Comments on: The Australians are Mocking Us http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/ Harangues that just make sense Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:48:33 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Chris Hutcherson http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/comment-page-1/#comment-400860 Chris Hutcherson Fri, 03 Oct 2008 19:33:12 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/3648/the-australians-are-mocking-us/#comment-400860 Lets hope the election is this close, what happens if its a tie? Lets hope the election is this close, what happens if its a tie?

]]> By: Milhouse http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/comment-page-1/#comment-22439 Milhouse Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:37:51 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/3648/the-australians-are-mocking-us/#comment-22439 They <i>could</i> require the Senate's consent, as the USA does. The government rarely has a majority in the Senate. As of 1-Jul this year, the gov't did take control of the Senate, for the first time since 1-Jul-1981; but even now, all it would takes to defeat a nomination would be for one gov't senator to cross the floor. And losing a nomination in the Senate wouldn't bring the gov't down, any more than losing any other vote does. In any case, were the Senate to bring down the gov't, that would only send the House to an election; the Senate would remain for the rest of its term, unless the PM had the trigger for a double dissolution, and the GG agreed to give him one. For that matter, were nominations to be put to the House, losing one would not bring down the gov't either, unless the PM decided to treat it as a vote of confidence, which he wouldn't do if it was clear that the objection was to the nominee, not to the gov't. But as it is, though, no consent is needed, either from the Senate or the House, which is why judicial nominations don't get much media play. Which was the point of the original post. They could require the Senate’s consent, as the USA does. The government rarely has a majority in the Senate. As of 1-Jul this year, the gov’t did take control of the Senate, for the first time since 1-Jul-1981; but even now, all it would takes to defeat a nomination would be for one gov’t senator to cross the floor. And losing a nomination in the Senate wouldn’t bring the gov’t down, any more than losing any other vote does.

In any case, were the Senate to bring down the gov’t, that would only send the House to an election; the Senate would remain for the rest of its term, unless the PM had the trigger for a double dissolution, and the GG agreed to give him one.

For that matter, were nominations to be put to the House, losing one would not bring down the gov’t either, unless the PM decided to treat it as a vote of confidence, which he wouldn’t do if it was clear that the objection was to the nominee, not to the gov’t.

But as it is, though, no consent is needed, either from the Senate or the House, which is why judicial nominations don’t get much media play. Which was the point of the original post.

]]> By: Angry Clam http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/comment-page-1/#comment-22402 Angry Clam Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:30:41 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/3648/the-australians-are-mocking-us/#comment-22402 Well, considering that Australia uses a parliamentary system, how else would they do it? Remember, the Prime Minister is the leader of the Parliament as well as the head of government- if he loses a vote, it's election time for everyone, including those in his own party who voted against him. If the President loses a vote, life goes on for our senators. Well, considering that Australia uses a parliamentary system, how else would they do it?

Remember, the Prime Minister is the leader of the Parliament as well as the head of government- if he loses a vote, it’s election time for everyone, including those in his own party who voted against him. If the President loses a vote, life goes on for our senators.

]]> By: Milhouse http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/comment-page-1/#comment-22399 Milhouse Thu, 29 Sep 2005 07:52:47 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/3648/the-australians-are-mocking-us/#comment-22399 Big difference: in Oz, judges are appointed by the government, with no need for the consent of the senate, or of anyone else. If that were the case in the USA, the Roberts appointment would be old news by now. And Robert Bork would be getting ready to celebrate his 20th anniversary on the court. Big difference: in Oz, judges are appointed by the government, with no need for the consent of the senate, or of anyone else. If that were the case in the USA, the Roberts appointment would be old news by now. And Robert Bork would be getting ready to celebrate his 20th anniversary on the court.

]]> By: NIF http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/comment-page-1/#comment-22385 NIF Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:42:33 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/3648/the-australians-are-mocking-us/#comment-22385 <strong>Blogicus Interrupticus</strong> Today's dose of NIF - News, Interesting & Funny ... Hump Day edition Blogicus Interrupticus

Today’s dose of NIF – News, Interesting & Funny … Hump Day edition

]]> By: Christopher Cross http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/comment-page-1/#comment-22383 Christopher Cross Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:04:40 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/3648/the-australians-are-mocking-us/#comment-22383 Images of Breyer in drag aren't what I need right now. Images of Breyer in drag aren’t what I need right now.

]]> By: Andrew http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/the-australians-are-mocking-us/comment-page-1/#comment-22382 Andrew Wed, 28 Sep 2005 22:57:22 +0000 http://patterico.com/2005/09/28/3648/the-australians-are-mocking-us/#comment-22382 Thank you Clam. I've linked to it at confirmthem. Thank you Clam. I’ve linked to it at confirmthem.

]]>