Superdelegates should be careful
They’re supposed to work as a reality check on a nomination process that can only be described as bizarre. They are the superdelegates, the elected officials and representatives of Democratic Party constituencies who this year are expected to make the difference — to add enough delegates into the column of one candidate or the other to put him or her over the top. But this is exactly the wrong year for them to play that role for one important reason: race.
Not only is it entirely within the rules for the superdelegates to vote their independent choice, rather than simply echo the voters of their states, that’s their reason for being — these professional politicians are SUPPOSED to exercise their judgment, both political and personal. They definitely CAN choose the nominee; the question is, SHOULD they? We think not. Not this year. If the party elites elect Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama, many African-Americans will be convinced that the rules were rigged to lock them out.
That’s too bad because the idea of ensuring a say for the politicians — people who have a stake in the future of the party, not just an individual candidate — makes a lot of sense. The concept of “power to the politicians” emerged as something of a counter-Reformation, after the Democratic reforms of the 1970s had emptied out the smoke-filled rooms by giving the nomination choice to elected delegates, creating complicated procedures for choosing those delegates and apportioning them on the basis of race and sex.
Party stalwarts, convinced that the reforms resulted in the nomination and subsequent landslide defeat of George McGovern in 1972, and the inability for the convention to unify behind Jimmy Carter after his challenge from Teddy Kennedy in 1980, decided to reclaim some clout as uncommitted delegates. And in 1984, when Walter Mondale had not completely wrapped up the nomination after the last primary ballots were cast, the political pros played a useful role in bringing the party together before the convention, though their choice resulted in another landslide loss.
Does that mean that the nominating process should stop right now and everyone get behind Barack Obama because he happens to be running slightly ahead at the moment? Of course not. This has been a year of so many twists and turns that it’s more important than ever to play out the whole game. Every primary and caucus, every state convention, every challenge, if it comes to that, must go forward. And some fair way must be found to seat delegates from the key states of Michigan and Florida.
Any attempt to force Hillary Clinton out of this race is not only a disservice to the voters who haven’t yet had their say but poses a threat to the Democratic Party from another key constituency — women — who don’t want to see one of their own pushed out. If the “old boys’ network” seems to be beating up on Clinton — and almost two-thirds of the superdelegates are men — that could backfire on any attempts to bring the supporters of the two candidates together.
We wish the nominating process were saner. We wish the rules were uniform from state to state. And we have no objection to elected politicians having a substantial say in selecting the party’s standard-bearer. But when so many people — from young black men to older white women — are excited by their choices and lining up to vote, this year can’t end in disillusion with “the system.” This is not the year for superdelegates to decide.
Steve and Cokie Roberts can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected].