The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee joined Franken in making the original request, seeking an FEC ruling that would allow individuals to contribute up to $30,400 to a proposed DSCC legal fund, while political committees would be permitted to donate up to $15,000.

FEC spokeswoman Judith Ingram told the Minnesota Independent it’s typical for commissioners to select from among several draft advisory opinions that sometimes contain only minor variations from one another.

In this case the drafts differ in who could raise funds under new limits and whether new groups could form. Draft A says:

… the DSCC may establish a recount fund and use it to pay for expenses incurred in connection with recounts and election contests … [but] the Franken Committee may not establish a separate election contest fund subject to a limit that is separate from and in addition to its existing recount fund.

Draft B says that the DSCC may establish the same kind of fund for recount and election contest expenses and that:

… the Franken Committee may establish an election contest fund separate from its existing recount fund and that donations to the election contest fund will not be aggregated with donations to the recount fund …

Draft C says:

… any funds the DSCC solicits, including any funds the DSCC solicits for any recount fund it establishes (whether separate or not from the committee’s general funds) are not subject to a separate donation limit … [and] that the Franken Committee may establish an election contest fund separate from its existing recount fund, and donations to the election contest and recount funds are not subject to the limitations of the [Federal Election Campaign] Act

The National Republican Congressional Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Republican National Committee told the FEC on Feb. 26 they agreed with the Franken and DSCC request.

Ingram said the FEC opinions are “precedental,” meaning all parties involved in the current contest for Coleman’s former Senate seat could take advantage of the ruling — as could candidates and partisan groups in future post-election recounts.

The FEC’s draft advisory opinions come on the same day the Coleman-Franken election contest trial wrapped up. The three-judge panel heard closing arguments from both candidates’ legal teams and now can begin deliberations.

An appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court is possible — and the loser could also try to bring a suit in federal court — so both candidates’ campaigns will likely face ongoing legal expenses. So they will welcome the word from the FEC today, which Franken had originally sought by the end of February.

Coleman’s fundraising efforts may now be hampered, however, by the donor-information leak that made headlines this week after information from campaign databases were posted at the Wikileaks.org Web site.

The FEC has received other requests related to the Coleman-Franken battle. In January, the Alliance for a Better Minnesota asked the commission to take action in response to the Coleman campaign’s stated intention to use campaign funds to pay for legal expenses related to a civil lawsuit that implicated the former senator in a supporter’s alleged scheme to give him $100,000 in unreported donations.

A Coleman spokesman said in December that the campaign would seek an opinion on whether it could direct campaign funds to Coleman’s legal expenses in the civil suit, but hasn’t filed a request for a FEC advisory opinion. Ingram said spending campaign money on personal legal matters is the kind of question on which candidates are well-advised to seek FEC opinions.

Also in January, Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) party filed an FEC complaint over fundraising for Coleman’s post-election campaign efforts by the Republican National Lawyer’s Association.

“Both candidates and their state parties have established recount funds and have raised large sums of money,” notes Franken attorney Marc Elias in the request to the FEC.

“But if the candidates are only able to raise under a single limit for the entire post-election process, and if only the state parties are allowed to establish separate recount funds, then it will be progressively harder to defend the candidates’ and parties’ interest in that process, which has become virtually unprecedented in its length, complexity and expense.”

In addition, the Franken campaign is seeking permission from the FEC to set up a new fund explicitly to raise funds for the election contest currently being argued before a three-judge panel at the Minnesota Supreme Court.

“This fund would be separate from the Committee’s existing recount fund, and would be used only for the purposes of paying for expenses related to the election contest and resulting litigation,” Elias writes. Contributions to this proposed fund would be capped at $2,400 for individuals and $5,000 for political committees.”

Elias asked the FEC to respond to the inquiry within 10 days — which expires on Friday.

Magnuson, Schumer, Cornyn

Here are three quotes from the last 24 hours on the Minnesota recount between Al Franken and former U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman:

“Everything’s been looked at and looked at carefully,” is how Minnesota Supreme Court Justice and State Canvassing Board Member Eric Magnuson sees it, according to a news report this morning. “If there were any nits to be picked, they’ve been picked.”

“It is now clear that Al Franken won the election. The Canvassing Board will meet tomorrow to wrap up its work and certify him the winner,” U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, former chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said in a statement Sunday. “With the Senate set to begin meeting on Tuesday to address the important issues facing the nation, it is crucial that Minnesota’s seat not remain empty.”

“Senator Schumer will likely play a key role in determining who ultimately assumes this Senate seat,” responded U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “Pre-judging the outcome while litigation is still pending calls into question his ability to impartially preside over this matter when it comes before the Committee, as it most certainly will.”

Cornyn elaborated on his position and the likelihood of a filibuster over seating Franken this morning on CNN’s “American Morning.” Excerpts after the jump. Here are excerpts from Cornyn’s Monday appearance on CNN’s “American Morning” program:

CNN: So you’re saying that the legal avenues for Norm Coleman have not been exhausted. You don’t want Al — Al Franken to be seated, or anyone to be seated, until all the legal challenges in Minnesota are up?

CORNYN: That’s correct. And the — and the the rules to the Senate — Rule Two of the rules of the Senate require an election certificate. In Minnesota, that has to be signed by both the secretary of state and the governor, and it can’t be issued before seven days have expired after the canvassing board’s decision. So we’re getting closer to a resolution but we’re not there yet. …

CNN: Are you guys going to filibuster?

CORNYN: Well, in filibuster, of course, in the Senate means unless you can get 60 votes to proceed, then — then you don’t. We continue debating it. And I think that is the likelihood here if the Democrats try to ignore the Senate Rule Two and Minnesota law and try to short-circuit this process.