MI & FL seated... on the Credentials Committee

by: memiller

Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:56:10 AM EDT

The Democratic National Committee said Tuesday that Florida and Michigan members will be seated on the three standing committees - including the critical Credentials Committee-at the party's 2008 national convention, a position that could affect the selection of the Democratic nominee.

Allan Katz, the lone member of the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee to vote against sanctioning Florida in August 2007, said the DNC's current position "strikes me as odd."

Katz, a Florida superdelegate who supports Obama, added that, "it doesn't make any sense to presume that a full cadre of representatives from Florida and Michigan would serve on these committees absent there being a delegation."

Katz, like all those interviewed, was also quick to offer the benefit of the doubt to DNC leadership. But, he said, "there is a lack of structural sense to this. I think people are confused."

It's possible that the DNC's interpretation of the rules will be moot if a compromise is struck to seat the delegations. Chairman Howard Dean and members of Florida's congressional delegation met privately Wednesday and issued a joint statement saying, "We are all committed to doing everything we can to ensure that a Florida delegation is seated in Denver."

But the decision to seat the two states on the Credentials Committee, prior to any compromise, further clouds an already Byzantine process for determining whether or not delegations from Florida and Michigan will be seated at the convention.

"It adds more confusion to a situation which is already tremendously confused," said veteran Democratic consultant Tad Devine, an expert on delegate rules who was surprised by the DNC interpretation. "When you have a situation like this, where people are deeply concerned about the process, and the public is evaluating the process on the basis of fairness and equality, I think it is really incumbent to have a tremendous amount of transparency so that people can understand the process and can make determinations about its fairness."

Read the whole article - it's full of juicy tidbits for those of us who have been compulsively following this since last August.

But it really makes no sense at all. Up to now, the DNC's position has been quite clear - while they were willing to help the errant states find a way to come back into compliance, until that way was found, we were out - period.

Now, we will have representation on the key committee, in direct violation of the rules (again, read the article if you are in any doubt about this), and in the (apparent) absence of any compromise in place on seating the actual delegation.

The practical consequence, in terms of any decisions the committee would make about the delegations, is probably small. With almost evenly divided representation on the committee for Clinton and Obama, the whip-hand would continue to be held by the DNC contingent, presumably Dean loyalists.

But for the DNC to act in violation of its clear rules, after harping for so long (rightly, in my view) on the rules, is indeed perplexing. What signal is being sent here?