Roland Burris

Ethics Committee: Burris' Actions "Reflected Unfavorably On The Senate"

Josh Kalven — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:20:03 -0800

This just out from Sen. Roland Burris' office:

After months of investigation into the circumstances surrounding the appointment and seating of Senator Roland W. Burris, the Senate Select Committee on Ethics has closed its inquiry and cleared the Senator of any legal wrongdoing.

In a ‘public letter of qualified admonition,’ the Senate Ethics Committee outlined the specific areas of concern that it investigated, and conclusively found no “actionable violations of the law” occurred. [...]

“I am pleased that after numerous investigations, this matter has finally come to a close. I thank the members of the Senate Ethics Committee for their fair and thorough review of this matter, and now look forward to continuing the important work ahead on behalf of the people of Illinois,” said Senator Burris.

The ethics committee is yet to post the full "public letter," but we'll have more updates on their findings once it's released.

UPDATE (10:30 a.m.): And the letter is now available. While declining to take any action against Burris, the committee still had some pretty harsh words regarding his activities and public statements prior to being sworn-in as Barack Obama's U.S. Senate replacement:

The Committee found that you should have known that you were providing incorrect, inconsistent, misleading, or incomplete information to the public, the Senate, and those conducting legitimate inquiries into your appointment to the Senate. The Committee also found that your November 13, 2008 phone call with Robert Blagojevich was inappropriate. Although some of those events happened before you were sworn in as a U.S. Senator, they were inextricably linked to your appointment and therefore fall within the jurisdiction of this committee.

While the Committee did not find that the evidence before it supported any actionable violations fo the law, Senators must meet a much higher standard of conduct. [...]

Again, the Committee has found that your actions and statements reflected unfavorably on the Senate and issues this Public Letter of Qualified Admonition.

Read the whole thing below:

Health Care Round-Up: Professionals Demand Reform, BaucusCare, Gutierrez On The Wilson Cave, More Reasons For Reform

Adam Doster — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:31:34 -0700

BaucusCare is here! That, and the latest local news in today's health care round-up.

Health Care Professionals Demand Real Reform

Before we get to the Senate Finance Committee, be sure to watch the latest video courtesy of the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law and United Action for Power and Justice. In it, we hear from three health care professionals who are on the ground in Illinois helping people navigate through the treacherous health insurance industry:

BaucusCare Introduced ... Finally

After months of anticipation and fractured bipartisan negotiations, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) finally released his committee's proposal (PDF) to remake the nation's health care system yesterday.

On policy, it's a mixed bag. (I'll rely a good deal on Ezra Klein's blogging from yesterday, as it's the most substantive I've seen. Be sure to check out his Washington Post site for the nitty gritty.)

To be clear, there are some glaring problems with this bill. For starters, no public option is included, as was expected. Instead, a co-op proposal, described by Klein as "neutered," has emerged. No employer mandate exists, either. Also, rather than require employers to cover their workers, the bill relies on something called "free rider" requirement, which would merely slap a fee on those who refuse to provide coverage to workers if those workers qualify for federal subsides. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities points out this provision's massive flaw: it discriminates against low-income workers, specifically single parents. Dana Goldstein has more.

The subsidies offered by the Baucus bill to working and middle-class folks purchasing private insurance are also far too small. Nick Beaudrot's widely-circulated chart comparing premium costs in Massachusetts under Commonwealth Care and the Senate Finance bill is instructive here.

On the plus side, the Health Insurance Exchanges (which would house the public option, if it is created) are much more robust than any bill unveiled to date. Businesses with up to 50 employees could buy into the exchanges and states would have the option of increasing that threshold to 100. Even better, states must develop plans to incorporate firms with more than 50 employees by 2017. By 2022, virtually every American would have access to the highly-regulated, transparent marketplace. The basic coverage structures laid out in the competing bills exist in Baucus' proposal as well. Medicaid would be expanded for all adults who have incomes at or below 133 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. And that means an additional 500,000 currently-uninsured Illinoisans would have access to the public plan. (As far as the state-federal financing ratio is concerned, the mark-up says the feds will "pay a greater share of the costs for individuals newly eligible for Medicaid" and it will be on a sliding scale based on the quality of coverage, but the amount is unclear and it will only be offered through 2018.) In all, the CBO estimates that 94 percent of legal residents will be covered. That's not universal, but it is much closer.

