Burris To The Senate

Senate "Leader" Harry Reid reprises a cheap suitcase.  Background from J Sullum at Reason.

MY BAD:  Since it is a football week I should strike the "cheap suitcase" and substitute "backpedaling like a Ravens D-back."  I am embittered because my flash of genius - David Patterson of NY appoints a black man (possibly himself) to Hillary's seat, thereby solving his Caroline Kennedy problem and the Senate's "whites only" problem - is now passe.

Comments

[Neo]

The real problem with not seating Burris is not Burris, it's the fact that it says that Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is already guilty ..
so if you want to ignore the act of the Governor in this case you have to stop cashing those state checks that have his name on them, too.

[bad]

The only thing standing between Burris, a black man, and a seat in the senate is a White.

[Danube of Thought]

It says even more than that they think he is guilty. It says that they think they can seat or refuse to seat whomever they choose, even if the person is selected in perfect compliance with his state's laws and the US Constitution. What a bunch of damn fools.

Anyway, I think Paterson's Caroline problem has been solved by a new poll showing her running neck-and-neck with Rep. Peter King in 2010.

[bad]

neck-and-neck

Any chance she takes it by a nose?

[glenda]

Dot, you are too kind! Harry Reid is perhaps the most unattractive, unintelligent, anti-American, pissant in Congress!! I so hope they have a good candidate to run against him in 2010.
Great news about Peter King, BTW

[MayBee]

It says even more than that they think he is guilty.

What's truly funny is they obviously think he's guilty of selling the Senate seat, but they all deny getting any offer from him.

[Porchlight]

What's truly funny is they obviously think he's guilty of selling the Senate seat, but they all deny getting any offer from him.

Heh. Well said, MayBee.

[bad]

Oh Yeah, Maybee

[matt]

"Blagojevich, Edwards, Rangel, Dodd, Richardson, Jefferson, Frank & Franken..., may I help you?"

the premier ambulance chasers and fixers in America!

[Porter]

glenda-

The last Republican candidate for US Senate was an import, Alan Keyes. Lyndon LaRouche would've gotten more votes. No Bench.

Doug Ross did suggest someone with far more experience if Burris didn't get seated.

Dan Rostenkowski. (D-Sure he's a thief, but he's MY thief.)

Can't wait for the tapes. They've GOT to be good, especially if the US Attorney is willing to share.

[Soylent Red]

Any chance she takes it by a nose?

If she doesn't throw a shoe, maybe.

Otherwise, call her Caroline Glue.

[Annoying Old Guy]

Porter;

Don't forget Jack Ryan, taken out by the Chicago Tribune to clear the field for Obama. A guy taken down by a sex scandal that (1) did not involve any actual sex (2) involved his wife and (3) turned out to be based on exaggerated tales.

[PD]

Brit Hume made the point yesterday (with his usual understated sense of irony) that in their rush to paint Blago as having acted unlawfully, the Senate Dems appear to be willing to act unlawfully themselves.

[Captain Hate]

Apology if this has been discussed already, but why is Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White withholding his signature and then claiming that his signature isn't needed? I read that he thinks that a governor facing corruption charges shouldn't make an appointment, but that just seems like a copout since (without addressing how valid these charges are) anybody can be accused of any spurious charges which shouldn't bring government to a standstill. But the requirement of the Secretary of State's signature has been included (I assume) in the state's constitution so it just can't be casually ignored. Which gets back to my point: What is Jesse White's agenda?

[Der Hahn]

What is Jesse White's agenda?

Not being left on the platform now that the train is leaving the station?

They were all against Burris, before they were for him.

[Der Hahn]

Also, I read that the counter-signature of the Sec of State is required by Senate rules but I don't think it's an IL constitution requirement. The US constitution refers to the state 'executive' performing the appointment.

IANAL but I recall discussions of a class of duties of a government official refered to as 'ministerial' in which it appears they have discretion but which they are in fact required to perform, and that the Sec of State signature requirement falls into this category.

Presumably any objections the Sec of State had to the appointment should be expressed privately to the Governor, or information he has about irregularities provided to the appropriate authorities but he has no power to 'veto' the appointment just because he doesn't like it.

[clarice]

Surprise, a legislative committee has recommended the Ill legislature impeach Blago and it probably will happen tomorrow...unless that little devil has another trick up his sleeve.

[MayBee]

If they impeach him, where does that leave Burris? I'm assuming his appointment still stands.

[Porter]

AOG-

If I remember correctly, Jack Ryan, whom I prefer to refer to as Jeri's ex, blew out while leading , Hull went down the same way, coincidentally. Ending up with the fabulous Mr. Keyes.

Jesse White needn't sign off to "certify" an appointment. It is a courtesy to, not a requirement of, the Ill. Constitution. The "credentials" garbage at the US Senate was Durbin's stab at a dodge. The appointment is sufficient in itself, under Illinois law. The US Senate rules, as made up by Harry and Dick (Reid and Durbin, violate the letter, as well as, the spirit, of the Powell decision.

The twist on the impeachment is that he can not be allowed to testify, at least that's what they're going to try to block.

Fun stuff!

[JM Hanes]

Der Hahn:

"IANAL but I recall discussions of a class of duties of a government official refered to as 'ministerial' in which it appears they have discretion but which they are in fact required to perform..."

To this fellow non-lawyer, the "ministerial" aspect suggests that the Secretary's signature may not have been intended to represent consent but rather to indict confirmation that a necessary notification has occurred. As a function of proper governance that makes far more sense than the idea of giving a Secretary of State de facto veto power over his elected superior's gubernatorial acts, without any explicit remedy, to boot.

The unfortunate lack of legal clarity exposed by current unprecedented circumstances, will require adjudication. Given the politicized nature of the brouhaha. it seems unlikely that such a cumbersome judicial antidote will engender what is a pretty simple legislative fix anytime soon. Any ruling which might result would hopefully include a stern note of advice in that regard.