Burris and Blago

[Hosnon]

Not being from Illinois, I've stayed on the sidelines of this situation since it began. However, this is how I see it:

My understanding of the Constitution is that the executive of a state (i.e., Governor) must immediately call for an election unless state law permits him to appoint a successor (until the seat's term expires, when a regular election will be held). Since we're even talking about whom Blago can appoint, I assume Illinois law permits him to fill the seat. (Jump in anytime Illinois election legal beagles if I'm wrong.)

That said, Blago is the Governor. He has not been convicted, and certainly has not been impeached. I think Obama's term ends in 2010 (but no later than 2012). Seat Burris, and let the people of Illinois decide what they thing about Blago's choice in two (or four) years.

P.S. I agree with many who think that Obama should stay out of this. This is a legislative branch issue and the executive should hold its tongue unless things get out of hand.

ETA: Neither should Senate Democrats delay or stall Burris' seating.

[mucifer]

1. yes, but the senate and Obama have stated they WON'T seat him.

It's a huge ugly mess.

[Hosnon]

2. And I think the Senate should seat him.

And Obama should stay out of it, for the most part.

[stillcool]

5. I second that..

if the Illinois State Senate chooses to do nothing, than neither should any other government body.

[Hosnon]

6. What is the Illinois Senate's role in this? nt

[stillcool]

7. Who else can take...

away the powers of the governor of a State? They can impeach, declare the governor incompetent, I'm sure I've read of other measures available to them if they choose to act.

[Hosnon]

8. Ah, by impeachment. But even then, he made the appointment before any impeachment proceedings began.

I agree, the Illinois Senate's silence is indicative of its unwillingness to intervene.

[RB TexLa]

3. They are not going to have a choice, there are no returns to judge and the man meets

the constitutional qualifications to hold the office.

[Hosnon]

4. I wish the Senate Democrats had either (1) made a better initial decision or (2) withheld

any decision until things settled down (as they already have begun to do).

Blago, it seems, punked the Senate Democrats by appointing someone who did not "buy" the seat. Their unequivocal "whomever Blago appoints will not be seated" was unreasonable, as is now clear.

[OHdem10]

9. You are so right. This is nothing but a dstraction. The Democrats

should get rid of this as quickly as possible.

[Hosnon]

10. I'm increasingly irritated by knee-jerk reactions (guilty of that myself in this case too).

Thankfully, my initial reaction doesn't mean squat to anyone. The Senate Democrats' opinions have a different effect. They should have stepped away, called it a state matter, and then took a position once the dust settled (or, if someone is around with enough foresight, take the appropriate position immediately).

[HubertHeaver]

11. The Illinois governor is one of a very rare breed of Democrat.

He has a backbone. If Pelosi or Reid had half as much they would have hamstrung the * administration in order to minimize the damage he could (and can) do. If Fitzgerald has the goods on him, then bring it on. Otherwise, he can just slink away to whatever dark hole disgraced republicans should go. (Actually, they stay in office and proudly in plain sight.)

[Hosnon]

12. Yes...we need to send our best doctors to examine his backbone

to find out what it is and how it works.

[naaman fletcher]

13. The clear answer..

Is for Blago to appoint a senior statemen type who promises not to run for re-election.

[Hosnon]

14. I don't think it's necessary that the appointee promise not to run for re-election.

Let Burris run (remember there will be a primary) and let Illinois decide.