back to: On the Ballot  to: political odyssey


Appendix D: January 2004 Correspondence about McGaughey’s Appearance on the Ballot for the Democratic Presidential Primary in South Carolina

January 6. 2004

William McGaughey
P.O. Box 50256
Minneapolis, MN 55405

Dear Mr. McGaughey:

This is to confirm receipt of your application to participate as a candidate in South Carolina’s February 3rd Democratic Presidential Preference Primary. Under the South Carolina Delegate Selection Rules, (Section VI.A.1) no one may gain access to the Primary ballot unless he or she is entitled to obtain delegates to the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

The Chair of the Democratic National Committee has advised me that in accordance with Section 11.K.(1)(b) of the Delegate selection rules for the 2004 Democratic National Convention, you do not qualify to obtain delegates. Accordingly, I am returning the check that you included with your filing form.

Thank you for your interest in the South Carolina Democratic Presidential Primary.
Yours truly,

Joe Erwin, Chair
South Carolina Democratic Party

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****

January 5, 2003

Joe Erwin, State Chair
South Carolina Democratic Party
P.O. Box 5965
Columbia, SC 29250

Dear Chair Erwin:

Rule 11.K of the Delegate Section Rules for the 2004 Democratic National Convention (the “Delegate Selection Rules”) adopted by the Democratic National Committee on January 19, 2002 provides that, for purposes of the Delegate Selection rules, a qualified candidate for the nomination of the Democratic Party for President shall -

(1)(a) be registered to vote, and shall have been registered to vote in the last election for the office of President and Vice President; and

(1)(b) have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate in the Convention in good faith.

Under Article VI of the Call for the 2004 Democratic National Convention (the”Call”), adopted by the Democratic National committee on August 10, 2002, the term “presidential candidate” means:

... any person who, as determined by the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, has accrued delegates in the nominating process and plans to seek the nomination, has established substantial support for his or her nomination as the Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United states, is a bona fide Democrat whose record of public service, accomplishments, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively demonstrates that he or she is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States, and will participate in the Convention in good faith.

This is to notify you that:

1. William McGaughey of Hennipin (sic) County, Minnesota ran as a candidate for Mayor of Minneapolis in 2001 as a member of the “Affordable Housing Preservation Party,” against the incumbent Democratic Mayor. In 2002, Mr. McGaughey sought the nomination of the Independence Party as a candidate for United States Senate from Minnesota, and ran in that party’s primary election. Mr. McGaughey has publicly stated that he “remains a member of the Independence Party of Minnesota”; and “has reservations about joining the current Democratic Party.”

2. Under the authority granted to me by Rule 11.K.(1)(b) of the Delegate Selection Rules and Article VI of the Call, I have determined that William McGaughey is not a bona fide Democrat and does not possess a record affirmatively demonstrating that he is faithful to, or has at heart, the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States. This determination is based on Mr. McGaughey’s candidacies as members of other parties; his continuing professed membership in another party; and his express refusal to affiliate with the Democratic Party of the United States.

Accordingly, Mr. McGaughey is not to be considered a qualified candidate for nomination of the Democratic Party for President under the Delegate Selection rules and is not to be considered a “presidential candidate” within the meaning of Article VI of the Call. Therefore, state and territorial parties, in the implementation of their delegate selection plans, should disregard any votes that might be cast for Mr. McGaughey, should not allocate delegate positions to Mr. McGaughey and should not recognize the selection of delegates pledged to him at any stage of the delegate selection process.

Further, Mr. McGaughey will not be entitled to have his name placed in nomination for the office of President at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. No certification of a delegate pledged to Mr. McGaughey will be accepted by the secretary of the Democratic National Committee and no such delegate shall be placed on the Temporary Roll of the Convention. The National Chair will, if necessary, and upon the proper filing of a challenge, recommend to the Credentials Committee of the 2004 Democratic National Convention that the Committee resolve that any such delegate not be seated at the Convention.

If you have any questions about the implementation of this notice, please do not hesitate to contact me or Phil McNamara, the DNC’s Director of Party Affairs and Delegate Selection, at (202) 479-5131.

Sincerely,Terence R. McAuliffe

National Chair

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****

January 9, 2004

Terence R. McAuliffe, Chair
Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street S.E.
Washington, DC 20003

Dear Mr. McAuliffe:

On my way to South Carolina to participate in the Democratic presidential primary, I learned from a reporter that the party had taken my name off the ballot. I drove to Columbia to learn the reason for that decision. Staff at the Democratic Party headquarters showed me a copy of a letter which you wrote to the state chair, Joe Erwin. I found several factual inaccuracies in that letter which I communicated to Phil McNamara. He indicated that he would be passing this information on to you. I would be hearing from him next week. I suggested that I drive to Washington, D.C., to meet in person, but Mr. McNamara discouraged that suggestion. I will return to Minneapolis tomorrow.

Your reasons for declaring me ineligible to receive delegates have to do with a perceived insufficient commitment to “the goals and objectives of the Democratic Party” and an unwillingness to “participate in the convention in good faith.” Yes, it is true that I sought the Independence Party’s endorsement for U.S. Senate in 2002, and that, technically, I remain a member of the Independence Party of Minnesota. However, in a telephone conversation with a member of your staff on or about December 29, 2003, I indicated that I would be willing to affiliate with the Democratic Party this year. I did express some reluctance to attend the DFL caucus on March 2nd since I intended to be in Louisiana campaigning in that state’s presidential primary until March 9th. However, if it is necessary to disrupt that campaign (assuming that I will be on the ballot) for the purpose of traveling back to Minnesota to attend the DFL caucus and thus, officially, become a Democrat, I would be willing to do so.

I tried to convey to Phil McNamara that my issues were consistent with the philosophy of the Democratic Party. If I participated in the national convention in Boston, it would certainly be in good faith. My main issue is jobs; secondarily, it is to criticize the divisive politics of gender and race. I have published several books on employment-related topics which I showed to Wyeth Ruthven and other staff of the South Carolina party. “A Shorter Workweek in the 1980s”, published in 1981, (ISBN 0-9605630-0-8) contains a foreword by Rep. John Conyers. “Nonfinancial Economics: The Case for Shorter Hours of Work”, published in 1989 (ISBN 0-275-92514-5) is coauthored by former U.S. Senator Eugene McCarthy. “A U.S.-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement: Do We Just Say No?” (ISBN 0-9605630-2-4) was used to inform opposition to NAFTA in the early 1990s. I am also enclosing a copy of the cover letter which I used in my latest mailing dated January 1, 2004, as well as an email “Why this is a jobless recovery and what to do about it” sent to more than 1,000 political reporters and editors. I believe these communications are consistent with those of a candidate representing the Democratic Party.

You apparently felt that I was an opponent of Paul Wellstone because I had run for his seat in the Independence Party primary. In fact, I knew Paul Wellstone for more than twenty years. I was a financial contributor to his Senate campaigns through the early months of 2002 until I became a candidate myself. My disagreement with Wellstone was that he would not support shorter-workweek legislation because he did not think it enjoyed enough public support. I hoped to demonstrate support through my candidacy. My campaign for U.S. Senate with the Independence Party stressed federal legislation to reduce the workweek to 32 hours by 2010. I received 31% of the vote in a 3-way contest. By my standards, it was a success. I had proven my point. However, tragic fate intervened in that race. It is untrue that I contributed in any way to Norm Coleman’s victory. Had Wellstone lived to be reelected, I feel sure he would have taken a new look at shorter-workweek legislation.

In summary, I would urge you to reconsider your decision and let me run in the South Carolina and Louisiana primaries. I would run as a candidate of “new ideas”, contributing useful proposals in the employment area. Please do not apply a purity test to my candidacy. The Democratic Party stands to gain by encouraging many different types of candidates to participate.


William McGaughey

To next appendix

back to: On the Ballot  to: political odyssey