The reality is, the punishment was never really supposed to matter. Florida and Michigan were breaking the party’s rules by moving their primaries up, and they were willing to accept the DNC’s punishment as a consequence, but everyone acted with a wink and a nod — once a candidate emerged in the primaries as the nominee, the states’ delegates would get seated anyway.
Of course, given the state of the competition, it’s obviously not working out that way. How to proceed has quickly become a dominant point of discussion in Democratic circles.
With the two Democratic presidential candidates in near-deadlock and battling for every delegate, party leaders and the rival campaigns started searching in earnest on Thursday for a way to seat barred delegations from Florida and Michigan. But they remained deeply divided over how to do so.
After weeks in which the issue hovered in the background, it shot to the forefront of the Democratic race as it became apparent that the delegates at stake could be vital in influencing whether Senator Barack Obama or Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the nomination.
Mrs. Clinton won the most votes in primaries in Florida and Michigan in January. But the states held their contests earlier than allowed by the Democratic National Committee’s rules, leading the party to strip them of their delegates to the nominating convention. Neither candidate campaigned actively in the two states, and Mr. Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan.
Obviously, because the rule-breaking states would be a huge boon to her campaign, Clinton wants to scrap the punishment and have her “victories” honored, even if it means changing the rules in the middle of the game.
The more likely scenarios seem to involve a second round of contests in Florida and Michigan that would count. Though there’s considerable disagreement about how do-over contests would be paid for, the Clinton camp, as of yesterday, “signaled that they were open to a revote under certain conditions.” Harold Ickes, a top Clinton adviser, told the NYT, “We haven’t ruled out rerunning these contests.”
His boss, however, may feel differently.
In fact, Clinton seems to be taking the opposite position.
In an interview published last night in U.S News, Hillary Clinton stated her opposition to any new caucuses in Michigan or Florida — a form of election where on-the-ground organization has benefitted Barack Obama.
“I would not accept a caucus. I think that would be a great disservice to the 2 million people who turned out and voted,” Hillary said. “I think that they want their votes counted. And you know a lot of people would be disenfranchised because of the timing and whatever the particular rules were.”
Hillary also stated her opposition to “any do-over or any kind of a second run in Florida.”
It’s a little hard to know for sure how inflexible Clinton may be on this point. Her comments to U.S. News came on Wednesday, and her campaign was saying something very different yesterday, when intra-party discussions began in earnest. It’s possible Clinton’s remarks on Wednesday were just bravado, and that she’s more open to negotiation than she let on. (That said, I suspect she’d continue to oppose caucuses under any circumstances, given that she almost always loses caucuses as opposed to primaries.)
The fight over money, meanwhile, is no small matter. The states don’t want to foot the bill for another contest, and the DNC can’t afford it.
Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm of Michigan, a Democrat, and Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida, a Republican, have jointly called on the national party to resolve the situation. Aides to both said on Thursday that they were seeking a solution that did not require either state to pay for new elections.
Ms. Granholm, a Clinton supporter, said Thursday that there would be a noisy protest at the Democratic convention if the Michigan delegation was not seated. But she left open the possibility of a new Democratic primary, as long as the taxpayers or the state party do not have to foot the bill.
“If there is a redo, it has to be inclusive,” she said. “Whatever it is would have to be a primary-like election.”
Florida officials said rerunning a statewide primary could cost as much as $18 million, which some state officials consider prohibitive. “A revote is not going to happen,” said Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, a supporter of Mrs. Clinton.
Michigan officials did not estimate the cost of a new election, but party leaders involved in negotiating a solution said that a full statewide election, as opposed to a caucus, could cost as much as $10 million.
Caucuses would be considerably cheaper, but Clinton won’t want to take the risk.
What a mess.