DNC “Unity Commission” to look at reforms to nomination process for 2020 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 03:50:37 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  DNC “Unity Commission” to look at reforms to nomination process for 2020 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: DNC “Unity Commission” to look at reforms to nomination process for 2020  (Read 10686 times)
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


« on: March 16, 2017, 07:57:12 PM »

It's sad to me that nobody seems to be entering these discussions in good faith. This shouldn't be another proxy war. There are real reforms that need to be made that will get clouded by everyone being at each other's throats.

My ideal reforms would be 1) abolish caucuses, 2) prevent superdelegates from making statements about who they'll support until the primaries have concluded, and 3) leave open-vs-closed up to state parties but mandate that any state with a closed primary must make it easier to become a Democrat in time for the primary.

Sure (I would probably include a steep delegate penalty for closed primaries, though) but I think it's also important for people to realize that there really are two separate groups with different interests walking into that room. A "Grand Bargain" (probably something to the tune of No Caucuses in return for Open Primaries or No Superdels) is possible, but only if people realize that what benefits one group really is going to hurt the other, and they need to compromise.
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2017, 01:20:10 AM »

"No caucuses" is a complete non-starter, because there are some states that just aren't paying for a primary.  There's nothing that either the DNC nor the Democratic Party of Idaho can do, for example, to force the state government of Idaho to hold a primary.  So if Idaho isn't going to run a primary, how would it happen?  The Democratic Party would pay for it on its own?  Not just there, but in every other state whose state government won't pay for a primary?  Yeah, right.


Fair enough, and it's unlikely that the Clinton faction will vote to get rid of Superdels entirely (I suspect that they would support a measure to 'gag' them before their state votes or something like that.)

Point being, neither side is going to get everything that they want. Hopefully, though, the Clinton appointees will recognize that a lot of change is necessary.
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2017, 01:25:36 AM »

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/323805-unity-commission-another-challenge-for-democrats

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The commission was agreed to as a compromise at last year’s DNC, to give Sanders supporters a forum in which to push for reform to the nomination process.  Among the things that this commission will look at are rules for caucuses vs. primaries, open vs. closed primaries, and the role of super delegates.

The story in The Hill seems to suggest that super delegate reform has already been agreed to, but Josh Putnam says that that’s not correct:

https://twitter.com/FHQ/status/841629576539340802
https://twitter.com/FHQ/status/841629962050367488

I don’t believe the decisions made by the commission are binding.  Any real changes have to go through the Rules & Bylaws Committee.  More on the commission here:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-democrats-unity-reform-commission.html

Get rid of the superdelegates, the closed primaries, the super Tuesdays, and then I'd say you've made some reforms.

Don't forget getting rid of caucuses.

Except Iowa.
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2017, 02:16:21 AM »

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/323805-unity-commission-another-challenge-for-democrats

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The commission was agreed to as a compromise at last year’s DNC, to give Sanders supporters a forum in which to push for reform to the nomination process.  Among the things that this commission will look at are rules for caucuses vs. primaries, open vs. closed primaries, and the role of super delegates.

The story in The Hill seems to suggest that super delegate reform has already been agreed to, but Josh Putnam says that that’s not correct:

https://twitter.com/FHQ/status/841629576539340802
https://twitter.com/FHQ/status/841629962050367488

I don’t believe the decisions made by the commission are binding.  Any real changes have to go through the Rules & Bylaws Committee.  More on the commission here:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-democrats-unity-reform-commission.html

Get rid of the superdelegates, the closed primaries, the super Tuesdays, and then I'd say you've made some reforms.

Don't forget getting rid of caucuses.

Except Iowa.

Iowa has coin tosses & in Nevada you apparently draw from a pack of cards, to settle ties. Talk about having archaic rules in need of reform !

Iowa does caucuses pretty well. It's basically the only state that does, but it does caucuses pretty well. Coin tosses are how you resolve tied votes in individual precincts. Which shouldn't (and didn't) happen that often.

The caucus format is a lovely tradition that is very difficult to implement.

Iowa does it well.

Iowa should keep their caucus.
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2017, 02:41:47 AM »

The Unity Commission will be tackling the subject of open primaries this weekend:
<snipped image>
It was thought that they might tackle the superdelegate issue, but looks like that'll be saved for one of their later meetings.

Interesting. I really expected open primaries to be one of the harder issues to resolve - though I suppose that superdels hits closer to home for the Clinton members of the commission Tongue.
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2017, 11:10:24 PM »

The Unity Commission will be tackling the subject of open primaries this weekend:
<snipped image>
It was thought that they might tackle the superdelegate issue, but looks like that'll be saved for one of their later meetings.

Interesting. I really expected open primaries to be one of the harder issues to resolve - though I suppose that superdels hits closer to home for the Clinton members of the commission Tongue.
I don't get why there isn't just an open primary for everything. The way the U.S. party system is structured, the more fluid a party's platform is the better. Two party systems are only viable here so all the coalition building is done during the primaries. By ignoring certain parts of the electorate the party is less incentivized to evolve its platform.

I quite agree. I've heard involved grassroots dems take a very proprietary tone when it comes to this sort of thing. There's an underlying attitude of "it's our club, let them do their own thing if they want it so bad."
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2018, 07:08:18 PM »

Do we have an update on what the commission has concluded?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 12 queries.