Democrats vote to punish Florida for primary move
Saturday, August 25, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Florida's decision to move up its presidential primary to January may be a costly one.

The Democratic National Committee decided on Saturday to strip Florida of all its presidential convention delegates unless the state holds its primary later in the 2008 election calendar.

The punishment would leave the fourth-largest state without a vote for the nominee.

The state party has 30 days to comply by moving its contest back at least seven days from the current January 29th plan, or lose its 210 delegates to the nominating convention in Denver next summer.

Party rules say states cannot hold their 2008 primary contests before February fifth, except for Iowa on January 14th, Nevada on January 19th, New Hampshire on January 22nd and South Carolina on January 29th.

The calendar was designed to preserve the traditional role that Iowa and New Hampshire have played in selecting the nominee, while adding two states with more racial and geographic diversity to influential early slots.

Other states are rushing to get to the start of the primaries pack, too, and Florida will be the first test of the Democratic National Committee's resolve to restore order to the schedule it set last year. Michigan and New Hampshire also are considering whether to move up their voting in violation of the party rules.

The DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee met Saturday to announce the sanctions. Several party officials said they want to take a tough stand against Florida to send a message to other states.

The shifting dates have left the party's presidential candidates in limbo about where they should be campaigning, with the first votes to be cast in less than five months.

Advisers to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has a wide lead in Florida polls, said she will go wherever elections are being held. But the DNC has threatened to penalize candidates who campaign in states that violate the rules, and other candidates are waiting to see how the dispute shakes out.

Party rules say states cannot hold their primary contests before Feb. 5, except for Iowa on Jan. 14, Nevada on Jan. 19, New Hampshire on Jan. 22 and South Carolina on Jan. 29.

Florida ignored that calendar and passed a law setting its date for late January.

"We are quite concerned that Florida Democrats are going to lose their right to vote," Nelson said. "And of all states, we have the sensitivity of this because of what we have gone through."



Associated Press reporter Nedra Pickler contributed to this report.



Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All right reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

wow, that was really stupid...

As an independent, I will definitely be thinking twice and three times about voting for any Dem candidate in any race now... it is clear that the Dem party does not respect Florida's voters, nor our rights to elect our leaders as we choose. WE the voters are what make the government, NOT the power elite!

As a registered Democrat, I see this move as a ridiculous excuse to appease the special interest groups and the filthy rich even more. As far as I see it, if Florida gets no delagates for the democratic party, the Republicans will win back congress.

They should have the primaries on the same day... Letting these rural farm states have the first go is just silly.

^^
I agree with that. Many primaries should be on the same day. It would make a lot of sense that way. Of course our corrupt govt won't want that to happen now do they?

The argument against that is that it will make campaigns even longer and have them cost even more because of having to do a national campaign for the primary... But having a few small sates that don't nearly represent the country go first makes no sense.

election is in November 2008? Right?

Who in there right mind thinks this BS now is right? Rep and Dems are expected to spend over 1 billion dollars on the campaign which is just wrong. Makes me completely sick.....

They all are basically running to control the right to spend 2.5 Trillion dollars anually....YES With a TTTTTTT

Term limits and campaign limits are long over due. But the people that make the laws are..yup, you guessed it!!!

Our corrupt federal govt doesn't want to change anything that will favor the people. All they care about is...well, you get the picture...

this isn't the government doing this, but yes, the feds are corrupt.

Oh, I forgot...Its the political parties themselves who are responsible for this mess...:lol:

I am an independent that leans Democrat...but I agree, no democrats will get my vote if they don't allow our primary votes to count.

I am an independent that leans Democrat...but I agree, no democrats will get my vote if they don't allow our primary votes to count.

Nope, I'm on the same boat as you. I might as well vote for Giuliani...:lol:

Man sues Florida Democratic Party and DNC
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Bay News 9

PINELLAS COUNTY (Bay News 9) -- The first salvo in a battle against the Democratic National Party was fired by a Florida activist Thursday.


Victor DiMaio filed sued against the Florida Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee (DNC), claiming its plan to strip Florida of all of its delegates because the state moved its primary to January 29 is unconstitutional and deprives Florida voters of their right in Democratic politics.

Several prominent Democratic leaders, including Florida Senator Bill Nelson, hinted they were ready to take legal action if the DNC attempted to strip Florida of its delegates to the national convention.

The lawsuit is asking for what's called declaratory relief. They want the judge to declare the DNC policy is unconstitutional and to determine what type of action must be taken to preserve Florida democrat's voting rights.

