Created by ImportMaster
Last edited March 25, 2026
robot: Import article using Special:Import
 
brief update structure after review and updated info
 
Line 2: Line 2:
{{redirect|Two-thirds rule|the railway safety rule|Two-thirds rule (railway safety)}}
{{redirect|Two-thirds rule|the railway safety rule|Two-thirds rule (railway safety)}}
{{use mdy dates|date=July 2016}}
{{use mdy dates|date=July 2016}}
{{politics}}
{{Electoral systems sidebar}}


A '''supermajority''', '''supra-majority''', '''qualified majority''', or '''special majority''' is a requirement for a proposal to gain a specified level of support which is greater than the threshold of more than one-half used for a simple [[majority]]. Supermajority rules in a [[democracy]] can help to prevent a majority from eroding fundamental rights of a minority. Changes to [[constitution]]s, especially those with [[entrenched clause]]s, commonly require supermajority support in a [[legislature]]. [[Parliamentary procedure]] requires that any action of a [[deliberative assembly]] that may alter the rights of a minority have a supermajority requirement, such as a two-thirds vote.
A '''supermajority''' is a requirement for a proposal to gain a specified level of support which is greater than the threshold of one-half used for a simple [[majority]], the latter sometimes expressed as a {{nowrap|"50%{{tsp}}+{{hsp}}1}} vote". Supermajority rules in a [[democracy]] can help to prevent a majority from eroding fundamental rights of a minority, but can also hamper efforts to respond to problems and encourage corrupt compromises at times when action is taken. Changes to [[constitution]]s, especially those with [[entrenched clause]]s, commonly require supermajority support in a [[legislature]]. In [[consensus democracy]], the supermajority rule is applied in most cases.


Related concepts regarding alternatives to the majority vote requirement include a '''majority of the entire membership''' and a '''majority of the fixed membership'''. A supermajority can also be specified based on the entire membership or fixed membership rather than on those present and voting.
__TOC__


==History==
==History==
The first known use of a supermajority rule was in the 100s BCE in [[ancient Rome]].<ref name="schwartzberg">{{cite book |last1=Schwartzberg |first1=Melissa |author-link1=Melissa Schwartzberg |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=we80AgAAQBAJ |title=Counting the Many: The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule |chapter=Prelude: Acclamation and Aggregation in the Ancient World - The Origin of Supermajority Rules |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=we80AgAAQBAJ |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2013 |page=44 |isbn=978-0-521-19823-3 |access-date=2016-12-05 }}</ref>{{how|date=October 2018}}
The first known use of a supermajority rule was in [[Quaestio perpetua|juries]] during the 100s BC in [[ancient Rome]].<ref name="schwartzberg">{{cite book |last1=Schwartzberg |first1=Melissa |author-link1=Melissa Schwartzberg |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=we80AgAAQBAJ |title=Counting the Many: The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule |chapter=Prelude: Acclamation and Aggregation in the Ancient World - The Origin of Supermajority Rules |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=we80AgAAQBAJ |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2013 |pages=44-46 |isbn=978-0-521-19823-3 |access-date=2016-12-05 |quote=Although a supermajority was necessary to demonstrate the sufficiency of the case – the presence of adequate information to form a judgment – a majority sufficed to convict. (p.&nbsp;46)}}</ref> In some{{which|date =May 2025}} cases, two thirds of jurors had to confirm they were ready to take a decision before the matter went to a simple majority vote.


[[Pope Alexander III]] introduced the use of supermajority rule for [[papal election]]s at the [[Third Lateran Council]] in 1179.<ref>{{harvp|Schwartzberg|2013|pp= 51, 58–59}}</ref>
[[Pope Alexander III]] introduced the use of supermajority rule for [[papal election]]s at the [[Third Lateran Council]] in 1179.<ref>{{harvp|Schwartzberg|2013|pp= 51, 58–59}}</ref>


In the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]] of the United States, a rule requiring the determination of a [[presidential nominee]] required the votes of two-thirds of delegates to the [[Democratic National Convention]] was adopted at the party's first [[presidential nominating convention]] in [[1832 Democratic National Convention|1832]].<ref>{{cite book |first = Richard Franklin |last = Bensel |title =Passion and Preferences: William Jennings Bryan and the 1896 Democratic Convention |url = https://archive.org/details/passionpreferenc00bens |url-access = limited |publisher = Cambridge University Press |year = 2008 |page = [https://archive.org/details/passionpreferenc00bens/page/n150 131]}}</ref> The two-thirds rule gave [[southern Democrats]] a ''de facto'' veto over any presidential nominee after the Civil War, which lasted until the rule was abolished in [[1936 Democratic National Convention|1936]].<ref>{{cite book |first = Bruce J. |last = Schulman |title = From Cotton Belt to Sunbelt: Federal Policy, Economic Development, and the Transformation of the South, 1938–1980 |publisher = Duke University Press |year = 1994 |page = 45}}</ref>
In the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]] of the United States, a rule requiring the determination of a [[presidential nominee]] by the votes of two-thirds of delegates to the [[Democratic National Convention]] was adopted at the party's first [[presidential nominating convention]] in [[1832 Democratic National Convention|1832]].<ref>{{cite book |first = Richard Franklin |last = Bensel |title =Passion and Preferences: William Jennings Bryan and the 1896 Democratic Convention |url = https://archive.org/details/passionpreferenc00bens |url-access = limited |publisher = Cambridge University Press |year = 2008 |page = [https://archive.org/details/passionpreferenc00bens/page/n150 131]}}</ref> The two-thirds rule gave [[southern Democrats]] a ''de facto'' veto over any presidential nominee after the Civil War, which lasted until the rule was abolished in [[1936 Democratic National Convention|1936]].<ref>{{cite book |first = Bruce J. |last = Schulman |title = From Cotton Belt to Sunbelt: Federal Policy, Economic Development, and the Transformation of the South, 1938–1980 |publisher = Duke University Press |year = 1994 |page = 45}}</ref>


==Common supermajorities==
In the [[Federalist Papers]], Alexander Hamilton and James Madison were critical of supermajority requirements. In Federalist 22, Hamilton wrote that while preventing harmful legislation from being passed, such requirements also prevented beneficial legislation from being passed, and "its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority". Hamilton also wrote that such a requirement would encourage "contemptible compromises of the public good".<ref>{{cite web | url=https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0179 | title=Founders Online: The Federalist No. 22, [14 December 1787] }}</ref> In Federalist 58, Madison wrote that supermajority requirements might help impede the passage of "hasty and partial measures", but "[i]n all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule; the power would be transferred to the minority." Madison also wrote that such requirements would encourage [[secession]].<ref>{{cite web | url=https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0207 | title=Founders Online: The Federalist No. 58, [20 February 1788] }}</ref>
 
==Common thresholds of supermajority==
{{Wiktionary|supermajority|qualified majority}}
{{Wiktionary|supermajority|qualified majority}}


A [[Majority#Majority vote|majority vote]], or more than half the votes cast, is a common [[Voting#Voting basis|voting basis]]. Instead of the basis of a majority, a supermajority can be specified using any fraction or percentage which is greater than one-half.<ref>See dictionary definition of "supermajority" at [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/supermajority thefreedictionary.com]. "[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Qualified+majority Qualified majority]" redirects to this definition.</ref> It can also be called a '''''qualified majority'''''.<ref name=":3" /> Common supermajorities include three-fifths (60%), two-thirds (66.66...%), and three-quarters (75%).
A [[Majority#Majority vote|majority vote]], or more than half the votes cast, is a common [[Voting#Voting basis|voting basis]]. Instead of the basis of a majority, a supermajority can be specified using any [[fraction]] or [[percentage]] which is greater than [[one-half]].<ref>See dictionary definition of "supermajority" at [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/supermajority thefreedictionary.com]. "[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Qualified+majority Qualified majority]" redirects to this definition.</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=Schermers |first1=Henry G. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=OMXToQLp21UC&pg=PA562 |title=International Institutional Law: Unity Within Diversity |last2=Blokker |first2=Niels M. |publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publishers |year=2011 |isbn=978-90-04-18798-6 |edition=Fifth Revised |location=Leiden, The Netherlands |pages=561–563}}</ref> Common supermajorities include three-fifths (60%), two-thirds (66.666...%), and three-quarters (75%). In most cases, if the supermajority fraction or percentage of votes yields a non-[[whole number]], it is [[Rounding|rounded]] to the next higher whole number.


==={{anchor|Two-thirds}}Two-thirds, or 66.66... percent===<!-- This section is linked from [[Grand jury]] -->
==={{anchor|Two-thirds}}Two-thirds===<!-- This section is linked from [[Grand jury]] -->
A two-thirds vote, when unqualified, means two-thirds or more of the votes cast.<ref name=":1">{{harvp|Robert|2011|p = 402}}.p</ref><ref name=":4" /><ref>{{Cite web |url = http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#5 |title = Frequently Asked Questions about RONR (Question 5) |access-date = December 30, 2015 |website = The Official Robert's Rules of Order Web Site |publisher = The Robert's Rules Association}}</ref> This voting basis is equivalent to the number of votes in favour being at least twice the number of votes against.<ref>{{harvp|Robert|2011|p=406}}</ref> [[Abstention]]s and absences are excluded in calculating a two-thirds vote.<ref name=":4">{{Cite book |title = [[Robert's Rules of Order]] Newly Revised |last = Robert |first = Henry M. |publisher = Da Capo Press |year = 2011 |isbn = 978-0-306-82020-5 |location = Philadelphia |edition = 11th |display-authors = etal |page = 401}}</ref>
A two-thirds vote, when unqualified, means two-thirds or more of the votes cast.<ref name="Robert2011402">{{harvp|Robert|2011|p = 402}}.p</ref><ref name="Robert2011401">{{Cite book |last=Robert |first=Henry M. |title=[[Robert's Rules of Order]] Newly Revised |publisher=[[Da Capo Press]] |year=2011 |isbn=978-0-306-82020-5 |edition=11th |location=Philadelphia |page=401 |language=zen |display-authors=etal}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url = http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#5 |title = Frequently Asked Questions about RONR (Question 5) |access-date = December 30, 2015 |website = The Official Robert's Rules of Order Web Site |publisher = The Robert's Rules Association |archive-date = December 24, 2018 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20181224205021/http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#5 |url-status = dead }}</ref> This voting basis is equivalent to the number of votes in favor being at least twice the number of votes against.<ref>{{harvp|Robert|2011|p=406}}</ref> [[Abstention]]s and absences may be excluded when calculating a two-thirds vote.<ref name="Robert2011401" />


The two-thirds requirement can be qualified to include the entire membership of a body instead of only those present and voting, but such a requirement must be explicitly stated (such as "two-thirds of those members duly elected and sworn").<ref name=":1" /> In this case, abstentions and absences count as votes against the proposal. Alternatively, the voting requirement could be specified as "two-thirds of those present", which has the effect of counting abstentions but not absences as votes against the proposal.<ref name=":2" />
The two-thirds requirement can be qualified to include the entire membership of a body instead of only those present and voting, but such a requirement must be explicitly stated (such as "two-thirds of those members duly elected and sworn").<ref name="Robert2011402" /> In this case, abstentions and absences count as votes against the proposal. Alternatively, the voting requirement could be specified as "two-thirds of those present", which has the effect of counting abstentions but not absences as votes against the proposal.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Frequently Asked Questions about RONR (Question 6) |url=http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#6 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181224205021/http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#6 |archive-date=December 24, 2018 |access-date=December 30, 2015 |website=The Official Robert's Rules of Order Web Site |publisher=The Robert's Rules Association}}</ref>


For example, if an organization has 150 members and at a meeting 30 members are present with 25 votes cast, a "two-thirds vote" would be 17. ("Two-thirds of those present" would be 20, and "two-thirds of the entire membership" would be 100.)<ref name=":0" />
For example, if there are 100 eligible voters, 67 votes are required for a supermajority (two-thirds of 100, rounded up). However, if two voters abstain or are absent, the total decreases to 98, and the required votes for a supermajority drops to 66 (two-thirds of 98, rounded up).<ref>{{harvp|Robert|2011|p=403}}</ref>


===Three-fifths, or 60 percent===
In Italy, between 1948 and 1993, the [[Senate of the Republic (Italy)|Senate]] was divided into a number of single-seat constituencies, where, to get elected in a [[First-past-the-post_voting|FPTP]] vote, a two-thirds majority of votes was required. Usually, it was attainable only for the [[South Tyrolean People's Party]] senators representing the German-speaking minority of [[South Tyrol]], thus most other Senators were still elected proportionally in regional constituencies, after being grouped in party lists.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Il sistema elettorale per il Senato |url=http://web2003.senato.it/funz/sistelet.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090618084220/http://web2003.senato.it/funz/sistelet.htm |archive-date=2009-06-18 |access-date=2025-06-05 |website=web2003.senato.it|lang=it}}</ref>
Another type of supermajority is three-fifths (60 percent). This requirement could also be qualified to include the entire membership or to include those present.


In 2006, the [[Constitution of Florida]] was amended to require a 60% majority to pass new constitutional amendments by popular vote.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Florida_Amendment_3,_Supermajority_Vote_Required_to_Approve_a_Constitutional_Amendment_(2006)&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop|title=Florida Amendment 3, Supermajority Vote Required to Approve a Constitutional Amendment (2006) - Ballotpedia}}</ref>
Two-thirds is the most common supermajority requirement in the US Constitution, as set out in: Article I with regard to veto overrides; Article II with regard to treaty ratification and to presidential conviction and removal after an impeachment; and Article V with regard to the proposal of constitutional amendments either by Congress or via petitions by the states.


===55 percent===
Systems that exercise consensus based on a minimum threshold of two-thirds super-majority also some-what reflect the technical mathematical attributes of [[Byzantine Fault Tolerance]] which requires a super-majority consensus agreement greater than a minimum threshold of two-thirds of a group.
For the [[2006 Montenegrin independence referendum|Montenegrin independence referendum held in 2006]] the European Union [[Diplomacy|envoy]] [[Miroslav Lajčák]] proposed independence if a 55% supermajority of votes are cast in favor with a minimum turnout of 50%. Such procedure, ultimately accepted by the [[government of Montenegro]], was somewhat criticized as overriding the traditional practice of requiring a two-thirds supermajority, as practiced in all former Yugoslav countries before (including the [[Montenegrin independence referendum, 1992|previous referendum in Montenegro]]).


In 2016, the [[Constitution of Colorado]] was amended to require a 55% majority to pass new constitutional amendments by popular vote. It had previously been a simple majority.<ref>{{cite web|title=Colorado Imposition of Distribution and Supermajority Requirements for Citizen-Initiated Constitutional Amendments, Amendment 71 (2016)|url=https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Imposition_of_Distribution_and_Supermajority_Requirements_for_Citizen-Initiated_Constitutional_Amendments,_Amendment_71_(2016)|website=Ballotpedia|access-date=15 January 2017}}</ref>
===Three-fifths, or 60 percent===
Another type of supermajority is three-fifths (60 percent). This requirement could also be qualified to include the entire membership or to include those present.


==Related concepts==
In 2006, the [[Constitution of Florida]] was amended to require a 60% majority to pass new constitutional amendments by popular vote.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Florida_Amendment_3,_Supermajority_Vote_Required_to_Approve_a_Constitutional_Amendment_(2006)&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop|title=Florida Amendment 3, 60% Majority Requirement for Constitutional Amendments Amendment (2006)|website=Ballotpedia}}</ref>
Related concepts regarding alternatives to the majority vote requirement include a "majority of the entire membership" and a "majority of the fixed membership".


===Majority of the entire membership===
In [[Poland]], the [[Sejm]] ([[lower house]] of the [[Bicameralism|bicameral]] [[parliament of Poland]]) requires a three-fifths majority of MPs present to overturn a [[veto]] from the [[President of Poland]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Konwencja PO. Budka proponuje Koalicję 276. "Tyle głosów potrzebnych do przejęcia władzy" |url=https://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/7,114884,26762104,konwencja-po-276-glosow-potrzebnych-do-przejecia-wladzy.html |access-date=2021-07-06 |website=gazetapl |date=February 6, 2021 |language=pl}}</ref>
A '''majority of the entire membership''' is a [[voting basis]] that requires that more than half of all the members of a body (including those absent and those present but not voting) vote in favor of a proposition in order for it to be passed.<ref name=":0">{{harvp|Robert|2011|p = 403}}</ref> In practical terms, it means an absence or an abstention from voting is equivalent to a "no" vote.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |url = http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#6 |title = Frequently Asked Questions about RONR (Question 6) |access-date = December 30, 2015 |website = The Official Robert's Rules of Order Web Site |publisher = The Robert's Rules Association}}</ref> It may be contrasted with a majority vote which only requires more than half of those actually voting to approve a proposition for it to be enacted. An '''absolute majority''' may also be the same as a majority of the entire membership, although this usage is not consistent.<ref name=":3">{{Cite book |title = International Institutional Law: Unity Within Diversity |last1 = Schermers |first1 = Henry G. |publisher = Martinus Nijhoff Publishers |year = 2011 |isbn = 978-90-04-18798-6 |location = Leiden, The Netherlands |pages = 561–563 |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=OMXToQLp21UC&pg=PA562 |edition = Fifth Revised |last2 = Blokker |first2 = Niels M.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title = Absolute majority of members (European Parliament) |publisher = EUAbc.com |url = http://en.euabc.com/word/6 |access-date = June 22, 2011}}</ref>


In addition, a supermajority could be specified in this voting basis, such as a vote of "two-thirds of the entire membership".
===55%===
For the [[2006 Montenegrin independence referendum|Montenegrin independence referendum held in 2006]] the European Union [[Diplomacy|envoy]] [[Miroslav Lajčák]] proposed independence if a 55% supermajority of votes are cast in favor with a minimum turnout of 50%. Such procedure, ultimately accepted by the [[government of Montenegro]], was somewhat criticized as overriding the traditional practice of requiring a two-thirds supermajority, as practiced in all former Yugoslav countries before (including the [[Montenegrin independence referendum, 1992|previous referendum in Montenegro]]).{{citation needed|date=May 2024}} The requirement for 50% turnout has also been criticized for causing [[Participation criterion|no-show paradoxes]].


By way of illustration, in February 2007 the Italian Government fell after it lost a vote in the [[Italian Senate]] by 158 votes to 136 (with 24 abstentions). The government needed an absolute majority in the 318 member house but fell two votes short of the required 160 when two of its own supporters abstained.<ref>{{cite news |title = Prodi stands down after surprise defeat in senate over US alliance |newspaper = The Guardian |first = John |last = Hooper |date = February 22, 2007 |url = https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/22/italy.topstories3 |access-date = June 22, 2011}}</ref> In the [[United States Electoral College]], an absolute majority of electoral votes are required for it to [[United States presidential election|elect the US president and vice-president]].
In 2016, the [[Constitution of Colorado]] was amended to require a 55% majority to pass new constitutional amendments by popular vote. It had previously been a simple majority.<ref>{{cite web|title=Colorado Imposition of Distribution and Supermajority Requirements for Citizen-Initiated Constitutional Amendments, Amendment 71 (2016)|url=https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Imposition_of_Distribution_and_Supermajority_Requirements_for_Citizen-Initiated_Constitutional_Amendments,_Amendment_71_(2016)|website=Ballotpedia|access-date=15 January 2017}}</ref>


