I have read the constitution. I have read the section on Congress and the Senate, and I see no where in the U.S. Constitution that gives Senator Harry Reid the power not to seat the person nominated to fill the seat of President Elect Obama -- Roland Burris.
Of course there's no surprise here, as liberals (notice I didn't say Democrats) have disregarded the Constitution many times in just the past eight years alone, and I've documented many of those instances right here on this blog.
Federalized Healthcare is unconstitutional, The McCain/ Feingold act was unconstitutional, the failed auto bailout, the banking bailout, Activist judges, and this is just a recent list.
Roland Burris recently said in an interview, "If that's to say something wrong with the governor, then you all have to deal with that, but the governor is still the governor of Illinois and still has the power. As a matter of fact, the governor just signed a directive that Rahm Emanuel's seat will be filled by special election, and the secretary of state signed that document. What's the difference?"
Burris is right: Governor Blagojevich of Illinois is still the Governor, he has not even been formally charged with any crime and is therefore officially not guilty until found guilty by a trial of his peers, and all the powers of any other governor are still the powers of this governor. Therefore, Senator Harry Reid is on thin ice rejecting this man.
It almost seems to me they are treating one of their own, a loyal liberal democrat, the same way they treated former House Majority Leader Tom Delay. According to the Constitution, you are innocent until proven guilty. But Delay was treated as though he were guilty until he finally gave up his seat.
Then again, the Senate does not have the Constitutional power to reject a nominated Senate appointee. He has no choice but to seat the Roland Burris. The law states an acting govnernor has a right to choose the person to fill a vacated seat in his state.
Again, I'm not saying whether I like or dislike Mr. Burris, because that's not the issue here. I'm not saying whether I like or dislike the Chicago Governor, what's at issue here is the Constitutional duty of the Senate.