Archive for January, 2009

President Obama apparently has a message for DC Republicans: If you want to be accepted by the in crowd, you’ll have to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh:

“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

One White House official confirmed the comment but said he was simply trying to make a larger point about bipartisan efforts. “There are big things that unify Republicans and Democrats,” the official said. “We shouldn’t let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done.”

Let’s hope Republicans take principled stands against what’s being called a stimulus package. That seems to be what John Boehner and Eric Cantor are doing. Frankly, I’d love seeing the bill get zero GOP votes. That way, voters can’t hang it around our necks when it goes splat.

One thing that’s certain is that President Obama is going to continue his fearmongering campaign in hopes of getting his stimulus package passed:

“We are experiencing an unprecedented economic crisis that has to be dealt with and dealt with rapidly,” Obama said during the meeting.

This combination of fearmongering and hyperbole is something I’d expect from Al Gore. It appears that President Obama is equally willing to tell tall tales to get his agenda passed. People with a grasp of recent history realize that Al Gore was best known for his partisan, divisive tactics and his willingness to say anything to get President Clinton’s agenda passed.

Here’s what House Minority Leader Boehner said in confronting President Obama on the stiumulus package:

“You know, I’m concerned about the size of the package. And I’m concerned about some of the spending that’s in there, [about]…how you can spend hundreds of millions on contraceptives,” House GOP Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) later said. “How does that stimulate the economy?”

The simple answer is that things like that won’t stimulate the economy. They aren’t meant to. Here’s some additional proof that President Obama will use fearmongering tactics to spend unprecedented amounts of money:

But White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs countered: “There was a lot of agreement in that room about the notion that we’re facing an economic crisis unlike we’ve seen in quite some time…that we must act quickly to stimulate the economy, create jobs, put money back in people’s pockets.”

While there’s no denying the fact that we’re in a recession, it’s intellectually dishonest to say that “we’re facing an economic crisis unlike we’ve seen in quite some time.” We certainly saw something far worse during the last days of the Carter administration.

The key question that we must keep asking is how spending $200,000,000 on maintenance of the National Mall will help pull us out of this recession. Here’s another key question we should keep asking: How will spending $650,000,000 on digital TV coupons pull us out of this recession?

Let’s hope R’s in Washington, DC start paying attention to the bad policies being pushed by the Obama administration. Let’s hope that they vote against pissing huge chunks of money away. It isn’t that I think they’ll derail this pork-laden legislation. Rather, I’d hope they’d vote against this so they don’t get blamed for the damage this legislation will do. I’d hope they’d vote against this legislation so they don’t get blamed for the wasteful spending that’s a significant part of this legislation.

BTW, here’s a thought worth pondering: John McCain campaigned saying that he’d veto bills that had earmarks in them, saying that I’ll veto the bill. I’ll expose their names. I’ll make them famous.” Now he’s irritated that John Cornyn is actually following conservative principles in opposing this legislation.

It’s also interesting that Sen. McCain isn’t raising any objections about the corruption machine known as Timothy Geithner.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

That’s the title of this article written by Jonathan Martin and Carol Lee. My response to President Obama would’ve been brief and succinct: Whether you won the election is irrelevant to setting good economic policy. This stimulus package is terrible economic policy.

President Obama listened to Republican gripes about his stimulus package during a meeting with congressional leaders Friday morning, but he also left no doubt about who’s in charge of these negotiations. “I won,” Obama noted matter-of-factly, according to sources familiar with the conversation.

The exchange arose as top House and Senate Republicans expressed concern to the president about the amount of spending in the package. They also raised red flags about a refundable tax credit that returns money to those who don’t pay income taxes, the sources said.

Simply put, the stimulus package will have little impact in the short term. According to the CBO’s study, significantly less than half of the stimulus package will be spent before the 2010 midterm election. Here’s a short list of items that money is being appropriated for:

  • $650 million for digital TV coupons.
  • $6 billion for colleges/universities, many which have billion dollar endowments.
  • $166 billion in direct aid to states, many of which have failed to budget wisely.
  • $50 million in funding for the National Endowment of the Arts.
  • $44 million for repairs to U.S. Department of Agriculture headquarters.
  • $200 million for the National Mall, including grass planting.