===Majority of the fixed membership===
==Use in parliamentary procedure==
A '''majority of the fixed membership''' is based on the total number of the established fixed membership of the deliberative assembly.<ref name=":0" /> It is used only when a specific number of seats or memberships is established in the rules governing the organization. A majority of the fixed membership would be different from a majority of the entire membership if there are vacancies.<ref name=":0" />
[[Parliamentary procedure]]s can utilize supermajority rules to avoid the [[tyranny of the majority]]<ref name="i057">{{cite journal | last1=Bradbury | first1=John Charles | last2=Johnson | first2=Joseph M. | title=Do Supermajority Rules Limit or Enhance Majority Tyranny? Evidence from the US States, 1960-1997 | journal=Public Choice | publisher=Springer | volume=127 | issue=3/4 | year=2006 | issn=00485829 | jstor=30026598 | pages=437–449 | url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/30026598 | access-date=2026-02-04}}</ref> and increase [[political stability]].<ref name="w487">{{cite web | last=Tsebelis | first=George | title=Veto Players | publisher=Princeton University Press | date=2011 | url=https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781400831456/html | access-date=2026-02-04}}</ref> The [[Robert's Rules of Order]] states:<ref name="Robert2011401" />{{Blockquote|text = As a compromise between the rights of the individual and the rights of the assembly, the principle has been established that a two-thirds vote is required to adopt any motion that: (a) suspends or modifies a rule of order previously adopted; (b) prevents the introduction of a question for consideration; (c) closes, limits, or extends the limits of debate; (d) closes nominations or the polls, or otherwise limits the freedom of nominating or voting; or (e) takes away membership.|sign = |source =}}


For example, say a [[Board of directors|board]] has 12 seats. If the board has the maximum number of members, or 12 members, a majority of the entire membership and a majority of the fixed membership would be seven members. However, if there are two vacancies (so that there are only ten members on the board), then a majority of the entire membership would be six members (more than half of ten), but a majority of the fixed membership would still be seven members.<ref name=":0" />
Supermajority rules can contribute to [[Gridlock (politics)|gridlock]] and cause the tyranny of the supermajority.<ref name="s165">{{cite journal | last=McGann | first=A. J. | title=The Tyranny of the Supermajority: How Majority Rule Protects Minorities | journal=Journal of Theoretical Politics | volume=16 | issue=1 | date=2004 | issn=0951-6298 | doi=10.1177/0951629804038902 | pages=53–77 | url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951629804038902 | access-date=2026-02-04| url-access=subscription }}</ref> Supermajority pivot points<ref>{{cite book|last=Krehbiel|first=Keith|year=1998|title=Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking|url=https://archive.org/details/pivotalpoliticst00kreh|url-access=registration|location=Chicago|publisher=University of Chicago Press}}</ref> can show higher volatility than median pivot points in case of [[political polarization]].<ref name="q982">{{cite journal | last1=Brunell | first1=Thomas L. | last2=Grofman | first2=Bernard | last3=Merrill | first3=Samuel | title=The volatility of median and supermajoritarian pivots in the U.S. Congress and the effects of party polarization | journal=Public Choice | volume=166 | issue=1-2 | date=2016 | issn=0048-5829 | doi=10.1007/s11127-016-0320-0 | pages=183–204 | url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11127-016-0320-0 | access-date=2026-02-04| url-access=subscription }}</ref>


It is possible for organizations that use a majority of the fixed membership to be caught in a [[gridlock (politics)|stalemate]] if at least half the membership consists of vacancies, making it impossible to perform any actions until those vacancies are filled.<ref name=":0"/> The requirement for a minimum number of members to be present in order to conduct business, called a [[quorum]], may be used to avoid such a possibility.
==Use in governments around the world==
===Australia===
To pass an amendment to the [[Constitution of Australia|Australian Constitution]], a [[Referendums in Australia|referendum]] is required and must achieve a "[[double majority]]": a majority of those voting nationwide, as well as separate majorities in a majority of states (i.e., 4 out of 6 states).<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-06-16 |title=Referendums and plebiscites |url=https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/having-your-say/elections-and-voting/referendums-and-plebiscites/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230808025616/https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/having-your-say/elections-and-voting/referendums-and-plebiscites/ |archive-date=2023-08-08 |access-date=2023-08-25 |website=Parliamentary Education Office |language=en |quote=Section 128 of the Constitution says a referendum is passed if it is approved by a majority of voters across the nation and a majority of voters in a majority of states — a double majority.}}</ref> Furthermore, in circumstances where a specific state is affected by a referendum, a majority of voters in that state must also agree to the change<ref>{{Cite web |title=COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 128. Mode of altering the Constitution. |url=https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s128.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230624131818/https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s128.html |archive-date=2023-06-24 |access-date=2023-08-25 |website=[[Australasian Legal Information Institute]] |quote=No alteration diminishing the proportionate representation of any State in either House of the Parliament, or the minimum number of representatives of a State in the House of Representatives, or increasing, diminishing, or otherwise altering the limits of the State, or in any manner affecting the provisions of the Constitution in relation thereto, shall become law unless the majority of the electors voting in that State approve the proposed law.}}</ref>—referred to as a "triple majority".{{Citation needed|date=February 2023}}


Similar to the voting basis for the entire membership, a supermajority could be specified for this basis, such as a vote of "two-thirds of the fixed membership".
===Bangladesh===
Article 142 of the [[Constitution of Bangladesh]] stipulates a bill in the [[Jatiya Sangsad]] must expressly state in its short title its purpose is to amend a provision of the constitution. Constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority in the unicameral [[Jatiya Sangsad]] to become effective.


==Use in parliamentary procedure==
===Canada===
{{Globalize|section|US|date=January 2021}}
In Canada, most constitutional amendments can be passed only if identical resolutions are adopted by the House of Commons, the Senate, and two-thirds or more of the provincial legislative assemblies representing at least 50 percent of the national population.


