December 1-3, 2008
Dec 01 11:05 Uphill Isn't the Word Dec 02 11:24 The Senate "Remains An Option"? Dec 02 21:19 Republican Saxby Chambliss Elected to Georgia Senate Dec 03 02:09 Chambliss' Victory Ends Franken's 'Senate Option' Dec 03 09:09 This Says It All Dec 03 10:42 Health Care Questions For Puff Daschle, Ted Kennedy Dec 03 11:52 Tarryl Takes No New Taxes Pledge
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Uphill Isn't the Word
I'm sure Franken's campaign would disagree with me on this but I'd say his campaign faces a stiff, uphill battle. According to this Strib article , it'll take a miracle to win the recount:
To win his case before the state Canvassing Board, Franken must prevail on more than 6 percent of his challenges of Coleman votes even if Coleman fails to succeed on any of his challenges, a Star Tribune analysis shows.The likelihood of Sen. Coleman not winning any challenges is practically nonexistent. I also think that the ballots in the infamous fifth pile will be tiny. (Minnesota election law contains 4 provisions for rejecting absentee ballots.) The reason I think that is because they're starting with 12,000 rejected absentee ballots, which sounds like alot but it isn't.
If the outcome of past election disputes provides a clue, Franken will have a hard time reversing enough votes to win, said one veteran elections official who has been involved in the Senate recount.
"Based upon the kinds of challenges I've been looking at in the last two weeks, I think that's just not going to happen," said Joe Mansky, Ramsey County elections manager.
Of those 12,000 rejected absentee ballots, it's my opinion that the vast majority will be rejected for valid reasons. That's my opinion because the people dealing with absentee ballots are professionals. I'll be surprised if there's 1,000 absentee ballots that were improperly rejected. I wouldn't be surprised if that number was more like 250-500. That's before you start considering which candidate got more votes.
Each step outlined above diminishes Franken's margin for error.
If that isn't daunting enough, consider that that's before Scott County, one of the reddest counties in Minnesota, does its recount. It's also important to remember that Sen. Coleman's lead is currently at 282.
Add up those hurdles and it isn't easy to see Franken's path to victory.
Mr. Mansky agrees with me on this point:
"Franken's best [and perhaps his only] chance will be in court, not with the recount," Mansky said.That's what I opined in this post .
Posted Monday, December 1, 2008 11:05 AM
Comment 1 by Chuck at 01-Dec-08 11:53 AM
Sounds good to me Gary. Hope you've got it figured out. I'm still hopeful but still a bit aprehensive too.
Never trust Franken and his ilk to do anything right, honest, or honorable.
Still in an undisclosed but secure location. :)
Chuck
Comment 2 by eric z at 01-Dec-08 12:11 PM
fyi - Gary and readers.
Tomorrow, Dec. 2, IS the Georgia runoff election date.
Presuming it is not close enough to get into recount matters, it WILL be decided before Minnesota matters are final.
I think Gary is right, if Saxby Chamblis is reelected, there's less cause for making greater noise in Minnesota.
It will be interesting to see the test of that idea - in actual practice, depending on what Georgia voters do.
Gary - Do you have a good website link to give to monitor this runoff? If so, please post it. If I find one, I'll suggest it in a comment, and put it up on Crabgrass.
The Senate "Remains An Option"?
I just read something in this Strib article that deserves a bigger spotlight. Here's what Marc Elias, Franken's lead recount attorney, said that caught my attention:
Drake also said the Franken campaign seemed to be moving closer to asking the U.S. Senate to decide the ultimate outcome, and said it was another sign Franken intended to "ignore the results of the recount."I've got this question for Mr. Elias: why is the Senate still an option? Shouldn't the recount and the subsequent lawsuits settle things? By then, every legal vote will have been counted. The courts will have ruled which ballots were improperly rejected. Those ballots will have been counted.
Elias denied that any decision had been made to put the election in the hands of the U.S. Senate, but added that "obviously, the Senate remains an option."
Assuming that they've lost the recount, at what point will Franken's campaign admit that they've lost?
Posted Tuesday, December 2, 2008 11:32 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 02-Dec-08 11:42 AM
The law is that the Senate has ultimate authority over who it seats.
I think established law and order should be respected, not railed against by those having ulterior motives to undo clear Constitutional precedent.
Especially when they were gleeful years ago, over Gore v. Bush.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 02-Dec-08 11:52 AM
I know that the Senate has the constitutional authority to ignore the will of the people. That doesn't mean it should use that authority.
Comment 3 by eric z at 02-Dec-08 02:34 PM
Should the five GOP appointed Justices have done what they did in Gore v. Bush? Forestalling even a recount? That is a debate that will rage for some time. Let's hope another is not caused by the Minnesota Senate recount.
We can hope.
We can expect the worse, however, politics being politics.
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 02-Dec-08 03:11 PM
Yes, they should've because the Florida Supreme Court chose to ignore Florida laws, then ignored the Supreme Court's ruling. Had the Florida Supreme Court followed Florida election law, the United States Supreme Court wouldn't have needed to get involved.
Instead, the Florida Supreme Court decided it would play legislature by unwriting the laws passed by Florida's legislature & signed by Florida's governor.
Comment 5 by walter hanson at 02-Dec-08 07:56 PM
Eric keep in mind that the vote that said what the Florida Supreme Court did was unconstitutional by a margin of 7-2. What was the famous 5-4 was the remedy vote on what should be done in a case like this in the future.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Republican Saxby Chambliss Elected to Georgia Senate
That's the headline on FNC's headline page. I can't say that I'm surprised Sen. Chambliss won. I'll just say that I'm surprised at the margin that he's winning with. The AP is calling the race, too:
Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss has won re-election in a runoff, dashing Democratic hopes of capturing enough Senate seats to thwart Republican filibusters. Chambliss, who fell just short of the majority vote needed to win re-election in November, prevailed in a one-on-one rematch with Democrat Jim Martin.According to Georgia's Secretary of State website , Sen. Chambliss is getting approximately 60 percent of the vote with 77 percent of the precincts reporting:
Chambliss (R) 932,227 votesThis likely eliminates Al Franken's chances of convincing Harry Reid to seat Franken. The only reason for Reid to do that was if Franken represented the 60th Democratic senator. That's now history.
Martin (D) 614,814 votes
Posted Tuesday, December 2, 2008 9:20 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 03-Dec-08 11:54 AM
It was a whomping. 58%!
But still you fight for every seat.
Franken should not give up any rights simply because Georgia has the electorate it has - light turnout, decisive margin of that GOP.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Dec-08 12:34 PM
Eric, I agree with you in the sense that the recount must continue until all the issues are resolved satisfactorilly.
I wasn't shocked at the outcome, though, because the third party candidate was a libertarian who siphoned off votes from Chambliss.
Chambliss' Victory Ends Franken's 'Senate Option'
It seems to me that Saxby Chambliss' win in Georgia eliminates Al Franken's 'Senate Option'. The only logic behind Harry Reid seating Al Franken was if he made the Senate filibuster-proof. There's no logic behind seating Franken to be the 59th Senate Democrat.
Franken's campaign got a legitimate but small boost Tuesday and a small PR victory but Sen. Coleman is still heading back to Washington for a second term:
The day's other news, which Franken's campaign quickly described as a "breakthrough", came when Ritchie's office asked local election officials to examine an estimated 12,000 rejected absentee ballots and determine whether their rejection fell under one of four reasons for rejection defined in state law. The Secretary of State's office asked that ballots that were rejected for something other than the four legal reasons be placed into a so-called "fifth category."Franken saying that there might be as many as 1,000 improperly rejected ballots is pure spin. It's also an insult to the election judges because Franken is essentially saying that the election judges aren't competent. As I said here , I'll be surprised if there's 500 absentee ballots that wind up in the infamous fifth pile. According to the Strib's website, Franken still trails by 300 votes.
The fifth category, Ritchie's office said, could also include absentee ballots rejected for reasons that were "not based on factual information." Ritchie's office, while stressing that the ballots be examined but not counted, asked that the task be completed by Dec. 18.
The move appeared to give at least some new life to the Franken campaign's longstanding effort to add to the recount what it estimates are as many as 1,000 improperly rejected absentee ballots.
It's worth remembering that Scott and Wright counties start their recounts this morning. I won't be surprised if Sen. Coleman gains votes in those counties because they're both heavily red counties.
Franken's campaign heralded the news as a significant development, and said it came on a day when the campaign's own internal recount showed that Coleman's lead had dwindled to 50 votes. "[This] process is not complete until every vote is counted. And today's directive is an important step," said Andy Barr, Franken's communications director.What choice did Franken's campaign have other than to trumpet this development as a monumental victory? Their campaign is on life support. Anything other than more bad news from the actual recount had to be good news for Franken's campaign.
Posted Wednesday, December 3, 2008 8:42 AM
Comment 1 by Eugene at 04-Dec-08 07:34 AM
In case you missed it, Franken now leads Coleman by more than 11,000 votes, pending challenges on 6200 some votes (more than half of the said challenges are originating on Coleman's side.
http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/SenateRecount.asp
Franken, it appears was selected on November 4, not Coleman.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 04-Dec-08 09:11 AM
Eugene, Don't be stupid. That isn't accurate. Even Al Franken isn't suggesting that. in fact, his spokesman said yesterday that he led by 73 votes. Franken's spokesman didn't say that Franken led by 7,300 votes. He didn't say he led by 730 votes.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 04-Dec-08 01:45 PM
Eugene, I just spoke with the SecState's office. The numbers on the link you provided reflect only the votes that've been recounted. It doesn't reflect all the votes cast statewide.
The total votes cast will be substantially different because Wright & Scott counties, 2 of the reddest counties in the state aren't included in the vote totals.
Your statement that "Franken, it appears was selected on November 4, not Coleman" is ignorant of the facts. A more accurate statement would be that "Franken, it appears was selected on November 4, not Coleman IF you exclude 2 solidly Republican counties."
Comment 4 by lawhite at 07-Dec-08 04:55 PM
The latest from Dec 6:
"The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that Coleman is leading Franken by 192 votes, but roughly 6,000 ballots that have been challenged by the campaigns remain to be counted by a state canvassing board. The board, comprised of the secretary of state and four judges, will meet on December 16 to begin issuing final calls on challenged ballots.
The Franken camp contends that among these 6,000 challenged ballots, Franken edges out Coleman by 196 votes, giving the Democrat a 4 vote lead. But Franken is leading by 4 votes only if his camp's internal tally is correct and 133 ballots missing from one Democratic precinct are included in the final count.
If these 133 ballots--which were not found after an extensive search--are not counted, Franken would be dealt a net loss of 46 votes and thus, by his own campaign's estimation, trail Coleman. However, it's possible that even if these ballots aren't found the canvassing board could choose to accept the election night results in that precinct and include the ballots. The Coleman campaign's lead lawyer says he's looking into the legality of counting ballots that cannot physically be produced."
Good grief! There's so much election fraud here, why don't they just have another run-off and do it right and legal next time? All these "lost" votes are incredible!
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 07-Dec-08 07:25 PM
Lawhite, Perhaps you can identify which laws were broken?
This Says It All
Posted Wednesday, December 3, 2008 9:12 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 03-Dec-08 10:42 AM
It does not say it all.
They make crappy cars. That says it all.
In the 70's it was worse. There's clueless mismanagement, Roger and Me was a documentary, after all.
They are so clueless that each of the big three head honchos flew into DC by private corporate jet, they could not even jet-pool to beg twenty-five billion tax dollars. Is that bright?
The fault seems to be top-down.
Or bottom-up.
Either way, mediocrity permeates the domestic auto industry.
In fact, the auto industry as a whole is not on any leading edge of any wave. Did Toyota or BMW invent new battery technology enabling the plug-in auto?
No. They are buying best available, from innovative start-ups out of MIT and such incubator places. The auto industry is moribund. NASCAR is stupid. Too much retarded adolescence. Mazda's "Zoom. Zoom." says it all.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Dec-08 11:06 AM
That's a fair point, Eric.
Health Care Questions For Puff Daschle, Ted Kennedy
Tom Daschle is expected to be confirmed as Obama's HHS Secretary, where he's expected to carry the ball on Obama's health care plan. Columnist David Broder has weighed in on the issue :
When Barack Obama's transition team let out word that former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle would be his choice to run the Department of Health and Human Services and quarterback his work on health reform, it signaled that Obama is serious about his campaign promise to make that issue a first-term priority.Anything coming out of that Bermuda Triangle of Bureaucratic Excess is doomed for failure. Legislation might pass on this but it won't be reform. I'll accept that it'll be Reform In Name Only (RINO) but it won't be true reform.
Daschle would not leave a lucrative job at a law firm in order to twiddle his thumbs. Only with a clear understanding that the new president will put his own political capital at risk in this cause would the South Dakotan sign up for the job.
Daschle can be of great help to Obama in achieving the goal. He has made his own in-depth study of health care issues and brings a genuine passion to the subject. And he knows the Senate, where past efforts have foundered.
But there are positive signs within the Senate as well. Max Baucus of Montana, the chairman of the Finance Committee, one of the two main centers of Senate action, moved first by releasing a detailed outline of his preferred piece of legislation. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the chairman of the other committee of jurisdiction, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, quickly asserted his right to be at the center of action. He organized three task forces within his committee and reached out to Baucus to suggest that their staffs start exchanging ideas as well.
It'll be a failure because they'll impose gazillions of mandates on insurers, hospitals and health care providers. In short, they'll try using a Washington-Knows-Best, Top-Down dictatorial model.
My question for Sen. Kennedy, Sen. Baucus and Mr. Daschle is simple: Why not allow the health care purchaser meet with their primary care physician to put together a customized wellness plan, which the health care purchaser would take to insurance companies for bids on the best prices?
When the issue is abortion, Democrats quickly point out that these decisions should be left to the patient and her doctor. Does that opinion only apply to abortion? Why shouldn't it apply to health care? Certainly a person's primary care physician knows what a person's health care needs are. Certainly a person would have to sign off on the plan as being worthwhile.
