It has been quite a while since we gave you a detailed update of the Coleman-Franken “race” in Minnesota, so we thought we would do so today.
A 3-judge panel ruled unanimously last week that Democrat Al Franken won the election for U.S. Senate back in November by 312 votes. Norm Coleman argued that Minnesota’s variety of procedures to count absentee ballots violated the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution and disenfranchised over 4,000 voters. Politico reports on how the panel responded.
While acknowledging that errors were bound to happen in any election, the court said that the Minnesota Senate election was free from fraud and that errors did not reach a constitutional violation of equal protection.
"There is no evidence of a systematic problem of disenfranchisement in the state’s election system, including in its absentee-balloting procedures," the judges wrote. "To the contrary, the general election resulted in a ‘fair expression’ of the voters of Minnesota."
Attorney Ben Ginsberg - a legend of the Bush v. Gore battle, and is representing Coleman - said the judges spent "so much time in patting their back on the Minnesota system" that they "missed the issue" that thousands of voters are still being disenfranchised. "We’ll be at peace if all Minnesotans are enfranchised."
Staying on message, NRSC Chairman Sen. John Cornyn told supporters in a fundraising email that the Court’s decision was "fundamentally misguided" and that Democrats were being hypocritical. "It’s frankly shocking that many of the same Democrats who so loudly decried voter disenfranchisement during the Florida recount in 2000 have so quickly run away from that principle when it no longer fits their political agenda" said Cornyn’s email.
But the Democrats are hitting back with a radio ad. The ad tells Coleman to "stop putting his political ambition ahead of what’s right for Minnesota."
"Enough is enough," says the announcer, noting that Franken won the original election, the recount and a legal challenge. "America is in an economic crisis - and Minnesota faces unique challenges of its own. Minnesota deserves two Senators and voters deserve to have their verdict stand without delay."
Coming one day after a three-judge panel in Minnesota ruled that Franken "received the highest number of votes legally cast," the ad also represents a coordinated Democratic push to end the race.
The DNC-funded ad is playing on news radio stations in the Twin Cities.
Coleman, however, has already appealed the recent decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which has agreed to review the case. However, there is some question as to whether a quorum of Justices can be reached.
Two of the seven Minnesota Justices have already recused themselves because they served on the State Canvassing Board that has ruled on a great number of issues in this case. Now the legal community is wondering whether there will be three more recusals.
Justices Lori Gildea and Christopher Dietzen donated to Coleman campaigns, while Helen Meyer gave money to Sen. Paul Wellstone, whom Coleman challenged in 2002. These are certainly grounds for recusal.
But in order for a quorum of the Court to be reached - and to therefore decide the case - at least four of the seven Justices must be present. It is pretty unusual for a case to be undecided by the Court due to recusals.
If it does happen, the issue would be dead and Al Franken would finally take his seat in the U.S. Senate. If the Justices do not recuse themselves…well, we don’t know where we’ll be a month from now.
Today WAYLA reports on local politics from Wisconsin.
The Badger State will vote for two important, non-partisan, state offices on Tuesday, April 7th - the State Supreme Court and State Superintendent.
State Supreme Court
The typical issues of crime and excessive lawsuits have come up recently in the race for state Supreme Court. While these issues have done well to elect conservative judges to the high court recently, it may not be as relevant this time around.
As we mentioned in a post in early February, the state’s business lobby - Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce - has decided to stay out of the race. So far they have certainly kept their word.
Unlike in years past - where conservative Supreme Court candidates won almost entirely because of WMC support - conservative judge Randy Koschnick faces an uphill battle against incumbent Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson. Koschnick trails Abrahamson by considerable margins in campaign money and no third-party group has come to assist him.
Nonetheless, Koschnick remains optimistic. He says that because more than 4 in 10 likely voters are undecided he has a real chance knocking off the incumbent. But local political scientists disagree.
"In Wisconsin Supreme Court races, there is a large incumbency effect," said UW-Madison professor Katherine Cramer Walsh. "People don't follow the doings of the state Supreme Court."
Charles Franklin, a UW-Madison professor and co-founder of the Internet site www.pollster.com, was also hard-pressed to explain Koschnick's optimism.
"Challengers in nonpartisan spring elections face a huge problem gaining enough visibility and name recognition to mount an effective challenge," Franklin said. "To do so, they need large amounts of money, or the backing of powerful interests who advertise independently."
In an independent poll taken late last month, Abrahamson led Koschnick 41% to 13%. And since then Abrahamson has ramped up the campaign with ad-buys, where as Koschnick has suffered the consequences of poor fundraising and been unable to get on TV.
Even if Koschnick were to build name-recognition now it would likely be too late. Most of the time, the voters that wait until the final few days before the election to make their choice end up splitting their support about 50-50. Mathematically, Koschnick is almost entirely unable to win.
State Superintendent
It has become a heated race between the current deputy State Superintendent, Tony Evers, and the self-proclaimed outsider, Rose Fernandez.
Fernandez recently attacked Evers for an email exchange between him and a school administrator in Green Bay regarding a fundraising event. Jeff Dickert, the school administrator, did not realize it is illegal to use a state email account to discuss political fundraising. Fernandez called it a “win-at-all-cost mentality” that sets a poor example for Wisconsin schoolchildren.
Evers then countered with a press release from State Rep. Don Pridemore's office which called Evers “a bad choice to lead Wisconsin's Department of Public Instruction.” Evers' campaign manager Peter Knudsen said he did not have any evidence that Fernandez was involved, but “that's what we'd like to know.”
But the biggest issue in the race appears to be the involvement of WEAC - the state’s teachers union - which supports Evers. WEAC’s PAC has spent a total $574,000 on the race so far. Fernandez - who is running as the candidate of change to emulate the success of the Obama message, despite being the conservative candidate in the race - has attacked the union as a principle source of failure in the Wisconsin education system.
So who is more likely to win?
It’s a tough question - there is evidence for victory on both sides.
Evers has the support of WEAC which not only helps him financially, but WEAC is organized and can get teachers to the polls. There are already reports of calls to members telling them to vote early for Evers, and the calls can be expected to increase come GOTV weekend. There is no counter-WEAC group organized enough to give the same meaningful support to Fernandez.
Fernandez does, however, have plenty of support. She trailed Evers in the primary by only 4 points, and actually beat him in Milwaukee. Additionally, there are rumors that internal WEAC polling shows Fernandez ahead going into the general election.
For both races, we’ll know for sure a week from tonight.
