El Paso lawyer Don Williams has filed a challenge to the El Paso County Democratic convention, citing rules he said were broken in order to send a disproportionate number of Hillary Clinton delegates to the state convention.
The challenge requests that the state party either change the mix of delegates from the current 9-1 for Clinton to a 3-1 advantage, which would more accurately reflect the makeup of delegates at the county convention, or unseat the El Paso delegation.
The issue has been simmering since the March 29 convention, with passions high on both sides of the debate. Numerous letter-writers to Newspaper Tree and callers to KHRO 1650 AM have made the argument that supporters of presidential candidate Barack Obama were disenfranchised by the actions at the convention, while others have dismissed the complaints as sour grapes and the complainants as “whiners.”
Williams, an Obama supporter and member of the Nominations Committee at the March 29 convention, said Saturday on 1650 AM that he is presenting the challenge because of his belief that a basic tenet of democracy and the Democratic Party is that the majority is bound by rules to respect the minority.
In the case of El Paso, and of the convention, there is no question Clinton was the overwhelming victor, he said. But not by a 9-1 margin, which was achieved by a disregard for the rules, said Williams: “Just because you’re the majority it doesn’t give you the right to be oppressive. This procedure became oppressive.”
A summary of the process and the issue (click here for april 1, 2008 npt background, and view the complaint via link at the bottom of this story):
-- The convention attendees chose delegates from among the representatives of the 170-odd precincts in El Paso. Some precincts were combined so the total of delegates from that process was 127.
-- The vote was based on the majority of the precinct representatives. The overwhelming majority of precincts had majority support for Clinton, and the split ended up 120 delegates for Clinton and seven for Obama.
-- In addition to the delegates picked through that process, on the floor, 48 at-large delegates were chosen by the Nominations Committee.
-- According to the state party rules, “Poll results shall be used by the Nominations Committee and by the Convention as a whole as the basis for nominating and for electing At-Large Delegates so as to ensure the fairest possible representation of the Convention participants as a whole within the total delegation, without disturbing the Precinct Caucus election results.” [(Article 4, Part 10. Election Procedure in Presidential and in Non-Presidential Years, (d)(4)]
-- The number of people signing in as delegates at the convention was about 3-1, a figure not in dispute, but the final count of delegates was 157 for Clinton and 18 for Obama, a ratio of about 9-1.
-- Williams’ challenge asserts that the state rule regarding the at-large delegates is meant to ensure that the overall mix of delegates sent to the state reflects the mix of delegates signed in to the county convention.
Danny Anchondo, Democratic Party chairman, and Ken Sutherland, chairman of the Nominations Committee, appeared with Williams on the Hector Montes show on 1650 AM Saturday morning.
Sutherland continued to defend his assertion that the word “fair” in the rule means that the Nominations Committee had the discretion to decide that even though the delegates signed in at about a 3-1 mix, the actual number of Clinton supporters was far more, and therefore giving the majority of at-large delegates to Clinton and leaving the El Paso delegation at a 9-1 ratio is what was the most fair.
But Williams said the word “shall” in the rule is far more meaningful, and means that the overall number of delegates sent from the county convention to the state must reflect the overall number of delegates signed in at the convention, the 3-1 ratio. To achieve that, the majority of at-large delegates should have been given to Obama, he said.
Anchondo said that he hoped “cooler heads” would prevail before the issue gets to the state convention.
“At the convention, I’ve been to so many, everybody gets excited. So sometimes we can’t always get everything done the way it’s supposed to,” he said. “I don’t think all this trying to destroy the Democratic Party helps at all. There’s a simple process … if it’s not corrected here it’s corrected at the state level. That will be taken care of.”
Williams said he wanted to be clear that he would vote for the Democratic candidate in the general presidential election. He also said that he and Anchondo had worked together for many years, he considers Anchondo a friend, and “I hope we will be friends at the end of this.
“I’m hoping clear heads can get together,” Williams said. “I am one of those naïve ‘whiners’ who believe right will prevail. … Like Danny said, we want to work something out in El Paso. We want a united delegation at the state.”
Related Documents:














Carlie Simmons
April 12, 2008
Obama – Black is Wright
Obama attracts thugs and bullies to his campaign and personal life and is able to do so with impunity.
If Obama where Caucasian, he would have been bulldozed by the media long ago.
Look at Obama’s affiliations:
- Senator Meeks who openly hates whites and gays and is listed prominently on Obama’s campaign website as a major Obama supporter and backer and is one of Obama;s super-delegate. Mr. Meeks has been integral in helping Mr. Obama succeed in politics.
- Mr. Ayers of the Weather Underground, a group that killed police and tried to bomb the US Capitol, served with Obama on the board of the leftist foundation called the Woods Fund.
- Robert Malley a close senior adviser to Obama who advocates negotiations with Hamas and providing international assistance to the terrorist group.
- Larry Sinclair alleges in 1999 Senator Obama’s arranged to meet him in a limousine, sold Senator Obama cocaine and then gave Senator Obama oral sex. Larry then claims that he and Obama went to a hotel and preformed oral sex again. Mr. Sinclair is testifying in court under oath that these allegations are true.
- Mr. Auchi is an Iraqi billionaire and major financial sponsor and closely connected to Obama’s rise to power.
While working with Saddam Hussein, Auchi made his fortune through the selling of arms in Iraq and the funneling off of money from the Oil for Food program.
- Mr. Rezko an Iraqi citizen and Obama’s and Auchi’s long time friend and a major mob figure. Rezko is NOT known for his civic sense of duty and does not do favors without asking something in return. Coincidently in the Chicago Times today it was reported that Rezko was negotiating to purchase rehab buildings in Obama’s district.
- Mr. Wright a racist who hates America and whites with Hitleresque triads. Mr. Wright has been Mr. Obama’s spiritual mentor for over 20 years. Before the media exposed Mr. Wright, Mr. Wright was on Obama’s campaign staff as Obama's chief religious advisor. Mr. Wright and Mr. Meeks are ideologically closer to Karl Marx and Black Nationalism, than to Christianity.
- Rashid Khalidi a fundraiser for Obama and is one of Obama’s close friends. Khalidi Khalidi claim Israel as a "catastrophe", and supports Palestinian terrorist groups.
- Mr. McPeaks is Obama’s military adviser and national campaign co-chairman who publicly states that American Jews are the "problem." and “Christian Zionists were driving America's policy in Iraq to benefit Israel.”
- Michelle Obama trumpets Obama as “the second coming of the messiah,” and also states that she “has never been proud to be an AMERICAN in her adult life".
The list goes on…
How can Obama’s bad judgment to choose to affiliate with criminals and fanatics be justified?
Had Hillary Clinton had any of the above ghosts in her closet, she would have been thrown out of the election long ago.
Hey everybody - am I missing something here?
Are we so in love with the color black that we forget to see the man?
Estlin Jack
April 12, 2008
There certainly is someone blind here.
bibliobibuli bibliobibuli bibliobibuli
An Obama supporter just hit you with a charm that prevents you from spouting ignorance.
Oh wait, that kind of magical thinking doesn't actually work.
Carry on.
Gloria Alvarez
April 12, 2008
Is this the way Obama is winning across country? The majority of us at the convention were Clinton delegates and that is who we were voting for. I don't believe that an OBAMA candidate would give up their seat for Clinton. Give me a Break, Clinton is the Winner. Read my Lips!!. I have never seen so many sorry loosers.
AC
April 12, 2008
The sore losers seem to be the Clinton camp. Behind in popular vote (even if Florida and Michigan were counted, take that), behind in number of states, and will soon be passed in superdelegates. And it is official...Obama won Texas. Here's the punchline, and this is what continues to earn El Paso it's low place in the Texas totem pole. When the state credentials committee reviews the minutes, reviews the official poll from the County convention there are going to be alot of people scratching their heads wondering what the heck did they do over there. And Mr. Anchondo and Mr. Sutherland will have to explain, "well there were so many pending precincts we just decided to make a unilateral decision that the official sign in was trumped." EL PASO, WAKE UP...don't you see the writing on the wall...your democratic leaders led you astray. All across TEXAS there were similar conventions with similar sign-in splits but the At-Large was used to balance it out, was there moaning at those conventions, YES, but at the end it was done out of fairness. just because you had more people clapping and waving signs does not mean you can disregard the rules to please the majority.
At the state convention, which will be a majority of Obama delegates (YOU'RE GOING TO OBAMA COUNTRY BABY) would you like it if the 46% clinton delegates got to send 20% delegates to the national convention? That's exactly what happened here. It's not being a sore loser it's called protecting the integrity of the rules. The Obama camp weren't asking for any more seats than the rules afforded them.
BUT integrity isn't like pretend sniper fire, if no one's paying attention maybe you can get away with them believing you. Guess what, all this corruption in el paso is no different than the mentality of thinking you can send a disproportionate delegates to Austin...but the truth always has a way of coming out, and come June the truth is going to make the clinton delegates look like kids in a cookie jar...then we will see about who the sore losers are,
ps ms. simmons can you please get your news from legitimate news sources not conspiracy theorists who probably still live with their parents and have nothing to do but blog in their underwear. Clinton has twice as many ghosts, and I'm just counting the ones running her campaign not the ones in her closet
Thurman Reynolds
April 13, 2008
I agree with Mr. Williams' position.
