Burris: Now, Harry Reid is from Illinois?

Roland Burris, Rod Blagojevich's designee to the Senate from Illinois, was turned away today when he presented his credentials, as Harry Reid -- after inserting himself into New York's Senate succession on behalf of Caroline Kennedy last month -- now tries to influence Illinois' Senate succession.
But this begins to not look like a winning issue for the Democrats.
For one thing, crude as it was, Blago's decision to name an African-American seems to be having its desired effect. Important members of the Congressional Black Caucus -- including Charlie Rangel, who must not have gotten the appropriate contributions to the CUNY Center for Rangellian Self-Importance -- seem to be rallying to Burris' defense.
More importantly, Blagojevich is still the governor of Illinois, and the idea seems to be dawning that it would set a dangerous precendent if Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and the rest of the Senate Democratic leadership can pick and choose which Senators they're going to seat.
The congealing legal opinion, summarized here, is that Reid may be overreaching under the Constitution if he turns away a duly appointed senator.
It doesn't help that Blagojevich hasn't even been indicted yet, much less convicted. One prosecutor filing a charge supposedly strips him of a core power of appointment?
It also doesn't help that the Illinois Legislature, representing the people, could have impeached, and hasn't. Finally, it doesn't help that the Dems real issue seems to be political -- they just don't like Burris because they don't think he can hold the seat. That's supposed to be a constitutional principle?
Liberal prof Erwin Chemerinsky: "Allowing the Senate to exclude Burris on any except the narrowest of grounds would create a dangerous precedent. It could open the door to the Senate or the House overturning the will of the people and excluding representatives under one or another pretext."
Conservative Bruce Fein: "That Mr. Blagojevich was under a dark criminal and impeachment cloud when he elevated Mr. Burris is beside the point. President William Jefferson Clinton did not forfeit his power to appoint, sign legislation, or negotiate treaties during his impeachment ordeal."
Photo: Senator-designate Roland Burris Tuesday in Washington D.C.
AP Photo

Comments (4)
FREE ONLINE TV, MOVIES, MUSIC, GOOD GAMES, VIRTUAL WORLDS, AND FREE COLLEGE EDUCATIONS @ INTERNETSURFSHACK.COM
While Burris is not my choice, I see nothing wrong with him individually, and the Senate should seat him. until a special election.
While Burris is not my choice, I see nothing wrong with him individually, and the Senate should seat him. until a special election.
As a lifelong Illinois resident, I find this fiasco to be politics as usual.
The Illinois House could have impeached Blago or taken away his power to name Obama's successor. They did neither because they remain, as always, in deadlock.
Roland Burris was appointed by the Governor, under the law, and should have been seated in the U.S. Senate. Period. The people of Illinois are the real fools because they have no idea of what democracy means and just vote in the same old partisan politicians time after time; therefore, there is no impetus for the politicians to change their ways. We think that the Palestinians are ignorant for voting in Hamas but vote in those officials that do as Hamas has done....NOTHING