State Senate rejects removal of Kane

HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane escaped being removed from office Wednesday after the Republican majority in the Senate failed to pick up the few Democratic votes it needed to oust her.

In urging her removal, almost every Republican - and one Democrat - said the state Supreme Court's suspension of her law license last year meant Kane could no longer effectively serve as the state's top law enforcement official.

But Democrats dismissed the push to remove her as politically motivated, arguing that voting to overturn her election to office would set a dangerous precedent. They said that Kane's duties were primarily managerial, and that she did not need to be a lawyer in good standing to perform her principal duties.

Moments after the 29-19 vote, Kane, 49, the first woman and Democrat elected attorney general, released a statement praising the outcome. She said remaining in office would allow her to continue exposing the scandal involving the exchange of pornographic and offensive emails that has enveloped her office and the judiciary.

"Today is a good day for all those who share my desire to restore confidence in our judges and prosecutors and integrity to our system of justice," she said. "I am happy to continue this effort, finish the mission I pledged to carry out and the job for which I was elected to serve."

With a two-thirds vote required to remove Kane, the measure fell four votes short of the 33 needed to pass the Senate. But Republicans garnered enough support for a measure that will allow them to bring up Kane's removal for a vote again in the future.

"It seems like every week there is a new revelation out of that office," said Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R., Jefferson), adding that the chamber wanted to have the option to reconsider her ouster.

Kane still faces serious trouble. In August, she is scheduled to go on trial on criminal charges in the case that prompted the high court to temporarily pull her license.

Prosecutors have charged her with perjury, obstruction, and other crimes. They say she illegally leaked secret grand jury information in a bid to embarrass a political enemy and then lied about her actions under oath. She has pleaded not guilty.

Moreover, the House is examining a proposal to impeach Kane. Even as the Senate was debating whether to remove her, the House approved a resolution formally launching an impeachment investigation.

In the dramatic three-hour floor debate before the high-stakes vote, Sen. John Gordner, the Republican chair of a special committee that recommended a vote on her removal, told his colleagues that Kane was "legally incapacitated" by the suspension of her license. The state constitution requires the attorney general to a member of the bar.

"Kathleen Kane cannot perform as the public's lawyer," said Sen. Lisa Baker (R., Luzerne), another member of the special committee. "The list of duties she cannot perform is striking in scope."

Sen. Stewart J. Greenleaf of Montgomery County was the lone Republican to vote against Kane's ouster. Though he made no remarks on the Senate floor, he has said that Kane, even with a suspended license, remains a member of the bar.

Sen. Rob Teplitz (D., Dauphin) said the public deserved an attorney general who used legal judgment. He was the only Democrat who voted to remove Kane, but said he did so reluctantly.

"I don't like the idea that three dozen people can overturn the will of three million voters," he said.

Democratic Sen. Art Haywood of Philadelphia cited testimony from former Gov. Ed Rendell that Kane mainly served as an administrator and policy maker for her 830-employee office, not as a lawyer.

"We all know the attorney general is not a solo law practice," Haywood said.

The Republican-controlled Senate launched the removal process against Kane last fall, relying on a little-known provision in the state constitution that has not been used in more than a century. It is a process different from and more streamlined than impeachment.

Under the provision embraced by Senate GOP leaders, the governor can remove an elected official from office "for cause" after a two-thirds vote in the Senate.

Even before the vote, several Democrats questioned the removal process, saying they believe Kane's office was running smoothly despite the suspension of her law license.

Kane has said the only legal way to remove her is through impeachment, a much lengthier process that requires a full investigation in the House and a trial in the Senate.

This month, Kane appealed to the Supreme Court, asking it to reverse its suspension of her license. She contended that a justice who voted to suspend her should not have participated because he had been caught up in the email scandal she exposed.

The court rejected Kane's appeal, saying she filed her request too late. It did not address her substantive argument about the participation of Justice J. Michael Eakin.

Eakin is suspended from office to await a March ethics hearing regarding his sending and receiving offensive emails.

The Senate vote was a culmination of events that began last summer, when Kane was arrested in the criminal case. The trial is scheduled to begin Aug. 8.

The criminal charges led the high court to suspend her law license, and that led the Senate to act.

In determining whether to remove Kane from office, the Senate held a series of hearings last fall to examine the narrow question of whether she can continue to run the office with a suspended law license.

Kane has said the majority of her duties are administrative and do not require her to make day-to-day legal decisions.

But during last year's hearings, legal and constitutional experts, as well as some of Kane's top deputies, said they believed she could not effectively run the office with a suspended law license because so much of the job involved making legal decisions.

acouloumbis@phillynews.com 717-787-5934 @AngelasInk