- Top Congressional Races in 2016: The West
- Murphy to Announce He'll Seek Rematch With Blum (Updated)
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: The South
- When the Second Time Isnt the Charm
- State Senator Considering Run for Arizona Open House Seat
Q: As a longtime Chicago resident, I have been keeping a close eye on the saga surrounding Roland Burris (D-Ill.) appointment to the Senate by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D). Prosecutors opted not to press charges, and the Senate Ethics Committee a few weeks ago announced that it had concluded its investigation and issued a public letter of qualified admonition to Burris. In response, Burris has said that the committee cleared him of the charges. Others have said the letter had the opposite effect. I am having trouble assessing who is right. What is the significance of a letter of qualified admonition?
A: This question goes right to the heart of the authority of the Senate Ethics Committee, so lets start there. The committee was established in 1964 to oversee the Senates authority to discipline its own Members. One of the committees primary duties is to investigate allegations of Senators misconduct, beginning with what is called a preliminary inquiry. After the committee conducts such an inquiry, it has several options. One of those options is to issue a public letter of admonition. According to the Senate resolution governing the committees procedures, such a letter may be appropriate if there is evidence of a violation, but the violation is inadvertent, technical, or otherwise of a de minimis nature. A letter of admonition is not considered discipline and is not subject to appeal.
In Burris case, on Nov. 20 the committee issued a Public Letter of Qualified Admonition to Burris for actions and statements reflecting unfavorably upon the Senate in connection with [his] appointment to and seating in the Senate. Specifically, the committee found that Burris made sworn statements to the Illinois House of Representatives that were inconsistent, incomplete, and misleading. The letter also stated that Burris shifting explanations about the sworn statements appear less than candid. Finally, the letter said that Burris had a telephone conversation with Blagojevichs brother that was inappropriate in its content and implications.
Reactions to this letter have been difficult to reconcile. Burris himself said he was pleased and issued a news release titled Senate Ethics Committee Clears Senator Roland W. Burris of Legal Wrongdoing and cited the language in the committees letter that it did not find evidence supporting any actionable violations of law. On the other hand, his fellow Senator from Illinois, Dick Durbin (D), said the committee found that Burris actions had brought discredit on him and the Senate.