|
Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean is worried. In fact, my good friend is quite nervous. The party, he recently announced, cannot afford to have a big fight at the convention. ... I think we will have a nominee sometime in the middle of March or April. But if we don't, then we're going to have to get the candidates together and make some kind of an arrangement.
How will primary voters in states that decided to abide by the rules view an arrangement ?
Many suspect that Dean was trying to send a message to superdelegates, the privileged class of delegates created to ensure that party elites didn't lose too much control over the process: seasoned political activists elected at the grassroots level, current elected officeholders and current party officials as well as former elected officeholders and former party officials to get ready to rule from above and stop the count.
Let's hope not.
Thanks to Bill Clinton and Al Gore, along with former House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt, I am one of those superdelegates. Since 2007, I have resisted the temptation to take a stand to publicly commit myself to any candidate until the voice of every primary voter in every state has been heard.
Here's why:
The fundamental principle of democracy is one person, one vote. On Feb. 12, 2008, two days before Valentine's Day, I, along with millions of Americans in the mid-Atlantic states, will cast my ballot for the candidate I want to be the next president of the United States. Yet I am going to hold the love for my chosen candidate close to my heart. I believe the vote I cast on Feb. 12 is mine: one person, one vote. As a superdelegate, the vote that I cast at the Democratic convention will be yours. And I need to hear all your voices before I cast that vote.
Superdelegates don't have capes and aren't faster than a speeding bullet. And, trust me, there's not one of us you would ever want to see in spandex. So, what's so super about super elegates?
Short answer: not much. The 796 superdelegates make up about 20 percent of the entire voting contingent at the convention. (It takes 2,025 votes to secure the nomination.) It's not as if superdelegates are some new-fangled, end-run around the electorate. The rules have been the same for decades; however, this is the first time those rules have truly mattered.
With Super Tuesday turning out a draw Obama won more states but Clinton won more delegates the superdelegate vote has taken on a practical weight. In previous elections, these votes merely affirmed what had already been determined by the primaries. This year, however, could be for superdelegates what 2000 was for the Electoral College: a chance to decide the presidency. Is that what voters want?
Enthusiastic and energized like never before, Democrats voted in record-breaking numbers. Folks in my native South braved tornadoes to vote. The elderly in Missouri stood in line for hours in the freezing cold to cast their votes. Single working mothers throughout the west hired babysitters, fought traffic and missed work to caucus for their chosen candidate. And people turned out in record numbers to vote in California despite being told by pundits that early-bird voters had already decided the election.
Every year, we ask, urge, cajole and beg people to get out and vote. Now, as they turn out in record numbers for both Clinton and Obama, why should any of us superdelegates consider silencing them with our own self-importance?
Some call us insiders ; others view us as party hacks. Semantics aside, spending years, if not decades, pulling the levers inside the party machine does not make us more qualified to choose the nominee than the folks who ignore politics between elections. I have been involved in politics since I thought caucuses were a type of insect. Does that make me better qualified? If anything, it probably makes me less qualified. Time and time again, the Democratic elite and their cohorts have found themselves out of touch with what the average American thinks, feels and cares about. It's time we muzzle ourselves and listen to the voters.
I am sure my colleagues on the Democratic National Committee, whom I deeply respect, will urge me to shut up. After all, my own hands are not clean. I, too, have benefited as a superdelegate by using my clout to add even more supers to the list of the chosen few. But, like Dean, I am worried. Worried about the eagerness of major party players to put their stamp on this election. If we decide to go there and lose in November, we surely cannot blame the people. We will have no one but ourselves to blame.
For the record, a significant percentage of superdelegates have already committed themselves to a candidate based on history, inspiration, their own judgment and perhaps some feel obligated because they don't know anything else. But for those of us who are on the fence as a matter of principle not dislike for one or the other stacking up superdelegates seems a transparent attempt to intimidate and discourage active citizen engagement.
Your voice matters. If my colleagues decide this election before the voters have a chance to give their input, I will happily seek to do something else with my free time. But I will quit the DNC.
This election matters too much for a few insiders to decide.
|
