Political news from Washington with an insider’s and nonpartisan perspective.

MINNESOTA GETTING CRAZY
The Minnesota Supreme Court issued a rather strange ruling late last week concerning the state’s undecided US Senate contest. According to the court, it is now incumbent upon the two candidates, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman and Democratic challenger Al Franken, to agree upon which rejected absentee ballots are added back into the count after each voter’s preference is known.
One associate justice, former Minnesota Vikings All-Pro defensive lineman Alan Page, joined the dissent. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, Justice Page wrote that the two candidates “are likely to be more concerned with their own election prospects than with protecting the absentee voter’s right to vote.”
The process, which began when the Election Night count determined Sen. Coleman to have a 725 vote lead, has no end in sight. The hand-counting of almost three million ballots is complete, and the candidates’ combined challenges of 4,600+ votes are being individually reviewed by the state Recount Canvassing Board. With the board proceeding through and ruling upon each individual challenge, Franken claimed the lead for the first time as last week drew to a close. Though the Democrat’s advantage is now 262, after Coleman peaked with a 458-vote margin, the single-vote rulings relentlessly grind forward. Franken attorney Marc Elias expects that the final challenge count, when the canvassing board finally finishes its work (possibly as early as today), will show his client maintaining a statewide lead of between 35 and 50 votes. The Republicans dispute that analysis.
A major issue for the Coleman campaign is their claim that more than 150 Franken votes have been double-counted. The canvassing board referred that complaint to the judiciary and the Supreme Court will hear those arguments tomorrow. The overriding issue, and the basis for the aforementioned high court decision, concerns more than 1,600 absentee ballots that apparently have been improperly disqualified. It is these ballots over which the court is telling the two candidates’ to come to an agreement. Only with the assent of both campaigns will even one of the disputed votes be added to the statewide count. Naturally, ballots that remain contested will have to be considered by a court.
With seemingly no official body willing to make a binding ruling, any final result could still be weeks away. Once the state finally determines a winner, the loser will undoubtedly file a lawsuit to overturn the decision. But the candidates are
not the only ones who can petition for a legal remedy. Any voter whose ballot has been barred will also have the right to file a legal challenge in order to determine why their individual vote is disqualified.
For his part, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, realizing that the seat will be vacant for a time after the new Congress officially begins in early January, is saying he will appoint a temporary Senator until the winner is finally determined. Senate leaders, who maintain that only they have the right to seat their own members, argue that Pawlenty has no authority to appoint a temporary replacement. They say the Senate will not vote to seat a gubernatorial appointment since the reason for the vacancy is an undecided election. Other constitutional authorities disagree. They contend the Senate’s role in seating members is to ensure that the person possessing an official certificate of election was chosen by a legal and fair voting process and not to judge the personal or political qualifications of any duly-appointed individual.
Without election and judicial authorities making decisions to resolve the critical recount issues, expect this situation to continue for several more weeks unless the two candidates come to some sort of agreement. Realistically, such a concurrence, meaning that one of the two virtually concedes defeat, is unlikely to happen. Now entering the seventh week of the post-election period, the Minnesota Senate race is still too close to call.
