Unfortunately, the confusing system of delegates and superdelegates - and, yes, even super-superdelegates - used to determine presidential nominees is undermining that impression.
Of course, they aren't known as “superdelegates” within the Democratic Party. Instead, they are simply called “unpledged delegates” - and the Republican Party has them too, by the way. However, these special delegates aren't expected to play a significant role in the Republican nomination process this year.
But many Montana Republicans felt disenfranchised by the party's decision to hold a closed caucus, in which fewer than 2,000 pre-determined Republican voters got to participate in a winner-take-all system that resulted in all 25 of the state's delegates going to Mitt Romney.
Now that the Republican nomination is all locked up for Arizona Sen. John McCain, some are wondering what good it does to have those votes pledged to Romney. And even if Romney were to withdraw his nomination, Montana's second choice was not McCain, but Ron Paul. How's that for making a difference?
By the same token, many Montana Democrats feel disenfranchised whenever they hear that yet another superdelegate has gone ahead and pledged a vote ahead of the June 3 primary.
Montana's open primary will determine how many of the state's 17 delegate votes go to which candidate. Then, an additional eight votes will be cast by superdelegates from Montana, and unlike other delegates, superdelegates don't have to abide by the results of the primary.
Superdelegates are Democratic governors, Congressional delegates and other state party officials. There are thousands of delegates, but fewer than 800 superdelegates - and only about 75 super-superdelegates, so-called because they get to name still more superdelegates. Of these, California Democratic Party chairman Art Torres is the super-est super-superdelegate in the nation; he has the ability to tap five additional superdelegates.
As it stands, delegate and superdelegate votes are split, with Illinois Sen. Barack Obama taking a slim majority of delegate votes but New York Sen. Hillary Clinton taking a slim majority of superdelegate pledges.
In Montana, three of our eight superdelegates have already thrown their support behind Obama. The others say they will wait to see how the June 3 primary unfolds before announcing their decision.
Even then, they don't have to go along with the results of the primary, a fact that gives them enormous power in this closely contested race.
It certainly doesn't seem fair - or democratic - for certain votes to count more than others. Why should superdelegates get to decide who the rest of us get to vote for in November? Don't they trust voters who don't hold high-profile positions in the party to pick the best candidate?
Presidential nominees should not be determined by a select few. Delegates should be required to cast their votes at the convention in proportion to the results of their respective state primaries. We should do away with superdelegates, and especially super-superdelegates.
That way, voters would actually get to decide who will be the next president of the United States. And isn't that the way it was originally meant to be?
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)