As we move slowly toward an answer to the question of the year, whether Donald Trump will have enough delegates to obtain the Republican nomination on the first ballot at the Cleveland convention in July, it is important to understand just exactly what a “contested convention” (meaning one where no one arrives as the clear nominee of the party) would mean.
For one thing, we will likely not know precisely whether Trump has the votes on the first ballot until the roll is called. Trump will undoubtedly claim he does. But we will not know whether he is bluffing because of the possibility that he will not arrive in Cleveland with 1,237 delegates who are bound by law and party rules to vote for him.
That he might reach that magic number of bound delegates is not impossible, but he is likely to be close, and to claim that he has enough commitments from unbound delegates to put him over the top — a claim that will be difficult (if not impossible) to verify and will be vigorously disputed by the Cruz and Kasich campaigns.
To understand why, consider the effect of Trump’s sweeping win in Pennsylvania this week. Despite getting nealry 57 percent of the vote there, only 17 of the 71 delegates elected in that primary are actually bound to vote for Trump on the first ballot. The other 54 Pennsylvania delegates are free to make up their own minds, though some have indicated that they will give great weight to the wishes of the state’s voters.
Additionally, many of the RNC members are not bound to anyone on the first ballot. It is estimated that there are over 100 delegates in total who are free agents on the first ballot, and may or may not promise their support to a candidate (or more than one) before the vote. If he fails to achieve a majority on the first ballot, the pool of unpledged delegates swells to more than 1,500 for the second ballot, and to more than 2,000 on the third, and so on.
It is also possible that there will be challenges to Cruz delegates at the meeting of the convention’s Credentials Committee the week before the convention opens. Trump has already made it clear that he thinks Cruz “stole” Louisiana delegates because Trump won the primary but Cruz dominated the separate selection process by which the actual delegates were chosen.
Trump has complained about other states such as Colorado, alleging that the delegate selection process was unfair. The convention’s Credentials Committee will have to decide these challenges, and if it rules in Trump’s favor it could swell his delegate total. Of course, Cruz or Kasich could challenge some of Trump’s delegates, and the committee might rule in their favor instead, thereby making Trump’s path to the nomination harder. Decisions of the Credentials Committee then must be approved by the full convention, which provides another opportunity for anti-Trump delegates (including those pledged to Kaisich and Rubio) to attempt to block the seating of pro-Trump delegates.
There has been much speculation about what the convention’s rules committee might do as well, because the party’s rules adopted at the last convention require that a candidate have a majority of eight state delegations to have their name placed in nomination. This was the result of a successful move by the Romney campaign to prevent Ron Paul from having his name put forward, with the resulting pro-Paul speeches and floor demonstrations.
However, this year it looks as if only Donald Trump and Ted Cruz will have the requisite eight state majorities, leaving Gov. Kaisich on the outside, with his face pressed against the window. It seems unlikely that the Trump and Cruz forces will agree to allow a rules change that would benefit Kasich. This committee, composed of 112 delegates (two from each state or territory) will meet during the week prior to the convention.
However, the real issue here is buried one level down: Do the current party rules restrict consideration by the convention to only Cruz and Trump on every ballot, or only on the first ballot? The answer does not matter if Trump gets the nomination on the first ballot; it matters hugely if he does not, because after the first ballot most delegates are no longer bound and could begin to move to other candidates, and nominate Kasich, or Rubio, or even the proverbial and hypothetical new “white horse” candidate like Paul Ryan or who knows.
Party rules experts have come down on both sides of this key question. Unless the convention clarifies this by changing the rules when it opens up shop, this vital question will be decided by the Chair (likely on advice of party counsel) and that decision can be appealed to the whole convention.
This is not even to mention the inevitable battles over the party platform, as Donald Trump has now outlined positions at odds with previous party platforms on issues of abortion, immigration, and taxes, to name only a few. No one may pay much attention to the contents of a platform once it is adopted. But everyone will be riveted by a bloody platform fight, not least because it will provide a look at how many delegates Trump actually controls. This fight will be made more complicated, though, by the fact that those delegates bound to vote for Trump on the first ballot are not similarly bound to vote for his positions in contentious platform issues.
All in all, an “open” convention in Cleveland would be a complicated and messy battle far different than the made-for-television coronations we have grown used to.
Trevor Potter is former commissioner (1991-1995) and chairman (1994) of the United States Federal Election Commission. Thinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions.
