Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Afro-Netizen
All Spin Zone
Altercation
Americablog
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Another Iranian Online
August J. Pollak
Baghdad Burning
Barry Lando
Bloggrrrlz Gallery
Blondesense
Bob Geiger
Body and Soul
Boing Boing
Booman Tribune
BOP News
Bush Watch
BUZZFLASH
Carpetbagger
Clean Air Blog
Cool Hunting
Corrente
CrooksandLiars
Cursor
Dahr Jamail
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
DC Media Girl
DemiOrator
Direland
Echidne of the Snakes
Elayne Riggs
Eschaton
Fact-esque
Falafel Sex, and Other Things Best Left Unsaid
Farai Chideya
Feminist Peace Network
Feministe
Feministing
Frameshop
Gristmill
Huffington Post
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
James Wolcott
Jesus General
Lady Jayne's Blog
Liberal Oasis
Mad Kane
Mahablog
Majikthise
Media Girl
Media is a Plural
MediaCitizen
Metafilter
Michael Berube
MyDD
News Dissector
News For Real
Norbizness
Oliver Willis
Pacific Views
Pandagon
Political Animal
PopPolitics.com
PR Watch
Prometheus 6
Raed in the Middle
RH Reality Check
Robert Greenwald
Roger Ailes
Rox Populi
Sadly, No!
Seeing the Forest
Shakespeares Sister
Sirotablog
Sisyphus Shrugged
skippy the bush kangaroo
Slacktivist
SpeakSpeak
Stay Free!
Steve Gilliard
Talking Points Memo
TalkLeft
TBogg
Thatcoloredfellasweblog
The Bilerico Project
The Hutchinson Political Report
The Republic of T
The Revealer
The Sideshow
The Swift Report
Think Progress
This Modern World
TikvahGirl
Trish Wilson
War and Piece
Waveflux
What She Said!
Whiskey Bar
Working Families Vote 2008
Burris' Ethics Bubble Bursts, Opening Door for Expulsion
By admitting that he tried, without success, to raise money for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich prior to Blagojevich appointing him to the U.S. Senate, Sen. Roland Burris has exposed himself to whole new set of complex and potentially damaging legal hurdles, ethics lawyers say.
No longer is the question -- as was the case during Burris' controversial appointment -- whether or not he is qualified to serve in office. Now it is a vaguer dispute over whether, by acknowledging that he left out information during his impeachment committee testimony and (unsuccessfully) tried to fundraise for the embattled former governor, Burris has exhibited conduct that deserves reprimand, censure or even expulsion from the Senate.
"We are beyond the constitution now," said Ken Gross, a Washington lawyer who heads Skadden Arp's Political Law practice. "It is within the Senate's authority to expel him from office. And the standards are amorphous... In recent history I don't know if a flat perjury conviction has ever been the basis for removal but it certainly could be. And in this case the Senator came in with two strikes against him already. There won't be many people standing up for him now."
The Senate has the authority to remove Burris from his current post, provided two-thirds of the body votes to do so. The process by which that would happen, however, seems far-fetched. For starters, as Gross notes, history shows that such punishments "are few and far between." Senate Democrats would have to willingly submit themselves to the same political histrionics that accompanied Burris' initial appointment. Even if they decided to walk down that path, there is hardly a guarantee that they would have the votes, though Gross says it is conceivable. Democrats could unanimously support the measure but be stymied by Republicans trying to keep an ethically tainted Burris in office as long as possible.
"My hunch is that if they want to go through this again, to wind up the machine one more time, they will fail to garner a 2/3 majority," said Tom Gerety, a legal professor at New York University and former president of Trinity and Amherst College.
And yet, the wheels are turning. Good government groups are already demanding Burris' expulsion, even before perjury has been proven. In the meantime, the Senator himself and Majority Leader Harry Reid have supported sending the matter to the Senate Ethics Committee, though that institution is notoriously slow and often lenient when it comes to investigating its own. Certainly the optics are damaging enough that it could spur the type of political reprimands that Congress rarely sees.
"What Congress can do ultimately is to censure him if they find his testimony was not consistent," said Stan Brand, an ethics expert with the Brand Law Group. "Theoretically they could expel him, though they would have to find that somehow this was intimately related and germane to his fitness to serve in the Senate and that his misstatements, if they were such, went to the heart of the Senate's agreeing to his being seated."
Complicating matters for Burris is the fact that he lacks the type of institutional support structure that has saved the hide of embattled officials in the past. He's served only a few weeks into office and came into the position under an ethics cloud. Senate Democrats view him as a liability who endangers their chances of holding unto the seat.
"It's becoming ridiculous," one senior Democrat told the Huffington Post. "It's time for the drama to end so we can actually win this Senate seat. We need this seat in 2010 -- it's the President's seat -- and while the Republicans are lining up solidly behind a potential [Rep. Mark] Kirk candidacy, we have a deep bench of talented candidates who can't jump in yet because of Burris."
In short: when Burris needed a smooth transition into office, he got a bumpy ride; when he needed distance from Blagojevich, he was drawn closer; and when he could use backers, his corner is empty. Whether this is enough to endanger his spot in the Senate seems unlikely. And yet, he has handed Democratic leadership in Washington an excuse to (at the very least) push him to sidelines in 2010 and (at worst) consider a more extracting punishment in the weeks and months ahead.
"It seems to me," said Brand, "that the Senate can argue with some force: 'Look, we stepped back because we thought he was qualified to serve. But if in the very act of him qualifying to serve in the Senate he perjured himself, how than can we not take cognizance of that?'"
Tagged as: senate, ethics, washington dc, dirty politics, blagojevich, blago, burris
Sam Stein is a Political Reporter at the Huffington Post, based in Washington, D.C.
| Also in PEEK | |||
| Quiz: Which African Country Just Proposed Legislation Making Being Gay a Crime Punishable By Up to Life in Prison? Here's a great letter-writing opportunity. Post by CaitieCat. November 26, 2009. |
White House Releases Turkey Pardon Spoof Then Does The Real Thing Someone in the White House has a sense of humor. Post by Daniel Kessler. November 25, 2009. |
New Info Shows the Stimulus Is Working, Time for Conservatives to Thank Obama There's no mystery here. The debate is over. The stimulus has made a real, positive difference. Post by Steve Benen. November 25, 2009. |
|