Over the weekend, the Unity Commission put forth primary revisions as outlined in the article below. As the article states, these changes remain subject to approval by the DWI lawyers and the Rules and Bylaws Committee. If you’re looking for a Long Island traffic lawyer because of a traffic ticket, call traffic lawyer nassau county for help with your case.
This represents nothing less than a hijacking of the Democratic Party by outsiders. It is unclear how many of the UC members were appointed by Bernie Sanders who remains an Independent, i.e. not a registered Democrat.
Open primaries and caucuses and registration dates close to or on primary dates leave our primary process open to tampering by outside forces. We know how that works. All they open is a can of worms.
WASHINGTON ― At its final meeting on Friday and Saturday, the Democratic National Committee’s Unity and Reform Commission agreed to a set of dramatic revisions aimed at restoring faith in the presidential nomination process and the management of the DNC.
The 21-member panel, which held its ultimate gathering in a conference room at the Marriott Wardman Park in Washington, D.C., is recommending the effective abolition of some 60 percent of superdelegates to the presidential nominating convention. It has also presented a set of measures designed to increase accessibility to presidential primaries and caucuses, as well as reforms aimed at opening up DNC budgetary and administrative processes to greater scrutiny through, among other things, the creation of an Ombudsmen Council.
The reforms are not yet a done deal, however. The commission’s report now heads to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, which will have a 6-month period to amend party rules to enact the reforms, and could theoretically try to dilute the commission’s recommendations (though they would have to run any changes by the commission). The roster of over 400 voting DNC members will also get to vote on the proposals at the full DNC meeting in the fall of 2018.
But the commission’s most adamant reformers, most of whom were appointed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), characterized the outcome as a major win for the Democratic Party’s disillusioned progressive wing. The acceptance of Sanders surrogates was essential to the commission’s success, since evidence that the DNC had favored Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential primary and the anger it inspired among Sanders supporters fueled the creation of the commission.
No, the party did not “favor” Hillary Clinton. Nonsense! Nearly 4 million registered Democrats voted for Hillary over Bernie Sanders.
Opening the primaries and caucuses is not going to sprinkle magic fairy dust over health care, minimum wage, taxes, or college tuition. Hillary won the nomination because of her experience in policy making and for the policies she proposed.
What these revisions will accomplish is to make the Democratic Party the “Drive-Thru” party that any minority movement can invade and sabotage.
We have no reason to expect the RBC to reject these proposals. As they proved on May 31, 2008, they are out of touch with the party’s registered base.
This is from Karen for Clinton on Facebook with a number we can call. Thank you. Karen!
Still4Hill 
I have observed and worked in politics for decades, and I have never seen anything like this kowtowing to Bernie Sanders, who, people keep pointing out, IS NOT A DEMOCRAT. Usually a candidate who loses a primary by almost 4 million votes fades away quietly. It should be obvious to party leadership that these Bernie people are engineering a hostile takeover of a party they refuse to join. Ironically, they are trying to rig the process in 2020 for Bernie after all their whining that 2016 was rigged for Hillary. Other potential 2020 candidates have no input in any of this.
The only explanation I can come up with is that Bernie has “kompramat” on Tom Perez.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Holy moly! I think you may be onto something there!
LikeLike
Even if the DNC had put it’s thumb on the scale in 2016 for Hillary (and there is no credible evidence it did), it would make perfect sense that the Democratic party bureaucracy would favor an actual Democrat who had toiled in party vineyards and raised money for the party and it’s candidates for years.
And would the party actually nominate an 80 year old as it’s standard bearer in 2020? This entire exercise is INSANE.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agree!
LikeLike