FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In

News is emerging today that it looks like an agreement is coming together for revotes in both Florida and Michigan using mail-in ballots.

Florida Democrats were moving forward Monday with a plan to redo their presidential primary using privately-funded mail-in ballots, a key state party official said, even though some congressional and party leaders had yet to sign on to the idea.

"We're huddling with state brass now," the official said. "The spotlight will be on us. We will have a detailed plan."

The official said the state party expected both the Clinton and Obama campaigns to eventually agree to the plan.

"They've seen the writing on the wall and they realize this is something they need to get behind," the official said. "Both campaigns have reacted favorably to the idea so far."

CBS: Florida Dems May Get A Recount - Politico: Plan To Redo Primary Using Mail-In Ballots Moves Forward

There is positive news out of Michigan as well:

A specific plan for holding a second contest in Michigan this year to help decide the Democratic nominee for president could come together within days, with a mail-in primary the most practical scenario, U.S. Sen. Carl Levin said Monday.

A day after Levin mentioned during a TV interview that the mail-in option might be the best way to hold a second primary, the senator acknowledged that his position on a do-over primary had changed because "there may be agreement among the candidates" that there should be a do-over

Last Friday, Levin -- a Democratic National committeeman -- said he didn't see "a practical and fair way" to hold an election in Michigan "given the immense financial and logistical hurdles."

Detroit Free Press: Primary do-over could come soon - Mail-in vote practical, Levin says

As many here may know, I have been particularly critical of the Obama campaign for apparently stalling the process of coming to agreement on revotes. I have pointed to ambiguous language coming from Obama surrogates Daschle and Kerry and the ridiculous 50-50 split proposal floated by Dodd. On the other hand the Clinton camp has agreed to revotes and surrogates Rendell and Corzine have offered up $15M. They have called upon the Obama campaign to pony up.

Most recently in an editorial today in the Washington Post:

When Barack Obama's campaign says that Hillary Clinton can't escape the harsh realities of delegate math, it's telling the truth. The problem with that argument is that neither can he.

...

Even if there were no other choice, having our nominee decided by superdelegates in the backrooms of Washington -- or Denver, at the convention in August -- would be less than ideal. But allowing superdelegates to determine the outcome of our nominating process while 366 pledged delegates, elected by more than 2 million democrats in Michigan and Florida, remain unseated is especially undemocratic and risks squandering the feelings of hope and optimism about a Democratic presidency that these two candidates themselves have done so much to engender across the country.

...

Fortunately, this enthusiasm has also translated into record-setting fundraising. So let's have a revote in Florida and Michigan, and let the Democratic National Committee pay for it. We'll even volunteer to help raise the funds.

If we don't pay now, we surely will in November.

WaPo: Delegates We Need - The Case for a Revote in Florida and Michigan

Well, maybe the pressure of standing on an untenable position is getting through to the Obama campaign. Or, maybe the short sighted self serving motivations that I ascribed to them were off base--as many Obama supporters have criticised. If the former, it is just water under the dam. If the latter, I apologize. The important thing is that we solve this problem in the manner that best preserves the Democrats chances for victory in the fall.

We shall see if these hopeful reports bear fruit, but they do indeed look hopeful. Presuming they are, and we get a valid, fair and meaningful revote agreed to quickly, I commend both campaigns for doing what is right for the Democratic Party. That is indeed the type of leadership we need to win this election in November.


Poll
Revote!
Yes
No

Votes: 24
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 1)

Sorry to have to point it out to you, but mail-in voting for this position is currently illegal in FL.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=876

The heavily pro-Clinton Florida Dem party is trying to rig the game in order to add more support for their candidate.  But they will have to circumvent the laws of the state in order to do so, and get the Dept. of Justice to sign off on it before moving forward.  

Don't hold your breath waiting for that ballot in the mail.


by Cycloptichorn on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:44:21 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 1)

See below... I don't think those laws apply to party primaries.


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:52:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

What makes you think that?  The laws in question support the fact that they do apply to primaries.

"(2)  The following elections may not be conducted by mail ballot:

(a)  An election at which any candidate is nominated, elected, retained, or recalled"

This is a nomination election for a candidate; in fact, that language ONLY applies to primaries, as that is where 'nominees' come from.

I think you are incorrect, and yes, it is illegal to vote by mail for elections such as this in FL.  I also think you oughta be honest and point out that the people pushing this are very pro-Hillary, and that's why they are pushing this: they see it as a way to get her out of the hole she's in.


by Cycloptichorn on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:55:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 2)

I think it doesn't matter as the STATE isn't conducting the election - the party is. If this were a state run primary they would be subject to the state laws. But it will be run, if it happens, by the party.

If it were up to the state, the Jan 29th results would be official and a re-vote wouldn't even happen. But the parties are free to use whatever system they chose and can ignore any results they chose. Legally.

The state on the other hand would never pay or run a mail-in election unless it followed the state laws for elections, which this obviously doesn't. Keep in mind that the state laws also say the primary is to be held on Jan 29th. That law also wouldn't apply to a re-vote.


