Election Rule Violators Florida and Michigan Unwilling to Accept Facts

"We are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game." - Howard Dean

(SALEM, Ore.) - Florida and Michigan could go from having no say in the Democratic nominating process, to deciding who wins the nomination. In other words, officials in Florida may have a chance to be the state that leaves honesty and integrity at the doorstep again, as it has earned a solid reputation for during Presidential election years.

Both states had their delegates stripped by the Democratic National Committee over party rule violations. The reason was that they scheduled their primaries too early.

If the rules are changed, it will violate those agreements both states made in 2006. Both Democratic contenders are trying hard to win the majority of support, and it is no secret that suddenly changing the rules and allowing the two ousted states in could tip the scales in favor of Clinton or Obama.

Between Florida and Michigan, there are 366 pledged delegates and superdelegates. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, says he is glad to hear that the Governors of Michigan and Florida are willing to lend their weight to help resolve this issue.

"As we've said all along, we strongly encourage the Michigan and Florida state parties to follow the rules, so today's public overtures are good news."

He says the rules, which were agreed to by the full DNC including representatives from Florida and Michigan over 18 months ago, allow for two options.

"First, either state can choose to resubmit a plan and run a process to select delegates to the convention; second, they can wait until this summer and appeal to the Convention Credentials Committee, which determines and resolves any outstanding questions about the seating of delegates. We look forward to receiving their proposals should they decide to submit new delegate selection plans and will review those plans at that time."

Dean says the Democratic Nominee will be determined in accordance with party rules, and out of respect for the presidential campaigns and the states that did not violate party rules, we are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game.

Dean says that all the speculation, we should also remember the overwhelming enthusiasm and turnout that we have already seen, and respect the voters of the twelve states and territories who have yet to have their say."

"As we head towards November, our nominee must have the united support of a strong Democratic Party that's ready to fight and ready to beat John McCain. After seven years of Republican rule, I am confident that we will elect a Democratic president who will fight for America's families in the White House. Now we must hear from the voters in twelve states and territories who have yet to make their voices heard."

Salem-News.com Top Stories

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

rewilding LA: Matilija Dam History and Ecosystems

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Ty Cello March 11, 2008 9:05 am (Pacific time)

Sawyer these super-delegates are essentially professional politicans, who no doubt want to make sure they go with the winner, at least most of them. Look at Massachusettes, you have the governor and Senators Kennedy and Kerry all endorse Obama, but the state went for Clinton. So those who argue that the "supers" should vote as per how the state they reside in voted, well, this may not make for a happy ending for some. If Clinton wins Pennsylvania , then I would say that the do-over in Michigan and Florida will not mean much, unless Obama wins over 65% of the vote in both those states. Things will get very negative and with the recent scandal in New York, people are going to start re-evaluating who the so-called moral party really is. Acrimonious times ahead.

Sawyer Johnson March 10, 2008 10:18 am (Pacific time)

Henry this Florida amd Michigan do-over will get done, but watch the fireworks over Pennsylvania. This is going to get real ugly. Say what's your view on the "super-delegates", should they cast their vote by what the popular vote is from their particular state? Would be interested in your assessment.

Henry Ruark March 8, 2008 6:22 pm (Pacific time)

Friend Sawyer: Dunno re costs, but will bet states get stuck. I agree on stain if something not done, and think simplest and best to re-do wit changes to make sure done right this time, for all those millions disenfranchised. Situation makes pretty good points for Curmudgeon comment and we may just have to come to that, when progressive movement now surging finally takes over...sometime prior to Armageddon, let's hope...

Sawyer Johnson March 8, 2008 8:09 am (Pacific time)

Henry I've been searching my memory, but can you remember the last time this many voters(in the millions) were disenfranchised, through no fault of their own? So if they do a do-over, who should be responsible for the cost? I can see why Sen. Obama may not want another election, but if one is not done, then it would always put a stain on his presidency if he wins.

Henry Ruark March 7, 2008 3:48 pm (Pacific time)

C-Mudge et al: Your suggestion far too "rational and reasonable" to win any support from our facile and fancy politicians. They love it this way, since it produces that much more full opportunity to pal-around with more potential corporate "campaign contributions" many- dollar donors, giving those bribe-handlers exposure worth much to them, if not too-obviously done --and thus helping pay-out harvest. Notice how many such rich "sponsoring companies" have top-guys right out there in the public eye, demonstrating their closer than normal contact with the pols. This is old-hat story in the print-side press, notably now neglected in the telling, for obvious reasons; but even so the public is finally wising-up to the ongoing manipulations for which we are paying so dearly now, at both Congressional and State levels.

Curmudgeon March 7, 2008 1:45 pm (Pacific time)

Wouldn't it be wonderful if all primaries were held on the same day, the same way we do the general election? It would be a much more reasonable system. And it gives everyone a say, Hold a single, nationwide primary. Then allow 4-6 months for the winners to campaign before the single, nationwide general election. Any benefit claimed for the system we're now using is purely an illusion, and it's extremely expensive and rather complicated. And to add insult to that, it sometimes leaves those at the tail-end of the primary cycle with no incentive to vote because the results have already been determined. Oregon comes to mind immediately.

Henry Ruark March 7, 2008 12:39 pm (Pacific time)

To all: $2CheapShot wrote: "...at one time the word "democrat" meant one who pandered to the uninformed masses." What he didn't mention was that the quote is sourced to a then-participant of English aristocracy attacking the Irish defenders of their nation. (O'Ruark family history, from defenders-then.) IF he knows quote, he should also know source --and share what that means: The Irish were among the longtime victims of the English-claimed "superior elite", still with us...much tattered, bedraggled and forlorn these days.

Sue March 7, 2008 7:04 am (Pacific time)

Kappi: If you live in your Oregon, your primary vote doesn't count either. We followed the rules. Having said that, I agree it is an unfortunate situation. Is anyone reporting that Hilary is in worse shape after Tuesday's "victories". She now has to win the rest of the primaries by a larger margin. I think she is the one bring all this up out of desperation. We need to figure out a better way to chose our president, first by getting rid of Diebold machines.

Kappie March 6, 2008 12:28 pm (Pacific time)

I think that if my state decided to vote early and i as a person had no choice in it I would be p.o.'d. I would want my vote counted... Does it matter what day you vote... shouldn't it count that you voted...

Kappi March 6, 2008 7:32 pm (Pacific time)

I understand. I don't think she should have it handed to her in any way. I just think the people should re vote. I think to not let them would be detrimental to our democracy.

Glen March 6, 2008 4:48 pm (Pacific time)

Kappie: the issue is that only Hillary was on the ballot in Michigan and Florida. Edwards and Obama withdrew their names in response to the party rules.

Anonymous March 6, 2008 1:00 pm (Pacific time)

Hey Kevin Mannix announced today that he wants hooley's old seat in congress. FYI

Kappie March 6, 2008 12:43 pm (Pacific time)

I think that if my state decided to vote early and i as a person had no choice in it I would be frickn pissed off. I would want my vote counted... Does it matter what day you vote... shouldent it count that you voted...

Kappie March 6, 2008 12:28 pm (Pacific time)

Glen March 6, 2008 12:16 pm (Pacific time)

If Hillary acquires the nomination by under the table moves, she will not be able to unify the party. Her craving for power at all costs is ugly.

$Two Dollars March 6, 2008 11:53 am (Pacific time)

Well probably by the time they sort this out the November election will have come and gone. Actually there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that provides a right to vote in a national election. Maybe Mr. Dean can tell that to the Michigan and Florida voters? Also for you thirsty for knowledge, at one time the word "democrat" meant one who pandered to the uninformed masses. Me thinks Howard Dean and the democratic leadership need to find a way to get these voters properly acknowledged. Though the state demo leaders did break the rules. Very interesting to see how this plays out. I'll put my money on Clinton figuring out a way, otherwise some major carnage coming during the convention.

[Return to Top]

Election Rule Violators Florida and Michigan Unwilling to Accept Facts

Quick Links

DINING

MUST SEE SALEM

AUCTIONS - APPRAISALS

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

ONLINE SHOPPING

Advertise with Salem-News