Republicans Shouldn't Help Dems Block Burris

The more I think of it, the more convinced I am that the right thing to do is for the U.S. Senate to seat Roland Burris.

This, of course, comes with caveats...

First, there is currently no indication that Roland Burris has been involved in the Blago scandals -- or that there is any reason to personally object to him on ethics grounds, etc. Should this situation change, my opinion would also change.

Second, while I personally object to the notion that governors should be appointing U.S. Senators, it is the law -- and even though Democrats often attempt to change the rules in the middle of the game -- we should adhere to the rules. ... As a matter of principle, clearly, the voters should have a say in this important decision. But at the present time, the law says the governor gets to appoint them, and until we change the law, we must abide by it.

Third, as a conservative, it does not escape me that Burris will be a liberal Democratic vote. Regardless, the rule of law trumps political ideology, and the question at hand is not whether or not we agree with his position on a given issue, but whether or not he was legally appointed. Blago has not been convicted or removed, and therefore, he is still the governor -- and is still legally empowered to make this decision. To be sure, I would almost certainly support Burris' Republican opponent in an election, but that does not mean we should attempt to block him now.

Fourth, it is natural to instinctively oppose this selection. Blago is obviously a corrupt egomaniac, and if he gets to pick a U.S. Senator, so the rational goes, he "wins". Beating Blago is the wrong motivation for opposing a U.S. Senator.

Finally, there is a political calculation here, as well. While some conservatives would probably take the default position that we should do everything in our power to stop any Democrat from being seated, I think conservatives gain more by standing on principle. If the Democrats who control the Senate want to block him from being seated, they should do so without Republican support.

(Note: I also philosophically oppose the notion that the U.S. Senate should be able to decide whether or not to seat someone -- even if that person has been duly elected or appointed. At present time, however, that is their Constitutional prerogative. However, many scholars believe the senate may only refuse to seat a nominee if the election was in dispute or if the nominee had ethical problems).

At the end of the day, conservatives must respect the rule of law more than any temporary political advantage. As such, my opinion is that -- unless more information surfaces that would disqualify Burris on his own merits -- Republicans should refuse to be part of any efforts to block Roland Burris from the U.S. Senate.