Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Florida DNC appeals

Via the 2008 Democratic Convention Watch blog, Jon Ausman's letter explaining the Florida DNC appeals dated 8 April 2008 (with emphasis):

The staff of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) have completed and submitted their review of the two appeals seeking to have 23 superdelegates and 92 pledged delegates award to Florida .

The first appeal notes the DNC Charter states Democratic US Senators, Democratic US House Members, former DNC Chairs and DNC Members “shall” be delegates to the Democratic National Convention. This “bill of rights” given to 23 Floridians cannot be taken away by a subordinate body created by the DNC since that subordinate body does not have the authority to do so.

The second appeal states the penalty for violating the “timing rule” “shall be” a fifty percent (50%) reduction in the pledged delegates and the loss of the three (3) unpledged add-on delegates. This means Florida should have at least 92 pledged delegates.

The remaining 93 pledged delegates and three (3) unpledged add-on delegates I hope to win at a later time if not on this appeal itself.

Review by Co-Chairs, Rules and Presidential Politics

The two Co-Chairs of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) have been reviewing the staff comments and recommendations since 31 March 2008. While the 2008 Delegate Selection Rules provide a strict timeline in many areas when an appeal is made it is silent on how long the Co-Chairs can review the appeals and the staff review.

For those who suggest the Co-Chairs are stalling, or planning to delay hearings until June, I say lets [sic] give them a reasonable amount of time to review the documents. If the staff has two weeks to review and write a report then lets give the Co-Chairs the same two week period of time.

This means the Co-Chairs should make a statement on Monday, 14 April 2008, at the latest.

The Co-Chairs can say one or both appeals are meritorious and grant the sought for remedies, they can deny one or both appeals (which will allow me to appeal such a denial within five days to the DNC RBC, or they can call for a DNC RBC Committee to here argument on the appeals.

I believe we are going before the full DNC RBC and I would like to be there no later than Saturday, 10 May 2008.

Unfortunately, these two appeals involve more than the consideration of what the written rules governing the DNC say. Rather than interpret the rules as written consideration is now being given to what the two Presidential campaigns want (what they want, of course, is what benefits them the most).

I believe one campaign is very interested in allowing the DNC RBC decide the matter while the other is stalling in order to preserve their position.

One would think both parties would see the tremendous advantage of resolving this matter early as it would help improve fundraising for both campaigns in Florida (not to mention DNC and FDP fundraising) as well as allow our attention to focus on getting ready to be [sic] Senator McCain, but short-term views are prevailing over the long-term benefits of ending this running sore.

With respect, I am,

Jon M. Ausman, Member
Democratic National Committee

What campaign would stall to preserve its position? Sen. Hillary Clinton hasn't enjoyed any pledged delegate or superdelegate counts from FL. So what advantage would she gain from a delay? What say you?