This email has also been verified by Google DKIM 2048-bit RSA key

Re: Sanders-related advice from Mark Siegel

From:re47@hillaryclinton.com To: luzzatto@aol.com CC: john.podesta@gmail.com, mmarshall@hillaryclinton.com, dhuynh@hillaryclinton.com Date: 2016-03-20 12:11 Subject: Re: Sanders-related advice from Mark Siegel

Thank you, Tamera! David can you follow up with mark on this and then we can discuss? On Mar 20, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Tamera Luzzatto <luzzatto@aol.com> wrote: Sharing as a favor and cause of his role in the Dems' delegate system. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: * Sent from my iPhone Tamera, I've tried to get this ( below) to Robbie but I'm not sure he's seen it. Is it possible for you to get this to him or someone else in Brooklyn dealing with the convention? It might be useful. Thanks/love. Mark I've lived through many national conventions and have found that it's critical that all delegates, especially those representing losing candidates, emerge from the convention feeling that they have won something, achieved something tangible. I think this is terribly important especially with people like Bernie's sometimes self-righteous ideologues. We want them to go home happy and enthusiastic in working their asses off for Hillary. Hillary has already smoothly pivoted to incorporate some important elements of Bernie's ideas and rhetoric into her own message. Thus I don't think the 2016 Platform is a sufficiently tangible prize for the Bernie wing of the convention. I think they have to be given something that they can claim as a singular success. I think I know something that would painlessly work. As you probably know I was the guy who drafted the "super delegate" provisions of the party's delegate selection rules. It was an outgrowth of the McGovern 1972 convention where very few of our elected officials were delegates. After the debacle, the "regulars," the Party establishment, wanted a big chunk of guaranteed representation at future conventions ( as much as 25%) The liberal wing was firmly opposed to this, saying it was undemocratic. Through the Mikulski, Winograd and Hunt Commissions I worked out a compromise giving ex- officio delegate status to Democratic members of the House and Senate, Democratic Governors and big- city Mayors. That would have totaled about 10% of the convention, what I thought was a reasonable compromise. The liberals were ok with it but the Democratic State Chairmen's Association wanted to add party officials to this new class of ex-officio delegates. When the new delegate selection rules were voted on by the DNC, it is not shocking that the DNC ADDED THEMSELVES as automatic delegates. That drove the percentage up to over 15%. It has crept up even a bit higher now. ( wouldn't the republicans like to have that now!) So here's my idea. Bernie and his people have been bitching about super delegates and the huge percentage that have come out for Hillary. Since the original idea was to bring our elected officials to the convention ex-officio ( because of the offices and the constituencies they represent), why not throw Bernie a bone and reduce the super delegates in the future to the original draft of members of the House and Senate, governors and big city mayors, eliminating the DNC members who are not State chairs or vice-Chairs. (Frankly, DNC members don't really represent constituencies anyway. I should know. I served on the DNC first as Executive Director and then as an elected member for 10 years.) So if we "give" Bernie this in the Convention's rules committee, his people will think they've "won" something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn't make any difference anyway. They win. We don't lose. Everyone is happy. Anyway, I don't know if Robbie is focusing on the convention at this point but the Bernie people have a lot of passion and we should try to keep them marginally on board. Just saying... Thanks. Mark Sent from my iPhone