Despite the continued legal challenges from her opponent Joe Miller, Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski's campaign expects that her general election write-in victory over the tea party-backed insurgent who defeated her in the GOP primary will be certified well before the new class of U.S. senators is scheduled to be sworn in on Jan. 5.

On Friday, the Alaska Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Miller's appeal of a superior court decision that upheld the state's vote count.

Current unofficial results showed Murkowski leading Miller by 10,328 votes, but U.S. federal judge Ralph Breistline stopped certification of the results until Miller's legal challenges in state court were resolved.

"It's likely that the federal judge will have time to decide this before Christmas," Murkowski campaign manager Kevin Sweeney told RealClearPolitics. "Worst case being that we would go into the week after Christmas, but once the Supreme Court rules on Friday, that gives the federal court plenty of time to hear any additional concerns and then remove the stay."

Even if the ballots that were unsuccessfully challenged by the Miller camp were to be excluded, the incumbent senator would still lead Miller by over 2,000 votes.

But Miller is showing no signs of giving up the fight. In a statement released on Monday, the Miller camp said that the lower court's ruling "essentially modifies state law" because it allowed some ballots to be counted in which the voters did not write in Lisa Murkowski's first and last name exactly as it appeared on her candidate's declaration form.

"We have consistently asserted that the law should be followed strictly," Miller wrote. "The fact that the legislature stated that there should be ‘no exceptions' to the ballot counting method is what, in our view, should govern this matter. Under the current ruling, there are now over 8,000 exceptions, a result everyone who favors the rule of law should question."

The Miller camp also continues to question the election's integrity on several additional accounts, citing among other issues equal protection concerns due to the way Murkowski's ballots were all counted by hand and Miller's were not, accusations of voter fraud in conjunction with ballots it says were cast by felons, and questions of fairness regarding the expedited timeframe of the legal process.

Miller spokesman Randy DeSoto shrugged off the charge that Miller's continued legal challenge was only delaying the inevitable result and could damage his long-term reputation, especially in the event that he seeks to run for elected office again.

"I think many people in Alaska feel that there's nothing wrong with making sure that this election was carried out correctly," DeSoto said. "And the fact that it was an unusual election with the write-ins and that new rules were promulgated 36 hours before the actual review began, those sort of things raise enough issues that people feel that the court should sort it out."

Amid the Supreme Court's decision to expedite the appeal process, the Murkowski camp is no longer expressing concerns it had previously voiced that the senator could lose her seniority, or even fail to be seated in January, due to the legal progress.

Murkowski's campaign manager anticipated that the Supreme Court judge would agree with the lower court's ruling that allowed for some discretion in interpreting voter intent in the write-in ballots that were counted for Murkowski.

"The superior court judge's decision was extremely clear that he believed the state followed the law appropriately -- it didn't leave very much doubt, I don't think," Sweeney said. "Everything is on track, and we were able to make the case that this needs to be dealt with swiftly, and that's what's happened."

Energy reform may be in flux on the congressional agenda next year now that Republicans will control the lower chamber and are unlikely to make it a priority. But the issue could help some lesser known potential GOP presidential contenders break from the pack as the primary race develops next year.

"If gas prices go above $3, energy will be an issue," Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley said of the upcoming presidential race.

The average cost across the country for a gallon of gasoline is currently $2.98, according to the Energy Information Administration, and prices are on the rise.

Current leading contenders in Iowa like former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney have shorter records on energy and renewable energy production than potential dark horses who could be threats for the nomination. In Iowa, the first contest in the GOP nomination fight, the issue could energize South Dakota Sen. John Thune's likely campaign, as well as those of Govs. Mitch Daniels of Indiana, Haley Barbour of Mississippi and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota.

Iowa, like neighboring South Dakota, has a large market for ethanol producers, and Thune has been proactive in seeking to extend ethanol tax credits. He also added to the 2008 farm bill reauthorization of the Biomass Crop Assistance Program, which routed funding from the Department of Agriculture to production centers that convert plant material into energy and fuel. Thune also supports opening part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil exploration.

"Other than John Thune, I don't know where any of them stand on energy or ethanol," Grassley said, referring to his Senate colleague's slate of potential opponents in the GOP race.

Doug Gross, who served as former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's Iowa campaign chairman in 2008, warned in an interview that energy isn't as high on the priority list as it was during the lead-up to the last race.

But, Gross said, "If energy is an economic security issue next year, then it becomes red hot. But if it's just academic, then it will be left to political parlor games."

He added that if it becomes a factor in the race, it will play to Thune's strengths and suggested that the senator may be the only candidate who can campaign on it successfully.

Since the last presidential race, the allure of ethanol has subsided some: Crop prices that go into it have increased, ethanol producers have lost money and the production has caused deforestation. Thune supporters, however, note that he has sought to bolster the product to encourage the next generation of biofuels, and that his energy portfolio is expansive and extends far beyond biofuels.

The senator said in a brief interview that some bipartisan reforms on energy can be achieved next year if the White House shows a willingness to move forward, and he hopes to take an active role in those deliberations. Such a role could boost his presidential prospects if the upper chamber considers moving legislation.

Barbour and Daniels, meanwhile, boast of their records in attracting energy producing companies to their states in recent years, and Barbour enhanced his reputation earlier this year in the wake of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Pawlenty actively pursued a "clean energy strategy" as governor.

Among the more well-known trio of Huckabee, Palin and Romney, Palin stands out, strategists on both sides of the aisle say, for her reputation of standing up to oil companies when she served as governor.

For his part, Huckabee supported mandatory cap-and-trade in late 2007 when he was running for president, as did the eventual nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain. Huckabee changed his position in October of 2009 via a blog post on his political action committee's Web site.

Huckabee complained that small businesses would shoulder the biggest tax burden imposed by the system and noted, "The effect on the American economy will be catastrophic."

As for Romney, Gross - his former Iowa strategist - noted that the candidate was not comfortable with the energy issue during the last campaign.

Romney devoted a chapter of his recent book, No Apology, to current energy policy and approached the issue from a national security standpoint. He mentioned that he considered joining Massachusetts to a regional cap-and-trade program that would cap carbon dioxide for electric utilities but ultimately decided against it when manufacturers in his state complained that it would raise their rates by 30 percent.

The Bay Stater noted that he has previously supported ethanol subsidies, but he called subsidies "a hidden form of energy tax." He labeled a direct oil or carbon tax a nonstarter and lamented that automotive mandates can't make a meaningful difference given the wide variety of energy consumers and carbon dioxide emitters.

Romney wrote that he's open to a tax swap program originally proposed by Greg Mankiw, an economist who advised President George W. Bush. The program would impose gas or carbon taxes on producers while reducing their payroll taxes, and Romney said he's open to exploring its potential.

A successful challenge to the new comprehensive health care reform law has both parties looking toward further legal action.

On Monday U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson ruled that the provision in the new law that forces individuals to purchase health care insurance is unconstitutional. The decision, which complicates the law's full implementation, puts the case on a path to the Supreme Court. The White House, however, has indicated that the Department of Justice first will try to appeal Hudson's decision.

But Ken Cuccinelli, the Virginia attorney general who brought the case, appeared Monday night on CNN's "John King USA" to push for an expedited hearing from the Supreme Court.

"[The impact of the decision] produces an amazing amount of uncertainty for our whole economy," Cuccinelli said.

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, who is from Virginia, joined Cuccinelli in calling for a quick path to the high court.

Both the White House and outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed confidence that the law would remain intact. Pelosi noted that Judge Hudson's decision does not stand in the way of other parts of the reform, which are moving forward.

"There have been and will continue to be a wide range of attempts to weaken this law," Pelosi said in a statement. "But as in previous court rulings across the country, I am confident that the Affordable Care Act will ultimately be sustained and will keep benefitting our middle class, our families, and our businesses, indeed every American. In Congress, we will stand firm against attempts to roll back the law, including the Patient's Bill of Rights and the critical consumer protections enacted by health insurance reform."

In a post on the White House blog, adviser Stephanie Cutter noted that opponents of the legislation have filed more than 20 challenges.

"Judges have already granted the administration's motion to dismiss 12 of these cases," she wrote, adding that the bill was upheld as constitutional in two cases that have moved forward so far. A similar case will get a decision on Thursday in Florida.

Cutter noted that challenges to other sweeping reforms have cropped up but failed in the past, and the administration expects the same thing will happen with health reform.

"Contrary to what opponents argue the new law falls well within Congress's power to regulate economic activity under the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the General Welfare Clause," she said.

Democrats also point out that in this case, the individual mandate originally was pushed by the GOP when Congress debated health care reform during the Clinton administration.

Nevertheless, continued wrangling over the law ensures that it will be a key issue in the 2012 presidential election.

Several likely Republican contenders for their party's 2012 presidential nomination chimed in after the decision was offered.

South Dakota Sen. John Thune said in a statement, "Today's ruling by the U.S. District Court confirms what Republicans have been saying all along: ObamaCare represents an unconstitutional federal power grab that should be repealed and replaced."

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty went a step further, touting his own efforts to curb the law's effects.

"While today's ruling is a victory for individuals' rights, I'm also hopeful that courts will recognize that Obamacare is also a threat to states' rights," he said in a statement.

He added, "Last month, I joined the federal lawsuit in Florida that challenges Obamacare's individual mandate and invokes the 10th Amendment in vigorous defense of states' rights. In August, I issued an executive order directing Minnesota state agencies to reject participation in Obamacare unless required by law or consistent with existing state policy. I encourage governors to stand up for their states' rights and do what we can to stop Obamacare."

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich argued that the single ruling is evidence that the law is unraveling and should be repealed.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has lauded former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as "terrific" and a "qualified, capable person." In an interview with RealClearPolitics, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty raved that she is a "successful leader" with a "very bright future in front of her." Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich applauded her impact on the Republican Party at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, calling her "tremendously important" and warning that "nobody should underestimate her."

At this preliminary stage in the slowly developing Republican primary season, the likely presidential contenders have settled on various early strategies and levels of public engagement, but there is one tactic they all seem to agree on: speak only in glowing terms about former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. But how long the pro-Palin refrains will last remains an open question.

According to GOP consultant Mike Murphy, who has been a consistent Palin critic, potential GOP candidates are smart to hold their fire for the time being.

"There will be such a media obsession with her that the best the other candidates can do is stand back and let her peak early," he told RealClearPolitics. "The worst thing you can do in a campaign is obsess about things you can't control, like your opponent's press."

Murphy, who said that he does not expect Palin to win the GOP nomination if she does decide to run, added that the other potential candidates' most pressing concern in the early stages of the campaign will be figuring out how to sell themselves to Republican primary voters and that engaging directly with Palin at this point would almost certainly be counterproductive.

"The media is dying for somebody to run as a Republican Palin-trasher, but pleasing the media is not the key strategic way you win the Republican nomination," he said. "The media obsession with Palin will guarantee that all her issues get aired to death anyway. There's no need for other candidates to engage in any of it."

But once the campaign gets into full swing, the other Republican candidates will have a hard time trying to ignore the woman who could become the defining factor of the race.

Should he decide to seek the GOP nomination for a second time, Mike Huckabee figures to be the top-tier candidate who might be most pressed to contrast himself with Palin, since the two former governors share a similar political base among social conservatives and have somewhat comparable populist personas on the stump.

Huckabee has spoken in almost completely positive terms about Palin thus far, but in an August radio interview, he dropped a hint of what might become a key element of his battle plan against her should the two end up becoming direct competitors.

"She's a very popular person," Huckabee told NPR's Tom Ashbrook. "A lot of people love her. She's a celebrity, and I respect that very much."

The backhanded compliment about Palin's "celebrity" status could prove an effective tool for Huckabee to raise questions about the depth of her appeal but might also leave him open to a similar countercharge, considering his own recent career as a Fox News television personality, albeit one who has enjoyed significantly less widespread media visibility than Palin.

But perhaps the most salient line of attack that her potential GOP rivals might use against her is criticism of her decision to resign with a year and a half left in her first term as governor.

Despite their almost universal praise for Palin's ability to energize the party, there have already been several instances in which Republican White House hopefuls have drawn attention to her early resignation.

After Palin stepped down in July of 2009, Pawlenty in an interview with Fox News carefully made sure to emphasize that Palin would "continue to be a strong voice and a leader for the Republican Party" but then drew a sports analogy in which he suggested that it was time for the Republican Party to "get some new draft picks."

Huckabee had an even starker immediate reaction to Palin's surprising move, telling Fox News at the time, "Even if she did get out primarily because of a feeling of being chased, that's not going to stop if she continues in politics."

And even the typically message-disciplined Romney could not help himself from getting in what was perceived as a jab at Palin in a recent interview with Jay Leno. When the comedian pressed Romney about his own four-year term as governor, the 2008 Republican candidate who is likely to give it another shot in 2012 said that it would have been "hard to imagine a circumstance where I'd have quit."

Palin and her aides are well aware of the potential pitfalls that her resignation might present to mounting a successful candidacy and have long argued that her decision to step down was necessitated by circumstances beyond her control, primarily the onslaught of frivolous ethics complaints that had taken up an increasing amount of her time.

Despite her potential vulnerability on this issue, her Republican rivals will have to be careful about pressing too hard on any line of attack against Palin since they likely will not be able to afford offending her legions of diehard supporters.

But if the other contenders themselves are reluctant to press too hard out of fear of appearing to be bullies, their surrogates likely will be eager to do it for them.

In an interview with The Kansas City Star that was posted on Saturday, retiring Republican Missouri Sen. Kit Bond gave a preview of what may become a mantra emanating from many more Republican leaders who are critical of Palin. Bond listed three of his favorite potential contenders for the GOP nomination before expressing his "reservations about anyone who quits as governor halfway through the term."

A spokesman for Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) on Wednesday signaled optimism that that the Senate will move quickly to take up debate on ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia sooner than had been expected.

"The senator is hopeful we can get to it right away next week," Lugar spokesman Mark Helmke told RealClearPolitics.

President Obama has called ratification of the New START treaty a "top priority" for the lame-duck session of Congress, but the chances for quick ratification had appeared unlikely before the agreement with Republicans over extension of the George W. Bush-era tax cuts was announced.

"We're optimistic about the number of votes we're going to get," Helmke said.

Helmke said that Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, had spoken to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) about taking up debate on the treaty early next week but had not spoken about it with Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). Kyl has long been the Republican point-person on New START and has repeatedly said that the Senate would not get around to the issue in the lame-duck session.

Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), echoed Lugar's optimism that the votes were there for passage of the treaty, with or without Kyl's support.

"Nothing's easy for us right now, and it's been a battle to get this far," Manley told RealClearPolitics. "I believe that if we were to take the treaty to the floor, there are the votes here to ratify it."

Manley affirmed that Sen. Reid still intends to take the treaty to the floor but declined to set a schedule.

Lugar has long been a vocal advocate for New START and has made several optimistic statements about acquiring the 67 votes needed for ratification. But his suggestion that the treaty could come up next week appeared to reflect a new sense of confidence after the framework for a deal on taxes was reached.

Senate Republicans had previously vowed not to take up any additional legislation before coming to an agreement on taxes.

Speaking in the Oval Office after a bilateral meeting with Polish President Komorowski on Wednesday, Obama denied any linkage between New START and the taxes deal, saying the treaty needs to be ratified "on its own merits."

"I have discussed it with Senate Republican leader McConnell," Obama said. "I am confident that we are going to be able to get the START treaty on the floor, debated and completed before we break for the holidays."

The New START treaty would follow on the heals of previous nuclear arms reduction treaties between the U.S. and Russia by cutting the number of nuclear missile launchers and deployed strategic warheads in both countries and establishing verification regimes for compliance.

Proponents of the treaty -- including the vast majority of members of both parties' foreign policy establishments -- have advocated for quick passage, pointing to the current lack of inspections of Russia's nuclear arsenal.

President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the treaty in April, but it needs to garner a two-thirds majority in the Senate and be passed in the Russian Duma, in order to be ratified.

As negative reaction from congressional Democrats continues to pour in over President Obama's framework tax cuts deal with Republicans, prominent progressives who have long been critical of the White House for not taking a firmer stand against the GOP appear to have new ammunition for their attacks.

Obama, they say, is coming across as "wimpy and wussy," as Bill Maher described it during a Sunday appearance on CNN. But some Democratic strategists are fighting back against that assessment, arguing that a pragmatic approach is the key to a successful Obama presidency in the long term.

After their midterm drubbing, Democrats who wanted Obama to draw the proverbial line in the sand, particularly on not extending tax cuts for the wealthy, became increasingly vocal in casting Obama as an irresolute president.

Democratic strategist and Clinton family confidante James Carville fired one of the most memorable shots last month when he told reporters, "If Hillary gave up one of her balls and gave it to Obama, he'd have two."

Last week, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote that it was "hard to escape the impression" that Republicans were correct in their belief that Obama could be "counted on to fold" on their vow not to act on any other legislation until the tax cuts extension issue was resolved on their terms.

"It would be much easier, of course, for Democrats to draw a line if Mr. Obama would do his part," Krugman wrote. "But all indications are that the party will have to look elsewhere for the leadership it needs."

In another column that ran on Monday, before the tax cuts deal was announced, Krugman argued that Obama should let the Bush cuts expire for everyone at the end of the year, rather than giving into Republican "blackmailers."

Obama has long had an uneasy relationship with many leading progressive opinion shapers. Last summer, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs revealed his frustration with "the professional left," and Krugman's suggestion on tax cuts was just the latest piece of advice on playing hardball with the Republicans that Obama declined to take.

But Democratic consultant Bob Shrum is one prominent Obama defender who is now speaking out more forcefully against what he called the "circular firing squad" that has developed among leading voices in his party.

"I'm probably going to lose my progressive union card, but I think it is wrong and self-destructive for progressives to be engaged in this," Shrum told RealClearPolitics. "This guy has achieved more progressive purposes than any president in 70 years, and I think he has the strength to do what's right, for example with the economy, when he's faced with an unpalatable choice."

Shrum said that he was "appalled" at recent public statements coming from some of the same influential Democrats who supported President Clinton's triangulation with Republicans after Democrats' midterm defeats in 1994 but are now accusing Obama of abandoning his economic principles.

Shrum was particularly adamant about the moral necessity of a deal on temporarily extending all of the tax cuts, which also extended unemployment compensation. He said that Democrats needed to "grow up" and understand that sometimes the ideal option is not one that is feasible.

"Do we really want to leave millions of people without a way to feed their families or pay their rent, so that we can prove their ideological point?" Shrum said. "Fundamentally, the only successful presidencies that my sides have ever had have been principled and pragmatic -- you've got to be both. I mean on the other side, Reagan was both principled and pragmatic. Reagan passed a large tax increase in 1982 that nobody ever talks about."

Pragmatic-minded Democrats also argue that the framework for the tax cuts deal, which includes a $120 billion payroll tax, is likely to put Obama in a better position to achieve a clear record of economic growth by the time the 2012 campaign kicks into high gear.

Furthermore, Obama's approval rating among Democrats remained at a healthy 82 percent in an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted last month, although that number will be closely watched for any potential slide in the coming weeks as the tax cuts framework moves to Congress.

"The support the Democrats got from liberal Democrats in the last election would not suggest any particular problem that the president has with that constituency in the country at large," Democratic pollster Mark Mellman told RealClearPolitics. "The president is mainly judged on results, and the question is going to be what are the results he produces."

In spite of recent speculation about a possible primary challenge to Obama, any potential Democratic contender would face a massive series of challenges to overcome in mounting a credible campaign. Those obstacles would include Obama's massive fundraising ability, presidential clout, organizing prowess in the early voting states, and unparalleled appeal within the African American community, which holds considerable sway in the Democratic nominating process.

Shrum said that the 2012 primary challenge talk was "insane," pointing to the two most recent failed attempts at taking on a sitting president from within the party in 1976 and 1980.

"If two of the great giants of modern American politics -- Ronald Reagan and Ted Kennedy -- couldn't successfully do that against presidents who fairly or unfairly were regarded as failures, I certainly don't see how anybody in the Democratic primary is going to do that next time around against President Obama," he said.

As former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney gears up for a near-certain second bid for the presidency, he will attempt to show off his business bona fides by headlining a small business event in Las Vegas in mid-February.

At the International Franchise Association's confab, he will have the opportunity to showcase his resume before a friendly and influential audience of approximately 2,500 small business owners in what also happens to be an early nominating state on the Republican primary calendar.

IFA's Web site notes that its mission is "to protect, enhance and promote franchising through government relations, public relations and educational programs." Data on the group's site show that approximately 21 million jobs are attributable to small franchises.

The group's 51st annual convention will take place in Las Vegas from Feb. 13 to 16 at the MGM Grand, and the theme is "Building the Future Together." Organizers plan to emphasize how small business owners can position themselves "as the economy begins to improve," meaning Romney will have to navigate his message carefully as he keeps up his current criticism of President Obama's handling of the economy.

Romney is the convention headliner, and he will speak at the opening general session on Monday, Feb. 14th. Forbes Inc. CEO Steve Forbes, who ran in the GOP primaries for president in 1996 and 2000, is keynoting the event during the closing luncheon on Wednesday the 16th.

Romney is the top draw and may help the group pull in some funds; IFA notes in its registration materials that Romney will be on hand to schmooze at a VIP reception for the association's political action committee, FranPAC.

In a release detailing Romney's appearance, IFA notes, "Elected governor of Massachusetts in 2002, Romney presided over a dramatic reversal of state fortunes and a period of sustained economic expansion. Without raising taxes or increasing debt, Gov. Romney balanced the budget every year of his administration, closing a $3 billion budget gap inherited when he took office and created tens of thousands of jobs."

The announcement even touts Romney's stewardship of health care reform in the Bay State.

As Romney devises a strategy for the primaries in 2012, he is popping up occasionally for key appearances, which included his interview on NBC's "The Tonight Show" last week. The February Nevada event will be another pop: As other candidates begin to enter the field or start maneuvering to do so, Romney's appeal before the business owners gathered in Las Vegas will remind the critical group of his place in the race.

The Silver State location won't hurt, either. Romney won the state's GOP caucuses in early 2008, but the results were non-binding. For the coming presidential battle, that will change. And the Republican primary will not be winner-take-all, so it's in Romney's interest to run up the margin in a state that he won handily last time.

The former Massachusetts governor is beating his potential competition in polling that samples the 2012 GOP electorate in the Silver State.

A Public Policy Polling survey of 272 typical Nevada Republican primary voters on Oct. 30 and 31 showed Romney leading with 34 percent of those polled, compared to 21 percent for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, 16 percent for former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and 11 percent for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. The margin of error was 5.9 percent.

In February 2010, Romney spoke in Las Vegas at a convention called Composites for a manufacturing association. He also campaigned for Nevada candidates in the state in early May and early October, and he took a separate trip to Las Vegas in late May to be a keynote speaker for a convention hosted by SkyBridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm.

Republican Rep. Connie Mack could upend the moderate-versus-conservative dynamic beginning to shape the 2012 GOP Senate primary that's almost under way in Florida if he launches a bid.

