Warminster Democrats

Processes as important as delegate selection this year shouldn't need a LONG POST to explain, but nonetheless, Pennsylvania's process does. Why does this matter to voters? On April 22nd, you must be careful when selecting Democratic delegates to be sure that the delegate you elect in the voting booth corresponds with the presidential candidate you desire. Sound confusing? It is! Simply stated, no organization has more complex rules than the Democratic Party.

The best explanation I can offer on delegate selection is lifted directly from an Aussie's blogspot -- yes, leave it to an Australian to explain American politics! Kudos to www.deuslovult.wordpress.com for at least attempting this explanation, which is lifted here pretty much directly. Thank you, Thomas!!


"Pennsylvania is allocated 188 delegates in total. Generally, I’d say there are 2 types - delegates tied to the voting in the state, and the superdelegates. While this is true, it is only to a point. There are actually 4 types of delegates. The first are 103 pledged district-level delegates. The second is the 35 at-large pledged delegates. The third, 20 pledged PLEOs. And the fourth, 29 superdelegates.

There is a base pool of 3,000 delegates for the entire (national) Democratic primary race. Starting with that 3,000, the proportion allocated to each state is figured out with a 50/50 mix of two things. The first is the state’s proportion of the entire electoral vote. The second is the state’s proportion (as compared to the entire country) of the votes for the Democratic candidate for the previous election. The 50/50 average of the two numbers comes to 4.378%, and of the 3,000 pool of delegates, Pennsylvania gets 131 delegates.

Now, as a ‘reward’ for holding their primary late in the process, the state gets bonus delegates. This entitlement is saved for ten states that hold their voting late in the process. The total bonus delegates for all ten states adds to 54. Pennsylvania gets 5% of them, for a total of 7 ‘reward’ delegates. This brings the total delegates allotted to the state to 138.

Now this number is the one that is used to figure out how many of the 3 types of delegates are tied to the voting. This 138 needs to be divided into two different ‘levels’ of pools - a statewide pool and a district pool. The statewide pool is 25% of the 138 delegates, the district pool is 75%. With rounding, the statewide pool comes to 35 delegates, the district pool comes to 103. That’s where we get our first numbers - 103 district-level delegates and 35 at-large pledged delegates. One is representing the congressional districts, another is representing state-wide voting.

Winning the state’s popular vote, thus, gives an added bonus. That is why you see Obama winning more delegates from a state while winning fewer counties than Clinton - he is winning the highly-populated areas with a high percentage, while Clinton is winning lowly-populated areas with various margins. This gives Obama an extra boost, as we will see when it comes to winning congressional districts.

Continuing with the 103 district-level delegates, they are distributed to the different congressional districts of the state using an approved mathematical formula. There are four formulas that can be approved, each that may or may not take into account the state’s population, the Democratic registration, Democratic vote for President, and Democratic vote for Governor. At the end of the maths though, the congressional districts are allocated anywhere between 1 and 8 delegates.

Pennsylvania has 19 congressional districts as of 2000 (prior to which, it was 21, but changed due to reapportionment), and dividing the 103 between each district gives each one roughly 7 or 8. However, the distribution isn’t uniform, and generally the highly-populated congressional districts are worth more than the lowly-populated ones. So by winning the congressional district that has the state’s capital in it, the candidate will get more delegates. Obama has been doing this - winning the urban and city centres - which along with delivering him the most votes (and getting him the at-large delegates), gives him more delegates from the district-level delegates.

The third type of delegates, the PLEOs, form another pool of delegates available to the candidates. PLEOs are Pledged (Party) Leaders and Elected Officials. This poll needs to number 15% of the base delegates - that is, 15% of the 138 delegates previously assigned to the state. This gives us the figure of 20 pledged PLEOs. This brings the state of Pennsylvania’s total pledged delegates to 158 - the final number of delegates that are tied to the voting on April 22.