Now to the political realities. Baucus -- who took months to build bipartisan consensus in his committee -- seems to have alienated both liberals and conservatives with his bill. House Republicans -- such as Illinois' own Rep. Judy Biggert -- as well as senators not involved in committee negotiations have dismissed it out of hand. Some liberals, most notably Sen. John Rockefeller (D-WV), were just as critical for the reasons outlined above. And even members of the so-called "Gang of Six" expressed reservations; Sen. Olympia Snowe, while open to discussions, said she was not ready to endorse the plan. Yesterday, Matt Yglesias slammed Baucus' delayed timing: "If he’d just stuck to the schedule, we would have been at this point in the process at a time when Barack Obama’s approval rating was considerably higher."

The good news is that, with the Baucus bill finally out in the open, the process can move forward. The measure will surely be modified this week and next (Klein offers some useful suggestions), and the Montana Democrat hopes to bring it up for a full committee vote next week.

Burris, Bean On The Public Option

While the Baucus legislation does not include a public option, there is still a chance that a government-run plan could be added to the Exchanges, either in the final Senate bill or in conference committee. In a statement yesterday, Sen. Roland Burris became the first U.S. Senator to join House progressives in pledging not to support any health care bill that does not include a public option:

"We need real reform now. The inclusion of a public option as a central component to any healthcare reform legislation is the only way to create meaningful competition with the insurance companies, and in turn, bring down costs and improve quality of care for the people of Illinois and all Americans."

He did not specify, however, whether or not he would vote no on cloture (thereby enabling a filibuster) if such a bill emerged in his chamber.

Meanwhile, 8th District Rep. Melissa Bean reinforced her stance on the public option earlier this week as well. During a tele-town hall meeting on Tuesday, the Barrington Democrat assured her constituents that the public option "is not a government takeover of health care" and expressed her support for it so long as "it’s done in a way that is paid for in a premium and not subsidized by the government.”

Gutierrez Blasts White House For Wilson Cave

After his ridiculous outburst at last week's presidential address, Rep. Joe Wilson was scorned by the national media and attacked by potential congressional challengers. But he might have influenced the reform fight in the process. And not in a productive or humane way.

To disarm opponents making false claims that the health care proposals in Congress would provide subsidies to undocumented immigrants, the White House has expressed a preference for barring undocumented immigrants from buying insurance on the health insurance exchanges, even with their own money. While it appeases anti-immigrant legislators, it will also increase health care costs across the system by providing a disincentive for immigrants to purchase private insurance, thus raising the chances that more will continue to flood emergency rooms for costly, inefficient, and publicly-financed coverage.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez wasn't pleased with the shift, telling a crowd of Latino leaders on Monday that the administration was "giving Rep. Wilson exactly what he wants." Wilson and his friends in Congress certainly don't deserve that.

Three Reasons To Pass Reform

Many political opponents of health care reform understand that our current system produces poor outcomes at a high cost for patients lucky enough to have insurance. Some just haven't internalized how dangerous the challenges we face truly are. A quick glance through some recent news demonstrates the urgency that's required on this issue.

Take this new report (PDF) from Families USA. Their research shows that the increased use and cost of health services, a lack of necessary oversight and competition in the health insurance marketplace, and implicit payments to care for the uninsured have dramatically increased the cost of employer-based insurance premiums in Illinois, which rose 86 percent (from $7,220 to $13,397) since 2009. At the same time, the median earnings of Illinois workers rose just 17 percent, from $26,806 to $31,414 (Click for an expanded version here):

Or read this Tribune profile of 17-year-old Brianna Rice, a Deerfield resident whose insurance was rescinded after her health insurance company found out she had celiac disease:

Her parents, Dale and Pat Rice of Deerfield, insist they were truthful on Brianna's application and say the insurance company is trying to back out of covering their daughter because of the February diagnosis. American Community disagrees, saying that if the Rices had given the company Brianna's full heath history when they applied for coverage, it would never have been granted. [...]

The family's situation shows just how quickly health insurance problems can lead to financial ruin. With their daughter's unpaid medical bills exceeding $20,000 and mounting, the Rices fear losing their home. Pat Rice said she cashed in some of her retirement account to pay bills.

"The next step is really bankruptcy," her husband said.

Finally, ponder this stark fact: single-payer advocate Dr. Quentin Young relayed to a group of north suburban college students last night: there are 45,000 people dead in this country because of a lack of health care, up from 18,000 in 2002.

This reform fight is literally a battle of life and death. The time for political delays and capitulation has passed.

2010 Grab Bag: Jackson Makes It Official, Unions Endorse Giannoulias, Treasurer Candidates Announce

Josh Kalven — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:58:36 -0700

The latest on the 2010 electoral landscape in Illinois ...

U.S. Senate

Greg Hinz is reporting that Chicago Urban League chief Cheryle Jackson will announce the launch of her Senate campaign today in an email to supporters:

Cheryle Jackson, the president and CEO of the Chicago Urban League, will e-mail supporters later today announcing that she will indeed run for President Barack Obama's old seat in the U.S. Senate.

A formal announcement with the usual press release and statewide fly-around will follow next month.

This morning, Alexi Giannoulias rolled out endorsements of his Senate bid from several Illinois labor unions: Unite Here Local 1, UFCW Local 1546, UFCW Local 881, UA International, and the Illinois Pipe Trades Association. Here's the accompanying statement from Ron Powell, president of UFCW Local 881:

Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias has supported the causes and concerns important to workers in the retail industry. He shares our concerns for obtaining affordable healthcare for all Americans and ensuring that every worker, no matter who they are, has an opportunity to achieve the American Dream. As a son of first generation immigrants, Alexi understands the obstacles working families are facing, especially in the current economy. He has put that work ethic to the test throughout his tenure as Illinois State Treasurer and has led the office in a proactive, positive direction. We believe Alexi will carry that same fighting spirit to Washington where many tough issues are facing working families at a nation level.

Alexi Giannoulias has earned the support of Local 881 UFCW and we are proud to endorse his candidacy as a fighter and a friend of working families. Alexi is the candidate for U.S. Senate that has the talent and refreshing ideas to effectively guide us through these tough times.

Giannoulias also posted a behind-the-scenes video shot on the day of his official campaign launch:

And then there's this (H/T Capitol Fax):

Illinois Sen. Roland Burris announced last month that he would not run to retain his Senate seat next year, but in his first television interview since making that decision, Burris told ABC News he could change his mind.[…]

“You never say never,” Burris told ABC News in a “Subway Series” interview for the ABC News program “Top Line.” [...]

“What I’m still hearing,” Burris said, is “people from all over the country and they are saying, ‘Don’t give up that seat.’”

There is no way this is actually going to happen. Nonetheless, it's simply amazing that Burris is even entertaining the thought.

Click here to watch the full ABC interview. At the very end, Jonathan Karl asks him about the mausoleum and gets a priceless answer in return. According to Burris, it was the managers of the Oak Woods Cemetery -- rather than, say, his own ego -- that led him to build the monument:

BURRIS: I'm an estate planner. And I do pre-planning for people's estate. So how could I have your estate be planned, if mine isn't? Plus, it takes a major responsibility off of my family. That's all done.

And the cemetery management insisted that, because of my history and my past, that there be a record and a resume of the accomplishments.

Cook County Board President

At the Bud Biliken parade this past weekend, Congressman Danny Davis strongly suggested that he is indeed running for president of the Cook County Board:

Representative Danny Davis appeared at the Bud Biliken parade wearing a Davis for Cook County Board President t-shirt despite recent speculation that he may want to hold onto his existing seat.

"Well this looks like Cook County Board President to me. This is Cook County Board President territory," Davis said.

T-shirts aside, as long as Davis continues to collect petition signatures for a 2010 congressional reelection campaign, he is not officially running for board president.

Meanwhile, Chitown Politics highlights alderman and board president candidate Toni Preckwinkle's "pickle": She is reportedly pursuing an endorsement from Mayor Daley while at the same time running on her record as a progressive reformer.

State Treasurer

The State-Journal Register's Bernard Schoenburg profiles the two newly-announced Democratic candidates for Illinois treasurer -- businessman Kip Kirkpatrick and Giannoulias chief of staff Robin Kelly.

On his Facebook page, Kirkpatrick posted this introductory video over the weekend:

IL-SEN: Burris Bows Out, Kennedy Doubts Rise

Josh Kalven — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:37:49 -0700

Here's the video of Sen. Roland Burris announcing this afternoon that he will not be a candidate in the 2010 election. He cited fundraising concerns as his main rationale for not launching a campaign and, around the one-minute mark, declared that "Political races have become far too expensive in this country." That comment caused a member of the audience to yell out, "Harry Reid, Harry Reid. Come up with the money, Harry Reid" -- which elicits a little chuckle out of Burris. Watch it:

On a related note, Greg Hinz writes today that there are increasing doubts about whether Chris Kennedy will ultimately enter the race (after stirring up a good deal of buzz in the Chicago press this spring):

Much of the media — me included —have assumed Mr. Kennedy would jump in if Lisa Madigan moved out. But three days after her move, he's still saying nothing, and speculation is rising fast that Mr. Kennedy in the end will take a pass. That would be awfully good news for state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, who then would have to face only Chicago Urban League President Cheryle Jackson.

Sun-Times: Burris Out In 2010

Progress Illinois — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:46:17 -0700

Well, that was a whole lot of hassle for two years in Washington. The Sun-Times has the scoop:

Sneed has learned U.S. Sen. Roland Burris has decided NOT to seek election to the seat he fought the government to keep.

Sen. Burris is planning to announce his decision Friday by issuing a statement to the press. But he’s reportedly not planning to field any questions from the press.

The decision by Burris was based on his inability to raise campaign funds; campaign disclosures with the Federal Election Commission are expected to be filed next week...and he has reportedly only raised approximately $20,000

Burris 2010 Bid Remains Up In The Air

Josh Kalven — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:57:09 -0700

Yesterday afternoon, CBS 2 Chicago reported online that Sen. Roland Burris would be returning to Chicago that evening and planned on kicking off his 2010 election campaign at the Chicago nightclub "Vain" that evening. The news wasn't altogether surprisng. After all, as we noted earlier, he had just sent out a fundraising email to supporters noting that the second quarter filing deadling "is approaching."

But the CBS piece turned out to be inaccurate. And they've since replaced that original article with a new one headlined, "Burris Won't Say If He'll Run In 2010." In it, Mike Flannery reports: "Burris chose not to answer any questions later in the day at O'Hare International Airport, including whether he'll run for election in 2010." No word about whether there was indeed a fundraiser held at "Vain" yesterday evening.

Strange stuff.

UPDATE: Capitol Fax has more.

No Perjury Charge For Burris

Josh Kalven — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:42:16 -0700

Capitol Fax notes some unsurprising news: The Sangamon County States Attorney won't be charging Sen. Roland Burris for perjury. If you've studied the transcript of his appearance before the Illinois House impeachment committee in early January, you know that the questioners gave him outs -- opportunities to avoid disclosing certain damning conversations -- and he appeared to take free advantage of them.

But let's be clear: While the transcript shows no violation of the law, it does show someone playing games. After all, when Rep. Jil Tracy asked Burris to name anyone other than Blagojevich associate Lon Monk whom he spoke to about the Senate seat "at that time" (meaning July-September 2008), he first said, "I don't recall." But then he went on to cite a conversation with his friend Rich Barber about the seat (which he thought occurred after November 4 election and therefore outside of Tracy's timeframe). Then he added this:

"I can start giving you names of people who you can follow up after that, after November 4th, I can certainly give you a few names, but I can't give you the thousands of people who were involved in this."

The legislators never asked for a list of "thousands." But you have to also remember that, days earlier, they had received a sworn affidavit from Burris stating that, prior to being offered the seat on December 26, "there was not any contact between myself or any of my representatives with Gov. Blagojevich or any of his representatives regarding my appointment to the United States Senate." He primed them. And he played them. And he got a Senate seat to show for it.

Now he's raising money and giving every indication that he plans to run for reelection, despite dismal favorability ratings. From an email sent out to supporters today:

For whatever time I am in the senate, I have one goal...to do a good job for the people of Illinois. Working alongside my colleagues, it is important that we make sure our economic policies benefit Main Street, not just Wall Street...that all of our citizens have decent health care...that we find a compassionate solution for immigration while protecting American jobs...that we develop effective measures for safe-guarding and allocating our natural resources...that we not mortgage our children's future with unnecessary spending... and that we provide our young people with a quality education and alternatives to crime and violence.

Our advocacy and efforts are built upon a grassroots network that requires activists like you. Please join me by visiting www.supportburris.com, where you can sign up to get more involved and receive e-mail updates. Together, there is nothing we can't accomplish! Take a moment to visit my Web site--then show your support with a donation today.

The crucial deadline for the next second-quarter financial report is nearing. This is one of the measures by which each officeholder is judged. Your immediate contribution will demonstrate the strong support I'm receiving to bring progressive change to Illinois. By donating now, you'll be among my earliest supporters. I want to add your name to the list of those who are stepping forward to stand with me.

Poll Suggests Most Illinoisans Understand Need For Income Tax Hike

Josh Kalven — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 07:56:02 -0700

On Friday, Rasmussen Reports released a new poll that touches on various Illinois political narratives, including the income tax hike debate and the 2010 U.S. Senate and gubernatorial fields. Below is our quick rundown:

The Income Tax
Rasmussen asked voters "how likely is it" that the legislature can balance the budget without raising the income tax rate. Over two-thirds (68 percent) described it as "unlikely." Because the poll didn't ask whether respondents themselves supported such a hike, we're left with this conclusion from Capitol Fax: "[I]t’s difficult to know whether the majority has no faith in the GA’s ability to do this without a tax hike, or they understand the budget problem better than most people think." The poll also quoted a recent statement from Gov. Pat Quinn -- "A budget in a lot of ways reflects the values of the people. It's very important that in our budget, every year, we take care of our neighbor" -- and asked whether respondents agreed. Thirty-nine percent said they did agree, 35 percent said no, and 26 percent weren't sure.

IL-SEN
Roland Burris' favorability remains amazingly consistent (and dismal). Three previous polls have put the number at 16 percent, 18 percent, and 16 percent. Rasmussen's finding: 18 percent. This latest survey also found that only 13 percent of respondents believe Burris should run for reelection next year, with 74 percent saying that he shouldn't. Seventy-seven also believe that it is "likely" that Burris was "involved in unethical pay to play politics." On a somewhat related note, Politico looks at Burris' legislative record since taking office and finds little there.

Rasmussen also gauged Chris Kennedy's favorability ratings, finding that 45 percent of respondents were unfamiliar with him, while the rest were split. Strangely, the poll didn't include numbers for State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, who is currently raising money for a Senate bid.

