Florida's Last Stand

State Democrats Release Re-Vote Plan

ORLANDO -- Florida Democrats today put the finishing touches on a presidential re-vote plan that almost no one likes, but represents the last hope (while perhaps not the best hope) for salvaging the state's nominating role without a bruising fight at the national convention.

CQ Politics has obtained the complete memo on the Florida Dem's re-vote plan

The idea is to combine a vote-by-mail process with in-person voting centers around the state to accommodate anyone who needs assistance. A slew of details are still unresolved, including how to pay the $10 million price tag and exactly how to work with state officials to verify voter signatures on mailed ballots.

Whatever the obstacles, this is it for Florida Democrats. Time is running out to come up with a plan that can be approved and implemented before the June 10 deadline for all states to vote on choosing convention delegates.

Without an alternative plan, Florida would have to seek legitimacy for its Jan. 29 primary results before the national party's credentials committee in a convention-eve showdown that would certainly become a vicious spectacle if the nomination is still contested.

But this is also the last chance for the Democratic National Committee to preserve party order in the nation's biggest swing state.

Party leaders in Washington smugly dismiss Florida's plight as fair punishment for leapfrogging the primary calendar without permission, but they might not be so smug in November if it turns out that this mess costs Democrats the White House. More on Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

Follow Craig Crawford on Twitter: www.twitter.com/craig_crawford

Comments

[Denni]

One of the "Washington Party Leaders" who agreed was HILLARY CLINTON, who now cares about voters rights, now that she's losing this race.

WHY did she sign the pledge to disenfranchise to only turn around and lead a charge to have the votes counted (or have a re-vote take place). It's clear, she's as good as her word. I'll be voting Obama.

[ntmessage]

If people agree that FL and MI should be salvaged, since they represent fully 16% of what is needed to elect the next president then we should forget about disenfranchising them and think about the votes that were already cast and elections that are already certified and paid for. We should just admit that the decision was a mistake, for just one reason. This situation has become a monumental political issue that damages only democrats.

It seems that thus far there is a stalemate on how and what any recount should look like and it is likely any revote route proposed thus far would likely fail to represent the voters’ intention and dynamics at the point in time the elections were held.

Here is the only solution to save 16% of the Electoral College in the fall.
1. We should seat FL as is, since no one really campaigned there and all were on the ballot. This is a no brainer.

2. The democratic candidates that were on the Michigan ballot, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel all received votes. This means all who voted Uncommitted were voting for Obama, Edwards, Biden or Richardson. I propose that we give ALL Uncommitted votes to Obama and be done with it.

Of course, this is controversial, but the price the DNC and our party are paying and will in the future is too great to let this linger. Already McCain is working those states.

Dean needs to lead and acknowledge his red herring logic that the candidates decide on a solution means they will never agree and this will end up in court. They are in a battle and you cannot expect them to make that type of decision. Cooler heads need to prevail and some leadership needs to emerge.

I have just proposed the most efficient and logical method to solve the issue that I have seen thus far. Unless someone comes up with a cheaper, easier or more fair process (fair meaning the voters not the candidates), we should just do it this way and MoveOn.

All flames or off topic replies will be ignored.

[MKWrites2]

I voted for Obama here in Florida, but let me tell you, this whole thing has really turned Democrats off against him down here. First, the DNC applies a sanction, but they never said those delegates would not be seated in a close race. I know this because I talked to state party officials when the sanction was first introduced. Karen Thurman refused to let Obama take his name off the ballot as he did in Michigan, because she told him we might push to seat these delegates. He ran ads down here. Hillary did not. That's why she came down here and "claimed" her victory, because Obama broke the rules. To run ads and then say that the contest was "meaningless" was just too ironic for many of us who support voters' rights.

Obama had better agree to something and fast, because if he does get the nomination, the republicans are already planning on running a "He didn't care about your vote then," campaign. He's got enough problems looming with these Wright tapes. I can see the ads now, playing day in and day out just like the Swiftboat ads. Ye gads! In addition, Charlie Crist is very popular right now and he supports McCain. Obama doesn't need to stack the cards in McCain's favor more then they already are down here by ignoring Florida Democrats now.

[GoGreen]

If Michigan or Florida voters (of which I am one) want to direct their displeasure over this, it should be at the representatives of their state that rolled the dice and moved their primaries up knowing of the possible consequences.

As Michigan state Sen. Tupac Hunter is quoted in the Detroit Free Press today as saying, "Here's the rub: We played a game of chicken with the DNC and we're paying for it."

[DavidK08]

It is nice to hear honesty and reason. I understand that you are getting screwed. It is someones fault. They should pay.

What do you think of pledged delegates counting and punishing the supers that caused the mess?

[LeftRight]

so we hold a revote, and allow the pledged delegates to be seated, BUT, we disenfranchise the superdelegates, ALL of whom were among the leaders who screwed the people!

[ruscle]

Another consideration in this is that many Florida voters have previously made their decisions in the precinct election. This previous decision will undoubtedly skew the results of a new election. Many voters will feel that they already made an informed decision and simply repeat that on their mail in ballots instead of participating all over again in gathering information and comparing the candidates. The problem here is that the candidates did not campaign in Florida (by agreement of all parties). So the initial voter decision was mostly made on name recognition and familiarity. Since one candidate is a former first lady, her candidacy was favored heavily by many Florida voters who did not have more meaningful information. Yet this previous decision, based on name recognition, will likely be repeated by many no matter how much information is available or presented. Do overs are not a common aspect of presidential elections, nor should they be. Otherwise, it could be reasonably argued that after the facts of the NAFTA issue with Canada were fully disclosed, many voters in Ohio might want (and deserve) a do-over to vote for a candidate based on more factual discourse.

No amount of "signature comparison" (however that might occur) or other verification of fair implementation in this process will rewind history in the minds of Florida voters so that this choice is new and fresh and important.

[DavidK08]

Who's fault is it that florida delegates aren't going to be seated??????

I was under the impression that Florida did it to themselves. Now, Because Hillary is so desperate to win and FL is a tool in that hand bag for her to make a case. Notice I did not say win. She is only trying to make a case to the supers.

Why do you care if FL or MI vote again??? Why do you care if you feel counted???

Hillary is asking the supers to overturn the vote of the people anyway. So, count or don't count, HRC is still trying to say you should count on one hand and on the other over turn the will of the people by making a case to the super delegates.

Some how that is not manipulation of the system. It isn't rewriting the rules as she goes.

She isn't a fighter, she is a sore looser.

[olderdem]

Florida should not be left to decide Presidential Elections. Their screw ups got us George Bush. Not surprising they voted for Hillary. Obama will win easily without Florida.

[Lemeritus]

"Their screw ups got us George Bush...."

Wasn't a screw-up; they meant to do that.

[SamThornton]

I'm calling BS on this.

There is no evidence that unless either the Michigan or Florida primaries are redone, Democrats will lose in the Fall. None. Let me repeat that: None. This is a fairy tale floated by media pundits, who, as they have been demonstrating for the last 7 years, have been right exactly zero times. Mr. Crawford is no exception.

[JackWOrf]

The Obama FASCISTS just HATE the idea of free and fair elections. Who needs elections when tribal chief Obama DECLARES that he is the victor?

After all, Chief Obama keeps telling his followers that he won the most states. And isn't that how the election is decided? After all, Chief Obama is a PROFESSOR OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, and certainly HE should know that the U.S. Presidential election is TOTALLY based on how many state caucuses each candidate wins!

Yes, and Chief Obama would NEVER lie!!!

But that lousy, stinking, racist Hillary was just talking the other day about how some states are more important than other states! She was mumbling something about some "electoral college". So what is she saying, the people have to go to COLLEGE before they vote? Typical racist elitist remark from Horrible Hillary!

Everybody KNOWS that winning the Wyoming caucus is JUST AS IMPORTANT as winning California. SO WHAT if California has 15 times as many electoral votes. Does that make California sNOBS more important then Wyoming caucus-goers? Of course not!

