April 16, 2009 NewsletterIn this issue:Election Panel Declares Franken Winner by 315 Votes; Coleman Promises to AppealShould Coleman Concede? Local and National Figures Urge Coleman to Abandon Legal Contest House Passes Budget Resolution for 2010, Economic Growth and Job Creation Basis for Plan Oberstar Introduce Bill to Build Great Lakes Icebreaker Stimulus Spotlight: Duluth International Airport Terminal Election Panel Declares Franken Winner by 315 Votes; Coleman promises to appealThe three-judge panel charged with hearing Norm Coleman’s election contest ruled earlier this week that Al Franken had won the most legally-cast votes in the 2008 U.S. Senate election. The ruling came amid promises from Coleman and his allies that the contest will be appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court if the three-judge panel did not rule favorably towards the Republican.Congressman Oberstar issued a statement shortly after the ruling: “The recount has been thorough; the judicial review has found no discrepancies. The process has been full and fair, but it has now run longer than the Andersen-Rolvaag recount of 1962-63, which Rolvaag won by 92 votes. Norm Coleman owes it to the people of Minnesota to take a decency page out of Elmer Andersen's record of public service and end this travail, while people still have a positive impression of him--or risk leaving a sore loser legacy.” Coleman, however, is expected to appeal the decision and extend the legal battle, which would further delay the seating of Minnesota’s second U.S. Senator. Minnesota election law states that an election certificate may not be issued until election challenges are resolved. Senate Republicans, interested in preventing the seating of Democrats’ 59th seat, have argued that a certificate should not be issued until all legal challenges, including federal challenges, are resolved. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), head of he National Republican Senatorial Committee, recently said that it could “take years” to seat the next Minnesota Senator if Coleman continues his appeal through federal courts. Many political and legal observers argue that the Minnesota Supreme Court has hinted in a previous ruling that it views the statute only applicable to state contests, which would suggest significant political and perhaps legal pressure for Gov. Tim Pawlenty to issue a certificate to the winner after the high court rules. Others believe Minnesota might be losing out on valuable federal projects with only one U.S. Senator. With all fifty states competing for federal funding, job creation programs, and a fair share of recovery dollars, Minnesota finds itself effectively with one hand tied behind its back, having only the representation of one U.S. Senator in the Senate. Democrats charge the delay is politically motivated, with national Republicans using the judicial system and Minnesota’s election law as a means to delay Al Franken’s seating in the Senate. A major source of Coleman’s post-election funding, Democrats argue, is from Washington fundraisers held by party leaders who cringe at the notion of another Democratic vote in the already Democratically-controlled Senate. When Coleman does appeal the case to the Supreme Court, legal observers believe the three-judge panel’s Monday night ruling illustrates the difficulty of Coleman’s road ahead as many of Coleman’s arguments were soundly rejected in the panel’s opinion. Richard Hasen, an expert on election law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles quoted in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, said, “It is the kind of opinion that is unlikely to be disturbed on appeal by either the Minnesota Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court.” Coleman has 10 days from the Monday ruling to appeal the contest to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Should Coleman Concede? Local and National Figures Urge Coleman to Abandon Legal ContestAfter Monday’s decisive court ruling in Al Franken’s favor, public opinion is turning against Coleman as his once quixotic election challenge now appears to be on life-support. A host of voices from Minnesota and throughout the country have weighed-in on the contest, and most of them agree: it’s time for Coleman to concede.Here’s a sampling of what they’re saying: Former GOP Gov. Arne Carlson: One of those GOP dissenters is the state's former governor, Arne Carlson, who said in an interview prior to the issuance of Monday's ruling that Coleman's legal maneuvering represents a “gross misuse of the American judicial system.” ... “Increasingly, it's becoming obvious that the Republican Party would like the seat to remain vacant to prevent the Democrats from having a 59th seat.” Read full story here. Former GOP Congressman Joe Scarborough: “When are the Republicans going to give up the ghost on this? Seriously. Norm, I like you. You lost, okay? Can we seat a senator so Amy [Klobuchar] doesn't have to do the job of two Senators? This