But the rule was you needed 67 votes to change the rules of the senate, not 2/3 of those who bother to vote as long as we have more than 50 vote in favor.
Thought you might want to read and share this.....
posted on 05/18/2005 10:05:41 PM PDT
(Cancel your NEWSWEEK subscriptions. If you don't have one write their advertisers.)
On 2nd thought, IIRC the Chair made a ruling similar to the "Byrd option" that indeed only 83 truly constituted "all senators were present and voting."
posted on 05/18/2005 10:28:52 PM PDT
(When Frist exercises his belated Constitutional "Byrd option", Reid will have a "Nuclear Reaction".)
No, it was obviously a majority of the Whole Senate that was obviously necessary-----51 votes.. This needs to get out.
posted on 05/18/2005 10:34:27 PM PDT
("We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts" ---Abe Lincoln, 1858.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson