Legal Commentary

What's Fair for Michigan and Florida

By Jeralyn

Here's Richard E. Berg-Andersson of Green Papers who says he has no dog in this fight on the correct solution to seating Michigan and Florida:

On Michigan

[W]hat is fair is that 73 pledged delegates be seated for Mrs. Clinton and 55 be free to vote for whomever they might wish (after all, they are 'Uncommitted'!)-- for Michigan constitutionally set its Presidential Primary date as 15 January 2008 under State law, held said election- again, under State law. The voters who wished to do so, thereby, voted on that date and the results, if the rules set for all jurisdictions under Democratic Party national rules be applied, would be 73 Clinton/55 Uncommitted... period!

....To my mind, the Michigan Democratic Party has done both their Party and their State a disservice by being so willing to advance a 69/59 split (that, and they are also ignoring the fact that, in the end, it is not really their "call" anyway...

On Florida: [More...]

By being so willing to settle for "half a loaf" ....the Floridian branch of the Democratic Party is, likewise, selling out as, again, Florida's Presidential Primary was held - in this case, on Tuesday 29 January 2008 - under State law, the voters voted as they did, and the result was (and should be) 105 pledged delegates for Mrs. Clinton, 67 for Mr. Obama and 13 for former Senator John Edwards (who has, of course, since released his delegates and endorsed Obama [though his released delegates from Florida become, in effect, "uncommitted" and are under no obligation to follow Edwards' lead]).

After tomorrow, it's on to Puerto Rico.

Full post as published by TalkLeft on May 30, 2008 (boomark / email).