Al Franken: Health Care In the Eyes Of a Calm, Policy Wonk

TW: Al Franken must have been reading the blog (and that New Yorker article I referenced in the homework assignment which is from where all the McAllen/El Paso stuff emanates). He is calm, he is informed and he has not been in DC long enough to be completely co-opted. Would love to see him debate this issue with an Inhofe from OK or even Grassley from IA. But then I realize this is not a debate it is a political process, very different concepts. They are what they are...

ps and this was not an angry mob just some folks asking questions

Al Franken Will Be a Good Senator

TW: I enjoy laughing about Franken from his church lady days as much as anyone but unlike some I have a great deal of respect for Al Franken's intellect and potential as a US Senator. Franken's books were insightful, funny and smart. Attributes that some may not appreciate or even regard as useful for a U.S. senator.

When a columnist like Broder frames Franken as a "loud-mouthed...comedian" it is a shame. But then the next Broder column of interest will be the first in a long-time. The one referenced below made the stunning claim that bi-partisanship takes mutual cooperation and is a good thing...oh really, and to think he gets paid to write such profound insights.

If the Senate was comprised solely of "policy wonks" we would have a problem but I believe having at least a handful is a good thing. Franken appears quite shrewd, you do not go from "church lady" to U.S. senator without some moxie (just like you do not go from 'B' movie actor to POTUS). Mark my word Franken will be around the senate for a long time or at least as long as he wants.

From Paul Krugman at NYT:
"David Broder has a column this morning calling for bipartisanship. I know, you’re shocked. But what struck me was this bit about Al Franken:

'Franken, the loud-mouthed former comedian, will be the 60th member of the Senate Democratic caucus …'

Two points.
First, implicit in this characterization of Franken is the notion of the Senate as a decorous gentlemen’s club. I doubt that club ever existed in reality; but in any case, these days the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body is, not to put too fine a point on it, chock full o’ nuts. James Inhofe: I rest my case.

Second, Al Franken’s dirty secret is that … he’s a big policy wonk.

I used to go on Franken’s radio show, all ready to be jocular — and what he wanted to talk about was the arithmetic of Social Security, or the structure of Medicare Part D.

In fact, the only elected official I know who’s wonkier than Al Franken is Rush Holt, my congressman — and he used to be the assistant director of Princeton’s plasma physics lab. (The campaign’s bumper stickers read, “My Congressman IS a rocket scientist.”)

So what will Franken do to the level of Senate discourse? He’ll raise it."

Now This Is Some Fair And Balanced Journalism

TW: One can always count on Fox for balanced and deeply insightful analysis. Or actually just some bouncing around within their own little echo chamber.

Finally!!

TW: So I am at the club, on the big screen is CNN. CNN managed somehow to squeeze in sandwiched literally between "Michael Jackson's will found" and "What Happened to Bubbles?", the fact that Norm Coleman finally conceded the MN Senate race after the MN supreme court unanimously ruled in Franken's favor.

Therefore, the Dems will have a theoretically filibuster proof majority. But as you know with two senators ailing (Kennedy and Byrd), zero Republican cooperation and some red state Dem senators always wavering; the filibuster threat will remain. Nevertheless, have been waiting months to post my Stuart Smiley photo, so here goes. Congrats Al!!! I actually think he will be a fine senator.

Senator To Be Al Franken In Action

Your New Minnesota Senator

TW: Our guy Al has been certified finally as the next MN Senator, which does not end the process, but I would assume it is better to be the certified winner than the alternative. I think it will be great having Franken in the Senate especially if he drops the all serious all the time demeanor and brings back some of the humorous schtick.

And jump to the 9:20 mark in this classic scene

Minnesota Should Hold a New Senate Election

TW: Floyd Norris suggests a re-vote for the MN Senate seat. I agree. There is no valid way to arbitrate a vote that appears literally to have come down to a few dozen votes amidst several million, a statistically invalid difference by any measure. At that point the "winner" is merely the one who wins the political/legal battles associated with defining which votes are counted. Regardless of who "wins" the re-count a re-vote should be held. It would probably favor the Republican since the Obama coattails would have been shorn but to me it is the best solution. It certainly would be a doozy of a re-race (and stimulative for the MN economy!!).

From Norris via NYT:
"On the Op-Ed page today, Charles Seife says that there are enough missing ballots and other problems in Minnesota that we will never be sure who got the most votes. He calls for invoking a Minnesota law that allows for the flipping of a coin to decide a tied election.
The idea of a senator’s being chosen by a coin flip is unsatisfying, and there is a contrary precedent that could be applied if the Senate wishes.
In 1974, John Durkin, a Democrat, and Louis Wyman, a Republican, basically tied in the New Hampshire Senate race. As I recall, there were recounts with different outcomes, and the Senate finally threw up its hands and a new election was agreed to. For the better part of a year, New Hampshire had one senator, until Mr. Durkin won the runoff. He served until he was defeated for re-election in 1980.
(Full disclosure: In 1977, I briefly worked as Senator Durkin’s press secretary. The shortness of my tenure reflects the quality of my work in that role.)"