Suit challenges presidential primary

National Democratic committeeman Jon Ausman this morning announced a lawsuit against the state for moving up its presidential primary to Jan. 29, claiming the statute enabling the move "interferes with the internal processes of the national Democratic and Republican Parties, and for purely political purposes, attempts to influence each party's selection of a candidate for the presidency of the United States."

Ausman said the state could move the date had it shown it necessary "so that elections are orderly fair and honest," but did not. The lawsuit was filed in the circuit court in Tallahassee. It seeks to declare the Legislature's action unconstitutional and revert the primary back to March unless lawmakers meet and move it to Feb. 5 or later.

"We want more people voting. We want Florida to get it right and that means moving away from this Jan. 29 date," said Alma Gonzalez (pictured) who is one of the plaintiffs.

Comments

[James Anderson]

What is wrong with Florida, now they can't even RUN an election. I think they should move the date back.

What a crock of a lawsuit. If we learned anything from the 2000 election, it's that the legislature has full authority on the method of the way electors are selected.That blow hard Ausman cares more about protected national democrats than his own state.
What a jerk.

This is an example of how the Republicans have more discipline than the Democrats.

It's funny how the Republicans are punishing their candidates and we never hear a complaint from a "National Republican committeeman" about it. The more the Democrats stir this issue, the more disenchanted Independents become with the Democratic candidates boycotting the state.

10:56-

We're talking delegates here-- Party functionaries-- as opposed to electors per the US Constitution. Big difference in that parties have broad authority to set their own rules, etc, per the Freedom of Association Clause of the 1st Amendment.

Ausman's a left-wing labor union jerk who puts his own interests before those of Florida's Dems.However, his lawsuit does make an interesting point that will bear watching. remember, too, that the state doesn't HAVE to allow the parties to use the state/counties' voting process to run their damned primaries-- we could make them run their own, pay for use of the state's, etc. This would result, though, as a practical matter in a caucus situation that would REALLY suck.

It's a complete waste of time to discuss this let alone give it a moment of thought.

Ausman must not be a lawyer. He would have known better than to file this totally groundles, frivolous suit. And whatever attorney is filing it for him should be looked over very carefully by the Bar Assn. He is tha kind that gives all lawyers a black eye.

What a RETARD!!!!!!!!!

[Reality]

The sad part about all this is that Ausman is right. This was not a move brought on, or demanded by the electorate. Nor was it a move of necessity. This was politicos, politicians, and political consultants abusing a system for political and monetary gain.

A system, by the way, that 1000’s of young Americans are sacrificing their lives in Iraq to protect and share… yet we always find a way to make a mockery of it right here at home. It’s despicable.

Unfortunately, Ausman is too easy a target, and his “nutjob” label will overpower the principle of the matter… nothing will come of it… and yes, Florida will remain a laughing stock. And make no mistake about it… the Republicons are not a damn bit different.

It is not my neighbor the R, the I, or the D that is the problem with this system… it is the self-serving politicians and politicos who have dishonored the single most important process in our nation existance; Democracy.

[Noneya]

Sue the crap out of legislature! The worst thing that the Florida voters ever did was to pass Term Limits. That is why we have the most imcompetant State Legislature in the country. HELLO these numb nuts... moved the primary up ONE WEEK earlier that allowed by the national parties. And for all of you that think this is only effecting the D's... Think again, The R's have said that they too will sue to have all of their delegates seated. Unfortunatly they are a wee bit short on cash!

Every state legislature sets the date of its presidential primaries - unless each state party wants to hold their own caucus. Choosing an earlier "Super Tuesday" election date twenty years ago was supposed to make us more relevent. As other states moved up, we had to also. The parties cannot tell a legislature when to schedule a date. And the punishment by the major parties hits the candidates and the voters, who didn't move the date. Internal party rules are fine, but not when they disenfranchise all the voters for actions by the state. The lawsuit against the state should fail miserably, but I hope the lawsuit against the national parties succeed.

[Reality]

Noneya,

Just so we’re clear on the reality of the process… the reason “we have the most incompetent State Legislature in the country” is due to ill-informed voters who are force-fed a process that has been bastardized from one of discipline and Democracy, to one of a dish soap and diet pill marketing – NOT term limits.

The fear of “term limits” and/or losing “institutional knowledge” is a political consultant researched, and market tested and framed term created by the incumbent system in an effort to keep their jobs and boondoggle process.

Make no mistake about it; every one of these politicians could be replaced today – and tomorrow, your water will turn on, your toilet will flush, schools and roads will be open, the police will come if you call, we will still be at war… and your taxes will be due and collected. The hope is that those who might replace the departing politicians may just do a better job at stewardship over those services, those actions, and our tax dollars.

Given the current “low-level” of voter turn out and “high level” of voter apathy due to discontent – term limits may be our only way to maintain true Democracy in this country.

[Maverick]

This is the 1st time I have actually seen Ausman. He looks as nutty as this lawsuit.

He’s definitely a bit freaky looking, who’s the split-tail?

A stoop and a boob! And oh, how they will whine when the suit gets thrown out.

At least he's not in biker shorts. That's what he was wearing the only time I met him.

I think Ausman is HOT!

[Mike]

I think what he is saying is that the Florida Democratic Party, as an arm of the Democratic National Committee, and the representative of Florida Democrats, had a duty to implement an alternate delegate selection plan to ensure the Florida delegate selection plan complied with national party rules.

I also think the FDP took the position that it is too costly and might violate the Voters Rights Act, to conduct an alternate delegate selection plan. Furthermore, in balancing the pros and the cons, the FDP figured that Florida would have more influence with a primary which did not result in the allocation of delegates, if held on 1-29, than a later primary, which complied with DNC rules.

The lawsuit is not frivolous, but is unnecessary, as the issue is already before the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

For this election, the outcome of the lawsuit probably won't matter, but it might. Consider the possibility that either a Democratic or Republican candidate would have enough votes to be the presumptive nominee if Florida was awarded delegates, but another candidate would win if Florida doesn't get delegates.

Since the presumptive nominee decides whether to seat Florida's delegates, a presumptive nominee who would lose the nomination by seating Florida's delegates would not seat the Florida delegation.

Do you think a lawsuit between the candidates would not ensue if this were to happen?

These lawsuits filed by those other than the candidates will settle the matter, before the end of the primaries.
Therefore, even if the Plaintiffs in these lawsuits "lose", they are benefitting the system, by putting to bed future possible challenges closer to the national conventions.

What is being said about the motives, intelligence, and sanity of the Plaintiffs and their attorneys may be true, but their actions may also be a blessing in disguise

We wanted our votes to matter. Our laws govern elections, so we used the law to move the date so we'd matter.

The parties just voided our votes--half or total to teach us two things: 1) Party discipline is more important than counting votes and 2) They have the power to cancel votes.

And you people think the courts ought to support their assumption of private power to regulate legislative establishment of elections rules?

You are some sick puppies.

Votes are what elections are about. Not counting them is the most direct affront to democracy imaginable. What ought to be done is laws ought to REQUIRE parties to count every single vote and count them whole.