Might that Sec/State signature matter?

Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 1:32 PM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC's Mike Viqueira
One wouldn't pretend to know how this Burris/Blago Senate affair is going to get sorted out, but one factor may be the signature -- or lack thereof -- of the Illinois secretary of state certifying the appointment.

While reports maintain that the signature may not be required under the rules and regulations of Illinois, the U.S. Senate rules do appear to require such a mark. So if the secretary of state follows through on his threat and refuses to sign and certify the appointment, this rule may come into play.

See section No. 2 below, from the Rules of the Senate, available at Senate.gov:

1. The presentation of the credentials of Senators elect or of Senators designate and other questions of privilege shall always be in order, except during the reading and correction of the Journal, while a question of order or a motion to adjourn is pending, or while the Senate is voting or ascertaining the presence of a quorum; and all questions and motions arising or made upon the presentation of such credentials shall be proceeded with until disposed of.

2. The Secretary shall keep a record of the certificates of election and certificates of appointment of Senators by entering in a wellbound book kept for that purpose the date of the election or appointment, the name of the person elected or appointed, the date of the certificate, the name of the governor and the secretary of state signing and countersigning the same, and the State from which such Senator is elected or appointed.

3. The Secretary of the Senate shall send copies of the following recommended forms to the governor and secretary of state of each State wherein an election is about to take place or an appointment is to be made so that they may use such forms if they see fit.
THE RECOMMENDED FORMS FOR CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION AND CERTIFICATE OF APPOINTMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION FOR SIXYEAR TERM
To the President of the Senate of the United States:

This is to certify that on the __ day of __, 19_, A__ B__ was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the State of __ a Senator from said State to represent said State in the Senate of the United States for the term of six years, beginning on the 3d day of January, 19__.
Witness: His excellency our governor __, and our seal hereto affixed at ___ this __ day of __, in the year of our Lord 19__.
By the governor:
C__ D__,
Governor.

E__ F__,
Secretary of State.
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION FOR UNEXPIRED TERM

EMAIL THIS

Comments

This sounds like a broken record.
www.choosejesusrightnow.com

Karen, Atlanta, GA (Sent Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:04 PM)

They should seat Burris. He was legally appointed. Period. Blago is another story. Fitz will have to prove his case. Why all the drama about "tainting"? Just seat the Senator. The voters will have a chance in the next election to keep him or get rid of him. Meanwhile, Ill. will have two senators.

jonnierae, boston,MA (Sent Friday, January 02, 2009 12:19 AM)

Houston wrote, "Failure to certify may not be able to defeat the nomination, but maybe it can slow it down -- until after Blago is impeached and removed from office."

Removal from office does not automatically cancel the actions of the departing governor. Even if a subsequent governor appoints someone else to the seat, Burris would have a strong argument that there's no vacancy to fill, because he was already validly appointed to the seat.

TKD (Sent Friday, January 02, 2009 3:09 AM)

Why are we not talking about the PAY RAISE for Congress. Why is it that the REPUBLICANS are not "Up IN ARMS" and asking for a veto of this RAISE. You would think that they would want to LEAD the CHARGE and show up the DEMOCRATS.
Let's get with it FR and get a Public Opinion to this as it QUIETLY go through without anyone in the major MEDIA make any comments!!!!!
I think they should step up and BITE THE BULLET just like the rest of US!!!!

Lonestarkaty, Rockville, MD (Sent Friday, January 02, 2009 10:59 AM)

I don't get it why is Illinois governor convicted without being indicted whereas ted stevens was indicted and headed to trial and yet he was allowed to rerun for his senate seat; let the Burris appointment stand and let's move on. I am so sick of the double standards and sick and tired of dems allowing Repubs to rule their party

RL, Philadelphia, PA (Sent Friday, January 02, 2009 11:52 AM)

What is the big harm of Burris holding the seat for 2 years. He will support Obama's agenda and is untainted by Blogo's troubles. Legally, someone has to fill the vacancy and the Governer of Illinois is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty (or impeached). So allow this OK appointment and remove the governor.

Mike Stern, Plymouth, MN (Sent Friday, January 02, 2009 12:26 PM)

<< Previous

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1728774