Ridiculous House of cards

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of commentary online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

When it comes to running for Minnesota state offices, the place one calls home matters — an address can make or break eligibility to even be a candidate.

And that’s why it’s so concerning and disappointing that some Minnesota Democrats chose to endorse a House candidate who didn’t live in the district. DFLers supported Curtis Johnson’s candidacy for the District 40B Roseville-area House seat.

Though he won overwhelmingly during the November elections, a judge ruled in December that he did not reside at the address he provided. Since Johnson wasn’t a resident, his candidacy and election were invalidated by the court. The DFL committee clearly fell on the job during vetting and must do better in the future.

“It’s a colossal screw-up. It would be costly even if it weren’t tied,” former DFL House Majority Leader Ryan Winkler told the Minnesota Star Tribune. “If you have people who live in the district who are running, why would you be supporting people who don’t live in the district?”

Why, indeed?

Because even though the local DFL endorsing group knew there could be a problem with Johnson’s residency before the election, they made little to no effort to confirm his residency. The candidate had acknowledged that he lived in Little Canada but rented an apartment in the district in order to run while he looked for a “forever home” home inside the district. Still, DFL screeners — perhaps because he had been a duly elected Roseville school board member in the past — didn’t follow up to make sure that he lived in the district.

But Paul Wikstrom, the GOP candidate for the House seat, was closely watching. He never saw a moving van. After the election, which Johnson won by a wide margin, Wikstrom successfully filed the residency challenge, which rendered his opponent ineligible.

“Johnson’s failure to maintain a residence in District 40B for the entire six months prior to the election was a deliberate, serious, and material violation of Minnesota election law,” Ramsey County Judge Leonardo Castro wrote in his 32-page order.

The residency requirement has been in the spotlight recently because the need to replace Johnson precipitated the hot mess that’s now playing out at the Minnesota Capitol. The judge’s ruling turned a 67-67 tie at the House into a 67-66 advantage for House Republicans, prompting GOP lawmakers to reject a power-sharing arrangement with the DFL. Then political dominoes started to fall. House DFLers decided to boycott the opening two weeks of the session until Johnson can be replaced in a special election (which might not happen until March) in the reliably blue district.

House Republicans were undeterred. They went on to open the session and conduct business as usual without the Democrats. However, another court ruling found that without the Dems presence they don’t legally have a quorum and cannot take any actions as a Legislature.

In the past, both Democrat and Republican parties’ subcommittees have been guilty of failing to thoroughly vet candidates on residency. They’ve mostly relied on the honor system: If a candidate said they lived at an address when they filed to run, that person was believed. But in a very small number of cases over the years, that honor system has failed as candidates have attempted to skirt the residency requirements.

Former GOP House Minority Leader Marty Seifert, who was previously involved in candidate recruitment, said Republicans have traditionally relied on the vetting process from local political units to determine if the candidates they endorsed actually lived in their districts.

“You would think that the endorsing conventions would do their jobs and the nominating committee would vet it, but at the end of the day they are put together loosely and they have various standards,” he said.

To that end, Seifert said both parties would benefit from requiring more solid proof of residency. That’s why the Legislature passed an amendment to election law that took effect this year, which requires information such as a photo ID with an address to prove residency.

But even that may not be enough — prospective candidates may find ways around it. So it is incumbent upon local party screeners to do the necessary leg work to ensure that candidates are indeed residents of the district they seek to represent.

“We don’t spy on our members. We don’t do ankle bracelets,” House DFL Leader Melissa Hortman, Brooklyn Park, told the Star Tribune.

Perhaps it’s time to start. The ridiculous election imbroglio in District 40B demonstrates a clear problem with the honor system.