Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

[srbbnd]

Why is 60 votes needed on the Buffett Rule ? I thought it was a simple majority unless it was a fillibuster. I am political inept. Thanks

[vinnie97]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

Not sure on the particulars of the vote nor the procedure, but the "revenue" it would yield is chump change in comparison to the shortfall...it's like trying to use a flyswatter to kill an elephant.

"It's the spending, stupid" (not directed at you, just a more generalized statement on the primary cause of current fiscal woes).

[subterFUSE]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

The reason is that 60 votes are required to close debate on the issue before it can move to a vote. There were not enough votes to close debate.

And yes, this proposal is a complete joke.

[srbbnd]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

Oh peoples opinions... I see, just another method of creating a non-working bipartisan bureaucratic system.

[subterFUSE]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

Actually, I would argue that our system is working perfectly. Obama took office with his party in control of both houses of Congress. He had 2 years to pass anything he wanted. He chose to focus on a healthcare bill that nobody read before passing, including himself.

The direct result of pushing the healthcare bill was the Democratic party losing control of the House of Representatives. Without control of the House, Obama no longer has the congressional votes to ram through his legislation. The Constitution provides for a balance of powers and we are watching this balance work perfectly. We have mid-term elections so that the people can vote to either give the president more ability to pass his agenda, or to take away some of this ability by swinging control of the legislative branch.

[srbbnd]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

nothing is working in the United States anymore we are the next Russia, just a matter of time,

[subterFUSE]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

nothing is working in the United States anymore we are the next Russia, just a matter of time,

I will politely disagree with you as of this moment. I do not see us as Russia. However, if we have another 4 years of Obama then I might agree with you.

The current political gridlock is an example of our government working precisely as intended. Like I mentioned above, Obama had his chance to change things. He is now facing the consequences of his party losing the mid-term elections. I would agrue that part of the genius behind our constitution is this very balance of power which makes it so hard to change things.

As for the topic of this thread..... If Obama thought raising the capital gains tax rate was so important, then maybe he should have proposed it during his first 2 years when he could have passed it. He really should stop whining about it now, though. Congress isn't broken. It's just filled with more people who oppose his agenda than support it. And that is thanks to the voters.

[srbbnd]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

I think we can both agree there is a problem, but I personally don't think its Obama. I think a lot of people are searching for answers in the wrong places and like to have a scapegoat.

[Jenks]

Re: Uhhhhm why 60 votes needed?

I would agrue that part of the genius behind our constitution is this very balance of power which makes it so hard to change things.

Good point. I would like to thank the powerful constitution for now allowing these two groups of assholes to further fuck up the country more than they already have.