Court Affirms Minnesota Recount and Election Fair

The full 68 page ruling <read>

The Court DECIDES, DECLARES AND ADJUDGES that Contestee Al Franken is the party to the contest who received the highest number of votes legally cast…and is therefore entitled to receive the certificate of election…Contestants’ [Coleman] Notice of Contest is dismissed with prejudice;…costs of the contest must be paid by Contestants

Pretty clear.  And some details:

The overwhelming weight of the evidence indicates that the November 4, 2008 election was conducted fairly, impartially and accurately…There is no evidence of a systemic problem of disenfranchisement in the state’s election system, including absentee balloting procedures…After seven weeks of trial, the factual record is devoid of any allegations of fraud, tampering, or security breeches on Election Day, during the recount process, or during the election contest.

Mark Ritchie

Mark Ritchie

For more information, we would highly recommend the video of Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s talk to the National Association of Secretaries of State <watch>. Or a longer talk about the recount, the length of time allowed for recounts, and how a national recount could be handled. <watch> This took place at the 2009 Legislative Conference, a national meeting of county election officials.

We highly recommend the 2nd video, if you are willing to invest the 87 minutes.  It covers the Recount, Election Day Registration, Early Voting, and the National Popular Vote.

Our Opinion: The Minnesota process was thorough and fair, the actually counting of ballots was accomplished in a few days, yet the counting of disputed ballots and reviewing absentee ballots took the bulk of the 40+ days.  There needs to be a way of streamlining that part of the process with more planning ahead.  Consider the problems, pointed out in the 2nd vidoe by SOS Ritchie, that could occur with a statewide primary to be followed closely by an election, when the primary requires a recount! In the first video SOS Ritchie gives great credit to the planning and preparation for potential recounts, something we see as sorely lacking in Connecticut — We are not comfortable that a statewide or even a Congressonal District recount in Connecticut would result is a thorough or as credible a recount as we have seen and admire in Minnesota.


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.