they turned it down, so your claim that it was the Republicans fault is just blatantly false.”
INCORRECT: 1. The DNC never offered us ONE CENT to stage a primary seperate from the official state primary that the REPUBLICAN-legislature of FL pushed through for 1/29. In fact, they made it clear that the FL Democratic party would have to foot the bill. 2. The FL Dems tried in vain to get the date moved back to after 2/5. Governor Crist (Repub) threatened to veto any such attempt.
“Finally, Dean’s punishment was right on. They broke the rules and needed to be punished. It sucks that the voters in Florida and Michigan got caught in the middle, but that’s just the way it goes.”
Well, I do thank you for at least acknowledging that the voters are caught in the middle and that we did nothing wrong to deserve “punishment”. That is WAY more than many commenters that I’ve read on the net realize. It is soooooo, so, so, SO not our fault that the date was set for 1/29. We didn’t want this. I personally couldn’t care less which states go “first”, I just want to vote and have it count, and I want that for my fellow Floridians and for the people of Michigan, too. This has, again (I feel the need to keep stating this!) NOTHING to do with who I support, it has to do with passionately believing in not disenfranchising MILLIONS of people. We in Florida are especially sensitive to being disenfranchised, if you get my drift (2000). It’s like: this can’t be happening.
Again, if Obama had won on 1/29, I’d be screaming just as loudly to have the delegates seated, even though I didn’t vote for him. It’s about the voters for me, not about the candidates. If Obama is really about “inclusion”, he should care about us (FL & MI), too, not just about doing what benefits his candidacy. If a re-vote is needed and that is what he and the DNC and Clinton can all agree to, so be it. I personally think the delegates should be seated from the 1/29 primary results, but okay, if people think a re-vote is a fairer option, WHATEVER. Some kinda way, our votes just need to COUNT, people.
1:45:
“No offense, 11:19, but when you say that Florida’s vote as it occurred should count, you are clearly coming from the perspective of a Hillary supporter.”
Incorrect. Please see my earlier comment of a few minutes ago, to the tune that my passionate position on seating the delegates has NOTHING to do with any candidate and EVERYTHING to do with the voters. I have felt this way since Dean issued forth his idiotic, ill-fated decree and I still feel this way. At that time, the race was wide open. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OBAMA OR CLINTON, so please know that. At least for me it doesn’t.
“Ok, perhaps the Democratic voters of Florida and Minnesota shouldn’t be punished. But should Obama be punished for following the rules as the DNC laid them out, when Hillary did not? Hillary clearly violated the agreed upon rules by campaigning in Florida and Michigan, while Obama did not.”
Why do Obama supporters keep claiming that Hillary campaigned in FL? She did not, which is why I find their repeated claims that she did to be increasingly BIZARRE. Anyway, moving along…
“You don’t want a fair election. You want the election that you won because your candidate violated an agreement and the DNC rules, because it gets your candidate elected. So stop being a hypocrite.”
You start your response to me out by saying “no offense”, but you have deeply offended me by calling me a “hypocrite”, when all I’ve wanted since the moment Dean did his thing was to reverse his ruling so that my vote and the votes of millions in FL and Michigan will count. I’ve wanted this since BEFORE ANY VOTES WERE CAST. If the votes had gone 100% for your hollow husk of a candidate, I would still want them to count and I would be leading the charge as I am now. So, you have offended me by falsely saying I’m a hypocrite without even knowing me or anything about me. You ASSUME I’m a “Clinton supporter”. Well, news flash: I’m a GORE supporter, how about that? But he isn’t even in the race, so there ya go. Of those in the race, I wanted Edwards. Then Biden. Then basically anyone else other than Clinton or Obama. But now that it is between these two, yup, I’m for Clinton. But that has ZERO to do with my stand on this issue. ANYONE with a sense of democracy, fairness and inclusion would want the voters in Florida and Michigan to have a say in selecting our nominee. Perhaps YOU are the hypocrite, since your candidate could potentially be hurt by seating our delegates? Hmmmm….
P.S. to 1:45:
As offended as I am by your incorrect and hurtful assumption that my stance on wanting the FL & MI delegates seated is because I’m some sort of rabid Clinton supporter who wants “my candidate” (not) to win at any cost, which is SO not true (as I stated in a response to you which has yet to show up), I want you to know that I am NOT (as you further assume incorrectly sigh…do all Obama supporters make so many false assumptions and misstatements? Wow, I guess that is the new politics that doesn’t label people and is so inclusive…wild!) totally opposed to a “re-do”, although I think it is an unnecessary, logistical nightmare, fraught with possibilities for things to go wrong. If that is what it is going to take to re-enfranchise me and millions of others, so be it.
I just can’t believe some of the Obama supporters on the web!!! Anyone who want to include millions of Floridians and Michiganers in the primary selection process is automatically assumed to be an amoral, blind Clinton supporter who will do anything (like wanting votes to be counted—GASP!) to get “our candidate” elected. When, in my case anyway, I was already extremely active on this issue before the votes were even cast, so how could I have known that they were not going to all go to OBAMA?! Also, I certainly wasn’t for Clinton at the point that Dean did this and I first became outraged and started calling for a reversal of the decision and for our votes to count: I had not decided on anyone yet, I was too busy being crestfallen about Gore not running! I was sorta kinda for Edwards, but not set in stone. What I want is for my vote to count, that’s all. What is with all the assumptions Obama supporters (or many of them, anyway) make? Their “new politics” of assumptions, misstatements, mischaracterizing people based on snap judgements and ignorance, exclusion, etc. is truly SCARY. It’s like, all the pretty slogans Obama spouts, his supporters actual behavior is just the exact opposite of!!! His supporters reflect very badly on him. I hope he is nothing like them! But how would we know? I can’t tell what the man stands for, as all he does is say “Change, change, change” and vote “present” on every important issue so that he never has to take a stand.
SCARY.
God, I wish Gore were in the race. But even if he were, my vote wouldn’t count anyway. AGAIN. And no one seems to care, least of all my own party. All the Obamabots just spout their party line of “Clinton broke the rules” (um, NO, she didn’t) and “anyone who wants the delegates to count only cares about Clinton winning (um, NO, that has zero to do with the price of tea in China, far as I’m concerned, so don’t speak for me, b*tches), and we’re all hypocrites and quite possibly racist (Um, no, I’ve been defending voting rights here, so I’m no hypocrite, and my hero in life is MLK, so I highly doubt I’m a racist, but then, I guess anyone who isn’t for Obama is a racist, apparently), and we should all just stop whining about a little thing like the disenfranchisement of millions of Democrats by our own party. What’s the big deal, really? Let’s just hand the election to Obama…he is the “change” we can believe in: which apparently is fascism with no voting. NICE.