And the Al Franken decade begins:
Here is what Al Franken revealed on his first day on Capitol Hill: He is looking forward to getting to work for the people of Minnesota.
And one of the things Mr. Franken, who will be sworn in Tuesday as Minnesota’s new Democratic senator, is working hardest at — both for his constituents and everyone else — is proving that he is no longer a comedian.
“I’m ready to get to work, thank you,” Mr. Franken said in a sober monotone on Monday after posing for photographs with Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader. That was about as much of a knee-slapper as Mr. Franken told, at least in public.
The fact that he makes Harry Reid as uncomfortable as he infuriates Republicans is just a bonus.
Face
Still stunned that Coleman did not appeal this to the USSC. With health care reform, union legislation, and climate change bills all of the cusp of votes, it behooved the GOP to keep them Dems at 59 as long as humanly possible. That Coleman capitulated is simply astounding.
John Cole
As Billmon pointed out months ago, it would never go to the Supreme Court, because the GOP is terrified of visiting Gore v. Bush.
Cat Lady
Wonder when his first Sunday bobblehead show will be? How many Republicans will it take to “balance” him?
Johnny B. Guud
Coleman is not only politically “broke” at the moment, but from what I gather, he is personally broke as well. The GOP was spending way too much in resources for his political campaign and Coleman I believe, is in dire straits in terms of his personal finances.
Bowing out now, makes political sense. I believe he intends to run for governor and he needs to clear the decks for that. That means raising money again. I don’t believe dragging out a doomed Senate race was in his best interest. That’s my take on it.
Punchy
Franken is not a near-pedophile.
Cyrus
Someone said in the open thread that Franken was now one of the best policy wonks in the Senate. My gut reaction was to be depressed by that, but you know, why? Those books of his that I’ve read are presented with jokes, but they make arguments. I should already know that the average Senator isn’t very wonky.
geg6
Even though I know he’ll never do it because he’d probably see it as disrespect for Paul Wellstone, I’d kill to see Franken on the Senate floor (or at a Judiciary Committee hearing) with his satellite dish football helmet on. That would be the most awesome Senate moment of all time.
Face
@John Cole: Huh? You mean giving the USSC the opportunity to invent a reason to overturn an election and select the winner?
Wouldn’t they want to revisit the logic behind B v. G to install Coleman? What did I miss?
lol
The other thing the national Republicans realized is that keeping Franken’s seat empty really isn’t that important after all once you take into account Kennedy and Byrd’s illness plus Lieberman, Nelson, Landrieu and Bayh’s willingness to defect on any issue.
All in all, Franken is really just the 54th or 55th Democratic Senator. Incredibly helpful to have around? Hell yes. Final straw that makes the Republican party utterly helpless? No.
Napoleon
@Cyrus:
Norm Ornstein af the American Enterprise Institute (whom Franken and his wife are temporarily living with) has a really complimentary of Franken piece up over at TNR to this effect.
geg6
@Cyrus:
Krugman had a greatly complimentary post about him the other day. He thinks he’s probably the smartest guy on Capitol Hill.
Napoleon
@Face:
Well since B v G explicitly states it can not be used for president purposes (which tells you exactly how political a decision it was) they have no need to revisit it.
lol
@8:
There are two scenarios:
1. The USSC cites Bush v Gore and awards the election to Coleman or more likely, orders a new election which Coleman ultimately loses several months later. But since every court including the Republican-appointed Minnesota Supreme Court thinks Franken was the lawful winner, the move will be seen as grossly partisan.
2. The USSC sides with Franken and reality, which would officially and directly contravene the precedent set in Bush v Gore, turning it into the Dred Scott of electoral court decisions.
Neither outcome is particularly helpful to the GOP and the past few months have proven that Franken’s 60th vote isn’t particularly magical anyways. So they cut their losses and sent Coleman home to run for Governor.
Face
Doubly confused. It was used for the purpose of selecting the president! Wha?
Edit: got it. President = precedent
linda
@Cyrus:
i semi-regularly listened to his air america program — he is one of the more informed people on capitol hill. as those sorry-assed media magpies will soon discover to their great horror. milbank will have to put away his very old snl tapes he’s been trolling for material…(well, at least those jabs not provided by the rnc) as franken will embarrass them all who came looking for those nifty one-liners.
SGEW
@Face:
Shorter SCOTUS in Bush v Gore:
“We hereby invoke the One Time Only Rule. No backsies!
Calvinball[This honorable court] now stands adjourned,eat shit and[sine] die.”Napoleon
@Face:
Whoops! Got to be more careful with spellcheck. Yes, the court said it could not be used as precedent, which means you even cite it in your brief before the USSC you could end up with a red faced Scalia yelling at you from the bench.
Da Bomb
I am excited that he is getting to serve his state as a senator. I am sure that Senator Franken will do fine.
Llelldorin
He typed “president” instead of “precedent.” Freudian slip. We all wish it hadn’t been used for president purposes!
LD50
@Face: See, this is why correct spelling is important.
LD50
I’m still not sure why the Supreme Court 5 would suddenly be afraid of ‘grossly partisan’ moves.
jcricket
Franken for majority leader!
No, seriously, someone replace Harry Reid with a leader who gets that arm twisting is a required component of the job.