If Dems take away my primary vote, they don't deserve my general vote.
by Step Beyond on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:05:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 1)

It is pro-Democrat to conduct the primary in a manner that does not alienate two import states that we need in the fall, so I think that whatever you may believe about an advantage going to Obama for stiffing MI and FL, it is overshadowed by the liability of losing those states in the general election.

Concerning the legality of mail-in ballots, I am sure that something can be worked out in time. By your logic, it is hard to see how absentee ballots are legal. In any case, we are not legal experts here on MyDD. I am sure that this is something that will be thoroughly debated and worked through and it is naive to think that a simple reading of a statute posted here automatically disqualifies anything. What is important is to get agreement in principle and then work out the details in a fair way. If both parties approach it with that objective, then a solution can be found.


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:10:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No candidate is nominated (none / 0)

delegates are selected.


99% perspiration
by DaveOinSF on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:40:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 3)

It's wrong.  It uses the wrong statute (F.S. Ch. 101, instead of the Presidential election chapter, F.S. Ch. 103), and it ignores the Supreme Court cases that say the laws upon which it relies simply do not apply to party selection of candidates.  Simply put, it is simply wrong.  Any more than that, and you'll have to pony up $375/hr.


by dhonig on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:03:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 1)

Thanks. That was helpful.


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:11:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

Well I work Pro Bono, but I can tell you after a quick review of Florida statutes, the section you refer to:

(Title IX),   ELECTORS AND ELECTIONS

(ch. 103),   PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS; POLITICAL PARTIES; EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES AND MEMBERS

Is written to address the procedures  for selecting the Presidential electors and delegates.  It does not address the process for the election, but rather the process for selecting the delegates.

There is nothing in this chapter that supersedes let alone addresses statute in Title IX chapter 101

Bottom line, there are some very big obstacles to overcome before a mail in election can be legally approved.  I certainly think it is the last best hope of seating the Florida delegates, but it is fraught with  many obstacles and very little time to navigate them.

This is not a slam dunk by any means.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 04:57:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

Nope, keep reading.  Primaries are also addressed in Chapter 103.  and yes, I'm licensed in Florida.


by dhonig on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 07:56:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

Indeed primaries are addressed, but, it is the "process" of choosing electors and delegates in the primary that is addressed.

I cannot find anywhere, where the "process" for choosing delegates and electors, in Title IX Ch. 103 would supersede the process for running elections as addressed in TITLE IX CH. 101.

Please quote the Title, Chapter and section that supports your claim.  I would be very interested in seeing the information that you claim is written into statute.


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 01:57:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

I don't think primaries fall under those laws.

At least that's what I heard on TV, so it has to be true...


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:47:21 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

Ooops.. that was supposed to be a comment to the above comment saying that a mail-in would violate Florida law. If anyone has any further knowledge of how Florida election law applies to the Party primaries please let us know.


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:51:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

From what I know (none / 0)

(which is, admittedly, not a lot), parties have a right to determine who can vote in primaries (such as forbidding non-Democrats from voting in Democratic primaries), but the individual states can impose additional regulations on those. Such as forbidding mail-in votes in this case.


John McCain
by MILiberal on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:54:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I support revotes (none / 0)

but not by mail-in votes. I've read a story from someone else who said that he was a Kerry volunteer in Florida, 2004. According to him, African-American voters refused to vote absentee and insisted on voting in person because they were extremely suspicious after the results of 2000.

Even if that story isn't right, I don't think Florida is in any way prepared to handle 1,000,000+ mail-in ballots. There would be massive fraud allegations, etc; the whole thing would be a mess.


John McCain
by MILiberal on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:52:12 PM EST

Re: I support revotes (2.00 / 2)

Well, if mail-in voting is all that we can do in time, would you support that over no revote at all?

Why wouldn't Florida be in position to handle mail-in ballots? They already handle absentee ballots and early voting.


by OrangeFur on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:56:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So thought the Bill Clinton of 1992 (none / 0)

when he created them. (As was noted on the front page here.)


John McCain
by MILiberal on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:57:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So thought the Bill Clinton of 1992 (2.00 / 1)

So what? Bill Clinton is not Hillary Clinton. The woman has a right to make up her own damn mind, right?


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:00:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So thought the Bill Clinton of 1992 (1.00 / 1)

When she stops using Bill's experience and time in office as her campaign, then you could make that comment and have it mean something.


by Cycloptichorn on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:01:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh bullshit (2.00 / 2)

Oregon has about the best turnout in the entire nation because they have mandatory 100% vote by mail. It enfranchises more people, and is more democratic than any other state.

Also, mail-in is good for Democrats. In CA, again because it includes more people, it has been a key factor in making us one of the most liberal states in the Union.

Look. I understand that a certain campaign does not like fully inclusive primaries and mail-in voting, those same people will fall in love with it come Nov.


by Pacific John on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:01:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I support revotes (none / 0)

Quite honestly, I think mail-in ballots are the most legitimate method period. You have a paper trail. Recounts are straightforward. They are less suseptible to fraud.

As someone said above, they are the same as absentee ballots.


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:02:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I support revotes (2.00 / 1)

as an oregonian, and a supporter of mail-in votes, i gotta stop you for a second, it's far from perfect.
 there are some legitimate questions about peer pressure, and the anonymity of mail-in votes.
 little stops an abusive spouse from making sure the vote goes his way, for example, that said i much prefer mail in ballots, there's no pressure to go out on a certain day and vote, there are no long lines to polling, no random method like electronic voting.
 one of the best thing about mail in votes...
unlike every other state in the union, on general election days i don't have to worry about being in line to a polling place until 3 in the morning.

also no diebold machines.


by theninjagoddess on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:34:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 4)

Hillary is clearly willing to go ahead with this, even though she won Florida by 17 points the first time around. There's no way Corzine and Rendell would make their proposal without her agreement.

Obama is busy hedging this way and that (see this diary on TalkLeft: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/11/ 13245/8058).

Sounds like somebody doesn't think he can win those states.


by OrangeFur on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:53:13 PM EST

lets have the vote (none / 0)

I've been saying it for months, I'll say it again.

When Obama wins Michigan, it's over.


by bigdavefromqueens on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:55:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: lets have the vote (2.00 / 1)

We agree, then. Now go convince the Obama campaign to go along with it.


by OrangeFur on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:56:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 1)

The reports today suggest the Obama campaign may have seen the writing on the wall. It sounds like Corzine and Rendell are willing to come up with the entire bill which would put the Obama campaign in a really untenable position. That may have been what pushed them over the edge.

Or... these hopeful reports may just be more smoke and mirrors. If that's the case, it will only reflect even more poorly on Obama.

We will see...


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:59:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's wanted the real vote all along (none / 0)

It's the HRC campaign that was trying to seat Florida delegates in a non binding beauty contest and then had the audacity to try and steal every delegate in Michigan when Obama was not on the ballot.

Let's have a vote in these two states.  I would expect Hillary to win Florida, Barack to win Michigan.


by bigdavefromqueens on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 02:54:34 PM EST

Re: Obama's wanted the real vote all along (2.00 / 1)

Great. We are in wild agreement then.


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:15:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes (none / 0)

Just to be clear, you understand that Obama:

-Played no part in the decision to not allow FL and MI votes to count; and

-has no real say in whether or not there is a re-vote in either state.


by Cycloptichorn on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:01:03 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes (2.00 / 1)

Well, he certainly has a say. He is one of two remaining Democratic candidates for the nomination, so he has a big say. In any case, I am happy to stipulate that he's in favor of revotes, as long as this gets wrapped up quickly and he comes out fully in support of them, and they happen.


by MediaFreeze on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:18:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He Has an Opinion (none / 0)

He doesn't have a vote.


by TooFolkGR on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:51:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes (none / 0)

Just to be clear, you understand that Senator Obama is running to be the leader of our party in addition to being President? If he were to stand up vocally against disenfranchisement (a core principle of the party he wants to lead), then there'd be no way not to have a revote. A little leadership on his part would go a long way to proving that he does in fact represent a new breed of politics.

[And yes, to be clear I understand that Senator Clinton is not arguing for a revote out of principle, but at least she's doing the right thing.]


by fsm on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 05:46:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Florida's revote (2.00 / 1)

I welcome a revote in Florida. I'm an Independent and am changing my party registration to "Democrat" so that I can vote for....HILLARY in our closed primary. Obama doesn't have a lock on all the Indies. May the best candidate win Florida (again).


by grlpatriot on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:10:14 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

I'm not sure that a mail -in in FL can be conducted without an appearence of fraud, but if the DNC is satisfied with what is planned, I'll go along.

But bear in mind, this is not likely to occur anytime before May, and frankly does anyone here REALLY think that there will still be 2 canidates by mid-may?  Really?


by a gunslinger on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:33:47 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 1)

mail-in in both states shouldn't cost 30 million, should be far less.

mail in votes are significantly cheaper then normal polling.


by theninjagoddess on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 03:37:36 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

Last info I saw was a guesstimate of $5 to $7 million for a mail in vote in Florida.


by Demo Dan in Dayton on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 05:46:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (2.00 / 1)

The State of Florida, specifically the Republican controlled legislature, got the Florida Democrats into this mess.  I wonder why more is not made of this fact.


by NewOaklandDem on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 04:02:27 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

No reason we can't get a legal opinion from the FL att'y gen in a couple days.  Crist said he would back a revote so that should come out ok for a mail in.  The ballots can be printed and mailed to all registered Democrats within a couple weeks and have a drop dead date of last day of March.  Get Michigan onboard with this and we can have our nominee by first week of April.  Sounds doable.


by Demo Dan in Dayton on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 05:51:59 PM EST

Re: FL and MI Revotes Look Like A Mail-In (none / 0)

As I have said else where a revote is not a solution. Opening the vote to any Democrat who was appropriately registered as of the date of the initial primary that did not cast a vote in that election is the only option. If one person  who voted is unable to revote then there will be a lawsuit.
It will be cheaper and quicker to allow only Democrats who didn't cast a vote to vote. No revotes no party switching now no nothing except the so called disenfranchised get to add their votes to the total

by coolofthenight on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 06:22:21 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.