May 8th, 2008
08:17 AM ET
14 years ago

Michigan Dems send latest delegate plan to DNC

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/05/06/primaries.change/art.voting.flag.in.ap.jpg caption="Michigan Democrats have accepted a new compromise."](CNN) - Michigan’s Democrats have accepted a compromise proposal in their latest attempt to ensure their state will be represented at this summer’s Democratic National Convention, CNN has confirmed.

The state party has voted to sign on to a plan devised a week-and-a-half ago by the working group seeking ways to end the impasse, including Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, Sen. Carl Levin, Democratic National Committee Member Debbie Dingell and United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger.

The group urged the Democratic National Committee to seat the Michigan delegation under a formula that would give a 10-delegate edge to Hillary Clinton, and allow all 157 delegates and superdelegates to be seated this summer.

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. Another compromise plan submitted by DNC member Joel Ferguson – which would have given half a vote to each pledged delegate, and a full vote to each superdelegate – had been opposed by the Michigan working group.

Under the latest proposal adopted by the state party, 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. Michigan Democrats has asked the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee – which meets at the end of the month – to consider the plan.

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


Filed under: Michigan
soundoff (395 Responses)
  1. Carol

    Simple,they broke the rules why should they be rewarded.they knew what they we doing . I'ts funny how Hillary went along with the other canidates at that time not to go to those states,it just shows you how desperate she really is to win this nomitation.why should they change the rules just to suit Hillary.I feel sorry for the people of these states because of the delegates that represent them.I'ts not the voters fault ,but they need to take a look at who's representing them.

    May 8, 2008 09:14 am at 9:14 am |
  2. Common Sense

    No compromise. They agreed it wouldn't count and it shouldn't count. The end. Hillary can't keep calling the shots and changing rules mid game.

    May 8, 2008 09:15 am at 9:15 am |
  3. Cammi317

    That's cool. The race basically over, regardless.

    May 8, 2008 09:15 am at 9:15 am |
  4. Anonymous

    Michigan & Florida should have a revote after all the other primaries. . . . and I still don't think Clinton will get it!!! Or, if they don't want to do that, give each candidate half of the delegates for each state. You can't give Hillary a 10 delegate advantage because you don't know how the vote would have gone if Barack Obama was on the ticket! He may have won it 60/40 for all we know! I say 50/50 down the line.

    May 8, 2008 09:15 am at 9:15 am |
  5. Marc in DeKalb, IL

    The election was still a sham and counting its votes would *STILL* be a bad precedent for the Democratic party.

    Who cares that these rules had all been agreed upon well in advance?

    Rules? What rules?

    ===

    To people who are angry at the Presidential candidates for this, don't be. It's not their fault.

    Blame the state-level politicians responsible for the decision to have an early election. Hold them accountable, they seem to be getting away relatively blame free because everyone is placing the blame on the nominees, where it should *NOT* be...

    May 8, 2008 09:16 am at 9:16 am |
  6. CW4Barak

    They should be split 64-64....since Obama's name was not on the ballot....Billary knew those votes wouldn't count and now wants to change the rules. FL, however they may split according to how people voted, since his name was on the ballot....all this still won't help Billary's case!

    May 8, 2008 09:17 am at 9:17 am |
  7. Tired of W, OH

    I still don't think this proposal is fair. If Michigan were to hold a re-vote with both candidates on the ballot, I think that Obama would get 50-55% of the vote, easily. But, I hope that everyone agrees to the proposal because a 10 delegate gain wouldn't do much to help Clinton and then she could finally quit whining about it.

    May 8, 2008 09:18 am at 9:18 am |
  8. SMOQ

    I don't like changing the rules, but am amicable to the 50/50 split and potentially the 59/69 split mentioned in this article. I don't like the fact that all candidates names were not ont he ballot, and there is no telling how many more voters would have shown had the rules not been broken and they voters knew their votes and delegates would count. Florida is a totally different story especially since no other option was avail on the ballot but Hillary...at least Michigan had the Uncommitted category to allow for some type of representation of each candidate.............

    May 8, 2008 09:20 am at 9:20 am |
  9. Daniel

    Cheaters never prosper. Don't move up your election if you want your votes to count. It's quite simple. If their votes are allowed, then every state will move up their elections in 4 years.

    May 8, 2008 09:20 am at 9:20 am |
  10. anon

    By hook or by crook... I'm starting to get a really bad feeling about all this stuff. The hair on the back of my neck is starting to stand up. The supers need to step up now because there is something really shady going on here.

    May 8, 2008 09:21 am at 9:21 am |
  11. Kevin, Hanover PA

    Obama and Edwards foolishly removed their names from the Michigan ballot (probably to look good in the eyes of the DNC). Then the Obama supporters tried to rally the troops and have them vote "uncommitted". Based on those two facts I'd say the Michigan results should count.

    May 8, 2008 09:21 am at 9:21 am |
  12. Ben I

    Why should Hillary get a 10 delegate lead? I bet many Obama supporters didn't go vote because he wasn't on the ballot and felt their vote wouldn't be counted.

    The results from January are in no way fair. I think they should be split evenly.

    May 8, 2008 09:21 am at 9:21 am |
  13. Michigan Male

    How about we give all the uncommitted delegates and uncommitted votes to Obama and the rest to Clinton. Then remove all the super delegates who favored moving the primary up and let the rest vote as they see fit. Penalize the people who broke the rules, not the voters!

    May 8, 2008 09:22 am at 9:22 am |
  14. paulie_nj

    How come FL and MI were penalized for moving up their primaries but IW, NH and SC were not? DNC Rule 11 states that no primary should occur prior to Feb 05 with exceptions for IA, NH and SC which shall not have primaries prior to Jan 08, Jan 22 and Jan 29, respectively. All 3 moved them up to Jan 03, Jan 08 and Jan 26, respectively. So why the the DNC not penalize those states?

    May 8, 2008 09:22 am at 9:22 am |
  15. H HEIDI

    YOU DON'T REWARD AN INDIVIDUAL (Hillary) OR STATE (FL & MI) FOR BREAKING RULES.

    If the DNC does not enforce their rules this will only cause more Chaos in the future.

    FL & MI should unseat their local officials who got them in this mess....when this is demonstrated then the other 48 states will support their efforts.

    NC followed the rules...we remained at the end of the primary and our state COUNTED and played heavy in the numbers.

    Helen
    Charlotte, NC

    May 8, 2008 09:23 am at 9:23 am |
  16. Kathy

    DO NOT ACCEPT THIS HILLARY, YOU KNOW YOU DESERVED MORE VOTES, OBAMA'S OWN FAULT FOR TAKING HIS NAME OFF THE BALLOT!
    GO HILLARY 08!!!

    May 8, 2008 09:24 am at 9:24 am |
  17. jonathan

    The Demcrats elections/primaries have been so exciting. I usuallly am bored by now. I like Hillary going on to the finish line. I also wish there would be a Obama/Clinton campaign.

    May 8, 2008 09:25 am at 9:25 am |
  18. Barbara,

    I am sure they will accept that suggestion as long as it does not change the outcome of the race. The important thing is that the people will now feel that their votes were a part of the process and the deligates will be seated for the convention.
    It still boggles my mind that the officials in Michigan was allow their state to be in this situation over a date. It is obvious that they were more interested in being in the lime light than ensuring the people's votes counts as they choose to ignore the rules knowing the concequences.

    May 8, 2008 09:25 am at 9:25 am |
  19. Alice

    Just say NO.

    Once you start bending rules like this, you can never go back.

    Even-stevens or nothing.

    May 8, 2008 09:25 am at 9:25 am |
  20. sharong58

    I think Michigan & Florida should have a revote after all the other primaries or give each candidate a 50/50 split. What is this deal about giving HIllary a 10 delegate edge? This is not fair because you don't know how the voting would have ended up if Barack Obama had been on the ticket! He may have won 60% to 40% or visa versa. A
    50/50 split is the fairest way to deal with the situation. Hillary has friends in Michigan and is desperate for more delegates because she is so behind! That's what that whole deal is about! That's why she's been screaming to count Michigan & Florida all this time. It's
    like she thinks she has the power to "call the shots" to the DNC!!!!
    Power-hungry elite egomaniac, that's what she is! Boy, is she dillusional! I hope she goes bankrupt in her ridiculous "I'm gonna go all the way to the covention" bit! Even Huckabee knew when to "bow out"!

    May 8, 2008 09:26 am at 9:26 am |
  21. Florida Voter

    Sen. Obama's name WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT!!
    The only fair thing to do is hold a re-election OR split the numbers 50/50.

    May 8, 2008 09:27 am at 9:27 am |
  22. Gabby

    55% of an election against no one. Now you want to give her a 10 delegate edge? that is perhaps the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Both states knew the penalty of holding elections early, now the Clintonites are blaming Obama for that. Do they not realize that they should be blaming the ones who decided that they were above the rules. If you want your voices heard in Fl. and Mi. start letting your state representatives hear from you, write and call.

    Obama 08 🙂

    May 8, 2008 09:28 am at 9:28 am |
  23. former clinton supporter

    At this point, I don't see the harm in allowing Clinton to pick up 10 delegates. She would still be behind by 140 delegates.

    May 8, 2008 09:28 am at 9:28 am |
  24. Honest American

    Well, to be honest, if Obama had campaigned there with his name on the ballot, then he might have even won, but everyone knew there were rules in play, no one was allowed to campaign, but Clinton campaigned, she broke the rules right there (although she agreed to the rules). Everyone knows that Obama does well once more people get to know him thru town hall meetings, and all that, even media agrees on that. So, to be fair, the delegates can be split among the two. Anyway, if this plan proposed by MI DNC was accepted, a 15 delegate difference would not affect Sen. Obama. It's time to unite the democratic party. It seems to be that Hillary cares about her more than the party. It's just so wrong. If Obama was in Hillary's position now, he would've already left, because he really cares about the party & the people. Anyway, people will have to decide for themselves as to who is honest, and also consider that the rules were in place, and were followed by Obama., Edwards, etc... no one campaigned there except Hillary.

    May 8, 2008 09:28 am at 9:28 am |
  25. Ilona Proud Canadian

    This is just not right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    What about all of those voters who did not go to the polls, because they knew the votes would not count????? Under this plan these voters WILL be disenfranchised. So it is okay to take away these people's right to vote, simply because it will help Sen. Clinton? This is one reason that she is staying in the race. The other major reason is because she is hoping to dig up another scam like Bill and Hillary's collusion with Rev. Wright. I am convinced that Rev. Wright issue was a deliberate set up between Wright Bill and Hillary. This man was a breakfast guest at the White House during Bills impeachment days.
    cnn even today you are still being biased. Please post my comment.

    May 8, 2008 09:28 am at 9:28 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16