No 60-seat majority

ATLANTA (Reuters) - Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss won a run-off election in Georgia on Tuesday, CNN said, denying Democrats the chance for a 60-seat “super majority” in the Senate that would have enabled them to pass legislation virtually at will.

So it seems that the Democrats wont have a supermajority after all. What do you think of this? Disappointed? Relieved?

Answer #1

The supermajority is symbolic more than anything. Neither party is monolithic.

If the Republicans abuse their ability to fillibuster I think the Democrats will have their supermajority after the 2010 election.

Answer #2

I am not disappointed. As a democrat I would have welcomed it, but I never thought it was really going to happen anyway. I think with the way Obama wants to lead there will not be a need for the super-majority. He will reach across the aise much more than Bush, or any repbulican ever did.

Answer #3

I am relieved. I do not think either party should have the ability to pass legislation without a chance for a filibuster. All opinions should be heard on an issue.

Answer #4

Imposing will and no checks & balances is never a good thing for America regardless of party.

More Like This
Ask an advisor one-on-one!
Advisor

Majors Law Group Arizona & Wa...

Law Services, Bankruptcy Law, Injury Law