I said then what I’ll say now: What stimulative effect is planting grass at the National Mall going to have? What stimulative effect will $650,000,000 worth of digital TV coupons going to have?

Though nobody is paying attention, the Obama administration is admitting that it doesn’t know what effect spending $850,000,000,000 will have in terms of creating jobs:

“Can you tell me Mr. Barthold, how many jobs will be created as a result of this legislation?” Camp asked. Barthold replied, “In short, Mr. Camp, I can’t.” Camp then pressed Barthold to clarify his position, “So we don’t have an estimate of the number of jobs this would create either private sector or public? We don’t have any estimate of the economic effect that this legislation would have on our economy, whether it would create any growth in our economy at all? We don’t have that data before the committee today?” Barthold then nodded his head and shrugged.

The best that the Obama administration can do is admit that they’ll spend unprecedented amounts of money. Unfortunately, they’d also have to admit that there isn’t a guarantee that spending that much money will help the economy. Why should people have any confidence that the Obama adminstration knows what it’s doing in terms of righting the nation’s economic ship?

The good news in this for the Obama administration is that they’ll pass this legislation without difficulty. The bad news for the Obama administration is that they’ll own the high inflation, weak job growth and unprecedented annual budget deficits that will happen as a direct result of this stimulus package.

“We expressed our concerns about some of the spending that’s being proposed in the House bill,” House Minority Leader John Boehner said after meeting with Obama. “How can you spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives?” Boehner asked. “How does that stimulate the economy?”

The Obama administration better get used to hearing the drumbeat of criticism for his irresponsible spending habits and for his not having a clearly defined plan on how he’d fix the economy.

Love him or hate him, Bill Clinton wrote a book titled Putting People First: How We Can All Change America outlining his economic plan. In that book, he talked about fiscal policy, middle class tax cuts, re-inventing government and reforming welfare. It was his blueprint.

Based on Thomas Bathold’s testimony in front of the House Ways and Means Committee, Barack Obama’s blueprint seems to be “I’m going to spend lots of money. Let’s hope it works.”

Forgive me if that doesn’t give me confidence in the Obama administration’s economic plan.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

This afternoon, I had the privilege of participating in a blogger conference call with Sen. Norm Coleman. (Ryan Flynn, who’s doing a great job at MDE, also participated in the call.)

The first thing I noticed was that Sen. Coleman sounded confident that he’d be the winner if uniform standards were applied, double-counted votes were eliminated and that the only thing that got counted as a vote was the information found on a physical ballot.

Another thing that stood out for me was that Sen. Coleman’s emphasis on this being decided in Minnesota in accordance with Minnesota’s election law, not by Harry Reid and Al Franken.

I asked Sen. Coleman if he knew, to the best of his knowledge, of a time when a candidate got votes counted that couldn’t be verified with physical ballots. He talked about a precedent in southern Minnesota in which only physical ballots were counted. Sen. Coleman then mentioned that there wasn’t much in the way of precedent on this issue.

As I said here, Franken’s lead shrinks dramatically when you eliminate the 100+ vote Franken gained from double-counting. It shrinks even more when the 46 votes Franken gained in the recount by going by the scanning machine tapes rather than by going strictly by physical ballots.

Obviously, as a partisan Republican, I’d prefer seeing Sen. Coleman get re-elected. first and foremost, though, is I want all the ballots counted that were properly cast, I want all relevant election laws followed to the T and I want the fifth pile absentee ballots to be accepted or rejected according to Minnesota law, not because a Franken political hack had veto power over which ballots should be accepted and which should be rejected.

I thank Sen. Coleman for taking the time to talk with bloggers on the recount. ?I found it informative.

Finally, this is typical Norm. One of the things I’ve appreciated about him is his staying in touch with Minnesotans through his blogger conference calls. We need more legislators in Washington, DC and in St. Paul that actually make time to listen. My biggest complaint with Washington, DC politicians is that they don’t listen but they do think they know better than the rest of us. That description has never fit Norm Coleman.

That’s why I hope he wins this recount.

UPDATE: Janet of SCSUScholars also participated in the Coleman conference call. Follow this link to read Janet’s post.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Dave Mindeman has been known for writing some strange articles. None is more strange than this article, though. It didn’t take Mr. Mindeman long to start using incendiary rhetoric:

And how true it will be for Minnesota. The Federal government is about to embark on a massive, monumental, gigantic stimulus program….and yet each state governor will probably do the things that will counteract the effect.

Oh, to be sure, governors have budget balancing constraints because of state regulations. Understandable. Explainable. But Governors who balance budgets by only slashing government spending are doing their own best Hoover imitation. And with Pawlenty, it is even worse.

First off, the “massive, monumental, gigantic stimulus program” is nothing more than the federal government pissing money away. As I pointed out here, much of the money won’t be spent until after the next midterm election. Calling this legislation stimulus isn’t just a stretch. It’s outright propaganda.

If that isn’t enough incendiary rhetoric, Mr. Mindeman’s saying that governors are “slashing spending” just adds fuel to the fire. Thus far, Gov. Pawlenty has offered several proposals that save state taxpayers money without cutting services. Why Mr. Mindeman thinks that’s “slashing spending” is beyond me. I suspect that anything even remotely approaching sane spending levels is considered slashing budget cuts with him.

Big cuts to education will stifle our economic recovery. An educated workforce is critical to meeting global competition. When the job market unfreezes….when businesses look to expand or rehire…only education can fill those needs adequately.

Mr. Mindeman hasn’t seen Gov. Pawlenty’s budget but he’s automatically assumed that education will undergo massive cuts. That’s hyperventillation at its most extreme. It’s also an indicator that Mr. Mindeman, formerly the campaign manager for Cowleen Rowley, thinks that every penny approrpriated for education is justified and doesn’t require oversight or review. That’s an intellectually indefensible position.

Mr. Mindeman suggests that Gov. Pawlenty take Paul Krugman’s advice. Here’s a little taste of Dr. Krugman’s advice:

But even as Washington tries to rescue the economy, the nation will be reeling from the actions of 50 Herbert Hoovers, state governors who are slashing spending in a time of recession, often at the expense both of their most vulnerable constituents and of the nation’s economic future.

First, the notion that Washington can “rescue the economy” is foolishness. Secondly, even if that were possible in any circumstance, it’s totally absurd to think that this legislation could rewcue this economy.

Dr. Krugman’s belief that there are 50 “state governors who are slashing spending” is absurd. Is California slashing spending? Is Michigan “slashing spending”? Are Pennsylvania, New York or New Jersey “slashing spending”?

California’s in the trouble it’s in because recent constitutional amendments passed through the initiative & referendum process require exorbitant spending on embryonic stem cell research. They’ve refused to set sensible priorities. As a reult, their budget deficit is bigger than Minnesota’s budget for this biennium.

If Mindeman chooses to use Dr. Krugman, I’d suggest that he uses something of Dr. Krugman’s that isn’t so ill-informed. (Admittedly, that’s a difficult task these days but it’s still my suggestion.)

Finally, there’s this:

Pawlenty will soon submit his budget and if the MPR report is correct, he will again continue this failed policy of “no new taxes”. He does this in the face of our jobs report that moves unemployment to 6.9%.

This is wrong-headed thinking on a number of things.

1) We don’t have a revenue problem. The DFL still hasn’t figured out how to set sustainable budget targets. That’s because they’ve refused to set intelligent priorities. The DFL has set priorities. Unfortunately for Minnesotans, that priority is to constantly spend more than we have and increse taxes to cover the shortfall.
2)It assumes that increasing taxes is what’s needed for prosperity. That isn’t just wrong-headed. It’s idiotic.
3) Raising taxes sucks money from the private sector and into the government’s coffers, thereby sucking the private sector’s ability to invest their money in their businesses and in job growth.
4) The DFL’s idea of setting budget targets is funding every item of the various special interest groups’ wish lists. That isn’t setting priorities. That’s just pledging to use my taxes to pay off the DFL’s special interest allies.

There’s a couple questions that I have for Mr. Mindeman:

1) Why won’t the DFL try thinking of ways to spend money more efficiently instead of constantly thinking of increasing taxes?
2) Why doesn’t the DFL ever think of innovative ways to save the taxpayers’ money?

When Mr. Mindeman can answer those questions, I’ll listen to his ‘advice’. Until then, he can kiss my ass.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

I’ve had the good fortune over the last 2 years of talking with several people in Rep. Bachmann’s communications team. Now, Rep. Bachmann’s team is undergoing a bit of a change. Here’s their official statement on those changes:

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) announced today that her Communications Director, Mary Vought, and Press Secretary, Stephen Miller, will join Republican leadership offices to help other members replicate her effective communications strategies.

