March 31st, 2008
05:10 PM ET
11 years ago

New Michigan plan proposed

[cnn-photo-caption image= caption=" Stupak is proposing a new plan to seat Michigan's delegates. "]WASHINGTON (CNN) - Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak proposed a new plan on Monday to seat his state's Democratic delegates to the party's convention in August, factoring in both the results of the state's January primary and the total popular vote of all the primary contests nationwide.

In a proposal sent to Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Stupak proposed allotting 83 of Michigan's pledged delegates based on the January vote, while the state's remaining pledged delegates and superdelegates - 73 total - are to be awarded based on the nationwide vote.

The DNC stripped Michigan of its convention delegates late last year after the state moved up its primary to January 15. Under pressure from other early-voting states, most of the Democratic presidential candidates removed their name from the ballot there.

But Clinton opted to keep her name on the ballot and ultimately received 55 percent of the vote, compared to the 40 percent of the vote that went for "uncommitted."

Under Stupak's proposal, Clinton would receive 47 delegates based on her vote total, while Obama would be awarded 36 delegates based on that "uncommitted" result; the rest would be divided according to the nationwide popular vote total after all the primaries are completed.

 Full story

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Michigan
soundoff (300 Responses)
  1. John E Lexington KY

    Obama's campaign has pushed 'one vote is a win' for the nomination if they have one vote over Clinton in delegates (but no majority), but won't agree to a solution for Florida and Michigan, disenfranchising millions of voters. The problems with the caucus wins – which are the basis of Obama's lead – are obvious when you see that he got more Texas delegates in total because of the added caucus than she did, though she carried the state by 5% in the primary. This is one man, one vote?

    So it's cherish the vote if he helps get me elected, ban it if not. Obama claims he's running a higher campaign, and the media echoes him on it; this tactic shows otherwise. Hypocrisy doesn't play well eventually.

    I'll certainly vote for him over McCain, but he's not going to be able to paper over this quality in the fall; it's sad the media has turned into Fox News whenever it's a Clinton story. It's going to look very ugly in hindsight, and very much as if a woman daring to run was the cause. The closeups of Clinton's warts would be fine if that scrutiny was applied to all of them. Is there any professional journalism out there at all?

    March 31, 2008 08:06 pm at 8:06 pm |
  2. been burrito

    Just let the votes for both Florida and Michigan count as is. the DNC is hurting itself by not allowing for those votes to be counted. No deals.


    March 31, 2008 08:07 pm at 8:07 pm |
  3. Allen in NC

    I'm a democrate... And I have an idea.... Play by the RULES!!!!!!!!!

    March 31, 2008 08:07 pm at 8:07 pm |
  4. ynw

    The remaining 73 delegates should also be apportioned based on Jan primary result. The national popular vote result should not be used for Michigan, because the caucus system held in many states is a flawed system and does not reflect the real number of the votes. This has been demonstrated by the divergence between the primary and the caucus results in TX.

    March 31, 2008 08:08 pm at 8:08 pm |
  5. Allen in NC

    I'm a democrate... And I have an idea.... Play by the RULES!!!!!!!!!

    March 31, 2008 08:08 pm at 8:08 pm |
  6. Very Concerned American

    To seat the delegates is the only way to be fair to all Americans.

    March 31, 2008 08:11 pm at 8:11 pm |
  7. jayme


    March 31, 2008 08:12 pm at 8:12 pm |
  8. Anna

    This sound good.

    March 31, 2008 08:12 pm at 8:12 pm |
  9. honkey white boy from cali

    I think this is a fair and ethical way to handle the situation we do not want to leave out these two large states. The earlier primary meant nothing it was for nothing. but this would be a way to include them in a fair and respectful manor for all candidates Go Obama 08!!

    March 31, 2008 08:16 pm at 8:16 pm |
  10. Paul

    The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in Florida shows John McCain holding a four-percentage point lead over Barack Obama and a seven- percentage point lead over Hillary Clinton. It’s McCain 47% Obama 43% and McCain 47% Clinton 40%.

    Also, the last Rasmussen Poll shows them tied in head to head election in Michigan on March 6. I haven't seen any reports on these numbers. Why does the media allow the Clinton campaign to keep suggesting they would beat Obama in Michigan and Florida when the polls show otherwise.

    Let's tell the truth!

    March 31, 2008 08:17 pm at 8:17 pm |
  11. Marie in California

    If both Hillary and Obama agree to it....then do it. Something has got to be done.....can't leave all those voters out in the cold. It wasn't their fault their states screwed individuals voted at the ONLY opportunity they had.

    Punish the states.....but not the voters, who were victimized by their states.

    Hillary or McCain – 2008

    March 31, 2008 08:18 pm at 8:18 pm |
  12. jennym

    ohh everyone still whining about MI and FL ... whyyyyyyyyyyyyyy? It is a primary for heaven sake !! Most years NOBODY's vote count in a primary and I don't hear everyone whining ohh it's so not fair boohoo..

    Play by the rules !!

    March 31, 2008 08:19 pm at 8:19 pm |
  13. Chris Smith

    All of these observations are erroneous (especially Sharon, fourth post). I could see dividing these delegates somehow, but the problem was OBAMA'S name wasn't even on the ballot !!! how can you divide these based on any rational formulae when...Obama wasn't even on the frigging ballot !!!

    To say Obama is trying to rob the voters of their will...when his name wasn't on the ballot is pure fallacy.

    HRC agreed to these rules UNTIL they were unfavorable to her....

    March 31, 2008 08:19 pm at 8:19 pm |
  14. Fran

    Great plan, but why should Obama get any delegates. It was his "judgement" to take his name off the ballot. Why reward him for a poor judgment call?

    March 31, 2008 08:19 pm at 8:19 pm |
  15. Alice

    No, Sharon, it doesn't "only favor the voters." It favors Hillary, who did not follow the rules.

    If Michigan delegates are to be seated, they should be divided 50-50. Period.

    March 31, 2008 08:19 pm at 8:19 pm |
  16. Monti, MI

    Bart Stupak just didn't get it. Is there any fair solution in Michigan other than re-voting ? No, there is not. Just because people had no choice here. If Hillary Clinton would have withdrawn her name from the ballots, Dennis Kucinich would have probably ended up with 80 % of the votes. Because a lot of people prefer to vote for some name rather than "uncommitted". Would that represent Michigans people ? No ! Michigans delegates can be just split half between both candidates. So basically they won't have any influence on the total outcome of the national convention and can stay home, saving party money. Sorry, guys. But the only ones to blame for that missed "trip" are Michigan party leader, non of the campains and nobody from the natinoal party leadership.
    However, a system like that might be an option for Florida since there all names remained on the ballot. Pledge half of the delegates according to the poll results and half according to national overall results. But also there ... we would already now the result so why flying 210 people into Denver. Just a waste of money and you could do something to protect the enviroment.

    March 31, 2008 08:20 pm at 8:20 pm |
  17. Jonathan Swift

    The Democratic National Committee she consider ths proposal after all the other primaries occur. The choice should be up to the DNC and it should not be subject to discussion or manipulation by the Clinton or Obama campaigns. If approved it should be made clear that this doesn't mean Hillary won Michigan, but rtaher is a way to enfranchise the voters of Michigan. A similar solution for Florida would also help to put this issue to rest. By the numbers neither will make a huge difference in the actual delegate counts but given the changing goal posts for the Clintons it would probably as the voice of the people rather than what it is, a last gasp attempt to fix the awful delegate selection rules provided by the DNC.

    March 31, 2008 08:20 pm at 8:20 pm |
  18. Robert Grunwell

    Do you people understand what punishment is?

    MI and FL were punished because their Governers decided to break DNC rules.

    Both Obama and Clinton AGREED from the beginning.

    Those votes in MI and FL SHOULD NOT count.
    The best solution is to do a 50:50 split of those delegates

    Clinton and Obama are not responsible for this mess.
    If you live in FL or MI go and hold you Governer responsible.
    Next time think carefully before you cast your vote for any governer.

    March 31, 2008 08:20 pm at 8:20 pm |
  19. Mike

    Allen –

    why dont we take your vote away and see how you like it

    March 31, 2008 08:20 pm at 8:20 pm |
  20. vic nashville,Tn

    55% for Hillary and rest 45% has to divided in to 5 for all other the candidates who was there at that time or Give 50 % Jeremiah Wright 50 % Tony Rezko these are two will dominate the white house if Barack H Obama become president

    March 31, 2008 08:20 pm at 8:20 pm |
  21. jennym

    Anyone who is so stupid to vote for McCain merely because their own sate screwed them in the primary deserves a NON STOP WAR AND A DEPRESSION which he will give you

    March 31, 2008 08:20 pm at 8:20 pm |
  22. mjaber

    I think that the Michigan delegates should be split into 30% January vote, and 70% nationwide vote.

    March 31, 2008 08:21 pm at 8:21 pm |
  23. TC

    I don't understand how this is a new proposal when I thought thats what they have been saying all along? And why do the Michigan and Florida reps always want to blame everyone one else for their voters being disenfranchised when its their fault? If the last thing they wanted to do was to disenfranchise voters then they should have followed the rules. They were warned and they new the consequences.

    I say NO to this plan, so much has changed since those votes that they aren't accurate anymore. Not to mention Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. What if alot of voters didn't vote because of this? They should either all be placed by the nationwide vote or there should be a revote.

    March 31, 2008 08:21 pm at 8:21 pm |
  24. John

    Using the results of an election where only one candidate was on the ballot is ridiculous. Stinks of something other than democracy. It's unbelievable to me that anyone is even still talking about this. Seems to me the politicians in Fla and MI are the ones to be blamed for this mess. They are the ones that decided the voters in their states didn't count. Just another way to separate the democrats and give the republicans an advantage. WAKE UP democrats!

    March 31, 2008 08:24 pm at 8:24 pm |
  25. steve

    Remember, the actual voters did not decide the change the rules that was done for them by their state govt. So, if the state govts and teh DNC can not make good to honor the voters right to be a part of the nomination of the democratic candidate....then I for one will vot republican to show that if the Democratic party does not want my vote then I will give it to a party that does.....I hope the voters in Michigan in Florida feel the same......GO MC CAIN

    March 31, 2008 08:26 pm at 8:26 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12