A California Super Delegate Asks—How Should We Come to a Decision?

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Garry S. Shay
Member
Democratic National Committee

I want to open up a debate here.

For the first time since they were conceived, the votes of so-called "super-delegates" may actually matter with regard to the nomination of the Democratic Party candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States.

As a matter of explanation and illumination, super-delegates are either Governors of States or Territories, members of Congress or members of the DNC. They are un-pledged delegates to the National Convention in Denver. They are either elected by their districts, states, state parties, or other constituencies such as the Democratic State Treasurer’s Association, or the Democratic Municipal Officials Association, or similar organizations. 75 DNC members were nominated by Governor Dean in 2004, and elected by the other DNC members.

The question I pose is not who super-delegates should vote for, but rather how they should come to their decision.

The question is not whether or not they should exist, because the fact is, they do. As my torts professor once said, in his thick German accent, if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a Volkswagen, but she doesn't. Whatever you think of the system itself, it is the reality we work in at this time.

And the question is not whether or not the Super-Delegates should come to a decision, because sitting it out is essentially a vote against any candidate, since we are part of the majority needed to nominate. Not voting does not lower the number needed to nominate and also deprives our constituency (whatever that may be) of their representation under the current rules. I don't think any of us would really advocate for that.

I know the people are quite capable of carrying on a philosophic discussion and not allow it to devolve into a debate of personality, if they choose to do so.

I ask you to participate in this discussion at that level. Please do not refer to Clinton or Obama. Please keep the discussion a step above personality and specific candidates.

This discussion is about the nature of representative democracy. Is one elected to represent their constituency, or to vote their conscience, or some other formula? How does that apply to the present situation?