The following is a timeline offering insight as to how we got into this quagmire with Florida and Michigan. It dates back to 2002.
This is a first draft and there are bound to be some missing elements which I will fill in as they are brought to my attention and as they are deemed appropriate. If you feel something needs to be added, please e-mail me or post a comment below.
Florida & Michigan Timeline
Jan. 19, 2002: Michigan Senator Carl Levin testifies before the DNC and asks for a rule change to break the lock that New Hampshire has had on the presidential nominating process. The DNC unanimously votes him down.
February, 2003: Michigan Democrats call DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe to inform him that they will move their primary date up to coincide with New Hampshire. Participants on the call include Senator Carl Levin, Congressman John Dingell and DNC member Debbie Dingell. McAuliffe, who had also previously supported changing the primary calendar, states that he can not support Michigan because he is bound to uphold the rules of the DNC.
March, 2003: Michigan explores moving its 2004 primary date up to coincide with the New Hampshire primary.
Sometime in 2003: Michigan agrees to not schedule an early primary in exchange for Terry McAuliffe's support of a resolution calling for the formation of a DNC commission to examine the presidential nominating process and propose recommendations.
Sometime in 2004: Michigan's DNC delegation drafts a resolution establishing a Commission on Presidential Nominating Timing and Scheduling.
July 25, 2004: The Democratic National Convention in Boston approves the resolution.
March 12, 2005: The CPNTS meets for the first time in Washington, D.C. and discusses the history of the early nominating window and the new challenges the Party faces.
May 14, 2005: The CPNTS meets in Chicago and hears from State Parties and individuals on their proposals to alter the existing system.
July 16, 2005: The CPNTS meets in Washington, DC and offers groups and organizations an opportunity to go on the record regarding the early presidential nominating process. Transcript is here.
October 1, 2005: The CPNTS meets in Washington, DC. Transcript here.
December 10, 2005: The CPNTS held its final meeting. Minutes here. The final recommendations of the committee were as follows:
- Preserving the first-in-the-nation status of Iowa and New Hampshire but adding other states in the pre-window period.
- Adding 1 or 2 new first-tier caucuses between Iowa and New Hampshire, and 1 or 2 new primaries between New Hampshire and the opening of the window for all other states on February 5, 2008.
- Having the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee determine which states should be added, using the following criteria: racial and ethnic diversity; geographic diversity; and economic diversity including union density.
March 11, 2006: The DNC reviews proposals from states wanting to join Iowa and New Hampshire within the pre-window period. South Carolina, which had previously held early contests, and Nevada, a newcomer to the presidential primary process are considered early favorites to host.
April-June, 2006: RBC meets monthly to evaluate state applications to host contests within the early pre-window time table. In total, 11 state Democratic parties submitted extensive written presentations and testified at length before the RBC. The RBC was guided by the Commission’s recommendation that racial and ethnic diversity; geographic diversity; and economic diversity, including union density, be highlighted in the selection of new pre-window states. Florida did not apply at any time to be one of the states that would be allowed to hold its primary prior to February 5, 2008. Michigan did submit an application to be one of the new early “pre-window” states alongside Iowa and New Hampshire. The State Party proposed to conduct either a traditional tiered caucus or a Party-run primary.
April 28, 2006: Michigan State Central Committee adopts a 2008 Delegate Selection Plan based on a February 9, 2008 “State Party-run primary” with in-person voting centers, vote-by-mail and internet voting following a 30-day public comment period. (In the past this process has been called a “caucus” by the State Party, or a “firehouse primary.”) The February 9, 2008 Party-run primary allocates delegates and alternate positions among presidential preferences. The 2008 Plan is submitted to the DNC RBC for its consideration.
July 22, 2006: RBC recommends to full DNC that Iowa caucuses take place no earlier than January 14, 2008; that one caucus be held between the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary, and that the caucus be held in Nevada, a state with a significant and growing Latino population, a sizeable Asian American and Pacific Islander community, a strong organized labor presence, and in the western region of the country where the Democratic Party was making electoral gains. The RBC further recommended that one primary be held between the New Hampshire primary and the opening of the window on February 5, and that that primary be held in South Carolina, a southern state that has prior experience in hosting an early event and a state in which African Americans represent a significant share of the Democratic electorate.
August 19, 2006: Based on a recommendation of the Rules and Bylaws Committee, the DNC approves a calendar which allows Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina to host early nominating contests in January of 2008. The measure is passed with near-unanimity (only New Hampshire votes no). Florida and Michigan delegations support the measure.
January 23, 2007: Legislation was introduced in the Florida legislature to move the date of the state government-run primary from the first Tuesday of March (March 4, 2008)to January 29, 2008, which would violate the Party’s rule on timing.
Early 2007: On hearing that Florida may move up its presidential primary date, a number of states begin examining the primary calendar to see where they can move up dates as well. Illinois, California, and New York all move up to February 5th, 2008, prompting as many as one dozen other states to rush to re-schedule primaries for the same day in order to "remain relevant."
April 5, 2007: RBC Co-Chairs write to Democratic members of the Florida congressional delegation notifying them that the proposed legislation has passed the Florida House of Representatives and is pending before the State Senate to move the date of the primary. The letter details automatic sanctions in the rules for states which violate the rule on timing. The letter concluds by urging congressional representatives to use their “leadership and influence to oppose and help to defeat the state legislation that will put Florida’s presidential primary in violation of DNC rules.”
March-April, 2007: DNC officials and Florida Democratic Party officials hold discussions about the status of pending legislation and what activities the DNC can engage in to try to influence Democratic state legislators to bring Florida’s system into compliance with DNC Rules.
May 7, 2007: DNC officials and Florida State Party officials meet in-person in Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss the pending legislation and strategies about how to cope with the legislation which was expected to be signed into law.
May 21, 2007: Florida officially moves its primary date up to Jan. 29, 2008. Democrats in the Forida legislature join Republicans in passing the bill.
May-early June, 2007: With assistance of DNC officials, Florida Democratic Party develop a plan for an alternative, Party-run 100% vote by mail process that would be scheduled for a date complying with the rules.
June 10, 2007: The Florida State Democratic Executive Committee votes to make the January 29, 2008 primary binding and to draft a Delegate Selection Plan based on that primary.
June 15, 2007: DNC Chairman Gov. Dean met with members of the Florida congressional delegation.
June 27, 2007: Michigan submits state legislation to move its primary up to January, 2008 , which violates the Party’s rule on timing. The legislation also provides a mechanism for the government to record those voters who take a Democratic ballot, thereby meeting the Party’s rules standard of “declaration and recordation.”
June 30, 2007: RBC considers the proposed Michigan 2008 Plan and hears presentation from State Chair Mark Brewer on internet voting. RBC postpones taking a formal vote on Plan until its next meeting in order for the State Party to provide more detailed information concerning the internet voting component.
July-early August, 2007: Discussions between DNC and FDP officials continue. The DNC develops a proposed State Party-run caucus system, with congressional district caucuses to take place after February 5, 2008. This system fully complies with the DNC’s Rules and affords an opportunity for all Florida Democrats to vote for the Democratic presidential nominee. The DNC offered to pay approximately $880,000 to implement the caucus system.
August 4, 2007: The Florida State Democratic Executive Committee adopts a 2008 Delegate Selection Plan based on use of the January 29, 2008 primary, the plan is submitted to the RBC on August 7, 2007.
August 11, 2007: In-person meeting is conducted between DNC officials and Florida State Party officials, including RBC Co-Chair Jim Roosevelt, State Chair Karen Thurman, and several Florida DNC members. During that private meeting, the DNC officials informed the FDP representatives that, if the State Party persists in its refusal to adopt an alternate plan complying with the rules it is likely that the RBC will not only allow the automatic sanctions to go into place (50% reduction in pledged delegates and a 100% loss of unpledged delegates), but would likely use its authority to further reduce Florida’s delegation to zero (0) delegates.
August 25, 2007: The DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee meets to consider the primary date move by Florida. The RBC offers Florida a 30-day window to re-schedule its presidential primary in compliance with rules. Failure to comply with the rules would mean docking Florida's nominating delegates by 100%. The move is also directed as a warning to Michigan, which had been considering moving its primary ahead of New Hampshire. The Republican National Committee issues similar warnings to the states on behalf of its own nominating process.
RBC considers Michigan’s 2008 Plan for a February 9, 2008 Party-run primary and finds the Plan in “Conditional Compliance.” The only deficiency indicated at the time was Committee staff’s desire to more fully evaluate the internetvoting component.
August 28, 2007: RBC Co-Chairs formally notified the State Party in writing of the RBC’s finding of Non-Compliance. Pursuant to the Committee’s Regulations, the State Party was given 30-days upon receipt of the written notification to submit a revised Plan that complied with the rules.
August 31, 2007: The Democratic Parties from the four states sanctioned by the DNC to hold elections in the pre-window period - Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina - issue a pledge to all of the Democratic candidates to honor the DNC rules and not campaign in any other states attempting to break DNC rules by holding early elections.
August 30, 2007: Legislation establishing a January 15, 2008 state government-run presidential preference primary passes the legislature and is signed into law by GovernorJennifer Granholm on September 3, 2007.
September 2, 2007: All candidates agree to the pledge.
September 4, 2007: The Democratic legislature and Democratic Governor of Michigan officially moves its primary up to January 15, 2008. Democratic officials call the early state's pledge put forth by Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina a "gun to the head."
September 11, 2007: Pursuant to state law, Michigan State Chair Mark Brewer submits to the Secretary of State a list of presidential candidates whose names should appear on the January 15, 2008 primary ballot. Chair Brewer names all eight (8) Democratic presidential candidates.
September 23, 2007: Florida Democrats affirm early primary vote, shrugging off the DNC's recommendation to come up with an alternative to the scheduled primary date.
September 27, 2007: Karen Thurman, Florida Democratic chair, vows to stick with the decision to move up the state's primary despite DNC threats to strip Florida Democrats of their delegates. "There will be no other primary. Florida Democrats absolutely must vote on Jan. 29."
September 29, 2007: Florida Democratic Party State Chair Karen Thurman notifies the RBC Co-Chairs that the FDP is reaffirming the Plan previously submitted based on the January 29, 2008 primary. Chair Thurman’s letter acknowledges that the FDP spent months considering potential Party-run alternatives which would have complied with the DNC Rules, but that the FDP does not consider any of these alternatives to be acceptable.
October 5, 2007: RBC Co-Chairs formally notify the Florida State Party that the Plan remains in Non-Compliance and that the delegate and alternate reduction imposed at the August 25, 2007 RBC meeting is now in place.
October 9, 2007: Most Democratic candidates remove their name from the Michigan ballot in order to reinforce the previously signed "early states pledge." Because Florida law requires a candidate to be on the primary ballot in order to be on the general election ballot, a similar move cannot realistically be done in that state.
October 10, 2007: Senator Clinton defends the decision to leave her name on the Michigan ballot. States that, "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything,"
October 16, 2007: New Hampshire, in a move to defend its first-in-the-nation primary status, explores the notion of moving its primary up to December 2007, due to actions by Michigan and Florida. This sets the entire presidential nominating calendar in flux as a move by any single state could trigger a chain reaction among other states.
October 31, 2007: Pursuant to state law, State Chair Karen Thurman submits to the Secretary of State a list of presidential candidates whose names would appear on the January 15, 2008 primary ballot. Chair Thurman names all eight (8) Democratic presidential candidates.
November 8, 2007: The Republican National Committee strips 50% of Florida and Michigan convention delegates as a consequence for breaking presidential nominating rules, along with South Carolina, Wyoming and New Hampshire.
November 21, 2007: New Hampshire announces that it will move its primary up from January 22 to January 8, 2008.
November 27, 2007: Michigan State Executive Committee votes to amend its 2008 Delegate Selection Plan. The amended Plan allocates delegates and alternate positions among presidential preferences using the results of the January 15, 2008 state government-run primary. The amended Plan is submitted to the DNC RBC for consideration.
December 1, 2007: RBC meets to consider requests from Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina to hold their respective caucuses and primaries on different dates than provided in the rules. The representatives of each state Party testified before the RBC that the date changes were necessary to preserve the spirit and intent of the goals of the early pre-window period. The representatives further acknowledged that the date changes were necessary because other states had scheduled events in the pre-window period. The Nevada State Party Chair testified to the RBC that the Nevada State Party had concluded that it was in its best interests to hold its caucus on the date provided in the rules, but that it supported the requests of the other three (3) states to move.
RBC considers Michigan’s amended 2008 Delegate Selection Plan based on the January 15, 2008 state government-run primary. Committee found the Plan in “Non-Compliance” for violating Rule 11.A. Under the authority of Rules 20.C.1, 20C.5, and 20.C.6 RBC imposed a 100% loss of delegates (pledged and unpledged) and alternates.
December 3, 2007: RBC Co-Chairs formally notify the Michigan State Party in writing of the RBC’s finding of Non-Compliance. Pursuant to the Committee’s Regulations, the State Party is given 30-days upon receipt of the written notification to submit a revised Plan which complies with the rules.
January 7, 2008: The 30-day time period for the Michigan State Party to submit a revised and corrected Plan expires. RBC Co-Chairs formally notify the State Party that the Plan remains in Non-Compliance and that the delegate and alternate reduction imposed at the December 1, 2007 RBC meeting is now in place.
January 15, 2008: Senator Clinton wins Michigan primary.
January 29, 2008: Senator Clinton wins Florida primary.
February, 2008: Calls to seat Florida and Michigan are ignited, claims of disenfranchisement are made.
February 9, 2008: Date of originally planned Michigan State Party-run primary featuring in-person voting centers, vote-by-mail, and internet voting.
Early March, 2008: Discussions resume between DNC officials and Florida State Party officials about holding an alternative Party-run process before June 10, 2008 which would comply with the rules. These discussions include, among other things, consideration of a new state-run primary taking place in the spring of 2008 funded by the state; a new state-run primary taking place in the spring of 2008 funded by private contributions raised by the FDP; and a Party-run vote-by-mail process, taking place in the spring of 2008.
In the course of these discussions, the FDP submits to the DNC, in March 2008, for informal review and discussion, a written plan for an alternative, party-run vote by mail process in which ballots would be mailed out to all Florida Democratic voters on May 9, 2008 and returned to the FDP for counting by June 3, 2008.
Michigan legislation is drafted for the state government to conduct a new Democratic only presidential preference primary in either May or June 2008. The primary will be conducted by the government, but paid for by the State Party. The legislature adjourns without taking action on the proposal to conduct a second Democratic primary.
March 11, 2008: Democrats representing Florida in Congress released a joint statement, effectively ending the mail-in re-do primary. "We are committed to working with the DNC, the Florida State Democratic party, our Democratic leaders in Florida, and our two candidates to reach an expedited solution that ensures our 210 delegates are seated. Our House delegation is opposed to a mail-in campaign or any redo of any kind.”
March 17, 2008: Florida State Party Chair Karen Thurman announces that after careful consideration of various alternatives, it is logistically impossible to conduct an alternative Party-run nominating event before June 10, 2008.
Florida DNC member Jon Ausman files two (2) challenges seeking the reinstatement of Florida’s delegates.
April 2, 2008: Gov. Dean meets with Florida State Chair Karen Thurman, Sen. Bill Nelson and members of the Florida Democratic congressional delegation. Following the meeting, the participants issue a joint statement that a delegation from Florida will be seated at the Convention.
April 4, 2008: The Michigan State Party announces that it is logistically impossible for the State Party to conduct an alternative Party-run nominating event before June 10, 2008. The same day, DNC Chairman Gov. Howard Dean, Sen. Carl Levin, Cong. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, DNC member Debbie Dingell, and UAW President Ron Gettlefinger released a joint statement that a delegation from Michigan will be seated.
April 8, 2008: Jon Ausman, Florida DNC Member, issues a memo to the DNC calling for seating at least 50% of the state's delegation.
April 17, 2008: DNC at-large member Joel Ferguson files a challenge seeking the reinstatement of Michigan’s delegates. The challenge seeks to reinstate all unpledged delegates with a full vote each and all of the pledged delegates with a half vote each.
April 25, 2008: The RBC Co-Chairs notify Committee members that the RBC will meet May 31, 2008 in Washington, D.C. to consider the Ausman challenges as well as a challenge concerning Michigan filed by Joel Ferguson.
May 12, 2008: Through Michigan Democratic Party State Chair Mark Brewer, Michigan State Executive Committee files a challenge seeking the reinstatement of Michigan’s delegates. The challenge seeks the reinstatement of all delegates (pledged and unpledged) with a full vote each. The challenge requests the 128 pledged delegates be allocated 69 to Sen. Hillary Clinton and 59 to Sen. Barack Obama. At the same time, Joel Ferguson formally withdraws his challenge filed on April 17, 2008.
May 31, 2008: The DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee will meet in Washington, DC to consider appeals made for the seating of delegates from Florida and Michigan
Gregory: The DNC and RNC are private organizations. There are no voting rights protected by the courts or constitution when it comes to election of delegates to their convention(s). Private organizations can set the rules and administer sanctions, which is what both the RNC and DNC both did in regard to MI and FL. FL already filed two lawsuits that were thrown out of court (based on the court having no jurisdiction over private clubs), and now have a third one pending that will go the same direction - out the door.
The other point that many miss is that the vote cast in a primary or caucus is not a "popular vote" as we understand it in the GE or in electing your town mayor. It is a vote to award a delegate to a candidate. The nominating rules say that the candidate with the most delegates is the nominee, presuming that those awarded delegates vote for the candidate they are pledged to at the convention.
Posted by: suekzoo | May 28, 2008 at 09:10 AM
You should include in your timeline the campaigning that Clinton did in Florida. No one is talking about this anymore. But two days before the Florida primary she started to talk about the need to seat those delegates. The day of the primary she appeared in Florida for two "private" fundraisers- with a photo op of her getting off the plane with palm trees in the background, saying how grateful she was to be here in Florida. That's campaigning- both in Florida, and outside of Florida for Florida votes. This is an internet age. We don't get to claim we are not campaigning in the state just because we are physically outside. Not when we're trying to get explicitely get their votes. It's no surprise she won the primary. She campaigned for them.
Posted by: Jedidiah Palosaari | May 28, 2008 at 09:18 AM
Thank for your comments and blog! I find them well-reasoned and informative.
Maybe I am trying to make a point without a distinction. But it seems that if MI and FL were caucuses or party-run elections then I would agree with you 100%. But they weren't. They were state elections that the DNC and RNC participated in. I guess that I would be more comfortable hearing that the MI delegation that was duly elected was going to be awarded 0 votes at the convention as a penalty rather than "the election results don't count".
Posted by: Gregory | May 28, 2008 at 09:36 AM
Gregory
The DNC & RNC did NOT participate in those state elections. They were unsanctioned by the DNC. The fact that they took place is proof that the DNC had no control over them.
The only contol they do have is what they do with the result, and that is currently a problem for thr RNC.
States run elections, but the DNC is perfectly entitled to ignore them all and decide the winner by hair style if it so chooses.
What we have here is the mess that results when two political authorities both award themselves jurisdiction over the same thing.
Posted by: Blame | May 28, 2008 at 09:58 AM
Gregory, believe me, I know it's all confusing! :o) I've learned more about the mechanics of primaries, etc. this season than I ever wanted to know. After this is over, I'm getting a new hobbie!
I contacted the MI ACLU right after our unsanctioned primary to see if there was any grounds to file a suit. I asked specifically about the fact that MI voters could not write in a name on the ballot, which one can normally do in any election. (Tony in MI posted earlier that his son's ballot was discarded due to a write-in.) The response I got was that they did not find any grounds that would force the State to redo the vote, including that.
The law that authorizes the state-sponsored primary has to be constitutional. In the case of MI, one provision was found deficit. Read the rest of the posts earlier in this thread for more info. The structure of the rules and sanctions are in the realm of the private organization (DNC / RNC) to set and enforce. So by stripping MI & FL of delegates, effectively the election results don't count. Remember, this is not a popular vote issue. The votes cast are not for a candidate, they are for the election of a delegate. Fine line, I know.
Posted by: suekzoo | May 28, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Time to include another update reflecting the judgment handed down by the DNC lawyers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/29/us/politics/28cnd-politics.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Posted by: bookish | May 28, 2008 at 10:56 AM
One hopes that New Hampshire and Iowa will wait until January 21, 2009 to begin the next caucus/primary elections. It will give President Obama at least one night of partying before the next election.
Posted by: The Grand Panjandrum | May 28, 2008 at 10:57 AM
One hopes that New Hampshire and Iowa will wait until January 21, 2009 to begin the next caucus/primary elections. It will give President Obama at least one night of partying before the next election.
Posted by: The Grand Panjandrum | May 28, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Good points all.
I hope there is a resolution of this by the DNC RBC on Saturday and based on the election results and not hair style :>
I do have to give MI props for trying to hold a primary election rather than a caucus, I just wish they had gotten it right.
Posted by: Gregory | May 28, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Ok - what a stupid mess. Right?
This is just like what's wrong with Congress & all these convoluted, thousands-of-pages bills stuffed with with who knows how many unrelated items.
No wonder nothing gets done. No wonder chicanery is at an all time high.
Considering what Limbaugh did with his call for dishonest Republicans to vote "Democrat for a day" due to the varying Primary dates, I think we should scrap the current method of staggering voting dates and all states vote on ONE DAY - just like we do when voting for President in November.
So far I can make no sense of the current method. Can any of you?
Posted by: Kira | May 29, 2008 at 12:20 AM
Kira
There is a point to not holding the votes all on one day. Sometimes the best candidate starts with little name recognition.
Starting slowly gives them the chance to build up momentum with a smaller initial budget. It still has to be millions, but not beyond the means of any Senator or Govenor who has made those who look for talent sit up and take notice.
Posted by: Blame | May 29, 2008 at 02:14 AM
Thanks for your response, Blame.
You say "Sometimes the best candidate starts with little name recognition." I agree that is a problem, but staggering the Primary dates doesn't really help with that issue.
For instance, Kucinich & Gravel were dropped from televised debates by ABC and NBC et al, on more than one occasion. In fact, Kucinich, who was polling at a high 4th place had not been allowed to debate since December '07. Squashed by the Corporate Media.
By the time Super Tuesday rolled around in Feb., there were only 2 Democratic candidates left - Obama and Clinton.
From SFGate article by Bob Egelko:
"The bottom line: Debates, the public's sole opportunity to see competing candidates in a neutral setting, are the prerogative of the sponsoring organizations - typically, these days, the news media - which set the criteria and have free rein to alter them."
We must address this issue if we are going to ever be able to hear all the candidates and have OUR choice ... not the one DECIDED for us by the Corporate Media.
AND - how do we address the problems we saw with Republicans voting as Democrats [for the Presidential candidate they perceived as the easier one to beat] which happened this year? They wouldn't be able to cheat this way if we all voted on one day.
MrSuper - do you have any thoughts on these issues and how we might address them in the future?
Thanks,
Kira
Posted by: Kira | May 29, 2008 at 12:23 PM