A gracious finish to an epic drama

Last update: June 30, 2009 - 6:10 PM

Al Franken received the most legally cast votes for U.S. Senate last Nov. 4. That was the unanimous word Tuesday from Minnesota’s highest court, affirming the unanimous finding of the five-member State Canvassing Board and the unanimous decision of a three-judge trial court.

With grace and humility two hours later, Norm Coleman made the Supreme Court’s word the final one in Minnesota’s longest-ever election contest. To his credit, Republican Coleman recognized that Minnesota has waited long enough for the dual representation in the Senate to which it is constitutionally entitled. And, he rightly said, further litigation would widen a partisan divide that is already damaging Minnesota unity, “which is fundamental.”

Coleman’s concession, followed within minutes by Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s statement that he would sign the requisite document certifying Franken as the election’s winner, should lead to the Democrat’s swearing in next week when the Senate returns from its holiday recess. For his part, Franken — whose low-key demeanor over many months of uncertainty has served him well — echoed Coleman’s gracious tone as he vowed to wake up every morning of his term with a resolve to work “for all of you.”

Tuesday’s events were met with sighs of relief all over this state. It was a Minnesota-worthy denouement — calm, civil, orderly — to an epic political drama that riveted the nation’s political establishment for eight months.

The national critics may have faulted Minnesota for a tedious, time-consuming process for deciding close elections. But they have to admire the result: a clear decision, arrived at with thoroughness and care, and with no evidence of fraud. That makes it possible it will be accepted by people of all political persuasions as the legitimate outcome.

The unanimity of Tuesday’s ruling is particularly welcome — especially from a court dominated by Republican appointees. It does much to assure Minnesotans who voted for Coleman or for Independence Party candidate Dean Barkley that Franken’s 312-vote victory was determined according to impartial law, not partisan favor.

Coleman’s case relied on a serious allegation of voter disenfranchisement that deserved high court review. He claimed that several thousand Minnesotans who did not meet the law’s requirements for absentee voting nevertheless should have had their votes counted, because similarly flawed ballots in other counties were accepted.

That argument was addressed squarely in Tuesday’s opinion, and found wanting. “Our existing case law requires strict compliance by voters with the requirements for absentee voting,” the court’s opinion said. “There is no basis on which voters could have reasonably believed that anything less than strict compliance would suffice.” Only if that had been true would Coleman’s claim of an equal protection violation been plausible.

Six long months have elapsed since the 111th Congress convened. The Senate stands on the verge of addressing issues of great importance to the nation’s future — health care, climate change, immigration, deficit control, the confirmation of an appointee to the U.S. Supreme Court. Minnesota’s senior senator, Amy Klobuchar, has been an energetic and effective voice for Minnesota — and was singled out for praise by Coleman yesterday. But as he acknowledged, two voices are better than one, especially in a body in which each state is entitled to two. In making that possible now, Coleman added to his record of service to Minnesota.

Recent Opinion Exchange stories

Readers Write for Friday, Jan. 29 - June 30, 2009

Readers Write for Friday, Jan. 29 - "A day late and a dollar short" was all Rep. Michele Bachmann could come up with in her shallow analysis of President Obama's State of the Union speech. More

Comment on this story | Read all 12 comments | Hide reader comments

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS