Message #122437

[Bianca]

FROM NOQUARTER.com:






".........Go ahead Civics Prof, give us the Constitutional reference that gives Reid the power to block?
(hint: Article 1, Section 5.) not in there…

Aside from that, show us Illinois law that gives the Secretary of State the right to simply refuse to sign the appointment.

All his spokesman has said is:



“His feeling is we studied the constitution of Illinois, we looked at the statutes, and there was nothing there that said he had to sign the paperwork,” said David Druker, White’s press secretary.”

“We don’t believe he has the authority to hold up the appointment or veto it, to put it that way,” Druker added. “How the U.S. Senate views the action, that would be for the U.S. Senate to determine.”



So,..his feeling…that’s how the law is going to be in Illinois..not on paper, but..in feeling.
Truth is…he has no authority to simply not sign it out of his “feeling”.




SECTION 16. SECRETARY OF STATE - DUTIES

The Secretary of State shall maintain the official records of the acts of the General Assembly and such official records of the Executive Branch as provided by law. Such official records shall be available for inspection by the
public. He shall keep the Great Seal of the State of Illinois and perform other duties that may be prescribed by law.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)



Hmmm…doesn’t seem to indicate he has the individual authority to simply ignore certifications based on…feeling.

It does not say he has the right to veto the Governor’s actions….so..no such power exists. He needs to be arrested or impeached for contempt or dereliction of duty.



And, NYTimes stated:

Senior Democratic officials said if Mr. Burris won the secretary of state’s signature and made a persuasive case before the state impeachment committee that nothing untoward happened, his appointment might move forward.

At the state level this may be something that the locals can figure out, but the Federal level…Reid has no such authority under Section 5 to make Burris give a “persuasive case before the state’s impeachment committee”.

Neither is this in the Illinois constitution.

The only thing Reid can do..is verify that Burris was sent by the state (pending) and he is at least 30 years old at time of oath, obviously he is.
That is all that the Constitution allows Reid to do.

This is supposed to be a government of laws not men.
And these men are playing little games with our Constitution and Congress.

I think Blogojevich is a crock, but he hasn’t been tried so…innocent until proven guilty is the law.

These Democrat assholes need to get over their ridiculous bulls**t and realize they are setting a very bad precedent by allowing their “feeling” to make determinations instead of following the law.

If the law gives you a provision out, fine, so be it. But it doesn’t, so these two a$$holes need to get on with biz and let Burris get the seat.

Reid needs to be removed from Senate power.





Reply to this comment
 Comment by truthtelling007 | 2009-01-07 10:10:14


Chicago Tribune reports:



                                      “White says he’s taking unfair blame in Burris saga




Associated Press
7:27 AM CST, January 7, 2009

CHICAGO - Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White says he’s being unfairly blamed by members of the U.S. Senate for not seating Roland Burris.

Burris was barred from taking President-elect Barack Obama’s vacant seat Tuesday because officials refused to accept a certification of his appointment signed by embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Senate officials say one of the reasons is the certification also needs White’s signature. White says he won’t sign any appointment made by Blagojevich, who’s facing federal corruption charges.

But White says Burris could have been seated without his signature, which he calls “mostly ceremonial.”






Comment by Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy | 2009-01-07 09:51:52

From what I understand, Jesse White has signed EVERY OTHER PIECE of legislation Blago presented to him. The ONLY one he didn’t sign is Burris’ appointment. How is it that he thinks he can pick and choose? If he claims it is because Blago is under investigation, he shouldn’t have signed ANY of the other papers presented to him.

The Senate, Harry Reid especially, and PEBO, have way overstepped their bounds in this case. They do NOT get to decide all on their own who gets to be a US Senator. But what the hell - let’s just ditch this whole democracy thing - it’s just getting in their way.

I might add, the same people who (rightly) criticized Bush for his signing statements are now going to accept Obama basically doing the same thing with a LEGAL move by a state governor?? Who is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY? So much for being a Constitutional Scholar





Comment by KmX | 2009-01-07 11:09:36

How is Roland Burris tainted by accepting a position from Blago? Is Barack Obama tainted by the conviction of Rezko? Barack Obama did the samething that Senator Stevens of Alaska did. He got cheap land from Rezko in exchange Rezko got kick backs for his slum apartment rentals. But yet Stevens is indicted for failing to document he got his house renovations for free and the Press gives Obama a free pass?

Roland Burris has done nothing wrong. I don’t even support Burris politics but the man has the constitution rights to be seated. Harry Reid would not have been satisfied with any appointment Blago made other than who Harry Reid wanted there.

Sadly, The 111th Congress will be known as the Congress that got the largest majority in over 50 years from the first elected Black President and simultaneously refused to seat the only legally appointed Black Senator from the State of Illinois. Those are the facts. Either we have a constituion or we don’t. Either Blago is the Governor or he isn’t. Are we to assume all the laws Blago signs are tainted?

Harry Reid is on thin ground and I will enjoy watching him squirm. Where was Harry Reid outraged when indicted Larry Craig remain in the senate? Or William Jefferson? Or Rangel? RoLand Burris will be seated, it’s just a matter of when.

Blago outsmarted the Leader of the Illinois Senate. All the Ill Senate had to do is change the laws and have a special election or take away Blago power of appointments.






Reply to this comment
 Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2009-01-07 11:20:50

Heh. Blago has his index finger on the closet door. There’s a huge dinosaur femur ready to topple out of the closet, along with many other skeleton bones. All Blago has to do is take his hand off the door to blow his nose and the skeletons will be all over the place.

All in a day’s work for a Chicago pol.

Reply to this comment
 





 Comment by oowawa | 2009-01-07 11:31:37



Sadly, The 111th Congress will be known as the Congress that got the largest majority in over 50 years from the first elected Black President and simultaneously refused to seat the only legally appointed Black Senator from the State of Illinois.

Looks to me like “Black President” trumps every other consideration regarding race. If O is in agreement, it cannot be racist. However, if O disagrees, the MSM will immediately sniff for “racism.” One man will be the new standard for what is, and what isn’t, to be considered racist. As long as O agrees with Congress, the Congress cannot be racist.