There's been a lot of talk today about Secretary of State Jesse White's announcement that he will refuse to certify Roland Burris' appointment to the U.S. Senate. For instance, during an MSNBC appearance this afternoon, Burris was asked about the matter. He responded: "Secretary White is a very good friend of mine. I talked to him this morning and I think he will rethink his position once he understands that his authority his really perfunctory." Watch it (full video here):
But having listened to White's press conference this morning, it seems clear that he understands the perfunctory nature of his role in this process. Speaking to reporters, he didn't suggest that his refusal to sign the "certificate of appointment" laid out under U.S. Senate Rule II will obstruct Burris' appointment. To the contrary, he said that, regardless of whether he signs, Blagojevich "can still send his recommendation on to the Senate in Washington and it would be up to them to determine whether they want to seat [Burris] or not." Watch it (full video here):
Notice how White said that he will be "asked" to sign the document -- not required. Indeed, Senate Rule II is a bit vague in this respect. It features a "certificate of appointment" form that includes a line for the Secretary of State's signature. At the same time, the rule says that state officials "may use such forms if they see fit." Not exactly the strictest language.
CQ noted as much in an article yesterday:
Although the secretary of state typically signs the certification letter — and a Senate-suggested template for the letter leaves a spot for the signature in addition to that of the governor — there appears to be no requirement under the federal or state constitution, Illinois law or Senate rules that the secretary of State sign off on the pick.
So White's refusal to sign the certificate seems to be a matter of principle, not an effort to actually block the appointment.
In short, if there is ultimately going to be a legal battle surrounding the appointment, it's more likely to be triggered when the Senate Democrats refuse to seat Burris.
UPDATE (12/31, 9:12 a.m.): From the New York Times (emphasis added):
While senators in Washington weighed their options, it was uncertain how efforts here to block the appointment would proceed. Jesse White, the Illinois secretary of state, said he would refuse to sign paperwork that Mr. Blagojevich must present to the Senate offering Mr. Burris’s appointment. Still, after Mr. White’s lawyers scanned the legal precedents on the question, there appeared to be no statutory requirement that Mr. White’s signature be included, his spokesman said, so the move seemed likely to be mostly symbolic.
UPDATE II (12/31, 1:40 p.m.): Today, White officially rebuffed the request from the governor's office that he sign the certificate. From the Tribune:
On Tuesday, White spokesman David Druker said the secretary of state's office doesn't believe White's refusal to sign the document would have any practical impact on Blagojevich's appointment of Burris.
"We feel the governor can still take the appointment to the Senate," Druker said.
Comments
Alex duBuclet on Tue, 12/30/2008 - 23:01
“What a partnership…Rush and Blagojevich?”
This afternoon, Rod Blagojevich announced that he will appoint Roland Burris to fill the U.S. Senate seat left vacant by President-elect Barack Obama. The incumbent congressman from the 1st Congressional District, Bobby Rush, also appeared at the press conference praising this move.
Rod Blagojevich has taken this action despite being charged by the federal government with attempting to sell the U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder. The Secretary of State, Jesse White, has already indicated that he will not certify any appointment by Blagojevich to fill the vacancy, and 50 Democratic members of the U.S. Senate have sent a letter stating that they would not seat anyone appointed by Blagojevich.
This underscores the need for a special election to fill the vacancy in the U.S. Senate left by Barack Obama. When a sitting Governor is under criminal investigation for trying to sell a US Senate seat, any appointment that Governor makes will be tainted.
This is not about Roland Burris, who has served this state and its people for many years. In fact, on the merits Roland Burris appears to be a good choice to replace Barack Obama. However, his appointment by Rod Blagojevich unnecessarily tarnishes his reputation, and will subject Roland Burris to guilt-by-association that may make him an ineffective Senator in these challenging times.
I’m surprised that Bobby Rush would choose to so closely associate himself with Rod Blagojevich, especially on the question of filling the U.S. Senate seat. This shows a serious lack of judgment. How can a sitting congressman support having Rod Blagojevich, who is caught on tape trying to sell the Senate seat, make an appointment?
We need good and trusted representation in Washington. By appointing anyone to this Senate seat Rod Blagojevich shows his contempt for the people of Illinois, and his contempt for Barack Obama. Shame on Bobby Rush for being a part of this travesty.
markg8 on Wed, 12/31/2008 - 08:46
Fitzgerald has 30 days from the day of the arrest (Dec. 9) to indict Blago. Despite Lisa Madigan's complaint to the IL Supreme Court it's pretty obvious he isn't incapacitated, he's been busy signing bills into law and appointing a US senator. If anything the Assembly looks like it's incapacitated.
I guess the US senate can stall Burris's nomination as long as it takes for the Assembly to impeach Blago or he resigns in a plea deal ro something else. But then what? Quinn withdraws Burris? Renominates him? What would be the point of letting Illinois be under represented if he does that? What would be the ramifications of someone else besides Burris getting the seat on the 2010 election?
Henry Hamburger (not verified) on Tue, 01/06/2009 - 11:45
Burris should be seated for a combination of six reasons. (1) He is qualified, as a four-time winner of state-wide elections. (2) He is not tainted; taint would imply actions he has not taken and that no one expects him to take, so to accuse him of it is either a slander or case of careless herd thinking. (3) Blagojevich is not a felon until and unless proved so in a court and he is still the governor, hence the one to appoint a senator in this circumstance, and he has done so. (4) Jesse White, despite his fabulous resume, has a role analogous to an optional notary public, in other words no legally required role. (The form leaving space for his signature is optional.) (5) Blagojevich has not even been impeached, much less removed from office; whereas Clinton was impeached and continued to serve. (6) The Senate can't be capricious about this and in view of (1)-(5), it has no case.
Fred Smith (not verified) on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 16:27
Let us put some things in its proper perspective. Congressman Bobby Rush stated that he was motivated to speak out on Roland Burris’ behalf to become the next junior Senator from Illinois because "I am faced with the reality that there are no blacks serving in the U.S. Senate and we have an opportunity to seat one." He also stated that it had nothing to do with Governor Blagojevich, however, let us take that at face value. In 2004, when State Senator Barack Obama was running for the open Senate seat in Illinois, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate. Did Congressman Rush see this as an opportunity to seat a black person in the all white Senate or in 2004? Or was it okay to have an all white Senate? Did Rush think this was okay in 2004 but not in 2008? By now many of us know that Rush backed the white millionaire Blair Hull for the Senate seat in 2004 and not the African American Barack Obama. It is time to call Mr. Rush on what he really is, an opportunist. He viewed this as an opportunity to get his name in the newpapers and his face on television. Congratulations Congressman Rush, you achieved your mission. Your name was in the news for over a week because of your inflammatory comments. Just 25 days before you made those far-reaching statements, this great country of ours went to the election poles and elected the first African American President. Rush being the opportunist that he is, did not consider that before he made his inflammatory comments, Congressman Bobby Rush had been absent in the first congressional district in Illinois for his last three terms. Rush only focused on the district of his church. For the rest of the district, he could not begin to tell you what was going on.
Post new comment
Progress Illinois' intention is to foster community and to maintain a comfortable and constructive blogging environment. While we encourage and appreciates different points of view, we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. All comments submitted will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
We will not publish comments that we consider:
Please leave a name or nickname when commenting, as it makes it easier for others to respond directly.