Tuesday March 18, 2008
What's up with a Florida primary?
It was decided yesterday that there will not be a re-vote for Florida’s Democratic primary. The story so far (skip to next graff if you’ve been following the news): Last year, the Florida legislature decided to move our primary up to January 29th in this primary season. The Democratic National Party had previously decided that no state, except four that have historically had early primaries, could have a primary before February 5th (Super Tuesday), and threatened to not seat Florida’s delegates at the convention, i.e. to not count our votes. The conventional wisdom at the time was that since most candidates are determined on Super Tuesday, Florida’s primary would count where it mattered — by giving a candidate “momentum” — and that actual delegate votes at conventions haven’t decided a nominee in decades. Except that the subsequent primaries have been very close, and there now appears the very real chance that Florida could have been the deciding vote, leading everyone to look for a way to fix the mess.
The response that you hear often to this is, “well, Florida knew the rules when it made the decision to have an early primary.” It’s shocking how often statement to this effect are repeated without being questioned. “Florida” is not a sentient being. The decision was made by one group (Florida state legislature) and impacts another group (Florida voters). To say that our elected officials disenfranchised us and that’s all there is to it reeks. So what now? Well, counting the vote goes against the rules that were established at the beginning of the process (= not democratic). Not counting the vote disenfranchises Florida voters (= not democratic). And re-voting has been determined to be unfeasible, not to mention an affront to those that voted on January 29th (so also = also not democratic).
So what’s the solution? Well, there is none; not for this election. The whole thing is dominated by realpolitik self-interest (e.g. I’m a Barack Obama supporter, so I should be happy that Florida isn’t being counted, as it was won by Hillary Clinton). There are lessons to be learned, however, starting with the fact that the whole primary system is an anti-democratic catastrophe in need of overhaul. Other then “because it was always so,” why should Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina have a more influential voice in selecting the president then any other state? Why do some states hold “caucuses,” some “elections,” and some (I smell Texas) such convoluted combinations that nobody even tries to explain them? And what’s up with “super-delegates,” anyway?
This, my friends, is no way to elect a president. The whole system is screwed (you can tell, in part, by looking at the men it has elected for the last 40 years or so). There are lots of ways to have an election, all with their valid criticisms, but all better then this. (Interjection: And what about Ralph Nader? What’s up with him??) Let’s pick a system and go with it. Do I think that’s going to happen? No, not yet. It’s going to take a few more disasters like this first. But it’s on the way.
Tags: election, politics, voting · Post to del.icio.us, digg, reddit · Comment feed for this post: RSS, atom
It’s always a good idea to know how to spell the name of the candidate you’re supporting.
Barack.
Just sayin’.
.
Florida, the but of every political joke in this country. And I agree, why the fuck do we have caucuses and primary’s? Why can’t we all just vote on the same day? And why the hell isn’t Nov. 4th a national holiday? Wouldn’t you think it would be wise to give people days off to go vote? Especially in highly contentious elections when more than the below average comes out?
Thanks for raising a seemingly overlooked question people have been wondering about… WHO exactly is the group/person who decided “Let’s just have Florida’s primary early and whether or not the votes count can be damned!” Can anyone shed some light on this? What was the rationale behind it? Alas, seems like more shady dealings in the Sunshine State’s political climate…
The decision was made by one group (Florida state legislature) and impacts another group (Florida voters).
Well, no. That’s just wrong. The “one group” exists for the specific, legally defined purpose of representing the other group. It’s how laws get passed in a democracy. That’s how the system works. It’s not a question of somebody calling the shot in a race where he doesn’t have a pony, which is what you describe it as here.
Did they fuck up? Damn betcha. They’re good at it. Which was Don Tequila’s point in the Obalesque post.
P.S. Why did this entire post also appear here: http://www.teachersmailroom.com/whats-up-with-a-florida-primary-1/
but without attribution to CM?
Near as I can tell, the impetus behind the date change was to have Florida take a more prominent role in the primary season. The Legislature passed the bill last session. I don’t know what the vote breakdown was, but given the overwhelming R majority in both chambers, it is not unreasonable to assume it was the brainchild of the majority. There may have been a fair amount of D’s who voted for it as well. The national parties have different rules to govern the behavior of state parties, and it seems that every legislator knew, coming in, the extent to which the proposed move would conflict with their respective national party rules. Yes, the move was in conflict even with the RNC rules, so it can be further assumed that there was at least some measure of “chicken” being played between the legislative R majority and its own national party as well. (In the end, the RNC dinged Florida half its convention delegates, but the significance of that penalty is now all but moot)
The irony of it all is that the 2000 election debacle that thrust Florida into the spotlight has been interpreted by some to mean that Florida was important to the process in its own right, somehow better than the rest, deserving of greater traditional prominence than Iowa or any of the other early states. That for some reason, it needed to stand out because, well, this is Florida, swing state extraordinaire, elector of Presidents. The Kingmaker State!
It turns out, all we had was a “Kick Me” sign on our back.
PS. A word on “super-delegates”, the exclusive creation of the D party: It just goes to show that even in the party of the masses, the party of Everyman, where all are welcome and equal, some are just more equal than others. A super-delegate is an insider who has managed to extend the time, and raise the stakes, to cut a deal.
Rick~ Touche. Fixed it.
squathole~
Yes, I understand the point of representation. But it doesn’t make it invalid to be pissed off about the situation — when you say “they got what they asked for” it’s important to realize that the two “they’s” do not refer to the same group of people.
Plus, there’s something odd and question-begging about elected officials deciding on matters that effect whether the votes of their constituents count or not.
so i guess this means, once again, the voters vote in Florida are again not counted. this is the government encouraging everyone to get out and vote and be heard and not listened to.
p.s. yea, Nov. 4th should be a nation holiday.
p.p.s.s. the “Kick Me” sign is so appropriate.