Stay tuned to Bay News 9 for updates.

http://www.baynews9.com/content/74/2007/8/30/284121.html?title=Man+sues+Florida+Democratic+Party+and+DNC+

Who voted to push the primary up?

The state legislature. They had a good reason though and definitely were not alone. Michigan just voted to move their primary to Jan 15! Everyone is sick of having a few states with primaries that matter (except the ones that had early primaries before, they are going to vote to move them up even earlier, it's a shell game). That's why they should all be the same day.

We are out of control.

With the US Constitution we are supposed to have delegates selecting our candidates, not primary voting.

I don't care which side you are on. If you don't see this crap is trouble, well then you are just ....stoopidd. Yes oo and a double d. stooopid.

Anyone read the founding papers lately?

IIRC the constitution doesn't cover political parties and they are who control the primaries. Since anyone is free to run, you don't need a party or a primary.

Nope, I'm on the same boat as you. I might as well vote for Giuliani...:lol:
He won't make it out of the primaries.

And all of the major Dem candidates guaranteed that I won't be voting for any of them... They have all canceled campaigning in Florida, because Florida's voters decided we wanted to vote on a different day... As a voter not interested in being disenfranchised, I won't be voting for any candidate who has such little regard for my voting rights... Maybe I just won't vote for President at all...

Ron Paul is the best canidate IMO, he's better tha any democrat on the liberal stance even though he is a republican.
RON PAUL RON PAUL!!!!

election is in November 2008? Right?

Who in there right mind thinks this BS now is right? Rep and Dems are expected to spend over 1 billion dollars on the campaign which is just wrong. Makes me completely sick.....

They all are basically running to control the right to spend 2.5 Trillion dollars anually....YES With a TTTTTTT

Term limits and campaign limits are long over due. But the people that make the laws are..yup, you guessed it!!!

Hey CWat -- this is no time for a reality check! ;)

Nearly twenty years ago a fairly well-known conservative, political humorist, P.J. O'Rourke, wrote a book entitled, "A Parliment of Whores," wherein (if I remember correctly) he made a similar point offering his distain for the process. As a result of the fundraising "process" our representatives are forced to become slaves to their political party, and more importantly, the fundraising "system" - especially beholden to the movers and shakers (and their respective lobbyists) who provide generous campaign contributions.

And in order to maintain their power and influence (i.e., job), each incumbent must begin raising campaign cash immediately after their victory throughout the respective political cycle until the next election. What's worse, they are also pressured to support legislation that serves to benefit those contributors, whether or not the representative has issues with the entire bill, or simply portions of the proposed legislation. In other words, they know where their bread is buttered and they're expected to plug their nose and vote Yea. Odds are, in nearly every instance the public interest is forced to take a back seat to the "special" interest. After all, the public interest doesn't pay for television ads. :(

Anywho, O'Rourke has often argued that the downfall of the American democracy will occur as a direct result of the "process" and not because the legislative branch passes poorly thought-out legislation which the President eventually signs into law. All thirteen appropriations concealing tens of thousands of earmarks... but I digress. :rofl:

And as I see it, we've managed to take two steps back where campaign finance is concerned. I respectfully suggest that one of the obstacles to effective and meaningful campaign finance reform stems from the Supreme Court's latest "activist" ruling regarding political contributions. Why, you ask? Well, a few years ago the High Court (by a 5-4 majority) ruled that financial contributions shall be considered a form of free speech and thus, shall not be unduly limited by the legislative branch through legislation - hence the McCain/Feingold bill was basically left impotent and had to be re-written providing far fewer financial limitations and restrictions. Basically a bill with no teeth and plenty of loopholes.

I suspect I will go to my grave believing (a minority view I'm sure) that the only solution powerful enough to allow "We The People" to take back control of our democracy is though public financing of elections.

Sure - I've heard all the counter-arguments - it'll be too expensive; it will never work; it's just more govt. bureaucracy; why should we pay more in taxes to support this nonsense?; blah, blah, blah . . . If one is satisfied with the current process, so be it - hope if you're considering a run for prez that you've saved up buttloads of cash and have kissed a lot of political ass, or you're incredibly wealthy... :tongue:

Ask any politican what sucks their campaign coffers dry and they'll tell you, to a person, it's the cost of political ads. I suspect that some voters do not realize that more than half of all the money raised by a candidate is spent just to buy airtime - radio and television. And I also suspect that many are not aware that the media corporations conveniently increase the cost of "commercial" slots during years of elections. Hummm... I wonder why? I guess everything has its price where profits are concerned, but I can't help wonder how our forefathers would react if they sprung to life tomorrow and witnessed this utter madness. ;)

Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought "We The People" owned the airwaves and that we, through our respective representatives lease out the wide communication spectrum to the media corporations proferred through occasionally amended telecommunications legislation. Point is, political ads shouldn't cost an arm and a leg... is this really asking too much?

