Election rule reform
The quality of Minnesota's election system has been debated in two prominent forums lately -- creating some curious contradictions.
Before the Minnesota Supreme Court, Republican Norm Coleman is appealing DFLer Al Franken's victory in a postelection trial. Coleman's lawyers have filed briefs arguing that the state's election process, especially for absentee voters, has numerous problems that disenfranchised voters and justify the court's intervention.
But in the Legislature last week, most of Coleman's fellow Republicans opposed bills aiming to reform the election system. Republicans argued that allowing early voting and streamlining rules concerning absentee ballots could undermine the integrity of elections.
Meanwhile, Franken's attorneys argued in their brief to the Supreme Court that the state voting process worked well in the Senate race, and that the strict requirements on absentee voters in state law were justified to prevent fraud.
But his fellow DFLers in the Legislature last week mostly backed the reforms to those rules that Republicans opposed.
So DFLers want to change an election system that (so far) has favored their candidate, while Republicans want to stick with that system.
Any questions?