The “Blue Ribbon” MI Compromise

So there I was, settling into my first pilgrimage glass of wine, when all of a sudden I see that the same folks who were in charge of planning a MI Mulligan had proposed their own compromise to seat MI’s delegation in Denver. So much for relaxing my way into vacation.

Here’s the operative part of the proposal. 

As a result, we recommend that the Michigan Democratic Party request the DNC to seat Michigan’s delegates, and that the pledged delegates be apportioned 69 to Senator Clinton and 59 to Senator Obama. That approach splits the difference between the 73/55 position of the Clinton campaign and the 64/64 position of the Obama campaign, based on our belief that both sides have fair arguments about the Michigan primary.

While we expect that neither candidate will explicitly embrace this approach, we believe that the DNC should adopt it and both candidates should accept it because it is fair and because it would resolve an impasse that with each passing day hurts our chances of carrying Michigan and winning the Presidency. We also believe that the DNC must exercise the leadership to resolve this impasse and not allow it to fester any longer. We urge you to seek the approval of the Executive Committee of the Michigan Democratic Party for this proposal and forward it promptly to the DNC for their consideration.

We also want to express our opposition to the challenge filed by DNC Member Joel Ferguson with the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee regarding Michigan’s delegates to the Democratic National Convention. Mr. Fergusons’s proposed remedy – seating Michigan’s so-called super-delegates with a full vote, and seating Michigan’s pledged delegates with a half vote – is unacceptable to us on two grounds. First, we cannot agree to a remedy that allows for super-delegates who didn’t run for the position to have a full vote, while pledged delegates selected by the voters have only half a vote. Second, we see no justification for seating Michigan’s delegates with anything less than full voting rights. If Michigan is punished for fighting the DNC’s decision to grant New Hampshire a waiver, it will hurt the Party’s chances of carrying Michigan in November. We will communicate these views to the Rules and Bylaws Committee and request that you ask the Executive Committee of the Michigan Democratic Party to take a similar position.

Sincerely,

Senator Carl Levin
Representative Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick
UAW President Ron Gettelfinger
DNC Member Debbie Dingell

cc: Governor Jennifer Granholm

A couple of thoughts. First, I think it rather likely that at least one member of this committee has seen my Solomon’s Baby proposal and my petition. And most MI politicos watch Tim Skubick’s show closely, so perhaps my little tirade about elections with only one candidate on it got some notice. I don’t know whether that has influenced the Blue Ribbon committee to come up with their own proposal. But I’ll take it, in any case.

I’ll have to do the math at some point when I’m not fresh off a red-eye (actually, "fresh" is not the word for it). But numbers-wise, this works out to be close to what I proposed. There are, of course, two big differences. First, my proposal lets the candidates choose their 14 At Large delegates. I did that for two reasons: first, to incent the campaigns to take this plan. And second, to allow Obama to exercise more control over the delegate selection process, since he was uninvolved in vetting candidates in our district caucuses (and also, I’ve been told, uninvolved in the smoky-room attempts to come up with slates for the caucuses, which only worked in a few districts). This proposal states clearly that MI’s delegates would be split between Obama and Clinton, though, which is not what happened at the district caucuses. Are they suggesting we revote all the delegates?

As an aside, there may be some push to hold a revote for reasons that have nothing to do with Obama. In the aforementioned smoky-room deal-making, some attention was paid to giving UAW and other unions a seat at the table. Reportedly, however, after all sides had agreed on their slates, Hillary’s team pulled most, but not all, of the UAW names off their slate–they didn’t want anyone with divided loyalties in their delegation. Then, though the unions had selected candidates for the Uncommitted side, they only managed to get them elected in 4-5 districts (probably only about 8 of the folks the unions wanted to send got elected). So this may, also, be an attempt to give the unions another bite at the apple. I’m not sure that’s true, but it’s one possibility.

The second big difference between this proposal and mine is that this one seats the supers as supers. When the Blue Ribbon Committee says,

If Michigan is punished for fighting the DNC’s decision to grant New Hampshire a waiver, it will hurt the Party’s chances of carrying Michigan in November.

I’m not sure they’re aware of how angry people are at the Clusterfuck. Frankly, when I asked people attending a party with ties to some really important MI constituencies the other night to sign my petition, the chief draw was that it punished the super-delegates who got us into the Clusterfuck. One person said, for example, "the supers ought to be in jail."

Suffice it to say I have a different understanding of what will sour people on volunteering in the fall than the Blue Ribbon Committee does.

Also note that seating the super-delegates will probably net Hillary more delegates than this 10-point differential would. I’ve long maintained that Hillary is at least as interested in seating the supers as she is in seating the elected delegates. 

Kudos, though, to the Committee for throwing Joel Ferguson and his crappy solution under the bus. This…

First, we cannot agree to a remedy that allows for super-delegates who didn’t run for the position to have a full vote, while pledged delegates selected by the voters have only half a vote.

… is a sentiment I agree with whole-heartedly. And with the names attached to this letter rejecting Ferguson’s proposal, I consider it dead.

I still think my proposal is vastly superior, because it gives the campaigns a reason to support it (the ability to pick some delegates directly), it integrates the results of the April 19 caucuses, and it gives the rest of the country–and the DNC–the feeling that MI has been punished in some manner for breaking the rules.

So sign my petition–and send it to everyone you know in MI.

image_print
37 replies
  1. ratbastahd says:

    I still see no reason to reward cheaters, nor harm those who played by the rules. They were told what would happen if they held an early primary, they did it anyways. How can they award delegates based on a sham election in which Obama wasn’t even on the ticket?

    I understand the need to seat delegates to avoid disenfranchisement, but then the only fair thing to do is split them down the middle. Supers should not be seated. Of course it’s politics, so they’ll have to make it more complex and divisive then it should be. I’m disgusted with the Dems and feel like I’m watching what should be another sure-victory lost to stupidity.

  2. GeorgeSimian says:

    Not seating the delegates was a huge blunder and I don’t see any way out of the mess it’s caused.

    By the way, the voters still turned up, so it’s they who got punished, not the people who changed the date of the primary.

    Someone has to concede before the convention. That’s the only way to restore peace here.

  3. radiofreewill says:

    Signing the petition was Easy and Painless!

    Sen. Levin will understand the draw of involving the Campaigns by giving them each 14 at-large delegates to choose. Additionally, making the Supers regular delegates prevents them from Exerting Any More Destructive Influence in this Election Cycle.

    Both actions, imvho, are mini-splittings of the baby by themselves – that would leave Sen. Levin and the other Party Leaders ‘unbiased’ to outcomes while using the best option left for Michigan to ‘get in the game’ at Denver.

    The Blue Ribbon Committee’s work is A Giant Step in the right direction, and has already repudiated the Ferguson ‘fix’. However, the Committee needs one more push to ‘fine-tune’ their proposal to Motivate and Inspire the “Make It Happen” wings of the Party – the Campaigns and the Grassroots Activists.

    Now would be a good time for Sen. Levin to hear from the Activist Grassroots Movements – promoting your petition – in A Drive to Bring Everyone to the Table, and get down to the business of Beating the Republicans in the Fall, whomever Our candidate may be.

  4. GeorgeSimian says:

    I guess I didn’t mean turn out, but, in Flordia they did. And if they didn’t, it was because they were told it wouldn’t count. In effect, they had their vote taken away.

    • PetePierce says:

      They had their vote taken away and the sat their passively while it was ripped from their hands by people like Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and while she was shoving ahead in line, the people of Florida knew it; it was headlined in their papers and they were so silent they might has well have been on a Pavulon Sodium Pentathol drip.

      I know this is a Michigan solutions thread, but Shultz’s solutions which were DOA were so one sided they were insulting. Shultz is a lawyer and what she proposed was so absurd it would never fly in any civil case she litigated.

  5. JTMinIA says:

    If Levin et al. can’t see why the Michigan delegates shouldn’t be seated as if nothing had happened, then he’s no where near as smart as I previously thought. Much more likely is that he is lying about this and is quite capable of seeing why some people still believe that there ought to be consequences for behavior.

    To Marcy: including statements such as the following do not help you at all: “Also note that seating the super-delegates will probably net Hillary more delegates than this 10-point differential would. I’ve long maintained that Hillary is at least as interested in seating the supers as she is in seating the elected delegates.” It makes your bias too clear. If you have a principled argument for or against seating the supers, go for it. But when you take the likely effect into account, you appear to be just as bad as the Clinton folks. Just a suggestion.

    • radiofreewill says:

      From the linked article “Ask Mark Brewer and Howard Dean to Resolve MI’s Convention Delegation–Fairly”:

      “But it focuses that punishment on those who played Chicken with the votes of MI and lost, last year, rather than punishing those who had no choice in the matter and lost their ability to cast a vote in a truly fair election. It penalizes the super-delegates, many of whom were instrumental in the decision to defy the DNC and many of whom are engaging in the worst posturing right now.”

      If you can agree with that reasoning, imvho, then the 11-16 delegate net for Hillary arrived at in the article is the most likely outcome.

      It’s a more nuanced look at the problem than simply splitting everything down the middle and sitting Supers as Supers – EW’s analysis allows the clearing of grievances by invested elements of the Party, paves the way to Unite the Michigan Dems to do what’s best for Michigan regardless of the Nominee, and leaves a Clean Slate for the next Election Cycle, too.

      The Blue Ribbon Committee’s Compromise is a good start – it just needs to go one more good step to be Healing, too.

    • bmaz says:

      Yeah, I don’t think she was taking it “into account” so much as explaining what it meant. Hard to see how it is a disservice to explain to people what is going on.

    • emptywheel says:

      I hear you. Though that’s precisely where we are at this: a bunch of Hillary supporters continue to present “fair” solutions all while ignoring what Hillary is really after, all while ignoring the real numbers at issue.

      I, personally, would prefer that we not vote. But since that’s not going to happen, I prefer that the Hillary supporters who largely run our state party don’t get to turn a solution into a large, hidden advantage for her.

  6. BillE says:

    A couple of questions.

    Who does Levin support?

    Who set the actual primary date? Was it the republicans?

    • emptywheel says:

      Hillary. And Democrats. Plus, unlike in FL, Granholm had the power to veto the early primary, and chose not to. (Granholm is also a Hillary supporter.)

  7. bobschacht says:

    It looks to me like Marcy’s proposal must have been getting enough traction that the MI “supers” were scared into action in order to preempt Marcy’s proposal from being the leader of the pack. After all, they have the most to lose from her proposal.

    Bob in HI

  8. PetePierce says:

    I still give my proposal the best chance. Michigan delegates will be seated after Clinton is elminated. Michigan has been screwed by the Waky Gang O Five (I add disigenuous Governor Jennifer Granholm to the list). This is all about helping Clinton and screwing Obama.

    The Wacky Michigan gang of four that wrote the letter and keeps coming up with proposals to steal votes for Clinton are Senator Carl Levin; Representative Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick; Ron Gettelfinger, the United Auto Workers president; and Debbie Dingell, a Democratic National Committee member. I suggest strongly you work to get them out of office at the soonest possible moment–and let me extend that to the Gang of Five –Jennifer Granholm deserves to go as soon as possible as well.

    NYT: Wacky Michigan Gang O Four Tries to Steal Clinton Votes Once Again and Gets Rejected Forthwith

    Obama has already rejected every proposal that the Wacky Michigan Gang O Four has made, including this one because every frigging one of them is calculated to give Clinton an advantage.

    Again, I don’t think that you have emphasized two realities.

    1) Reality one: The Democrats need the African American vote to turn out in record numbers to take the South. Without the Southern states, say hello to President McCain Marcy.

    2) I can get a ton of African American (Urban) radio here. If Obama wins the popular and delegate vote, or even the delegate vote, and he’s a shoo in to win both, and they were to steal the election for Clinton, most black voters will stay home/not vote or vote for the down ticket candidate of their choice. Additionally every poll known to man shows that down ticket candidates get tremendous help from an Obama candidacy, and not near as much from Clinton.

    The amount of vote that Clinton would lose under these circumstances is much highter than polls have predicted, because many more Obama supporters won’t vote for her under any circumstances whatsoever than anyone can imagine.

    If you or your Democratic buddy that kept interrupting you or trying to talk through and over you (the blond) on that TV panel can find me a Republican who wants to run against Obama, please sing out. Not one of the talking heads on TV wants Obama. They are scared shitless of him, Reverand Wright under the bus or not, Ayres and all the other hate shit that they are clinging to because they’re too stupid to understand issues. Every word out of Scarborough or failed candidate Buchanan’s mouth is to piss on Obama because they’re scared of him. Scarborough was conciliatory when he finally spoke in English clearly enough for even failed criminal lawyer Joe Scarborough to understand yesterday, saying he’s parted ways with Jerimiah Wright. I am so so sorry that Mrs. Greenspan, the MSNBC Hillary Superdelegate Wannabe is parsing the hours when Obama clearly spelled out in a way that stupid people like Andrea Mitchell can understand that he and Wright are too very different frigging people.

    A few code words are in order:

    Proposal From the Gang O Four–”Mommy mommy we know we were very bad girls and boys, but we know if we keep cryin’ you’ll give in to shut us up.”

    Answer to Michigan Gang O Five from Obama:

    “For Y’all the Audacity of Nope is to Piss Up A Rope. Don’t come back to me with anything else insulting. I’ve told you 64-64 is the only thing I’ll agree to and you’re wasting your time. You might as well be yellin’ at Lake Michigan.”

    People of Michigan–Your arrogant leaders screwed you. Ironically Harold Ickes who continues to get rejection after rejection from Super Delelgates which will become an avolanch after next Tuesday actually voted against Michigan at the DNC and against fellow DNC member Debbie the Dingell.

    Work for Rotating Regional Primaries in 2012.

    As to the Gang of Five–they can feel free to try to support their candidate Clinton in 2016 when she can attempt to make history as the oldest canbdidate since McCain sure ain’t gonna beat Obama.

    Clinton and Ickes never gave a rats ass for the people of Michigan until she was desperately losing the race.

    In September 2007, when the clusterfuck was being conceived, what were the people of Michigan and Florida doing to stop their leaders from screwing them?

    In the previous post, I think EW used an analogy of a bigger brother doing something bad and the younger sibs being screwed. I don’t buy that analogy. The people of Michigan could have taken to the streets, jumped up and down and gone to wherever Dingell locates her butt and told her hell no don’t screw us, don’t disenfranchise us Debbie. They could have done the same with Levin, Gettlefinger, Granholm, Carolyn Cheeky the Cheeks Kilpatrick as well.

    I am again sorry for people like yourself who have a superlative understanding of the situation, have thought it out in depth, want things to happen fairly, and are being screwed.

    But that petition is going nowhere. It’s going to be 64-64 split or every other plan is D.O.A.

    It’s probably the only petition imaginable that Marcy Wheeler would propose that I wouldn’t fight hard to help.

  9. radiofreewill says:

    PetePierce at 11:

    Again, I don’t think that you have emphasized two realities.

    1) Reality one: The Democrats need the African American vote to turn out in record numbers to take the South. Without the Southern states, say hello to President McCain Marcy.

    2) I can get a ton of African American (Urban) radio here. If Obama wins the popular and delegate vote, or even the delegate vote, and he’s a shoo in to win both, and they were to steal the election for Clinton, most black voters will stay home/not vote or vote for the down ticket candidate of their choice. Additionally every poll known to man shows that down ticket candidates get tremendous help from an Obama candidacy, and not near as much from Clinton.

    You make excellent points regarding Dem National Concerns, but, imvho, EW is addressing Michigan Dems about Getting Their Own House in Order – then, no matter what comes, the United Michigan Dems will be in a position to do best by its Citizens in the National Contest.

    If Obama sees that EW’s proposal is adopted by the Party Leaders, and that the Playing Field is Otherwise Level – I’ll bet he’d come to the Table, too.

    • PetePierce says:

      Ican guarantee you Obama knows about EW’s proposal and he’s not going for anything other than a 64 even vote split.

      He knows that every proposal other than not seating Michigan helps Clinton steal votes and thats the bottom line. She’s out of the race; she doesn’t know it yet. She selfishly refuses to dip into the $109 million and hidden funds they did not report on their tax returns. Back in the day, the Clintons narrowly escaped inditment for income tax evasion by hours and manuevering from the White House, and they will not release their 2007 returns; they are hiding the library contributions because many reveal illegal deals by Bill Clinton, and Clinton is doing a tremendous amount every hour and every day to damage the Democratic candidate Obama in the fall elections.

      Every effort Clinton makes is one to damage Obama and emphasize race and anything but a realistic look at the issues. Clinton is silent in differentiating Wright; she’s silent about the Supreme Court’s decision that hurt Democrats significantly on Monday, and she is the most effective campaigner for McCain imaginable.

      I don’t understand why the Michigan Five is not channeling their efforts into two productive areas:

      1) Rotating Regional Primaries that would stop the Michigan Five from screwing the people who elected them.

      2) Putting Clinton their candidate for whom every scintilla of their failed efforts and insulting proposals Obama has already rejected are made on the ticket she belons on, that of VP Candidate with McCain. Let her run where she is campaigning already.

  10. PetePierce says:

    By the way Karl Levin has stood in the way of significant improvement in fuel requirements for cars and trucks on a par with European requirements for a decade.

    I know the big 3 operate out of Detroit, but killing fuel efficiency in cars and trucks is not the way to help them. It’s Karl Levin’s way though. It’s Jennifer Granholm’s, Killpatrick’s, Gettlefinger’s way as well also.

    Levin is a major reason why as your gas prices progres up from $4 a gallon to $10 a gallon you will get half the milage you could technologically, even without the use of alternative fuels. We are now taxing efficient fuel from Brazil at the rate of 54 cents a gallon or so. That’s a compelling reason for Karl Levin and Jennifer Granholm to get out of the way of fuel efficiency in cars and trucks yesterday.

    The High Costs of Ethanol
    in the U.S.

    Brazil Satisfying Fuel Needs with Flex Fuel

    Ethanol produced here might not be cheaper, but ethanol produced from sugar cane in Brazil sure as hell would be if it weren’t taxed 54 cents on the gallon.

  11. bmaz says:

    Alrighty, that’s enough of the ranting Pete. We all already know exactly how you feel and what your position is on Obama; this isn’t a forum to go on about it…..

  12. PetePierce says:

    I have an uber Blue Ribbon proposal:

    Besides working to get the Wacky Michigan Five on Saturday Night Live as hosts (not just in a skit like the Rev. Wright skit coming Saturday), and getting Debbie Dingell paired with Jerimiah Wright in Dancing With the Stars I have a way to give Michigan a chance for their pro-Hillary proposals.

    I propose a 3 on one basketball championship. In diverting the campaign from the Issues, Hundred Million Dollar Candidate Clinton who refuses to talk about or release her 2007 returns (the Obamas have) and to release the library contributors (we have a legititmate interest in both because money can influence someone who wants to be President) Clinton has been primping as gun toting, boilermaker chugging girl of Scranton Pennsylvania, just one of the flannel shirt wearing good ole girl babes who lives every day like a starving ex-cole miner or auto worker out of work in Detroit. Pauper Lady Clinton, of course.

    And she’s made a big deal out of bowling as has the stupid airhead media when they omit that: Obama allowe a 3 year old and seven year old to bowl two of those frames and he never bowls.

    So how about giving the Clintonistas who want anything but a 64-64 split this:

    Obama will take on Hillary, Bill, Chelsea, and her boyfriend whose mommy and daddy bought him a $3.5 million pad in Manhatten where Chelsea brooks the hardships of poverty and struggle in a 4 on one 4 quarter basketball game to be televised just like the Spurs-Suns games. We can have it played at Phoenix so Bmaz can get a good seat.

    I’m sure the Clintons would look great on a roundball court. She can bring her guns.

    • bmaz says:

      The Suns are done thank you very much. They match up well with the Spurs, but not quite well enough. Got bounced from the series 4-1 last night. All but one were great games, but not quite great enough. Their coach is likely to be bounced as a result. Oh well, there is still the Dbacks…..

      • PetePierce says:

        Hawks were in everyone’s doghouse gunning for the Coach, the GM, the owners. Everyone who drew a breath proclaimed they could coach or play better. They were never expected to be in the Playoffs and expected to get hurricained away by the #1 seeded Celtics.