is not... It is seriously not fair to constituents in Minnesota to drag this out any longer. It’s over Norm, okay? It’s over.” Read the full story here. Former GOP Sen. David Durenberger: Durenberger said that he would not pressure Coleman to quit. But he added: “If it were me, I would not” continue appealing beyond the state Supreme Court. Read the full story here. Worthington Daily Globe Editorial Board: It’s becoming increasingly clearer that Coleman and fellow Republicans — desperate to keep the Democrats from strengthening their power — are pressing onward primarily for political reasons. Meanwhile, Minnesota continues to only have one U.S. senator, despite a prolonged process that has shown Franken to be the winner on two occasions. We, like the Albert Lea Tribune, endorsed Norm Coleman over Franken. We also share the same opinion that Coleman, for the benefit of the state and its citizens, should concede. Norm Coleman and his attorneys claim they want to ensure no Minnesota voter gets left behind. Instead, they’re trying their best to leave Minnesota behind. Read the full story here. Star Tribune columnist Lori Sturdevant: A state Supreme Court ruling -- and pray, make it quick-- should be the final word on who won this thing. The certifying and seating of a senator ought to follow hard on its heels. ... Granted, a federal court case is an option for a politician who can tap his national party's deep pockets. But a federal case, running way into the summer and maybe fall, would amount to putting his legal right -- and his party's interest in delay -- ahead of Minnesota's constitutional right to be represented by two senators. Read the full story here. Mankato Free Press Editorial Board: To say Minnesotans are weary of the ongoing court review of the Al Franken and Norm Coleman election count would be an understatement. With virtually all legal arguments and the vote total going in Franken’s favor throughout the review process, many Minnesotans are saying Coleman should accept the inevitable now and not appeal to the state’s high court. ... If, however, the high court either allows the three-judge panel’s ruling to stand, or takes the case for review and ultimately rules against Coleman, Franken should be seated in the U.S. Senate. ... Dragging a losing case into the federal court system would smack more of political tricks than a sincere attempt to clarify state election law. Read the full story here. National Review editor Kate O’Beirne: “It might well be time for him to acknowledge a Franken win.” Read the full story here. USA Today Editorial Board: On a deeper level, though, this case is sadly emblematic of the dwindling sense of public service among aspiring public servants. Minnesotans, who take pride in the state's reputation for civility, are clearly tiring of the ordeal. Yet the win-at-any-cost struggle continues, prodded by partisans and parties. ... The further Coleman's case goes up the judicial ladder, the more strained its reasoning sounds. It is one thing to ask a trial court to review the work of election authorities to make sure they carefully followed the law and their own guidelines. It is another to say that in making a series of tough calls on individual ballots, they grievously violated some important legal or constitutional principle. Read the full story here. NBC’s Mark Murray: We’ll say it again: The question increasingly is no longer whether Al Franken will be the next U.S. senator from Minnesota; it’s when he’ll be the next senator. Read the full story here. WCCO’s Esme Murphy: Today is the 100th day Minnesota has been without a second Senator. On the 99th day, after a seven-week trial, a three-judge panel ruled unanimously that Al Franken got the most votes and should get an election certificate. But what is perhaps more significant is that the ruling goes into great detail that this election was fair. Read the full story here. Election law expert Rick Hasen: “It is the kind of opinion that is unlikely to be disturbed on appeal by either the Minnesota Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court,” said Richard Hasen, an expert on election law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. "The opinion considers the major arguments made by Coleman and rejects them in a detailed and measured way." “Coleman has promised an appeal to the state Supreme Court, but I would not count on it. He might decide that his political future in Minnesota requires him to bow out gracefully at this point. The countervailing factor is the national interests of the Republican party, which want to keep a 59th Democrat out of the Senate for as long as possible. If Coleman appeals, it is possible that the Minnesota Supreme Court would reach the equal protection issues more directly, but even if it did, I'd be surprised to see a different result.” Read the full story here and here. University of Minnesota Law Professor Guy-Uriel E. Charles: Unfortunately for Coleman, his prospects always depended upon a miracle. He