In the contest for the Democratic presidential candidate nomination, Sen. Barack Obama has a slight lead of 153 pledged delegates over Sen. Hillary Clinton.
Time Magazine exit polls have shown that voter turnout, especially among youth, has increased, and the race for the nomination remains close.
Observers have said that the nomination may fall to the superdelegates, individuals who are not bound to vote for a particular candidate.
The term “superdelegate” is the informal name for the 796 delegates who are automatically seated at the Democratic National Convention based on their status as a current or former elected office-holder or party official.
While normal delegates are pledged to vote for a particular candidate based on primary election results, superdelegates can vote for whomever they want. Superdelegates make up about one-fifth of the total number of delegates at the convention.
People critical of the superdelegate system have said the institution could possibly reverse the recent rise of youth voter turnout because of the potential power for superdelegates to override the popular vote.
Overall, exit polls show that Democratic voter turnout leaped an astonishing 90 percent overall since the 2004 elections and 135 percent among Democrats under 25 years of age in the Iowa caucus this past January.
Geraldine A. Ferraro, a former Democratic vice presidential candidate who was directly involved in the creation of the superdelegate system, wrote in a New York Times opinion piece that the superdelegate system was set up in response to the 1980 presidential nominee elections, which were fraught with infighting among party members.
But Jennifer Nix, editor of the political blog Literary Outpost, is one of many critics of the system who has said the concept places the fate of the Democratic party in the hands of an elite few.
Nix, who is also a key contributor to the creation of The Superdelegate Transparency Project, a Web site that lists the identity of the superdelegates and whom they plan to vote for, said the system is flawed and should no longer be used.
“The superdelegate system is an unnecessary process in the Democratic election process. Why do we need them? Popular vote should tell us what’s going to happen,” she said.
She is not alone in challenging the system. Mark Myers, who is another contributor to the Superdelegate Transparency Project, said he is not a registered Democrat, but he was motivated to help because he believes there is a sense of dissatisfaction and powerlessness among some Democratic voters.
“People feel that they have been shut out, sort of thwarted by the system. I didn’t want to wait until after that it had happened to shine light on the issue,” he said.
David Moss, an officer of the Facebook group “Hillary Clinton for President ““ One Million Strong,” said he believes superdelegates are a logical extension of the Democratic election process.
“(The term) “˜political insiders’ is considered a bad word by many people, but I don’t necessarily think it is,” he said.
“Instead of having the messy floor fight, we could have the people who know the most about it come together and make a similar decision,” he added.
He said he believes the superdelegate system is still a representative method of selecting a nominee.
“You elect your representatives because you trust their decisions and their judgment. You are lending your voice to a person who will represent your voice so they should have some say toward the Democratic process.”