With the likelihood that the nominating process will not produce a candidate with the requisite number of delegates to win the nomination the Democratic infighting over Florida and Michigan has reached new heights. Today’s New York Times details the threats made by several Clinton fundraisers to hold back contributions to the national Democratic party unless the Florida delegation is seated or arrangements made for a new election to give Florida standing at the nominating convention.
Pushing to seat the Florida delegates, at least one top Clinton fund-raiser, Paul Cejas, a Miami businessman who has given the Democratic National Committee $63,500 since 2003, has demanded Democratic officials return his 2007 contribution of $28,500, which they have agreed to do.
“If you’re not going to count my vote, I’m not going to give you my money,” said Mr. Cejas, who was the United States ambassador to Belgium from 1998 to 2001.
Cejas is not the only big fundraiser making noise.
Christopher Korge, a Florida real estate developer who is another top fund-raiser for Mrs. Clinton, held an event last year in his home that brought in about $140,000 for the national party, which was set aside in a special account for the general election battle in Florida. But he told committee officials this week that if Florida’s delegate conundrum was not settled satisfactorily he would be asking for the money back.
“If we do not resolve this issue,” Mr. Korge said, “I think it’s safe to say there will be a request for a return of $140,000.”
With Michigan at least appearing to move towards a new primary there is a lot of frustration building over the inability of Florida Democrats to resolve this issue. Michigan, while still far from solved, is at least moving to a new primary on June 3.
Democratic Party officials in Michigan on Friday proposed a new primary election on June 3 to make up for the January election.
The new vote, which would be run by state elections officials but financed with money raised from private sources, is far from a sure thing. It requires approval by the divided state legislature and from the Clinton and Obama campaigns. There is also no assurance that the party can quickly raise the estimated $10 million it would cost to redo the January contest.
Despite this Michigan movement Clinton and Obama have yet to agree, with Clinton appearing to favor a Michigan re-vote, and Obama holding back.
A person close to the negotiations, who requested anonymity to discuss private talks, said the Clinton campaign was receptive to the June revote plan but the Obama forces were holding back for now.
The person said that Michigan Republicans, who control the State Senate, said they would not stand in the way. But Democrats, who control the state House of Representatives, are divided between Clinton supporters and Obama supporters. “The Clinton people say they’re not going to block it,” the source said. “The question is what the Obama people are going to do.”
And with all of the chaos at the State and local level where is Howard Dean, and how did the DNC allow this fiasco to get to the point it is at today? Dean’s lack of leadership on this has brought disorganization to a new level, high even for Democrats.
The situation in Florida seemed more intractable, with Clinton supporters arguing the party’s prospects in November could be jeopardized if a satisfactory resolution is not found. Some Clinton backers said they were intentionally withholding their contributions to the party, arguing that Howard Dean, the D.N.C.’s chairman, has left the situation in the hands of the states and the candidates, as opposed to exercising leadership to resolve it.
“My wife and I could max out, and we won’t,” said Ira Leesfield, a Miami lawyer who has given $61,500 to the committee since 1997. “We’re dissatisfied with the D.N.C. not taking the bull by the horns.”
The DNC should come out of the ether before this situation creates a no-win scenario for the Democrats in November. And both major candidates ought to stop being so selfish and putting their personal interests ahead of a Democratic victory in November. Its one thing to seek competitive advantage, but quite another to plunge the Party into the abyss if such an advantage is not achievable.
Read the Times story at this link.