I say to my colleague. It is not a supermajority here. It is a dangerous precedent in my view. So on a 50 to 50 vote on whether we met the other standards would fail and the President of the United States would not be able to act. Let me ask my colleague from Utah just a couple quick questions. I cited examples earlier, putting aside whether you agreed or disagreed with the action taken. In August 1990, when President Bush sent 100,000 troops to the Middle East, were we in actual--to quote the language of this section 5, were we engaged, in the Senator's opinion, in military conflict at that point?
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a 50-50 vote on military action during Senate debate.
Share
More from Chris Dodd
I appreciate my colleague's kind comments about my imminent departure after 30 years on this committee and in the Senate.
I have frequently been confronted with the extremely difficult necessity of voting for legislation that, while deeply flawed, includes provisions that are incredibly important for the well-being of the American people. Today is no…
Maybe we ought to be spending a little more time looking at the relationships at that level.
But, whether such a temptation is motivated by a noble desire to speed up the legislative process or by pure political expedience, I believe such changes would be unwise. To my fellow Senators who have never served a day in the minority, I…





