Press Conference with Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL); Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI); Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI)

Statement

PRESS CONFERENCE WITH SENATOR BILL NELSON (D-FL); REP. SANDER LEVIN (D-MI); SENATOR CARL LEVIN (D-MI)

Copyright ©2007 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Jack Graeme at jack@fednews.com or call 1-800-211-4020.

SEN. NELSON: Congressman Levin and I, along with Senator Levin, are announcing the legislation that the congressman has already filed and that I and Senator Levin are filing today, calling for a regional primary for the selection of the nominees of the parties in the every four-year presidential election. This legislation, if passed, would not take effect until the next election, which would be 2012, but it sets up a rational way of states coming together within a shortened period of time, from March to June, in order to select the nominees.

And I'm going to leave the details -- and the congressman has a specific map that will make it clear to you how the legislation sets up the six regions in the country and then the six subregions within each region.

Now, why is this necessary? Well, you see the chaos that we now have in this presidential selection process. And of all states who are sensitive to having their ballot count and have it counted as intended, certainly foremost among the states is the state of Florida, by virtue of the very painful experience that we went through in the presidential election in 2000 and only to be repeated in the congressional election of 2006 in the Sarasota Congressional District, of which, in an electronic voting machine with no paper trail, 18,000 ballots were undercounted in that congressional election in one county alone, Sarasota County.

So we have a sensitivity, so that when the DNC comes along and says, "Florida, you broke the rules; we're going to punish you by taking away all of your votes, by taking away your delegates," and therefore making the people's expression of their will, in a secret ballot in a duly called pursuant to Florida law election, completely moot, then that's getting to the point where the chaos is reigning substantially.

And I would just say that what this illustrates is a case of fundamental rights versus party rules. And as to the right to have the ballot counted and have it counted as intended, there can be no debate. And that is the position that the congressional delegation of Florida is very insistent upon.

Now, if you want, in your questions, to get into some of the specifics about all the fracas that has ensued, I'll be glad to. It is merely that backdrop that brings the congressman and me together today to announce this legislation, that out of this chaos order must be brought. And the plan that we are announcing gives an orderly process by which we can select our nominees.

REP. LEVIN: Thank you.

Well, I'm mighty pleased to join with Bill Nelson, also my brother, to bring forth this piece of legislation.

This is an opportune time, because the present system has clearly broken down, as Bill Nelson -- Senator Nelson has said, into chaos and into full irrationality.

My brother, Senator Levin, has been in the vanguard of showing the problems with our present system, how it's unrepresentative and really irrational.

And so I do think, as I said, this is an opportune time to bring forth an idea. I looked back at the date. It was in '96 that we first brought forth this idea of having a very different system. We called it interregional, but that was sometimes confusing, because it's not a regional primary. A regional primary system has, I think, a very, very fatal flaw, and that is, even if you alternate the regions, as you would, it would be very unbalanced, because the region that went first would have an undue impact on the democratic process -- and that's what Senator Nelson and I are talking about -- with a small d.

And I was saying, Carl, Senator Levin, that you have been in the vanguard of showing the irrationality and the unrepresentativeness in the system.

So let me just say a few words before Senator Levin takes over. As I was saying, the regional system itself is flawed because it's unbalanced. It's unrepresentative. So we came up a long time ago with this notion of having regions, grouping states, and having not regions but subregions.

And there are six of them. This is an example of one of them. And I think you have the material, do you not, indicating the six subregions. And there would be a selection of one state -- in some cases, they're grouped -- from each of these subregions. Who would go first within a subregion would be picked by lottery.

So in a word, you would replace the present system that is so unrepresentative -- and, I think, therefore so undemocratic -- with a system that would have a representative grouping of states, small and medium-sized and large.

And it would give the opportunity for the candidates to start off with some retail politics, but retail politics in places that were representative. This is just one example, and this is one possible lottery selection. There are innumerable chances. Under this one -- and again, each of these regions -- subregions would be picked by lottery -- you would have -- Pennsylvania, Michigan could end up sixth, not first; West Virginia in a different region; Georgia; you have these two states and then these three states that are grouped -- and as you can see, Idaho, Nevada and Utah are grouped in part because they're neighboring and because of population -- and Arkansas and Oklahoma.

This is rational. It is representative. And it also allows states to go first across the country, but with a chance for the candidates to do the one-on-one work that I think is an important part.

And I close with this: I believe in retail politics. I came up that way. But retail politics at the expense of total unrepresentativeness is unsatisfactory, is unacceptable, and that's what's happening here in this country. People are rising up.

And now Senator Carl Levin, my kid brother, is going to -- who's led an effort to change the system, will take over. We weren't planning it this way.

SEN. LEVIN: (Laughs.) We weren't. That's the way things happen.

So Senator Nelson and Sandy Levin, congratulations to you. Sandy's been on this proposal for a long, long time. Senator Nelson has taken over this proposal in the Senate. I can commend you on it. We have states that have similar problems at this moment. Both Florida and Michigan have now again witnessed two states, New Hampshire and Iowa, having this huge, disproportionate effect, or trying to at least, on the selection process of the nominees for president of the United States. It is unfair; it is unrepresentative.

Retail politics is great, and all the states ought to have an equal chance at it. We all like retail politics; we love it. As Sandy said, we were born with it, bred with it, and we believe in it. But each of our states should have that opportunity in a random way to engage in retail politics.

I want to commend both my dear friend Bill Nelson and my brother for a bill which avoids granting favored status to any one state, such as currently is given to the caucuses in Iowa and the primary in New Hampshire. That cannot continue. And the reason you got this chaos in this system and the reason you have such a buildup of states that want to go early is for an obvious purpose.

The domination of New Hampshire and Iowa in this process, election after election, has resulted in their issues being considered almost to the exclusion of issues in other states. If you add up the number of trips that are taken, even looking only at New Hampshire, without Iowa, I would bet you that there are more visits of candidates to New Hampshire than to all the other states put together, except perhaps Iowa. Now, I can't prove it; I don't have the statistics. But I read the articles every day.

And it is unconscionable in a democracy that any state such as New Hampshire can have that kind of access to candidates and have candidates consider their issues almost to the exclusion of most other states.

It's wrong. It makes no sense. It's got to be changed. And what Congressman Levin and Bill Nelson -- Senator Nelson -- have done is introduced a bill which will change that. It eliminates the long- standing privilege of a few small states, not particularly representative states, and it gives all states -- their proposal -- reasonable and equal chance to participate in the process through a rotating schedule of primaries and caucuses. And so it establishes a new process that is open, that is fair, that is reasonable and, as Sandy said, democratic with a small "d."

SEN. NELSON: Questions. Yes, ma'am?

Q Is this bill vulnerable to a constitutional challenge on Federalist grounds, that it violates Federalist -- (off mike)?

SEN. NELSON: I don't think so.

Give your answer.

REP. LEVIN: I think the answer is, perhaps any plan would be. But I have to believe that the democratic process, with a small "d," is something that is so powerful that it would answer any specific arguments. I just don't think that the framers of the Constitution really wanted the answer to the nominating process for now the most powerful office in this world to be a process of chaos and undemocratic process.

So I have some confidence. I think it might make a good Moot Court case. And we've argued those. But I think ultimately the decision would be that there's an overriding need to change the status quo and to change it in ways that represent representativeness and democratic process.

I've seen the passion of my brother on this issue, and it also always hasn't been easy for him. The passion comes from a belief that if the nominating process breaks down, our democratic system is going to falter, and falter badly. So I'm optimistic.

SEN. NELSON: A good example of that is the chaos that has resulted, that is having the DNC make a rule to take away the precious right of people to express their will by a secret ballot and to have that ballot counted. And it seems that that principle would trump the -- any principle that would say that the federal government would not have the authority under the Constitution to set up a(n) orderly system such as we have described.

Yes, sir.

Q On that, have you refined a specific legal theory that the challenge to the DNC might go along?

SEN. NELSON: Well, it's my hope that by the end of this 30-day imposed deadline on the state of Florida that there will be an accommodation worked out with the DNC. But as to the right to vote and to have that vote counted, there can be no debate.

Let me say also that if you all will refer to the letter that was written to the DNC by Senator Levin and Debbie Dingell of Michigan, a member of the Democratic National Committee -- that joint letter pointed out that when the state of New Hampshire's secretary of state joined a representative of the South Carolina Republican Party in a joint public appearance, stating that South Carolina had moved up their Republican primary and therefore the secretary of state of New Hampshire -- who, by state authority, has the right to move their primary -- they were moving it earlier than the limits within which the DNC prescribed. Senator Levin and Debbie Dingell, in their letter to Chairman Dean, pointed out since New Hampshire has broken the rules, why are you just picking on Florida, saying that you're going to take away their delegates, when in fact why aren't you telling New Hampshire, who has broken the rules, that you're going to take away their delegates?

So in this remaining three weeks left until the end of this self- imposed 30-day negotiation period, there are a lot of other shoes to drop. As you know, in the meantime, the Michigan legislature -- now signed into law by the governor -- has stated that they will have an election on January the 15th.

Apparently, likewise, they have the option of having a primary whenever they determine that they want a primary -- caucus. So there are so many balls in the air right now.

So therefore, that gets me to the answer to your question.

SEN. LEVIN: And I would just supplement it using that same imagery that the ball is now in Governor Dean's court as to whether or not he's going to have a double standard relative to New Hampshire for the reason that Senator Nelson just gave. Senator -- the chairman of the DNC has been silent. When New Hampshire announced through its secretary of State, who has the power, that it was going to move its primary forward in order to go ahead of the South Carolina Republican primary, the secretary of State of New Hampshire at that point said the delegates for the Democrats in New Hampshire were going to be selected in a way which violates the DNC rules. It is a clear violation. There has been nothing but silence from Chairman Dean so far, and there's a very important ball that is in the court of Governor Dean on this issue.

Will there be a double standard again allowing New Hampshire to dictate to the rest of the country what will happen in the primary and caucus process, or will the DNC apply our rule, which says that the delegates -- Democratic delegates from New Hampshire will be selected no earlier than January 22nd? That's the rule that was adopted, and the secretary of State announced that they were going to ignore that rule and move their primary forward. So far there's been dramatic silence from Governor Dean.

SEN. NELSON: Yes, sir.

Q Senator Levin, if it's okay, sir, I'd like to ask you a question about Iraq.

SEN. LEVIN: Why don't we save that until this is over, if you would.

Q Have either of you spoken to any of the Democratic presidential candidates to see if they would be willing to -- (off mike) -- their state's delegates -- (off mike)?

SEN. NELSON: No, and I purposely haven't. This ought to be something that the party can work out, and the presidential candidates are put in on a hot seat given the circumstance that they face, so the party ought to work this out.

REP. LEVIN: And let me just add it -- if the parties are faithful to their own rules, it is possible to temporarily put Humpty Dumpty together again, but it will be with tape. The system's broken. And whatever can be done this time -- and I think following your own rules is part of it -- there is a basic systemic issue here. And what's happened is, because of the efforts of a number of people, it has become so manifest. And if we keep going this way, we're going to end up with caucuses or primaries before Thanksgiving of the year before the election, and that makes no sense at all.

And maybe this is a good place to close, on this, and then you can ask about Iraq. Carl and I remember Labor -- the presidential campaigns starting in Detroit on the Labor Day of the presidential election year. Here we were at the Labor Day parade, a year before, and the presidential race had started many months before.

But what makes it especially difficult is that the candidates themselves have to deal with a basically irrational, broken, chaotic system.

We feel passionately, as Florida does; we want candidates to address the issues that relate to our constituents. And New Hampshire, with all due respect, and Iowa are very, very unrepresentative of most of the states on this map. And because historically they've gone first is no rationale for them continuing to do so, breaking up the democratic processes of this country of ours.

And who said that the Supreme Court does look at the last election results? I think, in considering your question, the Supreme Court will at least look at electoral chaos and lack of democracy. We've got to change this. A regional system won't work, because it's unbalanced. This would work, and we're determined now to bring it front and center and eventually have it become law.

Now Iraq, talking about --

SEN. LEVIN: No, that's -- we'll do that afterwards.

REP. LEVIN: Do that -- okay.

SEN. NELSON: Okay. Thank you.

Source