[EL] Frontloading HQ blog editor weighs in on Florida Republican Party
Richard Winger
richardwinger at yahoo.com
Sun Jan 29 21:07:51 PST 2012
Josh Putnam is in the process of joining the election-law list, and in the meantime he asked me to post his comment about the Florida Republican Party's winner-take-all rules and how that fits with the national Republican rules.
Richard Winger
415-922-9779
PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
--- On Sun, 1/29/12, Josh Putnam <josh.putnam at gmail.com> wrote:
From: Josh Putnam <josh.putnam at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: election-law list discussion of Florida
To: "richardwinger at yahoo.com" <richardwinger at yahoo.com>
Date: Sunday, January 29, 2012, 6:30 PM
Hy Richard.
I don't want to be self-serving but please send people with questions about Florida here (I'm awaiting my clearance for the list serve): http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2012/01/2012-republican-delegate-allocation_29.html
The RNC had the ability to punish Florida more and did. The national party stripped Florida and the other early states of VIP passes, prime floor seating and good hotel assignments for the delegate allocation violation. South Carolina was not punished further because the RNC rules exempt it and the other "carve out" states from the "proportionality" requirement.
What the RNC didn't do was penalize Florida anymore delegates which it could have done as explain on the above link.
Let me know if you or anyone there has any other questions.Josh
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 29, 2012, at 6:43 PM, Richard Winger <richardwinger at yahoo.com> wrote:
Richard Winger
415-922-9779
PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
--- On Sun, 1/29/12, Rob Richie <rr at fairvote.org> wrote:
From: Rob Richie <rr at fairvote.org>
Subject: Re: [EL] Jim (& other RNC members) -- any insight into why RNC ignores its 2010 rule on winner-take-all primaries before April 1?
To: "Jeff Hauser" <jeffhauser at gmail.com>
Cc: "Jim Bopp" <JBoppjr at aol.com>, "Aaron Blake" <BlakeA at washpost.com>, "Election Law" <Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
Date: Sunday, January 29, 2012, 3:08 PM
That's very helpful, Aaron -- although the RNC position is the same as arguing that if someone is already going to sentenced in a year in jail for stealing someone's wallet, he or she might as well get a free pass and no extra time for beating the victim over the head as well.
Note that the RNC's December 2011 report on state rules lists Puerto Rico has having a winner-take-all contest in March without any penalty. So it's not just that they are letting Arizona and Florida violate the prohibition against winner-take-all. Yet, as Aaron points out, some Republicans don't agree with the RNC position -- for instance, Michael Steele, who was chair from 2009-2011, said in the Adam Smith article: ""The rule is absolutely clear — it should be proportional."
One almost might think it's the big money wing of the Republican party willing to set aside rules in order to create a firewall to boost the candidate most able to have the financial resources to compete in what is an extremely expensive state. Maybe not, but it sure begs the question if the RNC can't come up with a better reason than "how can we possibly penalize a state for breaking more than one rule"?
As to South Carolina, Jeff, it's only being penalized for going early, just like New Hampshire, Florida, Michigan and Arizona.
- Rob
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Jeff Hauser <jeffhauser at gmail.com> wrote:
What's the status of South Carolina--I've seen reports they're being punished as well?
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Aaron Blake <BlakeA at washpost.com> wrote:
The RNC position on this has been that, because it's already punishing states like Florida for breaking the rules once (by moving up their primaries), it cannot punish them for not following the delegate-allocation rules. Basically, they say they can only take away half their delgates once, and there's no good mechanism for preventing them from breaking another rule. Whether they are in violation of one or two rules, the penalty is the same.
I will say that I have spoken with several RNC members who don't agree with this position and could potentially force the issue.
The Tampa Bay Times' Adam Smith recently had a good take on this situation: http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/if-gop-fight-drags-on-so-could-argument-over-floridas-delegates/1212342
Aaron Blake
The Washington Post
The Fix
www.PostPolitics.com
blakea at washpost.com
twitter.com/FixAaron
202.503.4669
-----law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu wrote: -----
To: Election Law <Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>, Jim Bopp <JBoppjr at aol.com>
From: Rob Richie
Sent by: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
Date: 01/29/2012 04:11PM
Subject: [EL] Jim (& other RNC members) -- any insight into why RNC ignores its 2010 rule on winner-take-all primaries before April 1?
