Former senators don't have voting privileges

by Jed Lewison

Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 06:35:04 AM PDT

As of noon on Saturday, Norm Coleman is a former U.S. Senator.

Sure, as a former U.S. Senator he'll have floor privileges...but he won't have voting privileges. Or will he? (Update, 5:23PM: Somehow, I forgot to link to the Politico article from which these quotes come. It's now included.)

Since he has not been certified a winner in the race, Coleman may have to give up his privileges as a senator, including his desk on the floor, his personal office and his right to vote on legislation, according to Democratic aides familiar with the rules.

Um, there's no "may" about this. We can debate Burris all we want, but there is no question about whether the senate has the authority to seat an unelected, unappointed Senator. It doesn't. Nonetheless:

It is possible, however, that all of Coleman's privileges may remain intact should the two parties reach an accommodation, and aides signaled that talks were occurring on the matter through Friday.

"We are still reviewing the situation," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). "Norm Coleman should respect the conclusions of the Minnesota State Canvassing Board."

There's nothing to review here. I can't really imagine that Harry Reid is seriously considering giving Norm Coleman voting privileges, but unless his quote has been twisted, Reid's spokesman seems to indicate that it's still an open question.

If it comes pass, it will be a WTF moment if there ever was one.

Race tracker wiki: MN-Sen

  • ::

Tags: MN-Sen, Norm Coleman (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 3 comments

  •  Ridiculous (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Jed L

    I don't like the idea of seating Burris, so why on earth would you even temporarily seat Coleman when he probably lost the election? Because "the people of Minnesota need representation"? Then seat Franken...he's ahead. Or seat Burris too, if "the people of Illinois need representation" so badly.

    I don't even get that argument. While we're waiting for these situations to pan out, Minnesota still has Amy Klobuchar and Illinois still has Dick Durbin.

    But really, we should wait for a certified winner in Minnesota and a non-Blago appointment in Illinois (let the State House impeach him, perhaps the Senate will convict in a timely manner, and Quinn can take over and appoint someone in February, one hopes). On a practical level, we do need every vote we can get for the big items like EFCA, so figuring out the Illinois dilemma soon is crucial.

    The Republican Party is neither pro-republic nor pro-party. Discuss!

    by Nathaniel Ament Stone on Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 08:03:22 AM PDT

  •  Oh what a conversation is going down... (0+ / 0-)

    My guess is that Joe Lieberman has put his foot in the middle of this.  

    Joe is great friends with Norm Coleman.  Sent money for the campaign, more for the recount, and came to Minnesota to speak up for Norm.  It has very deep roots, back to 1990, when Lieberman was campaigning for a previous holder of this particular Senate Seat, Rudy Boschwitz, and could not figure how in the world Paul Wellstone beat him.  When Coleman took Wellstone's Senate Seat, he got a big chunk of Boschwitz's staff to go along with it, and Lieberman took Coleman around to introduce him to the potential funders.  

    For some reason Harry must be listening to Lieberman on the state of play with regard to this Minnesota Senate Seat.  Maybe Lieberman is actually threatening this and that.  But of great significance today, Charlie Schumer finally spoke up and said Franken had won the race.  I suspect this will cover for now.  

    During the Bush Years, Coleman chaired the Government Operations Committee -- which is supposed to investigate fraud, contracts and things like that, and Lieberman was his ranking opposition member.  Then in 2006 with Democratic Control, they flipped the relationship -- Coleman was ranking, and Lieberman chaired.  Together they pretty much kept anything from being investigated.  I suspect Lieberman was putting in a word for his boy -- Coleman -- and finally Schumer saw the problem, and put his foot into the game.  At least Schumer knows when to call time at the end of a game.  

    by Sara on Sun Jan 04, 2009 at 10:43:17 PM PDT

Permalink | 3 comments