home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: soc.motss
- Path: sparky!uunet!UB.com!pacbell.com!ames!agate!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!milano!cactus.org!wixer!lazarus
- From: lazarus@wixer.cactus.org (Michael Lax)
- Subject: Re: G&L MILITARY BAN: Call the White House NOW!
- Message-ID: <1993Jan29.000327.7663@wixer.cactus.org>
- Organization: Real/Time Communications
- X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
- References: <19930126115134ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 00:03:27 GMT
- Lines: 44
-
- Jack B. Nimble (ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU) wrote:
- : In article <C1GJF1.2wn@acsu.buffalo.edu>, on 26 Jan 93 10:51:00 GMT,
- : viejones@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Michael A. Jones) writes:
- :
- : >
- : >In article <9648052325011993/A05354/POSSE/1171CDC11400*@mrgate.uwyo.edu>, LASAGA@corral.uwyo.edu (LASAGA) writes...
- : >>
- : >>In article <chavez.727989434@quorum.com>, chavez@quorum.com
- : >>Would congressional legislation be able to override an executive
- : >>order by Clinton? Or would an executive order by Clinton be able
- : >>to override congressional legislation? Anybody know?
- : >>
- : >>-maria
- : >
- : >Congress prevails and could pass a law overriding an executive order
- : >issued by Clinton.
- : >
- : True, but any such law could presumably be vetoed. Thus, as a practical
- : matter, it would take a 2/3 vote in the House and in the Senate to
- : override an executive order prohibiting exclusion and/or discrimination
- : based solely on sexual orientation.
- :
- : >Furthermore, the military code contains
- : >provisions outlawing homosexual behavior (sodomy, other stuff?) and can
- : >only be amended by Congress.
- : >
- : This is true. In order to achieve equal treatment wrt sexual conduct, a
- : majority of each of the houses would have to enact legislation revising
- : the applicable sections of the military code.
- :
- : >A quote I saw from Senate Minority leader Dole indicates that he's confident
- : >Clinton doesn't have enough support on the Hill.
- : >
- : The estimate that I heard is that only 30 out of the 100 senators
- : supported a lifting of the ban. This does not necessarily mean that
- : an executive order would be overturned in the Senate, because some of
- : the 70 opposed might not vote to overturn a presidential veto on party
- : loyalty grounds. At least this was what happened in the case of Bush
- : having had almost all of his vetoes sustained.
- :
-
- So does anyone know which Senators support the ban, which oppose it,
- and who's on the fence? NGLTF might have this info - if not,
- they need to get it _quickly_.
-