“Both Mary and Stephen have been incredible assets,” said Bachmann. “I am so proud that they will take on important roles where they can continue to spread the conservative message of lower taxes, smaller government, and greater personal freedoms.”

Mary Vought will lead the House Republican Conference’s effort to enhance the communications strategy for all House Republicans by supporting their press secretaries in spreading the Party’s message.

Stephen Miller joins veteran conservative leader, Congressman John Shadegg (R-AZ), as press secretary. Shadegg, a founder of the Republican Study Committee, the leading conservative caucus of House members, is a prominent national spokesman for conservative positions.

In her first term in Congress, Bachmann earned unprecedented media coverage. Her three-person communications team executed a strong strategy that earned her exceptional coverage in local papers in Minnesota, on nationally-broadcast news shows in both popular and financial news sectors, and in important conservative outlets on radio and the internet.

“Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is a rising star in our party who has groomed an excellent staff,” said Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN), Chairman of the House Republican Conference. “Mary Vought brings a wealth of communications experience to our team at Conference, where she will continue to serve Congresswoman Bachmann as well as the entire House GOP Conference in her new role as press secretary. In addition, we look forward to continuing to work with Congresswoman Bachmann as we communicate our conservative ideals of limited government, a strong national defense and traditional moral values to the American people.”

“Dave Dziok, who has blazed new trails as the Congresswoman’s Director of New Media, will continue to anchor our communications shop,” said Michelle Marston, Bachmann’s Chief of Staff. “Communications will continue to be an important part of our office work and we will hire new staff to build on our effective communications strategy.”

Having worked with Mr. Dziok, I can say without hesitation that he’s an innovator in the communications department. He’s a man that listens first and acts second.

About a month ago, I thought that having a tool in place to track the House’s votes and the GOP’s amendments to the Democrats’ bills would be a good thing. I told Mr. Dziok the type of information that bloggers like myself would find useful in holding Congress’s accountable. It wasn’t long after that that he created this new blog. This blog gives bloggers like me the ammunition needed to ask Democrats why they voted against common sense proposals.

If Democrats are going to vote against thoughtful amendments, their actions should be scrutinized.

Thanks to Dave Dziok’s work, bloggers now have a tool to help hold Democrats accountable. The thing I like most about this blog is that it’s got everything I want in one place. That’s an invaluable tool for bloggers.

While some of Rep. Bachmann’s communications staff is moving into different positions, I’m confident that she’ll still have a strong communications team, thanks in large part to Dave Dziok.

Technorati: , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Ben Ginsberg, the legal counsel to the Coleman for Senate campaign, issued this statement after a 3-judge panel rejected Mr. Franken’s motion:

“Tonight’s decision from the court is a stinging defeat for Al Franken. It underscores that the Coleman contest will proceed, that there will be a trial, and that every valid vote will be counted and counted only once. This victory for the voters of Minnesota should serve as another strong reminder to Harry Reid and Al Franken that they can’t just dismiss for their convenience the legal process in Minnesota. This will allow Minnesota voters whose votes have not yet been counted, to be counted. The Franken suggestion- repeated four times in court today- that this be done in DC by the US Senate was soundly rejected by Minnesota judges invoking Minnesota law. Al Franken now needs to once and for all step aside and let the process run its course so Minnesota determines who rightfully won this election.”

Here’s what the AP’s Pat Condon is reporting:

A three-judge panel in Minnesota’s contested Senate election has denied Democrat Al Franken’s motion to dismiss his opponent’s recount lawsuit, clearing the path for the trial to start next week. The judges rejected Franken’s argument on Thursday that their review should be confined to determining if the recount was mathematically correct, saying the court has jurisdiction to determine whether votes were legally cast.

This isn’t good news for Franken because some rulings ignored Minnesota law. Those rulings gave Franken the lead he has now. With this ruling, Franken must now watch the rules applied uniformly. That’s the last thing he wanted.

Whether this is enough to put Sen. Coleman in the lead is still to be determined. Nonetheless, it allows the court to look at the law and the evidence. At minimum, it will shrink Franken’s lead dramatically.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

Norm Coleman made his case to Minnesotans yesterday, laying out some specifics on why he expects to win the recount. Here are three things that Mr. Franken would rather you didn’t know about:

First, there were a number of ballots that were counted twice. These double-counted votes accrued overwhelmingly in Al Franken’s favor. When corrected, I will gain upwards of 100 votes.

Secondly, the inconsistent treatment of thousands of rejected absentee ballots has dramatically skewed the results. Simply put, certain types of ballots were counted in one area but were not counted in other areas. These ballots were counted overwhelmingly in pro-Franken areas. When a consistent standard is applied statewide, the vote totals will change drastically.

Third, a number of alleged “missing ballots” were counted during the recount even though no one could actually prove that these ballots ever existed. These votes again accrued in Franken’s favor. When corrected we will gain over 40 votes.

Mr. Franken currently holds a 225 vote lead. If you subtract the 100+ double-counted ballots from Franken’s totals, which I think will happen, Franken’s lead suddenly is dramatically narrowed.

When you eliminate the missing ballots that got counted, which will happen if they follow Minnesota’s election laws, Mr. Franken’s lead shrinks to approximately 75 votes. I pointed out here the portion of the law governing recounts:

Recounts are typically administrative proceedings with the scope limited to the manual recount of the ballots validly cast for the office or ballot question and the declaration of the results. A recount is performed by a canvassing board or by its staff.

Sen. Coleman rightly points out that you can’t count votes if there isn’t physical proof that the votes exist. It’s like the old lawyer’s saying that “I only know what I can prove.” Speculation isn’t proof. PERIOD.

Finally, it’s worth noting that a ruling on the infamous ‘fifth pile’ ballots gave both campaigns veto power over fifth pile ballots. Minnesota law clearly states that rejecting and accepting absentee ballots is an administrative process done by local election official and that absentee ballots are accepted or rejected for 4 specific reasons.

Minnesota election law certainly didn’t anticipate giving partisans veto authority over absentee ballots. When all fifth pile absentee ballots are counted, Mr. Franken’s lead will either be miniscule or nonexistent.

That’s why Norm’s right in fighting.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

This video says everything that needs to be said about the Democrats’ Spendapalooza stimulus package. It’s possibly the most devastating video I’ve seen.

Technorati: , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

The CBO has issued a report stating that the legislation charitably known as the stimulus package won’t produce much stimulus this year. This isn’t shocking. People need to stop looking at this as something to stimulate the economy. People need to see this as the Obama administration’s best opportunity to dramatically alter the federal government’s relationship with the private sector. Here’s what you need to know about the stimulus package:

Less than half the money dedicated to highways, school construction and other infrastructure projects in a massive economic stimulus package unveiled by House Democrats is likely to be spent within the next two years, according to congressional budget analysts, meaning most of the spending would come too late to lift the nation out of recession.

A report by the Congressional Budget Office found that only about $136 billion of the $355 billion that House leaders want to allocate to infrastructure and other so-called discretionary programs would be spent by Oct. 1, 2010. The rest would come in future years, long after the CBO and other economists predict the recession will have ended.

Here in Minnesota, the DFL is banking heavily on the stimulus package to wipe out Minesota’s deficit and create jobs. They’re especially banking on public works projects to create or maintain jobs. Considering the fact that “less than half the money dedicated to highways, school construction and other infrastructure projects” are “likely to be spent” this biennium, it’s apparent that the DFL’s plan is best characterized as being built on shifting sand.

Few argue that we need economic growth to balance Minnesota’s budget. That’s why it’s important that we do everything possible to spur economic growth immediately, not the next biennium. Here’s some of the breakdowns:

Still, the report from the CBO, the nonpartisan arbiter of congressional spending measures, offers a stark assessment of some of the Democrats’ top priorities. For example, of $30 billion in highway spending, less than $4 billion would occur over the next two years. Of $18.5 billion proposed for renewable energy, less than $3 billion would be spent by 2011. And of $14 billion for school construction, less than $7 billion would be spent in the first two years.

This bill is more trojan horse than short term economic shot in the arm. That’s alot of spending for so little stimulus. It’s also highly inflationary.

When an economic plan adds trillions in debt, increases inflation and doesn’t increase private sector productivity, isn’t that the worst of all possible worlds?

