Superdelegates say, we will decide

Uncommitted Democratic superdelegates in Congress overwhelmingly say they won’t necessarily back the presidential candidate who wins the most primary delegates. Instead, electability will be very important in their decision.

Of 42 lawmakers interviewed by The Hill, only four said they regarded the primary vote as decisive.

{mosads}The congressional superdelegates’ independence is precisely what Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) is banking on as she trails by about 130 pledged delegates behind rival Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.).

It also means the Democratic Caucus is unswayed by its leader, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), who has warned that the party will suffer if superdelegates overturn the will of primary voters. Pelosi has said superdelegates should take into account whatever is important but not give the nomination to the candidate who lags in delegates.

But Pelosi’s troops on Capitol Hill say they are more concerned about electability, plus each candidate’s momentum heading toward the convention, and how their own constituents voted.

Clinton is given little chance of catching Obama’s delegate count in the last few primaries. But her campaign has gained momentum in recent weeks as Obama has been on the defensive over his former pastor and charges of elitism.

Only 10 percent of lawmakers interviewed by The Hill said the delegate count on June 4, the day after the final primaries in Montana and South Dakota, will determine whom they decide to support. There are 70 neutral superdelegates in the House and 22 in the Senate.

“What will be decisive will be two factors: who would make the best president and who has the best chance of winning,” said Rep. Howard Berman (D), an uncommitted lawmaker from Los Angeles.

Neutral Democrats representing districts across the country voiced the same sentiment.

“I will look at who I think can be the winner in November,” said Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-Tenn.), who has yet to endorse a candidate.

Davis said he has become more focused on the question of electability as Obama has become ensnared in high-profile controversies. Since winning a string of primaries in February, Obama has been forced to distance himself from the incendiary statements of his pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and to try and explain his own controversial remarks made at a San Francisco fundraising event.

“In the last two or three weeks I’m focusing more on that being important,” said Davis, in reference to the electability of the Democratic nominee.

Some neutral Democrats, such as Reps. Marcy Kaptur (Ohio), Mike Michaud (Maine), Gene Taylor (Miss.) and Gabrielle Giffords (Ariz.) said they would pick a candidate based in part on how that candidate stood on issues such as trade, defense and immigration.

Kaptur and Michaud are members of a coalition of Democratic lawmakers concerned about trade and manufacturing jobs that has held talks with Clinton and Obama.

Giffords said she would soon meet with Obama to discuss immigration and said the candidate’s position on the issue would factor into her decision on whom to support.

Taylor, who represents a district where many people work for the defense industry, said he would not support a candidate who would cut defense spending significantly.

 {mospagebreak}A few Democrats echo party leaders, who have called on superdelegates to sustain the will of primary voters. But even superdelegates who say the delegate count will be decisive in their own decision-making add a caveat: They warn that the delegate count will be less important if the leading candidate has not also won a majority of the popular vote.

“For me it will be a combination of delegate lead and the popular vote,” said Rep. Jason Altmire, a neutral Democrat from Pennsylvania. “If Clinton catches Obama in the popular vote, that’s important.

“I don’t want to be looked at as overturning the popular vote,” Altmire added.

{mosads}Altmire is in the minority among undeclared superdelegates. Only three other superdelegates interviewed agreed with him. By contrast, 34 superdelegates said the delegate lead would not be decisive. Four Democratic lawmakers declined to comment.

“I’m looking for the candidate with the greatest support from those who participated in the primaries, the candidate who has the most momentum going forward and who has the best chance to win in November,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (Md.).

Pelosi warned colleagues soon after Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, that they should be careful about overturning a candidate’s delegate lead at the August convention in Denver.

“I don’t think it was ever intended that superdelegates would overturn the verdict, the decision of the American people,” she said. “What they are there to do is to be in place should there be a need for some change in what happens, but not to change what happened in the election.”

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Tuesday that superdelegates should choose against the delegate leader only if he or she commits a gaffe so extreme that it would seriously jeopardize the party’s chances in the fall.

Some Democratic strategists fear that if Obama leads in delegates and popular votes after June 4 and party officials decide to give the nomination to Clinton, it would anger many black voters. They warn that significant numbers of black voters could stay home in the fall, hurting Democrats in congressional races around the country.

“We should not overturn the decision of pledged delegates unless something comes up before the convention that makes it clear the leading candidate is unelectable,” said Van Hollen. “There would have to be a clear consensus that person is unelectable.”

But few other neutral Democrats agree with Van Hollen, even though they have tasked him with the job of protecting their majority status in this fall’s elections.