The New Math of Party Reform

ARIZONA'S route to the Miami convention began a year ago when the state's Democratic leaders settled upon a complex, two-tier nominating system. First, registered Democrats would elect 500 delegates to a state convention. Then the 500 would elect 25 national delegates to go to the main event in Miami, apportioned according to the number of state delegates for each candidate.

In the Jan. 29 vote, Muskie came out on top with 38% of the state delegates, Lindsay garnered 24% and McGovern 20%, with the remaining 18% uncommitted to any candidate. On the face of it, that seemed a reasonable outcome. But when the Democrats tried to apply the formula, they found themselves with a confusing set of fractions. Muskie's 38% of the state convention, applied to Arizona's 25 national delegates, came out to 91 delegates, creating a Solomonic dilemma. Similar mathematical puzzles plagued each camp. Three into two wouldn't go.

A week before the state convention, a group of Democratic leaders quietly assembled in the Phoenix office of former Governor Sam Goddard. Each of the major presidential candidates had an emissary present. The result of the meeting was a Lindsay-Muskie alliance favoring a change of the convention rules to eliminate fractions in the distribution of delegates. Under the new formula, the delegates would be apportioned on a base of 24, leaving the 25th delegate slot to Arizona Democratic State Chairman Herbert Ely, who professed himself for the present to be uncommitted.

The plan was unacceptable to McGovern backers, who argued that the reform rules should not be altered just to simplify the mathematics. Inevitably, news of the meeting leaked out. Goddard's sedate law office was quickly dubbed "the smoke-filled room."

So the convention opened under a cloud. Undeterred, Muskie and Lindsay supporters, backed by most of the uncommitted delegates representing Hubert Humphrey, labor and blacks, lined up for the rule change. McGovern supporters stood by the stipulated reform procedures.

Congressman Morris Udall, a Muskie supporter, opened the push for the revision: "We found our selves with a nightmare. The newest indoor game became 'My calculus professor can out-calculus your calculus professor.' " Udall, who had attended the meeting in Phoenix, warned of a McGovern power play to garner another delegate in the wrangle over fractions. The new rules were eventually passed.

A Woman. Only one surprise occurred. John Frank, a party leader for more than 20 years, came up for routine selection as an uncommitted delegate. McGovern's supporters noticed that there were no women among the uncommitted within the delegation. A McGovern backer managed to turn on the microphone to call out "Nominate a woman!" A name was shou ed, nominated in place of Frank, and the woman was elected as an uncommitted delegate. Ironically, Frank had drawn up the rules under which he was ousted.

When the convention was over, Arizona had picked two high school students, two blacks and six Mexican Americans among the 25 people who will represent the state in Miami. With only eight women in the delegation, there is the threat of a challenge, but the delegation approximates the character of the state's population. In 1960, one man picked the entire slate; in 1968, a handful of men drew up the delegate list. In 1972, more than 35,000 Arizona Democrats voted in the January election; 465 attended the state convention, and despite the smoke-filled room, the reforms worked.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.