Posted on 02/21/2009 9:32:32 AM PST by GreatOne
If one can achieve some emotional detachment from the stakes involved, the Coleman-Franken recount and election contest may provide entertainment value. The role reversals alone are a fertile source of comedy.
Immediately following the election, trailing Senator Coleman by an incredibly narrow margin, Al Franken began the traditional Democratic "count every vote" drumbeat. Franken instituted litigation to accompany the drumbeat. Working through a maze including a trip to the Minnesota Supreme Court that led to the inclusion of 933 previously rejected absentee ballots with Senator Coleman's agreement, Franken emerged at the end of the recount with a 225-vote lead.
Yet more than 11,000 absentee ballots were left out of the recount. They were excluded by local officials for various infractions of the absentee ballot statute. Somewhere between the trip to the Minnesota Supreme Court and the 225-vote lead, Franken lost interest in counting every vote. Indeed, Franken has taken advantage of some votes that seem to have been counted twice in heavily Democratic precincts.
Among the ballots that have remained uncounted are those of servicemen voting under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act if their balltos were received by election officials after the deadline for normal absentee ballots. (The Republican National Lawyers Association has issued a press release and accompanying white paper on the subject.)
After the recount, Senator Coleman picked up the "count every vote" drumbeat. In the election contest that he brought to challenge the result of the recount, Senator Coleman has argued that the technical requirements of the absentee ballot statute should be disregarded if they were not uniformly observed throughout Minnesota. Arguing for disregard of the applicable requirements of state law, the traditional Democratic-Republican role reversal was complete.
The Coleman legal team has framed its argument regarding the excluded absentee ballots in the name of equal protection. Urging a panel of judges to disregard the law never seemed a promising path to victory, at least to me. Coleman lawyer Ben Ginsberg somewhat paradoxically proclaimed the judges' adherence to the law "a legal quagmire."
The Coleman team now protests the inclusion of 100 allegedly illegal absentee ballots among the 933 it previously agreed to. Why the Coleman team agreed to their inclusion is a question for another day. Now the Coleman team is asking the election contest panel of judges to uncount the wrongly included absentee ballots.
The Coleman team has filed a motion for a temporary injunction precluding the Secretary of State from doing anything that would prevent the uncounting of the 100 ballots. In a press release issued yesterday, Senator Coleman's team explained:
Ballots identical to ones declared illegal by the three-judge Senate contest court in a February 13 order are included in the current vote totals of the candidates, a situation that must be remedied if there is to be a valid conclusion to the U.S. Senate election, Senator Norm Coleman's campaign said today.
"The most recent court ruling by the three-judge panel declares categories of ballots 'illegal' and throws into doubt the current count which contains thousands of ballots the court has now found illegal, meaning that Al Franken's lead is officially not real - and a valid result in this election is in serious doubt. Until and unless these serious problems are addressed, Minnesotans can have no confidence in being able to know who actually won this race. The judges must remedy the situation created by their Friday the 13th ruling that has resulted in ballots they now rule to be illegal to also be included in the current totals," Coleman counsel Ben Ginsberg said.
In its Motion to have the court apply its February 13, 2009 order uniformly to the previously counted absentee ballots, the campaign noted that the court said it "must enforce the comprehensive statutory scheme governing absentee balloting in accordance with its unambiguous terms." To do that, the campaign said the court must resolve the conundrum that "certainly hundreds, and likely thousands, of absentee ballots are already opened and included in the current count that under the Court's analysis were not legally cast votes."
Specifically, the campaign cited seven ballots the Court ordered included in the count on February 10 that it rendered illegal in its own February 13 ruling; more than 30 ballots that representative of nearly 100 included in the January 3 Canvassing Board recount that are now illegal under the Friday the 13th order, and 97 ballots representative of thousands of absentee ballots counted on election night in the counties that are now "illegal" under the Court's ruling.
The Coleman filing includes copies in excess of 135 actual ballots that are representative of those now in the count but invalidated by the Court's order. The campaign also filed an emergency motion offering the option of ordering the Secretary of State to preserve the status quo for all materials and the 933 ballots counted by the Canvassing Board. The Court and the two campaigns had signed a stipulation on February 3, 2009 that all those ballots are "lawful" and could be separated, but the campaign's motion noted the Court's February 13 contradicts that.
The examples attached to the pleadings include ballots counted on election day, during the canvassing board recount and on February 10 but which are now "illegal" according to the court in the following categories: ones where the voter did not sign the certification; the witness notary failed to affix stamp or seal; the witness gave out-of-state address; there was no identification number on UOCAVA ballot; there was no witness to the ballot; the voter did not include an address; the witness did not include an address or there was no proof of residence for the voter or witness.
The Memorandum also includes detailed statistics demonstrating that numerous ballots witnessed by persons who are not Minnesota voters and where the signatures on the absentee ballot envelope and ballot application did not match are included in the current counts. These ballots were also ruled illegal in the Court's February 13 order.
Having failed to persuade the panel to ignore Minnesota's absentee ballot statute with respect to the rejected absentee ballots it sought to have counted in the contest, the Coleman team now seeks to persuade the panel to enforce the statutory standard to exclude already counted ballots. In its response, the Franken team predictably points out the Coleman team's reversal of form on the 933 absentee ballots.
Senator Coleman's motion raises the question of what remedy might exist for the inclusion of absentee ballots the panel has in essence determined to have been illegally cast. It is a serious question whose answer is clouded by the Coleman team's own agreement regarding the 933 absentee ballots and the practical impossibility of uncounting the illegally cast absentee ballots counted on election day..
The Coleman legal team has been an embarassment, like Coleman himself. Ridiculous behavior during the reoount, and ridiculous behavior now. Right out of the Democrat handbook. I'm at a point that if were almost any other Democrat other than the loathesome Franken (excuse me, "Senator-elect Frankne - he better hope he does win; the scorn will be overwhelming), I'd be rooting for Coleman to throw in the towel.
Who ended up winning that one?
I don’t really know Coleman, but he does seem to be kind of a jerk. Still, we need this seat, with Obama intent on destroying the country.
They could save a lot of time, money and energy if the two fools simply agreed to flip a coin.
The Socialist DemocRATS are always whining for “fairness.” The only thing left to do with this Coleman/Franken fiasco is to conduct another election with Fidel Castro, Kim Song Il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Octo-mom “monitoring” the voting places.
Yes, we need the seat. But his conduct has been embarassing - from his performance in the debates to his statements after Election Day. The way things have turned out, it's too bad that Dick Cheney intervened and told Pawlenty to step aside for Coleman to get the Senate nomination. I think Coleman could have won the governor's race and done a better job then Pawlenty.
Some better are meant to be legislators, others executives. Coleman's not a legislator. Pawlenty, coming from the State Legislature, could have a good job as Senator.
Yep, losing elections to Jesse Ventura and Al Franken do not look good on a resume.
Well the problem is that Coleman and his team have a disadvantage with courts that appear to favor Franken. So sticking to one mantra is not as simple as it seems. Is it out of the ordinary to expect courts to abide by their own rulings? I know we live in an Alice in Wonderland world where even the meaning of “is” is in doubt. Tell me the strategy that would guarantee a Coleman win? I believe they need a way to re-vote the race. That is a long term and indeed fair solution. Coleman should be pushing for that and any Republicans in Minnesota should also work to facilitate that end. Otherwise I’m all for delaying Franken from taking the Senate seat till hell freezes over. It is one less vote in the Senate for the Democrats.
The bottom line is that Republicans are not as vicious
as the Democrats in these situations.
I don’t know what to say, if we can’t agree how to count votes, and how to conduct a recount of votes in a close election. It seems odd to me that the fight is over which votes can legally be counted.
I wish that there were a provision for holding a new election in our laws. Since the recount will hinge on legalities, the losing side will feel that they were cheated. I wish they could declare that this election was so close that the winner can’t be determined, and then have another election.
In reviewing the Court's February 10, 2009, Order, and the affidavits submitted to allow the ballots to be opened and counted, I'm not seeing what Coleman's campaign is complaining about. Seems to me that the judges did strictly follow state law (and we're talking about only 23 ballots, anyway). The bulk of the Colman team's complaint is about the 933 ballots they (stupidly) agreed to have opened and counted during the recount - even stipulating in a Beruary 3, 2009, document that those votes were legally cast - and complaining about an untold number of absentee ballots that may have been illegally opened and counted during the election; those ballots nothing can be done about.
A new election is not allowed under Minnesota law, so that is not an option.
I don't think holding new elections is the way to go. Just need to come up with better recount procedures, which I'm sure will happen in Minnesota after this experience.
Flip a coin? Flip a coin for a Senate seat? it seems to me that a seat in our house of lords should not be decided by something so trivial. Besides the loser would just cry ‘foul’. or is that fowl by one of those turkeys?? I think it should be pistols at 20 paces. Winner goes to Washington, loser goes 6 feet under and never again to inflict himself on us.
None of it makes a difference.
Those in power want Franken, they will get Franken.
Coleman is spinning his wheels. Conservatives, constitutionalists, are all spinning their wheels. The die is set.
IMO, the battle in the political arena, has been fought and lost. But, there is yet a battle to be fought.
Who needs Coleman in the Senate when the Democrats already have RINOs Collins, Snowe and Specter on their side?
Good point...Your idea is much more civilized. I like it.
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.