CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
– ETHICS
May 29, 2009 – 11:24 a.m.
Tie to Disgraced Ex-Governor Threatens Burris’ Future
By Bart Jansen, CQ Staff
Sen. Roland W. Burris likely faces two political fights over his relationship with the disgraced ex-governor who appointed him.
One is that the Senate could seek to discipline Burris, D-Ill., over apparently inconsistent statements he has given in sworn statements. The other involves the challengers who will try to unseat him should he seek election in 2010.
The most pressing political decision involves whether the Senate will discipline Burris for his varying accounts about his contacts with those close to former Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich .
A confidential Senate Ethics Committee inquiry prompted the release Tuesday of a transcript of a Nov. 13 call between Burris and the governor’s brother Robert that critics say contradicts Burris’ January testimony under oath to a state House Impeachment Committee.
The Senate ethics manual leaves wide latitude for “improper conduct,” meaning his colleagues could censure or expel Burris without his necessarily violating a rule or law.
Stefan C. Passantino, head of McKenna Long & Aldridge’s political law team, said Democratic senators are likely gauging reaction to an appropriate resolution, which the Ethics Committee would then adopt.
“They are going to then work backwards off of a political calculus and a head count,” said Passantino, whose clients include former House Republican Speakers. “That of course will depend on public sentiment and there is a lot of public sentiment about this story right now.”
The Ethics Committee is conducting a preliminary inquiry, which is akin to a grand-jury investigation, into the circumstances surrounding Burris’ appointment and seating. If the panel decides the case warrants an adjudicative phase, it could hold a public hearing and potentially recommend discipline to the full Senate.
In addition, an Illinois prosecutor, Sangamon County State’s Attorney John Schmidt, is investigating whether Burris committed perjury. But the Senate could act without any criminal charge.
The Senate ethics manual permits the most serious disciplinary action for “improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate,” regardless of whether the conduct violated a law, rule or regulation.
“The drafters of the resolution in 1964 intended that ‘improper conduct’ be cognizable by the Senate when it was so notorious or reprehensible that it could discredit the institution as a whole, not just the individual, thereby invoking the Senate’s inherent and constitutional right to protect its own integrity and reputation,” according to the Senate ethics manual.
The committee’s options include a letter of admonition, which isn’t considered punitive, and discipline ranging from censure to expulsion.
Expulsion is rare, having occurred only 15 times and not once since Confederate sympathizers were expelled during the Civil War.
Five other senators quit while facing possible expulsion, including Robert W. Packwood, R-Ore., in 1995 for “repeatedly committing sexual misconduct.”
Another eight senators have been censured or denounced. The most recent was David F. Durenberger, R-Minn., in 1990 for conduct including acceptance of prohibited gifts and conversion of a campaign contribution for personal use.
“This is a political calculus in terms of how long something like this takes,” Passantino said of the Burris affair. “I would personally characterize this as a bleeding wound and therefore likely to lead to prompt resolution.”
Meanwhile, Burris is coming under fire in his home state.
The Chicago Sun-Times repeated Thursday a February call for Burris to resign. In Illinois, state House Republicans offered a resolution Wednesday calling on Burris to resign, but as a minority party were unable to force action.
Another political calculation focuses on who could win the seat in 2010. Burris has refused to resign and has not yet announced whether he would campaign to keep the seat.
But his low poll numbers and his ability to raise only $845 during the first three months of this year left challengers circling the waters.
“Rather than increase calls for his resignation, I think this story will only accelerate the plans of others to challenge him in the primary, assuming he has the nerve and money to run,” said Ron Michaelson, a former state elections official who is now an assistant professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield.
Some Illinois political observers say it is by no means clear that Burris will step aside in 2010.
“The question is: Will Roland’s ego once again outweigh his common sense, if he decides to run anyway, and will he get his head handed to him on a platter? Or will he retire gracefully?” said Charles N. Wheeler III, a former long-time Chicago Sun-Times reporter who is now a professor of public affairs reporting at the University of Illinois at Springfield.
The transcript that a judge unsealed this week renewed questions about Burris’ conduct after he had seemed to settle into a Senate routine that has included presiding over the chamber, delivering occasional speeches and doing home-state tours.
Blagojevich appointed Burris to President Obama’s former Senate seat Dec. 30, weeks after the then-governor was arrested Dec. 9 on federal charges of soliciting bribes and conspiracy to commit mail fraud in a wide-ranging “pay-to-play” corruption scandal.
Senate Democratic leaders were initially adamant about not seating Burris, citing the ongoing federal investigation into allegations that Blagojevich had tried to auction the Senate seat to the highest bidder.
But Burris showed up in Washington to claim his seat, and Majority Leader Harry Reid and Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin later agreed to seat Burris if Illinois state officials would affirm the validity of his appointment and if they were satisfied by Burris’ testimony before an Illinois legislative committee looking into Blagojevich’s impeachment.
After initially filing an affidavit in which he said he’d had no contact with those close to Blagojevich, Burris told the state legislative committee in January of only one such contact, to a Blagojevich aide. But in an affidavit released Feb. 14, Burris acknowledged having had contacts with several confidants of the then-governor including his brother, Rob Blagojevich.
Federal transcripts released Tuesday at the request of the Ethics Committee reveal Burris pleading for the appointment in a Nov. 13 call with Rob Blagojevich by promising to make a contribution that never materialized. Burris also indicated that he would help Blagojevich raise money.
Burris’ fellow Illinois Democrat, Durbin, said the transcript suggests Burris wasn’t fully truthful and forthcoming at the state hearing. Durbin, who said he wouldn’t support Burris in the 2010 campaign, said Burris owes a better explanation to voters and Senate colleagues.
But Burris insisted Wednesday to reporters he never engaged in a “pay to play” scheme for the job.
And he told reporters Thursday that he shouldn’t be blamed for any lack of candor to the state panel because lawmakers asked the wrong questions.
“You all have got it backwards,” said Burris, a former state attorney general. “It is not upon a person who is testifying to go out of his way on anything. It is the person who has to ask the questions.”
Comments
Unfortunately, there is no way this guy makes it out of the primary, unless the "Race-Card" is played again as it was in January.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: