D.C. primary successfully got its message out

Way to go D.C. voters. You proved the pooh-poohers wrong.

Not only did D.C. voters demonstrate how much they value their voting rights by doubling the traditional turnout in past presidential primaries — from 8 percent to 16 percent — they grabbed national headlines for the close outcome of Tuesday’s “beauty contest.”

“My personal goal was to beat … the Iowa turnout and that we did, and did handily I might add,” said Sean Tenner, executive director of the D.C. Democracy Fund, one of the grass-roots organizations that spearheaded the much-maligned “first-in-the-nation” D.C. presidential primary.

After making adjustments for problems with the relatively new voting machines in the District, which must be fixed before the next election, the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics announced that the actual turnout was closer to 16 percent instead of the 10 percent originally reported.

Mr. Tenner, who was “feeling pretty good” yesterday, said, “The fact that thousands of D.C. voters came to the polls to vote in an election under these circumstances in greater percentages than Iowans in the last ’first-in-the-nation’ contest says more to me about our city and its people than anything I’ve seen written over the past year.”

To make his point, Mr. Tenner said the voter turnout in the 2000 Al Gore vs. Bill Bradley contest in Iowa was 10.79 percent of registered Democrats. That participation came after millions of advertising dollars and network airtime was spent on that race.

The political “circumstances” or pressures to which Mr. Tenner was referring that actually forced the District to hold a nonbinding contest include the key factor that the primary “was fought tooth and nail,” he said, by Democratic National Committee Chairman Terance B. McAuliffe, the national Democratic power structure, and officials in Iowa and New Hampshire, and was skipped by five of the major presidential candidates, leaving former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean to lead the field.

Given the strong showing of the Rev. Al Sharpton, who garnered 34 percent of Tuesday’s vote to Mr. Dean’s 43 percent, the candidates who opted out might live to regret snubbing the District.

Mr. Sharpton’s second-place showing was not surprising to yours truly, who sensed that his all-out efforts to woo D.C. voters would pay off. What was a little surprising, however, is how many people were willing openly to admit they cast their ballots for the controversial political preacher. It has been the talk of the town.

Most said their Sharpton votes were a symbolic protest in a “protest primary” The DNC would do well to take notice of the D.C. outcome which should be seen as a harbinger of things to come from a critical segment of their party loyalists who are tired of being taken for granted.

For her part, D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton was ecstatic that the primary turnout “surpassed our expectations and confounded critics.”

“Not only did residents come in unexpected large numbers, the American people came, too, with the first-ever nationwide coverage of D.C. voting rights,” Mrs. Norton said. she will attempt to catapult voters’ seeming renewed interest by holding a “next steps” meeting soon.

What next? Mr. Tenner said the D.C. voting rights activists will use their momentum to “go to the mat” for the candidates who stood by the city and campaign for them and congressional representatives and senators who support the statehood cause. This includes raising funds for their supporters — given that there are several D.C. voting rights bills, introduced by Republicans as well as Democrats, pending in Congress.

D.C. voters, who are highly taxed without representation in Congress, got the message. They demonstrated the deep-seated resentments of their uniquely undemocratic status by coming out strongly in support of this people’s effort designed to shine the national spotlight on the lack of full voting rights for the residents of the capital of the free world.

Their efforts should not be criticized. The local Republican Party is wrong to call the primary “a huge failure and a colossal waste of taxpayer’s money.” Betsy Werronen, chairwoman of the city’s Republican Party, said, “We support voting rights, but this was the wrong way to go about it.” She said the cost of the primary to D.C. taxpayers was $400,000.

That figure goes as low as $250,000, depending on whom you ask, but D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams makes the correct comeback by noting that the primary would have cost the same thing in January or May, when it has been held in the past.

Mr. Tenner also pointed out that Congress prohibits the District from spending its own taxpayer dollars on any efforts to seek statehood or enhanced voting rights. Thus, the pages of free press they garnered from holding the first-in-the-nation primary was invaluable. Mr. Tenner excitedly mentioned the media coverage the D.C. primary received by national and international outlets such as the Associated Press, Reuters, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times, in addition to the major television networks.

Some, he acknowledged, did discuss the lack of attention the major candidates were giving to the D.C. primary because of the fast-approaching Iowa caucuses, but then all went on to explain the city’s historical lack of voting rights.

Therefore, mission accomplished.

Defenders of freedom should take a stand, like the candidates who campaigned in the District, to wholeheartedly support the efforts of disenfranchised residents everywhere, especially those in the United States of America, to seek their full democratic rights “by any means necessary.”