Sentences with phrase «vote point of order»

Finally, provisions in a reconciliation bill that increase the deficit beyond the period covered by the budget resolution are subject to a 60 - vote point of order under the «Byrd rule» unless the costs are offset by savings from other provisions in the bill.

There would also be a 60 - vote point of order if the bill increased the deficit over the first five or first ten years, per the Senate «Pay as you go» (PAYGO) rule, unless the budget resolution repealed the Senate PAYGO rule or established an exception to it.

An exclusion from the Senate PAYGO rule and statutory PAYGO would be subject to a 60 - vote point of order.

Not exact matches

Sixty votes are needed to overcome a point of order.

This means that any net tax cut over the ten - year period not explicitly called for by the budget resolution would be subject to a budget point of order that would require 60 votes to override.

Therefore, I raise a point of order that the vote on cloture, under the precedent set on November 21, 2013, is a majority vote for all nominations.

Ordinarily, a point of order compels the Senate to follow its rules and precedents; however, the Senate may choose to vote down the point of order.

Conservative MPs reacted angrily to Mr Justice Mostyn's ruling in the Commons last night, repeatedly raising points of order immediately after the bedroom tax vote.

Ordinarily, a point of order compels the Senate to follow its rules and precedents; however, the Senate may chooe to vote down the point of order.

Nor will they be pointing out his walking back his promise on independent redistricting in order to get the votes in the Legislature he needed to impose Tier 6, or his shutting down the Moreland Commission early after his staff tried to steer it away from examining the operations of his supporters and political allies.

Moreover, the researchers argue that exposure would only have changed vote shares in the order of hundredths of a percentage point.

His point of order was ultimately rejected by a vote of 4 to 2.

But knowing the composition of the state legislature, and the hostility of the Republican leadership in both chambers to Prop B, we knew that we'd have to entertain compromise on some elements of the agreement (at no point, ever, publically, has Pacelle or anyone from HSUS mentioned any thought of compromise — and likely, this is why they didn't have a seat at the table when it came to this new law), in order to protect the measure for the long term and to obviate the need for a second public vote on the issue.

The Charlottesville Daily Progress broke the story: Letters Urged Protection of Minorities From Higher Electricity Costs Pointing out that «our state gets 56 % of its electricity from coal,» the letter urged Perriello to vote against the American Clean Energy & Security Act in order to «protect minorities and other consumers in your district from higher electricity bills.»

(8) the points made in the conclusion are: (1) consistent with avoiding expenditures on the criminal justice system, the federal attorney general appeared to be neglecting the plight of pre-trial inmates in custody in extremely bad jail conditions, and the provincial attorney general appeared to ignore the needs of prosecutors for greater resources of staff and time in order to work adequately; (2) similarly, the other examples presented also support the proposition that the criminal justice system is inadequately resourced because there are «no votes in justice»; and, (3) the reduction in the safeguards against wrongful convictions caused by the radical changes in procedures made necessary because governments do not provide adequate resources for the criminal justice system;

I hope you won't think that I am putting too fine a point on the matter if I point out that Bill C - 32 (and everything else on the Order Paper) did not die from the vote of non-confidence but from the dissolution of Parliament and the consequent proroguing of the session.