To: RolandTignor
A little bit of paranoia is useful; it keeps us all on our toes. But this is ridiculous. No treaty has any force or effect within the United States unless it is first ratified by a two-thirds vote of the Senate. The chances of that happening are precisely zero. In fact, in the current political climate, there is probably at least a two-thirds majority which would vote against the treaty.
The last thing the Democrats want right now is to get into a gun-control battle which they have no chance of winning but which will drastically increase the already-high danger to their incumbent Congressmembers and Senators.
21 posted on
01/09/2010 10:57:13 AM PST by
dpwiener
To: dpwiener
No treaty has any force or effect within the United States unless it is first ratified by a two-thirds vote of the Senate.Bull manure! That statement so full of "it" that it's not even funny!
Patrick Henry "Ratified": The Treaty Power, It's Perils and PortentsSimilarly, packages of as many as 34 treaties have been ratified by merely by voice vote.And that was by
members present!
Treaty Law: The Constitution's Original Trojan HorseThe problem is in the US Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
"Senators present" not two-thirds of the full Senate. It's the Constitution's original Poison Pill.It's called a
midnight vote 'cause it happens in the dead of night!
Robert's Rules of Order Revised - VIII
Art. VIII. Vote.
Two-thirds Vote. A two-thirds vote means two-thirds of the votes cast, ignoring blanks which should never be counted. This must not be confused with a vote of two-thirds of the members present, or two-thirds of the members, terms sometimes used in by-laws. To illustrate the difference: Suppose 14 members vote on a question in a meeting of a society where 20 are present out of a total membership of 70, a two-thirds vote would be 10; a two-thirds vote of the members present would be 14; and a vote of two-thirds of the members would be 47.
The chances of that happening are precisely zero.
Don't be daft! The previous links should dissuade you from that stupid statement.
24 posted on
01/09/2010 11:54:18 AM PST by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Carry_Okie
Since I knows you’re knowledgeable in the area would you lend a voice of consent on the misstatement I addressed above in reply 24.
25 posted on
01/09/2010 11:59:07 AM PST by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson