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

How Quinn Plans to Get Rid of Burris

A

Anonymous

Guest
Gov. Quinn Wants to Force Burris from the Senate

Gov Pat Quinn (D-IL) has a plan to force embattled senator Roland Burris (D-IL) from the Senate. The plan is based on the text of the 17th amendment, which actually requires senators to be chosen in statewide elections (before that they were chosen by the state legislatures). Here is the text of the amendment:

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.


Quinn's message is that the amendment says that vacancies are to be filled by elections, however the governor may make temporary appointments until the election is held. If Burris does not resign within 2 weeks, he will ask the state legislature to pass a law calling for a special election for Burris' seat. Once that election is held and a winner declared, the temporary appointment made by former governor Blagojevich will come to an end and the winner of the election will be seated. Of course, Burris can run for election, but the odds of his winning are pretty low. Burris could appeal to the Supreme Court saying that the law calling for special elections wasn't in place when he was appointed, but the basic text seems to call for an election and it says nothing about when the election law was passed or when the election is held. Special elections are held for all vacant House seats and for Senate seats in a handful of states so it will be hard to argue that special elections are unconstitutional.

The 17th amendment has an interesting history. Wikipedia has a nice article on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
 

VanC

Well-known member
I never thought of it that way. I always assumed that the appointment would stand until the next general election. Quinn has a valid point, but convincing our overwhelmingly Democratic legislature to call for an election that could end with a Republican winning the seat will be a hard sell. I'd be surprised if that happens.

Best option for the Democrats would be to expel Burris and let Quinn appoint another Democrat, but I don't think that's likely to happen either. The senate usually lets these types of investigations play out before taking steps to expel someone. That could take months.
 
Top