As for term limits, personally, I am no longer a fan of this concept because I've come to realize that those of us who vote should ultimately make the decision who serves, or not. I think the concept is counterproductive, no doubt borne out of apathy, frustration and political expediency. I think our forefathers got it right. Term limits serve to limit the will and voice of the voter, not strengthen it.

As for the many critical remarks concerning the DNC's stubborn position regarding Florida's delegates, trust me, this issue isn't as cut and dry as it appears. The RNC is also threatening to cut their delegate count by half, but they have decided to hold off until state party officials argue their case on Sept. 4th. Smart political move, I'd say. It's safe to say they wanna see how the DNC's response plays out.

Here's an interesting article I read in the Seattle Times regarding this issue: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2003853885_primary26.html

Has Kucinich said he won't campaign here? Maybe I'll just vote for him.

He won't make it out of the primaries.

Exactly, Jason. I suspect that a majority of republicans consider Giuliani far too liberal to represent the party. The single reason why he consistantly polls so well is because he's portrayed in the media as the candidate most able to beat Hillary Clinton in the general election - pure and simple. Everyone loves a winner!

If, for reasons beyond logic and understanding Giuliani does happen to win the republican nomination, odds are that planet earth will be sucked into the sun before he's ever sworn in as president, because many religious conservatives won't even bother to vote and Hillary will be our next president. Say it with me now - - Bob Dole. :lol:

I still predict that Fred Thompson and Hillary Clinton will ultimately win their respective party nominations. Thompson will be seen as the Republican party's next Ronald Reagan and Hillary as the next Bill. If this scenerio actually becomes reality, strap on your seat belt 'cause this is gonna be one helluva bumpy ride.

I bet I've seen Fred Thompson at least a dozen times on CSPAN speaking at various events this year and I must admit, he's as good as they get. He's polished, confident, and he definitely commands his listener's attention. He's really gooood! I'll say this; democrats had better pray that he's not the Republican nominee, because if he is, he's gonna be their worst nightmare. Anyone but Thompson - that is if he survives the ordeal. He don't look so well sometimes on television... kinda greenish, as if he suffers from recurrent flatulence. poor guy... it's sad. :lol:

Personally, I'd love to see Ron Paul and Joe Biden win their party's nomination. Today's America finds itself in critical condition and literally on life support. These are serious times and we find ourselves burdened with incredible challenges. Bottom line - we are in desparate need of a serious-minded leader willing and able to step up to the plate and lead from day one.

Senator Biden has more than earned my vote and total support. Where the hell is everyone else? Hello??? ;) In all my years and after watching literally thousands of speeches on the Senate floor, I have never seen a more passionate representative than Senator Biden. He is unquestionably the strongest supporter of our fighting men and women and that matters to me. I watched him literally chew the legislative and executive branch a new asshole when he learned that our troops were sent over to Iraq without adequate body armor. I've never seen anyone so angry and disgusted as he was. Tell ya what - they were shipping body armor as fast as they could make it after his ass-kicking.

His progressive approach to politics works for me. He is literally the only candidate who has drafted a serious, comprehensive plan worthy of consideration where Iraq is concerned. Somehow, he managed to buy a clue a long time ago! Sure. His plan is complicated and somewhat ugly, and even he knows and admits there are no guarantees; but it's the best proposal I've seen thus far, bar none. I also appreciate and respect him for his candor. He's certainly far from politically correct because he just doesn't give a shit - in fact, p.c. be damned. And he always speaks his mind - a quality I find refreshing. Unfortunately, he's long-winded and painfully direct to a fault, but he's just what the doctor ordered. I see Senator Biden for what he is: a serious, intelligent and passionate leader who would never settle for anything less than success. 16-hour days, seven days a week...

Ron Paul is next in line. He's the Republican party's Biden. He's not a party hack and he shoots from the hip. He presents fresh ideas and possesses a passion above and beyond his party's challengers. Joe Biden as president and Ron Paul as vice president. Wow! Bottom line - neither have a snowball's chance in hell to declare victory. Oh well... our loss! :(

^^
I think Thompson has a shot at getting the GOP nomination. Even though he's entering the race a little late. I don't really like Giuliani too much, McCain has no real plan - I dislike him a lot. Paul, I don't know enough about him so I will not comment on him yet.

For the Dems, I think Edwards will end up getting their nomination, even though I hate listening to his accent. Obama and Clinton both have good chances of getting their party's nomination. But in the end, I don't think the US is ready for either of them at this time.

Finally, FL being punsihed for such B.S. from the democratic party infuriates me. I don't understand why Iowa and Nevada get to be stinkin' first. It makes no sense for the party to bar our delagates and sway the candidates from campaigning in FL. Its outright ridiculous! If this problem isn't resolved soon, it WILL cost Florida the election. The Republicans WILL gain back congress and possibily hold on to the presidency also. I can already see more lawsuits comming... :mad: :mad2: :soapbox:

Great posts guys. True thoughts and NO Blind Bias in any of the posts. I really enjoy discussing without the bashing of the opposite party.

A couple points:

Q - You are right. Political office was not supposed to be a career. It was supposed to be a part time job/duty. G. Washington said this and stood fast in his stance to not run again after 2 terms. Senate should be limited to 2 terms just like the Pres. House - 4 terms.

Rep ticket:
I personally like Rudy and think he will not put up with the PC bull that plagues our country right now. He didn't put up with it in NY and it is now one of, if not, the safest big city in the country. I remember NY back in the 80's.... He is definitely more liberal on social issues which may hurt him in the primary elections but his no bs will help. I always hear he is too liberal but he sure cleaned up NY's ugly side.

Dem ticket: I think it will be Clinton on top. I really don't see any others but Obama pushing her. She really is good as a politician. That being said, rolling her hubby out will get her votes no doubt. In my opinion, Edward's 26,000 sq/ft mansion will kill him while he is trying to convince us he is for the poor.

Kucinich is just too far left to get any real consideration although he really is the only consistant candidate.

Q - Biden is strong on foreign policy no doubt. I still don't think most people even know his name. Why?... all we hear from the media on the Dems is - Clinton, Obama, Edwards..... at least that is how I see it.

I still see alot of Gore in the media. Not so much lately but he is definitely a name that everyone knows.

Who knows how it will play out. We will see.

^^ Right?!?! The media's roll in this is to spoonfeed us poll after poll and play by play just to tell us who's not worth voting for - you know - those worthless candidates who find themselves at the bottom of the polls. Every once in a while they get a wave and a nod. ;)

I wonder - if they stopped releasing any polling data until after election results are counted, what would the actual outcome be? In other words, if we didn't know where any of the candidates within the pool of candidates stood %-wise in the polls before the election, would the final results prove different? Do people talk themselves out of voting for the candidate they really like just because the media tells them that he/she doesn't have a chance? Is that fair? Does it offer a level playing field for all of the candidates? Equal airtime? Equal consideration? Hummm...

^ Election results wouldn't be any different unless they did that AND stopped telling us how much $$$ the campaigns have raised. But then people would talk about how many people attend campaign rallys etc.

Democrats' fight may aid republicans
Friday, September 14, 2007
Bay News 9

ST. PETERSBURG -- The top democratic party presidential nominees have signed a petition to stay away from Florida while the ongoing controversy over the state's adjusted primary date continues.

As a result, a string of top republican presidential candidates has made a beeline for Florida in recent weeks.

Fred Thompson had a rally Thursday in The Villages. He was the latest of the republicans to make a visit to Florida, preceeded in recent days by John McCain and Rudy Giuliani.

All of this has stemmed from the Florida Democratic primary being moved up to January 29, 2008. The earlier a state holds its primary, the more important that primary becomes in selecting the nominee for president.

But the national democratic party isn't happy about it because the moved-up primary date breaks rules, holding it a week before its is allowed to.

Bay News 9 democratic political analyst Bob Buckhorn said if the democratic party doesn't give in to Florida, it could cost the party dearly in the primary race.

"The Florida democratic party has its convention coming up in october which will make it interesting, because if these folks aren't allowed to campaign down here who is coming to the convention?'' Buckhorn said.

Meanwhile, although republicans aren't traveling to Florida strictly because of the democrats fight, it does provide some benefits.

"Those that will be holding rallies will be republicans, those who will be standing in street corners so to speak will be republicans,'' said Bay News 9 republican political analyst and former Florida governor Bob Martinez. "So, I think it gives the republican party a great advantage during this primary season by virtue of they being active, and democrats not being active."

The national democratic party gave Florida's democratic party 30 days to change its primary date but so far state democrats haven't made a final decision. However, it appears that Florida democrats aren't going to change the primary date.

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2007/9/14/287762.html?title=Democrats'+fight+may+aid+republicans

Florida Democratic Party not backing down
Sunday, September 23, 2007

BAY AREA (Bay News 9) -- Florida Democrats said the polls will open January 29 despite the punishment of losing 210 delegates to the National Democratic Nominating Convention.

