Eric, Your answer is telling me the same thing that you wrote is what I felt. You do a good job of answering questions. Thank you,
Linda ________________________________ From: Eric Vought <evou...@gmail.com> To: missourilibertycoalition@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, January 25, 2011 7:54:54 PM Subject: Re: [MoLiCo] Fw: Tomorrow A.M. On Jan 25, 2011, at 3:26 PM, Tom Martz wrote: > http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=sr112-10 > > After reading senate resolution 10 which I linked above I'm not quite certain >how it does any of the below listed measures.. Basically, it eliminates a filibuster opportunity by not allowing continuous debate before a bill can be formally put on the floor ("cloture") for amendment and vote, It also limits the number of amendments which can be proposed and resulting debate in order to speed up the process there. The Senate Democrats also discussed changing the cloture vote from 3-5ths (61) to 50% for the cloture vote, but this resolution does not appear to do that (yet?). The 51% the original poster talked about was the fact that Senate Democrats want to force this rule change through by fiat of the Vice President (who is "President of the Senate") instead of through the normal rule change process which requires 67 votes. The Senate is referred to as the place where bills go to die. Many, many bills make it through the House each year and then rot in the Senate. That was intentional design. The Senate was intended to be an effective veto by any voting block of states on the actions of Congress. The majority party always complains about the "inefficiency" of Senate process, but the fact is that efficiency is not desirable. We want only a small number of bills, from either party, to get through each session; the ones which do are bad enough. So, really, this proposed change is not good no matter who has the majority. Sincerely, Eric Vought "Faith does not absolve us from trying to understand our world and make moral distinctions with the eyes and brain given us. Religion is as much responsibility as direction: Duty not Distinction." --This is a Free Speech forum. The owner of this list assumes no responsibility for the intellectual or emotional maturity of its members. If you do not like what is being said here, filter it to trash, ignore it or leave. If you leave, learn how to do this for yourself. If you do not, you will be here forever. -- This is a Free Speech forum. The owner of this list assumes no responsibility for the intellectual or emotional maturity of its members. If you do not like what is being said here, filter it to trash, ignore it or leave. If you leave, learn how to do this for yourself. If you do not, you will be here forever.