wanted before and wants now more ballots to be counted. But the more ballots that are counted — by election officials, the Canvassing Board and the trial court — the better Al Franken does. Go figure. A good lawyer should know when further litigation is fruitless, and a good politician should abide by the same guiding principle. ... He has a legal right to pursue this lawsuit to the bitter end. But he has taken his best shots and consistently has lost ground. Further appeals will only delay the inevitable conclusion: Al Franken has won the seat. Read the full story here. Moritz College of Law Professor Edward B. Foley: But when a trial court has been as evidentially impartial as this one, one might hope that the losing party does not try to get the higher court to reach a different outcome—a hope equally to be felt if Coleman had been the victor in this court. What does it say about any candidate who attempts to overturn an impartial ruling, based on the evidence and the law, which would have been the same even if the parties had been reversed in the case? Is the candidate simply trying to find a different tribunal that won’t be impartial? To be sure, it is theoretically conceivable that a three-judge panel could be impartial and unanimous (as this one consistently has been) but mistaken, and that an equally impartial appellate court might unanimously reach the opposite conclusion. Theoretically conceivable, but quite unlikely. Read the full story here. University of Minnesota Professor Larry Jacobs: Added University of Minnesota political scientist Lawrence Jacobs: “This is judicial speak for 'nothing here,' and it is most definitely aimed at the appeals process. It's a signal that they are supremely unimpressed by the Coleman case.” Read the full story here. University of Minnesota Professor Kathryn Pearson: “People may grow quite tired of this,” Pearson said. “Most people believe it was reasonable to appeal through the Minnesota system, but I think when it becomes a federal question there are political costs involved, and he has to weigh those very carefully.” Read the full story here. Minnesota voters: Almost 5,000 people agree with the Minnesota DFL Party: It's time for Norm Coleman to give up his fight to reclaim his U.S. Senate seat. The DFL launched a website late last week, GiveItUpNorm.com, which included an online petition that encouraged Coleman – now trailing DFL challenger Al Franken by 312 votes – to abandon his court battle and concede the election. According to DFL spokesman Eric Fought, 4,659 people had signed the petition by midafternoon Tuesday ... Those sentiments appeared to be echoed by a Pioneer Press online poll, which asked: “At this point in an already lengthy process, should Norm Coleman concede the U.S. Senate seat to Al Franken?” Out of almost 500 respondents, 91.7 percent said yes, 4.7 percent said no and another 3.1 percent said they'd prefer not to have either one in Washington. Read the full story here. House Passes Budget Resolution for 2010, Economic Growth and Job Creation Basis for PlanThe U.S. House passed the budget resolution for 2010 earlier this month, laying the framework and setting priorities for the upcoming budget appropriations process. The resolution aims to bring the nation out of recession and create a path towards more steady and sustainable economic growth in the future.More specifically, the budget resolution provides guidelines to reduce the deficit by nearly two-thirds, cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans, and save jobs with investments in healthcare, education, and clean energy. The resolution is a result of compromises between Congress and the White House to develop a budget framework that includes the priorities of both branches. “President Obama sent us a thoughtful budget plan and members of Congress sharpened their pencils and made it even better by laying out a plan to cut the deficit by another $500 billion over the next five years,” said Congressman Oberstar. “Congress also eliminated a few sections of the president’s budget. Farmers will not see a reduction in agricultural payments, and we will not reduce the deductions for charitable contributions, nor does the budget resolution include additional funding for failing financial firms,” Oberstar continued. The resolution, while not authorizing spending for any specific program, is the clearest representation of where Democrats’ spending priorities lie. “It is important to have a discussion about our budget priorities before we start allocating dollars to government agencies,” said Oberstar. “We’ve laid out clear goals for creating jobs and ending this recession. “However, we also made sure we were laying the groundwork for an economy that produces smart and steady growth in the long run. We can’t go from one economic bubble to another,” Oberstar said. The resolution promptly moved on to the Senate, where it passed the following day. The 2010 appropriations process will begin later this year. Oberstar Introduces Bill to Build Great Lakes IcebreakerLate last month, Congressman Oberstar introduced a bill to build another icebreaker to assist the Mackinaw, currently the largest icebreaker on the Great Lakes. The bill is aimed not only at opening shipping lanes for the transport of goods, but also at ensuring vessel operators feel comfortable sending their ships at either end of the season without enduring the damage and delay ice can bring.During the spring of 2008, U.S.-flag vessels operating on the Great Lakes suffered more than $1.3 million in damages to their hulls because the Coast Guard did not have sufficient assets to keep the shipping lanes open. While Oberstar has been pushing for a new icebreaker on the Lakes for some time, the announcement came amid reports of a lackluster start to the Great Lakes shipping season. Given the industries of Northeastern Minnesota and the importance of the shipping industry to Duluth and Two Harbors, Oberstar said, it is crucial that the federal government help in preventing a slowdown in Great Lakes shipping. “During the 2006-2007 winter season, transportation of 10,400,000 tons of iron ore on the Great Lakes supported 100,000 jobs at Minnesota and Michigan iron ore mines and lower lakes steel mills and 300,000 jobs at supplier industries,” Oberstar said on the floor of the House. “U.S. industries in the heartland of the United States are totally dependent on Great Lakes icebreakers to keep them supplied with raw materials during the winter months. Without them, steel mills would shut down for want of iron ore.” Oberstar said the creation of the new cutter would also create jobs at U.S. shipyards and related supplier industries at a time when the U.S. is losing some 600,000 jobs per month. “Think of these icebreakers as the snow plows for Great Lakes shipping,” Oberstar said. “It is the federal government’s responsibility to keep these marine highways open so the needs of the public can be met.” Stimulus Spotlight: Duluth International Airport GrantSince the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act became law in February, Minnesota’s 8th Congressional District has received nearly $62 million in funding for programs that will save or create jobs.Earlier this month, Minnesotans began seeing some of those recovery dollars as the “Making Work Pay” tax credit went into effect and one-time payments of $250 were sent to senior citizens, people on Supplemental Security Income, and Veterans Affairs and Railroad Retirement Board beneficiaries. “We’re getting cash to people when they need it most,” said Congressman Oberstar. Last weekend, President Obama announced that stimulus projects are ahead of schedule and under budget, thanks in part to intense competition on behalf of contractors bidding for money. The U.S. Department of Transportation announced that fierce competition has lowered bids 15% to 20% on average. The announcement also highlighted the 2,000th transportation project approved under the stimulus package, a widening of I-94 in Kalamazoo County, Michigan. Today, the Oberstar Democracy Project is launching Stimulus Spotlight, a new series outlining some of the projects that Congressman Oberstar’s district will receive on behalf of the economic recovery legislation. First in our series is the project to start construction on a new Duluth International Airport terminal. The Federal Aviation Administration received a $1.1 billion grant from the economic stimulus bill aimed at funding airport improvements. Because the Duluth airport’s project was “shovel-ready,” the airport authority was chosen as a recipient of over $7 million in funding to create a new terminal at the airport serving Duluth and much of Northeast Minnesota. The economic stimulus bill specifically targeted “shovel-ready” projects in the legislation to avoid any delay in creating jobs. Because of this, many stimulus projects can get underway sooner, with much of the red tape already cleared. “This was a shovel-ready project because Congressman Oberstar has been helping us with this for several years,” said Brian Ryks, executive director of the Duluth Airport Authority. “There is still a lot of work to do to secure the rest of the funding; we will need more support from the FAA, but the State of Minnesota will also be a key partner.” Congressman Oberstar was pleased with the award. “It is gratifying to see another increment of the economic recovery funding coming back to Minnesota, especially for this project,” said Oberstar. “This is a project that is 30 years overdue; rebuilding this terminal will create hundreds of jobs in our economy, and when the work is finished, the completed building will serve as a welcome mat for Northeast Minnesota.” The new terminal is expected to be located on what is now the short-term parking lot. Ryks said he expects construction to start in late June or early July. For more stimulus information, please visit www.recovery.gov and stay informed with the Oberstar Democracy Project newsletter. |
|