National party rules prohibit any state from holding its 2008 primaries before February 5, with the exception of a handful of states.

Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Karen Thurman reaffirmed the decision Sunday afternoon.

"We will be voting as Democrats on Jan. 29 with our presidential candidates on the ballot,'' Thurman said Sunday.
Political Resources

* AnnouncementWatch Video
* Previous stories about this issue
* 2008 Presidential primaries
* Florida Decides

Party members said part of the reason for maintaining the Jan. 29 date was that many local elections in Florida are scheduled for that day also.

All the major Democratic candidates have signed a pledge to stop campaigning in Florida if the rules are broken.

Those candidates would come to the state only if they're holding a fundraiser, not for campaign stops.

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2007/9/23/289894.html?title=Florida+Democratic+Party+not+backing+down

I'm pleasantly surprised that the FL Dems held their ground. Good on you!

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/09/25/Opinion/Florida_Democrats_sho.shtml

Florida Democrats show spine

By A TIMES EDITORIAL
Published September 25, 2007

After much hand-wringing, Florida Democrats have found their backbone. They are sticking with the Jan. 29 presidential primary, encouraging Democrats to go to the polls, and dropping efforts to satisfy short-sighted national party leaders upset by the early election date. They finally realized that embracing the right to vote is far more important than complying with the party's petty rules.

While Gov. Charlie Crist and the Legislature overreached by moving the primary election from March to January, the Democratic National Committee's refusal to recognize the results is self-defeating. The only development more insulting is that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the rest of the candidates agreed to demands from four early-voting states not to campaign here. That could save them time and money between now and the spring, but it will force the party's nominee to play catch-up later.

It is understandable that Iowa and New Hampshire want to preserve their traditional status as the first-voting states. How Nevada and South Carolina wormed their way into similarly exalted status with protected early primary elections is harder to stomach. But the idea that these four states of modest stature can dictate Florida's election schedule, prevent candidates from campaigning here and disenfranchise Democratic voters is absurd. They had some nerve to tell Florida Democrats they would not let candidates campaign here even if Florida managed to comply with the party rules. Let's see how they would like it if Florida fundraisers told candidates not to spend any of their campaign money propping up the economy in Des Moines or Concord.

Here's a reality check. Florida has more registered Democrats than these four self-important states combined. Florida has raised more than three times as much money for Democratic presidential candidates than these four states combined. Florida has more Electoral College votes than these four states combined. Telling Florida Democrats they don't count doesn't add up to victory in November 2008.

The reality is that Florida Democrats had only one viable answer to the ultimatums. The party that has insisted that every vote counts could not tell its own voters they don't matter and hold an expensive caucus later. It could not discourage voters from going to the polls on Jan. 29 when a Republican-backed constitutional amendment forcing deeper tax cuts also was expected to be on the ballot (although a circuit judge threw the amendment off the ballot Monday). And the party's nominee is not going to allow Florida delegates to be locked out of the national convention in next summer.

Some good may come out of this petty turf war yet. The push for a system of rotating regional presidential primaries may gain some momentum, and the DNC succeeded even where Florida Republicans often fail. It united Florida Democrats against a common foe.

Good editorial! I for one am ticked off at the DNC. I got a fundraising call from them the other day and I said, nope you won't get a penny from me. I like the regional primary idea. I say enough of this letting one candidate spend a zillion dollars in Iowa and NH. Typically the Iowa winner becomes the nominee. Look at John Kerry in 2004. Everyone had counted him out, he spent a ton of money and then won Iowa and the rest is history.

Kerry was a lousy candidate. Everyone knew how bad Bush was b/c of Iraq, but Kerry had no real plan to get both the Iraq situation resolved or the domestic issues in the US. Yeah, good point there about Iowa.

The only thing that the DNC is doing by pushing forward with the punishments is tearing apart their own party. The Republicans will surely win Florida is this continues on.

I may be a registered Democrat, but I am certainly fed up with the false promises of both parties. I am especially fed up with fools like Pelosi who keep jibbering about what they're going to do but don't deliver anything productive.

Florida faces a primary problem

If either side was bluffing as state and national Democrats fought over the Jan. 29 election date, no one ever called them on it.

By ADAM C. SMITH and WES ALLISON, Times Staff Writers
Published October 7, 2007

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/10/07/images/tb_Primary_450.jpg
Jim Roosevelt and Alexis Herman of the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee listen as Karen Thurman makes a case for Florida's early primary at a meeting on Aug. 25.

To understand how Florida Democrats tumbled into purgatory over their presidential primary, it helps to go back to April 2003, to the Washington office of Michigan's senior senator.

Expletives were flying. The head of the Democratic National Committee was having it out with Sen. Carl Levin because Michigan wanted to crash the rarefied club of early presidential primary states.

Move your primary too early, Terry McAuliffe warned, and Michigan will lose half its delegates to the 2004 Democratic convention.

"The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television," McAuliffe vowed. "I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules."

Michigan Democrats backed down. McAuliffe's hard-line stance prevented a free-for-all among competing states that year, and it set the tone for future mutinies.

Like Florida's.

Earlier this year, Sunshine State Democrats faced the same warning after the Legislature moved the state's primary date to Jan. 29, a week earlier than national Democratic rules permit. But instead of DNC chairman Howard Dean leading a back-room showdown, open warfare erupted.

Now Florida Democrats stand to be the only voters in America whose votes won't count toward picking a presidential nominee. Their leaders are suing the national party. And the Democratic presidential contenders, terrified of antagonizing voters in places like Iowa and New Hampshire, have promised to ignore America's biggest swing state, while Republicans busily campaign here.

There's plenty of blame to go around:

- It was clear as early as March 2006 that Florida's presidential primary was destined to move early, but Democratic leaders in Florida and Washington were oblivious to the coming train wreck.

- When state Democratic leaders finally understood the potential repercussions, hubris prevailed. They believed Florida was too crucial to the national party to suffer any consequences for breaking the rules.

- DNC leaders were clueless about political realities in Florida. They failed to grasp how powerless the minority Democrats are in Tallahassee; the importance of a property tax plan added to the Jan. 29 ballot; and the outrage it would cause to tell rank-and-file Democrats, their memories seared by butterfly ballots and purged voter rolls, that their votes won't count.

Not only did Florida Democrats wrongly assume the national party was bluffing, they didn't see that the strongest hand belonged to those favored by the status quo - the party bosses in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

Steve Geller, the Democratic leader of the state Senate, is still scratching his head. "I don't think any of us thought that the DNC would be stupid enough to punish the biggest swing state in the country to make South Carolina happy."

* * *

Nobody realized it, but the storm began gathering in late March 2006. New Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio, a Miami Republican, visited Washington-based Florida reporters and touted a plan to boost Florida's influence in picking presidential nominees by moving the primary earlier than March.

"With all due respect to New Hampshire and Iowa, nowhere are you going to be on a national stage like Florida," Rubio said at the time. "You're going to get questions about Israel, Latin America, immigration. It's the old South, it's Latin, it's Midwestern, it's rural and urban."

Rubio already had Democrats on board.

"Florida Democrats are all for it," Mark Bubriski, spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party, said at the time.

* * *

Grumbling about the outsized influence of rural, lily-white states like New Hampshire and Iowa certainly isn't new, and states have tried to cut in line before. After McAuliffe's showdown with Michigan, he established a DNC commission to recommend improvements that would add some diversity to the early process.

As Rubio was selling his early primary, the DNC commission was inviting state parties to apply to hold one of the early caucuses or primaries. Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina alone were given permission to choose their nominee before Feb. 5. Florida Democrats didn't apply.

The commission also concluded that relying on states to cooperate wasn't going to work.

"It's hard for us to control the states and keep individual state legislatures from going off and doing things, so we needed some sticks," said Carol Fowler, a member of the DNC rules committee and chairwoman of the South Carolina Democratic Party. "The sticks seemed to be the only thing keeping every state from moving to the front."

The sticks were heavy: States that move their primary before Feb. 5 automatically lose at least 50 percent of their delegates, and candidates who campaign in those states could forfeit any delegates won there.

People often forget that primary votes are not direct elections, but are used to allocate delegates to the national convention. Ultimately, winning the nomination requires winning enough delegates. Florida, with 210 of them, has the fourth most in the nation.

* * *

The penalties Florida faced for scheduling an early primary were by no means secret.

"If they move it into January, their delegates won't count in the Democratic convention, so I wouldn't advise that," Howard Dean had warned in the St. Petersburg Times in December 2006.

The Republicans also stood to lose half their delegates by setting a primary earlier than Feb. 5, but party leaders shrugged it off. Likewise, state Democrats all along predicted a presidential nominee would emerge early and seat Florida's delegation.

With Florida's Legislature in session and the Jan. 29 primary bill moving along, Dean, the DNC chairman, phoned state House Minority Leader Dan Gelber of Miami Beach and urged him to try pushing Florida's primary to Feb. 5, to avoid the penalties.

