Blagojevich, Burris — and Balance
January 7, 2009 by Julia King · Leave a Comment
Like many citizens, I was gratified by the hard line Obama and the Democrats initially took against seating Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s Senate appointment. It’s been said that Blagojevich’s pick, Roland Burris, is a perfectly decent guy — and I have no evidence up my sleeve to suggest otherwise. The objection to Burris is, of course, an objection to a governor who’s been accused of trying to sell Obama’s vacated Senate seat (and that’s only his most famous misdeed – there are others).
Today, various news reports suggest Burris will, indeed, become the Junior Senator from Illinois because ultimately, the law is on his side. Apparently, the Senate Democrats did what the rest of us did: declared the situation BAD and drew some lines in the sand against a seemingly corrupt governor. Backed into a legal corner, however, the Democrats are softening their stance.
This piece by CNN Commentator Roland S. Martin gets to the core of the issue by pointing out that the law got us here. People called for Blagojevich to resign; but he didn’t. People hoped Burris wouldn’t accept a job from a questionable politician; but he did. Some wanted a special election; but there’s not going to be one. Etc., etc.
Martin suggests that while we may be stuck with the current players, the law could be changed to head off similar problems in the future.
Perhaps we could have laws that suspend an elected official pending an investigation if an accusation is directly related to his/her official duties. Police officers are routinely suspended during investigations. If such a law had been in place in Illinois, Blagojevich would have been stripped of his authority (but not necessarily his pay, or his personal freedom) until a conviction (or exoneration). The Lieutenant Gov. could have made the appointment — and Blagojevich could have walked into the shadows without the tools to display his stubbornness. As things stand now, Blagojevich continues to exercise his political power.
It’s important to remember that elected officials hold office at the will of the people. When the people lose trust, the offices they hold are diminished — which weakens our entire system. How do we find the balance between being fair to individual politicians (who could be innocent, despite accusations), while maintaining the public trust? We haven’t found it yet.
