
It took ten days for the Senate to organize in 1971. The days were filled with parliamentary maneuvering, the chief justice refusing to administer the oath, legislators storming out of the chamber, two secretaries of the Senate, two versions of the Journal, and a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling. What caused this turmoil in the Senate at the start of the 1971 session?
The election
In 1971, there were no party designations, but legislators chose to caucus with either the conservatives or the liberals. Conservatives had controlled the Senate chamber since at least 1913, the year legislators began being elected on a nonpartisan basis.
The results of the 1970 general election indicated that there would be 33 conservatives, 33 liberals, and one independent in the Senate. Prior to the election, the one independent, Richard Palmer, had said he would caucus with the majority, but the election results left the Senate without a clear majority party. Despite attempts by both caucuses to woo Palmer to their side, he eventually announced he would side with the conservative caucus when the legislature convened.
Then, more complications arose when Palmer’s opponent in the general election, Francis LaBrosse, filed an unfair campaign practices charge against him. This stirred up discussion before session convened over whether or not Palmer would be seated and, if seated, whether he could participate in the organization of the Senate.
On December 31, 1970, the Attorney General issued an opinion that explained that the oath of office may be administered to anyone who has an election certificate and that the Senate would need to consider the question of the eligibility of its members. The opinion also indicated that all senators could vote on organizational matters.
The first day of session
On January 5, 1971, the 67th Legislature convened. Lieutenant Governor Rudy Perpich, a former senator and DFL party member, called the session to order as President of the Senate, which was the custom at the time. Despite being the presiding officer of the body, he was not a member of the body and, therefore, it was presumed that he could not vote as a member.
Much parliamentary maneuvering ensued to attempt to keep Palmer from being seated. Perpich surprised the chamber by presenting only 66 names to be sworn in that session, blocking Palmer from being seated. Chief Justice Oscar Knutson insisted that all 67 senators-elect who hold an election certificate be sworn in. When Perpich refused, Justice Knutson left the chamber without swearing in any senators at all.
The Senate then called on Mr. Patrick O’Neil, a notary public, to administer the oath, with the hopes that he would swear in all members except Palmer. He refused, but then rushed forward to administer the oath individually to Palmer. (Some media reports at the time credit Palmer as being the first senator sworn in that session.) Rep. Jack Fena, a DFL House member who was standing in the back of the chamber, was then called forward to administer the oath to all except Palmer, but Palmer stood anyway and took the oath a second time with the rest of the chamber.
After this tumultuous swearing in process, Perpich further surprised the body by continuing to deny Palmer’s presence or recognize his vote when members were deciding who would serve as Secretary of the Senate. The conservatives’ nominee was George Goodwin, whose election included Palmer’s vote. Instead of the vote going in the conservatives’ favor, in an unprecedented move Perpich ruled that he could vote to break what he deemed a 33-33 tie in order to vote in the liberals’ choice for Secretary of the Senate, Pat Flahaven. Goodwin and Flahaven were each given the oath of office. However, as Flahaven was given the oath, the conservatives left the chamber with promises to file a lawsuit. It was reported that Goodwin then received the oath of office in the corridor outside the Senate chamber.
The Senate is organized
For the next few days, there were two versions of the Journal of the Senate, with the liberal’s Journal ignoring the presence of Palmer. The unofficial transcripts, the Journal, and the alternative journal text show how the question of Palmer’s seating and the question of how many votes were counted for each motion were debated at each daily session.
On January 13th, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that the Senate had the responsibility to determine Palmer’s eligibility, and that the Lieutenant Governor does not have the authority to break a tie and could not exclude Palmer.
The January 14th session opened with continued quibbling about whether there were 66 or 67 senators in the body as Senators discussed points raised by the court ruling. Eventually, the body successfully voted to amend the Journal of the Senate of the preceding days to acknowledge that Palmer had been seated. The Senate commenced further organization and was ready to proceed with legislative business.
For further reading:
Sources listed in chronological order. If you would like to request any of these sources, please email the library at library@lrl.mn.gov.
- Op.Atty.Gen., 280E, Dec. 31, 1970. - This Attorney General opinion concerns the seating of a Senate member.
- "Editorials: Seating of Legislators.” The Minneapolis Star, January 1, 1971, p. 8.
- Oath of Office Controversy, Minnesota Journal of the Senate, January 5, 1971, p. 5-11.
- “Legislature in Lengthy Debate Over Palmer.” The Duluth Herald, January 5, 1971, p. 1.
- “Senator-elect Palmer Vows to Take His Seat.” The Austin Daily Herald, January 5, 1971, p. 1.
- “Palmer Hassle Rocks Senate.” The Duluth News Tribune, January 6, 1971, p. 1 & 3.
- “DFL takes Senate Control: Conservatives Vow Court Fight.” Star Tribune, January 6, 1971, p. 1.
- “Battle of Journals Shapes Up.” St. Cloud Times, January 6, 1971.
- Senate Journal, January 5-8, 12-14, 1971
- Alternative Senate Journal, as written by the liberal caucus's Secretary of the Senate, Pat Flahaven, January 5-8, 12-14, 1971.
- Unofficial Transcripts from the Senate Floor Session, January 5-8, 12-14, 1971.
- State Ex Rel. Palmer v. Perpich, 1971, 289 Minn. 149, 182 n.W.2d 182. - Decision dated January 13, 1971.
- “Coleman Says Court Didn’t Resolve Dispute.” Saint Paul Dispatch, January 14, 1971.
- Pahl, T. L. “Minnesota.” Midwest Review of Public Administration, Vol. 5, no. 1, February 1971.
- Dornfeld, Steven. "Legislature's Opening Day 20 Years Ago Hard to Top for Political Chaos." St. Paul Pioneer Press, January 6, 1991.
- “Two Secretaries of the Senate – in 1971,” Memo by the Legislative Reference Library, January 2009.