In an interview with RealClearPolitics on Wednesday afternoon, Mack made clear that he has Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson on his mind and is considering a challenge to the incumbent in the coming cycle.

"We're seeing a different Bill Nelson now than we've seen over the last 12 years," Mack said. He added that over the next two years he wants to hold Nelson accountable for what he believes has been a big-government agenda.

There's been some debate among Florida Republican strategists over whether Mack will run, but they concede that they've noticed he's begun an outreach effort and is laying groundwork for a statewide campaign.

Already, outgoing Republican Sen. George LeMieux and new state Senate President Mike Haridopolos are sounding like candidates. A handful of other Republican officials in the state are also considering the race. A crowded primary may complicate the dynamic that Republican Marco Rubio enjoyed in the early stages of his then-primary race in the past cycle against the more moderate Gov. Charlie Crist.

Haridopolos, who served with Mack in the state House, said quizzically in an interview on Monday, "I don't know if Connie's going to run or not." The state senator noted that he's not concerned about other potential candidacies and likely will enter the race early next year.

Mack responded to RealClearPolitics, "I've made no decisions about whether or not I'm going to run for the United States Senate."

He continued, "I don't have any timelines, or any of those types of preconceived notions."

Still, he said he knows there's a letter circulating through the state encouraging him to run and asking Florida Republicans to support him in the race.

"It's been a humbling experience so far," Mack said.

The congressman said repeatedly that he thinks the state needs something other than "a liberal Bill Nelson" or a candidate similar to Nelson should the two-term senator ultimately decide to retire.

Asked about the dynamic developing between Haridopolos, who is pushing his conservative bona fides, and LeMieux, who has suffered some criticism from Florida Republicans for his ties to the independent Crist, Mack replied, "This needs to be a campaign about freedom." He continued, "What you'll hear me talk a lot about is freedom." He founded a "Freedom Caucus" in the House.

Chief among his policy concerns over the next two years is the size of government, he said.

"I don't understand how liberal Democrats here in Washington could come to Washington and vote and speak on the floor about reducing individual rights for Americans and then go home and ask for their vote," he said.

In the interview he stood by his May Washington Post op-ed in which he denounced Arizona's new immigration law, which he said didn't exactly address immigration. Republicans balked at his approach.

Instead, he argued that it is consistent with his rhetoric on "freedom."

Asked whether he maintains his earlier view, he said, "Absolutely. If you believe in freedom, you believe in freedom for all Americans regardless of what they look like or the color of their skin." He continued, "In my opinion, the Arizona law had the potential to destroy the freedoms of some Americans based on the way they looked."

But he wouldn't draw out the discussion into what it might mean in a potential Senate race.

For the time being, he said, "We're just going to continue to hold Bill Nelson accountable and fight for freedom. We'll worry about that decision on a U.S. Senate race down the road."

After witnessing Florida Republican Sen.-elect Marco Rubio's landslide win in this year's open race, about half a dozen rising Republicans already are jockeying to take on Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson in 2012 in what the Florida GOP says will be a spirited primary.

Leading the squad is Mike Haridopolos, the new state Senate president, and outgoing Sen. George LeMieux, who was appointed by Gov. Charlie Crist to finish former Republican Sen. Mel Martinez's term after he resigned his seat early. In interviews this week, Haridopolos and LeMieux both sounded committed to running and suggested they will make their decisions quickly and jump in early next year - due in large part to the exorbitant costs associated with running a statewide election there.

"I'm pretty close to making a decision," LeMieux said, although he said he wants to finish the lame-duck session before he pivots into a race.

Haridopolos said he's actively pursuing the race but won't make a final decision until he gets through the month, because as a professor at the University of Florida, he has to get through final exams. He also noted that the state Senate is focused on a budget shortfall and overriding some of Crist's vetoes, and, he added, "My kids can't wait till Christmas."

LeMieux, 41, and Haridopolos, 40, are both near-certain candidates, and neither is concerned about the other or the rest of the field. Haridopolos did mention his first call in exploring the race was to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whom Haridopolos said he'd support if he ran. The state senator intimated that Bush signaled him to go for it.

"I never thought there would be so much encouragement to run," he said.

"I was conservative when it wasn't cool to be conservative," Haridopolos added. "I think people are looking for someone like that now."

Former Rep. Dave Weldon approached him in 2007 and said he would leave his position early to create a special election if Haridopolos was interested, but the state senator said the timing was bad for him personally and professionally, as he has young children and was not finished with his efforts to make the state Senate more conservative.

Now that he's succeeded in moving the needle to the right at the state level, Haridopolos would like to do the same at the federal level, he said, noting, "The United States Senate is a moderate to liberal place."

His wife is a physician who he said cried the moment the House passed health care reform in March, and she has since encouraged him to seek the Senate seat. The couple is close to Rubio and his wife, and Haridopolos will court the new senator for support.

Potentially standing in the way for the likely candidate, according to Democrats, is an ethics charge against him for failing to disclose some of his financial interests properly.

Nevertheless, several GOP strategists with backgrounds in Florida politics suggested that the candidate best positioned to recreate the momentum that Rubio rode to victory is Haridopolos. They say he has shown himself to be more conservative than LeMieux, whose close ties to Crist may hurt him with Republicans.

A GOP Senate strategist in Washington noted of the outgoing senator and former chief of staff to Crist, "George will be formidable, but he has a challenging road. I think it is too early to tell how things will shake out."

For his part, LeMieux pressed that he earned the support of conservatives and the tea party movement when he dumped his support for Crist and backed Rubio after the governor left the GOP.

"It was not an easy thing to do for me," he said.

LeMieux seems compelled to run out of a desire to address spending, which he called a top issue.

"From my time in Washington, I've seen that this place is dysfunctional. We're on the precipice of financial disaster," he said.

Pressed on what has surprised him most about serving in the Senate, he continued, "Typical senators who have been around here for decades just keep spending and running up trillions in debt.... They walk around here like it is normal. It's not normal. It's bizarre and it's broken."

A Florida Democratic strategist broke down LeMieux's time in Washington by saying, "He's played pretty good public relations, but he hasn't done much."

LeMieux and his team, however, are promoting four legislative accomplishments of the senator's in his short tenure. Among those are his efforts earlier this year on three parts of the small business bill: His work with Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu to get $30 billion in lending into it; his work with Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar on the Export Promotion Act, which bolsters the Department of Commerce in promoting exports; and his Medicare anti-fraud initiative, which adds predictive modeling to Medicare in the Department of Health and Human Services. He also pushes an amendment in financial regulatory reform he authored with Washington Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell that restructured standards of credit worthiness used by national credit ratings agencies.

Other than Haridopolos and LeMieux, potential contenders eyeing the race include GOP Reps. Vern Buchanan, Connie Mack and Tom Rooney; outgoing state House majority leader Adam Hasner; and even thrice-failed New York independent gubernatorial candidate Tom Golisano, who relocated to the Sunshine State last year. Golisano is now a Republican and has personal wealth with which to fund a race; political operatives in the state say after Rick Scott's victory in the gubernatorial election this year, a serious Golisano candidacy is possible. Republicans also anticipate that incoming Florida CFO Jeff Atwater and incoming Lt. Gov. Jennifer Carroll also may test the waters.

Despite the growing interest in the race among Republicans, Nelson's backers say he is positioned well for a re-election race in two years, but Democratic strategists in and around his team have not said unequivocally that he will run, though they expect that he will.

"Bill Nelson will serve the folks in Florida as long as they're satisfied with the job he does -- and so far, they've said he's doing a pretty darn good job," said Nelson adviser Dan McLaughlin. "Unlike some, Nelson's focused on doing the job he was elected to do, and he isn't looking two years down the road or jockeying for some other post."

Should Nelson choose not to run, insiders expect possible Democratic contenders could be Crist, who lost an independent bid for Senate this year, and Democrats Kendrick Meek and Alex Sink, who lost the Senate and governor's race this year, respectively.

Nelson is in the best financial shape.

As of a Sept. 30, 2010, filing with the FEC, the two-term senator had $2.9 million in his campaign account and will begin the race far ahead of any potential opponents.

Haridopolos, Hasner and LeMieux would start from scratch, but Haridopolos pointed out that he helped pull $13 million together for state Senate campaigns, and operatives say Hasner has a national Jewish fundraising base that could boost his prospects.

As of mid-October this year, Mack's war chest stood at about $536,000, compared to about $518,000 for Rooney and $1.2 million for Buchanan. Buchanan is personally wealthy and could fund his own race.

Mack's team did not respond to an inquiry about the race, but Florida Republican operatives said he has been actively exploring a bid and is laying groundwork.

An ally of the Mack's noted that he can wait a bit longer than the rest of the field because his name recognition is high around the state, as his father held the Senate seat in the ‘90s. The ally, a veteran of Florida GOP politics, wondered whether Mack ultimately would risk an expanding portfolio in the House for a tough primary when he may get attacked for being too moderate.

To that end, a Florida Democrat said that how Mack approached the immigration issue by condemning the new Arizona law was "almost commendable."

Although Buchanan and Rooney have not closed the door on the race and still may consider it, they seem far less inclined than the others to enter it. One state GOP operative said that while Rooney may have a long future in elective office in the state, he's unlikely to run for higher office in the coming cycle.

In a statement provided to RealClearPolitics, Rooney said, "I'm completely focused on serving the people of Florida's 16th district in the House of Representatives. We need to roll back the failed policies of the last two years, and I'm going to be fighting in the House to lower taxes, make government smaller and more accountable, and strengthen our national defense."

And a spokeswoman for Buchanan said, "The congressman is focused exclusively on a pro-jobs agenda with the new Republican majority in the House." She added that any other race is "the last thing on his mind."

Although President Obama came into office vowing to work to renew even the most trying diplomatic relationships, his administration has proven less willing to engage North Korea than President Bush was during the Republican's second term. And due to a combination of factors, it appears highly unlikely that Washington will sit down with Pyongyang for either bilateral or multilateral negotiations any time soon, even as the risk of tensions boiling over into a larger crisis on the Korean Peninsula has increased.

In October of 2008, the Bush administration removed North Korea from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism in exchange for an agreement from the isolated dictatorship to close down its plutonium processing plant and allow international inspectors to verify compliance. The move marked the culmination of a dramatic shift in policy from Bush's first term when he famously included North Korea in the so-called "axis of evil."

Obama appeared to have every intention of continuing Bush's second-term policy of engagement as he prepared to take office in January of 2009. But on the eve of his inauguration, North Korea was already showing signs of taking newly provocative steps that were perhaps designed to test the young president, including declarations that the six-party talks on nuclear disbarment were null and void and the testing of a Taepodong-2 missile a couple of months later.

It did not take long for Obama administration officials to decide privately that an abrupt change in attitude was in order.

"They altered their policy 180 degrees and are now more hard-line, more conditional, more neoconservative than Bush was during the last four years of his term," said the Heritage Foundation's Bruce Klinger, who was a chief North Korea analyst for the CIA during the 1990s. "So now we have the administration pursing a policy and making statements that sound very similar to the first term of the Bush administration. Clearly the priority right now is on pressure tactics."

Indeed, Obama has dismissed the idea of returning to the negotiating table without a concrete shift in North Korea's posturing.

But instead of taking any conciliatory measures, Pyongyang has engaged in a string of increasingly provocative actions, including its apparent torpedoing of a South Korean warship in March that killed 46 sailors, its revelation of a new uranium enrichment facility, and its shelling of a South Korean island last week, which killed two South Korean civilians.

"Six-party talks cannot substitute for action by North Korea to comply with its obligations and to cease its destabilizing actions on the Korean Peninsula," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said on Monday, reaffirming the administration's reluctance to take the first step toward reigniting the countries' dormant diplomatic relationship.

White House officials appear to have decided early on in Obama's term that North Korea was not simply using its nuclear program as a bargaining chip, as had long been assumed by many key players in the previous two administrations -- a period in which Presidents Clinton and Bush tried to offer shifting combinations of incentives to Pyongyang with minimal results.

In 2006, North Korea conducted its first nuclear tests, increasing the inherent difficulty of convincing the regime to shift course.

"I don't think we can simply throw up our hands in defeat and say we accept North Korea's nuclear weapons state," Klinger said. "But it's very hard to find anyone in the administration who's optimistic that diplomacy will work."

Scott Snyder, an adjunct senior fellow for Korea studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, agreed that there was a wide reluctance on the part of the White House and the State Department to get involved in yet another negotiating cycle with North Korea, as the perception has solidified that previous talks, especially bilateral negotiations, had led to the United States being duped time and again.

"After two decades, there might be some creative ideas out there, but what I would say at this point is beware of creative ideas," Snyder said. "Most of the conventional ideas have been tried and found wanting, that's the reason why this is so difficult."

The Obama administration's decision to put the onus on North Korea before reentering negotiations may have encouraged Pyongyang to be even more aggressive, in the hopes of increasing its bargaining chips during a period of particular uncertainty within the regime as North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il continues to groom his youngest son, Kim Jong-un, to succeed him.

"These are the kinds of provocations that were routine back in the 60s and 70s, so that's disturbing," Snyder said. "Also, the South Korean response was less than what was expected by the South Korean public, so it means that in responding to the next provocation, the likelihood is that the South Korean government is going to have no choice but to overcompensate or to initiate a response that is disproportionate."

So far, U.S. and South Korean officials have been resistant to the idea of responding militarily to the provocations of a proven nuclear power that has the fourth largest standing army in the world.

And most experts agree that Obama has been left with no good options in dealing with a flashpoint that figures to continue to flare up intermittently and could potentially spin out of control.

"Even if you do a tactical level retaliatory response, you have to be prepared to go all in, in that you cannot guarantee that it won't lead to an all-out war on the peninsula," Klingner said. "And because of that slippery slope, there is the constraint against really doing anything militarily."