Comments on: Do Paterson & Bloomberg Actually Have a Shot at GOP Gay Marriage Votes? http://www.queerty.com/do-paterson-bloomberg-actually-have-a-shot-at-gop-gay-marriage-votes-20090422/ Free of an agenda. Except that gay one. Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:21:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bruno http://www.queerty.com/do-paterson-bloomberg-actually-have-a-shot-at-gop-gay-marriage-votes-20090422/#comment-151041 Bruno Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:29:57 +0000 http://www.queerty.com/?p=50131#comment-151041 @<a href="#comment-150940" rel="nofollow">Captain Freedom</a>: Just guessing here, but I think a simple majority of those present is all that's needed. @Captain Freedom:

Just guessing here, but I think a simple majority of those present is all that’s needed.

]]> By: Captain Freedom http://www.queerty.com/do-paterson-bloomberg-actually-have-a-shot-at-gop-gay-marriage-votes-20090422/#comment-150940 Captain Freedom Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:25:09 +0000 http://www.queerty.com/?p=50131#comment-150940 What if there are a few NONE VOTING? Nobody ever considers, but if I'm not mistaken by parliamentary procedures in most legislatures, a bill is considered passed so long as it gets more YEA than NAY. There is always a strong possibility that a few Republicans won't show up in order to avoid controversy. This could very conceivably give the YEAs the advantage. My question, does this follow procedure? If it passes with less than 31 YEAs but still more YEAs than NAYs? What if there are a few NONE VOTING?

Nobody ever considers, but if I’m not mistaken by parliamentary procedures in most legislatures, a bill is considered passed so long as it gets more YEA than NAY. There is always a strong possibility that a few Republicans won’t show up in order to avoid controversy. This could very conceivably give the YEAs the advantage.

My question, does this follow procedure? If it passes with less than 31 YEAs but still more YEAs than NAYs?

]]> By: Topher http://www.queerty.com/do-paterson-bloomberg-actually-have-a-shot-at-gop-gay-marriage-votes-20090422/#comment-150931 Topher Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:03:47 +0000 http://www.queerty.com/?p=50131#comment-150931 I would be interested to find out if this is a gambit by the NY GOP to continue to stonewall true progress for marriage equality, but put a positive spin on it so they don't seem like bigots. If they really want to win more seats (and potentially the Governor's mansion) in the next election they cannot be perceived as far right and allowing members to "vote their conscience" could be just the thing to help them recast their image. I guess the proof will be in the pudding. Either some Republicans will cross the aisle and truly vote their conscience or they will all tow the party line, as planned, but call it voting their conscience. I would be interested to find out if this is a gambit by the NY GOP to continue to stonewall true progress for marriage equality, but put a positive spin on it so they don’t seem like bigots. If they really want to win more seats (and potentially the Governor’s mansion) in the next election they cannot be perceived as far right and allowing members to “vote their conscience” could be just the thing to help them recast their image.
I guess the proof will be in the pudding. Either some Republicans will cross the aisle and truly vote their conscience or they will all tow the party line, as planned, but call it voting their conscience.

]]>