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. kathy baltimore

    Good grief...give this woman a break..x. It's in such poor taste to put Chelsea on the spot with these questions.... and the Lewinsky travesty is totally irrelevant as a metric on whether Hilary being a good president (or not.) Why are we so eager for dirty laundry and completely uninterested in things that have much more importance? The war? The economy? National health coverage??? PS. I'm not voting for Hilary–I just hate this question being laid on Chelsea.

    March 31, 2008 07:19 pm at 7:19 pm |
  2. Ada

    What a terrible idea. Obama name was not in the ballot. We have to give Edward some of the uncommitted votes. This is just laughable.
    Rules are rules and cannot be changed in the middle of the game to favor one candidate. How can a grown up man come up with such a silly idea.

    March 31, 2008 07:19 pm at 7:19 pm |
  3. Lucille

    I just want to say that this would be a great thing. Michigan and Florida must have their votes counted in this Democratic Nomination. Florida voters have already once been disenfranchised in selected our Nations Leader, we do not need a repeat. I am a HIllary supporter. I think Obama knows that if these two states count he will lose the popular vote and this is why he has chosen to remain quiet on this issue for the most part. He is playing the "time" card. For a man running for the "people" he sure is playing the game for himself. If he really wanted the will of the people to select the next nominee he would insist that these two states seat their delegates. I do not dislike Obama. I think he is a gifted man. His speech in 2000 was remarkable and respectable. However he does lack National Political experience. He cannot win the general election on his "I opposed the war from the beginning" speech. Funny how all of his supporters forget how at the time that the Politicians were in DC making this decision he was still in State politics and was not faced with making the decision. Had be been presented with the evidence that others were and voted against the war he would have been labeled "un-patriotic" as so many people were at that stage in our history. Let's not forget how we as people were viewed for openly opposing this War. It is easy to say now that we were against it because the backlash has now gone. Ultimately, Barack lacks experience. Hillary has more savvy and know how and is stronger than Barack. We need a strong President to help restore our standing in the World. Barack wants to make friends with everyone. While a nice thought, it is not practicle. I believe that if Barack gets the nomination, the Democrats will lose, AGAIN, in November. No matter how much movement he brings, there are too many unknowns when it comes to his background. This will create an uneasiness that will ultimately lead to "more Bush" as we elect John McCain. With McCain or Hillary atleast we will know what we are getting into. At this tough economic time in history we cannot afford to put our trust in someone who may or may not be able to deliver on his promises of change.

    March 31, 2008 07:19 pm at 7:19 pm |
  4. Jefferson in Ontario, Canada

    That's not doable. Obama shared those uncommited votes with John Edwards and other candidates that were on the race at the time. The only way to solve this is to REVOTE.

    March 31, 2008 07:20 pm at 7:20 pm |
  5. Rafi, NY NY

    Any plan that gives a hint of validity to Michigan's first vote cannot work. I'm sorry, but only one candidate's name was on the ballot.

    I'm an Obama supporter, and I'm annoyed with him and everyone else for not agreeing to an all-out re-vote (that allows those who voted Republican to vote Democratic), but this isn't a fair compromise.

    March 31, 2008 07:22 pm at 7:22 pm |
  6. carliss

    michigan cheated so they should be forfeited period. get caught cheating on your a.c.t or s.a.t test and see what happens

    March 31, 2008 07:23 pm at 7:23 pm |
  7. Demetri Demo

    "New Michigan". Located just north of regular Michigan =P

    On a serious note, um, this plan is a fail.

    How refreshing would it be if Michigan just came out and said, "You know what? We broke the rules. Let this be an example to the country."

    Everyone's heads would explode just trying to wrap their brains around the thought of the Democratic party behaving like adults.

    March 31, 2008 07:23 pm at 7:23 pm |
  8. ladyc


    March 31, 2008 07:25 pm at 7:25 pm |
  9. Ginia

    The total national popular vote should not be counted - it gives power only to the top most populous 20 states. On the other hand, the number of pledged delegates gives a voice to the smaller states and that is the way it should be.

    March 31, 2008 07:26 pm at 7:26 pm |
  10. nina

    Democrats will pay for it in november if Florida and Michigan get disenfranchised

    March 31, 2008 07:26 pm at 7:26 pm |
  11. Venus

    Don't fall for it Obama not un-less it is fair. Don't take any thing if it means cutting into your popular vote. Hillary wouldn't! Where was this Rep. Stupak before?

    March 31, 2008 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  12. Independent voter

    Clinton wants a revote and Obama wants to evenly divide the delegates so everything will remain unchanged. What is he so scared of? Let people vote. Geez. Democrats are so annoying.

    March 31, 2008 07:28 pm at 7:28 pm |
  13. mimi de la cruz





    March 31, 2008 07:28 pm at 7:28 pm |
  14. CJ

    Sounds like it is at least a plan to divide the delegates up based on the actual votes which seems fair. The DNC better do SOMETHING SOON because Michigan voters will not put up with this being dragged out and then voters being disenfranchised or delegates being seated that are disproportionate to the vote!

    March 31, 2008 07:29 pm at 7:29 pm |
  15. Grif

    It's so messed up now, it will still leak. Borack wan't it badly. And he's Clan will settle for nothing less than, you give it to him on a Plate.. You can't please Hillary this way...

    The Horse as Bolted...

    March 31, 2008 07:30 pm at 7:30 pm |
  16. paul k

    the clintons will stoop to any thing to win. mich.knew what the rules were period. this is a chance for voters to have a say in how the country is run. why would i want to vote for a liar? she can duck
    and run for cover all she wants. iwant somebody that i can belive in
    not wonder if what is being said is alie or not.

    March 31, 2008 07:31 pm at 7:31 pm |
  17. Anne

    The liberal elite wants very much to disenfranchise voters. Anything to win! Quite frankly their strong armed tactics make them look worse than the neo-cons. In the long run it is really ill-advised and such a backward step for women. So much for freedom in the USA.! Obama may look sweet but look at some of his backers. I don't want to have anything to do with them. For the first time in my life I am reconsidering my party affiliation and realize just how really controlling the DNC and its affiliates really are.

    March 31, 2008 07:32 pm at 7:32 pm |
  18. tomdavie

    For both of Clinton and Obama's sake, this plan is reasonable. This certainly doesnt give Clinton much of an advantage, and helps Obama as the nominee in the fall.

    Its fair to the democratic voters in michigan who voted in spite of their vote only being symbolic. And it puts the issue to rest.

    Howard Dean can accept this proposal and then move on to a similar proposal in florida.

    Clinton gets her advantage, but Edwards share of delegates can campaign to see if they want to move to Obama or stay with Edwards.

    March 31, 2008 07:32 pm at 7:32 pm |
  19. Susan

    I'm sorry Michigan, but your Democratice Governor did not want to play by the rules, and you can't get them changed at mid game. Vote her out for the damage she did. Let there be a total re-vote to make sure everything is fair, andnot let her Royal Highness Clinton trample the rights of your voters who perhaps may have wanted to vote for someone else.

    March 31, 2008 07:33 pm at 7:33 pm |
  20. Shirley

    This proportion of delegates is not equal or fair. Senator Obama was not on the ballad, how can you presume he would not have received votes that were cast for Hillary since she was the only Democratic name on the ballad. This 'fair' decision must have been suggested by the Hillary camp.

    March 31, 2008 07:33 pm at 7:33 pm |
  21. Jennt

    Hello, Hello,


    Please save us from LOU DOBBS AND WOLF BLITZER!

    They are so transparent and obnoxious!

    March 31, 2008 07:34 pm at 7:34 pm |
  22. frank

    That would be interesting solution. Clinton would get more votes but Obama moves closer to the magic number.

    March 31, 2008 07:35 pm at 7:35 pm |
  23. willis

    This "fuzzy math" makes no sense! What planet is he from? Where is the equity? How could he consider using the results of the January contest when Obama's name was not on the ballot!

    This is not negotiating - this is ignorance!

    March 31, 2008 07:35 pm at 7:35 pm |
  24. FA

    They've GOT to do SOMETHING!

    The fact that Obama never put his name on the ballot – despite
    saying that he was running for President – is utterly stupid!

    He calls himself a leader? A good leader would have back-up plan...
    a Plan B. Where was his?

    He doesn't deserve ANY of those votes! Give them all to Hillary who
    was smart enough to have her name on the ballots!

    March 31, 2008 07:36 pm at 7:36 pm |
  25. Mary

    Somebody tell Obama that spliting the delegates from Florida and Michigan is the same as doing nothing. I know that Obama knows that to be true and is trying to cheat the Florida and Michigan voters from having what they voted for. It was Obama himself that had his name removed from the Michigan ballot and he has no one to blame for that but himself. Don't say that you didn't campaign there because neither did Hillary. Personally I'm tired of the strong arm men trying to control the outcome of this election. Get Honest

    March 31, 2008 07:37 pm at 7:37 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12