This business of disenfranchisement
Mar. 7th, 2008 07:58 amOne thing I simply do not get about the disenfranchisement of Florida (and possibly that of Michigan) in the Democratic Party nominating process, is how can national party rules trump state law? Remember, the date of the Florida primary was dictated by a state law passed by the Republican-controlled legislature. What Federal law allows the Democratic Party to behave in this manner? I'm astounded the matter hasn't been placed before the courts already.
That said, the party needs to find a way out of this mess. The aborted primaries cannot stand, for the simple reason that candidates were told not to campaign for them and only one candidate (Hillary Clinton) failed to remove her name from the ballot as requested, making it an unfair contest. But no one wants to foot the bill for a re-vote. My guess is the only way forward is to hold caucuses (which are allegedly cheaper) in Florida and Michigan at the expense of the respective state Democratic Parties.
That said, the party needs to find a way out of this mess. The aborted primaries cannot stand, for the simple reason that candidates were told not to campaign for them and only one candidate (Hillary Clinton) failed to remove her name from the ballot as requested, making it an unfair contest. But no one wants to foot the bill for a re-vote. My guess is the only way forward is to hold caucuses (which are allegedly cheaper) in Florida and Michigan at the expense of the respective state Democratic Parties.