On the Democratic Delegate Decision

Crabby Old Lady likes rules. They establish boundaries of behavior, guide arbitration in disputes and keep the unscrupulous from taking unfair advantage.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States are nothing more than rules writ large, and long before we are old enough to appreciate the principles contained therein, we learn the essentials of fair play – and the consequences of ignoring them - on hopscotch grids, ball fields and, in modern times, within computer games.

Woe unto to those who try to cheat, particularly in childhood, where indignation of the majority can earn a malefactor expulsion from the game and even a bloody nose.

Senator Hillary Clinton’s nose was bloodied on Saturday at a meeting of the Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic Party which convened to settle the disputed primaries in Florida and Michigan. On Crabby Old Lady’s personal playing field, she deserved it.

For several weeks, not a word has been uttered by Senator Clinton and her surrogates about the crucial issues of our day – not on the Iraq war, the economy, escalating fuel and food prices, unwarranted surveillance, failing education, crumbling infrastructure and the rest that are imperative to voters’ ability to make a reasoned choice at the ballot box.

Instead, Senator Clinton spoke only to the primary horse race, to the delegate count and popular vote of the two disputed states inventing, in each speech, another new math by which to award her the majority and the nomination, never once addressing the rules set up by the Democratic Party which she and Senator Obama agreed to in writing before the first primary was held.

Here are the simple facts of fair play as Crabby Old Lady sees them:

• The dates of primaries in individual states were set by the Democratic Party.
• Michigan and Florida moved up the dates of their primaries knowing that the rules of the Democratic Party would not allow their delegations to be seated at the convention.
• The time for voters in those states (and presidential candidates) to protest was then, to insist that the states follow the rules, and not to whine afterwards that voters had been disenfranchised.

The most extreme of the subsequent and varied arguments put forth by Senator Clinton was to give all the Michigan votes – and, therefore, delegates – to her because Senator Obama’s name was not on the ballot. But Obama had removed his name in keeping with Party rules, and if an opponent’s name is not on the ballot, a victory over him cannot be claimed. From Crabby’s point of view, to do so is too similar to the kind of elections held in the Soviet Union to be comfortable.

Although it was too late for Senator Obama to remove his name from the Florida ballot, he – again, in keeping with Party rules – did not campaign there. Senator Clinton did, despite the rules. [UPDATE: See comments below re Crabby's error about Clinton campaigning in Florida.]

The point of campaigning is to set forth a candidate’s political beliefs and policy positions so voters have a basis on which to make their decisions. Because Senator Obama followed the rules, he did not have that opportunity in Michigan and Florida and there is no way to know how many voters he might have persuaded or what the count would have been if the states had held their primaries according to Party rules and normal campaigns had ensued.

To Crabby Old Lady, broken rules equal an invalid outcome which must be ignored in the final tally. In this case, all delegates from Michigan and Florida should not be seated at the convention.

The Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic Party on Saturday did not agree. They gave 69 of Michigan’s delegates to Senator Clinton and 59 to Senator Obama. For Florida, the Committee voted to seat the delegation, but to dock them by giving each delegate only half a vote. The final Florida tally is 34.5 delegates to Clinton, and 29.5 to Obama.

In the end, nothing substantive changed. The Committee decision gave Senator Clinton a net gain of 24 delegates placing her behind Senator Obama by 176. By including the Florida and Michigan delegations, the number of delegates needed to win the nomination was pushed up to 2,118 from 2,026.

As expected, Senator Clinton swept the Puerto Rico primary on Sunday reducing Senator Obama's delegate lead to 155. Two more super-delegates announced for Obama on Sunday and there are 31 delegates at stake in the Montana and South Dakota primaries tomorrow. In the unlikely event Clinton wins all of them, Obama would still be ahead by 124. (Numbers according to CNN. Counts from other organizations vary slightly - three or four delegates one way or the other - not enough to change the outcome.)

But wait – the delegate fight may still not be finished:

“Arguing that the Michigan compromise ‘is not a good way to start down the path of party unity,’ [Clinton campaign operative and Rules Committee member Harold] Ickes warned that Clinton had authorized him to note that she will ‘reserve her rights to take it to the credentials committee’ later. Campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson later affirmed that Clinton will reserve her right to challenge the outcome.”

- Washington Post, 1 June 2008

Although some commentators have dismissed Ickes' statement as political posturing, Senator Clinton herself left the door open:

"In a telephone interview Sunday from San Juan, P.R., Mrs. Clinton still raised the possibility that she would challenge the party’s decision on seating those delegates [assigned by the Party on Saturday]. 'Well, we are going to look at that and make a determination at some point,' she said. 'But I haven’t made any decision at this time.'”

The New York Times, 2 June 2008

Although the Democratic Party selects its nominee through delegate count, Senator Clinton continues to insist that it is the popular vote that matters even though she is still behind and any advantage she has depends on unreported votes in some caucus states and not assigning any of the 238,168 "uncommitted" votes in Michigan to Obama.

Senator Clinton has flouted the rules of her party. Now that its leaders have reached a compromise (however much Crabby is insulted by their willingness to change their own rules at the end of the primary season), this week is the time for Clinton to concede. To threaten to prolong the agony to the convention debases the fundamental principles of the United States and Crabby Old Lady's personal sense of fair play instilled at her mother's knee.

[At The Elder Storytelling Place today, Linda recalls a family tale about one of the yummiest treats summer in I Scream, You Scream...]