Just when Illinois was ready move on

What a mess. Does it ever end when it comes to Illinois politics?

It's been about a month since Roland W. Burris became a U.S. senator in an atmosphere of tumult and intrigue, and a little more than two weeks since his benefactor, Gov. Rod Blagojevich, was impeached and removed from office.

Other than Blagojevich's odd occasional appearances on network talk shows, we seemed to have been moving past the ongoing political circus that has made Illinois a laughing stock around the country.

Pat Quinn was restoring dignity to the governor's office.

And Burris, beginning today, was about to take a five-day "listening tour" around the state to touch base with constituents.

Although we were disappointed that he neglected to include the suburbs in his tour, the trip itself made sense as a way to reassure the public after the controversial manner in which he took office - appointed in one of the embarrassing last gasps of a discredited governor charged with trying to sell the same Senate seat.

Our attention actually was turning to the economy and the state's financial challenge, real and substantial issues that affect each of us.

And now, this bombshell - an admission by Burris that his statements last month to the Illinois House committee considering Blagojevich's impeachment were woefully incomplete.

Despite being asked specifically whether he

had discussions about the Senate seat or campaign donations with Blagojevich's brother Robert or other Blagojevich aides, Burris remarkably failed to acknowledge that he did.

Rep. Jim Durkin, the committee's ranking Republican, suggested Sunday that Burris may have committed perjury.

Even Quinn, a fellow Democrat, suggested Burris has some serious explaining to do, and U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the situation merits review.

Yes, what a mess indeed.

Burris said Sunday that he failed to answer more fully in front of the committee because he was sidetracked by another question.

A plausible explanation, we suppose. But if so, why didn't he correct the matter at the end of his testimony? If, as his attorney said, Burris didn't realize the omissions until he reviewed the transcript, why didn't he call a news conference then to set the record straight? And why did it take so long for him to filed an affidavit updating his testimony?

And for that matter, when did committee chair, Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, a fellow Democrat, learn of Burris' omissions and why didn't she inform Republican members of the committee or the public?

Durkin on Sunday called on Burris to resign. We think that call is premature. It's possible this was all bumbling rather than conspiratorial.

But Durkin also called for the matter to be referred to a state's attorney's office for investigation, and we think that makes sense.