do you think Burris should take his seat?

[Jacobtm]

Beet:

As of now, Blago is guilty of nothing.

Burris is guilty of nothing.

It doesn't matter that suspicions against Blago are well-founded.

The whole point is that you're innocent until proven guilty. When the Senate judges someone "guilty" before a court does, then they can exclude anyone at all on the pretense of suspected wrong-doings, whether that person was appointed or elected.

If you look hard enough, you can find irregularities in most any election. And if an irregularity benefits one candidate over another, certainly one could suspect that perhaps there may have been some wrongdoings that, if real, would be criminal, and preclude a candidate from taking his seat.

But that suspicion, whether grounded or ungrounded, has the same legal standing as the allegations against Blago: absolutely none.

[justfollowingtheelections]

I think he should be seated and I will explain why.

The only reason the Senate should not allow someone to be seated is if he has illegally been appointed.  Blagojevich is corrupt, but he has not been caught doing something illegal.  Talking on the phone about asking for money in exchange for the senate seat is not illegal unless you actually ask someone to pay you for the seat.
Have the people of Illinois regretted voting for him?  I'm sure they have but unless he does anything illegal that would give them legal ground to impeach him, they're stuck with him.  Better luck next time Illinois people.  If the Senate doesn't allow him to become a senator, then where does the power of the Senate end?  Will they be allowed not to seat a senator simply because they don't like the governor that appointed him/her or the senator him/herself?  I think it would be really dangerous to give the Senate such power.

[J. J.]

If the Senate doesn't allow him to become a senator, then where does the power of the Senate end?  Will they be allowed not to seat a senator simply because they don't like the governor that appointed him/her or the senator him/herself?  I think it would be really dangerous to give the Senate such power.

I do not like the precedent set by denying Burris the seat.  I think this point is the most important.  I do like Blago and do not think Burris should take his seat, but I also question the Senate's power to deny him that seat.  It is the lesser of two evils to seat Burris.

[Lincoln Republican]

Burris will never be seated, under any circumstances.

Guaranteed!

Nor should he be.

The Illinois Secretary of State and the United States Senate are completely within their rights.

The Illinois Secretary of State and the United States Senate are acting appropriately and responsibly, and, under the circumstances, the only way they reasonably can.

Some of the posters in this thread are using too broad a brush to paint this as a test case, on what power the United States Senate should have in a matter such as this.  This is a unique case, and should not be interpreted as a matter of how far the United States Senate can go in these matters.  The United States Senate would not deny a seat to anyone appointed by a Governor who is governing legitimately.  Blagoevich has lost any and all legitimacy he may have had.

I guarantee, Burris will never, I repeat, never, be seated as a United States Senator. 

[Stranger in a strange land]

I guarantee, Burris will never, I repeat, never, be seated as a United States Senator. 

I sure hope you're right. If Burris is seated, it should only be as a caretaker until a successor can be elected in a special election to serve the remainder of the term.

and BTW, this should really be in Congressional Elections or US General Discussion.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

I guarantee, Burris will never, I repeat, never, be seated as a United States Senator. 

I really, really hope you are right.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I really think this thread should be on the Congressional forum.

Nym?

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

oh ok please move. thanks

[Lincoln Republican]

Burris will never be seated, under any circumstances.

Guaranteed!

Nor should he be.

The Illinois Secretary of State and the United States Senate are completely within their rights.

The Illinois Secretary of State and the United States Senate are acting appropriately and responsibly, and, under the circumstances, the only way they reasonably can.

Some of the posters in this thread are using too broad a brush to paint this as a test case, on what power the United States Senate should have in a matter such as this.  This is a unique case, and should not be interpreted as a matter of how far the United States Senate can go in these matters.  The United States Senate would not deny a seat to anyone appointed by a Governor who is governing legitimately.  Blagoevich has lost any and all legitimacy he may have had.

I guarantee, Burris will never, I repeat, never, be seated as a United States Senator. 

Well, I will certainly have to eat my words.

Nonetheless, I am apalled that the United States Senate would seat anyone, black or white, appointed by one of the most corrupt Governors in the history of the United States.

I believe Democrats in the United States Senate did not want to be seen as barring a black man from being admitted to the most exclusive club in the country. 

As well, the question over the Burris appointment and seating in the Senate was a distraction from getting on with the Obama agenda.

Personally, I believe Burris is a decent and capable individual, with some good qualifications for serving in the United States Senate.  Whether or not he can translate his appointment into an election win for a full term is another matter altogether.

[chinaglenn]

Burris is having a hard time because he is black, and it is well known that a black man cannot make it politically in the United States, especially one that looks like George Jefferson...

Weezy, those evil honkeys are tryin' to take my seat, Lordy, Lordy, Lord!