Clinton Camp: Texas Democratic Party Has Some 'Splainin To Do

An article in this morning's Star-Telegram hints that Democratic Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton might be considering an "imminent" lawsuit over our state's antiquated (and downright confounding) delegate selection process:

The Texas Democratic Party is warning that its primary night caucuses could be delayed or disrupted after aides to White House hopeful Hillary Clinton raised the specter of an "imminent" lawsuit over its complicated delegate selection process, officials said Thursday night.

"It has been brought to my attention that one or both of your campaigns may already be planning or intending to pursue litigation against the Texas Democratic Party," wrote TDP attorney Chad Dunn in a letter sent to both camps and later obtained by the Star-Telegram. "Such action could prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated Democratic process."

In a primary that's already seen a record turnout of early voters—the Congress-Oltorf HEB alone has drawn some 4,000 voters—such a move could seriously affect the Clinton campaign's public image. Marc Ambinder from The Atlantic Monthly spoke with Guy Cecil, the campaign's national political director, who was quick to dismiss the rumors—despite slightly similar antics that happened in Nevada last month.

"Absolutely not. There was no threat, 'direct or veiled' to engage in litigation. We asked that the results of the call be put in writing," he said.

Nevertheless, Ambinder speculates:

My guess is that the campaign is worried about what happens when the voting stops and the caucus starts and believes that the Texas Democratic Party isn't prepared to run the caucuses competently.

Admittedly, the Democratic delegate selection process in Texas is ridiculous, especially to casual voters who don't hold a particular allegiance to either candidate—or, in this case, the exact type of swing voters that each campaign is now clamoring to bring to the polls next Tuesday.

In case you're curious, we've broken it down for you after the jump.

The gist of it is that there's both a primary vote and a subsequent caucus, each of which allocates a set number of delegates. The primary (delegates at stake: 126) includes the early voting that runs through today as well as the main voting on March 4th. The caucus (delegates at stake: 67) takes place immediately after the primaries are complete, and is a separate voting process.

In each of our state senatorial districts, the result of the primary votes directly corresponds to the proportion of delegates that go to each candidate—for example, Travis County has 8 total delegates up for grabs, and if Clinton was to win 75% of the votes here versus Obama's 25%, she'd score 6 of our delegates and Obama would get 2.

Meanwhile, there's the entirely separate caucus. In order to participate in this, you need to first vote in the primary. The way they ultimately calculate this involves a labyrinthine arrangement of (A) precinct-level delegate distributions based on the number of people who voted for Chris Bell in 2006 (remember that?), (B) county/senatorial district level conventions, and (C) various and sundry bureaucratic shenanigans -- all of which you really don't need to worry about. The bottom line is that in order to cast your caucus "vote", you need to show up after 7:15pm on March 4th at your designated caucus location, sign in with your presidential preference, and hang out until they count the votes.

It's that, uhh, simple.

Note: Your caucus location is most likely to be the same place where you voted earlier in the day, unless they tell you otherwise.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@austinist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Allen Y Chen in News on February 29, 2008 1:06 PM 0 Comments

Comments [rss]

smack

You're right, it is tan, I am, apparently color dyslexic.

And it's in my wallet. Precinct 374 represent.

JUBCHA

asdf

oh steph

The great news is that, according to election laws, you just have to sign in and then you can leave:

1. Precinct Convention Sign-In – Tex. Elec. Code § 174.022 (c), Texas

Democratic Party Rules Article IV, Section B (6)(b)

Participants may NOT begin signing in until the precinct convention has been called to order.

The call to order may not occur until 7:15 pm or until the last voter has voted (whichever is

later). If, after the convention has been called to order and participants have signed in, any

participant who wishes to leave may do so, and their sign in WILL count toward the delegate

allocation for each candidate. Sign-In ends when the last person present waiting to sign in has

done so.

However, the waiting will come into play at the beginning of the sign in, as you have to wait for all voters to clear out (and if last night was any indication, there will be at least a 45 minute-hour wait after the 7pm shut down.)

I'll be caucusing in precinct 266. Who's with me?

hangingfire

Regarding the delegate count: you've got it almost right. In Texas, every State Senate district gets 4 delegates to the state convention. These delegates are apportioned according to the primary votes—the thing for which you'll be casting your ballot on March 4. The remaining 60+ delegates are apportioned among the State Senate districts according to how those districts voted in the 2006 gubernatorial election, and the number of votes that were cast for Democratic candidate Chris Bell. These are the delegates selected in the caucus portion.

Our State Senate district, represented by Kirk Watson, is the most powerful Democratic district in the state of Texas; we get eight additional delegates in the caucus portion.

Burnt Orange Report had some solid coverage here and here.

kenneth1

I believe it's Hillary Ricardo who has some 'splainin to do.

The reason this has just now become an issue is because it was assumed Texas' Dem primary would be irrelevant (as it always has been in the past). But I agree if the Clinton camp had issues with our arcane process, they should've protested sooner than five days before the primary.

A federal judge will summarily toss her suit (assuming it's filed) into the round file where it belongs.

bob

I am frantically trying to find that fucking pink card.

Don't know if this helps the search, but mine's tan.

I admit it's not the most straightforward process, but why is her campaign balking at this at the 11th hour? I'd have thought someone would have researched it awhile ago. I believe Obama's campaign has actually been proactively educating people on the process.

Anyway, it feels like grasping at straws (along with talk from her campaign of having the Florida and Michigan votes now counted).

smack

And if you voted early, they give you a little card saying you voted and in what precinct you belong.

I am frantically trying to find that fucking pink card.

rtelles

You just have to have voted, either early or that day, to participate in the caucus.

rtelles

You have have to have voted, either early or that day.

k

i thought you had to vote early in order to participate.

gk

"(A) precinct-level delegate distributions based on the number of people who voted for Chris Bell in 2006 "

My vote for Chris Bell wasn't in vain!!!

Allen Y Chen

according to the Texas Observer:

4. Individuals committed to a particular candidate break into separate caucuses to vote on who gets to attend the senatorial district convention as delegates or alternates. Individuals may nominate themselves or others.

I guess, presumably, you could take off before this happens.

gk

"sign in with your presidential preference, and hang out until they count the votes."

I was under the impression you just signed your name and leave.

gk

"sign in with your presidential preference, and hang out until they count the votes."

I was under the impression you just signed your name and leave.