[EL] Florida to award delegates proportionally?

Aaron Blake BlakeA at washpost.com
Tue Jan 31 07:56:19 PST 2012


I've checked with RNC on this, and they said Florida remains winner take 
all, pending a challenge at the convention.

Here's what RNC adviser Sean Spicer just tweeted:

FL lost 1/2 delegates & received additional penalties 4 breaking party 
rules. Contest Cmte is designed 4any delegate concerns that may arise 

https://twitter.com/#!/seanspicer/status/164373619475087360


Aaron Blake
The Washington Post
The Fix
www.PostPolitics.com
blakea at washpost.com
twitter.com/FixAaron
202.503.4669




From:   Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
To:     "Goldfeder, Jerry H." <jgoldfeder at stroock.com>
Cc:     "law-election at department-lists.uci.edu" 
<law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
Date:   01/31/2012 10:50 AM
Subject:        Re: [EL] Florida to award delegates proportionally?
Sent by:        law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu



My semi-facetious "doomsday clock" for a brokered Republican convention 
just moved another minute closer to midnight in anticipating of Florida 
awarding its delegates proportionally rather than winner take all.  
Everyone can decide for themselves whether the clock's hands are showing a 
time during the morning, or showing 11:59 p.m., or somewhere in between.  
The convention could be a lot of "fun", given the blessing of the US 
Supreme Court in NY Bd. of Elections v Lopez-Torres to the idea that 
convention procedures for elected delegates "need not be fair", given 
(among other considerations cited) the venerable history the Court cited 
of political parties making nominating decisions in "smoke-filled rooms."  


Rather than embracing an anti-corruption principle, the US Supreme Court 
has gone all the way to the opposite extreme in Lopez-Torres, embracing 
past unfairness or corruption in smoke-filled rooms as venerable 
tradition.  While the Court did mention in dicta that legislatures might 
act to mitigate unfairness, they would have to do so while respecting the 
First Amendment rights of association of the political parties themselves, 
raising grave questions about whether state legislatures could act in an 
effective manner to vindicate a fairness or anti-corruption principle that 
operates at party nominating conventions.

Paul Lehto, J.D.


On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Goldfeder, Jerry H. <
jgoldfeder at stroock.com> wrote:
There is an issue, raised on this site over the weekend, that, while the 
RNC has "punished" Florida for its primary date by halving its delegation 
and limiting its credentials and other convention-related perks, the state 
might also be forced to award its delegates proportionally. The rationale 
for not having done so thus far was that Florida has already seen its 
delegation cut by 50% ("the state has been punished enough!"); the 
rationale for compelling proportionality is that such procedure was 
contemplated by the RNC Rules that Florida has broken, and to simply 
reduce its delegation without compelling the required proportionality 
would be to turn a blind-eye to the central offense.  The long and short 
of it is that a challenge to any winner-take-all result might ensue.

Jerry H. Goldfeder
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP
180 Maiden Lane
New York, NY 10038
212-806-5857   (office)
917-680-3132   (cell)
212-806-7857   (fax)
jgoldfeder at stroock.com
www.stroock.com/goldfeder


-----Original Message-----
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Michael 
McDonald
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:15 AM
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: [EL] Florida to award delegates proportionally?

Michael Steele on MSNBC just stated that he has learned that Florida will
award its delegates proportionally. Certainly an important development,
particularly for Gingrich, if true.

============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor, George Mason University
Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution

                            Mailing address:
(o) 703-993-4191             George Mason University
(f) 703-993-1399             Dept. of Public and International Affairs
mmcdon at gmu.edu               4400 University Drive - 3F4
http://elections.gmu.edu     Fairfax, VA 22030-4444



_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

IRS Circular 230
Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS in 
Circular 230, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this 
communication (including any attachment that does not explicitly state 
otherwise) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for 
the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or 
(ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction 
or matter addressed herein.
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election



-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1 
Ishpeming, MI  49849 
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)





_______________________________________________
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/20120131/47e7becf/attachment.html>


View list directory