Sen. Sessions on the Burris Appointment

ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: Joining us tonight with more on night 2 of Roland Burris' soap opera, Alabama Republican senator, Jeff Sessions.

Senator, good to have you on HANNITY & COLMES. Thanks for being here.

JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA SENATOR: Thank you. Good to be with you.

COLMES: You believe he should be seated, correct?

SESSIONS: I think so, Alan. I mean the -- governor has the power to appoint, he remains the sitting governor. I see nothing in the constitution of Illinois that gives power to the secretary of state or in anyway infringe on that power.

And then the Congress, according to the Supreme Court in the Powell case, must seat him if he meets the constitutional requirements of age and residence.

COLMES: Is it true that.

SESSIONS: So I -- I think he should be.

COLMES: I believe that Harry Reid said that never before has someone been seated without certification. Is that true?

SESSIONS: Well, I'm not sure whether you get certification on a gubernatorial appointment or not, but at some point, certification would be a ministerial act if that is required, and the court will order the secretary of state to fulfill that responsibility if the secretary of state refuses.

COLMES: It seems like Blagojevich.

SESSIONS: The secretary of state does not have a veto power over the governor's appointment.

COLMES: Blagojevich really stuck it to his fellow Democrats, didn't he? I mean he really threw him a curveball. They didn't know how to deal with this, how to react, and it seems like finally they seem to be finally doing the right thing.

Would you agree with that?

SESSIONS: I think so. I think Harry Reid's statement that the Senate determines who sits is not quite accurate. The Senate must seat a constitutionally qualified person, but they do have the power to expel for misconduct, and that requires a two-thirds vote, so I think.

COLMES: What do you.

SESSIONS: . under the law he must be seated.

COLMES: Yes.

SESSIONS: . at some time soon and could be expelled, but I see no basis to expel him.

COLMES: What happens -- I mean, he's, I guess at this point, likely to be seated, and --when that happens, which is likely, how will he be treated by his fellow senators?

SESSIONS: Oh, I think he'll be treated very well. People understand what's happened. And I know some of the Democrats wanted to -- they're worried about who they'd prefer to be in there for their election campaign and that kind of thing, but the governor gets to make the appointment, and it would be a threat to the Senate if senators for that kind of political reason rejected a duly appointed member.

COLMES: Do you get a sense whether there might have been any deal made that he would not run, I know Burris would deny this, that he would be a -- you know, caretaker senator and not run come election time?

SESSIONS: I haven't heard that. I just haven't. I'm not privy to those discussions.

COLMES: What is -- what is course from here? What does the timeframe do you see this happening in?

SESSIONS: Well, I think there's this excuse that's being raised, it seems to he, about the secretary of state certifying this. I'm not sure a certification is required on a gubernatorial appointment, but if it is, it must be given if he meets the constitutional qualifications in a court.

Sooner or later I think we'll order that.

COLMES: I know on the political -- on the political side there'll be people going after Obama saying he flip-flopped, he changed his mind, bad for Democrat.

Is there -- is there a political hay to be made here against either Obama himself or Democrats, in general, and would that be a fair line of attack?

SESSIONS: Well, I'd say they overreached, the Democrats did, in trying to -- alter the system to maybe get a political advantage, but they seem to realize now that they're not empowered to do that and seem to be retreating from it, so maybe they took a little embarrassment, but in the long run I doubt it'll amount to much.

HANNITY: Hey, Senator, it's Sean Hannity. Good to see you and happy new year, my friend. Glad you're with us.

SESSIONS: Thank you.

HANNITY: All right. And let me ask you this, because we've got to walk through this step by step here. The fact is, after we look at the Powell case, the Supreme Court made a decision. You have a legal background.

And the Supreme Court couldn't be any more clearer that Congress must seat any candidate who meets the constitutional standards for holding office, so I -- frankly don't even understand why this is even an issue here.

As much as I condemn Blagojevich, he still is the sitting governor. He has not been indicted. He's not been impeached. The law directs the governor to make the appointment.

What am I missing here? How -- where's Harry Reid coming up with this notion that he can stop this?

SESSIONS: I -- he made -- he's wrong about that. I guess it's worth a discussion of whether or not a certification of the secretary of state is required. I doubt it, frankly. And he should be seated now, in my opinion. But perhaps that's a justification to delay it some longer.

HANNITY: Well.

SESSIONS: But, really, I think it's kind of an embarrassment to the leadership there to keep this thing being dragged out.

HANNITY: It is, it is interesting to see that Reid over the weekend was saying under the constitution we determined who sits in the Senate, and he's had to back off that quite a bit here.

As an outside observer, I'm just -- kind of knowing politicians and their inclination and desire for power. Nancy Pelosi reverses rules to shut out the minority party, the Republicans in the House, and now we've got Reid what seems to be a power grab here.

Do you sense this is more about power than anything else?

SESSIONS: Yes, I think he may be overreaching, frankly, and I don't like that.

Let me tell you, we've got the stimulus package coming up, and a number of things that have come up of great significance. Harry Reid has used a device to block amendments by any opposition.

That is contrary to the history of the Senate, the great deliberative body.

HANNITY: Well.

SESSIONS: And I think Republicans are going to have to fight tenaciously to ensure.

HANNITY: Well, let me ask.

SESSIONS: . that they can fulfill their constitutional role. We can't just be a rubber stamp in the U.S. Senate.

HANNITY: Well, does that mean that you think you could unite the entire Republican caucus, including some pretty liberal members, and -- build a filibuster if he stands by that?

SESSIONS: You mean on the Burris appointment?

HANNITY: Well, no, no, no. On the stimulus package.

SESSIONS: I think so. I'd be very disappointed if every single Republican, whether or not they supported some amendments or not, would not support the right of a fellow member to actually have an amendment and debate a stimulus package of $1 trillion.

It would be unthinkable that that would be steamrolled through without, really, any discussion and debate.

HANNITY: So, in other words, some -- Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, some of the more -- is Chuck Hagel still there?

(LAUGHTER)

HANNITY: Some of the more liberal Republicans.

SESSIONS: Well, Arlen Specter has already made a speech. He's firmly opposed to the eroding of the principle of individual senators' right to file amendments. He's made a number of speeches on it.

He's one of the more articulate senators even though he may not support some of the amendments. He believes in the right to debate and amend.

HANNITY: All right, Senator, good to see you and happy new year. Appreciate you being with us.

SESSIONS: Happy new year.