Senate Dems' Opposition To Burris Softens

Chairwoman Of Rules Committee Says Seating Blagojevich's Appointee Would Be Legal Thing To Do

(CBS/AP)  Roland Burris failed to capture President-elect Barack Obama's old Senate seat Tuesday in a wild piece of political theater, but the Democrats' opposition cracked when a key chairwoman said seating him was simply the legal thing to do.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein rejected the reasoning that all of the chamber's Democrats, herself included, had cited in a letter last week - that corruption charges against Burris' patron, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, tainted his appointment.

"Does the governor have the power, under law, to make the appointment? And the answer is yes," said Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Rules Committee, which judges the credentials of senators.

Burris marched into the Capitol earlier Tuesday, declaring himself "the junior senator from the state of Illinois." But Secretary of the Senate Nancy Erickson rejected his certification, as he knew she would, saying it lacked Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White's signature and the state seal.

Late Tuesday, Feinstein urged the Senate to settle the matter.

"If you don't seat Mr. Burris, it has ramifications for gubernatorial appointments all over America," the California senator said. "Mr. Burris is a senior, experienced politician. He has been attorney general, he has been controller, and he is very well-respected. I am hopeful that this will be settled."

A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Earlier, Reid had said, "Mr. Burris is not in possession of the necessary credentials from the state of Illinois."

But CBS News has learned Senate Democrats are now rethinking Burris' rejection, Wyatt Andrews reports. They are now hinting they might consider seating Burris if Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is impeached by the state legislature.

Burris, meanwhile, pivoted from his rejection at the Capitol to the Illinois Supreme Court, asking it to order White to certify his appointment.

Burris was expected to meet with Reid on Wednesday.

It would be his second appearance at the Capitol in as many days. His first included an escort by Capitol police officers to Erickson's third-floor office for what was described as a highly cordial, 21-minute meeting.

Burris, 71, then led a small mob of lawyers, consultants, police and reporters across the street in pouring rain, to a news conference which Burris aides said Reid had tacitly allowed.

Erickson, Burris reported, had advised him that "I would not be accepted, and I will not be seated, and I will not be permitted on the floor."

The former Illinois attorney general said he was "not seeking to have any type of confrontation" over taking the seat. In addition to his court filing late in the day in Illinois, Burris said he was considering a federal lawsuit to force Senate Democrats to seat him.

It was a distraction for majority Democrats eager to project an image of progress with Mr. Obama on an economic stimulus package estimated to cost as much as $800 billion.

Democrats and Mr. Obama have said that the corruption charges against Blagojevich would strip credibility from anyone he appointed to the seat.

Blagojevich denies federal accusations that he tried to sell the seat Mr. Obama has given up for the presidency.

In a written statement Tuesday, the governor said allegations against him shouldn't be held against Burris, whom he called a "good and decent man."

"The people of Illinois are entitled to be represented by two senators in the United States Senate," Blagojevich said.

An attorney for Burris, Timothy W. Wright III, said that "our credentials were rejected by the secretary of the Senate. We were not allowed to be placed in the record book. We were not allowed to proceed to the floor for purposes of taking oath. All of which we think was improperly done and is against the law of this land."

Some of Burris' supporters have bemoaned the fact that Democrats would stand in the way of the Senate gaining its only black member. Burris himself downplayed the issue of race, telling reporters: "I cannot control my supporters. I have never in my life, in all my years of being elected to office, thought anything about race."

On CBS' The Early Show this morning, Burris dismissed his critics, saying his appointment by the scandal-plagued governor is valid.

"They're causing the drama, my appointment is legal. Are you saying there is something wrong with me? I'm qualified," Burris, who was the first African-American elected to statewide office and was the former Illinois attorney general, said. (Watch the video)

"There's nothing wrong with Roland Burris and there's nothing wrong with the appointment," Burris said.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus said Tuesday that Burris should be seated.

"A lot of people want to talk about race or the governor and his problems, but the bottom line is you have a sitting governor who has certain legal rights and authorities and he's made an appointment," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md. "This is an issue that goes beyond race."

[credibility2]

I guess having the signature of the IL Secretary of State on the certification papers, a part of law, is of no consequence in any of this. A quagmire for sure, but the only reason Reid and his ilk are softening is because they''re caving into the inferred sentiment that this is all about race. Never mind that the IL Secy of State is also black. Rep. Rush pushing this issue is an old has-been racist radical from the 1960s. The fact that Rush was even elected proves how mindless and corrupt many Chicago voters are. Poor Reid and his ilk - spineless.

[redhoffer]

It''s nice we have a party in charge of the senate capable of changing their minds when new information and feedback comes to light.
I think Bush and the repubs continued their assault on the economy and pretend-intel war in part to avoid being labeled a "flip-flopper", which led to this darkest of times in America.
The repubs and Bush reaped pain on the country and the world due to their inability to change their minds and change the horrid course they placed our nation towards.

[pepperwood2]

Senate Dems'' Opposition To Burris Softens? - All it takes is for Burris to support the pork projects that his opponents supports and to kick in some funding for their reelections. Not hard to figure this one out. Did somebody say we''re going to CHANGE how things are done in Washington? Cackle cackle cackle

[thcarson-2009]

Obama now supporting seating Burris, flip-flop, flip-flop.

[remrafbn]

txgrouch said "ALL THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOIN'''' DOWWWWWNNNNN!!!!"

Your claims are so ridiculous. Democracts are about to take control of the White House, the Senate, and the House and you say they are going down? "LOL" No wonder you got fired from your internship. You problably told your students "Why do we celebrate Martin Luther King''s Day? Well Timmy...errrrrr...uhmmm...Martin Luther King was famous because he founded Burger King so thank him for the Whopper...and errrr...because his brother was Don King the boxer. Pop quiz tomorrow about that...errrrr...study."

[jackp32]

Where oh where are those race warlords Jackson and Sharpton demanding that Burris be seated and that he is being discriminated against?

[walt1944-2009]

This is crazy!!!!

The Whimpo-crats were given control of the country to get us out of the major messes that the Great Emperor Bush II and his neocon Fascist Nazi Republicans have gotten us into. We, THE PEOPLE, believed them and had had enough of the neocons so we put the Whimpo-crats in office because we wanted CHANGE!

So what do we have? Whimpo-crats arguing amongst themselves as to who of their party they can EAT NEXT! Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have shown they are totally inept at being majority leaders. They have bowed LOW to everything the Great Emperor Bush II wanted and failed to attack neocon Fascist Nazi Republican filibusters on any legislation.

People are getting totally fed up!!!!

You might not like the neocon Fascist Nazi Republicans as to what they have done to the country and to us over the past 8 years, but you have to admit, they know how to unite and stand their ground when they want to!

In the meantime, how many evil, cowardly Whimpo-crats does it take to screw in a light bulb???

SIG HEIL, I LOVE IT WHEN THE WHIMPO-CRATS SHOT THEMSELVES IN THE HEAD!!!, BUSH!!!

[craigh9]

What a bunch of blowhards! - What has changed - nothing, except they are now concerned about their own butts versus the good of the country.
Burris MAY BE an appropriate choice but the circumstances remain that he has been named in an highly inappropriate manner.
Deal with Blago first - then deal with seating the position and if it is decided that it should be Burris then wellcome him with open arms.
What is the big deal about leaving 1 seat open - Illinois is still represented and WE ALL KNOW that all the Senators are rarely in attendance anyway.
DO IT RIGHT!

[torva-2009]

Burris appears to be highly qualified for position of Senator. Sad that his appointment comes under such circumstances.

But I believe the Senate Democrats are wrong for not seating Burris.

The governor of each state has the power to appoint a senator.

Blagojevich, perhaps a scum bag of politician, is still the governor. Yes he has been indicted...but that in and of itself is not a conviction; he is under America''s most cherished legal concept is innocent until proven guilty -- which considering this indictment is the product of Shrub''s DOJ!

