True North

The recount is finished and it appears that, through a variety of machinations, Al Franken will be declared the winner. The process has been a travesty from the getgo, of course, but it doesn't matter now, because there was never any real chance for conservatives to derail it. I'm guessing that Norm Coleman will contest the results and he may even prevail on a number of challenges. It's even theoretically possible that he could overturn the results and get his seat back. But it's not likely. The writing is on the wall and a manufactured plurality of Minnesotans has sent a foul-mouthed comedian and moral cipher to represent us for the next six years, replacing a flawed but decent man who has served the state pretty well.

 

My friend and colleague Right Hook offers typically top-shelf analysis of what has happened, and its portents, over at Boots On. As always, you should read the whole thing, but here's his eminently sensible conclusion:

I proudly admit I am a Conservative and do not want Franken to represent me. But I am hardly a rabid Coleman supporter (I voted against Franken rather than for Coleman). I did not actively support or work for Coleman (in fact, I took a lot of heat from GOPers for my criticism of him) and could accept a legitimate Franken victory, but if the Canvassing Board's selection stands his "victory" is tainted to say the least. I also do not want Kate Knuth to (mis)represent me in the State House, but I accept the fact that she clearly won the election based on a majority of legitimately cast and counted votes and that I have to deal with the unfortunate result of two more years of her in office.
 
In my judgment the process that has apparently given Franken the win does not pass the smell test and certainly has the appearance of election theft by the political party in power. It also sets some dangerous precedents for future elections and could encourage more creative and aggressive attempts at manipulating an election.
 
The root of the problem is the liberal policies and laws that govern our election process (this problem is not exclusive to Minnesota). Our issuance of absentee ballots for almost any reason, allowing absentee ballots to be revoked by the voter right up until the polls close, same day registration with loose rules on voter identification, "motor voter" laws, inconsistent or unenforced chain of custody rules for handling ballots, tolerance of groups like ACORN that promote and encourage voter fraud, and probably several other factors I haven't thought of contribute to the problem. Until real election reform occurs (don't hold your breath with the DFL in power) our election process will continue to be a joke.
 
Without well-defined and consistently applied rules the election process will be open to fraud, abuse, and manipulation. Most reasonable people, no matter how partisan, can accept and deal with a legitimate political loss. It's much tougher when the perception is that the election was manipulated or stolen. The doubt about whether the result of an election reflects the will of the people, either real or perceived, cannot and should not be tolerated.

Franken can go to Washington but the taint is going to follow him.  And it should. Perhaps he will surprise us and act in a mature and responsible way, but he has a lifelong history of scurrility and it is highly unlikely that he will suddenly grow judicious and fair-minded just because he gets to share a cloakroom with exemplars of probity like Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid. Al Franken will embarrass all Minnesotans, most likely repeatedly. And those of us who opposed his candidacy will have both the right and the responsibility to rub the noses of our betters in it every time it happens. And don't worry, we'll be on the job. 

 

But that's only part of what needs to happen. The more important task for conservatives is to make clear, cogent arguments about the implications of this process. They must then work to reform the process by demanding that uniform, easily understood procedures are in place for voting. Right Hook's sensible suggestions would be an excellent place to start. Most of all, conservatives must make it impossible for those who would game the system to have a chance to do so. And if politicians continue to build in ways to game the system, they need to be retired from office, by means of the ballot box, and with sufficient votes to ensure that those who would game the system have no possibility of doing so.  Might I suggest that one of the first people who ought to be under a whole lot of scrutiny is a certain state official who most recently presided over this travesty? And that perhaps a certain dedicated public servant who appears to be without portfolio, a person who stared down a corrupt international bureaucracy, might be just the person to take on this state official?  Just a thought.

 

Cross-posted at Truth v. The Machine and Mr. Dilettante. Comments always welcome!