Korean Job Discussion Forums

[khyber]

[Milwaukiedave]

So is it over yet? Are the Republicans still dancing at the thought of Franken losing?

I guess that didn't work out very, well did it?

[Milwaukiedave]

[ChopChaeJoe]

My fear is that Franken becomes another pol hack in office.

[Milwaukiedave]

With more ballots counted, Franken extends lead
By PAT DOYLE and KEVIN DUCHSCHERE, Star Tribune

Last update: April 7, 2009 - 4:25 PM

Republican Norm Coleman's dim prospects for winning the U.S. Senate trial darkened today as several hundred disputed absentee ballots were finally counted and split strongly for his DFL opponent, Al Franken.

Minutes after the ballots were opened for the first time, state elections director Gary Poser counted them, reading off the votes one by one to a hushed courtroom. When he was done, Franken's lead had grown from 225 to 312 votes.

Coleman's case during the trial has rested mostly on counting absentee ballots that he contends had been wrongly rejected. Barring an unexpected court ruling, he now lacks the ballots needed for a trial victory, and his lawyers repeated vows to appeal an adverse final verdict.

Franken's side hailed the day's developments. "The result confirms what we knew going in, which is that more Minnesotans voted for Al Franken than Norm Coleman," said lawyer Marc Elias. "That was the case when we recounted the ballots the first time, and it's now the case after the election contest."

The three-judge panel overseeing the contest, or trial, could issue a final decision any day. Coleman would have 10 days to appeal an adverse decision to the state Supreme Court.

Elias brushed aside that prospect. "I don't think there is much of a case on appeal at all," he said.

In all, 351 absentee ballots that had previously been rejected were opened today. They were on a list of 400 that the judges had considered opening before discarding some because they lacked documentation or had been counted previously.

Franken won 198 of the 351 ballots, Coleman got 111 and Independence Party candidate Dean Barkley or other candidates received the remaining 42.

The ballots, which local officials delivered to the Secretary of State, were brought under tight security into the Supreme Court room of the Minnesota Judicial Center in St. Paul. State troopers watched the entrance to the courtroom, and people wishing to enter were screened.

As Poser prepared to separate the ballots from their return envelopes, Coleman lawyer Tony Trimble asked for a recess to review the list.

District Judge Elizabeth Hayden, who spoke for the panel, refused. "We're prepared to proceed and we will do that at this time," she said.

Maintaining anonymity

Hayden stressed at the outset the importance of keeping secret the way people voted.

So state officials sat down at two tables in front of the Supreme Court bench and separated secrecy envelopes containing the ballots from return envelopes signed by the voters.

Officials then opened the secrecy envelopes and removed the ballots, placing them in piles on the tables. Sitting in the crowded spectator section, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie leaned forward and watched intently.

Before discarding the secrecy envelopes, Poser double-checked to make sure officials hadn't overlooked any ballots inside.

Then Poser, flanked by Trimble and Elias, went ballot by ballot through the pile, sorting them into separate piles after calling out for whom they were cast.

"Franken, Coleman, Franken," he read aloud.

Trimble and Elias watched carefully, alert for anything on a ballot that cast doubt on the intent of the voter. They didn't challenge any ballots.

The process was reminiscent of the tallying of 933 previously rejected absentee ballots in January during the recount. Those ballots also broke decisively for Franken and helped him achieve the 225-vote lead that he held going into the trial.

After reading the latest absentee ballot breakdown, Poser handed the results to the panel. "I believe this concludes the procedures," Hayden said.

But minutes later outside the courtroom, there was no indication that Coleman's challenge would end any time soon.

Legal spokesman Ben Ginsberg said the judges erred in permitting only 351 rejected absentee ballots to be counted.

"It should have been about 10 times more than that," he said. "We will be appealing this to the Minnesota Supreme Court."

Coleman has claimed that some counties rejected ballots similar to ones that other counties accepted, violating constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process.

He also complained that the panel excluded thousands of absentee ballots that met the same criteria as those accepted on Election Day and during the recount.

Ginsberg said that if the panel had approved the 4,800 absentee ballots that Coleman sought to count, the candidate would have picked up far more votes during the trial. Ginsberg claimed the 351 were likely from precincts that leaned Democratic.

The final group was winnowed from lists selected by the candidates. During the trial each candidate put forth lists of ballots that came from areas that generally favored them during the November election.

The panel's final ruling, which could come this week or next, is expected to include an order on Coleman's claims that some Minneapolis ballots were counted twice and others lost, with decisions that netted Franken as many as 100 votes. But Elias said that those issues "can't mathematically effect the outcome."

As for the prospects of a Coleman appeal, Elias said, "The problem former Senator Coleman has is he lost fair and square. No amount of lawyering or sophisticated legal arguments is going to change that."

An appeal would likely stretch into May and further delay the seating of a U.S. senator from Minnesota. The state Supreme Court ruled that the losing candidate must exhaust all state court appeals before an election certificate can be issued by the governor and Secretary of State.


http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/42588822.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU1yDEmP:QMDCinchO7DU