Democrats & Democracy: The Problem with Super-Delegates
In November of 2000, many Americans watched dismayed as our national presidential election was ultimately decided in favor of George W. Bush by five Supreme Court Justices. These five individuals stopped the recount process in Florida and overrode the will of 51 million Americans who voted for Al Gore: over half-a-million more voters than supported Bush. As a nation, we have had to live with the repercussions of that Supreme Court case for nearly eight years.
Now the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary, in what should be an attempt to unify our country and bring real change and dignity back to our Executive Branch, instead threatens to create a situation in which more American votes could be disenfranchised at the Democratic National Convention this August in Denver. Currently, to receive the Democratic nomination for President a candidate must receive the support of 2,025 delegates. Most of these delegates are handed out proportionally as a result of state primaries and caucuses. California, for instance, has 350 delegates who will represent the 4.1 million voters who went to the polls in California's February 5th Democratic primary. This works out to each delegate, on average, representing the will of nearly 12,000 voters in that state.
Unfortunately, the DNC also plans to seat 796 so-called Super-Delegates at its convention this summer. These delegates are made up of party leaders, congressmen and senators, former Presidents and so on. Each of these Super-Delegates is free to vote for whomever he or she chooses and is not bound by any election results, unlike typical pledged delegates. In short, people such as former President Bill Clinton or Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy may attend the convention exerting as much influence over the Democratic nominee as the will of 12,000 American voters.
3 comments:
Most years, the race to the nomination is not as closely contested as this year's contest between Senators Clinton and Obama and these Super-Delegates do not play an active role in choosing the Democratic nominee. This year, however, it is conceivable that neither Mrs. Clinton nor Mr. Obama will enter the convention with the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the nomination and so, in effect, the nomination will instead be decided by the votes of the 796 Super-Delegates. Furthermore, just as happened in 2000, it's possible that a candidate may enter the convention leading in the most national votes and most pledged delegates but lose the nomination because of the vote of the Super-Delegates.
A candidate entering a national election against the Republican nominee without the will of plurality of voters behind him or her would make the Democratic Party look both corrupt and hypocritical.
This site is not meant as endorsement of either Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama. Instead, we are urging Americans to simply stand up for what's right and let democracy work the way it's intended to. No one person's vote should matter more than any other's. The Democratic National Convention should nominate the candidate who secures the support of a plurality of Americans or face the chance of seeming no more honest or better suited to lead our country than the current disastrous administration has been.
Do not let the American electoral process be once again corrupted and tainted by the will of a privileged few. We must urge the DNC to not seat the Super-Delegates at this year's convention and instead nominate the candidate leading in the delegate count as determined by popular vote.
Please sign our petition.
http://www.petitiononline.com/Superdel/petition.html
Better yet, let's urge our state legislatures to adopt an instant run-off voting system, which would effectively eliminate the party system, super delegates, and the tactical voting that such a system often necessitates. Also, vote Nader in 2008!
In the Onion News Network story, "Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early", a woman on the street comments: "If you can't trust your shadowy Overlords to keep a secret, what is the purpose, really, of voting in a puppet democracy?"
Post a Comment