This is just more ELITISM from Horrible Hillary. SO WHAT if Floriduh has 9 TIMES more electoral votes then Wyoming. Florida voters are EVIL!!! Not only because they didn't vote for Chief Obama but also because they voted one week only!

[LeftRight]

wow, obviously you haven't been reading most of the posts here. I and others have been insisting on a re-do for Florida and Michigan ever since the idea was raised! Even though I'm an Obama supporter, I feel that both states should have their votes counted, BUT I also refuse to count either vote currently, since both states showed skewed results.

[Kasandra]

What nonsense. If you're not careful you're going to blow an artery when Obama is officially the candidate.

I'm from Michigan. I'm for Obama. And I've been pushing for a do-over since the start. You like to accuse Barack of opposing a re-vote and nothing is further from the truth. He just won't be bullied into an unfair electoral process, and in this, I support him. Michigan's primaries are open to independents and reformed Republicans. The re-vote that Granholm and others have been floating is intended to lock out independents. This is flat wrong. Michigan could move forward with a vote by mail process but the loggerhead now blocking that is.. Granholm. She won't support a redo in Michigan unless Florida revotes as well. Why do you think that she, a Clinton supporter, is doing that? Obviously, because Michigan, in a fair and open election, will likely go to Obama. She wants Florida, which is more likely to go to Clinton to balance that out. And the only reason that Clinton would support a revote at all is to get the SUPERDELEGATES seated who are currently locked out. She doesn't care at all about the 10 pledged delegates she would net from the general citizenry's votes. She does not care about YOUR vote being counted.

It would really help if people learned to look beyond the obvious and stop accepting what they see on the surface. You are being manipulated. And judging from all that yelling in your post, it's not good for you.

[TedB]

You don't really know what 'fascist' means,do you.

[RLuzzatto]

Why are people talking about a revote at all, regardless of method? All parties agreed that Michigan and Florida LOST their delegates. Not just delayed or postponed.
The assumption is that the MI and FL Democratic voters are so teenage and petulant that they will stay home for the general election. Of course, they'd rather have either Dem elected rather than McCain. When they look and see that their other choice represents back alley abortions, 100 years in Iraq, and a president that doesn't understand the economy (by his own admission), they will no longer be worried about whether their delegates were seated.
Give the people of Michigan and Florida some credit.

[LeftRight]

I don't think that they are so stupid that they will want McBush as president just cause the dems wouldn't let them play, but why are we punishing Americans for something that they didn't do? Cause that's what's happening, the people of FL and MI didn't change the dates, the leaders did, and I don't want to be punished for what my boss does, do you???

[RLuzzatto]

I didn't elect my boss.

[RLuzzatto]

If I elected my boss, I'd have to live with his or her decisions without complaining and devaluing the rules.

[Kasandra]

While I support a re-do in both states, I think FL and MI are totally different. Florida Dems were messed up by the Republicans in their state and should have a re-do if at all possible. Here in Michigan we were messed up by our own party leaders and so we bear some burden of responsibility.

[Researchguy66]

That's not true. Florida's and Michigan's delegates cannot be seated because they did not have qualifying selection contests, namely due to date. There's nothing preventing a new selection contest as long as it qualifies with all the requirements set forth by the DNC.

IF the republicans decide to stir up trouble in FL and MI (imagine that), they don't need to siphon off too many voters or to keep too many voters at home to greatly improve their chances in November. You assume that McCain will not seem like a reasonable candidate by November. Do you really believe that a country that elected George W. Bush TWICE will not look on McCain as a reasonable successor?

[Countess]

Poor Craig! Hillary is so desperate and heading for defeat and like most of her voters he is in a panic. Please realize that Hillary Clinton is a poor candidate and if you want someone to represent the old politics you need a better candidate than her.

[ruffmama]

oh puleeze! I am born and raised in Miami-Dade County and we have had scandal after scandal involving absentee ballot fraud. Who really believes that a mail in ballot would be ay different?

[Nonamnesiac]

Good post.