The Senate isn't interested in that model because it exposes the true agenda behind the health care reform debate. That agenda is getting more control of our lives. It isn't about making the best health care system in world better. It's about C-O-N-T-R-O-L, which is what motivates Democrats.
Instead of signing onto a top-down model, Republicans should push for fewer mandates, both at the federal and state levels, with more choices for consumers and more competition for insurers and health care providers. I'm betting that combination of principles would appeal to lots of voters because people prefer choices over restrictions and overregulation.
Posted Wednesday, December 3, 2008 10:44 AM
No comments.
Tarryl Takes No New Taxes Pledge
A loyal reader to LFR just emailed me about this morning's meeting of the St. Cloud Chamber of Commerce executives group meeting. This friend of LFR told me that Tarryl Clark made this startling announcement:
"I will not raise taxes" in terms of the looming state budget deficit.This person attended the meeting so it's firsthand, reliable information. Here's my first reaction to Tarryl's declaration:
WOW!!!Here's my first reaction to Tarryl's declaration:
How long before she breaks that promise???Frankly, Tarryl doesn't have alot of credibility on this issue. I'll simply remind people of her evolving positions on tax increases through this Taxapalooza video:
Didn't the DFL make the same promises in 2006? In light of this fact, shouldn't we be more than a little skeptical of Tarryl's statement? I pointed out in this post that Tarryl voted for every major tax increase that the Senate voted on:
MN 2007: S.F. 1024 (Business Taxes), Final Passage The Senate Omnibus Tax Bill increases the statewide property tax, paid by commercial, industrial and utility property, and increases the tax on Minnesota companies that use the foreign operating corporation structure. The Chamber opposes S.F. 1024 as a whole, even though there are two items within the bill, an up-front exemption for capital equipment and the acceleration of sales-only apportionment, that the Chamber supports.It's time that Tarryl was held accountable for her evolving positions on tax increases. Frankly, I don't think they're evolving as much as they're evasive. It's my opinion that she's said contradictory things before because she's prepared to say whatever her audience at the moment wants to hear.
MN 2007: S.F. 1611 (Income Tax), Final Passage The Minnesota Chamber opposes S.F. 1611, which creates a new 4th tax bracket for the individual income tax at 9.7%, the highest state income tax rate in the nation. This affects many small business owners that flow their business income through their personal income taxes.
MN 2007: S.F. 1986 (Transportation), Final Passage This is the Senate Transportation Finance bill, which the Minnesota Chamber opposes. The bill is heavy on taxes and fees for businesses. The Minnesota Chamber supports a more moderate package but this bill fails the cost-benefit analysis.
One thing I can't accuse Tarryl of is lacking core principles. I don't doubt but that she's totally committed to raising taxes to support her unsustainable spending increases.
UPDATE: This loyal reader to LFR just sent me this update:
Her exact quote: "I'm not going to raise taxes!" (emphasis on the "I'm") In fact, all the DFL legislators (Tarryl, Larry Haws and Larry Hosch) stated that raising taxes is not a good option.The update also said this:
Rep. Dan Severson and Rep. Steve Gottwalt were in the room and heard her say it, as did Chamber executive, Teresa Bohnen.It's worth noting that Tarryl made these comments with the knowledge that the budget deficit will be the biggest in state history :
Gov. Tim Pawlenty said Tuesday that Minnesota's budget will start hemorrhaging red ink in the next seven months, much sooner than he and other state officials had anticipated, and he's ready to start cutting spending this month to stop the bleeding.Tarryl can't now say that she didn't know about the historic nature of the deficits.
In a conference call from Philadelphia, where he and other governors met with President-elect Barack Obama, Pawlenty told reporters for the first time that he now expects the state to head into a deficit before the current two-year budget period ends June 30.
The immediate budget shortfall won't be as severe as the massive deficit he expects in a revenue forecast that state finance officials will unveil Thursday, he said. Legislative analysts expect the forecast to project a $4 billion-plus deficit.
"I don't think it (this year's deficit) is going to be overwhelmingly large or unmanageably large, but there will be a noteworthy deficit in the current biennium," he said. He expects the projected deficit for the next two years to be a "historic number."
UPDATE II: I just spoke with Teresa Bohnen about Tarryl Clark's quote. Ms. Bohnen said that the quote is accurate in its wording but that it was taken out of context. I invited Ms. Bohnen to make an official statement on this morning's meeting, an invitation she immediately accepted.
Check back Thursday morning for Ms. Bohnen's statement.
Posted Wednesday, December 3, 2008 10:31 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 03-Dec-08 03:41 PM
I'm all for holding the DFL responsible for what we KNOW to be outright lies. How do you suggest we do that?
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Dec-08 06:46 PM
Simple: Post something every time they double back on their previous statements. That & writing LTEs highlighting their duplicitousness.