Hi, Jim,
I thought you might be able to clear up for this listserv why the Republican National Committee apparently plans to allow Florida to hold a winner-take-all primary this week without penalty.
In 2010, the Republican National Committee adopted this rule: "Any presidential primary,caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April 19 of 41 in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis." (See Rule 15b at: http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf )
The 2010 rule also changed the the schedule in a way designed to have initial nomination contests in February. When Florida insisted on holding a January primary, South Carolina, Iowa and New Hampshire also moved their contests into January. The RNC responded by taking half the convention delegates away from SC, NH and F, along with states like MI and AZ voting earlier than allowed under the rules (but not Iowa, because Iowa doesn't bind delegates with its straw poll in January).
Florida, however, in addition is prepared to violate the 2010 rule on not using winner-take-all. Like Arizona and Puerto Rico, which also are holding winner-take-all contests before April 1st, it apparently is facing no penalty for doing so -- seemingly inviting a convention challenge to those delegates.(As an aside, South Carolina was given an exemption from the rule -- Gingrich likely will end up with all 25 delegates if the final vote shows him carrying all 7 congressional districts, as anticipated.)
Below is a link to a story from Marketwatch. It has a curious quote from Kirsten Kukowski, identified as spokeswoman for the RNC. She says the national group gave no formal nod to Florida’s winner-take-all system, but doesn’t approve or disapprove of such plans.
But why wouldn't the 2010 rules indicate the RNC disapproves of such a plan? Is there a way to understand why the RNC enforces some rules and not others?
Finally, although the media generallly doesn't get this issue, as most pundits in their hyper way treat all contests as if they were winner-take-all (thus the silly focus on who "won" Iowa with less than 25% of a straw poll), but Florida's decision to violate the rules has a very real impact on how candidates campaign and who may win the nomination contest. For instance, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul have both said that they will focus on states with proportional allocation, as they earn rewards for political activity and votes even when not finishing first. Here are links to some FairVote's resources on this topic:
Delegate allocation rules in 2012 GOP race
Open, closed and mixed primaries, state-by-state
South Carolina Primary: One Candidate May Easily Win All Delegates
Understanding How Proportional Representation Worked in NH
State-by-State Popular Votes and Delegates won in GOP 2012 Primary Races
Thanks,Rob Richie, FairVote
######
EXCERPTS FROM...
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/election/2012/01/27/gop-tries-to-quash-rumors-of-change-in-floridas-winner-take-all/
GOP tries to quash rumors of change in Florida’s winner-take-all
January 27, 2012
Rumors have been circulating around Florida in recent
days that a challenge is looming to the state’s winner-take-all primary
system, but Republican officials there say the chances of such an
appeal being successful are virtually zero.
All of Florida’s 50 delegates are likely to go to either former
Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney or ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, the
two frontrunners in the GOP contest there. There has been talk that the
runner-up in a tight race might contest the winner-take-all rule, since
many other states dole out delegates proportionately to election
results......
....Kirsten Kukowski, spokeswoman for the RNC, says the national group
gave no formal nod to Florida’s winner-take-all system; it doesn’t
approve or disapprove of such plans. The state, however, was penalized
for holding its primary earlier than April 1 and lost half of what had
been a 99-delegate slate for moving up its election. It was one of
several states that lost half its delegates for moving their primaries
ahead of the national committee’s planned schedule, including Arizona,
Michigan, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Respect for Every Vote and Every Voice"
Rob Richie
Executive Director
FairVote
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 610
Takoma Park, MD 20912
www.fairvote.org rr at fairvote.org
(301) 270-4616
Please support FairVote through action and tax-deductible donations -- see http://fairvote.org/donate. For federal employees, please consider a gift to us through the Combined Federal Campaign (FairVote's CFC number is 10132.) Thank you!
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Respect for Every Vote and Every Voice"
Rob Richie
Executive Director
FairVote
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 610
Takoma Park, MD 20912
www.fairvote.org rr at fairvote.org
(301) 270-4616
Please support FairVote through action and tax-deductible donations -- see http://fairvote.org/donate. For federal employees, please consider a gift to us through the Combined Federal Campaign (FairVote's CFC number is 10132.) Thank you!
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120129/25620665/attachment.html>
View list directory