Really does anyone feel that U.S. attorneys appointed by Shrub and Gonzo have any more integrity than Blagojevich???

Blagojevich may have made his best or for that matter the best political appointment of any of the recent governors of Illinois - so what if it was to spite the Dems and their political machine - Burris is still a valid and good appointment!

[rushlimpdrug]

Burris is a fraud.

Does he have the best interest of America in mind?

Well, he does have the best interest of Burris in mind.

And of course we keep getting reminded that he is
african-American.

Whoop-dee-doo.

The man is shameless.

[ramos937]

Burris appointment is legal and valid. There is no proof that Blago "sold" the seat to him. Blago is still the legal govenor of Ill. White is breaking the law by not certifying Burris. Once the courts order White to certify Burris, White should do so immediately and the Senate should then seat him.

[samthetvcat]

PS I also think it doesn''t help when Harry Reid had as ''unelectable'' all the black people, and had as ''electable'' the person who just lost an election - if the ''taint'' argument is in actuality a Harry Reid preference argument, and Harry Reid''s preference isn''t necessarily an accurate read of peoples'' true merits, well . . .

[samthetvcat]

pt 1

---"Democrats and Mr. Obama have said that the corruption charges against Blagojevich would strip credibility from anyone he appointed to the seat."---

I understand why people support the blocking of Burris on these grounds, and I agree that this case is distinguishable from the Powell case. But I think what makes this principle not controlling is the fact that Blago agreed to NOT appoint somebody and allow a special election. Here there was an alternative that only Harry Reid quite frankly would have cared about, not the Ill. legislature.

I think it''s also key that if a special election were to have been held, the Dems would have lost. Because if a Dem win were inevitable, then rejecting a special election on cost grounds stands as an act of principle rather than what everybody''s reading it as - a desire to maximize power. People are taking Harry Reid''s Blago call and candidate preference list as evidence of that, right?

[samthetvcat]

pt 2

Which then gives rise to State sovereignty issues - if it''s truly Harry Reid who''s nixing the idea of a special election (because the Ill. Senate has no stake in party affiliation of Federal representatives, do they?), can he then demand support from the Courts over concern of a taint when he himself had the power to avoid a taint in the first place? Is this really an issue of taint, or has Harry Reid made the paramount issue Harry Reid''s personal preference?

There is a taint, and Burris unresponsive to electorate concerns - I just don''t see the law fashioning a remedy for Harry Reid ON THE ISSUE OF TAINT when Harry Reid himself had/has the power to avoid the taint in the first place.

Dianne''s right! :)

[gce65]

It''s a shame he was nominated by Blagojevich, because otherwise he''s qualified and probably suitable. I don''t think anyone expects anything radical out of him in the Senate, so if he''s willing to commit not to run for the open seat in 2010 I say let his nomination stand. Already too many distractions in Wa, DC after Bush/Cheney anyway.

[standlee5]

Democrat pyscho-drama. Get used to it.

[standlee5]

The 60 Minutes'' DVD, "Barack Obama''s Road to the White House." advertised on this site should be, "Brack Obama''s Road to the White House? SHORT, STRAIGHT and Easy"

[barbjc1]

As I wrote earlier in the day, the governor of Illinois has NOT been indicted, he is still legally the sitting Governor of the state of Illinois. Mr. Burris is qualified for the job, US Senate get your act together and stop playing games. Senator Feinstein appears to be the only one there at this moment with a lick of sense.

[lopezf11]

Legal? Not signed by Sec of State of Ill.

Ethical? Probably not.

Political suicide? Likely.


Posted by Nearl4511

The crazy white guy from Minnisota is welcome. The inexperiences patrician white woman with a famous name is welcome, you know. The black former Attorney General from Illinois must come in through the door designated for the colored and wait behind the white line, before being dismissed. I suspect that Senator Burris will overcome, though.

[ms1-1-1]

sorry mispelled it''s Blagojevich