It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by redhatty
4 more Nays will stop this in it's tracks, 3 more Ayes will pass it
Originally posted by lernmore
Gillibrand (D) NY
Bayh (D) IN
Brown(D) OH
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by redhatty
4 more Nays will stop this in it's tracks, 3 more Ayes will pass it
Do they need a super-majority? I thought they just needed a majority.
Since When Does The Senate Need 60 Votes To Pass Legislation
So I bet you’re now thinking that the Senate Republicans filibustered this legislation. Well, you’d be wrong. The Senate Republicans, as they have done for virtually every major piece of legislation since 2006, have THREATENED to filibuster. They haven’t actually done it. And every time they do, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid tries to get 60 votes to stop them, or the legislation dies.
teresacentric.com...
Threatening to filibuster is almost as powerful as a filibuster itself, at least by what i'm reading.
[edit on 13-2-2009 by David9176]
The Senate's version of the bill narrowly passed by a 61-37 vote -- one more than needed.
Reid was looking for additional votes out of an abundance of caution, the aide said, after learning that Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, who returned to Capitol Hill for votes this week, will not be present for the final vote because he returned to Florida to continue his recovery from brain cancer.
Reid was concerned that if a Democratic senator gets sick or has some other unforeseen obligation, he could have trouble getting the bill passed, the aide said.
Reid also was concerned because the three GOP moderates suggested that they did not want to provide the decisive 60th vote for passage, the aide said.