The Democratic Party was lucky it’s system of allotting about 15.9% of the national voting delegates to state parties to parcel out any way they see fit to party elites, was NOT the decisive factor in determining the Party’s nominee for President. Had the Democratic Party’s “Superdelegate” system become a decisive factor in 2016, it probably would have undermined the legitimacy of the party’s nominee in the view of the American public, weakening our Party’s nominee going into the general election.
For that very reason the “Superdelegate” system needs to be reformed before it does undercut an eventual Democratic nominee. The system is the last remnant of the old days when party elites decided on our nominees behind closed doors.
Superdelegates, explained
By Becca Stanek
These superdelegates are not bound to follow the will of the voters, nor are they required to stay true to the candidate they've pledged to support. But they may well decide the Democratic race.
Who gets to be a superdelegate? A superdelegate is typically an elite member of the Democratic Party falling into one of three categories:
1. A major elected official, including senators, members of the House, governors, and leaders from each state's Democratic Party. For example, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren are superdelegates.
2. A notable party figure, such as former and current presidents and vice presidents. For example, former President Bill Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden are superdelegates.
3. Select leaders of organizations affiliated with the Democratic National Committee. These select party elders get their superdelegate status automatically by virtue of the fact that they've been elected to public office. For example, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Louis Elrod of Young Democrats of America are superdelegates.
How many Democratic superdelegates are there? 712. They control about 15 percent of the nominating process. The remaining 85 percent is controlled by delegates apportioned by the results of primaries and caucuses.
How are superdelegates different from regular delegates?
Superdelegates are free to support whichever candidate they choose, even if that candidate is not the voters' pick. As for normal delegates: Each state has a different system for selecting who they'll send to the convention as a delegate. But unlike superdelegates, delegates are allotted to candidates in proportion to their share of the vote in the state's primary or caucus and are then pledged to vote for that candidate.
Party elites saw "a need for there to be a voice for the establishment within the party to not necessarily overturn the will of the voters, but to nudge along a nominee who would be well equipped to win during the general election
The resulting solution, settled upon in the early 1980s, was a superdelegate system in which party elites could put their thumbs on the scale. The New York Times reports that party elders claimed it "created a more stable and predictable nominating process that favors mainstream candidates and policies."
Do we really want a party where “party elites could put their thumbs on the scale”? When party elites foist job killing trade deals, and other preferential treatment for big donors on the party’s rank and file?
At the very least Democrats should consider reducing the numbers of “superdelegates” along with the size of their thumb on the scale.
I think three per state would be be enough to give party dignitaries a role. Enough say for a governor and the senators, or some other elected officials, or past elected officials, or Democratic hopefuls, depending on however the state parties decide to allot them. That would reduce the “superdelegate” share from 15.9% down to 3.8%.