![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Newps" wrote in message news:4cF5c.21773$Cb.469313@attbi_s51... The republicans had both houses long before 9-11. The Republicans have held the House of Representatives since 1995. The Senate was even in January 2001, the Republicans had a nominal majority due to Dick Cheney's tie-breaking vote. Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords left the Republican party two months later, giving the Democrats the majority. The Republicans regained the majority with the 2002 election. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() The Senate was even in January 2001, the Republicans had a nominal majority due to Dick Cheney's tie-breaking vote. Not nominal! Actual. Constitutional. Real. Working and workable. Are you suggesting that the committee chairmanships were divided equally between Dem & Rep? all the best -- Dan Ford email: (requires authentication) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... Not nominal! Actual. Constitutional. Real. Working and workable. Constitutional? Better check again. Are you suggesting that the committee chairmanships were divided equally between Dem & Rep? I'm not suggesting anything. I'm saying a number equal to the opposition does not constitute a true majority. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:16:00 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote: I'm saying a number equal to the opposition does not constitute a true majority. Then that's what you should have said. But you still would have been wrong. If you have one more vote than the opposition, then you have a majority. The time-honored practice of the president pro tem voting to break a tie ensures that the presidential party will have a majority. Beware people who say things like "true majority". The adjective is trying to write a new definition. Do you also peddle "real facts"? all the best -- Dan Ford email: (requires authentication) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... Then that's what you should have said. But you still would have been wrong. That is essentially what I did say and I was right. If you have one more vote than the opposition, then you have a majority. And when you have the same number as the opposition you do not have a majority. The time-honored practice of the president pro tem voting to break a tie ensures that the presidential party will have a majority. No, it assures the presidential party will have control. To have a majority requires holding at least one more seat than half of the total. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|