Democrats to Consider Reducing Superdelegates

| | Comments (1)

You knew it was going to happen at some point. The Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee are trying to set up a commission to recommend changes for the next presidential primary season — including, possibly, cutting down on the number of “superdelegates.”

Their proposal, which will be presented to the Democratic convention rules committee in Denver on Saturday, would create a 37-member “Democratic Change Commission” to suggest a series of changes to the delegate selection and primary rules for the 2012 election. They’d look at ways to make sure no states hold primaries or caucuses before the first Tuesday in March — except for “approved pre-window states,” which could hold their contests in February — and they’d consider changes to the rules for caucuses.

All of this was probably inevitable — especially the debate over the primary schedule — given the mess that Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton faced in their drawn-out nomination fight. The early Florida and Michigan contests, which almost cost those delegations their seats at the convention, were some of the testiest issues Obama and Clinton had to resolve to make peace before the convention.

But for members of Congress, the biggest issue before the commission may be the question of whether to reduce the presence of superdelegates the next time around.

It wasn’t that long ago that the superdelegates — mostly elected officials, including all Democratic members of Congress, and party powerbrokers — looked like they might have been in a position to decide the nomination. Clinton’s campaign openly pursued them, hoping to overturn Obama’s lead with the pledged delegates. Obama’s campaign, meanwhile, warned that unelected delegates shouldn’t overturn the will of the voters. The whole episode served as a refresher course on why the Democrats had created superdelegates in the first place: to give party officials a voice in the process and make sure they could step in if the grassroots party voters were about to nominate a candidate who was sure to lose in the fall.

But since that goal started to look unseemly, many Democratic lawmakers became more open to re-examining the superdelegate system — not by changing the rules in the middle of the game, but by looking at it after the nomination was settled. That’s exactly what’s happening now. “The commission will review it and make recommendations on reductions to ensure the voters choose our presidential nominee, not party insiders,” said Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro.

Now, all they have to do is convince Democratic members of Congress to give up their automatic seats at the conventions. Don’t hold your breath.

    Comments

  1. I think that they should require all states to VOTE IN THE PRIMARIES INSTEAD OF HAVING CAUCUS.

    The caucus as flawed. The supporters of obama intimidated people at the caucus. In the state I live in I know for sure what they did and a friend of mine lives in another state where they did the same. And how about the illegal sign ups in Texas that the DNC would not allow Hillary to challenge.

    When you went to to caucus and raised your hand and wanted to vote for Hillary a group of thugs got up came over sat next to you and shouted you down. We were seniors and we were intimidated. And other states had this problem.

    How do you say the voting is fair when this happens. If they had security control these THUGS we might have a different outcome.

    Posted by: MdDeeDa Author Profile Page | August 22, 2008 12:18 PM

Post A Comment


(for verification only; will not be published with your comment)