Posted by
The Anthony Vultaggio Show on Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:57:42 AM
The
whole concept of Superdelegates runs contrary to everything that made
America what it is today. For those of you who aren’t familiar with the
concept, superdelegates are elected officials — past or present — and
party officials. Like superheroes they have extra power. Unlike
superheroes there’s no reason for this extra power other than their
position in the party. The issue I have with them (aside from the name)
is not whether they are capable of making a good decision, but why
their vote should count more than a regular voter. In the states where
they live, they have the ability to vote just like every other member
of the Democratic party. So why does their vote carry more weight? In
America, the purpose of voting is to give everyone a voice. We aren’t
supposed to have a king, queen or nobility. And yet, the superdelegate
system gives the votes of certain people more weight than that of
others. In my on-air interview with Democratic party insider and
superdelegate Bob Mulholland, campaign advisor to the Democratic
National Committee (DNC), Bob said that he believed that these people
are very capable and trustworthy. His point was that these officials
have a lot invested in the party and in the country. To which I say,
“So do the rest of the registered Democrats.” People already feel
disconnected from the political process. Voting turn out is too low and
voter registration does not include every citizen of this country.
That’s because people feel like their vote doesn’t matter. Why vote
when you feel like your vote won’t make a difference? The race for the
Democratic nomination between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has
brought to light the importance that these so called superdelegates can
play in the nomination process. The superdelegates account for 20% of
the delegate vote. If either candidate does not receive the necessary
delegate count, then these superdelegates will be the deciding factor
with no accountablilty to the voters. It’s a very real possibility that
party insiders — not the people — will decide the nominee. The people
need to become a part of the solution. I’d argue that this is the wrong
time in history to minimalize the will of the people. Aren’t the
Democrats the ones that always shout on behalf of the disenfranchised
voter? Just how disenfranchised will the people feel if their district
votes overwhelmingly for Obama and their elected official votes for
Clinton? It’s not about rights. The Democrats have a right to run this
show however they see fit. And were the right-wing Republicans the only
ones discussing it I’d say let it rest. But the battle is taking place
inside Party lines. Personally, I disagree with Bob Mulholland. I don’t
think that this will all blow over. I believe it will only get bigger
until changes are made. Mrs. Clinton’s been involved in the party for
years — on her own and as the first lady. She’s deeply entrenched with
the party and elected officials. She’s also got her husband — the
former President of the United States Bill Clinton — personally
contacting superdelegates on her behalf. Barak Obama and Hillary
Clinton’s campaigns have both made significant campaign contributions
to elected officials over the last several years. Do you think this
could sway the vote of any of the superdelegates? Of course. Everyone
knows how it works. You scratch my back, I scratch yours. At the end of
the day, the real question is who holds these superdelegates
accountable? And so goes my final question for Bob Mulholland … When
the final vote plays out will there be transperancy? Will the
superdelegates be required to disclose who they voted for?