Personally, I do not see Massachusetts delaying the seating of its new Senator if Tuesday night's result is not disputed, but this GOP argument is ridiculous:

Appointed Senator Paul Kirk will lose his vote in the Senate after Tuesday’s election in Massachusetts of a new senator and cannot be the 60th vote for Democratic health care legislation, according to Republican attorneys. [. . .] {I]n the days after the election, it is Kirk’s status that matters, not Brown’s. Massachusetts law says that an appointed senator remains in office “until election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy.” [. . .] [B]ased on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period. [. . .] “Qualification” does not require state “certification,” the lawyers said.

Of course qualification depends on certification of being the winner of the election. Brown would not be the winner of the election until he is certified as the winner of the election. As I said, I do not expect that there will be a delay in certifying and seating Brown if he is a clear winner Tuesday night, but he does not officially win until the election is certified.

Speaking for me only