What with the distribution of senators by state, the use if a supermajority allows a very small Right Wing Wacko minority, to stop all action in the senate.Below is a very interesting article discussing the Super-Majority requirements in the U.S. Senate. It was written by Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley.
It's well worth a read in the interest of general knowledge.
By Jeff Merkley,November 04, 2011
My colleague Sen. Ron Johnson recently argued on these pages that a supermajority voting requirement in the Senate is part of our Founding Fathers constitutional design and that recent efforts to change it are driving the bankrupting of America[A simple majority is not enough, op-ed, Oct. 23].
I take a different view.
At no time did our Founders envision that the Senate would require a supermajority to pass legislation. Indeed, the Constitution requires a supermajority only for very limited purposes, including the ratification of treaties and the override of a presidential veto.
Nor did the early Senate adopt any supermajority requirements by rule. Senators extended the courtesy of extensive debate as a basic principle of deliberation, but they passed all legislation by simple majorities.
While some were tempted to talk a bill to death by not agreeing to a final vote, this temptation was moderated by working relations historically, the Senate had many fewer members than it does today a deep commitment to the principle of majority rule, and the prospect that if individuals were to abuse the process, the Senate could respond by adopting a rule change with a simple majority.
Many Founders saw the possibility of a supermajority requirement for passing bills as destructive, inappropriately subjugating the wisdom of the many to the wisdom of the few. Alexander Hamilton observed in the Federalist papers that a supermajority requirement has a tendency to embarrass the operations of government and would generate tedious delays; continual negotiation and intrigue; contemptible compromises of the public good. This characterization matches how many Americans perceive the Senate today.
ARTICLE CONTINUED AT: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-11-04...
I expect that from the RWWs.
What is annoying is Harry Reid and the majority, roll over every time a RWW senator even claims he' "filibuster" legislation.
I think it's a great game. RWW Senate Republicans claim they'll filibuster almost every bill proposed, and Senate Democrats pretend they are powerless to overcome the filibuster.
Kind if like the AFC and the NFC pretending anything matters but the NFL making money.