As a South Carolina Democrat, I've watched closely the process that has played out over the past six years or so that the Democratic National Committee has undergone to expand the early primary/ caucus field to include more minorities. It was a very long process and meticulously handled by the rules and by-laws committee of the DNC. Many hearings and meetings were held to get input from countless numbers of people.
In the end, Nevada was chosen for an early caucus and South Carolina was chosen for an early primary. The "window" was set to "open" a matter of days after the SC primary, giving all other states the opportunity to jockey, as has been the tradition in the past, for position after a date certain.
Unfortunately, after not being chosen for the early primary period, Democratic leaders in Michigan and Florida are ignoring the rules that were passed by the rules and by-laws committee and full DNC by an overwhelming margin. In doing so, they're denying minorities a much-sought after voice in the early nominating process.
Nevada was chosen as an early Caucus State because of its' growing labor population, it's Native American population, and its Hispanic/Latino population. South Carolina was chosen because African Americans are expected to represent at least 40 percent of Democratic primary voters. These ethnic minorities have NO SIGNIFICANT representation in the other early States.
The primary and caucus calendar is a delicate thing. We've all seen the magic of Iowa and New Hampshire and the power they have in dictating the direction of the nomination. Understandably, we are all envious of that magic and would love to have a piece of it.
There was a vigorous competition to win the two coveted spots that the DNC opened to the pre-window period. In the end, Nevada and South Carolina were chosen.
Accordingly, we now have the most diverse early-nominating process we have ever had. We, as Democrats should be incredibly proud of that. By having these contests in four "small" states, it also allows more candidates the ability to compete, giving a wider array of options to primary voters.
Michigan and Florida have broken the rules and should be penalized for it. They are rogue state parties that have chosen to ignore the rules and the spirit in which those rules came to exist. It's offensive to those who worked so have to increase diversity in the process.
The Democratic National Committee should realize that they are on the verge of becoming irrelevant. If their party rules can be ignored without significant penalty, then their existence may be pointless. The most coveted thing the party controls in our nominating process is the calendar. The DNC MUST stand up and make it clear that any state party that violates the pre-window period will be severely punished.
Follow Lane Hudson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/tlanehudson
Michigan and Florida do being very unique things to the table. However, there was a very extensive process that involved many people over the span of six or so years that produced SC and Nevada as the two new "pre-window" States. The Party officials involved in this decision were from around the country. The full DNC includes hundreds of people representing every State Party in the US plus the District of Columbia.
While I agree that the system should be expanded in some way to even out the influence that any one (of few) States has, I believe the DNC has made a move in a very good direction.
It is also worth noting that the Michigan Democratic Party issued a statement opposing the early Primary bill passed by the Senate. However, on primary issue, the Michigan Senate unanimously voted to move the date of their Primary from Feb. 5 to Jan. 15. Governor Granholm intends to sign this bill.
The DNC should "stand up" if it want to lose Florida in 2008 and truly become irrelevant. I applaud my home state of Florida for moving up its primary. It's about time a big swing state has some influence and it'll help the Dem's win if the DNC doesn't blow it by pissing off Floridians since a few percentage points will be all that it takes.
In 2004, Kerry won the nomination because Democrats in states like Florida were too eager to abandon their favorite candidates to follow the lead of smaller early states to avoid a contentious primary. Then of course, Kerry got soundly defeated because he never really connected with voters. Do NOT make that same mistake again!
If the citizens of Michigan and Florida want to have an early primary, who is Lane Hudson, let alone the DNC, to decide that they don't have the required minority population? The president is supposed to represent all Americans, not just the minority and special interest voters that the DNC deems desirable.
What is there to be proud telling states, and millions of honest voters, that they get LESS say in the process simply because they aren't deemed "special enough" by the DNC and Mr Hudson?
We aren't the Soviet Union, we shouldn't be punishing people for "defying the party", or "being disloyal". If you do that all you are doing is punishing normal people over a squabble between a small handful of establishment-types over who should be more and less represented.
Guess what? In America, everyone should be represented equally. Citizens' will should trump party goals. And this blog post is a good microcosm for what is wrong with American politics.
We won't be one nation until we stop dividing people in ways that are most beneficial politically. Bush does it religiously, and unfortunately the Democrats have gotten into it as well.
Except that introducing the idea of diversity and race seems silly. Because the diversity that exists in SC is somehow less important than the diversity in FL or MI? Michigan has one of the largest union populations in the country and a significant enclave of voters from the Middle East.
Now what SC really does is provide a "Southern Test." Will the good ol' boys vote only for Edwards? Will they shun Hillary and Obama? Will this defection make it nigh unto impossible for either of them to win a single Southern state, forcing us again into a must-win situation in every single swing state? Or will they prove more viable than everyone thought, putting states like WV, Tenn, Ark, and LA completely in play? The importance is as much on regional differences and character as union membership and ethnic diversity.
It's more than that.
SC's a bit tired of being known as nothing more than the red state that bUSH used to destroy McCain in '00.
In truth it's a test to see if minorities are as sick of "business as usual" as everyone else (NOT a test to see if Bubba will vote Edwards. He won't.)
What will make SC important? HISTORY:
Civil rights
Disability
Farm safety laws
FMLA
Medicaid
Medicare
OSHA
Rural electrification
Rural telephone service
Social security
Unemployment insurance
Union legitimization
Veterans benefits
Welfare
WIC (SC’s Fritz Hollings)
Workplace safety
Etc.
ALL created by DEMOCRATS
ALL fought by REPUBLICANS.
Any black man who realizes that perhaps the only reason his sick, old, beloved grandmother isn't eating out of a dumpster is the Democratic party (if only in a prior incarnation) WILL vote Democratic. At least once.
There is an implied obligation to be tapped.
Of course, any poor American of any age or gender will do the same.
NOT that we aren’t all VERY interested.
AND Bubba just might come through….
Additionally, while I am by no means a fan of Jeb, I can't help but feel that one of the reasons he remains so popular in Florida is because he speaks perfect Spanish (thanks in part to his wife Columba, who was born in Mexico) which is rapidly becoming the language of choice in South Florida's heavily-populated urban areas.
BTW, the democratic party hasn't done much for the hispanics, period. And neither have the republicans. Hey, hispanics are now 22% of the population, so why so few representation.