J.D. Rhoades
@Face:
Bush v. Gore did more to damage the reputation of the Supreme Court than any decision since Plessy v. Ferguson. And they know it.
Napoleon
@J.D. Rhoades:
And that is why I think they said you could not use that case in support of anything else. Basically the majority in order to come to the conclusion they did had to totally abandon the intellectial framework they used in a long line of past decisions in order to rule the way they did. Anyone arguing a case from that point forward on a variety of subjects from, just to pull made up example out of thin air, say the regulatory power of the FDA, to states trying to control preditory lending within its borders, would have had BvG tossed back at them, which they would then ignore when they simply returned to their old intellectial framework. So basically on a routine basis attorneys would be, in so many words, pointing out what an intellectial fraud someone like Scalia is.
eyepaddle
@geg6
From the comments to Krugman’s post:
I just thought this comment on Broder was good enought to share.
LD50
I’m still not convinced that the SCOTUS 5 care about their reputation. They have power that no one else can mitigate. Who needs a good reputation when you have the power to install presidents?
In other words, this ‘damage to their reputation’ argument depends on Scalia/Thomas/Kennedy having some modicum of shame. Maybe Kennedy does. I see no evidence of such for Scalia/Thomas.
ChrisB
@Napoleon: Franken frequently had Ornstein on his Air America program.
@linda: I did too and I agree, Franken will know what he’s talking about.
@eyepaddle:
Indeed it was.
Evinfuilt
Franken is educated, intelligent, an excellent speaker and seems to have a spine to backup his convictions. I have no clue what he’s doing in the Senate, its like 2 different species with him standing next to the amazing upright invertebrate, Harry Reid.
Origuy
@Napoleon: That’s known as the Cupertino Effect.
TenguPhule
Obviously they’re not so sure how firm the ground under them is.
Especially now that they can’t rely on good ol boys in the executive and Congress to cover their asses should they go for a true legal coup.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
And that is why I think they said you could not use that case in support of anything else.
Pardon me, but I believe they can’t stop people invoking it. Personally, I’d like to see it bought up as often as possible at lower courts, just so the lower judges have to rule again and again that it is crap law and inapplicable.
Emma
LD50: the power of the Supreme Court can be mitigated through impeachment. They know the current Democrats are cowards, but with the country in a big enough uproar there’s the chance they would grow a spine. Also, there’s the chance the “undecideds” could throw their lot on the Democratic side of the fence out of sheer rage.
Wile E. Quixote
I know that Franken is being all serious and shit these days as befits a US Senator but I was hoping that he would give us one last moment of comedy by saying “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, I won the election. So suck my balls Norm Coleman!”
Wile E. Quixote
@John Cole
Yeah, because if they did revisit Gore v. Bush this would be the outcome
jcricket
@Wile E. Quixote: I too, hope for some comedy moments (more a la Barney Frank smackdowns) from Franken once he’s seated.
Seriously, he’s good with the mic, knows policy, and is an unabashed progressive. What’s not to like? Downside is he’s low on the seniority totem pole in the Senate, which makes it hard to get your name attached to anything.
But the Democrats need to be deploying our strategic “weapons” better. Instead we get our worst speakers on TV, the worst parliamentarians into leadership posts and the most conservative Senators on committees. We suck.
drillfork
@Napoleon:
Franken’s buddies with an AEI guy? Super…
gypsy howell
Wow – that makes Al Franken our Sarah Palin!
Well, except he’s smart. And well-educated. And he understands the structure and functioning of our government. And he can not only speak in sentences, he has won awards for his writing. And he’s intentionally funny. But other than that, just like Sarah Palin.
jcricket
@gypsy howell: What’s even funnier is that they see the two as identical. Like if we have someone that infuriates them, it’s because he’s dumb and can’t articulate anything, etc.
They literally can’t see reality. (And I don’t mean figuratively). As our blog host once said, this is what happens when you stop having a conversation with America and only talk to yourselves.
he fixed election
big al…..he’s as fat as m.moore….fatter than limbaugh!….hey lefties, i thought weight was an issue with someones freedom of speech?…what gives?….. this country is in big trouble… whatever happened to “they fixed the election”?…..left is so hypcritical, its so obvious…..
Aspasia
Last week (on Andrea Mitchell) I heard Sandra Day O’Connor opining that Americans don’t understand what the law is or how it works. Instead, she complained, they think it’s political.
Now I wonder where they got that idea, Sandy?
tripletee (formerly tBone)
@drillfork:
Ornstein is a centrist and regularly blasted GOP idiocy during the Bush years. Not exactly your typical AEIdiot.
gwangung
You could say that DOES make him our Palin–done right.
Patrick
What Billmon is pointing out is that the application of “equal protection” , the Supremes justification for their Bush v Gore decision, would help people from groups considered to be democratic voters and is not a door repubs want opened.
patrick
Just to clarify, on my previous comment the writing was by billmon except the last sentence. Evidently the blockquote concept is a little too complicated for me. Not that anyone confused my writing with billmon’s anyway.
Wile E. Quixote
@patrick
We knew what you meant, WP’s handling of the blockquote tag is teh suxxors. When I’m president I’m going to have the Department of the Internet investigate them for it.
Augustine
@Wile E. Quixote:
That would make you the Undersecretary of Homeland Intertubes?