Not 60... It is a 50 Vote Hurdle for Withdrawal Timetable

BooMan takes a look at a common misperception concerning current legislation on the timetable for withdrawl:

THE DUDE: Yeah, my thinking about the case, man, it had become uptight.

All the time I have been thinking about this supplemental bill for funding the war in Iraq I have been working on the assumption that the Senate would need 60 votes to pass the legislation. I thought, briefly, that Reid could invoke reconcilation because the bill would affect the budget, but that only pertains to regular budget legislation, not supplemental funding. Nonetheless, it looks like I've had my head up my ass.

Proponents of the troop withdrawal deadline face a lower hurdle than in earlier Senate votes. Earlier efforts to win approval for a withdrawal timetable needed 60 votes to overcome a filibuster; this time, opponents will be trying to strip a withdrawal plan that's already in legislation. That means it will require a simple 50-vote majority to keep it in.

So, okay, I'm still learning Senate procedure.

WALTER: Dude, nothing is fucked. Come on. You're being very unDude.

This changes things substantially. There was literally no chance that the House version would pass the Senate if it required 60 votes.

But at 50 votes... The hurdles don't seem quite so insurmountable, eh?

It even renders Joe neocon Lieberman's vote and positions as a moot point. There will be enough moderate Republicans that will, likely, make the 50 vote mark an easy one to surpass in this political climate. Ya gotta love that! heh Poor ol' obsolete Joe...