Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fledermaus

Unless I'm mistaken, the only extra- or supermajority vote mentioned is for ratifying treaties. Two thirds required in that case. The filibuster rule has been changed in regard to parliamentary delaying tactics for legislation in the past.


1,864 posted on 05/18/2005 1:10:45 PM PDT by Don Carlos (Me cache en los Moros. (Ancient Spanish curse))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1840 | View Replies ]


To: Don Carlos

Impeachment also. For some reason I thought there was language as to legislative matters...but you are more than likely correct. I'll read up on it again later.


1,868 posted on 05/18/2005 1:13:42 PM PDT by Fledermaus (Rats theme song: "Whatever it is...I'm AGAINST it!!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1864 | View Replies ]

To: Don Carlos
Unless I'm mistaken, the only extra- or supermajority vote mentioned is for ratifying treaties.

Conviction for impeachment (2/3rd of members present); override presidential veto (2/3rd of HOuse, 2/3rds of Senate);concur with treaties made by the President (2/3rd of Senators present); Constitutional amendments (2/3rds of both houses).

1,924 posted on 05/18/2005 1:37:46 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1864 | View Replies ]

To: Don Carlos

Yep...you are correct. I couldn't find anything on legislation in Article I. Supermajority is only discussed in Article II.

Don't know where I got that impression.


1,930 posted on 05/18/2005 1:39:24 PM PDT by Fledermaus (Rats theme song: "Whatever it is...I'm AGAINST it!!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1864 | View Replies ]

To: Don Carlos
The filibuster rule has been changed in regard to parliamentary delaying tactics for legislation in the past.

From 1789 to 1806, a simple majority vote of Senators would move the question. From 1806 to 1917, there was no method to force the vote over the objection of a single Senator. From 1917 to sometime in the 1970's, cloture required 2/3rds of members present, and was changed to its present 2/5ths of elected Senators.

Which makes another argument. The hurdle for approving nominees is better what the Constitution implies (simple majority), not what the Senate says it is "today," which hurdle may change "tomorrow."

1,936 posted on 05/18/2005 1:42:07 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1864 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson