loosecannon
Senior Member
- May 7, 2007
- 4,888
- 269
- 48
I seem to do better at math than you do with reading comprehension. Where in the Constitution does it require that either branch of Congress resolve anything with a majority vote? If you bother to read the document you love you will see that the only time it mentions anything about how much of a majority it takes to pass something it requires far more than a simple majority, and goes as high as requiring 3 out of 4 to pass some things. The only mention of breaking a tie is in reference to the Vice President who, at the time the Constitution you love was written, was the guy who had lost the election for President.
Making the loser of an election President of the Senate was a booby prize, which is why it specified that the only thing he gets to do is vote if their is a tie. It does not, however, say that that vote will make a difference in any way, shape, or form, just that he gets it. It was a position for losers, not a position of power.It wasn't until no one managed to get elected as President in 1800 that the system was changed through the addition of the 12th Amendment that the President and Vice President got elected in separate ballots, and the present system was implemented.
Nothing in the Constitution requires your simple majority vote.
Still not dazzling us with your math skills
If there is a tie (50-50) the President of the Senate makes the deciding vote. There is no other purpose of the vote.
Again, where does it say that the Senate has to set a simple majority as the way to pass anything? Or are you just going to try throwing back something I told you as if it proves something?
It is right under your nose and you don't want to see it.
The Filibuster is a gimmick, it should be eliminated entirely. It never had a useful purpose. And it is an end around the expressly stated intentions of the framers.