Supermajority Rules and Policy Outcomes

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. Archit Shah says:

    Or you could look one step deeper. If we assume that Senators only represent those who voted for them, then you have to look at how each Senator was elected, some won in landslides and others squeaked through. Here’s data from the Senate of 2005-06, where in aggregate across all races 46% of votes went to Republican candidates produced 56 Republican Senators.

  2. Calvin TerBeek says:

    Good fact-based critique of McGinnis’s supermajority assumption. This is, I think, a serious problem in legal scholarship. That is to say, legal academics taking certain propositions as fact — e.g, the countermajoriatarian difficulty — instead of trying to engage with empirical reality. I think originalists (original public meaning originalists) are esp susceptible to this . . .

  3. M. Simon says:

    The less legislation Congress can pass the cheaper it is for all of us.

    Now if only we could prevent Congress critters from bribing each other with earmarks we might actually get some where.

    As it is super majorities often raise the cost of legislation.

    BTW I like having the Senate as a brake on legislation.