[KarlInOhio]

treaty will be rammed through by the lame duck Senate after the November election if the Democrats are still in charge.

Last time I checked it required 2/3 of the Senate to vote to ratify a treaty. I know that sometimes they try some BS where the president makes an "agreement" rather than a "treaty" like NAFTA, but this is an actual treaty. Will the Republicans vote for it or not? I hope so but I never bet against their spinelessness.

[PapaBear3625]

Last time I checked it required 2/3 of the Senate to vote to ratify a treaty.

2/3 of senators PRESENT. They might try a parliamentary trick where they pass it at 3am when only Dems happen to be present, but that would be raw even by Dem standards.

[InterceptPoint]

Last time I checked it required 2/3 of the Senate to vote to ratify a treaty. I know that sometimes they try some BS where the president makes an "agreement" rather than a "treaty" like NAFTA, but this is an actual treaty. Will the Republicans vote for it or not? I hope so but I never bet against their spinelessness.

It really shouldn't take 31 posts on Free Republic to finally get to the truth of the matter. Freepers should really spend a little more time reading the Constitution before they start firing away.

I think the chances of two thirds of the Senate voting for this Treaty are approximately ZERO.

[OneWingedShark]

Last time I checked it required 2/3 of the Senate to vote to ratify a treaty.

It's 2/3 of senators present; so then 0 senators would be technically viable, however that'd likely get a call... so the solution is a small group that agree with the treaty.