Good Morning: News from the First
MANKATO FREE PRESS: Gutknecht’s filing practice challenged
Reporter Mark Fischenich does a thorough job of looking at the pending legal case. We will leave the merits of the case to the courts, as does the journalist. Go read about the details at the MFP.
His report does address some of the questions raised by the netroots. About the identity and political history of the plaintiff:
The case results from a lawsuit filed late last week by a township supervisor from Olmsted County. Louis Reiter, an Elgin resident and Farmington Township Board chairman, isn’t commenting on his party affiliation or motivation for filing the suit.
His attorney in the case — Alan Weinblatt of St. Paul — regularly represents the DFL Party and successfully argued to remove a Republican state Senate candidate from the ballot in St. Cloud last year because she was actually a resident of St. Paul.
and
The plaintiff in the lawsuit, Elgin resident Louis Reiter, refused to comment and isn’t on record making contributions to any of the candidates in the 1st District congressional race.
His attorney Alan Weinblatt, long affiliated with the Democratic Party, wouldn’t talk about how the case came about.
Fischenich also explores the possible involvement of the other candidates in the race:
Mikkelson, Walz say they didn’t initiate lawsuit
The two men who could benefit most from a lawsuit filed against Congressman Gil Gutknecht each say they had nothing to do with it.
But both Republican Greg Mikkelson and Democrat Tim Walz, Gutknecht’s opponents in the 1st District race, said they read state election law the same way as a lawsuit filed on behalf of an Olmsted County resident last week.
Greg Mikkelson, a Lake Crystal farmer and owner of a grain business, was asking questions last month about whether Gutknecht had properly filed for re-election.
Mikkelson, a surprise competitor to Gutknecht in the Republican Party primary election, said he couldn’t believe his opponent could collect the required 1,000 signatures so early in the filing period.
“I had checked into it,” Mikkelson said. “I was surprised that he was able to file on the 5th of July. I was curious how that could be possible.”
Mikkelson, who has made third-party runs for Congress in the past, said he believes the petition process — an alternative to paying a filing fee — requires signatures be obtained during the two-week filing period in July. Gutknecht collected his signatures as early as February and March.
But Mikkelson said he had nothing to do with the lawsuit attempting to remove Gutknecht from the primary election ballot — something that could send Mikkelson automatically to the Nov. 7 general election.
. . .
. . .
Walz’s campaign was not involved in the lawsuit, said a spokewoman for the Mankato West High School geography teacher, although she noted that Weinblatt has made a political contribution to Walz.
Walz also issued a statement saying he couldn’t comment on the legal merits of the case but that he received election rules from Secretary of State Kiffmeyer that “clearly stated that petitions must be signed between July 4th and July 18th. ... I don’t know if my opponent failed to follow the rules or if he received a different set of rules from the Secretary of State, but in either case I believe it is important that the problem be addressed.”
Mikkelson will become involved in the case later this week. The Supreme Court ordered that both he and Gutknecht be given a copy of the lawsuit and offers them an opportunity to respond in writing until Thursday.
Mikkelson, still deciding on what he will submit to the court, said he was convinced by the legal arguments in the lawsuit.
“They made an excellent case,” he said. “I think it’s a well-thought-out and thorough argument.”
Star Tribune: Court to hear challenge of Gutknecht
Gutknecht and Kiffmeyer must file responses by 4:30 p.m. Thursday and the Supreme Court will then schedule a hearing.Court applies law strictly
How one reads Gutknecht's legal standing depends on which section of the law they refer to, said one legal expert.
"I think there are respectable arguments that could be made either way," said Fred Morrison, co-dean of the University of Minnesota Law School. "Minnesota elections law is very complicated, largely because it has been built a little section at a time, and they are not necessarily consistent with one another."
One of those sections would put Gutknecht's reelection bid in jeopardy because of his collection of signatures outside of the normal filing period, according to David Schultz, a professor at Hamline University who also teaches elections law at the University of Minnesota Law School.
"I think Gutknecht's in trouble," said Schultz, who added that his reading of that section is that it refers to both nominating petitions and to petitions filed in lieu of a filing fee. "The secretary of state's got it wrong as far as I can tell," he said.
Gutknecht's candidacy looks less vulnerable under a subsequent section, said Guy Charles, a co-dean of the law school. "That section does not contain any restrictions on when you can gather the signatures," he said. "The only thing it requires is that a number of signatures be collected. It's an argument Gutknecht could make, a good-faith argument."
The state Supreme Court has taken a very strict view of elections law, Schultz said. Each signatory on a petition, for example, must write not only their name but their address. If someone signs the petition after their housemate and uses "ditto" marks for the address, that person's signature might be ruled invalid by a court, Schultz said.
"The courts have very strictly construed the requirements of the law regarding the language that you have on the petition," he said.
Winona Daily News LTE: Bring the troops home now
Gutknecht told the Strib's political reporters that this constituents don't say much to him about the war in Ira, but they "instinctively" know what he's saying:
"When I go out and talk to people, they don't have much to say about Iraq," he said. "The reason is they're frustrated. They understand instinctively what I've been trying to say. An immediate withdrawal is a disaster, and 'stay the course' isn't getting us anywhere. There must be a better way."
Here's another letter to the editor of a First District newspaper:
Bring the troops home now
By Tom Parlin | Winona
It has been more than three years since our country invaded Iraq. In that time, I don’t think a day has passed without a serious act of violence in that nation. In the past three years, a constitution was passed, elections were held, Saddam Hussein was captured, high-ranking insurgent leaders were caught or killed, and Iraqi armies and police forces were assembled. Each time the Bush administration has touted these things as successes and steps toward Iraqi autonomy, but the violence continues to escalate, and Iraq is moving ever nearer to civil war.
“Iraqi freedom” has been a colossal failure. There have been untold casualties as a result of this conflict that cannot outweigh whatever perceived success the Bush administration will claim. I am not sure that things will be better if our troops leave, but things have not and will not if they remain. We need to bring the troops home while continuing the financial aid to rebuild the infrastructure that we have destroyed. Finally, we must make commitments as a nation to never engage in a pre-emptive strike again. We need to exercise diplomacy and other peaceful means before we commit to war as a last resort.
Rochester Post Bulletin: Podcasting
The Post Bulletin keeps its news behind a firewall but now offers a podcast of daily news.
Netroots
Minnesota Central puts together a summer reading list and scolds Mark Kennedy. MC spots a Kennedy dig at Gutknecht.
Ollie Ox:
Drop me an email - I have a question re: Gil's record and if a particular vote has been reported on or not - - -
noah *AT* blanked-out *DOT* com
Posted by: Noah Kunin | August 15, 2006 at 11:10 AM