« Poll: Voters Approve Of Obama's Budget, Prefer Democratic Positions Over Republicans | Home | Frank: We Own AIG, Now Let's Act Like It »
Minnesota Dem Spokesman: "It's Very Telling" That GOP Is Already Talking About Appeals
Minnesota Democratic spokesman Eric Fought gave TPM this statement, in response to the repeated invocation of Bush v. Gore by Senate Republicans regarding the Minnesota Senate race:
"Minnesota isn't Florida. Minnesota has a long and proud tradition of conducting meticulously fair elections and has rightfully earned a reputation of having one of the best election systems in the country. Attacking the hard-working men and women who conduct our elections does nothing but show the desperation these Washington insiders are experiencing.
"It's very telling that Republicans are talking about appeals before this case has been decided. They know what Minnesotans know -- that Al Franken received the most votes on Election Day. And while Norm Coleman and his friends in Washington may want to drag this out for as long as possible, Senator-elect Franken is prepared to get to work for the people of Minnesota."
Advertisement
Josh
Elana
Matt
Eric
And while Norm Coleman and his friends in Washington may want to drag this out for as long as possible,
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
March 17, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Franken Camp should have made an issue out of Ginsberg - the Washington Republican who was flown in to be the Coleman media hitman, to trash the Minnesota system and then fly out on the first plane after the court decision was rendered.
March 17, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find it extremely doubtful that an appeal to federal court (or SCOTUS) is in the cards. My reasons are as follows:
1. Once the MN-SC makes its decision they will direct a certificate to be issued. Once that happens, it goes before the Senate. Once accepted and seated by the Senate (more on this later) Coleman can flail away in federal court all he wants, but Senator Franken will still be voting in the Senate, which is what this whole charade was intended to delay in the first place. Also, it will be EXTREMELY difficult to convince a federal court to remove a sitting Senator.
2. The only way to prevent a certificate from being issued is to file an appeal in federal court and have the court issue an injunction preventing the issuance. Coleman would have to work fast, and I find it extremely doubtful that a federal court would even take the case on, much less issue an injunction.
For these reasons, I think the final battle will be in the Senate. The PR campaign being waged is intended to give them cover for trying to filibuster Franken's seating. If they can establish the meme that there's any kind of problem with the election, it becomes easier to keep wavering Senators from breaking ranks. All it takes is two.
March 17, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think that a Federal court has the constitutional power to remove a sitting Senator. Even if a Senator were sent to proson, only the Senate itself has the power to remove him.
I think that the next big battle will occur after the Minnesota Supreme Court affirms the trial court's determination that Franken wins. At that point, Coleman will petition the USSCT to hear the case and Pawlenty will take the polition that the election contest is not "final" and will refuse to issue the certification. At that point Franken will petition the Minnesota Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus to force Pawlenty to issue the certificate.
March 17, 2009 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're correct, of course. I misspoke. What I meant was that it would be extremely difficult to convince a federal court to rule that the certificate of a sitting Senator should be revoked by the state: after the horses have left the barn, as it were.
I'm not sure if Pawlenty would hold out on signing the certificate or not. It's pretty well established that the law pertains only to the current contest and not to any later federal appeals. I'd expect the MN-SC, as part of their ruling, to direct that the certificate be issued. Pawlenty would be pretty far out on a limb to refuse to sign it, and I'm not sure he'd go there for Norm Coleman.
March 17, 2009 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tim Pawlenty will be happy to sit on his hands and want for the injunction . . .
March 17, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we're seeing a new dance called "the 60-vote two-step".
Their desperation is becoming palpable.
March 17, 2009 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find it very strange that we never hear anything about how Minnesotans feel about this. Are they so politically apathetic that they don't care one way or another what happens?
March 17, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, there are a lot of comments by Minnesotans on these pages. They just aren't typically identified as such. Here's one Minnesotan's opinion:
Most people have concluded Franken won an extraodinarily close vote, that the recount was as open and fair as could be expected, and that in a few days or weeks Franken will be awarded a certificate of election. I would say most people are simply waiting for this to play out.
Having said that, local legacy media has been abysmal. TV news barely mentions the recount, and when it does, reporting is scandalously superficial.
I personally think Franken has enhanced his standing somewhat by playing this low key. This is not a state that goes for grandstanding. I would also say that Coleman's strategy of denigrating the election, Minnsota election law and the recount process is not playing well. This is a state that takes pride in its election laws and its highest in the nation levels of voter participation. Coleman questioning the validity of the election is a bit like a Vermonter questioning the quality of their syrup or and Idahoan admitting hes not a fan of potatoes.
March 17, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Neal. You've explained a lot. If I were a Minnesotan I would be irritated as hell about the trial even if I didn't care who won. I guess that's what I was wondering and you answered it.
March 17, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a Minnesotan, I'm far more irritated by the antics of the Coleman camp during the trial, then by the fact that a trial is taking place that has delayed full representation within the Senate.
The trial is, after all, part of the well-defined statutory process, and there's a strong sentiment that if you have to do something, do it right (i.e. don't give Coleman any reasonable basis for an appeal).
If the shoe were on the other foot also applies, even though I'm about ready to throw my shoe at Ginsberg.
March 17, 2009 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, right wing tools.
comic strip (#205)
March 17, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the Coleman campaign is running out of steam, but more important, they're running out of money. Virtually all knowledgeable observers of the election contest believe the court will rule in Franken's favor. At that point (pending the outcome of further appeals, of course) Coleman's campaign is on the hook for all court costs, including Franken's legal team. On top of that, Coleman's campaign is facing some financial and legal issues stemming from the negligent public exposure of their donor database on their website. All of Coleman's donors last week got a letter telling them of the breach, and suggesting they cancel the credit cards they used to donate. So raising additional money from that donor base is going to be tough. Not to mention that they could end up being sued, or charged with criminal violations of Minnesota's data breach disclosure law, or with violating federal data security law, or with financial sanctions for violating the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS). If ever there was a good time for Norm to cut his losses and throw in the towel, this is it.
March 17, 2009 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink