Using Burris to Delay Seating Brown

There has been a lot of talk lately of a "Massachusetts Miracle", with Republican State Senator Scott Brown closing the gap in deep blue Massachusetts against Attorney General Martha Coakley in recent polls. One issue which has also been front and center have been reports that the Secretary of the Commonwealth, Bill Galvin, will delay in certifying the election until after interim Senator Paul Kirk casts the 60th and deciding vote for Obamacare. 

This morning Real Clear Politics takes a look at the Senate Rules and how the delay may occur.

How the Democrats could use the Burris expericene as precedent in delaying seating Brown:

Should Republican Scott Brown pull off an upset victory in next week's special election in Massachusetts, Senate Democrats may seek to use the chaos surrounding the appointment of Roland Burris last year as a precedent for delaying the swearing in of a man who campaigned as the 41st "no" vote on health care reform.

When the disgraced and soon-to-be-impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich chose Burris for Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat, Democratic leaders delayed seating him by citing a statute that required a formal certificate of election to be signed by all appropriate state officials. The Illinois Secretary of State had not signed it, so the Secretary of the Senate held the controversial appointment for days.fin

The Senate Rules and how it works in Massachusetts:

Under Rule II of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a certificate of election must be signed by a state's governor and secretary of state, and presented to the Secretary of the Senate before a newly-elected senator can be sworn in. A spokeswoman in the Senate secretary's office said that was indeed standard procedure and could not think of an instance where that rule was not followed.

According to McNiff, that document won't be issued from Galvin's office for weeks. Cities and towns must by law wait 10 days for overseas and military absentee ballots to come in. They then have 50 days from the date of the election to certify their results and submit them to the secretary of the commonwealth. Once received, the Governor's Council certifies the outcome and issues a certificate. That timetable could stretch as late as March, though McNiff said it should take less time since the Senate race is the only contest on the ballot next week.

And Republican concerns on why this is really happening:

In the event of a Brown victory, Republicans in the state are worried the certification process could be delayed for the benefit of Democrats' health reform bill. One Massachusetts Republican operative not affiliated with any campaign in the race went so far as to claim Galvin sees his own interests in play, and that prolonging the certification would make him a hero to his party and enhance his stature for future statewide bids. A Brown campaign spokesman was equally cynical.

"The political machine in this state is going to use every trick in the book to hijack this election and, failing that, they'll do whatever they can to stop Scott from having a voice in the healthcare debate," said Eric Fehrnstrom. "The political bosses may think they run things, but Scott Brown is running in the name of every independent-thinking citizen to take on one-party rule, and the bosses, and their candidate."

While Democrats may stand behind Senate Rules and procedure in this, the real reason is they want to ram through the health care legislation.  It's sad that a party will hide behind these rules to deny the voters of Massachusetts their say if and when they elect Scott Brown.  I'm sure that this will become a major issue in the week leading up to the final vote on January 19.