Talk:List of tie-breaking votes cast by the vice president of the United States

Vice Presidential vacancy?

What happens if there's a Senate tie during a Vice Presidential vacancy? --Jfruh 23:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• I guess it's considered rejected. I know that at the U.S. Supreme Court, a 4-4 vote means that the lower court's ruling stands. I wonder if the same rule would apply in the Senate. Furthermore, it's possible to have a tie vote in the House of Representatives, too. There may be an odd number of Representatives, on occasion there may be absences or vacancies. —Markles 00:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC).

Before the late 1960s, the vote would have been a Nay. After the 25th Amendment was passed, it provides for a way for a new VP to be appointed after Congress' approval so the position's constitutional roles can be fulfilled. Before the 25th Amendment, there were years when the position was vacant due to the Constitution providing no way to get a new VP other than a national election. There were likely a few tie votes during those times. --Frmorrison (talk) 20:53, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

If the vice-president is absent (or if the office is vacant), the tie stands and the motion fails by default, as any motion requires a majority of those voting to pass. There is no requirement that the vice-president break a tie, the Constitution simply allows him to do so if he is presiding (and in modern times would typically preside briefly only for the purpose of breaking the tie). Mdewman6 (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Wrong Terms

I'm correcting the table to remove "Enacted" as the comment when an amendment has passed. Bills and joint resolutions are "enacted" and everything else is "Agreed to." Thus, Vice President's tie-breaking votes in the affirmative that pass an Amendment is "agreed to" and not "enacted." You cannot "enact" an Amendment to a bill. 71.242.241.108 15:39, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Cheney's procedural votes

Since Cheney's vote was the balance of power between his inauguration until Jeffords defected from the Republican party, he obviously cast tie-breaking votes on procedural issues to establish the Senate leadership and committee chairmanships. But he's only listed as having seven tie-breaking votes, all of which are on legislation, according to the second table. Are procedural votes not considered in the first table? --Jfruh (talk) 16:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

It's possible that it wasn't formally used to establish control of the Senate - ISTR reading that the initial resolution on organisation & control of the Senate was negotiated in advance to agree that (until the numbers changed to end the tie) the party with the Veep would be the Majority but both Majority and Minority Leaders would have various powers normally only available to the Majority. So it's possible that any necessary procedural votes were not contested as the core issue had already been settled. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Chronological List

I think an additional chronological list or chart would also be useful to show any historical trend. 149.217.72.1 11:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

John Adams

I have noticed whilst reading a contradiction between this page which lists John Adams as casting 29 tie breaking votes in the table, and his biographical page which puts the number at 31 John_Adams#Vice_Presidency, I am not from the US so don't have any idea how I could verify which is accurate due to not knowing where I could look up records of Senate voting. But if someone who has access to sources could check the figure and correct the one which is inaccurate, I think it would improve wikipedia. It doesn't really look too good to have two pages contradict each other in my opinion. MttJocy 14:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I know this is a decade and a half late, but I just left a comment on John Adams' talk page regarding the question of whether John C. Calhoun or Adams have (as of posting, as Kamala Harris may possibly break the record) the most tie-breaking votes. Commenting to second this question, as it still is not resolved. Packer1028 (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Is "casting vote" a British English term?

I don't think Americans use the term "casting vote," so the use of that term in an article about an American institution strikes me as odd. I'm an American, a lawyer, and a constitutional law buff, and I have to confess I've never seen the term "casting vote" used by Americans. I think we only say "tie-breaking vote."

So I'm tempted to remove the words "casting vote" from this article, but before doing so I'd like to hear if there are any Americans out there who DO think that "casting vote" is used in American English. CoramVobis (talk) 07:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

At first I was going to agree with you and remove it, as that term isn't usually used that way in the US; however, I ended up searching senate.gov and found the exact phrase being used multiple times for the Vice President's role in the Senate. Less importantly, Dictionary.com doesn't note it as "Chiefly British" (as it usually would if the term wasn't also American). The problem that arises is that we also use the common phrase "cast a tie-breaking vote" so this may confuse readers ("a casting vote" versus "casting a vote"). To compromise, I reworded the sentence to include the synonymous "casting voice" and used it in even clearer context. Hope this helps. :) --Qwayzer (talk) 02:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Motion to Delete a Section

I would like to propose a deleting of the section titled "List of tie-breaking votes since 1981." It is both incomplete and useless. I cannot recall what is the proper waiting period, so I'll wait one week for someone to raise an objection. NuclearWarfare (talk) 01:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Since it has been one week, I shall go ahead and delete it. I will preserve the text on the talk page for future reference is anyone wishes. NuclearWarfare (talk) 22:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the table is pointless as it will always remain incomplete. Besides, the article links to the official Senate.gov page that lists all these votes anyway. --Qwayzer (talk) 03:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

==List of tie-breaking votes since 1981==

This is an incomplete list of tie-breaking votes cast by Presidents of the Senate.

Senate President	Date	Bill	Vote	Ultimate result
George H. W. Bush	July 13, 1983	Motion to table Pryor Amdt.1468 on nerve gas	Yea: 50-49
	November 8, 1983	Stevens/Tower/Goldwater Amdt.2517 on nerve gas	Yea: 47-46
	June 14, 1984	Motion to table Moynihan Amdt.3208 on MX missiles	Yea: 49-48
	May 10, 1985	Dole Amdt.93 on cutting deficit	Yea: 50-49
	July 23, 1986	Motion to reconsider vote on Manion nomination	Nay: 49-50
	August 7, 1986	Pryor Amdt.2612 on nerve gas	Nay: 50-51
	September 22, 1987	Motion to table Johnston Amdt.710 on SDI funding	Yea: 51-50
Dan Quayle	None
Al Gore	June 25 1993	H.R. 2264 (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993)	Yea: 50-49	Conference Report (see below) enacted as Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 103–66
	August 6 1993	H.R. 2264 (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993) Conference Report	Yea: 51-50	Enacted. Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 103–66
	August 3 1994	Motion to table S.Amdt. 2446 (Johnston Ethanol Limitation Amendment) to H.R. 4624 (Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act of 1995)	Yea: 51-50	S.Amdt. 2446 tabled
	May 20 1999	S.Amdt. 362 (Lautenberg Gun Show Sales Amendment) to S. 254 (School Safety Act of 1999)	Yea: 51-50	S. 254 rejected by House by voice vote for Senate's lack of constitutional jurisdiction
Dick Cheney	April 3 2001	S.Amdt. 173 (Grassley Prescription Drug Reserve Fund Amendment) to H.Con.Res. 83 (2002 budget)	Yea: 51-50	Agreed To
	April 5 2001	S.Amdt. 347 (Hutchison Marriage Penalty Tax Elimination Amendment) to H.Con.Res. 83 (2002 budget)	Yea: 51-50	Agreed To
	May 21 2002	Motion to table S.Amdt. 3406 (Allen Mortgage Loan Amendment) to H.R. 3009 (Trade Act of 2002)	Yea: 50-49	Tabled
	April 11 2003	H.Con.Res. 95 (2004 budget)	Yea: 51-50	Enacted
	May 15 2003	S.Amdt. 664 (Nickles Dividend Exclusion Amendment) to S. 1054 (Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003)	Yea: 51-50	S. 1054 incorporated into H.R. 2 (see below), which was enacted as Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 108–27 (text) (PDF).
	May 23 2003	H.R. 2 (Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003) Conference Report	Yea: 51-50	Enacted. Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 108–27 (text) (PDF)
	December 21 2005	S. 1932 (Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of 2005)	Yea: 51-50	Passed. Bill sent to conference committee and enacted, Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law (United States) 109–171 (text) (PDF).
	March 13 2008	Motion to reconsider S. Amdt 4189 to S. Con. Res. 70	Yea: 51-50	Motion agreed to.

Source: Votes by Vice Presidents to Break Tie Votes in the Senate and Occasions When Vice Presidents Have Voted To Break Tie Votes In The Senate via Senate.gov

List Missing

This list does not seem to contain "tie-breaking votes cast by Vice Presidents of the United States" at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.44.125 (talk) 23:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

101 Senators in the 107th Congress?

Can someone explain to me how the 107th Congress, after its swearing in but before Dick Cheney's, had 101 members (51-50)? Each state only ever has two, at the maximum. Should this be changed, to fit the context of the section, to say that for those 17 days Democrats controlled the Senate because Al Gore was still president? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.5.203.203 (talk) 01:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Total Number of Casting Votes

So the discrepancy between Wikipedia's total number (247, including the 2 yesterday) and the Senate's total number (242, not including the 2 yesterday) is due to Wikipedia attributing 17 casting votes to Richard Johnson, rather than the 14 counted by the Senate. Since Wikipedia does not appear to have any sources besides the Senate which would justify the different number for Johnson, I am going to change the article to reflect the Senate's data and adjust accordingly. Once this is done, the total number of votes indicated here (244) will match the Senate's own records (242 through early last month, plus 2 yesterday) and will also equal the sum of the individual numbers given in the table. This should be sufficient to not require any additional citations, so I am also going to remove that tag. 107.145.77.108 (talk) 14:59, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the discrepancy, but it seems the U.S. Senate may have issued an incorrect version of the document previously. According to the March 30, 2017, version that was downloaded April 3, there are a total of 258 votes. --Frmorrison (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Total votes by John C. Calhoun

For years, the total was 28. When did info pop up, to show it as 31? GoodDay (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

From here עם ישראל חי (talk) 21:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Voting Nay

Tie breaking no votes shouldn't really count because it is defeated anyways a majority didn't vote for it.עם ישראל חי (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Notable sources all count the "Nay" votes as a tie-breaking vote, therefore this article mirrors that record. Original research is not allowed at this encyclopedia to decide otherwise. --Frmorrison (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not saying not, I'm just noting it, its mentioned in this source that a no vote is not needed. עם ישראל חי (talk) 21:03, 8 February 2018 (UTC)