April 29th, 2008
02:01 PM ET
7 years ago

New compromise proposed on Michigan delegation

(CNN) - Michigan’s Democrats have released another new proposal yesterday in their quest to ensure their state will be represented at this summer’s Democratic National Convention.

Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, Sen. Carl Levin, Democratic National Committee Member Debbie Dingell and United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger – the working group that has been meeting to try to end the impasse - sent a letter to state party chair Mark Brewer Tuesday in which they urged the Democratic National Committee to seat the Michigan delegation under a formula that would give a 10-delegate edge to Hillary Clinton.

Clinton was the only major candidate to appear on the ballot in the state’s January contest, which she won with 55 percent of the vote. No delegates were awarded because of national party penalties on Michigan Democrats for moving up their primary date. Forty percent of January’s primary voters chose the “uncommitted” option on the ballot; a majority of those “uncommitted” delegates are backing Barack Obama.

Clinton’s campaign has said that the results of the January vote – which would give her an 18-delegate edge, 73-55 – should count. Obama’s campaign had said the delegates should be split evenly, 64-64.

DNC member Joel Ferguson has called for a plan that would give half a vote to each pledged delegate and a full vote to each superdelegate. The committee said Tuesday they opposed this plan. Under their proposal, which splits the difference between the Obama and Clinton proposals, the state’s 128 pledged delegates would be split 69-59, with the majority going to Hillary Clinton.

If both campaigns do not agree on a compromise, the issue will head to the DNC’s Credentials Committee for a resolution.


Filed under: Michigan
soundoff (95 Responses)
  1. Hec in SA

    I love how Dems feel one should compromise about following rules they already pledged to agree to. Confused yet? Just wait...

    April 29, 2008 05:26 pm at 5:26 pm |
  2. Susan MO

    That is good!!

    Hillary 08 :)

    April 29, 2008 05:26 pm at 5:26 pm |
  3. Tim

    That is just crap!!! This just another ploy by Sentor Clinton to try to add in the popular vote in MI. DNC, you set the rules. Either they don't count or you should split them down the middle. They broke the rules and should have to live with them.

    April 29, 2008 05:27 pm at 5:27 pm |
  4. fred

    They need to let FL and MI count!!!

    I think Hillary should get more!!

    April 29, 2008 05:27 pm at 5:27 pm |
  5. Theresa

    Rules are made to be broken? They broke the rules. The candidates knew, the voters knew. How many times is FL going to jack with the democratic process and cry foul?

    I for one do not think they should be counted. As Hillary once agreed to with a signature. Now that it is in her best interest, she's all for counting them.

    April 29, 2008 05:28 pm at 5:28 pm |
  6. Claire

    This is ridiculous! Michigan Democrats broke the rules. They should suffer the consequences.

    April 29, 2008 05:31 pm at 5:31 pm |
  7. Eric-PA

    Obviously a 50-50 split suggested by the Obama camp doesn't make sense, but I also I'm not too excited about awarding Hillary just 10 delegates. Remember, Obama's 40% vote included votes for Edwards, Biden and Richardson as well. So, she should at least get 15 delegates if not more. Of course the only way to solve this problem is to do a revote.

    April 29, 2008 05:31 pm at 5:31 pm |
  8. Carol TX

    Since this election DID NOT COUNT why should HRC receive more delegates? Any compromise other than a 50-50 split does a disservice to all, although 45% voted uncommited numerous people DID NOT VOTE because they were told it WOULD NOT count so STOP trying to change the rules, besides whatever the outcome each delegate should be worth only .5 instead of 1 full vote as punishment FOR breaking the rules.

    April 29, 2008 05:32 pm at 5:32 pm |
  9. Phil

    How do we know they supported Obama and not Edwards ????

    April 29, 2008 05:32 pm at 5:32 pm |
  10. No Hillary

    What a dumb stupid proposal. Giving Hillary 10 delegate lead...why ?...what is the justification for this? What makes you think that Hillary would have even one single delegate lead if we had a real primary there? Where is the voice of the voters here? Either re-vote or don't bother to count those delegates – periode.

    April 29, 2008 05:32 pm at 5:32 pm |
  11. James

    The new proposal favors Clinton. That is not fair and would not work.