Quinn and Madigan
Attorney General Lisa Madigan continues to enjoy very high favorability ratings: 65 percent in the Rasmussen survey, with 23 percent describing their view as "very favorable." Gov. Quinn, meanwhile, has 55 percent favorability, but his support lacks intensity. Only 9 percent have a "very favorable" opinion of him -- not surprising when you consider that he was unknown to many Illinoisans at the time he took office in late January. The rest of the questions about Quinn show equally soft support, as Capitol Fax also noted.

Burris Adviser: "Roland ... Has Made Dick Durbin A Better Senator"

Josh Kalven — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:18:25 -0700

From the department of dubious claims ... On Ray Hanania's WJJG radio show this morning, Delmarie Cobb, adviser to Sen. Roland Burris, said that she "jokes with Roland that he has made Dick Durbin a better senator than he ever was." She also asserted that Durbin "is so busy trying to show Roland up that he is suddenly running all over town at ribbon-cuttings and groundbreakings." Hanania asked in response, "Is it really him leveraging Roland's problems to make himself look better?" "Oh, that's exactly what it is," Cobb responded. Listen (full audio here):

Internal mp3

Hmm. Having kept a pretty close eye on Sen. Durbin here at PI over the past 15 months, I can't say we've noticed any particular shift in his work ethic since Burris' swearing-in. (He's been quite active in Washington, but that is probably a byproduct of, you know, having a Democratic president for the first time in eight years.) Then again, maybe Cobb has a special "ribbon-cuttings and groundbreakings" counter we don't know about.

During the radio appearance, she also defended Burris' January testimony before the Illinois House impeachment committee, in which he said nary a word about the fact he had discussed the vacant U.S. Senate seat in the context of a fundraising call from then-Gov. Blagojevich's brother and campaign fund chairman. Listen:

Internal mp3

We've thoroughly rebutted the notion that it was incumbent upon the committee members to pry the full truth out of Burris. Indeed, Rep. Jil Tracy did follow-up after Burris mentioned a previously-undisclosed conversation about the seat with Blagojevich associate Lon Monk, asking: "So you don't recall that there was anybody else besides Lon Monk that you expressed that interest to at that point?" Burris' answer: "No, I don't recall."

In hindsight, could the committee members have grilled him in more detail? Of course. But it's also important to remember that the January 8 hearing came just four days after Burris submitted an affidavit stating that, prior to being offered the seat, "there was not any contact between myself or any of my representatives with Gov. Blagojevich or any of his representatives regarding my appointment to the United States Senate." By putting the onus on the lawmakers to ferret out the whole story that day, Cobb is essentially arguing they should have assumed Burris was lying in that affidavit.

Some defense.

Burris' Excuses Continue To Defy Reason (UPDATED)

Josh Kalven — Thu, 28 May 2009 08:38:26 -0700

Yesterday's interviews with Roland Burris focused largely on this question: Does the newly-released tape of him speaking to Robert Blagojevich in November 2008 amount to evidence of "pay to play"? I'm somewhat sympathetic to Eric Zorn's interpretation: "Burris wasn't trying to buy the Senate seat. He was trying to stay in Gov. Blagojevich's good graces while avoiding the appearance of any conflict of interest." But the whole discussion seems off-target.

What's clear is this: The "pay to play" debate should have occurred before Burris was sworn in as a U.S. Senator. But thanks to a misleading affidavit and some incomplete answers to the House impeachment committee back in January, he made his way into office. Only then, did we get the full story (in drips and drabs, no less).

What's frustrating is that Burris continues to claim that both his original affidavit and testimony were perfectly appropriate. Here he is talking to the State-Journal Register's Bernard Schoenburg yesterday (the video is cued to the relevant section):

When Jim Warren referred on MSNBC to Burris' "Antonin Scalia, strict-constructionist-like" parsing, this is what he was talking about.

