I'd like to think that it helped to at least start the discussion.

The only other way that MI and FL could be completely counted would be if Obama re-gained his commanding position, and his people could accept the delegations in an intrinsically meaningless gesture of magnanimity.

If Hillary cleans his clock in Indiana and at worst loses small in North Carolina, she will advance the epic comeback/collapse narrative, and the pressure will intensify even further on Obama.  So far, he's reacted to heightened pressure with errors, and he still hasn't stopped the bleeding from his now multiple wounds.  

Even though Obama ran ads in FL and set up phone banks to get out the vote for uncommitted in MI, I'm willing to let that slide.  :)  When both of them signed the pledge, neither had any idea that it would be such a tight race.  Obama promised his FL supporters that he would work to seat them, per an interview with the Tampa press.  

50/50 is a just a way of saying that he's not going to back his promise to his FL supporters.  

It seems to me he wanted to hold off as long as possible so she couldn't get traction that she has won the popular vote.  She's already getting that traction now.  There's virtually nothing to be gained by Obama by letting this go forward.

Rules committee member Allan Katz, a top Barack Obama fundraiser, says he may call on a couple prominent committee members, Harold Ickes and Tina Flournoy, to recuse themselves from the May 31 vote because they are working for the Hillary Clinton campaign.

"If your'e being paid that would normally be considered a conflict of interest,'' said Katz, who said he may also be precluded from voting because he is a super-delegate directly effected by the decision. That would also eliminate Michigan Democratic party chairman Mark Brewer.

Related to that from Miami Herald:

About nine of the rules committee's 30 members have not endorsed a candidate. Of the rest, about 15 are backing Hillary Clinton and six have endorsed Barack Obama. One member, Harold Ickes, serves as a top Clinton advisor on the campaign's payroll.

From Naked Politics who will be representing Florida:

Democrats have picked Democratic congressional hopeful and former Hialeah mayor Raul Martinez to help them make their case for relevancy next month in DC.

Democratic National Committee member Jon Ausman, who filed the appeal asking the national party to recognize Florida's Jan. 29 presidential primary, said he's asked Martinez, a Hillary Clinton supporter and Janee Murphy, a Barack Obama supporter from Tampa to help him make his case May 31 before the national party's rules and bylaws committee. Ausman, a onetime Dennis Kucinich supporter, is uncommitted.

It could be over by that time.

It appears the Party believes it's found an escape hatch, a way out of the hole it dug.

I do have a feeling that if it's still close when the committee meets we'll be able to see how the internal battle is going.  If there's still resistance to seating the delegates it will mean the internal war takes precedence over all else.

I see no reason to gift Obama half the Uncommitted delegates in Michigan. Uncommitted after all means uncommitted.  In Michigan the Congressional district conventions have already been held and delegates to the national convention selected.  Other than threats, how can uncommitted delegates be forced to vote for any given candidate?  During the district conventions it was well known who was who.

In a just world the delegations should be restored in full or if cut in half then the delegations from Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina should suffer the same fate.

After this is all over the party has to set about serious reform of the selection method.  The public caucuses must be eliminated and all primaries must be closed to Democrats only. In states like Michigan that have no partisan registration, a requirement to register by party for participation in the primaries (before the first primary)is IMO sensible and can in the long run yield better candidates.

I mean, to me, it just screams more of the same lack of leadership and courage to put it off until the end of primary season, and if this decision flows from the same short-sighted place as the original decision, I predict they will have really made a mess of things by waiting until the end of May.

It still irks me that Obama may be awarded delegates he didn't earn, and a share of the popular votes that were not cast for him; I totally agree that the delegates allocable to the uncommitted vote in Michigan should go into the convention as uncommitted delegates, free to align with the candidate of their choosing.  It just seems wrong to hand over votes and delegates to someone who made a bad decision to begin with, and then acted as a roadblock to the democratic process of a re-vote.

1. I hope they can figure out a way to resolve this fairly, because otherwise, I'm afraid we will lose these two states in November.  If we do lose these states, the blame lies with both the state parties and the DNC, IMHO.

2. I really wish there was a way to show that if the tables were turned, and these states would favor Obama, party leadership and the very loud Obama supporters would flip flop their positions on what to do with FL and MI in a NY minute.  Because they would do that, and everyone knows it.  And that's wrong.

As to the pledged delegates, I think all them, not half of them, should be counted. Hillary should get her's, and Obama should get his.

Putting all the unfairness, the rules (and the future effect on Iowa and NH's dethronement of FL and MI getting away with breaking them), and bickering about being on the ballot and not; there wasn't a campaign in MI or FL, on either side. And campaigns matter.

That said, from your math it seems like they'd almost split the SDs (much of MI to Obama, much of FL to Clinton, slight advantage to Clinton) and Obama would lose a net of around 30 delegates total (right?). Well, he's got 30 undeclared SDs in his back pocket now, and they'll be even more in his pocket once MI and FL is finally off the table. So:

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BARACK, TAKE THIS DEAL.

I strongly wonder if this means they intend to DENY to overturn the punishments. Remove without any doubt any hope on the part of Clinton and her supporters that they intend to seat FL or MI. In their eyes that would then precipitate a wave toward Obama at the end by SDs horrified by the possiblity of a floor fight in Denver and not wanting Clinton bad enough to go to the mat on it.

Sending uncommitted delegates to the convention is no solution. How do you select uncommitted delegates? At this point, Rep. Clyburn and Donna Brazile would both be considerd uncommitted, which is of course a joke.

I do think some compromise has to be reached regarding Michigan (Florida should stand as is. We can harp all we want about what's right, but the fact is that no agreement will ever be reached if the Clinton campaign insists on total victory. It's like Donna Brazile's declaration that the two states deserve the maximum punishment: it may be satisfying from some moralistic point of view, but it's just bad politics. Obama has to come away from a Michigan agreement with some substantial portion of delegates, although certainly not half. I think the upside for Hillary getting an agreement is much greater than the downside to Obama for not agreeing. Among other things, it toally legitimizes the popular vote argument.

But another Tallahassee DNC member who sits on that rules and bylaws committee, Allan Katz, predicted no delegates would be reinstated unless Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton agree on a compromise.

"Nothing's changed, except there's a meeting scheduled,'' said Katz, a member of Obama's national finance team. "And nothing will change until the campaigns work something out."

Hillary double-crossed all of the Democratic candidates in Michigan.  Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Barack Obama all were knee-capped out the gate in two major primaries because they could not campaign in the state.   She signed the same agreement as the other candidates, but then turned around and kept her name on the ballot - knowing that name recognition and the obvious lack of other candidates would give her the easiest - and cheapest victory - with a ton of delegates.