Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> TalkLeft

Legal Commentary

: TalkLeft

DRC Hearing Live Blog V: Michigan Portion Two

By Jeralyn

There's a big storm in DC and the tv coverage blanks out occasionally. BackFromOhio is live-blogging for TalkLeft from the meeting room here.

I'm going to start with Hillary's representative arguing her case. On Obama, I was surprised he asked for 50% of the delegates when the news yesterday was he abandoned that in the spirit of compromise. Apparently not.

Former Michigan Gov. Jim Blanchard is up for Hillary. I'll live blog below the fold: He associates himself with remarks of Carl Levin.

On behalf of Hillary and Gov. Granholm, we urge you to make Michigan count. Michigan has close elections. Kerry only took state by 3%. But we have been reliably Democratic. Don't turn your back on MI and our 600,000 voters. That's more than IA, NV and NH. 4x as many votes as our firehouse caucus in 2004.

If Obama is the nominee, he will campaign vigorously for him. So will Hillary, I heard her say that in private company.

We need a nominee of 50 states, not 48 + territories.

How do we honor MI voters?

A bipartisan law was enacted to have Jan. 15 primary. Hillary had no participatin in that law. we had the primary. 4 tooked their names off the ballot. It was a knowing willing decision. They signed affidavits.

It wasn't a flawed election, they had a flawed strategy. 4 stayed on the ballot.

Neither law nor DNC rules required them to take themselves off the ballot.

Some vote uncommitted because they were mad at the process, and didn't know who to vote for.

There was a media campaign to get people to vote uncommitted. Obama and Edwards and Richardson had handbills handed out in Detroit.

Hillary got 73, there were 55 uncommitted. We want our delegates seated in that ratio with a full vote.

You need to honor the voters of Michigan and the assignment should fairly reflect their preference.

How can we see 48 states and Guam and PRico and not Michigan. We've already been punished. We didn't get to air our issues.

It makes no sense to punish the voters for our party's rules to be used to disenfranchise voters. It is not the American way. Applause.

We need to think about November. If you turn your back on FL or MI voters, you will flirt with McCain victory. We believe the right to vote is sacred. Dont' take us for granted. Florida, 2000. This committee should avoid being viewed as the Supreme Court of 2008.

Show us respect.

Q: Do you support MI party proposal of 69/59. We do not support MI proposal. We support 73/55.

He doesn't agree primary was flawed. It was a primary that our party leaders helped establish. They shouldn't have allowed people to remove their names from the ballot. 5,000 open polling places and 600,000 votes. They had a flawed strategy. They could have left their name on the ballot. People were following this electon.

I'm not going to do the whole q and a, just the parts of interest to me. I'm not interested in Iowa and NH as an issue, they are addressing that.

We shouldn't have rules that disenfranchise voters. Thomas Hynes disagrees and the chair cuts him off. Good, new questioner: (I skipped Sharon someone -- it was a waste of time.)

Don Fowler: on rules and consequences. Was any other rule not complied with by MI primary? No. this primary was fully legitimate with compliance with rules of the party. Don't insult the primary by saying that it was flawed. Applause.

Fowler also disagrees with changing the delegate apportionment. Blanchard agrees. He add, "By August, some of superdelegates may be switching back and forth." Silence in the room.

The principle is to treat the right to vote as sacred. That's what is at stake here.

The committee can do whatever it wants. But I want to make the case that 600k voters should not be ignored and the candidates who left their names on the ballot should not be punished.

Another member brings up those who didn't vote. Worst argument ever. Now this member is talking about write-in votes even though they knew they wouldn't be allowed.

Blanchard: No one said the votes wouldn't count. The leaders told people to vote. The media told them to vote uncommitted if their candidate wasn't on the ballot. They discuss fixing the write-in for the next election. [The write-ins were told not to write-in. They ignored the instructions. And they should count? ] Clinton's position: Seat all the delegates,count every vote and apportion in the manner they voted, 73 for Hillary -- give all 55 uncommitted to Obama if you must. Brazile lapses into dialect." what my mama taught me" --play by the rules. She gets big applause for that. Outrageous. She wants to count people who didn't vote and write ins for Obama. She says changing rules is cheating. No, Donna, what's cheating is Obama taking votes he didn't earn.

Blanchard: Hillary did play by the rules. She just said whatever the rules are, we'll try to win. I just want the voters to be treated fairly.

Morning Recess. Comments closed. New thread here.

Full post as published by TalkLeft on May 31, 2008 (boomark / email).