vote to override the Marijuana Legalization Veto

[Peter]

Its actions like these by certain Senators that really wind me up.

Bono, you knew full well that this bill does not have anything approaching broad support and that if it achieved passage it would cause a legal crisis, and yet you have persisted in pushing this bill. You have just lost my respect.

As information to Senators:

Before casting your vote, bear this in mind: If the override passes by the same majority, i.e. 3-1-5, then that will constitute a two-thirds majority under the precedent that JFK has set on my advice. There is no doubt that this will then end in Court (something I would prefer to avoid) if this bill makes it into Law.

[Peter]

I've thought (and read) about this some more, and I hereby rescind my previous advice in this thread. Fortunately the wording of the Constitution is skewed in our favour this time:

Article I, Section 5, Clause 5:
"...But if he or she shall veto it, the bill or resolution shall be of no effect unless the Senate shall vote, two-thirds of the Senators concurring, to override the President's veto."

Effectively out of the ten senators present, seven must vote to override the veto for the bill to become law.

[Peter]

Article I, Section 5, Clause 5:
"...But if he or she shall veto it, the bill or resolution shall be of no effect unless the Senate shall vote, two-thirds of the Senators concurring, to override the President's veto."

Two thirds of the Senators that exist or two thirds of the Senators voting? I think the latter makes more sense. If they disagree with the bill so much, they'll vote against it. An "abstain" vote is basically saying, let the vote go on without me.

I read it as two-thirds of the Senators that exist. If we assume your interpretation of abstain, an interpretation I have rejected, then the Bill never passed in the first place because only four Senators actually voted, and a majority is necessary for a vote to be valid.

[Peter]

Then pass an amendment to abolish such a silly rule. All that does is make "abstain" another way of saying "no." What else is the difference?

Only in override votes though, not in standard votes, as was evidenced in this bill getting passed 3-1-5 in the first place.