My proposal for the 2010 DNC convention where the rules for 2012 will be made.

[CK_John]

First: Keep the superdelegate system but...reduce it from the 80/20 formula (80% elected delegates 20$ SD) by counting the SD as 1/2 vote at the convention as oppose to a full vote now.

Second: Encourage 5 regional primaries to be held every 3 weeks. Also give a 10% bonus of delegates on a winner take all basis to states with a primary vs a caucus system.

Third: Reduce any state delegate count by 10% that has an open primary or caucus.

Fourth: Require 30 days prior party registration to voting or lose 5% of delegate count.

[crispini]

1. My thoughts.

1) Will get a lot of pushback from elected officials who are also members of the DNC and superdelegates. I don't think this is going to really be a problem. I'd forget about this one.

2) Regional primaries are a great idea.

2A) Bonus for a primary vs. a caucus -- well, I don't think that'll fly. Here's what you do: Count up the number of DNC delegates from primary states, vs. the number of DNC delegates from caucus states. Which system has more representation on the DNC? That will tell us something.

Now, the type of the primary, as well as the open/closed status of the primary, are not determined by individual state parties. They are determined by the respective state legislatures. Therefore, this is not something that could be easily changed. Especially since these same rules also govern the Republican primary/caucus. Furthermore, it's difficult to argue that you should penalize states that aren't Democratically controlled and can't do a damn thing about their system. So I think 2A, 3, and 4 are going to be very tough sells.

Furthermore, I think that there could be a very good argument to be made for open primaries, that they get the electorate excited and involved. How else do you bring people into the party? I am not entirely convinced that the crossover vote is significant, although I could be convinced.

Are you planning on running for the DNC?

[mohc]

3. Keep in mind

That currently the DNC awards bonus delegates to states which have their "first determining step" later in the primary calendar. The date of the primary or caucus is set by the state just like voter eligibility rules and selection method. So I do not think the DNC will have an issue setting bonus delegate targets based on anything it may want on the basis that Democrats are not necessarily in control of the state legislature. So long as the bonus values are reasonably low, I doubt many states will take issue. I will admit that states have an easier time with the primary date bonuses because they believe having an earlier date gives them more of an advantage than the extra delegates, while these other bonuses will not have the same offset.

And on a separate note, another change I would suggest is that whatever the final primary date is, we should try and have over 50% of the delegates awarded on that date. That way a state would never be voting on a date where the nomination was already settled. So long as 50% of the delegates were out, no one would have the nomination locked up.

[crispini]

5. Well taken.

What would your second change actually mean? A 'end of the line' sort of Super Tuesday? Just trying to wrap my head around it. I agree in theory, not sure how it would play out.

[mohc]

7. Yeah, Super Tuesday Grand Finale kind of thing

I know it would be really hard to do, and unlike the bonuses, there would really be no way for the DNC to enforce it. But I like the idea of no primary being wasted. How many states have basically no primary participation because they have never held a significant primary? I know in some election cycles the nomination will be all but certain with most delegates awarded on the final date, but in those cycles it really would not have mattered what order things were in. For the competitive years, having the final primary date have say 60% of the delegates will make it so every state matters, and due to proportional allocation (most) every vote will matter too. I would like to see successively larger primary dates on the calendar. Meaning starting out with 1 or 2 states for the first date and gradually moving up to one large mega date.

[CK_John]

4. No, I was active in the 70 and 80's but it's time for a younger generation to do

the heavy lifting. Thanks for your comments, just trying to get the ball rolling.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. regarding open/closed primaries

The supreme court has ruled that parties have the right to decide whether a primary is open or closed, not the legislature, not by plebiscite.

Political parties have a first amendment right of free association:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Democratic_Party_v._Jones

[MaineDem]

2. I don't think there is a 2010 convention

The next one will be in 2012.

The Rules are set by the DNC, probably in 2010.

You have some good points to start with, though. Not sure I like the winner-take-all provision or the regional primaries. But it's a start.

I'd rather see states grouped by the amount of delegates available. We're seeing an example of what will happen when big and little states compete on the same day now with Ohio/Texas getting all the buzz and leaving little mention of Vermont and Rhode Island going on the same day. States with similar numbers of delegates should be combined and leave the larger states to go alone or pair up with other big states.

[CK_John]

6. I believe there is a convention in the off yrs, after the state and county conventions. They may not

get press coverage and only one or two days to ratify proposals. Most of the work now is done by tele-conference.

[MaineDem]

11. Not every state has county conventions either

I truly believe there is only a National Convention every 4 years.

But let's not quibble about that.

There are major changes needed although the idea of the 4 (and it should only have been 4) states going before February 5 worked out really well. All was not decided on Super Tuesday. More work is needed.

[crispini]

20. There is not a true national convention like this every 4 years.

But there are Democratic National Convention committee members who are elected, at the state conventions, and they have sort of a continual ongoing membership and they do have meetings and do work in the off years. I'm not sure how long their terms are.

[MaineDem]

22. There are National Committee members

They meet a few times every year. But it's not a convention.

[SoCalDem]

8. My plan is simpler..and we know how "simple" most politicians are

:evilgrin:

SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts)


Fri Feb-22-08 02:23 AM



29. I would like 6 regional primaries. One a month Feb-July


Assuming there are still 3,253 pledged delegates available, the "magic number" would be 1,627..and NO "sooooper delegates".. They would be re-named VIPs and would get :

1. valet parking
2. front row seats
3. a very nice buffet just for them
4. lovely parting gifts

Iowa could still go first, as could NH..but both in January..BEFORE primary season starts..

The order, each election month would be determined by DNC head and RNC head alternately drawing numbers, until all were drawn.. they could flip for who goes first..

each region has a regional flavor, large & small municipalities, and major airports & media centers...so candidates could easily cover the area in a month.. Each primary could be set for the LAST Saturday of the month so more people could participate.
One debate per month in the FIRST week of the month..



and NO EARLY VOTING ALLOWED..(except for people who truly need absentee ballots due to travel or infirmity).. This early voting skews real support and campaign effectiveness, and highly favors the most well-known candidate..before any real campaigning even happens..

August could be spent preparing for the november election & resting up....with the convention (if they MUST) at the end of the month..

That leaves ALL of September & October for the really heavy duty campaigning..

[CK_John]

12. I'm good with your 6 regions and I like the order going across the top and working back across the

south. This would also cut the cost to the candidates with regional ad buys.

[SoCalDem]

13. and it makes the area small enough for them to campaign "on the ground"

but the numbering order would change, depending on the order drawn..they could be drawn 6,1,3,4,2,5...opr another combination.. but even then, each region would still have the "local" flavor....and be easy to travel to and within..and has a large nough population to show real support..or non-support.. It would help guys like Biden & Dodd

[CK_John]

16. I do have a problem with the Sat voting because of religious conflicts. Also

caucus require a fixed block of time. My proposal is to the DNC which can only set guidelines. Trying to keep state involvement to a minimum. I'm trying to keep it as simple as possible so that states will go along.

[SoCalDem]

18. I'm guessing that most people can do Saturdays..and the ones who cannot, are prime

candidates for absentee ballots.

The regions are for primaries..not caucuses.. If states want their own "beauty contest" caucuses, it would be on them.. These would all be primaries..with the same "rules of engagement"

Caucuses, present problems for people whose work schedules/commuting obligations prevent them from being able to participate..and they do not allow for absentee ballots for the infirm and people who may travel for a living.

[CK_John]

21. How about a weekend. Polls open from Fri 6pm until Sun midnight?

[SoCalDem]

23. That would be ok.but ballot protection & staffing might be a problem

unless it was all "mail-in"..but that might take too long to tabulate..

It will probably always remain a one day thing..and if that's the way it goes, a weekend day would open it up for many more people..

Out here, the polls are open from 7-8(I think)..but people LEAVE for work at 4AM and some don;t get home until 7PM..(if the traffic cooperates)..and even if they do get home before 8..after long days like many have here, voting is not as easy as it would seem..

[CK_John]

24. NY has noon until 9pm for primary and 6AM until 9PM for GE. n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

28. I wish all our elections could be like that

but it's hard enough to get poll workers to work one day. We'd need 3x as many to accomplish this.

[bicentennial_baby]

9. 5 primaries every 3 weeks...So that's 11 primary days

(including Guam, Am. Samoa, VI, DC)

11 * 3= 33...33/4 weeks (month)=8 months. Correct? 8 months of primaries?! Yikes!

[CK_John]

10. I'm confused. 5 groups of states every 3 weeks would take 12 weeks. n/t

[bicentennial_baby]

14. Sorry, I totally read that wrong! My apologies!

:o

:hi:

[CK_John]

19. No prob. The 6 regions actually may be better balanced. n/t

[Perky]

15. I think such a plan is highly discriminatory towards states that

can not afford the expense of a primary.
I don't like the idea of winner take all. I think the allocation system is actually pretty well conceived. I do think it needs to ve standardized and not left to party hacks.


I do notlike the idea or regional primaries because the regions are so vastly different. I prefer a bunded concept five diverse states at a time over 20 weeks.


I also think the election cycle ought to start in March....not January if they are pushing the conventiions back to the end of August anyway.

[CK_John]

17. The winner take all was only for the 10% bonus delegates for going to a primary.

[johnnydrama]

25. keep em at full vote

but dump DNC members from being superdelegates.

The amount of governors, congressmen, senators and past party bigwigs (president, vp, speaker) would be just about the right amount
of Super Delegates.

I do not mind one iota that Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Tom Daschle etc... are Super Delegates.

I do mind that approx 400 people who we have no idea who they are are worth 10,000 votes.

[MaineDem]

26. But those DNC members care more for the Party than the electeds

They tend to be much more active in their states and in the business of running the Party.

How many times have we all complained that the Democratic members of Congress weren't working for what we wanted?

I'd prefer to see the DNC members be the superdelegates rather than Senators and Members of Congress.

[Hart2008]

29. Uh, why doesn't the '08 convention set the rules for '10?

Wouldn't that be more democratic?

[rufus dog]

30. good with some of it

The regional primaries should be rotated, that is a primary in each of the regions but the state order rotates each year.

I think opposite party voting is WAY over rated. A lot of talk, not much action

30 days, why, many European countries have same day registration. Why make it hard for people to vote?