Let us summarize what the problem is:
 
In their efforts to synchronize primaries and caucuses, the Democratic  Party 
of the US drew up an advisory plan for schedules. The schedule presented  to 
the states was supposed to assist in determining the nominee sooner rather  
than later so that the eventual nominee could begin campaign sooner and raise  
the most funds. And, the number of delegates required to clinch the nomination  
was based on that schedule being adopted by all states.
 
However, campaigns draw a lot of money into states with their attendant  
industry. Also states clamour for notoriety for their unique problems such as  
Michigan's loss of auto industries and because Florida's past election woes  make 
it ripe for another bout with self expression jitters. New Orleans wants to  
keep attention on its recovery after the hurricanes. You name it, the states  
want it. So forgive state democratic officials for being over-zealous and not  
wanting to take too much of a backseat to Iowa and New Hampshire.
 
This scenario inevitably made for a prospective impasse. The national  
democratic party officials were a bit short-sighted and frankly did not  anticipate 
the onerous affect of such deadlock. Plus, they did not anticipate a  two-way 
contest between Hillary Rodham and Barack Husein, two very tenacious and  
prolific candidates.
 
So one of the solution that I will suggest to them is that since the  
de-limiting number of delegates required for nomination was based on all states  
participating according to the advisory schedule, it will no longer be valuable  
to maintain that same number if the delegates of two or more states were to be  
ignored. It is mathematically flawed. And since none of the candidates  
campaigned in Florida and Michigan in keeping with the spirit of agreement,  then 
neither of the candidates should be penalized. So it comes down to  recognizing 
the voters of Florida and Michigan and the fault of their state  democratic 
party officials. Should the voters of Florida and Michigan be  beholden to the 
infringements of their state party officials????? That is the  $65,000.00 
question.
 
If we agree that such dis-enfranchisement would not hold muster in any  court 
of law, we must therefore devise a way to honour the voters of Michigan  and 
Florida. One of the ideas is that the states re-do their primaries and  
caucuses. This idea runs against some problems of funding. The states are averse  to 
funding the same exercise twice because that is both foolhardy and  unfair to 
the republican voters of the states. The National democratic party is  also 
averse to the funding because it felt dishonoured by the state party  officials 
and it wants to honour its bargain with the contesting  candidates Husein 
Obama and Rodham CLinton.
 
Therefore, and I suggest, the national democratic party hold meetings with  
the two candidates and share the following: SInce it is the desire of both  
candidates that the voters of Florida and Michigan be honoured (because they  
will be needed in the national elections), and since funding is limited, these  
entities are advised to fund a re-do:
 
The CLinton Campaign - 35%
The Obama Campaign - 35%
The national Democratic party - 20%
The states' Democratic parties - 10%
 
The percentages of funding can be reviewed to mutually-satisfactory levels  
but I believe the idea is proficient and benign as to Democratic party  
fortunes.
 
Haruna Darbo. 



**************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & 
Finance.      (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