• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Dems won't seat Burris

Sandhusker

Well-known member
WASHINGTON (AP) — Roland Burris tried to take President-elect Barack Obama's Illinois Senate seat Tuesday but failed in a scripted piece of political theater staged just before the opening of the 111th Congress. "Mr. Burris is not in possession of the necessary credentials from the state of Illinois," declared Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

Burris, 71, earlier confirmed that Secretary of the Senate Nancy Erickson had informed him in a private meeting that his credentials lacked a required signature and his state's seal.

He said he had been advised that "I would not be accepted, and I will not be seated, and I will not be permitted on the floor." He spoke to a crowd of reporters who had followed him across the street for a news conference in a cold and steady rain outside the Capitol.

The former Illinois attorney general said he was "not seeking to have any type of confrontation" over taking the seat that he was appointed to by embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich. But Burris also said he was considering a federal lawsuit to force Senate Democrats to seat him.

It was a distraction for majority Democrats eager to project an image of progress with Obama on an economic stimulus package estimated to cost as much as $800 billion.

Democrats and Obama have said that the corruption charges against Blagojevich would strip credibility from anyone he appointed to the seat.

Blagojevich denies federal accusations that he tried to sell Obama's seat.

In a written statement following Tuesday's action, the governor said allegations against him shouldn't be held against Burris, whom he called a "good and decent man."

"The people of Illinois are entitled to be represented by two senators in the United States Senate," Blagojevich said.

That Erickson turned away Burris was no surprise; Senate Democrats had warned that if Burris showed up to be sworn in on Tuesday without the signature of the Illinois secretary of state, he would be turned away. That's just what happened.

A mob of reporters awaited him outside the Senate's North Door, where Sergeant at Arms Terrance Gainer and a throng of officers escorted him through security and up to Erickson's office on the third floor.

There, more reporters waited. Burris went through another metal detector and into Erickson's office, nestled between the elevators and the press gallery.

Twenty-one minutes later, he left. A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed that Burris had been rejected.

Burris left the building, escorted by Gainer and his officers.

An attorney for Burris, Timothy W. Wright III, said that "our credentials were rejected by the secretary of the Senate. We were not allowed to be placed in the record book. We were not allowed to proceed to the floor for purposes of taking oath. All of which we think was improperly done and is against the law of this land. We will consider our options and we will certainly let you know what our decisions will be soon thereafter."

Asked what his options were, Wright said there could be a court challenge and Burris also would continue to talk to Senate leaders.

Some of Burris' supporters have bemoaned the fact that Democrats would stand in the way of the Senate gaining its only black member. Burris himself downplayed the issue of race, telling reporters: "I cannot control my supporters. I have never in my life, in all my years of being elected to office, thought anything about race."

"I'm presenting myself as the legally appointed senator from the state of Illinois. It is my hope and prayer that they recognize that the appointment is legal," he said earlier on CBS' "The Early Show."

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus said Tuesday that Burris should be seated.

"A lot of people want to talk about race or the governor and his problems, but the bottom line is you have a sitting governor who has certain legal rights and authorities and he's made an appointment," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md. "This is an issue that goes beyond race."
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
They should seat the man. He's a fine choice and he was chosen by the legal Gov, as the Gov is innocent until proven guilty.

I don't think it's fair to whip Burris about like this and it makes the Dem's look like the Keystone Cops.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
They should seat the man. He's a fine choice and he was chosen by the legal Gov, as the Gov is innocent until proven guilty.

I don't think it's fair to whip Burris about like this and it makes the Dem's look like the Keystone Cops.

Damnit, I hate it when Kolo responds with logic!
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
kolanuraven said:
They should seat the man. He's a fine choice and he was chosen by the legal Gov, as the Gov is innocent until proven guilty.

I don't think it's fair to whip Burris about like this and it makes the Dem's look like the Keystone Cops.

Damnit, I hate it when Kolo responds with logic!


Ohhhh goodie, I just screwed up your evening!!!! That's one for me!!
 

alice

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
They should seat the man. He's a fine choice and he was chosen by the legal Gov, as the Gov is innocent until proven guilty.

I don't think it's fair to whip Burris about like this and it makes the Dem's look like the Keystone Cops.

I have to agree...

Alice
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
I don't think it's fair to whip Burris about like this and it makes the Dem's look like the Keystone Cops.

That's what we've been trying to tell some, the dems look like bumbling idiots.

Glad to see at least Kola and Alice have caught on!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
I heard an interview with Burris tonight on the radio. I don't understand why the Illinois Sec of State did not sign his credentials. Does anyone know? Is it pressure from the DNC and Reid?

The liberal radio pointed out that this is a BAD precedent that might mean future appointees of other Governors could be denied and that they should seat him.

