Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.), leaves a press conference outside Fellowship Missionary Baptist Church in Chicago, Monday, Feb. 16, 2009. (AP Photo/Paul Beaty)
by Frank James and Mike Dorning
Now that Sen. Roland Burris has acknowledged that he indeed tried to raise money for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich as he sought the Senate seat President Barack Obama once held, calls for his ouster are likely to grow.
But anyone hoping the U.S. Senate will act to remove Burris in light of what appears to be his sin of omission when he testified at Blagojevich's impeachment trial, should probably dampen those expectations.
Even with Burris saying today that he's open to a Senate Ethics Committee probe of how he got the Senate seat, there's probably not a high likelihood much would come of it.
That's because the Senate doesn't have a particularly strong record of disciplining its own and it hardly ever expels one. Not that we even know yet if what Burris did rises to the level of punishment or violated any laws.
Part of Burris's agreement with the Senate's leadership before they would seat him was that Burris would fully disclose to Illinois lawmakers his contacts with Blagojevich's circle.
But it increasingly appears Burris may not have keep his end of the agreement with Sen. Harry Reid, the Majority Leader, and Sen. Dick Durbin, Illinois's senior senator.
Still, the Senate may give Burris a pass since senators who have been accused of worse haven't been ejected from the body or even wrist-slapped.
That doesn't mean there won't be a complaint. Anyone can file a complaint against a senator before the Senate Ethics Committee and the Senate can take a range of disciplinary actions against a senator up to removal from office for any action that runs afoul of an amorphous standard of conduct "unbecoming" a senator.
But even a preliminary investigation first requires a majority vote of the ethics committee and in recent years the panel has been reluctant to act.
"Disciplinary actions by the Senate are few and far between," said Kenneth Gross, a Washington attorney specializing in ethics law.
In the last two years, the Senate Ethics Committee took no disciplinary action against any senator despite complaints lodged against Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), who pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct in connection with charges of lewd homosexual behavior in an airport bathroom; Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who admitted to "sins" in connection with payments to a high-priced Washington prostitution ring; Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), whom a U.S. attorney testified pressured him to pursue corruption charges against a Democratic candidate in advance of an election; and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who was convicted in federal court on seven counts of corruption-related charges.
The ethics committee did send letters to Domenici and Craig admonishing them for their behavior.
Asked about the Burris affair, Natalie Ravitz, a spokeswoman for Senate Ethics Committee chair Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said: "Whenever we get a complaint, we take a look at it. But as for this specific matter, I am going to have to decline to comment."
Comments
Wonder if he had that Senate accomplishment added to the tombstone yet?
Posted by: vla | February 17, 2009 3:17 PM
Dosen't make the Senate look good.
Looks as if the Senate wants to hold on to a rubber stamp for their agenda.
Posted by: Inky | February 17, 2009 3:18 PM
Don't blame Harry Reid. He tried to listen to the people of Illinois. But Obama, Rush, Eric Zorn and the rest of the Burris apologists steamrolled him into letting the louse into the senate.
I hope he stays every day of his term and continues the lying spree that put him there in the first place. Every day is just one more nail in the coffin of his political career and a bigger boost to Mark Kirk in 2010. We needed Mark Kirk in what SHOULD have been a special election this year. Now we'll just have to wait a little longer for him and watch this buffoon lie and be ineffectual the whole time.
Posted by: Jeff | February 17, 2009 3:22 PM
Another story about Burris? This just can't be!
Posted by: Bubba ✔ | February 17, 2009 3:28 PM
Another story about Burris? This just can't be!
Posted by: Bubba ✔ | February 17, 2009 3:28 PM
More to come Bubba.
Sounds like Burris can't make up his mind as to what to put on his tombstone.