    Thanks for your proposal.

    April 29, 2008 05:33 pm at 5:33 pm |
  12. Obama 08

    This is still not going to work– because you never know what the results WOULD HAVE BEEN if Obama and Edwards were on the ballot--- sorry people, just forget about it. You broke the rules... now you have to deal with the outcome.

    April 29, 2008 05:34 pm at 5:34 pm |
  13. Jesse - San Antonio TX

    It was not 40% uncommitted. Dodd, Gravel and Kucinisc garnered votes.

    Furthermore, Uncommitted could have been for Edwards, Biden and Richardson.

    Obama should not get anything. he took his name off the ballot. It's called karma.

    April 29, 2008 05:36 pm at 5:36 pm |
  14. Ponder this

    why a ten delegate advantage......the DNC should stick by its ruling and not let any count or just split them 50 /50............talk about lack of understanding the rules........Hillary next time read the rule book......and you wonder why you are trailing nobody Obama...

    April 29, 2008 05:36 pm at 5:36 pm |
  15. Dee Dee

    This is absolutely ridiculous! What a stupid thing to do when there was only one candidate listed on the ballot. This makes absolutely no sense and makes me question as to why I am a Democrat. Why not play fair if it has to be a "re-do?"

    April 29, 2008 05:36 pm at 5:36 pm |
  16. GCG - Austin, TX

    I think the funniest thing I have read in this is that while she was the ONLY (major) candidate on the ballot, she only got 55% of the vote.

    Now THAT's funny!

    April 29, 2008 05:36 pm at 5:36 pm |
  17. BJWL

    Finally some reason is creeping in. Now hopefully, Democratic leaders can get somewhere sane on Florida.

    April 29, 2008 05:38 pm at 5:38 pm |
  18. Phil Mickelson

    they agreeeeeeed that it wouldn't count. who knows if hillary would have won if she wasn't the only person running. ughhhhhhhh

    April 29, 2008 05:40 pm at 5:40 pm |
  19. HP Boston

    THIS is the crap that has divided the DEMS! THIS is the crap that sent me out of the party. This is the crap that will have me voting for Hillary even if she is not on the balott!!!
    I WILL WRITE HER IN>>> and I know that is as good as voting for McCain without the PAIN!!!

    April 29, 2008 05:40 pm at 5:40 pm |
  20. R.I.F.

    Still not fair since they BOTH signed the agreeement not to count the results in MI and FL, but if it will shut Hillary up then go for it. Obama will make up those 10 delegates by announcing 10 supers.

    Obama '08

    April 29, 2008 05:40 pm at 5:40 pm |
  21. Chuck

    Wrong for many reasons. Obama was not on the ticket. Those that are persuing this are Hillary supporter, that in its self leads one to question their underlying motives. Not every voter in Michigan voted because they were told their vote would not count. Many of those that did vote, did so for the only candidate on the ticket. If Michigan wants to be seated it should be a 50/50 split period.

    April 29, 2008 05:42 pm at 5:42 pm |
  22. Jim T

    every other candidate took their names off the ballot, these people must be clinton supporters(suffering from idiocy)

    April 29, 2008 05:42 pm at 5:42 pm |
  23. Kelly From Oklahoma

    Good.... Everyone should be heard.... Split the votes, everyone in the uncommitted vote give to Obama and let Clinton get her's. Problem solved and Mr. Dean..... Yell somemore we miss that....hahaha

    April 29, 2008 05:42 pm at 5:42 pm |
  24. Jeff Spangler, Arlington, VA

    The Democratic Party's heavy-handed disenfranchisment of MI and FL voters is profoundly undemocratic, and every new proposal further confirms this conclusion. Their candidates are both unelectable and such proposals amount to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

    April 29, 2008 05:42 pm at 5:42 pm |
  25. linoue

    This does not make any sense at all. What's fair is fair only Clinton's name was on the ballot. They should split the delegates 50/50 or stick to the rules don't sit them at all. The DNC needs to have some backbone. The republicans would kip their words. That's why they are better them democrats in actions.

    Those power hungry Clintons people get me sick.

    April 29, 2008 05:43 pm at 5:43 pm |
1 2 3 4