My guess would be the same as Reid, putting personal desires ahead of the law.
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White says he'll reject any paperwork that Gov. Rod Blagojevich files to name a new U.S. senator.

The secretary of state keeps state records and certifies official actions.

But White says he won't certify anything Blagojevich does to fill the Senate seat once held by President-elect Barack Obama.

White issued a statement today saying he can't accept any paperwork from Blagojevich on the Senate seat "because of the current cloud of controversy surrounding the governor."

It isn't clear if that administrative roadblock would keep the appointment from taking place.

Blagojevich is expected to name former attorney general Roland Burris to the vacancy later in the day.

Senate leaders have said they won't seat anyone appointed by Blagojevich, who was arrested on federal corruption charges this month.

Although the secretary of state typically signs the certification letter — and a Senate-suggested template for the letter leaves a spot for the signature in addition to that of the governor — there appears to be no requirement under the federal or state constitution, Illinois law or Senate rules that the secretary of State sign off on the pick.
 

VanC

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
I heard an interview with Burris tonight on the radio. I don't understand why the Illinois Sec of State did not sign his credentials. Does anyone know? Is it pressure from the DNC and Reid?

The liberal radio pointed out that this is a BAD precedent that might mean future appointees of other Governors could be denied and that they should seat him.

From the NY Times:

While senators in Washington weighed their options, it was uncertain how efforts here to block the appointment would proceed. Jesse White, the Illinois secretary of state, said he would refuse to sign paperwork that Mr. Blagojevich must present to the Senate offering Mr. Burris’s appointment. Still, after Mr. White’s lawyers scanned the legal precedents on the question, there appeared to be no statutory requirement that Mr. White’s signature be included, his spokesman said, so the move seemed likely to be mostly symbolic.

Don't know if White is under any pressure, but the senate Democrats are using his refusal to certify Burris' appointment as their reason for not seating Burris. Now it would seem that White's signature is only a formality, and is not really necessary under Illinois law. Burris has appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court. If the court follows the law, I would expect them to rule that there is no legal reason for the senate not to seat Burris, and the ball will be back in the senate's court. I read somewhere that the Democratic Black Caucus is not happy. This could get very interesting.

I agree that, if the senate refuses to seat Burris, it would set a terrible precedent. Do we really want the senate to have the power to refuse to seat a legally appointed person just because they don't like the person that appointed him? If that were the case, could they then refuse to seat a duly elected person because they didn't like the outcome of the election? Ouch!!
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Finally the press calls Democrats on the carpet for playing the race card and ignoring the Constitution! I didn't think I'd ever see that day this happened.

Burris is legit. Do I think he'll be a good Senator? No.

Would I have voted for him? Not on your life, but the law is the law and, like it or not, Democrat politicians have to abide by the law too.

Burris Unbanished
Democrats receive a lesson in Constitutional law.
January 8, 2009


Majority Leader Harry Reid reversed course yesterday and prepared to abide by the law and welcome Roland Burris to replace Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate. There's no final deal yet, but it looks like the man appointed by disgraced Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich will soon be seated. Democrats have thus ended a week of intraparty squabbling that was entertaining, but also made them look like they were putting politics above the law.

The turning point came Tuesday evening, when Senator Dianne Feinstein broke with her party and called for Mr. Burris to be seated. "The question, really, in my view, is one of law," which gives Governor Blagojevich the power to make the appointment, she told Politico. If Mr. Burris wasn't seated, she said, "it affects gubernatorial appointments all over the country." No such principle was enunciated by President-elect Obama, who first said Mr. Burris should not be seated and yesterday said that it was up to the Senate to make the decision.

This drama has had plenty of ugly moments, but the nadir came Tuesday, when Democrats barred Mr. Burris from entering the Capitol, thereby forcing him to hold a press conference outdoors in the pelting rain. Another low point came earlier, when Congressman Bobby Rush, an Illinois Democrat and, like Mr. Burris, African-American, called the Senate the "last bastion of plantation politics." Now Democrats know what it's like to have the race card played against them.

There are still more acts to go before the saga is over. In particular, it remains to be seen whether the price Mr. Reid extracted for the Senate seat was Mr. Burris's promise not to run for a full Senate term when his appointment expires in 2010. But on present course, it looks like Senate Democrats have decided to end this spectacle and give Mr. Burris his rightful seat.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123137325102362713.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
 

Mike

Well-known member
Didn't the "Democratic" Caucus of 50 members just sign a petition/U.S. Senate Motion just a few days ago saying they WOULD NOT seat Burris under any means because the seat would be tainted?

Can you say "CRAWFISHING"? :lol: :lol:

Reid needs to be gone............................
 
Top