        Down 2-0 after a 19 point loss to Boston in Game 2, and a 23 point loss in Game 1 (and a combined 3 game loss during the season to the Celtics by 43 points–not good omens) and people talking about a mercy rule for the NBA, they came back after being down 16-3 to rally, then were down by 109 in the 4th and won the game to tie it up.

        They play tonite in Boston @ Banknoth, and back at Phillips for Game 6. I like the Spurs as a team, but I’m for the Suns this time around.

    • Neil says:

      Umm, let’s see who wins Celtics-Hawks game five first.

      I found your rants thought provoking. We don’t talk about that contest much here or how it is conducted. I think its fair game at FDL, though.

      I’m worried about my judgment. I found myself cheering for Rev. Wright at the Press Club and didn’t see how he was hurting Obama. Am I blind or just a liberal elitist (not taking credit for being elite just allowing for my elitist attitude.)

  13. JTMinIA says:

    Pete ranted a bit.

    The he wrote: “I propose a 3 on one basketball championship.”

    Then he ranted a bit more.

    Then he wrote: “Obama will take on Hillary, Bill, Chelsea, and her boyfriend…”

    And right around this moment, I couldn’t help but remember Dan Quayle.

    I wonder why.

    • PetePierce says:

      I don’t know but you could take those memories into the McCain-Clinton ticket and vote it if you like.

      It’s a 4 to 1 roundball challenge I’m proposing for the Clinton athletes.

      • Petrocelli says:

        I agree, the only likely solution is a 50-50 split. There were many Dem voters who switched and voted in the Rep primary and there were many voters who did not vote because they knew it would not be counted. Both these groups would be sore if they found out that their votes would have counted. This is a tenuous situation without a good or bad option; more like ‘the lesser of two evils’ option.

        • PetePierce says:

          I don’t know what is so difficult for Dingell who for years had a job at GM,(lobbyist and Vice Chairman at GM) to understand 128/2=64. Maybe she should hire an accountant for that very straight forward equation she has been offered, or she can have status quo. Those are the two viable choices.

    • PetePierce says:

      Pete ranted a bit.

      The he wrote: “I propose a 3 on one basketball championship.”

      Then he ranted a bit more.

      Then he wrote: “Obama will take on Hillary, Bill, Chelsea, and her boyfriend…”

      And right around this moment, I couldn’t help but remember Dan Quayle.

      I wonder why.

      Maybe you’re equating Quayle with McCain except that Quayle had less law breaking bagage and more substantive command of the issues than Quayle.

      Maybe you’re equating Quayle whose daddy was very very rich with McCain who married into a hundred million dollars or the democratic candidate who poses as a poor lady who has over a hundred million dollars whose family paid for her schooling. but refuses to reveal its source in contrast to the Democratic candidate who barely and a couple years ago finished paying his and his wife’s college and law school student loans.

  14. PetePierce says:

    I have to love that the only things Buchannan and Scarborough can think of to rant about are never ever the issues of the economy, the slaughter of Americans and Iraqis in Iraq, the housing crisis, the health care delivery crisis, the environmental crisis, the gas cost crisis. It is halarious to me that they and the air headed media can only focus on Reverand Wright who is in Iraq blowing up Americans as we speak. We have a President so bad and McCain who is his mirror image, that Congress has had to block implementation of the disastrous Bush Republican medicare changes until Bush is out of office. That is precisely what they did.

    Reverand Wright Wright Wright Wright. Like the Hostage Crisis that started Nightline how many days will it occupy cable news TV and its higly paid airheads including the one married to the guy who did nothing to stop the mortgage/major investment houses and banks in trouble crisis? Thank something that there are NBA playoffs on.

  15. PetePierce says:

    So what I have understood so far, (this is all so complicated) is that

    1) I don’t think Jerimiah Wright should get any of Michigan’s or Florida’s delegate votes.

    2) I will not vote for Jerimiah Wright for President.

    I really appreciate the cerebral cable talkheads for educating me so that I could come to this conclusion.

    I also didn’t know that Obama and Wright were Siamese tiwns. The separation surgery can be very difficult to have an outcome with two kids/adults who are both intact post-op. That much I have known.

Comments are closed.