The house of representatives is meant to be made for a two party system and always has a majority party and a minority party. but what would happen if a third party broke up the votes and the amount of votes for both republicans and democrats was split down the middle? what would happen if there was no majority or minority party in this case ?
2006-12-25 17:05:50 · 10 answers · asked by IRunWithScissors 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
bob- I'm not speaking about bills I'm talking about the rules set up specifically for a majority party and the minority party..for example the majority party has power over how debates managed and they have more leverage when choosing a house speaker.
2006-12-25 17:16:52 · update #1
Paul- If you forgot to throw a third party into the mix
say a libertarian took over one seat, that would leave 434 which can be split down the middle.
now if both the dems and repubs have 217 each which one is the majority party ?
and that goes back to my original question.
2006-12-25 20:27:11 · update #2
I will concede that a mathematical possibility does exist. Having said that I offer the following:
Since there are, according to Wikipedia, 435 voting members of Congress I don't see how this could actually happen. It would require an odd number of House members to abstain and that, IMO, is less likely than the Moon crashing into the Pacific Ocean.
Assuming we had X number of Democrats and an equal number of Republicans we would have an odd number of members of another party or parties. If each party nominated a speaker I think it would require a runoff type of election for speaker. If no one received a majority the two top vote getters would then be subject to another vote. With 435 votes cast one or the other would surface. That individual would act as speaker, make appointments and set the agenda. I am basing my opinion on, what I consider common sense. Now what that means is, since we are dealing with government, I am probably completely wrong. But, that would be my guess.
If you had access to a member of the House Rules Committee your question might generate a debate in the committee. That would be interesting.
One more thing: Assume you are the Republican nominee for the Speaker seat and I am the Democrats nominee. Can you imagine what sort of leverage a non-aligned independent would have on us as we lobbied him or her for that swing vote?
Thanks, I really liked your question. Thumbs up and I don't give them away for free.
2006-12-26 04:47:34 · answer #1 · answered by gimpalomg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Third party or independent Conmgressional representatives would determine the Speaker of the House, the most important position in Congress.
While the possibility of a 50%-50% vote is possible, the liklihood is extremely rare. Seldom do all the representatives vote on the issues, and seldom is the voting that close. If I am not mistaken, there are 435 representatives, so it is usually possible to achieve the 50% + 1 needed to pass a bill.
2006-12-25 17:19:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Distraction from their real problem. Flat GDP and massive unemployment. Actually Harry Reid has over 30 House approved jobs bills and he ignores them. Will not even consider a vote. He is incompetent. All the Democrats have is Obama and a slim majority in the Senate. They have nothing else. Think about it... Most states have Republican Governors [60%] - 30. Most states have Republican Legislatures [56%] - 28. The US House of Representatives is [57%] Republican. The Democrats have the Presidency and the Senate, just barely. When you think about it .. all the Democrats have besides Obama is a slim majority in the senate .. that is their total power. Democrats are blocked from runaway spending and control. Republicans will return to total power soon.
2016-05-23 07:05:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Originally, the Republicans were an off-the-wall abolitionist party, a third party with no chance. They got a president elected, and the House kinda-sorta followed along. (The guy elected was Lincoln, as I'm sure everybody knows.)
Third parties have always been dismissed, however I believe they have much to offer. Many Americans feel that the two major parties are too much alike, too entrenched, and too powerful. A rising third party, by working the usual political game of negotiation, could change the balance of power.
2006-12-25 17:23:55 · answer #4 · answered by Boomer Wisdom 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are an odd number of seats in the House -- 435. By definition, there cannot be an exact tie. Even if there were 217 Republicans and 217 Democrats and one independent, that independent could cast the tie-breaking vote.
2006-12-25 17:50:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It takes a MAJORITY vote to pass anything. Thus, if the vote was 217 - 217 - 1, the bill does not pass since it takes 50+% of the votes cast to pass. End of story.
2006-12-25 17:12:25 · answer #6 · answered by bob h 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The American people would finally be able to hear both sides of the story, and make an intelligent decision about which party represents them.
2006-12-25 19:03:25 · answer #7 · answered by bettysdad 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There would be a perception of less stability and the stock market would suffer. Also happens when the two houses are under leadership of different parties.
2006-12-25 17:17:18 · answer #8 · answered by pinwheelbandit 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They would be so busy arguing we would never get anything voted on. On the slight chance that we did we would have a better balance of op ions. Life would not be so one sided. better economics, education, law enforcement,tax's and so on and so on.
2006-12-25 17:19:56 · answer #9 · answered by sunflower51296 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
435 doesn't divide eaually
2006-12-25 20:13:30 · answer #10 · answered by paulisfree2004 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