Damage already done...
One of the arguments made against seating the delegation in places like the bowels of the Orange Site is that turnout for the Florida primary, while a record at 1.75 million, was still significantly lower relative to other states, and so it "wouldn't be fair" to seat them. I was having a difficult time addressing this issue myself, until I read this amazing comment thread on the subject at Why Now? Here's an excellent comment from hipparchia:
There was a primary and it was against the rules which were previously agreed to, but through no fault of the Florida Democratic party, therefore the correct thing to do is address the rule violation to the rules committee with an explanation, and the rules committee then approves the delegation.florida has offered and is still offering explanations galore, but throughout the entire kerfuffle the dnc hasn't been listening. at this point, there is zero reason to believe that they will ever listen.
But nobody has been disenfranchised if the delegation is seated.
that's not entirely true. we really don't know how many people stayed away who might have otherwise voted, simply because they believed their votes wouldn't be counted. sure, nobody forced them to stay away from the polls, they could still have gone and voted, but convincing people that their vote won't count is still disenfranchisement.
and by "seating the delegates" do you mean "the nominee is first chosen and then overrides the rules and seats the delegates" [not an unprecedented action], or do you mean "florida's delegates will be counted in determining the nominee"? because the first scenario is arguably the most likely, and it's still disenfranchisement.
Some Floridians, such as Why Now? editor Bryan have already left the Democratic Party, and, frankly, for good reason. But many, many more voters are at risk is this situation is not dealt with fairly and quickly.
Update: I meant to include this comment from Bryan as well,
Michael, how does the rules committee undo the damage caused by the passage of Amendment 1 to the Florida constitution, the real reason for the Republicans to change the date?They designed this to suppress Democratic voters, so the amendment would pass. Over 50% of registered Republicans voted, but only 40% of registered Democrats, the lowest Democratic turn out from any state this cycle, and the DNC made this possible.
You really don't want to know what school districts and local governments who have lost millions in revenue because of Amendment 1 think of the Democratic Party.
Comments
Thank you for the coverage, MB, it takes out some of the sting as we listen to the "stupid Southerners" garbage.
While they sit in their liberal enclaves, they have no idea what it means to be liberal and Democrat in a place like Okaloosa County on the Florida Panhandle where church, the GOP, and "America" are the order of precedence and it is often hard to differentiate between church and the GOP.
Local offices are decided in the Republican primary as no serious candidate would consider being a member of the Democratic party, so getting a chance to vote when you are Democrat is a rare opportunity.
The redistricting after the 2000 census was so effective that despite a larger number of registered Democrats in the state [4.1 million D vs 3.8 million R], the state legislature is 65% Republican in both houses, and 68% of the US House delegation is Republican.
This is our reality, and why some of us exploded when the DNC followed the Republican script and junked our votes. We are inured to fighting the Republicans and losing, but we don't need to be stabbed in the back by the party we have supported for years.
Posted by: Bryan | March 14, 2008 04:04 PM
echoing bryan: thank you. most of the blogosphere seems to have decided that floridians are just too stupid to vote.
Posted by: hipparchia | March 16, 2008 12:46 AM