I would guess that he found that Senate rules wouldn't give him extra seniority.
No, that has little to do with it.
Tell it to Coleman. Again, this is what he said, "...it appears that an earlier swearing in will not give any added seniority for Minnesota."
There is Senate precedent at play here...
Read my post again and you will note that I said Senate rules may prevent Coleman from being seated early.
However, although this has been repeated a number of times, I've seen nobody cite anything specific about such a rule. Whether it does or doesn't exist, I doubt very much it is based on a belief that his term would exceed 6 years. It is clear he would be completing the remainder of one term and then starting another. Just as Talent will be doing, and nobody is suggesting this is a problem for Talent.
sorry, it is not senate rule, it is senate precedent. exactly the same situation arose years ago, a death just before an election with new guy elected, and the issue was decided by them on the basis of the Constitution, senate-term-is-six-years, statement. i think it takes 3/4 vote to change such a "parlimentary-type" decision, but i could be way off base on that. ventura could have appointed coleman to fill the remainder of wellstone's term, by MN law, but he chose not to do that.
the situation with Talent is entirely different. he was elected specifically to fill out husband carnahan's term, which wife carnahan was appointed to for the past two years. Talent will serve the remainder of that term: FOUR years only.