Subsidize party
The biggest legal problem for the early Michigan primary had nothing to do with the date or who was on the ballot.
Instead, Michigan Democrats and Republicans wrote a cute little phrase that, for the first time, would have given the voting data to only the state Republican and Democratic parties.
A Michigan judge ruled the Jan. 15 primary unfairly gave voting data only to the Republican and Democratic parties, a wholly unfair proposition written by the same Democrats and Republicans.
This is valuable stuff; information on who voted for which party in a primary is invaluable in a state where voters don't have to register their party to vote. The lists are worth millions of dollars, according to pollster Mark Grebner, one of five people who brought a separate suit a few months ago.
Favoritism, thy name is Lansing.
Small political parties would not be able to get the voting data; neither could private polling or other firms that regularly buy and rely on such election data.
The judge found no reason the information would go only to political parties, and even then only to the two parties. So now no one gets the lists - all the better because now no one will know which party we voted for - or everyone gets the lists.
This ruling doesn't really affect the primary much, although Sen. Hillary Clinton would beg to differ. Most of those involved in the case say that despite the primary law being invalidated, the primary that happened is still valid. Don't hold your breath for a new primary; this didn't breathe new life into that pipe dream.
So now it's a continuation of the fight over how the January primary will count. But at least the subsidization of the state parties is gone; that's a solid step in resolving this mess.
