Pawlenty has given mixed signals as to whether he’ll sign such a document if Coleman continues his legal fight in federal courts. The Republican leadership in Washington will undoubtedly pressure the governor to withhold his signature.

“What will Pawlenty choose?” reads the billboard, at the intersection of I-94 and Snelling Avenue. “People of Minnesota? Or his national ambitions?”

The coalition, which includes Alliance for a Better Minnesota and AFSCME Council 5, has also created a web site, SeatOurSenator.com, to build pressure to seat Franken.

The ad’s sponsors are Americans United for Change, Alliance for a Better Minnesota and the Minnesota AFL-CIO.

When’s the last time you saw a TV ad asking an elected official to obey the law?

The drawn-out process has also seriously eroded Coleman’s approval ratings. Just 38 percent of those surveyed indicated that they view the Republican favorably, while 55 percent viewed him unfavorably. Franken’s standing with Minnesotans, however, isn’t much better. Nearly half (48 percent) view him unfavorably, while 43 percent look upon him favorably.

The telephone survey of 1,042 Minnesota residents consisted of 36 percent Democrats, 20 percent Republicans and 37 percent independents. It had a margin of error of four percentage points, plus or minus.

Another poll, commissioned by Alliance for a Better Minnesota, found similarly widespread dissatisfaction with Coleman’s continuing legal contest. Roughly 60 percent of respondents indicated that the former senator should concede, while just 34 percent of those polled also expressed approval for the way the statewide recount was conducted. Just over 60 percent believed that the process was “fair, impartial, accurate and carried out according to Minnesota law,” while just over a quarter of respondents disagreed with this statement.

Most Minnesotans also now believe that Franken was the victor in last year’s election, according to the ABM poll. The DFLer was deemed the winner by 54 percent of the respondents, while just over a quarter believe Coleman received more votes.

The ABM poll, conducted by Grove Insights, surveyed 600 registered voters between April 22 and 25. It has a margin of error of four percentage points, plus or minus.

Norm and Laurie Coleman at a 2008 campaign event (Paul Demko)

Norm Coleman is facing massive legal bills.

The former senator took another substantial financial hit yesterday when the three-judge panel presiding over the U.S. Senate contest ruled that Al Franken won the election. The judges also ordered Coleman to pay for court costs accrued during the trial. While this does not include attorney’s fees, it does cover administrative expenses such as witness transportation and copy costs. Given that the seven-week case included 19,000 pages of legal pleadings, 1,717 individual exhibits, and testimony from 142 witnesses, it would seem that such costs could be substantial.

In addition, as indicated in a March 2 ruling, Coleman will be responsible for some of Franken’s legal bills. This punishment stems from Coleman’s lawyers failure to properly disclose contacts with a potential trial witness. It’s impossible to say exactly what the financial damage will turn out to be. Marc Elias, Franken’s lead recount attorney, declined to speculate on how much money this might entail during a conference call with reporters Tuesday afternoon.

Coleman has had a team of high-profile lawyers on retainer for months to fight the U.S. Senate contest. Determining exactly how much this litigation will ultimately cost is impossible at this point. But Nate Silver recently estimated the damage to be around $145,000 per week. (Coleman’s first quarter FEC report, which should shed some light on the matter, is due tomorrow.)

What’s more, Coleman faces seemingly substantial legal bills stemming from a pair of lawsuits related to his relationship with longtime associate Nasser Kazeminy. The former senator said back in December that he would ask the the Federal Election Commission whether he could utilize his campaign funds to cover attorney’s fees related to allegations that Kazeminy attempted to funnel $75,000 to the then-sitting senator. But according to FEC records, Coleman never followed through on seeking what’s known as an “advisory opinion.”

Roll Call (subscription only) recently attempted to get an explanation from the Coleman campaign as to why they failed to seek FEC clearance for using campaign funds to pay his legal bills. But repeated phone calls and emails were ignored.

Coleman is under no obligation to seek explicit permission for the fundraising scheme, but legislators often seek guidance from the agency in controversial matters. Last week, for instance, Rep. Elton Gallegly, asked the FEC to clarify whether he could use campaign funds to upgrade the security system on his Southern California home. The reason: a stalker was harassing his wife after an altercation on the campaign trail.

In January, Alliance for a Better Minnesota filed a complaint with the FEC arguing that Coleman’s use of campaign funds to pay legal bills unrelated to election matters ran afoul of the agency’s rules. While the FEC acknowledged receiving the complaint, there has been no further communication on the matter, according to Denise Cardinal, executive director of the liberal advocacy group.

The allegations contained in the pair of lawsuits are still very much alive. A second person involved in the matter recently provided sworn testimony that Kazeminy ordered $75,000 funneled to a Minneapolis insurance firm where Coleman’s wife works. While Coleman is not a party to the cases, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reportedly is also looking into the allegations. The former senator recently refused to answer when asked if he’d been interviewed by the law enforcement agency. Coleman has hired Doug Kelley to represent him in the matter, while his wife has tapped Earl Gray to watch out for her interests. Both are former federal prosecutors turned high-profile defense attorneys. They undoubtedly also charge a pretty penny for their services.

It remains a mystery why Coleman failed to get approval from the FEC to cover these bills with campaign funds. But if the agency ultimately determines that Coleman must pay for the attorneys’ fees himself, it would certainly add to his personal financial troubles.

Norm Coleman insisted Thursday that he and his wife, Laurie, have done nothing wrong.

The former U.S. senator was talking about a Texas lawsuit’s claim that a campaign donor funneled the Colemans $75,000 disguised as a business transaction. Also, a Coleman spokesman insisted that after three and a half months the campaign is still assembling a request for federal approval to spend campaign cash on fighting the allegations.

“There have never been any allegations that either my wife or I have done anything wrong,” Coleman told MinnPost correspondent Cynthia Dizikes Thursday as he left a meeting at the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “There are allegations between businessmen about a business dispute. But there has never been a single allegation that me or my wife have done anything wrong, and we haven’t.”

That doesn’t mean they’re not spending money to prove their innocence. Both Colemans and both owners of businesses named in the allegations have hired top-shelf attorneys. One of the lawyers is Joe Friedberg, who represented Coleman in his election contest trial and is also representing Coleman donor Nasser Kazeminy, a defendant in the Texas suit.

It’s the first time in months that Coleman has himself publicly addressed the money-funneling allegations.

Meanwhile, a Coleman staffer insisted for the second time in two weeks that the former senator is still seeking federal approval to pay for legal expenses arising from the Texas lawsuit (and a related suit in Delaware) out of campaign coffers.

“We’re in the process of working with the FEC on that matter,” Tom Erickson told The Hill’s Briefing Room blog. It’s the same thing he told MinnPost March 19.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) provides advisory opinions on questions of federal election law within 60 days to candidates who request them. Often the commission can rule sooner, if the requestor asks for an expedited response, Commissioner Cynthia Bauerly told MnIndy.

That was the case with Franken’s request for an opinion as to whether he and a party organization could establish new funds to pay for the election-contest phase of the dispute.

Coleman’s campaign announced on Dec. 17 it would seek such permission, but the Minnesota Independent’s monitoring of the FEC’s Web site since then has revealed no Coleman requests. An FEC spokesperson has told MnIndy that the agency doesn’t comment on advisory opinion requests until they are officially received.

The FEC has also not made any public response to a complaint filed later in December by the Alliance for a Better Minnesota, which asked the commission to rule on what the Alliance called Coleman’s violation of federal election law. The alliance last year asked for investigations into the money-funneling claims by the Senate ethics committee and the FBI.

News last December that the FBI has launched a probe preceded Coleman’s announcement about the FEC request by a few days.

This week, the alliance’s executive director, Denise Cardinal, told MnIndy that she had received a flurry of calls from reporters in Washington, D.C., about the complaint, but she has no news from the FEC.

Interest in the Texas lawsuit, which was filed last October, was revived last week on news of sworn testimony by a second former executive from Deep Marine Techology Inc. B.J. Thomas claimed Kazeminy had demanded in 2007 that the company make a series of $25,000 payments to Hays Companies, a St. Paul insurance firm where Laurie Coleman works. Kazeminy, the executives claim, gave the order in the context of a comment that “United States senators don’t make shit.”

In his brief interview with MinnPost today, Coleman said “I can’t say anything”  about the FBI probe. ”We want this matter to be fully reviewed and fully investigated because nothing happened, and we are looking forward to that taking place.” It’s the same thing he said Nov. 12 in response to the Alliance’s call for investigation — with one difference. This time he didn’t accuse “my political opponents” of being behind the charges.

In a separate federal investigation, the U.S. Secret Service is looking into a leak of donor data, including credit card numbers, from Coleman’s campaign Web site. Coleman’s campaign said they welcome that probe as well.

Now, Alliance for a Better Minnesota, which in November asked for FBI and Senate ethics investigations into the allegations (and later expressed gratitude on news of an FBI inquiry), has forced the question in a complaint filed with the FEC late last month. The complaint asks for more than the advice that Coleman said he’d seek; at its Web site, the Alliance calls on Minnesotans to demand the FEC take swift action. The FEC will likely do something in response to the complaint, though exactly what or when isn’t known. It’s one of two complaints against the Coleman campaign to be lodged with the FEC in two weeks.

From the Alliance letter (pdfs of page 1 and page 2):

This letter is a complaint … that U.S. Senator Norm Coleman is violating Federal Election Commission regulations as they relate to the use of campaign accounts for non-campaign purposes. … These allegations have arisen completely outside of the campaign and electoral process … [and] do not pertain to the performance of Senator Coleman’s official duties. … [W]e urge the FEC to take swift action, and rule on this issue as soon as possible.

