Just like the DNC voted to strip all the delegates from Michigan and Florida during the Democratic primaries, the RNC has now taken the first step to strip five states of half their delegates as well. Yes, you read that correctly – five states.
The RNC rules state that no voting can take place prior to February 5. They don’t have any exceptions like the DNC does for states such as SC, NV, IA, and NH. So the RNC Executive Committee voted this morning to halve the delegates from the following states: New Hampshire, Michigan, Wyoming, South Carolina, and Florida.
The total delegates from Iowa and Nevada will not be halved because those states technically hold non-binding caucuses and delegates aren’t chosen until later conventions. (See this piece for more details.)
The issue now proceeds to the full RNC body for a vote after local November elections. It is widely expected to pass that vote as well. Katon Dawson, chairman of the SC GOP, has already threatened legal action against the RNC if the vote passes, but as on the Democrat side as well, the law and the courts seem to favor national parties over local ones when it comes to primary calendars.
This vote also activates a contingency plan for selecting delegates in Florida: no longer will the primary be proportional (3 delegates per Congressional district plus the remaining for whoever wins the statewide vote). Once Florida’s delegates are halved, it will be a winner-take-all contest based on the statewide vote.
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:35 pm
In that case, by Feb 5, Rudy will have locked up more delegates in CA early voting most of the previously available delegates.
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:51 pm
If this passes, this will be good news for Rudy. I new that FL would get whacked losing half, but I’m surprised that the others states: New Hampshire, Michigan, Wyoming, South Carolina will also get whacked. I did not think that they would fall in to the same category.
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:53 pm
new = knew
Sheesh, we do need that preview function.
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Florida is actually not that cut and dry. Because if half the delegates are stripped, two people will likely get to choose which delegates to send to the RNC, and consequently who they vote for.
Those two men are Gov. Charlie Crist, and his guy Jim Greer, the chairman of the state committee.
Whoever gets Crist’s endorsement will have a huge strategic advantage.
October 22nd, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Do any of these states have open primaries? If they do and the democrats elections don’t count,
wouldn’t it be logical for the independents to vote in the republican elections? If so, doesn’t
that seem to benefit Rudy & McCain?
October 22nd, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Terry,
MI would be the prime example of what your talking about.
October 22nd, 2007 at 2:56 pm
Any talk on the RNC table concerning Delaware Plan for future elections? I mean, it is ridiclous that CA, FL and NY have the same primary date as the rest of the smaller states. It is ridiclous becuase it is very expensive to campaign there, and absolutely no way can candidates work in any smaller states. The Delaware Plan would focus first on 13 smallest states, then on to next bigger 13 states a few weeks later, and again, after a few weeks, with 12 bigger states. With those 3 rounds, they provide for only 51% of delegates. With the final fourth round, we are left with the biggest 12 states with a saying (49% of delegates), and with 2 or 3 candidates having the money to run in those expensive states.
Go, Delware Plan, go!
October 22nd, 2007 at 5:29 pm
SGS, why is it ridiculous that CA, FL and NY have the same primary date as the rest of the smaller states? (setting aside for a moment that FL may be on its own date) Why should voters from larger states be sent to the back of the pack in terms of voting order? I know what you are going to say, its expensive to campaign in big states. So what? Is it fair that, for all practical purposes, a few states (IA/NH/SC) decide the election before the rest of the nation even gets a voice? There are many flaws with the primary schedule, but having states where most of the electorate resides vote before the primary is effectively over is not one of them.
October 22nd, 2007 at 5:54 pm
I don’t understand why New Hampshire would get half of its votes eliminated. That’s never happened in the past. Also, isn’t Wyoming holding a non-primary? Wouldn’t it share Iowa and Nevada’s exemption?
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:13 am
Dave: The Democratic Party rules gave Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina permission to hold primaries or caucuses in January. The Republican Party rules didn’t. I was surprised when I first read those rules, because I expected to see recognition of the early states’ privileged positions. But I guess that’s not happening.
It’s going to be hard to argue that the New Hampshire primary is all-important if NH is going to have fewer delegates than any other states. Only American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands will have fewer delegates than New Hampshire.