Superdelegates – superbad?

Much controversy has emerged recently over the presence of superdelegates in the Democratic presidential nomination process. This is simply because they have become a real factor in deciding who the nominee will be, because it appears likely that neither Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) nor Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) will win enough “regular” delegates to decisively secure the party’s nomination.\nA report released by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics last week states that Clinton and Obama have contributed nearly $1 million in the last three years to the campaigns of the elected party officials that now hold positions as superdelegates. The report found that, for the most part, superdelegates have thrown their support behind the candidate that donated the most money to them.\nThis only highlights the need for reform in our primary system in both parties. Of course, political parties are not included in the U.S. Constitution, and they can choose their candidates as they please. But there is so much effort made to convince the public that selecting the candidates is a democratic process, when in reality, so many barriers prevent its votes from really counting.\nWe’re frustrated by the “winner-take-all” rule on the Republican side. We’re frustrated by the disproportionate power of the superdelegates on the Democratic side. We’re frustrated by the order of the contests, which makes Iowa and New Hampshire so important, and Indiana almost worthless – year after year – on both sides. \nAgain, there’s not much we can do to change this, because parties make their own rules in selecting candidates. As idealistic young college students, we’d like to see the breakup of the two-party system in favor of an arrangement that is open to a wider variety of opinion. But also as cynical young college students, we know that’s not going to happen any time soon. And we admit that not many of us will be voting for the Libertarian, Green or Constitution parties in the near future. But we hope that at least people will begin pressuring the major parties to make changes that will ensure the candidates who run in November are truly the ones chosen by the will of the people nationwide.\nDissent – Rachel Fullmer\nPolitical parties exist to allow voters the luxury of a life outside the political spectrum. Not everyone is going to be a career politician. Likewise, the average voter does not necessarily spend hours of their own time researching candidates for public office. Parties simplify democracy for citizens who wish to make an informed choice about candidates. Superdelegates are an extension of this concept. When the Democratic Party reformed, it became too democratic. Party activists come out to vote in higher numbers during the primaries and caucuses and can produce candidates that are unsuccessful in a general election. The superdelegates know the candidates. They also know what’s best for the party. And if primary voters can’t make a decision, superdelegates should.