Now, you might be thinking that the name of these delegates, PLEOs, is quite similar to what superdelegates sound like. They are, actually, quite different. These delegates are selected by the Pennsylvania Democratic State Committee, and the slots that are put aside for them are filled by the statewide voting results and not congressional district results. Remember, in all the primaries, the people are voting for a delegate to go and vote at the Democratic National Convention for the candidate that they say they will vote for. They aren’t actually voting for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton - they are voting for someone who will vote for them. Thus, for the PLEO spots, if it was a 50/50 split between Obama and Clinton, ten of the spots would be filled with candidates selected by the D.S.C. that support Obama and ten for Clinton.
But in the case of PLEOs, the candidates that the people are voting to send to the D.N.C. are from the Democratic party leaders and elected officials, like county officials, constitutional officers, mayors, and the like. For the district and at-large delegates, the candidates are regular citizens.

Another difference between the PLEOs and the at-large delegates is that they are assigned via the statewide voting, but separately. It is not treated as 55 delegates, rather 20 PLEOs and 35 at-large delegates.

Now we come to the 15% threshold. If a candidate doesn’t receive 15% in either congressional district votes or in statewide votes, then they cannot get a single delegate. However, it they do get 15%, they are guaranteed at least one delegate. These threshold rules work on both the congressional districts and in the statewide voting that determines the PLEOs and the at-large delegates.

And finally, we come to the fourth group of delegates: The superdelegates. For Pennsylvania, there are 29 superdelegates: 14 Democratic National Committee members, 12 members of congress, 1 distinguished party leader (Governor Ed Rendell), and 3 add-ons. The add-ons are superdelegates that are chosen after the primary process by either the delegates already chosen or a committee, depending on the state. Each state has to select a certain amount, and the total the amount of 70 add-on delegates.

And just to run a scenario to see if you’ve got it all into your head. Let’s say that Clinton wins Pennsylvania with the same figures as Ohio - 55% to 45%. If she wins each congressional district with 55%, she gets a net of 13 delegates on Obama - Clinton wins 58 delegates from the 103 district level delegates, while Obama wins 45. If the numbers change to 60% to 40% Clinton’s way, it still only nets her 15 delegates. Thus, a landslide win of 20% only gets her 2 delegates more than a 10% win at the district level.

With the 35 at-large delegates, with a 55% statewide win for Clinton, she gets 19 delegates, Obama gets 13, and she only nets 3 there on Obama. If she managed to get the 60% to 40% win, she still only nets 7 delegates on Obama.

Moving to the PLEOs, assuming that Clinton gets 55% of the vote statewide, she gets 11 delegates, Obama gets 9. She has only netted 2 more over him here too.

Thus, if Clinton gets a 10% win on Obama, she will net just 20 delegates on his lead by the close of the day. Considering his lead is 120-140, it won’t make a whole lot of difference, and especially considering he is expected to wipe out any deficit in delegates he gets with his win in North Carolina two weeks after Pennsylvania anyway."

Pennsylvania's primary on April 22nd will be among the most watched, not only nationally as Hillary and Barack are neck and neck, but now, also locally.


In State Assembly District (SAD) 29, which encompasses a large part of Warminster, the Democratic primary is a contested battle between municipal party chair Brad Kirsch, and the newcomer Benjamin Irey.
The incumbent (who is running unopposed in the primary) is State Rep. Bernie O'Neill (R-Pa.29).

Brad's info can be found by scrolling down on this blog page. We supported him in 2004 and 2006 when he ran against Bernie O'Neill previously.

This year, voters in Warminster's 29th SAD have a choice -- and we encourage you to learn more about both contestants. Mr. Kirsch, age 69, resides in Warminster. He is a former Centennial School director, now retired former business manager and former Director of Warminster's Office of Licenses & Inspection, whose public sector appointments include service in the areas of budget, economic development and solid waste management. Few can boast his range of experience, garnered only after time and involvement in the Party.

Mr. Irey, 25, is a Penn State graduate hoping to launch his public service career as the area's next state representative. The Warwick resident's goals are ambitious; click on his literature (above left) to learn more about some of the positions he is taking on issues that are of importance to local residents. He is taking his experience as a Congressional intern and is coupling it with energy to give Democrats a choice on April 22nd. Not many of us (present company included!) over 50-year-olds ...AARP qualified! ... have the get-up-and-go that we did when we were in our 20's. (If you do, several campaigns would like your help with door-knocking!) So we respect Irey's enthusiasm and willingness to work for your support.

As difficult as it is to "bottle" youthful energy and optimism, experience is also hard-fought. In the primary race for SAD 29, experience and energy are mutually exclusive terms this year. Only the voters can and should decide this one. Meet the candidates, and most importantly, VOTE!

At the February meeting of the Warminster Township Democratic Organization (WTDO), there was an agenda item buried toward the bottom:

"Brad's report on the intrusion into the 29th..."

Having received the agenda in advance of the meeting, I saw this and inquired. I learned that there is a young man namd Benjamin Irey of Warwick, PA who has collected enough signatures on petitions he's filed with the state, to run in the primary for the Democratic position on the ballot in the 29th District. The incumbent member of the State Assembly is Bernie O'Neill (R).

Brad Kirsch, the chairman of the WTDO, will thus face a primary battle against Irey to win the right to run against Bernie for State Assembly in the 29th -- yet again. Kirsch claimed that he is "only running this year again because no one else wants to run." Kirsch further believes he has a chance to win the seat this time because of gains he made against Bernie in 2006 versus his campaign in 2004. Brad says he campaigned in '06 "flat on my back", having suffered a severe shoulder injury while campaigning; Bernie spent little-to-nothing on the race he was sure he'd win.

In '06, Brad's gains were picked up in an off-year when our Congressional newcomer, Patrick Murphy, took the area with a hard-fought campaign. This year, Brad -- at almost 70 -- must give the run his all if he's to retain the prior gains this year. It's a Presidential year, when each party will be coming out in force. And since there are more registered R's in the 29th than D's by a wide margin, we predict it will be tougher for Brad than ever to maintain his gains or win the seat.

Plus our local party is fracturing. Why? We're not keeping pace with the changing times. We're mired in the past. And we've got a mindset of pessimism. And we EAT our own! For example:

When Ben visited the Bucks County Democratic Committee (BCDC) to express interest in running in the 29th as a Democrat, and sought help, the BCDC made the first mistake: they referred Ben to Brad. Brad is Ben's opponent in the primary, and is not the chairman of the 29th. The BCDC should have referred Ben to Frank Feinberg.

The Democrats' mishandling of Ben went on from there. Brad met Ben and Ben's father for FOUR hours, "to scope him out." (One Democratic insider said he'd "have to stick a hot poker in my eye" if called to such a meeting.) Brad reported to the WTDO and BCDC that Irey showed up carrying a folder from Mike Fitzpatrick for Congress, so "obviously, he's a plant."

Frank, chairman of the 29th, says that Brad "apologized" for overstepping and interviewing Irey himself. Such "intrusion" BY BRAD into the business/work of the 29th -- as a candidate -- has usurped Frank's authority. Many in the 29th, outside of Warminster, are questioning who's running the show here ... Frank or Brad. As a result, many of the non-Warminster 29th members called for a meet-and-greet featuring Ben Irey, to give him equal footing with Brad.

To make matters even worse, the meet-and-greet was held on Thursday 2/28 at 7 p.m. -- a time when Frank (who is chairman of Warminster's Board of Supervisors, who met at exactly that date/time) would certainly be unable to attend.

Clearly, the 29th is in disarray -- and "intrusions" on many levels.

In my opinion, we are charged with following a complicated process -- one that should not be fraught with "intrusions". People -- that is, potential candidates -- should not EVER be considered an "intrusion" but rather, we should welcome them as potential stars down our long road toward genuine democracy. Let's respect one another ... and welcome "newbies" with open arms. Let's nurture them and have them lead us in new directions for inspirational change, if not now then later.

There is no greater responsibility for Democrats than to get out and vote on Tuesday, April 22, 2008.

The nation is watching Pennsylvania.

Will your choice be Hillary Rodham Clinton or Barack Obama for President? You decide!