Crashing the Florida Party: Primary Concerns

Riverview, Florida. 7:10 am, 29 January 2008. I insert my card into the machine and begin the process. "Florida Property Tax Amendment One." Casting my vote, I press the "Next" icon on the touchscreen, ready now to move on to the "big race" of the day. I actually feel a tingle of excitement as I prepare to vote for a candidate in whom I truly believe. I haven't felt this strongly about a Presidential race since 2000, when I worked for John McCain's campaign in South Carolina... when "Dubya" put the screws to him... and when the fate of this country - my country - was sealed. But today, eight long years later, I am making my voice heard once again, this time as part of a Democratic movement that's all about change. About making it right again. And this vote - my vote - is the first step on the road to Pennsylvania Avenue and finally making right all that is so very wrong.

I'd like to tell you that I pressed that touchscreen again. That I was part of the process. That, win or lose, I did my part. But I can't. I didn't. You see, my voter registration card bears three letters that disqualified me from participating in Florida's Presidential primary. Three little letters that rob me of my voice; that steal my right to affect change in what is arguably the most important phase of the democratic process. My card says "NPA." No Party Affiliation. And because of this, all I can do is sit back and watch helplessly as my candidate loses the race. I suppose I can take some solace in the fact that Florida "doesn't count" this time. Frankly, though, that knowledge affords me precious little comfort. I am outraged.

The closed primary system in Florida - shared by almost half of the United States - restricts participation to registered party members only. The rationale: only a party's membership should be permitted to select that party's standard-bearer for the upcoming election. Furthermore, the point has been made that allowing all voters to choose which party's primary to vote in could lead to unfair skewing of the results. Imagine, in 2004, if Florida Republicans had flooded the Democratic Primary in order to choose the weakest possible candidate to face the GOP incumbent, George W. Bush! (That said, let's not think too much more about Florida's rather checkered past where the current administration is concerned!) I concede that these are valid points, but I still feel strongly that the overriding concern must be that people like me - learned, well-informed potential voters who refuse to swallow hook, line and sinker the ideology of either party - are being unjustly barred from a vital part of the electoral process. Are we to quietly accept our places as political outsiders, and be content in the knowledge that we will be able to make our voices heard come November? By that time, the contest (realistically) will have been whittled down to two candidates - and usually the ones that their respective partisan "Machines" want. Let's face it. The Dems don't want Obama. The GOP doesn't want McCain. But who's to say that if all of us got our fair shake in the voting booth, we might not fly in the face of "The Machines," and nominate the men and women whom we want to see lead our nation? The system is broken.

According to The Florida Division of Elections (statistics as of 5 March 2004), of the 9.3 million registered voters in Florida, only 17% are registered NPA. That's roughly 1.6 million. Let's just say that half of those NPA's voted in today's Democratic Primary, and of that number, 42% voted for Obama, while 23% cast ballots for Hillary Clinton. (I base this admittedly unscientific estimate on Independent/Other voting in South Carolina's primary last Saturday - source: MSNBC.com) At this very moment, Clinton has a lead of 225,802 votes over Obama here in Florida. BUT, factor in the "estimated NPA vote," and the gap narrows to a mere 73,802. Now, perhaps, we've got a race on our hands! At the very least, Obama picks up a few more crucial delegates (if Florida actually had any - but I digress...)

I don't claim to have all the answers. I'm sure there will be plenty of folks out there who read this as a case of sour grapes because my guy didn't win. And perhaps there is a bit of truth in that allegation. But the bottom line is unchanging. The system is broken. And the power to fix it is ours. We simply have to decide to use it.

Comments

[LynneBH]

"Don"t blame the system for your lack of responsibility or personal preference on party affiliation."
Sorry, dude, I can"t disagree with you more. I do blame the system, because "closed-primary" states systematically exclude from the process moderate voters who do not follow strict party lines. (I choose based on issues and candidates rather than a single party's philosophy.)
Sure, I can vote for a candidate from any party in the November election...but my choices are constrained by a primary process that, in effect, doesn't allow me to participate. I would have to change my voter registration every time we have an election! (And not miss any deadlines--heaven forbid I should change my mind or find out new information about a candidate less than 29 days before the primary.)
The author has already cited the theoretical reasons for maintaining the status quo, so I won"t belabor them here...except to note that they all presuppose the continuation of an entrenched two-party system, a big-money machine with neither motivation nor intention to divest themselves of the power they wield like a bloody club.
Closed-primary states require taxpayers, regardless of party, to fund a voting process that systematically favors those two main parties; one that disenfranchises voters who prefer to think and choose for themselves in favor of those who are lazy or complacent enough to live with the option the party chooses.
"The fact is that a record breaking number of Floridians did indeed participate in the primary. And they accomplished it in a state that has a lackluster record on voting. So obviously something went right this time."
Hmmm...the fact is that a record breaking number of Floridians turned out to vote on the property tax amendment. As for "something went right this time"--maybe you haven"t heard about the poll worker improprieties reported by the Florida Sun-Sentinel. Be sure to check it out at
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sfl-129electionday,0,6968764,print.story.

[FreeThinkn1]

What's stopping republicans from registering as Dems and voting in the Dem primary or vice versa? I doubt that people would give up their vote in their own party's primary in order to skew the other party's primary. I used to live in Florida as an independent and it sucked during primary season not having any say. Fortunately, I've moved to a state that does not require a declaration of party affiliation. Voting in my state's primary is like voting in a general election; I pick the person I want--it's that simple. Also, not knowing a voter's party affiliation makes voter caging less appealing.

[mdmnyp]

sir,

We are all responsible as individuals to meet the requirements of our state to participate in primaries. They teach that at the junior high level in civics class. So don"t blame the system for your lack of responsibility
or personal preference on party affiliation.

The fact is that a record breaking number of Floridians did indeed participate in the primary. And they accomplished it in a state that has a lackluster record on voting. So obviously something went right this time.

Why don"t you Point your fingers instead at the DNC for not counting the Florida primary.

Another thing! STOP calling Florida a "beauty contest." Shame on the media for undermining the significance of Florida voters. Chris Matthew should be rebuked for the insensitivity he displayed on the night of the primary in Florida.

Long hours of contemplation and intense soul searching is what every American goes through to determine the candidate they will support.
and that is exactly what Floridans did.

As if a town hall meeting would somehow sway the majority of our votes this late in the game. Today we live in the "information age." Americans as a whole have enjoyed more exposure to the candidates for president than ever before.

If campaigning in Florida would have made that much of a difference than why did Giuliani lose?

The author of the post mentioned that he had a feeling of "excitement" about his candidate. According to the media that is not possible.

The citizens of Florida are supposedly too simple minded to understand the complexities of this election. However, Chris Matthews and the
rest of the pundits can supposedly read the minds of the American voters like a book. Give me a break. The New Hampshire Primary proved once again that they are clueless.

If anything Florida's represents a clearer picture of what really mattered to democratic voters. With no coercing people had to think for themselves. Which is the way it should be.

The bottom line is Florida spoke and Hillary won.

From: A Registered Fort Myers "indepeendent."

[ButterflyWeed]

If only the Founding Fathers could see us now. Double thumbs down to the notorious Florida Board of Elections for disabling the rights of Independents. Thanks for speaking out and refusing to succumb to our government injected x factor in voter apathy. (The old *I tried to vote but "they" wouldn't let me* trap).

[Carolinacolumnist]

Well said; an insightful piece. Those of us neatly registered by party seldom give a thought to what might be termed "The Rape of the Flock"--the "flock" being those fiercely independent voters who are wooed by both Democrats and Republicans, necessary to either side for a win, yet denied a voice in a closed primary system.

We want you when we want you, on our terms and expect you to accept your non-status as second class citizens.

Clearly we need a change. In more ways than one.