Three MN Pubs Call For Coleman To Concede

As the Democratic National Committee puts pressure on Sen. Norm Coleman to bow out of the Senate race that has captivated the state and the nation for five months, three Minnesota publications have called this week for Coleman to concede. And two of those outlets endorsed Coleman over Democrat Al Franken during the general election.

Their suggestions follow the decision of a three-judge panel to declare Franken the winner by 312 votes.

"It's becoming increasingly clearer that Coleman and fellow Republicans -- desperate to keep the Democrats from strengthening their power -- are pressing onward primarily for political reasons," wrote the Worthington Daily Globe editorial board. "Meanwhile, Minnesota continues to only have one U.S. senator, despite a prolonged process that has shown Franken to be the winner on two occasions.

"We, like the Albert Lea Tribune, endorsed Norm Coleman over Franken. We also share the same opinion that Coleman, for the benefit of the state and its citizens, should concede. Norm Coleman and his attorneys claim they want to ensure no Minnesota voter gets left behind. Instead, they're trying their best to leave Minnesota behind."

The Albert Lea Tribune saw "stalling" in Coleman's vow to take the matter to court. The paper compares the situation in Minnesota with the 2004 Washington gubernatorial contest between Republican Dino Rossi, a state senator, and Democrat Christine Gregoire, then the state attorney general. Rossi lost his slim advantage after multiple recounts, and Gregoire took the lead.

"Rossi knew when fighting became a waste of his time, the time of his supporters and the time of the citizens in his state," the paper's editorial board wrote. "There are too many important issues in Minnesota to let the state be without Senate representation. Whatever the means, Franken holds the lead in the race by 225 votes, and the courts have agreed with that result. Coleman is now only delaying the seating of Franken and in doing so is not servicing his staff, his financial contributors or the people of Minnesota."

A good politician, the paper added, "knows knows when he is looking bad and making his state look bad." Coleman is "looking like a career politician who is losing his career."

That's the same Albert Lea Tribune that endorsed Coleman last fall saying that he "is the better man" and "deserves your vote."

The Faribault Daily News suggested that the MN situation is a "saga that almost puts Florida in 2000 to shame and Minnesota on the radar of stand-up comedians."

"Now, Coleman claims that, on behalf of all those voters who were denied their constitutional right to have their vote counted, he's going to continue his battle," writes the paper's team. "But experts who've examined the appeals panel's ruling note that it shot down most of the arguments he could use on appeal. And, meanwhile, important work on the economy, the war in Iraq and health care is being done with only half of the state's full representation participating.

"It's appropriate for Coleman to have challenged the recount once. But to do it again belies his stance that he's acting on behalf of the disenfranchised voter -- those whose votes were not counted. It's time for Franken to be certified."

Sure, these are smaller papers, serving smaller communities. But it's just these outlets that are tapped into the sentiment of local residents. And they would typically provide a better indicator of any groundswell of support for Coleman to exit the contest and Franken to be certified than would a radio ad from the Democratic National Committee.

It's worth noting, too, that the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, today backed Coleman's call for a judicial evaluation, albeit a speedy one:

"That review should be conducted with as much expedition as appellate jurists can muster. Coleman has a right to appeal, and the absentee voters whose ballots he seeks to add to the count have a right to serious consideration under the law. But those rights stand in increasingly evident tension with Minnesota's constitutional right to dual representation in the U.S. Senate."

And not surprisingly, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, prefers the Star-Tribune's general thinking.

"The guarantee of due process and equal protection provided in the U.S. Constitution should be no less important than the similar guarantee of free speech that newspapers themselves have so vigorously defended for over 200 years," said NRSC spokesman Brian Walsh. "So while editorial boards have every right to offer their opinion, it's important to respect and defend the entire U.S. Constitution, and not just parts of it. That's why it's so important for the over 4,000 Minnesotans who had their votes thrown out to have a voice before the Minnesota Supreme Court."

(JENNIFER SKALKA)