First, let's take Burris' defense of the assertion in his January 4 affidavit that, prior to being offered the seat on December 26, "there was not any contact between myself or any of my representatives with Gov. Blagojevich or any of his representatives regarding my appointment to the United States Senate." Here's what he told Schoenburg:

"There's a major difference between who talked to me from the governor's office about the seat -- and who I was talking to about the seat. ... I was talking to the governor's people about wanting to get appointed to the seat. The committee asked me to come talk about my appointment to the seat. So that affidavit dealt with my appointment. The only time anybody from the governor's office talked to me about the appointment was when that lawyer showed up at my house on the 26th."

We heard this one back in mid-February and it was just as ridiculous then as it is now. Burris is arguing here that the committee only wanted to hear about what happened between December 26th (when Burris was officially offered the seat) and December 28th (when he was officially appointed). As the letter accompanying that original affidavit suggests, the committee's intention was to learn about the "events leading up to his appointment." Certainly, Burris expressing interest in the Senate seat in the context of a fundraising call from the governor's brother should have qualified as such an "event."

Then there's Burris' account to Schoenburg of what happened during the January 8 testimony:

"What we said at the testimony was absolutely correct. This Republican [Rep. Jim Durkin] called off all these names. How many names did he call? Five or six, right? And the only one we ended up talking about -- because he was the only one I sat down and met with in my office -- was Lon Monk. That's how we ended up with Lon Monk. And they never did go back to those other names, which I didn't even remember that they had been asked."

Here's the exchange with Durkin referenced by Burris above:

And via the full transcript (PDF), here's the follow-up question he got from Rep. Jil Tracy later in the hearing:

TRACY: You said that you had visited friends perhaps in September of '08 or July of '08 concerning a desire to perhaps be appointed as a senator if our President-elect was elected. And could you give me the names of those friends?

BURRIS: I don't think I said in July. I said they were friends that I contacted after the election, but I was talking to people. I mean, I don't know who you want as my friends that I consider as persons. For example, when I handled a press conference to express my interest in the seat ... some of my friends were there for instance. ... One of those persons was the former Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court, Justice Cousins. And then some other friends that supported me to seek to be appointed to the seat. [...]

TRACY: So you don't recall that there was anybody else besides Lon Monk that you expressed that interest to at that point?

BURRIS: No, I can't recall.

TRACY: Is there anybody that comes to mind in that light that you can --

BURRIS: Yes, Rich Barber from Summerset, New Jersey.

Burris then goes on to recall a conversation in which Barber told him he would make a great senator. He also notes that members of his 1955 high school class were contacting him. Finally, he adds this:

BURRIS: I can start giving you names of people who you can follow up after that, after November 4th, I can certainly give you a few names, but I can't give you the thousands of people who were involved in this.

As you can see, Burris had ample opportunity to bring up the relevant "friends" -- i.e., the ones who worked with then-Gov. Blagojevich. Instead, we hear about some guy from New Jersey, a court justice buddy, and his old high school classmates. According to Burris, he had to be asked directly about the Blagojevich associates. Because Tracy didn't do so, he's apparently off the hook.

Like I said, ridiculous.

UPDATE (1:45 p.m.): The Tribune has these quotes from Burris today:

“See, you all have got it all backwards,” Burris said. “It is not upon a person who is testifying to go out of his way on anything. It is the person who has to ask the questions.” [...]

“Why should I have to, in your estimation, in your assessment, go out of my way to answer a question when I was answering questions that were asked?” Burris asked reporters. “Why didn’t the impeachment committee follow up with the questions to ask me?”

But as the transcript above shows, Burris did go "out of his way" to name some of the innocuous "friends" to whom he'd expressed interest in the appointment. No one asked him directly about the guy from New Jersey, the judge, or the former classmates. He offered those names up and talked about them at length. At the same time, he failed to mention that he'd talked to the governor's brother about the seat in the context of a fundraising call.