Friday, March 7, 2008

Multiple Choice?

Since it's become clear neither of the Democratic presidential hopefuls will gather the 2025 delegates necessary to win the nomination during the primary season, eyes have become focused on two situations which could help decide the outcome. One is which way the 796 odd superdelegates will pledge themselves, and whether party bigwigs should even be in the position of choosing the nominee. The other is the sticky question of what to do about Florida and Michigan.

Right now, none of their delegates will be seated at the national convention in August. That's because, in their haste to make an impact on the process, both held their balloting before the Democratic National Committee told them they could. The party, however, faces a problem. Stick to their guns, and they risk losing both states at an angry electorate in November. Letting the delegates be seated by their actual results will see the Obama camp crying foul. Aside from losing Florida by 50-33%, the senator from Illinois wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan.

So, party people, here the multiple choice test facing Howard Dean and his friends at the DNC.
1) Stand pat. Refuse to seat the delegates, and take their chances in November.
2) Reverse course, and allow the delegates to be seated based on the primary vote.
3) Allow a do-over. This appeared to be gaining momentum earlier this week until Howard Dean said the national party wouldn't pay for it.
4) Split the pledged delegates right down the middle, awarding half to each candidate.

Both Obama and Clinton have their reasons for advocating options 1 and 2, respectively. Yet neither should be confused with the health and well being of the Democratic Party. Given the estimated $30 million dollar price tag of re-votes in both states, option 3 seems problematic.

While the 4th option may not satisfy the candidates, or those who say "rules are rules", it is ultimately equitable and fair to both Clinton and Obama. The DNC should also give all states fair warning that this is a one time solution, and that the next states to defy the party's rules won't be treated with such beneficence. 

And then there's the issue of the superdelegates........  

No comments: