FAIR REFLECTION’S ABSENCE

by: John West

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/…

http://www.demconvention.com/s…

I will be addressing only the Democratic results for the purposes of this entry.

Note that the “hard count” refers to the total delegate preference as originally assigned. (Note: unpledged delegates are hard counted as “Uncommitted”.)

Note that the “floor count” refers to the floor vote taken during the convention.  However, it should be noted that the “floor vote” actually occurred at the Delegation Hotels during breakfast.

The roll call of states and U.S territories proceeded in alphabetical order and ended at New York when Hillary suspended the rules of the convention to call for a vote of acclamation for Obama to be the party’s Presidential nominee. California and Illinois chose to “pass” on announcing their Delegate floor vote totals. The Delegate floor vote of any state after New York, including CA and IL, are not reported on greenpapers website, so refer to the DNC website link provided. Again, the majority of delegates voted before ever getting to the floor of the convention to attend the roll call of states.

Make the jump for more…

Name} Votes}  Pct.}  Hard} Pct.} Floor} Pct.Obama 300,319 55.96% 27.0 45.00% 48.0   80.00%

Hill  223,089 41.57% 25.0 41.67% 5.0    8.33%

Hillary won 41.57% of the vote and 25 delegates, or 41.67% of the delegates from Alabama were allocated to to her, i.e pledged. Come time for Convention, only 8.33% of people who cast a ballot for Hillary can say their vote was represented at the Convention by their delegate. The remaining 33.24% of the people who cast their ballots for Hillary in Alabama’s primary, had delegates who cast a vote for Obama instead. It could be said those delegates misrepresented 74,155 Alabama voters who voted for Hillary during their state’s primary.

NOT ONE PERSON who voted for Hillary during the primaries/caucuses in American Samoa, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Vermont and Delaware had their vote reflected in the roll call tally by the delegates they elected for this sole purpose. The pledged delegates for Hillary in these states unanimously changed their votes from Hillary to Obama believing they did the voters right by supporting unity and following Hillary’s lead. Was this a fair reflection of the sentiments of the voters when they cast their ballots for Hillary during their primary/caucus?

In Arkansas,  8 out of 27 pledged Hillary delegates cast their vote for Hillary during the roll call of states, yet Arkansas announced a unanimous vote for Senator Obama during the roll call. This mistake has since been corrected.

Everyone who voted for Hillary in the states listed next, can say more than 75% of their delegates honored their pledge by voting for Hillary at the convention:  AL, AR, CO, CT, ID, IL, Guam, MA, ME, MS, MT, NV, TX, OR, and WA.

Please click on your state listed on the greenpapers website to see the break down.

Over the course of this nominating election year, it appeared the numbers all added up and it appeared all votes were counted. (FL and MI only counted at the very end)  The delegates were allocated to each candidate according to some proportional system. The voters from each state elected delegates who were pledged to cast a ballot for their candidate at the convention.

The Convention came and the delegates voted. They did not vote on the floor of the convention, but in their hotels at breakfast. Hillary then addressed her delegation where she “released” them but instructed they should vote the way they wanted.  The partial roll call of states following this, revealed to everyone watching just how many delegates changed their vote from Hillary to Obama.  The Democratic party does indeed count every vote as Dean and Germond repeatedly claimed during the convention with their toothy  ear to ear smiles. But behind by their JOKERS grin, is the muffled cry of “bullshit!”

There are Hillary delegates who truly believed they did the right thing by Hillary, the Democratic Party and the voters. However, the voters they represented, were never provided a means to say if they wanted their vote to go to someone else. A delegate is pledged to their constituents, and it is this covenant the delegates have with the voters they represent which is the basis for “fair reflection.”

   A covenant, in its most general sense, is a solemn promise to engage in or refrain from a specified action. More specifically, a covenant, in contrast to a contract, is a one-way agreement whereby the covenanter is the only party bound by the promise.[citation needed] A covenant may have conditions and prerequisites that qualify the undertaking, including the actions of second or third parties, but there is no inherent agreement by such other parties to fulfill those requirements. Consequentially, the only party that can break a covenant is the covenanter.

A NOTE ABOUT “FAIR REFLECTION:   It should be noted that the concept of “fair reflection” is related to the actions of the voter – it is not, and cannot be interpreted as, “what the voter wished he could have done under other circumstances”. Rather, it is a requirement that delegates be apportioned by states based on the votes as they were cast.

   Assurances are made in the DNC rules for Delegate Selection, that provides language enforcing the committment to fair reflection of the vote in each state.

   I. No delegate at any level of the delegate selection process shall be mandated by law or Party rule to vote contrary to that person’s presidential choice as expressed at the time the delegate is elected.
   J. Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.

For some of the delegates who changed their vote, were they truly reflecting the sentiments of their voters? Do delegates have the authority to make that determination absent of some poll, vote or caucus of their constituents?

One only has to compare the floor vote totals for each state and compare it to the Hard count totals for each state to see a complete abandonment of our party’s commitment to fair reflection  the day of the MI and FL RBC meeting.

RBC rules make it clear that delegates are to be allocated in a fashion that fairly reflects the expressed presidential preference or uncommitted status of the primary voters or, if there is no binding primary, the convention and/or caucus participants.

I don’t see how this allocation rule was applied for the voters who cast a ballot for “uncommitted” in Michigan.So we are left asking; What happened to fair reflection?  Was the  nominating process subverted to favor one candidate over the other? Were Hillary delegates pressured to change their votes? What is the mechanism for “releasing” one’s delegates? How come out of 1730.5 pledged delegates, only 400 signed the petition to make sure her name was placed in nomination? What can we do to help strengthen our party and restore credibility and integrity of our pledge of a fair reflection and our commitment to count every vote?