TDP Does Not Need the Approval of the Texas Legislature to End the Texas Two-Step

The Texas Democratic Party could stop using the Texas Two-Step system without seeking a change in the Texas Election Code through the Texas Legislature. TDP could adopt a system of allocating all pledged delegates based on the results of the popular vote just by changing its own rules and adopting an appropriate National Delegate Selection Plan for 2012. It is not necessary to go through the Texas Legislature to end the Texas Two-Step.

The relevant section of the Texas Election Code says

§ 191.007. ALLOCATION OF DELEGATES. Each political party holding a presidential primary election shall adopt a rule for allocating delegates based on the results of the presidential primary election. At least 75 percent of the total number of delegates who are to represent this state at the party’s national presidential nominating convention, excluding delegates allocated among party and elected officials, shall be allocated in accordance with the rule among one or more of the candidates whose names appear on the presidential primary election ballot and, if applicable, the uncommitted status.

There are a total of 228 delegates from Texas to the National Democratic Convention. 35 are superdelegates and 25 are pledged party and elected leaders. 228 minus 60 leaves 168 delegates who are not allocated among party and elected officials. 75 percent of 168 is 126, which is exactly the number of delegates currently elected at the senatorial district level based on the popular vote in the senatorial district.

The key phrase in the Election Code is “at least 75 percent.” The TDP could simply change its rules if it decided to raise the number of delegates that are allocated based on the results of the presidential primary election to 100 percent of the total number of delegates who are to represent Texas at the party’s national presidential nominating convention.

Article VII of the TDP Rules state:

8. (a) At least 75% of the base number of Delegates, not including designated Party and Elected Official Delegates, shall be elected by Senatorial District Caucuses at the State Convention. The exact number (between 75% and 100%) to be so elected shall be determined by majority vote of the SDEC at its meeting in January of presidential years and shall be included in the official Call to the State Convention of that year.

Are Elderly Voters Disadvantaged by Caucuses?

According to an InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research poll conducted on 02.28.08, people who are 65 and over are 26.1 percent of Texas Democratic Primary voters.

The question that needs to be answered by Senator West’s committee is whether elderly voters also constitute 26.1 percent of caucus goers. If they do not, then we can conclude that there are significant barriers to them attending caucuses that many of them are unable to overcome. Elderly voters can vote by mail or during early voting during the primary, but in order to participate in the caucus, they have to appear in person at 7:15pm on a Tuesday night.  This presents insurmountable obstacles for many older voters, who may not drive at night and who may have health issues that prevent them from attending caucuses. Many people older than 85 were part of “the greatest generation”.  We need a system that ensures that their votes count equally.

According to a 2003 report by the Texas Department on Aging:

■ Over 2.7 million Texans are age 60 or older.

■ Older Texans are relatively young; an estimated 66 percent of the older population is younger than 75.

■ 34 percent of the older population is 75 or older, or 918,000 people.

■ Texans 60-plus are projected to total 8.1 million by 2040, a 193 percent increase from 2000. By 2040, the 60-plus population is projected to comprise 23 percent of the total Texas population.

■ The 60-plus population will itself grow older. In 2000, the 85-plus population totaled over 237,000; by 2040, this population is projected to reach about 831,000, a 249.4 percent increase.

Demographics of Democratic primary voters

InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research

Texas Democratic Primary Poll – 02.28.08

Hispanic: 37.1%
Black: 22%
White: 38.1%
Female: 51.9%
29 and under: 11%
65 and over: 26.1%

Many Workers Have Problems Attending Caucuses

People who work evenings or long hours during the day are another group that has problems attending the caucuses. While there is a statute in Texas that requires employers to allow employees to take off work to attend caucuses, the reality is that many evening workers miss the caucuses because they do not want to ask their bosses for time off.

One of the reasons for the reluctance to ask off of low wage workers is that they lack power in the workplace. Barbara Ehrenreich addressed the pressures faced by low wage workers in her book, “Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America“. A low wage worker may be asked to find a replacement for their shift if they want off. While the law prohibits this, someone working a low wage job knows that if they ask off for the caucuses, the next week they may have to ask off again for another personal reason or the week before they may have had to ask off for one reason or another, so their boss may say well you just had off last week.

Other people may not work in the evenings, but they may still have missed the caucuses because they had to get up early and work all day, some doing physically demanding jobs. They could have voted early at their convenience, but they may not have had the energy after a long day to attend a caucus at 7:15 PM that might last several hours. Low wage workers are also more likely to have trouble hiring a babysitter, so that they can attend the caucuses.

People whose jobs take them out of town on caucus night are also not able to attend a caucus.

Military Members Overseas Excluded From Caucuses

Larry Romo, Texas Democratic Veterans Chairman says, “The caucus system discriminates against some of our military and their families, the Texans that are fighting for our Country in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also discriminates against Texans that are in the military or family members of the military serving our Country in other states or countries. They cannot have a voice in the caucus. This is undemocratic and unpatriotic. Change the system to let their votes count!”

Members of the military who are stationed overseas are able to request a ballot by mail for the primary, but they are not able to attend the caucuses. One of the issues the West Committee will need to investigate is how many members of the military requested and received a ballot by mail. We can assume that if military members voted by mail that they were not able to attend the caucus, so their votes were not counted equally as those people on the home front who were able to “vote twice” by attending the caucuses after voting in the primary.

In “Bringing Voting Rights to Military and Overseas Voters,” report author Tova Wang, Democracy Fellow at The Century Foundation, explains how difficult it is for military and overseas voters to vote, examines the problems encountered in making sure that their votes are counted, and suggests reforms for both easing the procedural problems and improving turnout among this often neglected group of voters.

According to the report, the biggest problem confronting overseas and military voters in the 2008 nominating system is the caucuses. More than one third of the states plan to have a nominating contest that is a caucus or convention for at least one of the two parties. Caucuses do not allow absentee ballots, and mandate personal attendance. As a consequence, they completely exclude members of the armed services stationed overseas or away from home within the United States, voters who are working or studying abroad, and voters fulfilling government contracts, such as for the Department of Defense, the State Department, or USAID; similarly, the families of these individuals living away from home also cannot participate.

In addition to the military members on active duty currently stationed overseas, the West Committee should also determine how many former military members who are now past retirement age and were unable to attend the caucuses. Many elderly people do not like to drive at night or they may have health issues that prevent them from activities that go into the late evening. Many precincts conventions on March 5 lasted several hours. Many former military members who are now in their 70s or above fought for their country in their youth. Those who fought in World War II have been called “The Greatest Generation”. Veterans and military members have earned the right to have their votes counted equally. The TDP needs a system that ensures that they all have the ability to participate fully in the delegate selection process.

In 1988, Texas Democrat Scott Cobb was in the military stationed in Europe. Cobb says, “I was able to request a ballot by mail, but there was no way that I could have attended the caucuses in 1988, which was the first year of the Texas hybrid caucus system. That year, one candidate won the primary and another candidate won the caucuses. I had organized my precinct in the 1984 caucuses, so I knew how important it was to attend the caucuses”.

“Has America Outgrown the Caucus?” by Tova Andrea Wang

Caucuses, as opposed to primaries, by their very structure violate fundamental principles of voting rights. Their time-consuming, inflexible, Byzantine procedures discourage broad participation, presenting substantial barriers to the right to vote. It is not that the caucuses violate the Constitution—they are run by the parties, not the states, and do not violate voting rights as a matter of law. Rather, because of their exclusionary nature, they go against some of the core values we express when we talk about voting rights, such as the fundamental nature of the right, equality of opportunity to participate in the process, and fair access to the ballot.

Download the full article in PDF format from The Century Foundation, First Published 10/23/2007