First, a brief note of explanation: to override a veto, there must be 2/3rds of those voting and present to override. This means means that if all 150 members of the house show, there is a necessary supermajority of 100 people who have to vote to override the veto of same-sex marriage by Governor Douglas in order for his veto to be successfully rejected (this applies to the house. I’m not talking about the Senate because it’s pretty much a lock).
The vote last week was 95 – 52. Among those voting yes, there were 5 Republicans. Among those voting no, there were 11 Democrats.
If we had only those 147 members voting for the override, we’d need 98 votes to make the 2/3rds.
But we know a few things. First, two of the Democrats who voted against the legislation have pledged to vote in support of the override. That means our numbers are more like 97-50. We also, however, know that one Republican opposed to the bill will be there for the override, which means 97-51.
We can’t rely on those five Republicans to support a vote to override their own governor, and we don’t know what those other nine Democrats will do.
But what if the override vote didn’t involve the full house, but was fourteen votes short? I.e., if any Republican who supported the bill but didn’t want to go against the governor didn’t vote? And those Democrat who supported opposed [bad fingers!] the bill but didn’t want to get in the way of the leadership didn’t vote? That’s 136 members voting in the override vote, which means that all we need to win is 91 votes. If Audette and Evans both vote as promised (against the veto) and we let the five Republicans off the hook provided they don’t vote to support Douglas, if you take away those five Republican votes, you’ve still got 92, which means we win.
I’m okay with winning that way. I’d rather win with a few Republican votes. But I’m okay with winning without them. We can do this as long as they stay out of the way.
But seriously: if Democrats show up and vote to sustain Douglas’ veto here? I’ll be beyond livid. If they want to sit it out? Fine. Whatever works for them. But they need to stay the hell out of the way.
…or more complicated depending how you look at it 😉
There were actually 96 House members who voted yes last week (1 was absent for Thursday’s vote and 2 different ones were absent for Friday’s vote). 1 other member did not attend either day’s vote but sent a note that they would have voted no, so that’s 53 no votes. The remaining 1 missing vote is Shap Smith, who didn’t vote on the bill last week, but can vote on the override.
That Democrats who voted against the original bill but didn’t want to get in the way of the leadership on the override could take a walk?
Otherwise this calculation doesn’t – quite – make sense to me. Then again, I consider myself number-impaired, so it could just be me.
NanuqFC
Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. – Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.
…that I was completely wrong about this. We didn’t need those dems to stay home, and the Republicans who supported the bill held. I was surprised on both counts (and a bit impressed).