Former Sen. Norm Coleman (WDCpix)

When Norm Coleman gathered the media at his St. Paul residence last week to announce that he was conceding the U.S. Senate contest after a nearly eight-month post-election battle, he hit all the appropriate notes for appearing gracious in defeat. The Republican repeatedly congratulated his Democratic challenger, praised the integrity of the Minnesota Supreme Court and hailed Minnesotans as the smartest, most decent folks on the planet. It was a relaxed, even folksy display of Coleman’s redoubtable political skills — a tone noticeably missing during the bitter fight with Al Franken.

At the close of the press conference, however, Coleman made perhaps his most illuminating comment. Pressed on his future political plans, he didn’t duck the question as inappropriate for a day on which he was conceding a previous political contest. Rather, the former senator promised prompt news on that front.

“Sometime next week I presume I’ll be talking a little bit about what the future is,” he said.

That teasing answer caught political observers off guard and has fueled speculation that Coleman may turn around and run for governor in 2010.

“I was shocked by it,” says Larry Jacobs, director of the University of Minnesota’s Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs. “He was using the announcement almost as a boomerang into the next campaign.”

While some political prognosticators are highly skeptical that Coleman will wage a gubernatorial bid in 2010, the specter of another campaign raises an intriguing question: Is Norm Coleman still politically viable?

There’s little doubt that he comes out of the battle with Franken as somewhat damaged goods. As far back as January both candidates registered approval ratings south of 40 percent — and it’s doubtful the intervening six months have done anything to bolster public sentiment. Most Minnesotans would be happy not to see either of their mugs until ice-fishing season.

In addition, Coleman may have run out of chances to prove his political mettle in a statewide campaign. He’s now lost two of three such races, including a 1998 bid for governor. Even Coleman’s 2002 Senate victory carries an asterisk, owing to the death of Paul Wellstone just 11 days before the election.

But few political observers count Coleman out of the contest. He’s an unusually adroit politician who further endeared himself to the GOP base by taking the Senate contest all the way to the state’s top court despite repeated calls for him to concede. In addition, with Tim Pawlenty opting not to seek a third term, the GOP gubernatorial field looks to be a wide-open affair with no obvious favorite. Even so, Coleman can’t be considered a shoo-in for endorsement if he enters the fray.

“I think that he would be among the front-runners,” says Greg Peppin, a GOP political consultant who is advising former House Speaker Steve Sviggum on a potential gubernatorial bid. “I think he would be in the top tier.”

Peppin believes the taint from the ugly Senate fight will fade as the contest recedes from the headlines. “It was kind of a pox on both their houses, but I don’t see that lasting for either of them,” he says.

Coleman would easily have the widest name recognition among the current crop of contenders. He’d also bring a proven track record of raising revenue in what’s likely to be a very expensive race.

“The amount of money this guy raises is just stunning,” says Jacobs. “This is a guy who has been in the big fights and knows how to put together a plan for a campaign and then stick to it.”

Former Republican U.S. Sen. Dave Durenberger agrees that the voting public won’t continue to punish Coleman for taking the contest to the state’s top court. But he believes Coleman will be hurt by a hallmark of his six years in Washington: fealty to the Bush administration.

“He will have to answer for appearing to be George Bush’s man from Minnesota,” says Durenberger, who supported Coleman in the 2008 campaign.

Coleman’s plans, however, will likely be driven by more than simple political calculus. The Senate campaign revealed numerous indications that the Republican’s vaunted fundraising ability doesn’t extend to his personal bank account.

In January it was revealed that Coleman had refinanced his St. Paul residence 12 times over the last 14 years, most recently in 2007 for $775,000. In addition, Harper’s Magazine reported that longtime Coleman patron Nasser Kazeminy had purchased suits for the then-senator at the Neiman Marcus store in Minneapolis. Finally a pair of lawsuits filed just days before the election alleged that Kazeminy attempted to funnel $100,000 to Coleman through a Minneapolis insurance firm. The businessman’s purported reason for this political philanthropy: “Senators don’t make shit.”

Eyeing age 60, with two kids currently in college, it seems likely that Coleman might be seeking a post more financially rewarding than the governor’s $180,000 salary.

“I’m not sure he can afford to be governor with his private debt load,” says David Schultz, a political science professor at Hamline University. “He may actually need at this point to say, ‘Gosh, I can’t run for governor.’ That could very well factor in to what he’s going to do down the line.”

Durenberger expresses similar misgivings about any future campaigns for Coleman. He believes the former senator would be better served by stepping away from public life.

“Does he have legs?” Durenberger asks of Coleman’s political future. “Yes. I’d rather he trotted off into civilian life, but that’s just a personal thing.”

By constitutional mandate, redistricting takes place every 10 years: Each state’s legislature must redraw the lines that define congressional and legislative districts. But it rarely happens the same way twice; when politicians fail, judges step in to finish the job.

