RELATED STORIES

• Dr. Politics: The staples of American politics

More Columnists

• The Farmer File: Bleak holiday — a long-run blessing?
• Brent Batten: Proud father laments lost legacy
• Dan K. Thomasson: Being paid well for doing badly isn’t really the American way

Tell us about it

• What would you add to this story? Tell us what we missed.
• Do you have photos from this event? Documents we need to see? Share with us.
• Upload photos & videos
• More ways to get your stuff online and in the paper.

STORY TOOLS

• E-mail story
• iPod friendly
• Printer friendly

Share and Enjoy [?]

The political wisdom this week appears to be that neither Senator Clinton nor Senator Obama will have enough “elected” delegates to win their party’s nomination without the support of some portion of the 842 Democratic super delegates.

These individuals, often the party elite at the state and national level, receive their status because they are Democratic Party leaders. They include former presidents, governors and members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

2008 Democratic super delegates include former Presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, former Vice President Al Gore and retired congressional leaders. These delegates are not elected or required to vote based on the outcome of their states’ nominating caucuses or presidential preference primary elections.

How these individuals voice and vote their preference may play a deciding factor in their nomination because super delegates make up nearly 40 percent of the number of delegates needed to capture the Democratic nomination.

Thus, the question of how should super delegates vote is raised. Who are they responsible to? Should these individuals act as delegates or trustees in the Democratic Party? Edmund Burke, Irish statesmen, political philosopher and member of the British House of Commons addressed this question in 1774.

In what is now a classic address, Burke defined the role of a delegate as “one who views the voters wishes as authoritative instructions — mandates, which the individual is bound to obey, to vote.”

The ideal delegate, as defined by Burke, “is one whose voice and vote ... is in strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents.”

Yet, in the same speech, Burke rejected this delegate model and offered his preferred choice of a representative as a trustee. He argued that a representative’s “mature judgment, his enlightened conscience ... should not be sacrificed to any man, or to any set of men living.” Burke argued that decisions should be a matter of reason and judgment, not one in which decision “precedes the discussion” and vote.

What will be the appropriate role of super delegates when they endorse and vote for a Democratic candidate for president? Should super delegates act as Burke’s delegate and mirror the wishes of their state or as the trustee and give allegiance to what they think is in the interest of their party or the nation?

In the next several months the actions and voice of these super delegates will be the focus of national attention and speculation. As the campaign proceeds it will be interesting to observe which model these delegates will use to rationalize their vote. Will they see themselves as delegates or trustees? Will one of these models be more beneficial to Clinton or Obama?

- - -

Peter Bergerson is a professor of public affairs at Florida Gulf Coast University. If you have questions or responses to Dr. Politics columns, please contact Peter Bergerson at pbergers@fgcu.edu.