home

The Minnesota Senate Recount

With the main work of the Minnesota Canvassing Board on the Minnesota recount complete, it has been reported that Al Franken holds a 48 vote lead. What's left to do? One thing is to deal with certain rejected absentee ballots. The Minnesota Supreme Court issued a ruling that required the parties to try and work it out and identify which ballots should be counted (MN NPR reports the camps have come up with a system for dealing with these ballots but as I read it, it is an agreement to agree to a system, not an actual agreement). It can safely be assumed that the parties will not agree on all or even most of the ballots. But one assumes a consistent standard will be applied eventually. More importantly, Norm Coleman wanted none of these ballots counted and Franken wanted all of them counted, meaning that both campaigns believe there are more Franken votes than Coleman votes in these rejected absentee ballots.

To wit, Coleman seems to be behind the 8-ball now if the Canvassing Board tallies are the final word. Are they? Well, Minnesota provides for a contest procedure More . . .

Who can file a contest? "Any eligible voter, including a candidate, may contest in the manner provided in this chapter . . ."

On what basis can a contest be filed? "The contest may be brought over an irregularity in the conduct of an election or canvass of votes, over the question of who received the largest number of votes legally cast, over the number of votes legally cast in favor of or against a question, or on the grounds of deliberate, serious, and material violations of the Minnesota Election Law."

Basically, in an election this close, Coleman can contest the election on any and all grounds that effected the count in this election. Including but not limited to every single contested decision by the Canvassing Board.

So here comes the important question, what is the standard of review for a court to review the decisions of the Canvassing Board?

When a contest relates to the office of senator . . . the only question to be decided by the court is which party to the contest received the highest number of votes legally cast at the election and is therefore entitled to receive the certificate of election. The judge trying the proceedings shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law upon that question. . . .

That sounds like the court can conduct a de novo review of the Canvassing Board decisions on the challenged ballots to me. My quick look at Minnesota state law found no decisions on the standard of review and the deference to be given to the decisions of the Canvassing Board. Realistically, Coleman will likely limit his contest to particular ballot decisions by the Canvassing Board on his challenges plus any general standard of ballot review decisions that the Canvassing Board made with specific reference to ballots that were effected by those decisions.

The Canvassing Board is not likely to certify the results before mid-January and a contest can be filed within 5 days of the certification. Even an expedited process would likely put the final decision into February at the earliest.

At this point, one has to ask this question, what does Norm Coleman think of this statement now?

You gonna "step back," Senator Coleman? Do you really want to deprive Minnesota of a duly certified Democratic Senator while momentous decisions are being made in Washington at the very beginning of a Democratic Presidential Administration?

I am joking of course. My own view is that Norm Coleman should do everything within his legal rights to uphold the views of his voters - including fully adjudicating a contest of the election in the Minnesota courts. Nothing matters more than upholding the rights of voters to have their votes counted.

Speaking for me only.

< Will Dem Congressional Leaders Answer Cheney's Charge Of Complicity In BushCo Illegality? | 2010: A Referendum On Governance, Not Messaging >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Thank you for this, above all (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by Cream City on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 11:39:13 AM EST
    My own view is that Norm Coleman should do everything within his legal rights to uphold the views of his voters - including fully adjudicating a contest of the election in the Minnesota courts. Nothing matters more than upholding the rights of voters to have their votes counted.

    This is about the people of Minnesota, not the two guys who both want -- inexplicably, to the minds of many of us in the heartland:-) -- to leave Minnesota for Washington.  The real leadership party can reclaim the stand for all the votes to be counted, after the debacle of the primaries and the aborted roll call at the convention.

    But.... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Lora on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 08:53:24 PM EST
    My own view is that Norm Coleman should do everything within his legal rights to uphold the views of his voters - including fully adjudicating a contest of the election in the Minnesota courts. Nothing matters more than upholding the rights of voters to have their votes counted.

    But whatever happened to the coin-toss??!  ;-)


    Great summary (none / 0) (#1)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 09:27:06 AM EST
    And BTD, I just have to say that you are a very good writer. That gets lost in all the back and forth about the content itself (as it should).

    Good thinker often results (none / 0) (#8)
    by oldpro on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:39:20 AM EST
    in good writer.

    Not always, of course.  Hence...the editor!

    Parent

    The Minnesota Supreme court (none / 0) (#2)
    by magster on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:15:59 AM EST
    has seemed too receptive to Coleman's arguments for my comfort in the oral arguments and in their weird opinion last week.  I am not comforted by the thought of this being left up to the courts.

    The saving grace may be Coleman's other legal problems and his need to preserve resources to defend himself in a criminal investigation.

    The courts are your best bet. (none / 0) (#9)
    by oldpro on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:54:37 AM EST
    If they have integrity, that is.  You know, rule of law and all.

    Four years ago our governor's race was contested by Republican Dino Rossi after the third and final count left Democrat Chris Gregoire ahead by some 130 votes.  The Republicans thought they had it cold for a turnover with a conservative Republican judge holding court in conservative Republican Eastern Washington.  They thought politics would carry the day.

    They were wrong.  Every minute of the trial was televised.  Very instructive.  And heartening.  The judge did his job without fear or favor and ran a tight ship.

    Gregoire prevailed.  In fact, she gained votes from that judge's decisions.

    I know it's hard to trust the courts after the activist Supremes gave us George Bush in 2000 but, on balance, if you can't go to the courts all that's left is the streets.

    Parent

    Gregoire is a superior (none / 0) (#23)
    by oldpro on Thu Dec 25, 2008 at 08:23:03 AM EST
    administrator...not such a great campaigner, tho.  Nevertheless, she made some smart political moves (endorsing Obama) and this time it all went our way.

    Parent
    Pretty good summary (none / 0) (#3)
    by herb the verb on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:17:04 AM EST
    The number is actually 46 (or 47 if you believe the Strib, but I think that is out of date) votes up for Franken but the main sticker is the absentee ballots. It isn't true that these are presumed to favor Franken, at the time he demanded they be counted he was two hundred plus votes down. Any additional votes could only help him.

    Regarding who can challenge and how challenges are being handled, they are being expeditiously handled and/or dismissed by the courts.

    I go into some of that here at Corrente.

    The bottom line is that the election will not be decided before the new Congress is seated, and it appears Republican governor Tim Pawlenty has no plans to appoint an interim senator. This may change (or have to change) depending on how long it is projected for the election to be contested. Another reason the courts are expediting the processes.

    I am under the impression (none / 0) (#6)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:30:39 AM EST
    that Minnesota law precludes Governor Pawlenty from appointing an interim senator. A response from the Governor's office concerning a possible appointment brought the following response, "our office has looked at this and it appears the governor only has the authority to appoint in the case of a permanent vacancy and this situation likely wouldn't apply."

    Also, the legal wrangling on the horizon doesn't necessarily stop the Election Board from certifying the result and moving ahead with seating Franken. In Washington, in 2004, Dino Rossi didn't drop all his legal challenges until the following June, long after Christine Gregoire was sworn in as Governor in January.

    Parent

    Here's an interesting question (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:37:20 AM EST
    Supposing the Senate declares a vacancy, as is its right, and Pawlenty fills it with an appointment, will a completion of the recount and any potential contests serve to fill the vacancy? Does the Senate answer that question, or the person in MN who certifies elections?

    Parent
    Your thought processes (none / 0) (#10)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 11:02:02 AM EST
    far surpass my research capabilities ;)

    But I would assume a Dem majority in the Senate would never declare a vacancy with a GOP Governor in Minnesota, and would much prefer the system play itself out.

    I'll trust Harry Reid on that one.

    Harry Reid from a Minnesota Public radio interview:


    "It's perfectly acceptable for us to just wait to seat somebody until somebody is certified by the state."

    He also dismissed any notion that Gov. Pawlenty could appoint someone. He said the Senate would have to declare a vacancy first which he said the body is unlikely to do.



    Parent
    Well there we go (none / 0) (#11)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 11:05:24 AM EST
    That's for a best, of course. It would not be good for the Senate to go nuclear over its own membership.

    Parent
    This kind of post (none / 0) (#4)
    by ricosuave on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:22:22 AM EST
    is why I keep coming back to this blog.  Good summary of the facts, and a real mensch in supporting the process even if it erases your guy's lead.

    And I have to add: GO AL!

    Sooner or later (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 10:25:51 AM EST
    it looks like Al Franken is going to be Senator.

    One thing I would observe about this otherwise transparent process is that it really is taking too long. They should have been able to finish this within a month after the election.

    Far better than the Florida rush (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Cream City on Thu Dec 25, 2008 at 11:35:36 AM EST
    in 2000 that we witnessed.  And historically, there have been many cases of Congress opening without all of its members in place.  Somehow, the republic survived . . . as it will survive only if and when processes are followed.  (That's a lot of what worried me about what we witnessed this year. . . .)

    Parent
    sen. coleman should utilize (none / 0) (#12)
    by cpinva on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 11:08:47 AM EST
    every legal means at his disposal to achieve victory, if it is to be achieved.

    that said, this merely highlights his hypocrisy, and that of the republican party in general.

    i spent a few minutes last night reviewing some of the contested ballots (they've been posted online). if the sample i looked at are representative of the entire population of ballots in question, mr. franken should be the winner when the dust settles.

    I really want Franken in teh Senate. (none / 0) (#13)
    by Salo on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 11:35:05 AM EST
    Greatly entertained by his books.   He's a breathe of fresh air in that musty old place.

    I looked at the first 100 (none / 0) (#15)
    by ding7777 on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 01:06:20 PM EST
    "challenged" ballots and 96% are clear-cut for one or the other candudates. Why they were even "challenged"??

    As someone that went through (none / 0) (#16)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 01:58:45 PM EST
    5400 challenges, your question is easily answered...the challenges to the precinct hand counts were the proverbial Hail Mary on nearly every attempt. Franken succeeded on a slightly higher percentage of challenges but the hand count itself is what gave him the lead.

    Parent
    Court denies Coleman request on duplicates (none / 0) (#17)
    by cymro on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 03:41:29 PM EST
    Franken keeps inching closer to victory:
    The Minnesota Supreme Court today denied a bid by Republican Sen. Norm Coleman to force the state Canvassing Board to consider his campaign's claim that some votes in strongholds of Democrat Al Franken were counted twice.

    StarTribune.com



    Actually (none / 0) (#18)
    by CoralGables on Wed Dec 24, 2008 at 04:50:08 PM EST
    not quite that cut and dry, and their ruling was a bit more of a kick the can down the road.

    The court said the Coleman campaign's challenges of ballots that it believes were double-counted are better resolved in a court hearing where evidence can be presented, rather than by the Canvassing Board.

    In doing so, the court allowed those ballots to be counted, at least for now.

    Still, it's a Franken win before the highest court but not quite a knockout blow. It opens the door for another court procedure from the Coleman camp.

    But as you noted...inching closer

    Parent

    except........ (none / 0) (#25)
    by cpinva on Thu Dec 25, 2008 at 10:51:38 PM EST
    Still, it's a Franken win before the highest court but not quite a knockout blow. It opens the door for another court procedure from the Coleman camp.

    in the reports on this issue that i read, the coleman camp provided no actual evidence to support their claim. absent that, and i don't see him having any more success, in any other court, than they had in the MN SC.