Ever since Tim Canova announced he'd be running a primary race against Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, I've been following his statements, the occasional post on DKos (which reminds me, someone needs to invite him over here as well if that hasn't been done already), and contributing to his campaign when I have an extra $20 on a downticket race. I haven't seen this posted here yet, and I haven't checked GOS either, so here goes. I got this email this morning from the Canova campaign:

Dear Steve,

Last week, I called the Florida Democratic Party to request access to the voter file database and software known as VAN that is routinely used by Democratic candidates across the country.

I was told that our campaign would be denied access to this database because I am running against an incumbent Democrat, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. I was also told that any Democratic candidate running against an incumbent Democrat would be denied access — even a lifelong progressive challenging an out-of-touch incumbent.

This is unfair and undemocratic. My opponent already has untold advantages against an insurgent progressive campaign like ours. We are refusing to take corporate money, while she has taken millions of dollars from Wall Street bankers, payday lenders, private prison companies, and other corporate special interests. How much more of an advantage does Wasserman Schultz need to silence the voices of grassroots voters in our district?

It goes on a bit, but if you're supporting Canova, you likely received the same email.

My question is simple: Has it always been standard practice of the DNC to shut out access to the voter registration software in a primary with an incumbent candidate? Any answers would be helpful, since I can't find any historical evidence to this on the Googlez.

Cheers