Court Refuses To Seat Franken In Minn.; Voters Split On Do-Over

A question about the disputed Minnesota Senate race from Pamela Matthews of Albuquerque, N.M.:

Sen. Al Franken -- where is he now? I'm astonished that more isn't being said about the injustice of having his election win hijacked by a sore loser. Things are fairly backward here in New Mexico, but after four months, most losers here admit defeat and move on.

I still think, when all is said and done, that Al Franken will be the next senator from Minnesota. But it hasn't happened yet, and there's no telling when it will happen.

First of all, he is not "Sen." Franken. The Minnesota Supreme Court today rejected his petition to be certified the winner. Franken sued both Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, a Democrat, to sign an election certificate but they refused, citing the legal process, and the court agreed.

For the record, the court's dismissal of Franken's petition is not major news. Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist Lori Sturdevant reminds us that state statutes "allow for protracted legal examination of the election's matters of dispute, and prohibit the issuance of an election certificate until legal appeals are exhausted."

Second, Franken maintains a lead of 225 votes -- a lead he's had since December. But it's not an "election win." Not yet. Is Norm Coleman a "sore loser"? Democrats think so. Just as Republicans thought that about Christine Jennings, a Florida Dem who refused to concede her 2006 race against Republican Vern Buchanan in the 13th District, one she lost by 373 votes. Democrats were all for Jennings fighting on back then, just as Republicans were telling her to give it up. It all depends on who's behind, I guess.

But back to Minnesota. The Coleman camp has suggested that since the race is hopelessly deadlocked and the way the votes are being counted is flawed, the best course of action would be to simply have the vote all over again. That hasn't happened since 1975, when the Senate finally gave up trying to decide a winner in the 1974 New Hampshire battle between Louis Wyman (R) and John Durkin (D) and ordered a special election, which was won by Durkin in September. Most legal observers feel that is not going to happen this time.

Meanwhile, voters are split. A Rasmussen Reports poll conducted earlier in the week shows that 46 percent of Minnesota voters favor a revote, while 44 percent are against it. Seventy-one percent of Republicans support a do-over; 69 percent of Democrats are opposed.

Ballots. Coleman is saying an additional 1,725 previously rejected absentee ballots should be counted; earlier he was calling for more than 3,000. It was Franken's bid to dismiss Coleman's case that the court rejected today.

Outrage. Pamela Matthews' e-mail above expresses one point of view. The opposite comes in this Coleman fundraising appeal, as per St. Paul Pioneer-Press' Rachel Stassen-Berger:

This week, a senior official with the AFL-CIO admitted that Al Franken is all the Unions and Democrats need to pass the most important part of their agenda -- legislation denying workers the right to a secret ballot in union elections. That's why the Democrats and their allies are so eager to claim Minnesota's U.S. Senate seat for Al Franken. ...

They need his vote to meet their dream of a filibuster-proof 60th vote that lets them pass the "Card-Check" bill. ...

If you're outraged that Al Franken and Big Labor are counting on the results of a tainted recount contest process to take away workers' rights to a secret ballot in union elections...

Act now. Don't set this e-mail aside with the best of intentions. Make sure your voice is heard. Tell the Big Labor Union Bosses to stop counting their chickens before they're hatched and all the votes are counted.

Turn Left on Norm. Is Coleman testing the patience of Minnesotans? I haven't seen any evidence of that other than anecdotal. But there is no shortage of bloggers who are suggesting it's time for him to give up. Here's a brief sampling:

John Mashek, in his blog at U.S.News & World Report:

It is about time for [Coleman] to throw in the towel. He is depriving his home state of a second vote in the U.S. Senate, threatening to stretch the appeal process of his losing Senate race into April. ... Get over it, Norm.

Zach Stephenson, writing in MN Publius:

I'd like to see some reporters ask the Coleman campaign if they really think Minnesota should really spend tens of millions on a new election when we're going to have to cut billions from education and health care to balance the budget.

More important, however, is the fact that there is simply no legal basis for holding a re-vote in Minnesota. There is no precedent, no statutory language, nothing. Essentially, the Coleman campaign is asking the court to make election law from the bench, ironic given Coleman's attitude towards "activist" judges.

Aaron Landry, also writing in MN Publius:

It is pretty safe to say that Norm Coleman's political future is toast. If he cared about it, his contest to overturn the election results would have been over by now. The only thing he can do now is to drag this on as long as absolutely possible, at the expense of everyone else ready to begin the process of moving on.