Gelber called state Rep. David Rivera, a top Republican pushing the early primary. It had to be January, Rivera said. Otherwise, Florida would be lost in the scrum of states voting Feb. 5.

Gelber agreed. And why urge Democrats to oppose a popular idea when they had no chance of stopping it anyway?

State Democratic chairwoman Karen Thurman sent lawmakers a couple of letters opposing the January primary, but she said Dean never seemed to understand how little Democrats could do in Republican-controlled Tallahassee.

"I had one or two conversations with him, but it was always around the idea of, 'Change this, do something about this,'" she recounted.

The early primary date was eventually folded into a sweeping elections reform bill that contained a top Democratic priority: paper trails for electronic voting machines. No way Democrats would oppose that.

In April, as the elections bill neared final passage, Democrats made a token stab at satisfying the DNC. Geller, the Senate minority leader, filed an amendment to push the primary back to Feb. 5, "which we will duly show to them later, that we tried," he said on the floor.

It failed by voice vote. So did the one in the House. Florida's primary would be Jan. 29.

* * *

For the DNC, the solution was simple: Florida Democrats would declare the Jan. 29 primary meaningless and instead hold an alternative election of delegates later on, like a series of caucuses across the state. But in the state of recounts and Katherine Harris, the idea of saying the Jan. 29 votes wouldn't count was ludicrous to Democrats, especially in a state with no history of caucuses.

"It's not like there's been negotiations and failures. You start out with both sides not being able to move into the middle," said Eric Johnson, chief of staff to U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Boca Raton. "The DNC ... could not back away from the threat they made. And the Florida party could not physically change the day of the election. So they would have been left with, 'Okay, the Republicans get to pick a nominee, and we're blinking.'"

It was a tough atmosphere to seek common ground. National Democrats were petrified that giving one inch to Florida would invite more states to move early and collapse the entire nominating calendar into chaos.

Meanwhile, state party leaders mulled their options. Rather than picking a proposal and aggressively selling it, they painstakingly analyzed everything.

Just as state party leaders became attracted to a $5-million vote-by-mail delegate selection plan, the Legislature put a major property tax initiative on the Jan. 29 ballot. Democrats were intent on defeating it, and state labor leaders made it clear their unions would not spend a dime on any election except the one on Jan. 29.

Sen. Bill Nelson, the senior statewide elected Democrat, met first with Dean on June 6 in Washington to discuss the controversy. Several U.S. House Democrats from Florida met with Dean a few days later. At the time, all sides reported they felt some compromise could be reached.

But Florida party leaders decided they could not raise enough money - or count on the national party - to fund an acceptable alternative election that would maximize participation.

Jim Roosevelt, co-chairman of the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee, said he spent hours on the phone with members of Congress and other Florida Democrats, including Thurman. But none of the options suggested by the national party were acceptable to Florida Democrats.

"There was a point where realism was called for and it didn't prevail," said Roosevelt. "You've got to accept reality that the rules will stay in place, and that you've got to come up with a plan that works."

On June 10, dozens of members of the state Democratic executive committee voted overwhelmingly to stick with the Jan. 29 primary. They knew mercy from the DNC was unlikely.

On Aug. 25, the DNC's rules committee voted to strip away all of Florida's delegates. Florida's clout cowed no one.

"The last thing we want is Democrats not all coming together to elect our Democratic president, so this is not a pleasant thing," said Sharon Stroschein, a committee member from South Dakota. "But someone has to the whip."

But nobody ed it harder than the Democratic leaders in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

A week after the DNC vote to yank Florida's delegates, the party chairmen of those states, led by Fowler in South Carolina, convinced the leading Democratic candidates for president to boycott any state primary violating the DNC calendar. Which meant Florida. Not only were the candidates to visit, except for private fundraisers, they couldn't hire staff, open offices, or recruit volunteers - the heart of a good ground game.

"This is the classic definition of cutting your nose off to spite your face," said U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Pembroke Pines. "We are legitimately the biggest swing state in the country. Yes, there are maps showing you can win the presidency without Florida, but why would you want to start that way?"

In September, the DNC made a final offer: The national party, with just over $4-million in its campaign account and $2-million in debts, would transfer $880,000 to Florida Democrats to defray the cost of a $2.3-million vote-by-mail delegate selection plan. Florida Democrats would have to raise $1.4-million themselves to fund an election aiming for 10 percent participation.

Unacceptable, declared the Florida Democratic Party. Jan. 29 would be the election, let the chips falls where they may.

Now Republicans Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson are traipsing about Florida. Democrats Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards are not.

* * *

South Carolina's Fowler, like other veteran Democratic politicos across the country, acknowledges the controversy could help Republicans win Florida's 27 electoral votes in the general election.

But rules are rules.

"I'm sorry to be the one to say," she said, "Florida is not the center of the universe."

Information from "What a Party!" by Terry McAuliffe was used in this report. Adam C. Smith can be reached at asmith@sptimes.com or 727 893-8241. Wes Allison can be reached at allison@sptimes.com or (202) 462-0577.

[Last modified October 6, 2007, 20:05:18]

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/10/07/State/Florida_faces_a_prima.shtml

Tossed DNC lawsuit heads to appeals court
St. Pete Times

TAMPA -- A local political consultant is appealing a judge's ruling that dismissed his lawsuit challenging the Democratic National Committee's decision to deny Florida a role in selecting the party's presidential nominee.

Vic DiMaio says in court papers filed today that he is asking the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to review U.S. District Judge Richard A. Lazzara's decision.

Judge Lazzara tossed DiMaio's lawsuit in an Oct. 5 order, saying it failed to show that DiMaio had incurred any wrong that the court must make right. DiMaio recently sued the DNC and the state Democratic party, alleging his rights would be violated if the DNC stripped Florida of its 210 delegates.

The DNC voted to do just that after the state decided to move its primary to Jan. 29, violating the national party's rules.

Lazzara said that political parties, as private entities, can set their own rules on selecting presidential nominees. Therefore, the judge said, political parties do not act as agents for the government.

http://blogs.tampabay.com/breakingnews/2007/10/tossed-dnc-laws.html

All roads lead to Disney World for Florida Democrats
Saturday, October 27, 2007

ORLANDO (Bay News 9) -- All roads lead to Disney World this weekend for Florida democrats.

Democrats are holding their annual state party convention but they won't be seeing any of the major presidential candidates.

The state and national democrats are divided over Florida's early primary.

It'll be held Jan. 29, which is too early for the national party's rules.

So, the presidential candidates have vowed not to campaign in the sunshine state, even though they can still hold fund-raisers.

It's a contrast from last weekend's republican convention when the entire field of GOP contenders went head-to-head in a prime-time debate.

The democrats downplay talk the mess could hurt their chances of taking back the White House.

State Senator Charlie Justice loves a good challenge.

"You know, any party can win with their candidates. We're going to show that you can do it without your candidates here," Justice said. "And, these are 3,000 hard-working Democrats that are going to knock on doors, make the phone calls, when the Democratic nominee comes out, this party will unite behind our candidate. "

While the top-tier democratic presidential candidates boycott Florida, former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel is attending the state party's convention.

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2007/10/27/298355.html?title=All+roads+lead+to+Disney+World+for+Florida+Democrats

Florida presidential primary candidates' list released
Thursday, November 8, 2007

The names of 17 Democratic and Republican presidential candidates who will be on Florida's ballot on Jan. 29 have been released.

The eight Democrats are Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson.

The nine Republicans are Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Alan Keyes, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo and Fred Thompson.

Candidates have until Nov. 12 to remove their names from the list, although they would be unlikely to do so. The Florida secretary of state's office has until Nov. 20 to certify the names.

Sample ballots will be out in mid December.

Meanwhile, Florida, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Michigan and Wyoming will each lose half of their convention delegates.

Florida has also lost its delegates for the Democratic Convention, since moving the primary violates the DNC's rules.

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2007/11/8/301451.html?title=Florida+presidential+primary+candidates'+list+released

Looks like I'll have to become a republican for a few months if I want to vote at all. At this rate I might as well just stay home, but I figure a vote for Ron Paul would salve the spirit in these ugly partisan times.

Looks like I'll have to become a republican for a few months if I want to vote at all. At this rate I might as well just stay home, but I figure a vote for Ron Paul would salve the spirit in these ugly partisan times.

I agree, this is getting ugly. It would not have been a big deal for me If I had registered as a Republican. But I registered as a Democrat and something has to be done soon to dish this situation out. The only thing, as I mentioned earlier, that is happening in the long run is that DNC is tearing itself apart. The GOP has done the same. And I don't think things will change anytime soon.

If nothing is done come Jan 29, I will not vote...this is getting more and more pathetic by the day and I'm sick of it. Congress will go back to the Republicans and Giuliani will become President if this does not change...that is my prediction right now.

I'm now registered a Democrat and will vote in the primary. If nothing else Florida's results will be broadcast all over the U.S. and will receive a ton of attention -delegates or no delegates. Oh yeah, and I'm voting for Hillary.