Stakes are especially high in Minnesota, as the state may lose a congressional seat after the 2010 U.S. Census reapportionment. And if Minnesota loses a congressional seat, the redistricting process will decide whether the district of Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann or another incumbent will be relegated to the history books.

The bill, carried by Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller (DFL-Minneapolis), takes up recommendations from a group led by former Vice President Walter Mondale and former Gov. Arne Carlson.

The Mondale-Carlson group (technically, the Advisory Board for the Minnesota Redistricting Project of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota) proposed saving time and sweat by getting judges to draw congressional- and legislative-district lines before legislators themselves get involved. The reverse sequence — Legislature, then courts — is responsible for the state’s current political lines.

But some who were among the closest to the work of reshaping Minnesota’s political boundaries last time around seem to think the existing system worked pretty well.

Redistricting reform got nowhere last session, but this year Pogemiller pushed through his bill by a vote of 39–28 in the final days before the state Legislature adjourned. Next stop: the House’s Committee on State and Local Government Operations Reform, Technology and Elections, which could hold discussions on the topic before considering the bill itself when the legislative session resumes in February, according to legislative staff.

UPDATE: In an email, Committee Chair state Rep. Gene Pelowski promises that the committee “will be looking at redistricting over the summer and this bill will be included.”

Reform advocates, led by Mondale and Carlson, have argued (pdf) that the current system is “broken” — badly enough that it won’t do for the next round of redistricting after the 2010 census.

The new system would create a commission of five retired appeals court judges to make the first maps of new district boundaries based on the latest census data. The majority and minority caucuses from both the House and the Senate would appoint one judge each. The four judges would together choose a fifth to join them.

Their first plan would go to the Legislature for an up-or-down vote — no changes allowed. If that fails to pass, the commission would work up a second plan, which again would be subject to an up-or-down vote by the Legislature. Only if the second plan fails to pass would legislators have a chance at concocting their own plan.

Musical chairs

Demographic estimates predict the count in Minnesota may fall about 2,000 people short of the number needed to retain the state’s current complement of eight congressional districts. If that happens, the question of which party’s incumbent loses a seat in Congress will fall to the state’s redistricting process — and will likely make the decennially debilitating battles over creating new legislative boundaries look like cake walks.

So the rules for what could become a titanic game of musical chairs matter deeply. And exactly who applies those rules depends on who wins the race for governor next year. If Democrats retain control of the state Legislature but lack veto-proof majorities in both houses, then a Republican in the governor’s mansion keeps things complicated, as both the state’s legislative and executive branches must approve a new plan.

On the other hand, if a Democrat succeeds Gov. Tim Pawlenty, the struggle for the DFL becomes one of drawing the most advantageous plan possible under constitutional requirements.

The last time the state took on this task, after the 2000 census, it was not simply a matter for one party, or even two. For the first time, redistricting was a three-way partisan game: The Independence Party’s Jesse Ventura was governor, Republicans held the House, and the DFL controlled the Senate.

Each assigned a staffer to draw a redistricting plan. (Wielding somewhat less influence were the minority caucuses from each legislative body, whose redistricting staffers included one Michael Brodkorb for the Senate Republicans.)

Veterans of the trenches

Over the past few weeks, the Minnesota Independent interviewed key staffers from each party as well as the man who ran redistricting for the state Legislature: Peter Wattson, now secretary of the Senate.

All had a hand in drawing — or, in Wattson’s case, evaluating — maps that eventually got redrawn by the courts. But all seem satisfied by the result.

Wattson said the redistricting process last time was “pretty orderly, actually.”

Greg Peppin, who drew redistricting maps for the Republican House majority, recalls that “everyone felt that the plan was pretty fair.”

Vic Thorstenson, Peppin’s counterpart for Senate Democrats, said: “We were pretty happy with the court’s plan.”

Joe Mansky, who represented Ventura and the Independence Party, concurred: “We were pretty happy with the outcome,” he said.

That doesn’t mean all four oppose Pogemiller’s plan. Thorstenson and Wattson still work at the Capitol and wouldn’t give their opinions on the reform proposal.

Peppin, now a political consultant, said “the process is just steeped in politics” and reckons that a judicial panel assigned first crack at drawing maps “will not be able to do it better than the Legislature.”

Mansky supports the plan, in part because it hearkens back to a commission Ventura formed for the same purpose.

Popularity and obscurity

In his current role as elections manager for Ramsey County, Mansky became a familiar face this year to the dedicated followers of the Norm Coleman/Al Franken Senate race, due to long hours he spent on the witness stand of the recent election-contest trial.

But seven years ago, the trio toiled over their redistricting maps in relative obscurity — outside of the state Capitol, that is.

“We mapmakers were very popular,” Peppin recalls. Legislators of every stripe were eager to know how things were shaping up — particularly for their home districts. “There was a reason for changing the locks and giving us all fresh keys,” he said.

Thorstenson’s recalls his home-away-from-home during those days the same way: “I was in a room at the State Capitol that even the janitors weren’t allowed to go into.”

Coming: Scenarios past mapmakers see for the redistricting to come