🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Cxy4uA.4GxC@austin.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>
>Really?  By what mechanism does Phil Gramm have the power 
>to "single-handedly kill a bill" in the Senate?

It was simple, really.

Power plays at the end of a session can use strategies 
that wouldn't work at other times.  In this case, Mr. Gramm simply had to 
threaten to ammend the bill.

Senate rules on ammendments take over at that point.

The net result is that the Senate didn't have a chance to go through the 
required floor debates (or committee hearings) for an ammendment.  And, in the 
slim coincidence that his ammendment passed, it would have thrown the bill 
into a House/Senate Conference Committee to resolve the differences between 
the two bills.

The word "obstructionist" keeps coming to mind here.

-- Wynn




/-------------------------------------------------------- ______
| Wynn Wagner III                        ww3@fasttax.com  \    /
| Computer Language Research, Advanced Technology Group    \  /
|    DISCLAIMER:  Any sufficiently advanced technology is   \/
\                 indistinguishable from a well-rigged demo.