Senate Has No Right Not to Seat Roland Burris, Despite Blagojevich
Reader Comments
I disagree with you
Burris was wrong to have accepted the nomiation, he is wrong to pursue court action, he is wrong to cross the party that has supported him all these years. Burris was wrong in bringing up the racial thing in the first place. It is not about Burris already, it is about Blango and whether or not he is competent right now to even make the decision. Why is this so difficult for people to understand? Blango chose this man, because Burris gave him $11,000 in campaign contribions, Burris owns a consulting business, that got paid hundreds of thousands of collars in contracts from the state. These articles are listed in the Chicago papers. Seems like Burris is play for pay also.
How do the Democrats get paid back by him, causing problems for out new President-elect, not doing what party seniors want, all for a self centered, egotisical and defiant man, who just happens to be blaci. These two birds of a feather have done more harm then good to racial issues.
I disagree with you
Another person trying to make a racial problem out of a case that isn't. This man wants that position too bad, he could have waited a few weeks to see if Blango is forced out of office. The Republicans will just use this against the Republicans. Further more many of us question when the Republcans want something so much as they want Durris to join the senate, you better ask yourself why?
Do you feel it is right for the Republicans to do this to Frankin? That is crossing the parties of all things.
Truman Newberry
He was elected in 1918 and served until he resigned. He was initially convicted under the Corrupt Practices Act (for spending an obscene amount of (primarily his own) money to win his seat running against Henry Ford in Michigan, spending a reported $195,000 if you can believe such extravagance. Both John Corzine and I find this appalling, for obvious reasons. His conviction was reversed by the Supreme Courtin 1922. While a convicted felon he was allowed to serve in the Senate while his appeal was heard (well, he was a Republican), although once the Supreme Court reversed hisconviction he resigned his seat.
Chicago Politics
This situation require an understanding about Southern Illinois, The Northwest and Suburban regions and the city of Chicago and Southwest suburbs. The understanding must also consist of an understanding of the machine (and now the split of the machine), race (on both sides), ethnicity, and the combine. Also include Daley I, Daley II, the Death of Harold Washington. The rise and fall of James Thompson, Jim Edgar and Geroge Ryan. Somewhere in the middle of these last few should have been the name Roland Burris, but it wasn't.
This is all the saga from the intertwining of all those interest groups and constituencies. The Obama presidency is unique because it managed to bridge all those entities and lead to something that could profit all the constituencies. It succeeded in accomplishing many of the same things that Burris couldn't in his initial gubernatorial run, and sucessive. Truth be told, judging from the standpoint of the machine, the combine and Chicago faction - he should have won. He lost due to race and ethnic concerns. He also lost due to a split in the machine that occurred. He should have won. He was much more a statesman than Obama and made Blagojevich look like a joke. If race was no factor he would have been governor and the people of Illinois would have been spared two corrupt governors.
However, the chickens always come home to roost. So now that race has played a factor we have a corrupt govenor nominating the real deal, a statesman worthy of Illinois and the legacy of Lincoln. However, those who don't know Illinois politics will also fail to realize that Blago can survive this. He might be corrupt, but the tape isn't it. They wont get him out on that tape - it really does prove nothing, and they can't show the other corruption because it will implicate them - and it is far far worse, and the machine and the combine will survive. There would be too much collateral damage to both, unless deals are cut - and they will be, and they will be off the record. I bet ghost of Mike Royko is smiling somewhere.
Senate has no Right Not to Seat Roland Burris
The Chicago Sun Times Lynn Sweet reports 11 pm 01-02-2009-
Senator Reid called Blago December 3, 2008 and asked him to appoint Lisa Madigan(White Female IL Attorney General daughter of IL house Pres Mike Madigan) or Tammy Duckworth(white female). Reed told him he specifically did not want IL Senate President Emil Jones, US Rep Danny Davis or US Jesse Jackson
Jr.
Reid wanted inexperienced white females over experienced black males. It's all been recorded by US Attorney General Fitzgerald on undercover phone recordings.
Let us see if this gets any media play?
Seating of Burris
I think that Powell v. McCormack is controlling here. The Senate may not refuse to seat him.
However, Burris has no constitutional right to be a member of either party's conference or caucus. That is purely a Senate matter. It is doubtful whether he has a right to a seat on a Senate committee. (No one has a right to membership on a "good" committee.) Senators may only address the Senate when recognized by the Presiding Officer. No Senator may compel the Presiding Officer to recognize him. The allocation of Senate offices is completely a Senate matter. Members have on constitutional rights here.
In other words, constitutionally the leadership of the Senate can make it very difficult, if not impossible, for a member to function in the Senate. Think of Joe McCarthy after he was censured.
Blagojevich
For more about Blagojevich please go to www.blagojustice.com
@ John
"Of course Barone believed the media attacked Palin because she had refused to abort her baby. This guy is a totally discredited idiot who leans so far right his straw is falling out. It's no wonder he favors seating a nonentity appointed by by a crook"
I don't think it is right wingers that are so set on Mr. Burris being seated. Rather, Mr. Barone cited precidents of law. True, that kind of objectivity is unusual from right or left wingers, but that is what he has done.
"Mr Burris Goes To Washington"
Good for Burris, eh?!
And John of CT...The media cabal more than besmirched Sarah Palin for doing the right thing, refusing to abort her baby.
