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. Hillary-Monster-LIAR

    Don't worry, Obama will ask Dean to seat the delegates after HillBilly drops out. Should be long now. Bankrupt, superdells migrating to's over.

    March 31, 2008 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  2. Ratgurl

    Are they STILL trying to get MI to count? What part of "you broke the rules" do they not understand?

    This proposal doesn't even sound remotely fair.

    Could someone in MI have been promised a position of power if Clinton gets the presidency? Something to consider.....

    March 31, 2008 06:06 pm at 6:06 pm |
  3. GM from MN

    I'm a firm Obama supporter and I don't think that this is to bad of a compromise....she'd probably gain about 10 delegates overall over him out of this deal and he leads her by 166. Compromise on this and get at least this part of the headache done.

    March 31, 2008 06:07 pm at 6:07 pm |
  4. Scott C

    Sounds fair to me.

    She will net maybe 7 delegates.

    Then all she will need are 163 more to catch up...

    To seat the delegates this is a good plan, it gives Obama the "uncommitted" vote and will give him more because of his popular vote lead.

    However the results are still largely inaccurate. She got only 55% of the vote while she was alone on the ticket. She would have gotten FAR less if she had competition.

    March 31, 2008 06:07 pm at 6:07 pm |
  5. jikamens

    Stupak's proposal strikes me as a fair solution of the Michigan situation. I hope that Dean, Clinton and Obama will agree!

    March 31, 2008 06:07 pm at 6:07 pm |
  6. Peter in Canada

    This actually sounds like a reasonably fair proposal. It is what should be looked at on about May 15 when the chicken entrails look easier to read! It won't help Hillary much if you see it implemented then you will know for sure...ITS OVER HILLARY!

    March 31, 2008 06:08 pm at 6:08 pm |
  7. GM from MN

    Plus this is coming from a neutral party, he was a Edwards supporter and both Pres Candidates like Edwards, so maybe this guys plan will satisfy both parties.

    March 31, 2008 06:08 pm at 6:08 pm |
  8. Jean

    About Michigan that sounds ok but there is 2 things I have concerns about. 1st. the main thing is it WAS NOT 40% IT WAS ONLY 33 % they need to add up all the uncommitted then divide the total by the counties again it is only 33%. 2nd. What about Edwards he wouldn't have gotten any? I do think that they should give him some even if it's a small amount. It's only fair. Obama is always preaching fairness that would only be fair. Of course I don't really expect him to be fair because he's not just like the media and his supporters. Jean

    March 31, 2008 06:10 pm at 6:10 pm |
  9. Lisa from GA

    That is only fair since Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot.If they can't be divided equally then they need not to be divided at all. Honestly, they shouldn't have a revote, their party broke the rules.. maybe they need to think about voting for some different electives next time....

    March 31, 2008 06:10 pm at 6:10 pm |
  10. Wayne

    You broke the rules. Why didnt you guys think of the voters when you decided to violate the party's rules? You met the penalty so deal with it.

    March 31, 2008 06:12 pm at 6:12 pm |
  11. D McKee

    Here we go again. Obama would agree if the votes were distributed equally ie: 50/50 That is'nt what happened in Michigan or Florida. Nice try Obama but you are starting to show your real colors. and they are'nt red, white&blue. You are cheating!again!

    March 31, 2008 06:12 pm at 6:12 pm |
  12. Jordan in San Marcos, TX

    As unfair as the MI process ended up being...this seems like a semi-fair way to settle it. The problem is, "uncommitted" and Obama aren't the same thing...and it's easier to garner votes if your name is on the ballot against "uncommitted" instead of a venerable candidate.

    But at this point I just want it over with.

    Obama '08

    March 31, 2008 06:12 pm at 6:12 pm |

    Hillary will not even get her job back as a New York Senator.
    The Clinton's and their cut throat politics will "do them in"
    People are tired of lies in politics.

    Retired Professional White Women of 63 for Obama from Day 1.

    March 31, 2008 06:13 pm at 6:13 pm |
  14. Jean

    I forgot 1 more thing all the rest of the people the in Michigan should get there votes that they got. Then FLORIDA stand like it is because all the peoples name was on it even Obama Hillary can't help if they liked her better. So give her the delegates she deserves. Jean

    March 31, 2008 06:13 pm at 6:13 pm |
  15. deidre

    Sounds fair, I hope Dean comes up with a good solution soon.

    March 31, 2008 06:13 pm at 6:13 pm |
  16. Shakur

    +Well it sounds like an idea that could work. At least our fellow Dems would have a voice.

    March 31, 2008 06:14 pm at 6:14 pm |
  17. Henry

    Shouldn't happen, not going to happen.

    March 31, 2008 06:15 pm at 6:15 pm |
  18. Cangirl

    It's better than nothing!
    At least Mr. Stupak is trying to come up with a fair
    solution that somewhat reflects the primary results.

    March 31, 2008 06:15 pm at 6:15 pm |
  19. Irina

    I think the rules set for this election must be followed through.

    The Michigan and Florida delegates should either not vote in the primary or may be allocated votes according to the national distribution.

    It may be worth not seating those states delegations so the DNC would have a presedent of strogly enforcing its rules.

    March 31, 2008 06:15 pm at 6:15 pm |
  20. Manuel TX

    The Obama campaign is going to turn down any plan for MI and FL.

    They want to win, and it's irrelevant whether the voters in MI and FL get run over.


    March 31, 2008 06:15 pm at 6:15 pm |
  21. Paula

    How can any delegates be given out except evenly?? Only one name was on the ballot – as per the rules agreed upon by all parties. This would only be the fair way to resolve this issue as there will not be a revote.

    March 31, 2008 06:16 pm at 6:16 pm |
  22. Brian

    Another Clinton way to change the rules. This one will fail as well!

    March 31, 2008 06:18 pm at 6:18 pm |
  23. Eric in Lincolnton, NC

    Of course Obama would like to split the delegates, he LOST!!! How stupid!

    March 31, 2008 06:18 pm at 6:18 pm |
  24. Lee

    Why would a person who leads, has followed the rules, agree to play along with a "cheater and loser" DUH !

    March 31, 2008 06:19 pm at 6:19 pm |
  25. Billy

    Yet another bad plan from Michigan. It appears that not only are jobs leaving the state, but intelligence as well. I am sick and tired of hearing the media report that Hillary "won" Michigan. She ran virtually unopposed!! This is yet another arm-pulling tactic on behalf of the Clintons, and exactly the reason why I will never vote for her. Claiming that Michigan and Florida should count as they stand now is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of. The primary either needs to be completely re-done in a fair way (which seems to be impossible) or the delegates should be split 50-50. Anything else gives an unfair advantage to the Clintons, and would be a stain on American democracy.

    Not like it matters much anyway, Obama will still be the nominee. I would just like our democracy to live up to its standards and not reward a candidate who actually thinks those elections were "fair."

    March 31, 2008 06:19 pm at 6:19 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12