Williamson-Democrat
April 13, 2008
In Williamson County we had the same situation except Obama was the 3-1 favorite over Clinton. We had the same result in voting, Obama ended up with 80% of the Precint votes. However, our county chair invoked Rule 10 and over 90% of the At-Large delegates came from the Clinton Camp. Same deal different outcome. Williamson has only 3/4 as many delegates but if we used El Paso fairness, it probably would have netted out close. We respected the people who showed up to vote and did not use parliamentary strategy to disqualify their vote. With that respect, we can expect them to show up for "our" candidate in November. Can you?
Cathy Smith
April 13, 2008
I totally agree that this convention was unfair. I was selected as an Obama delegate at the caucus meeting only to find my name NOT on the list when I arrived at the convention. I (and many other Obama delegates) was left pending while they did the count to see what the split should be. It was truly a sad day to be a Democrat and El Paso has failed me tremendously!
Marcos
April 13, 2008
I was at the convention as an Obama delegate from my precinct. What is hard to understand from what transpired is that the whole convention was put on notice early on that the El Paso delegation could be disqualified if it didn't follow the rules. What is stupid about all this is more along the lines of gluttony: instead of settllng for a 3:1 mix, or even 4 or 5 to one, the Nominations Committee went for the whole rotten enchilada. Nine to one?! The only "message" to the mostly-new participants in the process that could come out of something like this is that democratic principles are only rhetorical. I hope Messrs. Anchondo, Sutherland, and Williams can correct this in El Paso, before our dirty laundry has to be aired in Austin. We are a poor community and it costs a lot for El Paso Democrats to go to Austin, so better to now let just a few Clinton delegates know they're not going, and let an equallly few Obama delegates know that they need to start saving their pennies for the trip. This truly is only a matter of principle, since the 3 to1 ratio is an awsome statement of Clinton's support in El Paso. But to insist on usurping the rules to emphasize that it is 9 to 1 .... that's just wrong!
oscar barreda sr
April 13, 2008
From an unbias observation, it is my belief that the ratio of 9 to 1 clinton favor should have been higher. Why? The mix of delegates reflected that ratio, unless there is proof otherwise.
Blanche Darley
April 13, 2008
29th Senatorial District - 3 National Delegates for Hillary - The count was fair & correct.
Mike Reynolds
April 13, 2008
The very fact that someone like Carlie Simmons exists is reason enough to support Obama for President. Unfortunatley for many of the folks in this town supporting Clinton and McCain they have lost touch with reality on both the national and international scenes. This country is really in trouble and you can see clearly from Simmon's remarks just how far we have to go to get America back on track. Go Obama in 08.
Margaret E. Mendoza
April 13, 2008
I attended the County Convention and rules were suspended, substituted and amended by Danny Anchondo. He did not sound like
a "knowlegeable and experienced" County Chairman and lawyer.
When I signed in as an alternate and my husband as precinct chair,
I was ready to take part in an orderly and legal experience. However, I was transported back to my kindergarten teaching
before retiring. We started out wrong when Danny did not "expect
so many participants" and had to amend the rules for the time to
start the convention. What was he talking about? Our pricinct turned
in the names and number of people who were elected to attend and represent. Didn't all the othe El Paso precincts send in their count?
Do you know your numbers, your colors, and your ABC's, Danny?
The numbers are the number of people who were to attend the
converntion, Danny. Why did we and several hundred others have to stand outside the building because you didn't know your numbers, Danny.
When the convention came to order, Danny dismissed the delegates
for a two-hour lunch. What was going on now, Danny?
This convention went down-hill legally after lunch. Little Kinder-Danny ate too much. The hotdogs were free at a candidate's
RV! ! Shame on you, little Danny. You started out wrong and you ate too much and the hotdogs didn't help.
My advice to you is to stop eating hotdogs and go back to law school but
start with kindergarten.
Adrian Juarez
April 15, 2008
Even though I am Clinton supporter and would like to see a majority of delegates go the candidate that I support, I think Mister Williams has a valid argument. If the process is deemed unfair, meaning the actions at the convention, then it is worth investigating.
The reason I state this is becuase being a member of the majority, i.e., Hispanics, we have a responsibility to make sure those that feel disenfrnachised have a right to be heard. The new Hispanic majority, whether it be in Los Angeles, Phoenix, Houston, here in west Texas or along other areas of the southern border; we must remember the lessons we have learned from the past. The past when we were a minority and we were disenfrnachised wished not to be heard.
Lets let Mr. Williams have his voice heard.