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Harry Reid will attempt to seat Al Franken as the junior senator from Minnesota. His logic, if it can be called that, is disturbing:

“We’re going to try to seat Al Franken,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told reporters on Wednesday, a few hours before he posed with Franken for photos just off the Senate floor. “There’s not a question in anyone’s mind, an assertion by anyone, that there’s been any fraud or wrongdoing in this election.”

Sen. Reid is trying to overlook the fact that Sen. Coleman has said that there’s been wrongdoing “in this election.” It’s apparent that Sen. Reid didn’t read King’s post on all the different ‘oddities’ that have occured during the process.

Rest assured of this: If Reid is successful in seating Franken before the election contest is finished, that will fire up the Republican base across the country. That will be the GOP’s rallying cry in 2010. It’s one thing to lose an election. It’s another for the Senate Majority Leader to say that he’ll ignore the will of Minnesota’s voters.

John Cornyn, who’s chairing the NRSC, says not so fast:

After the Reid-Franken meeting, Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican and chairman of the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, said: “With every press conference and photo-op, it becomes more apparent why Harry Reid and Al Franken want to circumvent Minnesota law and avoid a fair and legal review of the ballots – they’re worried about what the outcome might be.

“The fact is that if Al Franken truly believes he won this election, he should respect the laws of his state and allow this legal review to be completed,” Mr. Cornyn said.

I’ve said before that Sen. Coleman faces an uphill fight in this election contest, though I’m certain that, at minimum, Franken’s lead will be narrowed and eliminated at worst. I noted here that the process used to determine which ballots from the infamous “fifth pile” of absentee ballots was flawed because it gave both campaigns veto power over which fifth pile ballots would get counted. That’s contradictory to clearly-written Minnesota election law. Minnesota election law clearly gives that responsibility to local election officials. Here’s the criteria laid out in Minnesota election law for determining whether absentee ballots are accepted or rejected:

The election judges shall mark the return envelope “Accepted” and initial or sign the return envelope below the word “Accepted” if the election judges or a majority of them are satisfied that:
(1) the voter’s name and address on the return envelope are the same as the information provided on the absentee ballot application;
(2) the voter’s signature on the return envelope is the genuine signature of the individual who made the application for ballots and the certificate has been completed as prescribed in the directions for casting an absentee ballot, except that if a person other than the voter applied for the absentee ballot under applicable Minnesota Rules, the signature is not required to match;
(3) the voter is registered and eligible to vote in the precinct or has included a properly completed voter registration application in the return envelope; and
(4) the voter has not already voted at that election, either in person or by absentee ballot.
There is no other reason for rejecting an absentee ballot. In particular, failure to place the envelope within the security envelope before placing it in the outer white envelope is not a reason to reject an absentee ballot.

The law doesn’t provide for partisans to have a veto over which ballots are accepted or rejected. That ruling shouldn’t be allowed to stand because the court, in essence, has written new election law. Writing Minnesota’s election laws is the responsibility of Minnesota’s legislature. PERIOD.

Tom West, the GM/editor of the Morrison County Record, highlights another oddity in the process:

And then there is the infamous Minneapolis Ward 3 Precinct 1, where 133 ballots allegedly turned up missing. The original count is still being used, which increases Franken’s margin of victory by 46 votes. How can a recount include numbers with no paper trail? Most likely, those ballots never existed, but 133 others were double counted.

Here’s the portion of Minnesota’s election law that deals with recounts:

Recounts are typically administrative proceedings with the scope limited to the manual recount of the ballots validly cast for the office or ballot question and the declaration of the results. A recount is performed by a canvassing board or by its staff.

In other words, Minnesota election law limits recounts to the recounting of physical ballots.

The bottom line is simple: Harry Reid and Al Franken don’t know what the outcome of the election challenge will be. That’s why they want him seated ASAP. The last thing they want is for their bloviating to be exposed as utter nonsense.

Recent history indicates that Reid’s predictions aren’t particularly worthwhile. in fact, his predictions have been worthless. (See “The Surge has failed” for proof of that.)

Republicans will stick together on filibustering Reid’s attempt to seat Mr. Franken. That’s why Reid’s attempt should be seen for what it is: a predictable move that isn’t based on the will of Minnesota voters. That’s why his attempt should be scuttled.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative