
February 22nd / 24th, 2008
"Delegate System Not So Super & Must Be Changed"
In the old days, candidates could be chosen in smoke filled rooms by party
hacks and influential business leaders. Today, smoking is not politically
correct, but very little else has changed. That’s because we the people still
aren’t allowed to elect candidates, not really.
The oldest and most controversial obstructive institution is the electoral
college, which was put in place by our founding fathers so that the popular
vote could be trumped by elite politicos. Of course, in 2000, it was the
Supreme Court, not the electoral college, who circumvented the will of the
people after a series of hanging chads and questionable vote counts in Florida.
Clearly, there is so much reform needed in so many areas, that I won’t even
attempt to spend any more time railing against the EC or the courts, however,
there are a couple of political traditions that we can change without a
major revolution. One is the ridiculous notion of “winner take all”. The
Republicans employ this system in most primaries, and it is also a fixture of our
general elections. The Democrats have it right on this matter. In their
state primaries, they allocate delegates based on popular vote in individual
Congressional districts. Yes, those districts are, and have been subject to
political gerrymandering, but it is still a preferred alternative to awarding
all of a State’s delegates to the person with the most total votes.
The other good old boy system that needs changing involves the so-called
Super Delegates. These delegates were created in 1982 in order to give party
leaders more control (or certainly more influence) over the nominating process.
Democratic National Committee member Elaine Kamarck prefers to call them “
safety valves” which assure that voters don’t nominate a candidate who is out
of sync with the party (such as George McGovern in 1972). The irony of
this system, especially for Democrats, is that while the party as a whole is
known for its racial and gender diversity, the Dems Super delegates are mainly
white male party hacks (Kamarck and Donna Brazile notwithstanding).
Yes, Super delegates are free agents, and are not legally bound to anyone,
but, in reality, they still tend to back the machine candidate. Just take a
look at the current Obama-Clinton battle. Obama has won more states than
Hillary, and is leading in regular delegates. However, for much of the
campaign, he has trailed in Super Delegates, and they are the kind of elected
officials and party workers who still think of Bill Clinton with reverence. That
may change, and certainly if Obama’s surge continues, the Super Delegates will
be hard pressed not to do the right thing and cast their lot with Barack.
In any event, the super delegate system is, at best, flawed, and, at worst,
potentially corrupt. Right now, of the 4,049 total Democratic delegates, about
one fifth are Super Delegates. Translation? A mere 800 power brokers could
supersede the other 3,200 delegates, and decide who gets the nomination.
The Republicans have less total delegates, and, thus, less Super delegates,
but the scheme is the same. Super delegates simply wield too much influence
over the free election process.
It is time for the Federal Elections Commission to step in and clean up the
two party system as it currently exists. No more winner take all, and no
more Super people. Both of these problems essentially represent legalized
voter fraud, and we must make the necessary changes to insure that every vote
counts.
In the days prior to passage of the Voting Rights Act, red neck whites
(including some police) could legally block Black persons from entering a polling
place. It took a federal law to eliminate that racist barrier to voting.
Now, we must take similar action to eliminate more subtle barriers which
circumvent everyone’s right to vote.
Restoring power to individual voters is a super idea whose time has come.
|