[Mollye]

I hope it's fair and untainted. It's a real shame that Hillary's huge lead cannot be counted. It seems the deck has been stacked against her, from the beginning. I think the mess sits squarely in Howard Dean's lap...he should never have given an ultimatum.

Craig, care to update us on the Rezko trial? Politico seems to be the only blog interested. I want to know more about the Iraqi Billionaire, Nadmi Auchi..who is a Rezko associate.­, and what part his money played in any of this.

[RabidRightRebel]

Are you sure you feel comfortable using the typical Republican tactics of providing half truths on the subject and then try to change it?

While Hillary has not been handed the nomination on a silver plater, I hardly think that the deck has been stacked against her. Infact I would argue that the race was stacked in her favor but Obama has proven to be a better candidate. Given that but for Obama would she aready have secured the nomination this eems to show your statement to be untrue.

As for the implication in the second part of your post that Obama is a criminal, isn't that more than a little disceptive and do you really feel engaging in that kind of gutter politics should be part ot the nomination process between two Democratic candidates. If you feel no shame in using these tacitcs perhaps you should join the Republicans.

[LeftRight]

Please explain you logic here. Hillary was the nominee before the voting started, everyone KNEW it. Suddenly, here's this strong candidate, Obama, who's beating her at the game she SHOULD be playing, and she couldn't do it.

And, since the "lead" you speak of is hers ONLY because she broke the party's rules in Michigan and Florida, the fact that you bring it up at all is curious...­.

[Mollye]

No, he is not beating her..he has caught up with her. It's because the media has given him a FREE ride and because he gives speeches that sound like the favorite gospel Preacher in every town. 1/2 of the Democrats are for Hillary. More, if Michigan and Florida had been allowed their delegates from the start. This process has been rotten from the start. Your candidate, Obama, advertised in Florida...­is that breaking the rules?

[DoninJoisey]

Bill? Is that you?

Stacked against her? That's a joke, right? She was the odds-on favorite at the start.


Rezko - no money ties - can the same be said of Norman Hsu? Drug companies? Insurance companies? The Clintons have always been for sale - don't even try to compare integrity.


Who has released their tax return?

[CaveatMagnusFrater]

Neither Barack or Hillary. I wonder why the truth is so seldom mentioned in the MSM or HuffPo blogs.

[tedbear]

I heard on the news this evening, that Florida law prohibits mail in elections, if the vote is for a candidate. It was also discussed that a private company could manage the election and leave the government out. However, the private company would need a list of registered voters and Florida law prohibits releasing that information. I hope these two states are kept out, they broke the rules and need to accept the consequence, even though Hillary isn't going to like it. She signed the agreement on this and she needs to accept responsibility.

[Thatcher]

It's the voter's signatures that are prohibited from being released. The Democratic Party of Florida has a voter file ... every state party has a voter file.

[LeftRight]

I disagree with you, especially about Florida, since it was a republican led legislature and a republican governor who moved the primary too early. Why, then, are we punishing the DEMOCRATIC voters, who really had no say in the matter?

And, as far as Michigan is concerned, remove the superdelegates from there (since most of them either were instrumental in getting the date moved up, or at least supported it) and then allow a new election for the PEOPLE! That way you don't punish the voters (who, after all, did NOT move the date!) while still punishing the state party leaders (who DID move the date!)

[RickO]

One reason the Florida Democrats (not the voters) are to blame is that the bill passed the legislture and the vote was UNANIMOUS. And, the Florida super delegates had a heavy hand in the decision that ultimately put us in this position. (I'm a FL voter),

We have to remember that this primary is not a general election. While federal and state election laws govern how the election is conducted, the party gets to set the primary rules and there's an attempt at a national calculus that goes into determining the order in which states hold their primaries. There are previously signed agreements between the state and national parties and those agreements were knowingly violated by Florida, who knew the consequences in advance. Senator Nelson even sued to challenge that agreement, and lost in court, well before the election, the candidates knew it, all the voters knew it, and now Florida (and Clinton) is crying foul? If Clinton was ahead and Florida was leaning toward Obama, you can bet the argument would be coming from the opposite direction. That's why standing agreements should apply.