"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Hawke" wrote:

Nobody can be said to control congress unless they get to where they have
the 60 votes needed in the senate to break a filibuster. Having a small
majority gives one side more power than the other but it doesn't give it
control until they can pass what they want regardless of what the
opposition
party does. The republicans had that for a number of years and passed
anything they wanted and the Democrats couldn't do a thing about it. It's
nothing like that right now. But having the White house and a close
minority
can arguably be said to be the party actually in control of the
government.

Hawke


You are correct on the 60. 60 is clouture which will get something to the
floor passing a
filibuster that seldom actually happens. Two thirds gets a treaty
approved or a senator
expelled.

Now when did the Republicans have 60 seats in the Senate and own the
House? I must have
missed those good times. I tried to google for how the various parties
held congress
over the years but could not not find the proper search terms.

Wes

The republicans didn't have 60 but they always had a few Democrats from
republican leaning states they could always count on to give them the votes
they needed. Like Joe Lieberman who could be counted on to vote with the
republicans whenever they wanted him to. Like I said you can't find examples
where republican senators crossed over and voted with the Democrats. If they
did they would never be allowed to keep living if they betrayed the other
republicans. Everything doesn't need 60 votes either only some issues. But
the point is the republicans had effective majorities when they were in
charge. As you can see from this congress the republicans don't let the
Democrats pass anything. It wasn't like that in the first six years of
Bush's term.

Hawke