Posted by: Inky | February 17, 2009 3:56 PM
Unfortunately they're right. This is why it was so important to keep him out in the first place. Funny that Rank James wouldn't list any of the oh-so wonderful democrats that have committed sins far worse than anything Craig or Vitter did in recent memory. There's always Robert Torricelli, D-NJ, who was being investigated for receiving illegal campaign contributions from Korean national David Chang, when he resigned. Like Tom Daschle, he's now a lobbyist. Then there's Daschle, himself, who used illegal campaign contributions from Indian tribes to try to hang onto his seat. Going way back through history, the gold standard for senatorial corruption has got to be democrat William McKendree Gwin. He served in the senate from September 9, 1850, to March 3, 1861. Gwin had a duel with Congressman Joseph McCorkle with rifles at thirty yards following an argument over his alleged mismanagement of federal patronage: Shots were fired by both men but only a donkey some distance off was shot dead. This introduced a period of turmoil in California's political scene with bribery, physical intimidation, and non-stop political maneuvering being prevalent.
Gwin was born in the South and although he publicly opposed slavery in free-soil California, he advocated it everywhere else. Gwin even considered that it might be possible for a Republic of the Pacific centered on California to secede from the Union but when his party suffered badly in the elections of 1861 he saw there was little that he could do in California. In 1864 he attempted to interest Napoleon III in a project to settle American slave-owners in Sonora, Mexico. Despite a positive response from Napoleon III, the idea was rejected by his protegé, Maximilian I, who feared that Gwin and his southerners would take Sonora for themselves. After the war, he returned to the United States and gave himself up to General Philip Sheridan in New Orleans. General Sheridan granted his original request for release to rejoin his family but this was countermanded by President Andrew Johnson who was on the outs with Sheridan.
Posted by: Jeff | February 17, 2009 3:59 PM
Jeff,
Quite the read. But let's not get too carried away, I might have to recap the Teapot Dome Scandal and all it's glory. Not very flattering to the Republic party.
Posted by: Bubba ✔ | February 17, 2009 4:59 PM
Inky, u thik Obama will toss him under the bus? You know, like, this is not the Roland I know. Also, how about more of the ole' standby; the race card? Going to get interesting, especially when Rod starts singing.
Posted by: Bubba Porter | February 17, 2009 7:17 PM
Just give him a cabinet post, that should save face for everyone involved!
Posted by: slashnews | February 17, 2009 8:24 PM
Speaking of more problems for BO's inner circle:
.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzllYTJjNDkxY2MzNWI4NDM2NzM1ODhmNjRjZWZkNGQ=
Posted by: Terry | February 17, 2009 9:56 PM
Ronald Reagan:
(paraphrase from memory)
Some time ago I told you that we did NOT trade arms for hostages.
I'm sorry to tell you now that I was wrong. I've learned that in fact we did.........
Remember that one?
So far all I've seen are semantics, parsing of some ineptly framed questions and answers.
Did he "raise funds"?
Did he "contribute"?
Did he "donate funds"?
Or did he ask some friends whether they would be interested in doing a fundraiser?
It's all semantics. There was no perjury.
End of case.
Mark Kirk should have run against Obama in 2004 if he wanted to be in the Senate.
Let's see what his fundraising activities were.
Any for George Ryan, for example??
Posted by: ornery | February 18, 2009 12:39 AM
I would hope that the Senate would get rid of the guy. Enough of partisanship, lets do what is RIGHT for the country for a CHANGE!
Posted by: lochnessmonster | February 18, 2009 7:12 AM
Hang 'em high, you good, old constitutionalists !! Ride those bill of rights, out on a rail !! Illinois, the odious Land of Lynchings !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, America | February 18, 2009 11:43 AM
Bubba, not trying to dredge up ancient history I just thought it's pretty amazing that they couldn't kick Gwin out of the senate for committing high treason back then. I guess it means we're stuck with Burris now.
Both parties have had corrupt senators in recent years and I just thought Frank could've named them all. Toricelli would've been a good one to bring up.
Anyway, I'm ashamed to tell people I'm from Illinois. I'm sick to my stomach that there's nothing we the voters can do to stop this liar from representing us against our will, that's all.
Posted by: Jeff | February 18, 2009 2:03 PM
Did I lose my draft post?
Posted by: deborah oughton | February 21, 2009 10:03 AM