Another Meaningless Caucus

Op-Ed Columnist
Notes From a Caucus
By GAIL COLLINS
Published: February 14, 2008
Once again, we are discovering that our election process works great as long as it doesn’t actually have to decide anything.

Democrats are having an exciting race for the presidential nomination, which always means trouble. Now we’re being told that it all comes down to Ohio (currently engaged in voting-machine litigation) and Texas, which has a system that involves both a primary and a caucus.
One-third of the states that have voted for a presidential nominee so far have done it by caucus. There is an impression abroad that these caucuses are grass-roots democracy, like those cute town meetings in “The Gilmore Girls.” Even if that were true, which it’s not, consider whether you would really want a presidential nominee selected by about 20 colorful characters in a barn.
Most people have never been to a caucus, even if their state happens to have them. In Washington, the caucuses last Saturday drew a little more than 1 percent of the registered voters. Mike Huckabee won his much-heralded victory in Kansas in caucuses where less than 20,000 Republicans participated.
I was at a Democratic caucus at the South Portland High School gymnasium in Maine last weekend. It was run by some lovely, public-spirited people and was attended by about 1,000 voters who took the trouble to come out of their homes on an extremely snowy Sunday. Kudos to all. However, on the down side:
A) The parking lot was also accommodating the audience for the final performance of “High School Musical.” Hillary! Barack! Troy! Gabriella! If only they’d had Hannah Montana in the library, we could have backed up the cars into New Hampshire.
B) The gym’s seating was not constructed for people over the age of 18. If you were inspired by those Iraqis with purple fingers, envision an elderly man with a cane trying to clamber up over several tiers of benches so he could spend the afternoon sitting on a backless bench in order to vote for a presidential nominee.
C) The caucus was scheduled to open at 1 p.m. Three hours later, they were just approaching the part where people actually vote.
“I know this is not the most pleasant place to spend the afternoon,” said Larry Bliss, a state representative who seemed as close to being in charge as anyone. Babies cried. Clinton supporters diverted themselves by spelling out HILLARY over and over. The Obama supporters, who were clearly more numerous, had not remembered to bring giant letters and were having a little trouble with BARACK.
Caucuses normally work fine because somewhere around the New Hampshire primary, the presidential nominees usually become a foregone conclusion. Then the only job for the parties in other states is to conscript a handful of delegates to a state convention and ratify the inevitable choice. Caucuses are great for this. And the states like them because they don’t have to pay for a real primary. This is the crucial point. Caucuses have nothing to do with recapturing the spirit of the New England town meeting. They exist because they cost the states nothing. And you get what you pay for.
The South Portland Democrats, who were all working as volunteers, had prepared for the 1,000-odd voters who showed up. But they could not handle the very large number who were not party members and had to be registered before the caucus could get under way. Then came speeches from candidates for Congress and the State Legislature. Then the nominating speeches, which were complicated by the fact that about a dozen Dennis Kucinich partisans insisted on speaking out for their man. The attorney general of Rhode Island spoke for Obama and then introduced Representative Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island, who spoke for Obama again.
State Representative Bliss then announced that it appeared that Barack had really gotten two speeches, so there would be additional remarks by the Clinton and Kucinich camps to make everything fair.
That was about when we lost a woman who was on chemotherapy. An elderly lady with hip problems stuck it out to the bitter end and should be given a Medal of Freedom.
Finally, it was time for people to divide into groups and be counted. On one side of the gym, a leader was addressing the confused crowd through a toy megaphone, for want of any better amplification system. “I’m reading the instructions as we go along,” he said.
On the other side, once voters were divided into Clinton, Obama and Kucinich camps, and noses counted, the leaders seemed at a loss as to what to do next. “We’ll get back to you,” one of them told the crowd. About 20 minutes later, everyone was dismissed. They had yet to figure out exactly who had won what.
I can’t wait for Texas.
_______________________________________
Ron Fournier
Chickens come home to roost
Top Democrats, including some inside Hillary Clinton's campaign, say many party leaders — the so-called superdelegates — won't hesitate to ditch the former New York senator for Barack Obama if her political problems persist. Their loyalty to the first couple is built on shaky ground.
"If (Barack) Obama continues to win .... the whole raison d'etre for her campaign falls apart and we'll see people running from her campaign like rats on a ship," said Democratic strategist Jim Duffy, who is not aligned with either campaign.
The rats started looking for clear waters when Obama won Iowa, narrowly lost New Hampshire and trounced Clinton in South Carolina before holding his own in last week's Super Tuesday contests. He won primaries in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia on Tuesday to extend his consecutive win streak to eight.
Obama has won 23 of 35 contests, earning the majority of delegates awarded on the basis of election results. The remaining 796 delegates are elected officials and party leaders whose votes are not tied to state primaries or caucuses; thus, they are dubbed "superdelegates."
And they are not all super fans of the Clintons.
Some are labor leaders still angry that Bill Clinton championed the North American Free Trade Agreement as part of his centrist agenda.
Some are social activists who lobbied unsuccessfully to get him to veto welfare reform legislation, a talking point
for his 1996 re-election campaign.
Some served in Congress when the Clintons dismissed their advice on health care reform in 1993. Some called her a bully at the time.
Some are DNC members who saw the party committee weakened under the Clintons and watched President Bush use the White House to build up the Republican National Committee.
Some are senators who had to defend Clinton for lying to the country about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.
Some are allies of former Vice President Al Gore who still believe the Lewinsky scandal cost him the presidency in 2000.
Some are House members (or former House members) who still blame Clinton for Republicans seizing control of the House in 1994.
Some are donors who paid for the Clintons' campaigns and his presidential library.
Some are folks who owe the Clintons a favor but still feel betrayed or taken for granted. Could that be why Bill Richardson, a former U.N. secretary and energy secretary in the Clinton administration, refused to endorse her even after an angry call from the former president? "What," Bill Clinton reportedly asked Richardson, "isn't two Cabinet posts enough?"
And some just want something new. They appreciate the fact that Clinton was a successful president and his wife was an able partner, but they never loved the couple as much as they feared them.
Never count the Clintons out. They are brilliant politicians who defied conventional wisdom countless times in Arkansas and Washington. But time is running out.
Two senior Clinton advisers, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the race candidly, said the campaign feels the New York senator needs to quickly change the dynamic by forcing Obama into a poor debate performance, going negative or encouraging the media to attack Obama. They're grasping at straws, but the advisers said they can't see any other way that her campaign will be sustainable after losing 10 in a row.
Clinton strategists are famous for poor-mouthing their own campaign in order to lower expectations, but these advisers have never played such games. They're legitimate, and legitimately worried.
The fear inside the Clinton camp is that Obama will win Hawaii and Wisconsin next week and head into the March 4 contests for Ohio and Texas with a 10-race winning streak. Her poll numbers will drop in Texas and Ohio, Clinton aides fear, and party leaders will start hankering for an end to the fight.
Clinton should find little comfort in the fact that she has secured 242 superdelegates to Obama's 160.
"I would make the assumption that the ... superdelegates she has now are the Clintons' loyal base. A superdelegate who is uncommitted today is clearly going to wait and see how this plays out. She's at her zenith now," Duffy said. "Whatever political capital or IOUs that exist, she's already collected."
Few Democrats want to cross the Clintons when they're on top. But how many are willing to stand by them when they're down?
___
EDITOR'S NOTE — Ron Fournier has covered politics for The Associated Press for nearly 20 years. On Deadline is an occasional column.