The DNC needs to enforce its rules…

…On everyone.

There’s something I need to get off my chest. I’m very disappointed in the decision by several of the Democratic candidates for President to fore-go forgo campaigning in Florida, Michigan, and any other state that tries to “leapfrog” ahead of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina in the presidential nominating process. I’m also disappointed in DNC Chairman Howard Dean because from this point forward, his talk about Democrats needing to “show up” and have a “50-state strategy” is nothing but rhetoric.

How exactly can you talk about Democrats “showing up” and talk about Democrats having a “50-state strategy”, but at the same time all but demand for the Democratic presidential candidates not to campaign in all but four, small states. I said it one year ago, and I’ll say it again; Screw Iowa & New Hampshire!

But…

…Seeing that Iowa, New Hampshire, and now Nevada & South Carolina (four states with a combined electoral vote total of 23 that is still just over half of the combined 44 electoral votes that Michigan & Florida bring to the table) want to play this game called “We wanna be first”, I say let them win this game.

However, the word should go forth that Rule 11.A of the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention will be strictly enforced and adhered to.

What does Rule 11.A say?

Just this…

No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention. Provided, however, that the Iowa precinct caucuses may be held no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the Nevada first-tier caucuses may be held no earlier than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the New Hampshire primary may be held no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February; and that the South Carolina primary may be held no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February. In no instance may a state which scheduled delegate selection procedures on or between the first Tuesday in February and the second Tuesday in June 1984 move out of compliance with the provisions of this rule.

Simply put, if Iowa (22 days), New Hampshire (14 days), Nevada (17 days), or South Carolina (7 days) violate this rule (and at this point, it looks as if Iowa and New Hampshire are set to do that), then those states should face the same sanctions that Florida and Michigan are facing.

To quote DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee member Donna Brazille regarding the decision to sanction Florida, “The rules and bylaws committee had no choice but to enforce the rules.” That’s fine, but if you’re going to enforce the rules, then enforce them equally and fairly. The precedent set by the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee is that if any state violates the DNC’s 2008 Delegate Selection Rules, they will be stripped of their delegates to the Democratic National Convention.

So, when will Iowa & New Hampshire be stripped of their delegates?

17 comments

  1. Doug Deal says:

    Maybe Florida can pass legislation that any party that does not recognize it’s full delegation in a primary may not be put on the ballot to recieve electors for the Presidential election. The DNC would cave in microseconds.

  2. Doug Deal says:

    Is that on the talking points this morning Decatur? You guys are so intellectually bankrupt the only thing you have to offer is insults, putdowns and vague innuendo. How typical.

  3. Holly says:

    Doug, I like that idea. I’d hate that it would have to come to that, but how can the national convention of either party discount all the votes from those states? I think this whole primary thing has fallen into the realm of the ridiculous. Oy vey.

  4. bsjy says:

    Couldn’t read your post because you do not seem to know the difference between forgo and forego.

    Forgo is to go without, which seems to be what you intended to mean.

    Forego is to go before, which is rarely used except in the perfect sense: foregone, as in a foregone conclusion.

    Another for/fore combination to master before using is forebear and forbear. The former is a noun meaning ancestor and the latter is a verb meaning resist.

  5. Chris says:

    Even better, here in Georgia the Primary date is set by the General Assembly. The GOP majority could (in theory – they are more gentlemanly that that) decide to set the Georgia Primary day to be 1/1 thus forcing the Dems to invoke the rule and denying Dems in this state any choice in who their nominee is.

    That should be a perfect example of why it should be the political party’s responsbility to hold the primaries (both Presidential and other) and not be a function of the state government.

    I do like Doug’s idea. That would be funny.

  6. Doug Deal says:

    Holly,

    I agree that the primaries are pretty rediculous this year, but I do not blame states that have had n0 influcnece on the nominees complaining about the same few states choosing the candidates every four years.

    If the parties want to control the process so much and lock out third parties from the ballot, they should be paying for evey dollar of their own selection process, including the cost of registering/credentialling the electors, printing the ballots and maning the polls.

    Chris,

    I got a good laugh thinking about it. It would be perfectly within the right of the state legislatures, as they alone have the constitutional authority to set how presidential electors are selected.

    National political parties are rarely, if ever, the good guys in any kind of dispute.

  7. jrgarland says:

    The GOP will also penalize any state that holds its presidential primary prior to the first Tuesday in February – by reducing its delegates to next year’s national convention by one-half. Check out my most recent comments over at The Other Athens for the specific citations of the applicable RNC rules.

  8. Archibald Bulloch says:

    It’s becoming clear that we need a plan along the lines of the one Boxer-Lieberman-Collins planned that would have four primary dates set up over four months (1 in Jan, 1 in Feb, etc.).

    The question is whether that should be done regionally or whether states should be divided evenly among the four dates to make each like a mini-national primary.

  9. GAWire says:

    Andre, to answer your question – it’s because they want to win. If winning means not campaigning in certain states, then wouldn’t you say it would be a waste to do otherwise?

    Complaining for the sake of complaining … and I’m not even a Dem.

    Either way, I agree with Rome’s first comment.

  10. Doug Deal says:

    GAWire,

    BS. If it was so boring, why did you bother to read it and all of the comments.

    I guess you Rome and Decatur all found this to be the first and only boring post on PP, or you would have posted on each and everyone that you have found.

    Good to know you are all on the same talking point meme.

  11. GAWire says:

    Doug, WHAAAA? I can’t even tell what you’re saying. I don’t think I ever said it was boring. I said “who cares” (actually Rome said “who cares” and I seconded that). What I also implied is that this post sounds like Andre is complaining for the sake of having something to complain about. Reminds me of my Party.

  12. HeartofGa says:

    I think Florida delegates should be restricted to distributing orange juice to delegates at the convention. That’ll show ’em.

  13. Doug Deal says:

    Ah,

    Sorry GAWire. I thought the story was valid for discussion, and it appeared as if you were dismissing its relevance. If that is not the case, then I am sorry for interpretting it that way.

Comments are closed.