Posted on 12/12/2008 6:34:44 PM PST by flattorney
ST. PAUL – Following the State Canvassing Board’s confusing actions over the so-called “fifth pile” ballots, the Coleman for Senate campaign today announced that it will be filing a petition with the Minnesota Supreme Court to create a uniform standard for which ballots belong in the fifth pile. Fritz Knaak, Senior Counsel for the Coleman campaign, made the following statement at press conference this afternoon.
“The actions today by the Canvassing Board can only be described as confusing to us. “While advocates for the Franken Campaign stood outside with signs reminiscent of Florida in 2000, what we now have before us is a situation in which there now exist essentially, more than 87 different standards for how ballots will be included in the so-called fifth pile. “However, as one State Canvassing Board member pointed out today, it’s no longer just one fifth pile. It’s a fifth pile with subpiles from A to Z with no uniform standard for determining which, if any, legally rejected absentee ballots ought to be included in a pile. “Sadly, based on a lack of direction from the Secretary of State’s Office on how fifth pile ballots should be determined, we’ve now gone from a state that had a clear, consistent and verifiable standard to one in which any county is left to decide on its own– or simply, as has been the case in several, not to decide at all– – what constitutes a fifth ballot pile.
“Nobody disputes that legally valid, cast votes should be counted. But, there can be no question that a legally valid cast vote is statutorily defined, not defined by the Secretary of State’s Office, but by law. “Clearly, the Canvassing Board was missing important information from the Secretary of State’s Office such as why it deviated from clear statutory definition of what ballot should be potentially included in the fifth pile into a subjective, personal and potentially politically motivated decision about which ballot should go into that pile. “The confusing, and overly expansive directives on how rejected absentee ballots should be treated by the Secretary of State’s Office over the past week leads us to the conclusion that there is no longer any uniform, statutory levels or standards by which legally rejected absentee ballots are being considered and reviewed in Minnesota.
“So we will be filing a petition with the Minnesota Supreme Court to create clarity and more efficiency in this process as it moves forward, and at the same time to create a uniform standard- which will expedite the recount results by resolving the kind of disputes taking place now and will truly make sure that every vote counts so that we will eliminate disparities between counties.
“As to the issue of the 133 so-called missing ballots in Minneapolis, we simply disagree with the decision on this matter, and it is obvious that any contest will include a vigorous discussion of this issue. “So, while the direction given today remains confusing, and lacking in uniformity, what is clear is that no county is authorized to open any rejected absentee ballot until both campaigns have not only been notified but have also been given the opportunity to be present.
“As we have said from the beginning and as we continue to believe today, once this recount is completed, we’re confident that Norm Coleman will continue to lead, and ultimately, be re-elected to the United States Senate. Today’s meeting and decisions made do not alter these realities.”
MAR
Franken has the newly nationalized Chicago machine behind him.
What is the matter with the citizens of Minnesota to even think about voting for this clown?
Our Country is in a flat spin, and on it's way to an obamanation,or is it abomination.
A third party candidate took 15% of the votes.
MAR
I’m of the opinion that ALL recounts should be abolished. Mistakes do happen, but it’s far better to accept them and let the results stand. It’s pretty clear that purely random mistakes will tend to balance out in the long run.
The loser of any race, even by one vote, should graciously concede. Recounts only cause Americans to lose confidence in the system, which generally works pretty well.
It’s like making sausage. The more you look at how it’s made, the less you like it. Elections are much like that.
Unfortunately, Democrats would rather drag our country through the muck in order to claw their way into office. It’s truly reprehensible, but not at all surprising.
A true statement, but their reasoning is quite understandable. It is all about getting and holding on to power. All considerations of decency are jettisoned as required to get power.
How does this help Coleman? I am sure the canvassing board would have no complaints with having all counties use the same standard for absentee ballot rejection. In fact that would appear to be the whole purpose of the boards recommendation.
Not to mention how does having an equal standard help our boy Coleman? If those absentee votes get counted Coleman loses, having an equal standard will not prevent that.
More like WITHOUT an equal standard Coleman loses. In Florida 2000, standards were not just different from Democrat county to Democrat county but many cases from precinct to precinct and in some cases from counting team to counting team IN THE SAME PRECINCT.
Rise or fall, an objective standard needs to be embraced to give any credibility to the winner.
Agreed, this is why the canvassing board specified a equal standard for all counties.
They said to accept all ballots except for the following four reasons
1) a voter’s signature doesn’t match up with her registration card
2) the return address on the mailed ballot doesn’t match up with his address on the ballot
3) the ballot was sent to the wrong precinct
4) the person already voted in person.
But all the reports I have read claim that if an equal standard is used, Franken picks up a boatload of votes. I am pretty sure Franken’s people want an equal standard.
Thanks for the info.
I'm willing to bet that the sources of those stories are Franken partisans that want the Coleman campaign and supporters to believe that if a equal standard is applied they'll lose. I don't believe it for a second.
The bottomline is, win or lose, a uniform standard needs to be in place.
Right and when we argue in court that the current standard is not uniform....how will we argue that? Because looking at the standard that was setup, that ballots can only be rejected for one of those 4 reasons listed above.
How will we argue that standard is not uniform?
I’ve followed this story but not in detail.
So if my question is out of left field so be it.
If rejected ballots go into one of four piles based on four reasons for rejection, why is the story about a fifth pile?
This legal filing is all about standards for ballots going into a fifth pile.
If it were only about the four reasons for rejecting a ballot, there would be only four piles.
Right?
Am I missing something?
I think the 5th pile is for absentee ballots not dated.I heard here on local talk radio that the statutes don’t specify what to do with those.At this rate, it will be next year before we know.
The fifth pile is simply all the ballots that do not qualify for one of the 4 valid reasons for rejection.
That is, four piles of correctly rejected absentee ballots, and all the leftover ballots must be counted.
So, if in each county they can do what they please with these, then is that the basis for this complaint by Coleman? That the standard for what to do with the undated ones is based on whatever the individual ballot counters decide?
Can they be counted or not counted based on who the counters want to win?
Say, a Franken supporter decides to count them because most of them are marked for Franken?
But if they were undated and marked for Coleman he decides to exclude them?
So the Coleman camp is lying when they say these fifth pile ballots can be treated however anybody wants to treat them who is handling them, and that that is not a uniform standard?
If they did, they would have eagerly gone along with Coleman's legal action and even joined as a co-plaintiff. No, what they want is that all rejected absentee ballots count in 'Rat majority jurisdictions and that no rejected absentee ballots count in GOP majority jurisdictions. To them, it's all a matter of winning, not whether or not there is an "equal standard."
I suppose that is for the Minnesota Supreme Court to decide. But this case does not look promising when you consider that the two republicans on the canvassing board who ruled for Franken and against Coleman, are Minnesota supreme court judges.
Demcrats: Do whatever it takes to win - no holds barred. Don’t worry about future consequences. The laws can always be changed back if the circumstances warrant for winning.
ie. No laws, No rules, just politics to “get the job done.”
That’s what Repubs are up against. How do they combat this?
Can it be done without abandoning principle. Maybe NOT.
It’s the same issue when fighting a war against an enemy that has no conscience. Innocent civilians are “fair game.”
Can you fight them without becoming like them and sacrificing human rights?
Now why are Democrats so unprincipled in domestic politics and so principled to the point of losing a war for fighting a foreign enemy?
Maybe, it all depends on the war. For “their war” they might not care so much about the “rules.” Torture might even be in order if they were questioning Bush’s appointees over whether they condoned torture.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.