Score A Big Point For Blagojevich
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) suggested a few moments ago that if Roland Burris leaps a few remaining legal hurdles, and pending a full Senate vote to seat him, he will likely become the junior senator from IL.
Reid, who stongly opposed seating embattled IL Gov. Rod Blagojevich's pick to replace Barack Obama, said Burris "appears to me to be candid and forthright" and noted that Burris is not "trying to hide anything," a nod to the corruption investigation swirling around Blagojevich. He also said that Burris, who would be the only black member of the Senate, has assured him that he believes there is no racial component to the Democratic leaders initial opposition to his appointment.
Reid said the leadership is waiting for an IL Supreme Court decision assessing if IL Secretary of State Jesse White must sign Burris' certification papers for him to be seated; White has thus far refused to do so. Reid also said that once that decision is finalized he will refer the matter to the Senate Rules Committee.
"There is going to be a time when the entire Senate is going to have to act on this," Reid said, suggesting a full vote to seat Burris.
Durbin said he has known Burris, 71, for 36 years in IL politics. Burris is a former state attorney general who had unsuccessfully run for governor.
"We've always been friends," Durbin added. "I've always respected him."
Reid said that he believes White's certification is "vital to comply with Senate rules" but that the whole situation would be reassessed when the state Supreme Court decision is issued. He stressed that no one has an issue with Burris personally.
"We're going to do the best we can to insure that the state of illinois has two senators not one senator," Reid said.
The latest developments show a marked evolution in the leadership's view. When Blagojevich was first arrested, Durbin called for a special election to fill the seat. But that possibility was costly and opened the door for a Republican to run and possibly win a seat long held by Democrats. Lawmakers then suggested Blagojevich resign so that Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn could appoint the next senator. Blagojevich, of course, dug in, denying wrongdoing in the criminal case, insisting that he deserves to keep his job and nominating Burris to the Senate, despite the calls from his party leaders, Obama included, to step aside.
So what have we learned? Blagojevich is a street fighter, and he won this battle against the party's top leaders. He could likely argue that he's doing the responsible thing in appointing Burris. If Burris is seated, Blagojevich's authority is inherently validated by the very people who want him out of a job.
(JENNIFER SKALKA)
Of course this guy will be seated!
He's a Democrat!
They only put on the pretense of objection so as not to seem overtly corrupt! They realize this is a futile effort as they can only hid so much, after all, they've got NoBama headed to the White House! NoBama's mother renounced his U.S. citizenship when he was a boy so he could go to school in Indonesia, he's Constitutionally unqualified to become President.
These pesky little things like, the Constitution and Laws of the Land, mean nothing to the power drunk Democrat Elite!
If Burris has no corruption surrounding his choice as senator he should be seated. The investigation would be able to tell if their was any corruption. If there is evidence and they are unable to show this because Blagojevich has to go to court, then this is just another example of the failure of beuracracy to handle real-life situations. If there is corruption in the appointment of Burris then the investigators should come out and say so. If there is no corruption then he should be seated. Unless the law says that a governor under investigation does not have the authority to appoint a vacated senate seat then Burris must be seated.
And get over it AA. It's not about who is in power as what they do with it. Putting either side into a box and then claiming that all of a group is like the once you descibed is both juvenile and childish.
FREE ONLINE TV, MOVIES, MUSIC, VIRTUAL WORLDS, GOOD GAMES, AND FREE COLLEGE EDUCATIONS @ INTERNETSURFSHACK.COM
Average American,
Sorry but a parent can NOT renounce a child's citizenship and a child can not renounce their own citizenship until their adults. It's simply illegal. How do I know this? Well I've been looking at leaving this country before congress sends it into ... (oh, well you can guess what goes here) and takes us into ... . However, since I'll still be an American citizen I still have to pay US income tax (on income over a certain amount). Gee, pay for a do nothing government here or pay for not living under a do nothing government abroad? Still wondering.
While I commend the Sec of State White for his stance, the facts are: Blagojevich has a duty and the authority to appoint some one to fill the vacancy. By not signing the certificate an therby having Burris turned way from the Senate, Secretary White VETOED Blagojevich's pick. The consitution does not give him that authority. By not signing the certtificate he in in fact failing to execute his duty.
Illinois should have representaion & Blagojevich needs all the representation he can afford.
Why are we seating Mr. Burris if Blagojevich is impeaced. He has no authority to pick a new senator. I really dont care if hes a Democrate or not. The goverment is there to represent us not to line thier own pockets. I think they keep forgetting this
Why are we seating Mr. Burris if Blagojevich is impeaced. He has no authority to pick a new senator. I really dont care if hes a Democrate or not. The goverment is there to represent us not to line thier own pockets. I think they keep forgetting this
Why are we seating Mr. Burris if Blagojevich is impeaced. He has no authority to pick a new senator. I really dont care if hes a Democrate or not. The goverment is there to represent us not to line thier own pockets. I think they keep forgetting this
Why are we seating Mr. Burris if Blagojevich is impeaced. He has no authority to pick a new senator. I really dont care if hes a Democrate or not. The goverment is there to represent us not to line thier own pockets. I think they keep forgetting this
I am confused as to what are required for a senator to be seated. So in this particular case, it seems that following steps are implied. Can someone provide some clarifications?
1) appointed by the state's governor (although unfornate in this case, a governer under investigation for pay-for-play)
2) co-signed by the state's secretary?
Seems no one is absolutely sure about this. The state supreme court will determine if it is needed?
3) obtain verbal consent/approval from senate leader and enough number of existing senators? (How many is enough?).
Is this a requred step? If yes, is this in the Constitution, or is just a senate rule? Or a rule that can be made in a case by case basis.
4) pass the vote by full senate?
Is this a requred step? If yes, is this in the Constitution, or is just a senate rule?