Minnesota Senate Race Goes On Forever.
I will confess that I am confused by the case of Ex-Senator Norm Coleman to try to challenge the election returns in Minnesota. The State already had a recount, and they looked at all of the votes that were questioned by the parties. The result of the recount, after the board reviewed all the challenged ballots, including the absentee ballots, was a victory for Al Franken by 225 votes. Coleman is now challenging that result. Coleman must somehow prove that the commission set up for the recount did it wrong, even though they followed the directions of the Minnesota Supreme Court through every step of the way.
The Coleman campaign is now preparing for what they call a very tedious proceeding. Apparently they want to the court to recount all the ballets again. Coleman's counsel will have to prove that there were irregularities and inconsistencies (that the state recount commission missed,) and these votes were for Coleman. Coleman is also threatening to bring a class action case on behalf of all of the voters whose absentee ballot was not counted because of an error by the voter.
Meanwhile the state is without there second senator. I think that the legislature needs to rethink the process of election challenges. In my view every proper vote needs to be counted, but it seems as though we already went through that step with the recount. I am not sure if the proposed instant runoff will solve the question of which ballots need to be counted. After all, the state law is clear about which absentee ballots must be rejected. (No signature, arrive late, etc.) Part of the problem was that many ballots were challenged, some on the most trivial grounds.
There is always the problem of ballots that were rejected or challenged because the intent of the voter was not clear. I don't think instant run off solves this problem. On the other hand, lengthy court challenges after the recount are not in the interest of the state or the people. At some point the state needs to have a process that the people believe is fair (and the recent recount procedure seemed very fair - it was even live on the web if the people wanted to watch,) and perhaps that should be the end of the matter. In other words, the process needs closure short of a lengthy litigation process.
Having said all of that, I think that the legislature should consider a procedure that declares that in the future, should there be a recount, the decision of the recount board shall be final, absent fraud. When the recount panel is directed by the state Supreme Court, the people should feel comfortable that the process was properly conducted and the results were the best that could be achieved.