From the FEC response (pdf):

This letter acknowledges receipt of your complaint on, December 31, 2008 … The respondent(s) will be notified of this complaint within five business days. You will be notified as soon as the Federal Election Commission takes final action on your complaint.

Alliance for a Better Minnesota has sent letters to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics and the FBI calling for investigations into allegations contained in a recently filed lawsuit involving Sen. Norm Coleman. The lawsuit, filed in a Texas court, alleges that Nasser Kazeminy, a longtime associate of the Senator, funneled $75,000 that was intended to benefit Coleman to a Minneapolis insurance firm.

“These are serious allegations,” said Donald McFarland, a spokesman for Alliance for a Better Minnesota, at a press conference this afternoon. “We need to know what actually happened. There should be a thorough and formal investigation. Minnesotans deserve to know the truth.”

The letters question whether Coleman has violated federal laws, as well as senate rules for accepting gifts. Alliance for a Better Minnesota, a liberal advocacy group, also references a report in Harper’s Magazine stating that Kazeminy footed the bill for Coleman’s shopping trips to Neiman Marcus.

A second lawsuit against Kazeminy, filed in a Delware court, echoes the allegations against the Republican Senator. Coleman has denied receiving improper gifts or compensation from Kazeminy. The incumbent currently holds a precarious 206-vote lead over challenger Al Franken in a race that’s headed for a state-mandated recount.

McFarland said he was uncertain how soon the ethics committee might be able to act on the request given that the Senate is not currently in session. “Our hope is that they’ll act quickly,” he said. “It seems that the ethics committee typically doesn’t drag their feet.” A simliar complaint, however, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington in July over Coleman’s living arrangement in Washington, has prompted no action by the committee.

Related: Coleman to federal investigators: Bring it on

Before Rep. Michele Bachmann’s Oct. 17 statements on MSNBC about “anti-America views” she feared some in Congress hold, the airwaves in the 6th Congressional District were relatively quiet. But over the past two weeks well over $1 million in campaign contributions from people outraged by her comments have poured into the campaign of DFLer El Tinklenberg. Meanwhile, outrage over what conservatives have deemed a media smear-job against Bachmann have generated half as much money for her campaign.

The result has been a slew of ads pushed out by campaigns and third-party supporters — at least half a dozen in the last five days.

Flush with new money, DFL candidate El Tinklenberg has started airing his third ad of the campaign season, which includes words from former Secretary of State Colin Powell. Bachmann has released four new ads in the last five days. Two repeat a misleading message regarding Tinklenberg’s term as transportation commissioner, one attacks him on property taxes and another promotes Bachmann’s “23 foster children,” as well as her opposition to the Wall Street bailout.

Alliance for a Better Minnesota put out an ad with Bachmann kissing Bush, saying “she embarrasses us.” The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee attacked Bachmann on her deregulation stance on Wall Street.

Bachmann: Tax Hikes Up Ahead!

Bachmann: Google Search Tinklenberg

Bachmann: Tink’s Failed Leadership at MnDOT

Bachmann: A Brighter Future

Alliance for a Better Minnesota: Michele Bachmann – Nonsense

Tinklenberg: Crisis

DCCC: Michele Bachmann – She’s for Wall Street, not Minnesota

A new mailer sent out by the Alliance for a Better Minnesota accuses Republicans Michele Bachmann and Norm Coleman of being distracted from the work of “finding solutions to the most difficult economic crisis facing America since the Great Depression.”

But Bachmann gets the sharpest jab: Instead of dealing with the financial meltdown she’s “questioning people’s patriotism.” The flyer prominently features a quote and image of Gen. Colin Powell who, referring to Bachmann’s infamous comments on “Hardball,” said, “We have got to stop this kind of nonsense and remember that our great strength is in our unity and our diversity.”

Got a piece of political mail you think we’d like to hear about it? Send it our way.

Who gets Twit? UC-Berkeley J-school student James Karl Buck knows the power of Twitter: jailed in Egypt after photographing a protest, he was freed in one day after his one-word tweet alerted friends who contacted the U.S. embassy and an Egyptian lawyer. Hillary Clinton, it seems, doesn’t get it so well: she is  followed by 3,051 people (well shy of Barack Obama’s Twitter-leading 24,000), but follows no one herself, a move that BusinessWeek calls not only “bad PR” but a possible lost opportunity in data collection.

Reporting military suicides: Editor & Publisher’s Greg Mitchell has long been tracking the alarming spike in non-combat military deaths in Iraq, noting that local papers consistently break news that many deaths the Pentagon reports as “non-combat-related” are really suicides. Today he points out work by the Pioneer Press’ John Brewer who reported that 22-year-old St. Paul resident Jacob J. Fairbanks died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound six months into his second tour in Iraq.