The super delegate needs to be removed from the Democratic party presidential primary process. Our party’s platform has a long history of fighting for voting rights. The current presidential primary system makes it more difficult for an individuals’ votes to count. It seems the party only wants the voters’ voices to be heard during a presidential election when the candidate has already been chosen for us through the use of super delegates – which flies in the face of everything our political process stands for. We have a system that allows certain people in our party to cast a vote for a presidential primary candidate who the people did not support. They commit to a presidential primary candidate before the election has even taken place. You talk about suppressing the voters’ voices!
Yesterday on Morning Joe, they spoke about this issue with our party. They commented on how they thought the Democratic primary system is rigged against voters. It is a system in favor of the rich, powerful and politically connected. Watch Morning Joe’s video. Bernie Sanders wins Wyoming by 12% points but he loses Wyoming to Hillary Clinton, how is this system not rigged? The people voted for Sanders — yet Clinton walks away with more delegates. Does the party only want our votes to count in a General Election for the candidate that they choose for us?
Click here, to see every Democratic super delegate in the nation.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida congresswoman and Democratic Party chair, made it clear as to why the party has super delegates.
“Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists.”
If we want all voters’ voices to count, then we need to change our election system.
Nothing is more threatening to a representative democracy than discouraging voters or disenfranchising them. The newest incarnation of voter suppression and denial of access to the ballot box has surfaced in one of the most unlikely places. It is created within the Democratic Party by party rules and under the guise of the privileged “super-delegate” appointment. Clearly a creation of homage to a bygone era of aristocratic recognition within the party powerful it allowed those at the top of the pyramid of power, often beholden to the status quo of party politics, to be given access to the party convention and front row seats from which to preen. This mimicking of the English style of a “House of Lords” and a “House of Commons” would seem harmless enough until the “super-delegates” presumed that their appointment precluded any vote of the party faithful yet to come.
Although legally placed as a democratic party rule it is no less offensive than abrogating the party memberships’ vote or simply putting a match to the ballot box when these “super-delegates” preempt the primary election and pledge their allegiance and delegate vote to one candidate or the other before the votes have been cast and counted.
Let me make it perfectly clear that my challenge to this system is not based, in any way, on the individuals who are seeking the nomination. I do not care, in the least, about which candidate or candidates will be named or chosen for this benefit. It is the fact that preemptive pledging of a delegate vote will result in voter disenfranchisement, discourage voters from going to the polls, (viewed as an exercise in futility thereby suppressing the vote), and render the ballots yet to be cast as meaningless. It is an almost arrogant presumption on the part of those appointed “super-delegates” to think that they have the right and/or privilege to force their personal choice (or that of the party apparatus that they feel allegiance to) upon the voters of record before their votes are recorded.
They can still enjoy the honor and recognition of their positions within the party but they should have absolutely no right to pledge their delegate vote anywhere other than to the majority dictate of the people who actually vote.