It appears that the concept will continue….
But the superdelegates may NOT be able to vote in the first round of the 2020 Presidential nomination choice….
The compromise is in response to complaints mainly from the Sanders faction in the party, but has been a sore point for others who feel the group of politicians are an undemocratic part of the parties Presidential candidate selection process…
Democratic National Committee head Tom Perez supports the above listed second option over a firstb option that would have different classes of superdelegates …That option didn’t make the cut previously….
The second option, which Perez supports and which appears far more likely to be enacted, would allow superdelegates to continue to exist, but they couldn’t vote during the first round of the presidential roll-call vote. They could, however, vote during the second round or any subsequent roll call, and they would still be permitted to support any candidate they wanted.
Perez believes this approach ensures that “we have an inclusive party, transparent process, democratic principles, and empowers the grass roots,” a DNC official said.
And that’s what set the House members off, because none of them believes there will be any more than one roll-call vote for the nominee.
In their view, that means elected Democratic officials — who have been put into office by hundreds of thousands or even millions of constituents — won’t play a role in nominating their party’s presidential candidate.
“I believe this decision, if they go forward, is going to do terrible damage to party harmony,” said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), who raised his objections with Perez during Tuesday’s dinner. “It disenfranchises the elected leadership of the party. The last time we allowed that to happen was 1972, and we had the worst landslide in our history.”
“I believe that elected officials across the country — Congress and governors — I believe they provide a ballast for the party that we very much need,” Connolly added. “With all due respect to somebody who thinks we don’t need it, when we haven’t had it, Democrats have had disastrous results.”
“I think this is absolutely an insult to us,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.). “We’re no better than anybody else, but we stand for election. That has to mean something, that has to stand for something. That’s a lot of baloney.”
In an interview, Pascrell said that he told the same thing to Perez during Tuesday night’s closed-door dinner but didn’t like Perez’s retort.
“I didn’t really get a response, just more of an explanation,” Pascrell said. “I got the impression that this is pretty much a done deal with the options they had come up with, which I find difficult to handle.”
DNC officials said they plan to hold further discussions with members over this issue, although there may not be room for a deal that will satisfy lawmakers….