Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White was just on MSNBC reiterating that he will not sign Blagojevich’s appointment of Roland Burris to fill Obama’s vacant Senate seat, and that he expects the matter to be resolved by the courts in a few days.
Remember, this is the same court that refused to entertain Lisa Madigan’s rather goofy attempt to remove Blagojevich on grounds of "disability." So as far as they’re concerned, nobody’s changed Blago’s status.
There certainly is no "consensus opinion" about the Burris appointment. Taking a spin around the toobz:
In a move that can only be described as akin to the throwing of the shoe, Rod Blagojevich, the embattled Governor, has just told Illinoisans, the feds, and Harry Reid to "talk to the hand" minus 3 fingers and a thumb. Even Michael Corleone would have to "respect what he’s done".
The Senate leadership is on questionable legal ground here–a fix that is in part its own making, because Harry Reid resisted the idea of a special election to fill Barack Obama’s Senate seat. As it stands, Blagojevich is still the Governor of Illinois, and Burris meets the constitutional requirements for being a Senator: He is over 30 years old, has been a citizen for at least nine years and is a resident of the state that he would represent. The most relevant legal precedent would suggest that Congress does not have the power to add any other requirements.
Keith Boykin, The Daily Voice:
I know that Bobby Rush and some other black politicians will try to make this into a racial issue, but it is not. This choice is purely about one man, Rod Blagojevich, and his efforts to preserve his job and positively impact his potential pool of jurors.
Yes, Illinois deserves to have the Senate seat filled as quickly as possible, and yes I would like to see an African American, if possible, in that seat. But the method and manner by which the governor made his decision today is all wrong, and Roland Burris does not inspire confidence.
Mark Allen, The Daily Voice:
The majority of the debate over the selection of Roland Burris has been more "political" versus "legal." When you separate the emotional "political" analysis versus the "legal" analysis, then it is clear to me that Roland Burris will be seated as the next U.S. Senator from Illinois. And as a constitutional lawyer, President-elect Obama and other "experienced" elected leaders should see the same "legal" reality.
When will Burris be able to sue? Probably when Blago is removed from office, his replacement is in place and names a different person to fill the Illinois Senate seat, who is then seated by the Senate….The real world does not often resemble law review articles, especially when politics is involved.
I suspect that a lot of people will find [the Senate's] high regard for abstract "process" somewhat bizarre in light of the fact that they blithely allowed Larry Craig to sit in the senate for two years, while this man who has not even been accused of wrongdoing will be barred from the door. The optics are terrible.
This is all over Black talk radio, which can be like all other talk radio in ginning up positions and false equivalences, whether real or imagined. While I, as an African American woman, think Burris is an incredible opportunist, you can bet the idea of not seating him in the US Senate is not playing well in Black America.
America is not in a post-racial (or post-partisan) phase yet – no matter how we may wish it to be so.
Thanks to the Senate Dems, a bad situation (a charged-but-not-indicted governor’s legitimate and unalterable authority to appoint) has been made infinitely worse by putting themselves in a position to look like the heavy-handed and undemocratic bad guys. To compound the farce, the Senate Dem caucus would need 7 Republican votes to expel Burris. Homer is laughing. Yeah.. the ancient one AND Simpson.
I have to agree with Moe Lane on this:
All of this means that on Tuesday we may be treated to the sight of an elderly African-American being led off the Senate floor in handcuffs because his sitting there would be contrary to the collective wish of old, white Democrats….This very well may be the single greatest act of vicious political revenge that I have seen in my lifetime. It’s a pity that Rod Blagojevich couldn’t have used his powers for good.
I have never gone wrong betting that in the end, Harry Reid will do the el-foldo. I think my money is safe there once again.
Related posts:
- Burris Makes it Official: Will Not Run for “Re”-Election (And GOP Rep. Kirk Won’t Run Either!)
- Burris: Health Care Reform Must Have a Public Option
- Roland Burris Will Vote Against Any Bill That Doesn’t Have a Public Plan
- Sunday Late Night: Your NN2010 Host, Harry Reid
- Hey, Harry Reid, Stop Protecting Democrats Who Want to Filibuster the Public Option
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Zed?
It’s been a while since I’ve had quite this much fun blogging about something. And I usually have a lot of fun.
I must, sadly, agree that Harry Reid has not inspired confidence in either his spine or strategic thinking, well, ever. And the sick thing is that the only thing worse than backing down is talking tough first and then backing down.
My biggest problem with Burris is this:
Blagojevich is scum, but he’s clearly craftier than most everyone else in this sorry mess.
Mostly because you just can’t make this shit up, and if you did, no one would believe you.
In these days of great uncertainty, financial and otherwise, it is almost axiomatic that we can bank upon Harry Reid to rise, gracefully, thoughtfully, and most responsibly, to the occassion, any occassion.
Your money is safe, Jane.
Mornin Jane,
This is all political theater. Blago is governor and IL supreme court said he was qualified to serve. Burris does not have blemishes on record to prevent him from serving. Burris has been appointed in accordance with law.
We don’t like the way this has turned out. TS isn’t it
433 hrs & 37 min
Former Illinois governor George Ryan was under investigation most of his second term. He left under that cloud, and eventually was convicted. Even so, he first declared a moratorium on the death penalty, and then, shortly before the end of his term, he commuted all death penalties and cases waiting for sentence to life in prison. No one questioned his right to do that, just because he was suspected of crimes.
That case is directly on point. Burris should be seated.
Somehow I just don’t think the Senate will allow that theater of hauling Burris off the senate floor……. Got a feeling he will be diverted before getting there….. AND if they would swear him in, could it happen when the IL SOS has not certified his appointment?
See my crawler on CNN states Burris has asked the IL Supreme Court to certify his appointment….
my question is still this: what are the rights of the illinois voters? are they being protected? is there anything we could do to advocate on their behalf?
serious questions – i haven’t followed this from the beginning, so i don’t know the answer.
Dontcha think this contributes to the public view of Ds as morons and jokes?
I think you missed the point….. was Ryan’s crimes related to the death penalty?
Blago is being investigated for selling that senate seat for favors/money…… It should be examined and investigated if there was an exchange in favors…..
The teeny fly in the ointment is that Blago is being charged with selling said seat.
But then again, since Blago made the appointment weeks AFTER Fitz’s complaint was made public, I’m in the “seat Burris and elect the replacement forthwith” camp.
for video of Harry Reid in this, see Morning Swim.
That is true.
We can change laws in this country to impact the future not the past. The law is what it is not what people now would like.
433 hrs & 13 min
which is the beauty and value of the Rule of Law
has anyone other than blago been accused of breaking the law? iow, are any of the political games being played in violation of the law?
Obi spoke too soon and said dumb things.
Legally the man should be seated. If a nutjob criminal of a legally in place gov appointed him there is nothing that can be done WITHIN the system to get rid of Burris that doesn’t stink to high hell.
Of course letting the people decide such a thing as who represents them should be avoided at all costs. So we get these appointments when we should be having special elections. O MY what a horror, a special election, The sky is falling the sky is falling. and who will pay for it!
This is the government bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporate america.
We need term limits to rid the government of the nasties and their entrenched power bases. To lose a few good reps is a more than fair price to pay to be free of slackers like Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, DiFi, even Hillary. Do you service and let other citizens do theirs.
And screw the notion of “institutional memory”. The lamest excuse of all.
ALL ELECTED POSITIONS SHOULD BE LIMITED TO ONE TERM or TWO SHORT ONES – including the Supremes.
Elections and incumbency are where the lobbyists and the corps get into the system…. where they don’t belong.
His aid or whatever Harris who was also arrested and has since resigned
433 hrs & 2 min
What’s wrong with a face-saving deal in which Burris is ‘confirmed’ by the Illinois State Senate? There seems nothing objectively wrong about his nomination other than that it was made by an alleged criminal.
There is going to be a special election anyway to fill Rahm Emanuel’s seat….
But if Obama has said that Burris should not be seated, then Harry Reid has more of an excuse to have a spine. The Ds in Congress are probably more concerned with the appearance of avoiding corruption and any ties to Blago than the appearance of racism at this point. The problem of the appearance of racism depends on how blacks in Illinois react.
As usual, Jane (and in this case, Moe Lane) gets it just right. Blago must be laughing his head off. Mike Allen reports the Senate is cooking up a 90-day delay scheme (story linked on RealityChex), but in all likelihood Maybe-Senator Burris is going to Washington, Actual-Congressman Rush will escort him into the Capitol building, and Maybe-Soon-to-Be-Ex-Senate Majority Leader Reid is going to have to hide in his office while big burly guys push the elderly Roland Burris down the Capitol steps as Bobby Rush screams “racist lynch mob” — cameras rolling.
Caveat: remember that guy Barack Obama, the Rodney King extraordinaire of the American political scene? He’ll be in Washington as of Sunday, and I think there’s a good chance he’ll come up with a Senate bailout plan and maybe even a Burris stimulus package.
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
I agree that Reid, for once, needs to use his fainting goat reaction for good, rather than evil. Still, Burris’ apparent eagerness to accept the tainted appointment, his repetitive failures, and his preconstructed tombstone which reads like a high school annual entry, don’t create great respect for him. Nevertheless, he needs to be seated and allowed to be around for two years.
good point. though the question i was trying to ask was more about reid, il sos, and all the other political actors who were (apparently) not involved in the crimes now being discussed. when you say rule of law, i’m confused as to what you mean by that – is there any political actor who is not now following the rule of law as you understand it?
Can’t understand why Burris allowed himself to be drawn into this mess especially since he was apparently the second choice and Davis turned it down. Shouldn’t that have been some kind of warning to him?
that’s not a statewide election.
The point I want to make is that governors have powers and can use them. That is true regardless of whether they are under a cloud. If there is evidence that Blagojevich got something from Burris, then things would be different. On that we agree.
In a word…yes.
A friend of mine kept saying “he’s going to appoint someone to the seat.” And I sort of dismissed it because I’d heard Harry Reid say that the Senate has the absolute right to seat or not seat, and I foolishly believed him.
Now it turns out things are a lot more murky than that (as Reid should have known), and Democrats were stupid not to push for having the power taken out of his hands. That Harry Reid keeps putting his thumb on the scale for political reasons just makes them all look no better than Blago, which is really the true genius of the move.
Blago can shrug and say “these people are supposed to be better than me?” and claim he was just conducting business as usual. It might not be a compelling legal argument, but Blago’s target audience is a potential jury pool.
Fitz must be tearing his hair out.
The remedy Section 5 of Article I provides, if it is shown this nomination was corrupt or fraudulent, is expulsion upon a 2/3rds vote.
A refusal to seat Burris would simply be to fight suspected corruption with lawlessness.
well, unlike jane, i can’t say this is fun. i still don’t know what is now in the best interests of the voters (especially the illinois voters) and what we might do or advocate on their behalf.
too much circus, not enough bread for me i guess. glad everyone else is having fun, gotta run, so i’ll stop with being the party pooper now. *g*
Will ANY of the actors in this comedy of errantcy emerge with reputation intact?
This has to be the silliest(if vaguely disturbing) skit we have had the dubious privilege of watching since Colin Powell took his salt-shaker to the U.N.
But it does get 5 bones for ‘diversion’ …
Reed is a fool if he persists in his attempt to prevent Burris from obtaining a seat in the Senate. I don’t believe he is a fool. Legal precedent requires that any refusal to seat Burris be rejected by the courts. Politically refusal will lead to negative results. It will provide the right with daily ammunition (until resolved Fox News will have a Christmas gift tied up for it each and every day)to ridicule the ineptitude of Democrats and it will anger an important segment of the Democratic base, namely the African American community. In light of the unchallenged qualifications Burris holds and in light of an absence of a challenge to his integrity the only sensible resolution is to seat him quickly.
If this guy’s qualified- and apparently he is, and if there is no evidence of bribery concerning his selection, he should be seated promptly.
Obama seems to believe that governmental accusation should carry the full weight and penalty of conviction:
This is Constitutional scholarship? Conviction by Presidential fiat?
Though the opponents may be different, the actions are exactly the same as Dubya’s: torture in the political Guantanamo of the MSM in order to extract a confession.
Looks like another 8 years of having a White House run by “The Decider.”
That’s change I can believe in.
Anybody here interested in the applicable Constitutional law? The lead case involved Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. who was barred from taking his House seat by the House because of improper conduct. Now Powell was elected, and the Supreme Court stressed the sanctity of the vote, but in language that leaves little doubt that the same sanctity argument would apply to the decision of a popularly elected governor who was following the law in making an appointment. The Court also made clear that their reasoning would also apply to Senate actions. So unless the candidate does not qualify under the very limited Constitutional restrictions: age, length of citizenship, and residence, it would appear that neither the House nor the Senate has the constitutional power to bar a properly elected or appointed person from taking his or her seat.
But that’s just round one, folks. The Supreme Court spent an unusual amount of time discussing the power of either body to expell a sitting member. The Court made clear that the Senate and the House had much wider powers to determine who was unfit to continue to serve. There was some discussion suggesting that the expulsion should be for conduct committed after the person took office, but this was dicta (judicial ruminations not decisive of the opinion and therefor not binding on future courts) and the bottom line seems to be that the Senate or the House gets to decide its own criteria for expulsion. It does take a 2/3 vote, but given the way Governor Blago and political hack Roland Burris have acted, that should be an easy goal to meet.
Bottom line: Burris can completely ruin his already very limited legacy by insisting on being seated and then immediately being expelled. Or he can face reality and make a brave show of retreating for the good of the country.
I have spent thirty years analyzing legal cases, in case you wonder why you should listen to me.
Term limitations are idiotic. Either we trust the electorate to choose its leaders or we change our system of government. California has term limits and they have been both a disaster and a charade. We lost some of our best legislative leaders because they were termed out. But all they did then was to run for and obtain another political office. Result: often the same folks, good and bad, in new titles. Besides, what in the Wide Wide World of Sports do term limits have to do with a Senatorial appointment (of a political hack) by a governor who federal wiretaps conclusively prove tried to sell that seat for money and his own sinecure?
Thanks.
You know, all this talk about Reid backing down? I think it’s misguided. This is _exactly_ the kind of fight that Hammerin’ Harry won’t back down from, and will fight to the bitter end. It has no Republicans involved, it has no legal backing, it hurts his own party, it’s fundamentally a lose/lose situation, and (most importantly) it’s unfathomably stupid. There’s no way that Reid could back away from such a tempting target.
Well said!
Don’t kid yourself into thinking that there’s a winner here outside of the Republicans, especially when it comes to making it into a racial issue. They get the joy of watching African Americans argue about this. It’s the same thing we get when we have conservative Mormons and Baptists arguing because a Baptist called Mormonism a cult.
I get a kick out of that, Republicans are getting a kick out of this, and neither situation does anyone any good. It’s divisive crap.
Obama really needs to weigh in here with more force. His tentative “wait until the last minute and perhaps the problem will go away” tectic isn’t helping. He should meet with Burris, Reid, and other Democrats involved in this talk with them, and pick a team to publicly support all the way.
Yeah, Jane, Blago is making them all look corrupt. That’s not hard, because they all are corrupt, and that’s the fucking problem.
This guy says the Senate can legally not seat Burris.
Interesting argument, especially the part where he says MCCORMICK V. POWELL actually cuts against Burris’s argument to be seated.
Blago has not been impeached, tried or convicted. He’s still the governor and we still live in a democracy where we are all innocent until proved guilty.
oldgold (#30) I doubt Reid could get 2/3s of the Senate to throw Burris out…and I agree with everything MrToad says in #38…good ole “Fightin” Harry Reid only gets his back up opposing fellow Dems, he is spineless when it comes to opposing Republicans!