[[Parliamentary procedure]] requires that any action that may alter the rights of a minority have a supermajority requirement. ''[[Robert's Rules of Order]]'' states:<ref name=":4" />{{Quote|text = As a compromise between the rights of the individual and the rights of the assembly, the principle has been established that a two-thirds vote is required to adopt any motion that: (a) suspends or modifies a rule of order previously adopted; (b) prevents the introduction of a question for consideration; (c) closes, limits, or extends the limits of debate; (d) closes nominations or the polls, or otherwise limits the freedom of nominating or voting; or (e) takes away membership.|sign = |source =}}This book also states:<ref>{{harvp|Robert|2011|p = 404}}</ref>{{Quote|text = The vote of a majority of the entire membership is frequently an alternative to a requirement of previous notice, and is required in order to rescind and expunge from the minutes (see p. 310). Otherwise, prescribing such a requirement is generally unsatisfactory in an assembly of an ordinary society, since it is likely to be impossible to get a majority of the entire membership even to attend a given meeting, although in certain instances it may be appropriate in conventions or in permanent boards where the members are obligated to attend the meetings.|sign = |source =}}
===Czech republic===
Any change of [[Constitution of the Czech Republic]] or any other [[Constitutional act of the Czech Republic]] require a 3/5 majority of all [[Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic|Deputies in Chamber of Deputies]] and 3/5 of [[Senate of the Czech Republic|Senators]] present. Same supermajority is needed for ratification of the international treaty that transfers part of state sovereignty to some international organization.<ref name=Art39_CZ>Constitution of the Czech Republic, Art. 39</ref> Same majorities apply for start of impeachment procedure of the President of the republic.<ref name=Art65_CZ>Constitution of the Czech Republic, Art. 65</ref> Majority of all members in both chambers are needed for: declaration of war, deployment of Czech armed forces outside Czech republic, approval of foreign armed forces movement inside of the country, or for approval of Czech republic membership in defensive international organization.  


==Use in governments around the world==
[[Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic|Chamber of Deputies]] can order its own dissolution by 3/5 vote of all deputies.<ref name=Art35_CZ>Constitution of the Czech Republic, Art. 35</ref>
===Canada===
In Canada, most constitutional amendments can be passed only if identical resolutions are adopted by the House of Commons, the Senate and two-thirds or more of the provincial legislative assemblies representing at least 50 percent of the national population.


===Denmark===
===Denmark===
Line 72: Line 74:
{{Main|Voting in the Council of the European Union}}
{{Main|Voting in the Council of the European Union}}


The [[Council of the European Union]] uses [[Voting in the Council of the European Union#Qualified majority voting|'Qualified majority voting']] for the majority of issues brought before the institution. However, for matters of extreme importance for individual member states, [[Unanimity#Voting|unanimous voting]] is implemented.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_1.4.2.html|title=Intergovernmental decision-making procedures - EU fact sheets - European Parliament|website=www.europarl.europa.eu}}</ref> An example of this is [[Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union]], whereby a member state can have its rights suspended with the unanimous approval of all other member states.
The [[Council of the European Union]] uses [[Voting in the Council of the European Union#Qualified majority voting|'Qualified majority voting']] for the majority of issues brought before the institution. However, for matters of extreme importance for individual member states, [[Unanimity#Voting|unanimous voting]] is implemented.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_1.4.2.html|title=Intergovernmental decision-making procedures - EU fact sheets - European Parliament|website=www.europarl.europa.eu|access-date=May 9, 2017|archive-date=December 1, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201053950/http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_1.4.2.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> An example of this is [[Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union]], whereby a member state can have its rights suspended with the unanimous approval of all other member states.


After the accession of Croatia, on 1{{nbsp}}July 2013, at least 260 votes out of a total of 352 by at least 15 member states were required for legislation to be adopted by qualified majority. From 1{{nbsp}}July 2013, the pass condition translated into:
After the accession of Croatia, on 1{{nbsp}}July 2013, at least 260 votes out of a total of 352 by at least 15 member states were required for legislation to be adopted by qualified majority. From 1{{nbsp}}July 2013, the pass condition translated into:
Line 83: Line 85:


===Finland===
===Finland===
According to [[Law of Finland|Finnish Law]], when a new legislative proposal would in some way add, alter or remove a part of the Finnish constitution, a bill requires a 2/3 majority in the [[Parliament of Finland]]. In other words, a legislative proposal that would modify, add or remove a part of the [[Constitution of Finland|Finnish Constitution]] requires at least the approval of 134 out of 200 representatives in the [[Parliament of Finland]]
According to [[Law of Finland|Finnish Law]], when a new legislative proposal would in some way add, alter or remove a part of the [[Constitution of Finland|Finnish constitution]], a bill requires a 2/3 majority approval (or 134 out of 200 representatives) in the [[Parliament of Finland]]. The voting takes place in the first session after the parliamentary elections following the original proposal. Alternatively, the proposition may be declared urgent, in which case the voting takes place before the next elections, requiring an approval of a 5/6 majority.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.finlex.fi/api/media/statute-foreign-language-translation/688686/mainPdf/main.pdf?timestamp=1999-06-10T21%3A00%3A00.000Z|title=The Constitution of Finland (731/1999, amendments up to 817/2018 included, English translation)|access-date=22 February 2026|at=Page 15, chapter 6, section 73}}</ref>


===India===
===India===
[[Amendment of the Constitution of India|Article 368]] of the [[Constitution of India|Indian Constitution]] requires a supermajority of two-thirds of members present and voting in each house of the [[Parliament of India|Indian Parliament]], subject to at least by a majority of the total membership of each House of Parliament, to amend the constitution. In addition, in matters affecting the states and judiciary, at least above half of all the states need to ratify the amendment.
[[Amendment of the Constitution of India|Article 368]] of the [[Constitution of India|Indian Constitution]] requires a supermajority of two-thirds of members present and voting in each house of the [[Parliament of India|Indian Parliament]], subject to at least by a majority of the total membership of each House of Parliament, to amend the constitution. In addition, in matters affecting the states and judiciary, at least above half of all the states need to ratify the amendment.
===International agreements===
The [[Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court|Rome Statute]] requires a seven-eighths majority of participating states to be amended.


===Italy===
===Italy===
{{Main|President of Italy#Election}}
{{Main|President of Italy#Election}}


The [[President of Italy]] is elected by an electoral college consisting of both chambers of [[Italian Parliament|Parliament]] sitting in [[joint session]] with 58 electors from the [[Regions of Italy|country's 20 regions]]. In the first three rounds of voting, a candidate must get two-thirds of the votes to win, but from the fourth round onwards only a simple majority is needed. Even reforms to the [[Constitution]] need to achieve a supermajority of two-thirds of the votes both in the [[Camera dei Deputati|Chamber]] and in the [[Senate (Italy)|Senate]] to avoid the possibility of being sent to popular vote in order to be confirmed through a referendum.
The [[President of Italy]] is elected by an electoral college consisting of both chambers of [[Italian Parliament|Parliament]] sitting in [[joint session]] with 58 electors from the [[Regions of Italy|country's 20 regions]]. In the first three rounds of voting, a candidate must get two-thirds of the votes to win, but from the fourth round onwards only an absolute majority is needed. Reforms to the [[Constitution]] need to achieve a supermajority of two-thirds of the votes both in the [[Camera dei Deputati|Chamber]] and in the [[Senate (Italy)|Senate]] to avoid the possibility of being sent to popular vote in order to be confirmed through a referendum.


===Japan===
===Japan===
Line 103: Line 102:


===Nigeria===
===Nigeria===
Under the [[Constitution of Nigeria]] a two-thirds majority is required in the [[National Assembly (Nigeria)|National Assembly]] to alter the Constitution, enact legislation in a few areas, or remove office holders from some positions, such a Speaker. Legislative override or impeachment of the executive at either the state or federal government level also requires a two-thirds majority of the corresponding legislative assembly.<ref>{{Cite web |title = Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria |url = http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm |website = Nigeria law |access-date = November 12, 2018}}</ref>
Under the [[Constitution of Nigeria]] a two-thirds majority is required in the [[National Assembly (Nigeria)|National Assembly]] to alter the Constitution, enact legislation in a few areas, or remove office holders from some positions, such as Speaker. Legislative override or impeachment of the executive at either the state or federal government level also requires a two-thirds majority of the corresponding legislative assembly.<ref>{{Cite web |title = Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria |url = http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm |website = Nigeria law |access-date = November 12, 2018}}</ref>


===Philippines===
===Philippines===
Line 111: Line 110:


A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to ratify treaties, and to remove an [[Impeachment in the Philippines|impeached]] official from office.<ref name="Phil"/> Impeachment by the House, which is the required first step in the removal process, only requires one-third of Representatives to sign a petition (specifically a verified complaint or resolution of impeachment).<ref name="Phil"/><ref>[https://www.economist.com/asia/2000/11/09/impeachment-in-the-philippines Impeachment in the Philippines: Joseph Estrada faces a tough fight to hold on to his presidency], ''The Economist'' (November 9, 2000).</ref><ref>Seth Mydans, [https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/14/world/philippine-congress-impeaches-president-on-graft-charges.html Philippine Congress Impeaches President on Graft Charges], ''New York Times'' (November 14, 2000).</ref>
A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to ratify treaties, and to remove an [[Impeachment in the Philippines|impeached]] official from office.<ref name="Phil"/> Impeachment by the House, which is the required first step in the removal process, only requires one-third of Representatives to sign a petition (specifically a verified complaint or resolution of impeachment).<ref name="Phil"/><ref>[https://www.economist.com/asia/2000/11/09/impeachment-in-the-philippines Impeachment in the Philippines: Joseph Estrada faces a tough fight to hold on to his presidency], ''The Economist'' (November 9, 2000).</ref><ref>Seth Mydans, [https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/14/world/philippine-congress-impeaches-president-on-graft-charges.html Philippine Congress Impeaches President on Graft Charges], ''New York Times'' (November 14, 2000).</ref>
===Poland===
To amend the Constitution the [[Sejm of the Republic of Poland|Sejm]] need to approve the change with at least two-thirds majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Deputies, and then by the [[Senate of Poland|Senate]] by an absolute majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Senators. Changes of the chapters 1, 2 and 12 of the Constitution have to be approved by majority of participating voters in referendum.<ref name=Art235_PL>Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 235</ref>
For ratification of the international treaty that transfers part of state sovereignty to some international organization two-thirds majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Sejm Deputies and two-thirds majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Senators is needed.<ref name=Art90_PL>Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 90</ref>
Sejm can order its own dissolution by two-thirds vote majority of all deputies (Senate is then also automatically dissolved).<ref name=Art98_PL>Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 98</ref>
The [[president of Poland|president]] may return the bill to the Sejm in a standard package veto, the Sejm can override the bill by a three-fifths majority of members present (at least half of all members have to be present).<ref name=Art122_PL>Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 122</ref>


===Singapore===
===Singapore===


Different amendment procedures apply to different parts of the Constitution. Most of the Articles of the Constitution may be amended by a bill enacted by Parliament if there is at least a supermajority of two-thirds of all elected MPs voting in favour of the bill during its Second and Third Readings in Parliament.<ref name="Art 5(2)">Constitution, Art. 5(2).</ref> Since ordinary bills only need to be approved by at least a simple majority of all the MPs present and voting,<ref>Constitution, Art. 57(1).</ref> the supermajority requirement is more rigorous and gives the Constitution its rigid characteristic. However, the present ruling party, the [[People's Action Party]] ("PAP") has commanded a majority of more than two-thirds of the seats in Parliament since 1968. In addition, due to the presence of the [[Parliament of Singapore#Party whip|party whip]], all PAP MPs must vote in accordance with the [[party line (politics)|party line]] save where the whip is lifted, usually for matters of conscience.<ref>{{Singapore Hansard|mp=Goh Chok Tong|office=First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence|reading=Second|bill=Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment No. 2)|url=http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic.jsp?currentTopicID=00061821-ZZ|date=29 November 1989|volume=54|columns=698–699}}: "[O]n important issues like this one, they [Government MPs] are not allowed to vote against the Government unless the Whip is lifted. And we do not intend to do so, except in matters of conscience, because of the system of collective responsibility. PAP MPs often vote on issues, but this is done in closed-door party meetings. Once a vote is taken and the decision made, they are expected to abide by the majority decision."</ref> Thus, in substance the more stringent amendment requirement has not imposed any real limitation on Parliament's ability to amend the Constitution.<ref name="Neo & Lee 165">Neo & Lee, p. 165.</ref>
Different amendment procedures apply to different parts of the Constitution. Most of the Articles of the Constitution may be amended by a bill enacted by Parliament if there is at least a supermajority of two-thirds of all elected MPs voting in favour of the bill during its Second and Third Readings in Parliament.<ref name="Art 5(2)">Constitution, Art. 5(2).</ref> This is in contrast to ordinary bills, which only need to be approved by at least a simple majority of all the MPs present and voting.<ref>Constitution, Art. 57(1).</ref>
 
However, the ruling [[People's Action Party]] (PAP) has commanded a majority of more than two-thirds of the seats in Parliament since 1968. Thus, the more stringent amendment requirement has not imposed any major limitation on Parliament's ability to amend the Constitution.<ref name="Neo & Lee 165">Neo & Lee, p. 165.</ref>{{failed verification|date=June 2022}}


===South Korea===
===South Korea===
A three-fifths majority of legislators is required for a bill to be put to a vote in the [[National Assembly (South Korea)|National Assembly]] to prevent the ruling party from passing laws without the support of opposition parties.<ref>{{Cite web |title = The Tyranny of the Minority in South Korea |url = https://thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-tyranny-of-the-minority-in-south-korea/ |website = The Diplomat |access-date = December 30, 2015}}</ref>
====Legislation====
A three-fifths majority of legislators is required for a bill to be put to a vote in the [[National Assembly (South Korea)|National Assembly]] in order to prevent the ruling party from passing laws without the support of opposition parties.<ref>{{Cite web |title = The Tyranny of the Minority in South Korea |url = https://thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-tyranny-of-the-minority-in-south-korea/ |website = The Diplomat |access-date = December 30, 2015}}</ref> However, if a bill does not achieve the required three-fifths majority at one session without also being rejected, it must then be voted on at the next session even if less than three-fifths of legislators agree to do so.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.nknews.org/2020/12/controversial-south-korean-anti-leaflet-bill-delayed-after-filibuster-attempt/ | title=Controversial South Korean 'anti-leaflet' bill delayed after filibuster attempt | website=NK News | date=December 9, 2020 }}</ref> Additionally, if the [[President of South Korea|President]] vetoes a bill, the veto can be overridden by a two-thirds vote in congress, provided that an absolute majority of legislators are in attendance.<ref name="refworld.org">{{cite web | url=https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b4dd14.html | website=Refworld | title=Constitution of the Republic of Korea }}</ref>
 
====Impeachment====
According to Article 65 of the [[Constitution of South Korea]], impeachment of the President requires a two-third majority of legislators to be effective.<ref name="refworld.org"/>
 
====Judicial review====
According to Article 113 of the Constitution of South Korea, the [[Constitutional Court of South Korea|Constitutional Court]] requires a two-thirds majority of its judges to issue rulings nullifying laws, removing impeached officials or dissolving a political party.<ref name="refworld.org"/>
 
====Constitutional amendments====
According to Article 130 of the Constitution of South Korea, amendments to the constitution must be passed by a two-thirds majority of legislators and then approved by voters at a referendum in order to become effective.<ref name="refworld.org"/>


===Spain===
===Spain===
Line 133: Line 153:
====Other legal procedures====
====Other legal procedures====
The Spanish Constitution states other supermajorities:
The Spanish Constitution states other supermajorities:
* Members of the [[General Council of the Judiciary]] are appointed by the Congress of Deputies and Senate of Spain, and each appointment needs a three-fifths majority.<ref>{{Cite web |title = Title VI of the Constitution: The Judiciary (in Spanish) |url = http://www.congreso.es/consti/constitucion/indice/titulos/articulos.jsp?ini=117&fin=127&tipo=2 |website = Constitución.es |access-date = June 9, 2018}}</ref>
* Members of the [[General Council of the Judiciary]] are appointed by the Congress of Deputies and Senate of Spain, and each appointment needs a three-fifths majority.<ref name="spanishconstitution">{{Cite web |title = The Constitution (in Spanish) |url = http://www.congreso.es/consti/constitucion/indice/titulos/articulos.jsp?ini=117&fin=127&tipo=2 |website = Constitución.es |access-date = June 9, 2018}}</ref>
* Members of the [[Constitutional Court of Spain|Constitutional Court]] are also appointed by both Congress of Deputies and Senate of Spain, and each appointment needs a three-fifths majority.<ref>{{Cite web |title = Title IX of the Constitution: The Constitutional Court (in Spanish) |url =https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/Congreso-inmediatamente-presidente-RTVE-exigencia_0_657234417.html |website = Constitución.es |date =June 22, 2017 |access-date = June 9, 2018}}</ref>
* Members of the [[Constitutional Court of Spain|Constitutional Court]] are also appointed by both Congress of Deputies and Senate of Spain, and each appointment needs a three-fifths majority.<ref name="spanishconstitution"/>
* The president of the [[RTVE]], the public radio and television broadcaster, must be elected by two-thirds majority of the Congress of Deputies.<ref>{{Cite web |title = The Congress passes that the president RTVE will be appointed by consensus again (in Spanish) |url =https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/Congreso-inmediatamente-presidente-RTVE-exigencia_0_657234417.html |website = eldiario.es |date =June 22, 2017 |access-date = June 9, 2018}}</ref>
* The president of the [[RTVE]], the public radio and television broadcaster, must be elected by two-thirds majority of the Congress of Deputies.<ref>{{Cite web |title = The Congress passes that the president RTVE will be appointed by consensus again (in Spanish) |url =https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/Congreso-inmediatamente-presidente-RTVE-exigencia_0_657234417.html |website = eldiario.es |date =June 22, 2017 |access-date = June 9, 2018}}</ref>


Line 143: Line 163:


===Taiwan===
===Taiwan===
Before the [[Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China]] in 2005, the constitution amendments need to be passed by the [[National Assembly (Republic of China)|National Assembly]]. Since the Additional Articles ratified on June 7, 2005, the National Assembly was abolished. Amendments of the constitution need to be proposed by more than one-quarter of members of the Legislative Yuan, passed by three-quarters of those present in the meeting, the presence of which must surpass three-quarters of all members of Legislative Yuan, then followed by approval by more than half (50%) of all eligible voters in [[referendums]].
Before the [[Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China]] in 2005, constitutional amendments needed to be passed by the [[National Assembly (Republic of China)|National Assembly]]. Since the Additional Articles were ratified on June 7, 2005, the National Assembly was abolished. Amendments of the constitution need to be proposed by more than one-quarter of members of the Legislative Yuan, passed by three-quarters of those present in the meeting, the presence of which must surpass three-quarters of all members of the Legislative Yuan, followed by the approval of more than half (50%) of all eligible voters in a [[referendum]].


===Turkey===
===Turkey===
In Turkey, [[constitutional amendment|constitutional amendments]] need a three fifths majority (330 votes) to be put forward to a referendum and a two-thirds majority (367 votes) to be ratified directly.
In Turkey, [[constitutional amendment]]s need a three fifths majority (360 votes) to be put forward to a referendum and a two-thirds majority (400 votes) to be ratified directly.
 
===Ukraine===
 
====Legislative veto====
The [[president of Ukraine]] may refuse to sign a bill and return it to the [[Verkhovna Rada]] with proposed amendments. The Verkhovna Rada may override a veto by a two-thirds majority.
 
====Constitutional amendments====
According to Article 155 of the [[Constitution of Ukraine]], amendments to the constitution, except for Chapter I — "General Principles," Chapter III — "Elections. Referendum", and Chapter XIII — "Introducing Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine", must be previously approved by a simple majority of the constitutional composition of the [[Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine]] and then passed by a two-thirds majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine at the succeeding regular session of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
 
According to Article 156 of the Constitution of Ukraine, amendments to Chapter I — "General Principles," Chapter III — "Elections. Referendum", and Chapter XIII — "Introducing Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine" must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and then approved by voters at a referendum in order to become effective.


===United Kingdom===
===United Kingdom===
Prior to its repeal, the [[Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011]] provided that the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom House of Commons]] could be dissolved and an election held before the expiry of its 5-year term by a vote of two-thirds of the membership of the House of Commons. The Act’s provision for an early dissolution vote was the only supermajority required in the [[Constitution of the United Kingdom|British Constitution]]. The Act also provided that Parliament could alternatively be dissolved if the House of Commons passed a motion of no-confidence in the government and no new government were to win a motion of confidence within two weeks of the original vote of no-confidence.


The two-thirds supermajority provision for an early dissolution and election was triggered only once, resulting in the [[2017 United Kingdom General Election]]. The previous election in [[2015 United Kingdom general election|2015]] had occurred due to the natural expiry of the 5-year term of the House of Commons.  
====UK Parliament====
A rare example of a supermajority requirement affecting the [[Parliament of the United Kingdom]] is the need for a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]] and the [[House of Lords]] to amend or dissolve the [[Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press]], insofar as it applies in [[England and Wales]].<ref name="bbcpressregulation">{{cite news |author=<!--not stated--> |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36034956 |title=Press regulation: What you need to know |work=[[BBC News]] |date=13 April 2016 |access-date=7 July 2024 |quote=While an act of parliament can be amended with a simple majority, it was possible to insert a clause in the Royal Charter requiring any changes to be approved by a two-thirds majority.}}</ref><ref name="independentpressregulation">{{cite news |last=Burrell |first=Ian |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/press-regulation-judge-for-yourself-the-royal-charter-in-full-8910572.html |title=Press regulation: Judge for yourself - the Royal Charter in full |work=[[The Independent]] |date=29 October 2013 |access-date=7 July 2024}}</ref>


[[Parliamentary supremacy]] meant that theoretically the Act could be circumvented by a government with a majority that wanted to bypass the requirement for a two-thirds vote by passing an act that stated, "[[Notwithstanding clause|Notwithstanding]] the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, a general election will be called on DATE". This was precisely what was done to initiate the [[2019 United Kingdom general election|election in 2019]], the final election held whilst the Fixed-term Parliaments Act was in effect.  
Before its repeal, the [[Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011]] provided that the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom House of Commons]] could be dissolved and an election held before the expiry of its 5-year term by a vote of two-thirds of the membership of the House of Commons. The Act also provided that Parliament could alternatively be dissolved if the House of Commons passed a motion of no-confidence in the government and no new government were to win a motion of confidence within two weeks of the original vote of no-confidence.


During the 2019 election, both the governing [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] and the opposition [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]] expressed a desire to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act and restore the traditional, centuries-old system under which elections could be held at any time, subject to the 5-year maximum term limit established by the [[Parliament Act 1911]]. Such a repeal would only require a simple majority.  
The two-thirds supermajority provision for an early dissolution and election was triggered only once, resulting in the [[2017 United Kingdom General Election]]. The previous election in [[2015 United Kingdom general election|2015]] had occurred due to the natural expiry of the 5-year term of the House of Commons.
 
[[Parliamentary supremacy]] meant that theoretically the Act could be circumvented by a government with a majority that wanted to bypass the requirement for a two-thirds vote by passing an act that stated, "Notwithstanding the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, a general election will be called on DATE". This was precisely [[Early Parliamentary General Election Act 2019|what was done]] to initiate the [[2019 United Kingdom general election|election in 2019]], the final election held whilst the Fixed-term Parliaments Act was in effect.
 
During the 2019 election, both the governing [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] and the opposition [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]] expressed a desire to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act and restore the traditional, centuries-old system under which elections could be held at any time, subject to the 5-year maximum term limit established by the [[Parliament Act 1911]]. Such a repeal would only require a simple majority.


Ultimately, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act was repealed by the [[Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022]], thereby removing any supermajority requirement and restoring the previous [[royal prerogative]] power to dissolve the House of Commons at any time during its 5-year term.
Ultimately, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act was repealed by the [[Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022]], thereby removing any supermajority requirement and restoring the previous [[royal prerogative]] power to dissolve the House of Commons at any time during its 5-year term.
====Devolved parliaments====
The devolved legislatures in [[Northern Ireland Assembly|Northern Ireland]], [[Scottish Parliament|Scotland]] and [[Senedd Cymru|Wales]] all usually operate with [[Fixed-term election|fixed intervals]] between ordinary elections. However, the acts governing the operation of those legislatures all allow for an early election to take place if a motion to that effect is approved by two-thirds of the total number of members of the legislature in question.<ref>{{cite legislation UK |type=act |year=1998 |chapter=47 |act=Northern Ireland Act 1998 |section=32 |date=19 November 1998 |accessdate=7 July 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite legislation UK |type=act |year=1998 |chapter=46 |act=Scotland Act 1998 |section=3 |date=19 November 1998|accessdate=7 July 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite legislation UK |type=act |year=2006 |chapter=32 |act=Government of Wales Act 2006 |section=5 |date=25 July 2006|accessdate=7 July 2024}}</ref>
Section 31A of the [[Scotland Act 1998]]<ref>{{Cite legislation UK |type=act |year=1998 |chapter=46 |act=Scotland Act 1998 |section=31A |date=19 November 1998|accessdate=29 July 2023}}</ref> and Section 111A of the [[Government of Wales Act 2006]]<ref name=2006c.32>{{Cite legislation UK |type=act |year=2006 |chapter=32 |act=Government of Wales Act 2006 |section=111A |date=25 July 2006|accessdate=29 July 2023}}</ref> provide that certain provisions of those Acts relating to the functions of and elections to the respective Scottish and Welsh devolved legislatures are protected from amendment by those legislatures, unless a two-thirds supermajority of the total number of members votes in favour.
Regarding Scotland, the protected provisions are:<ref>{{Cite legislation UK |type=act |year=1998|chapter=46 |act=Scotland Act 1998|section=31 |date=19 November 1998|accessdate=29 July 2023}}</ref>
*Who may vote at Scottish Parliament elections
*The system of election for members of the Scottish Parliament
*The number of Scottish Parliament constituencies
*The number of members returned by each constituency
The protected provisions regarding Wales are the same as those in Scotland; in addition, there are two Wales-specific provisions:<ref name=2006c.32/>
*The name of the legislature
*The number of individuals permitted to be appointed Welsh Minister or Deputy Welsh Minister
A two-thirds supermajority vote is required in the Scottish Parliament in order to amend or dissolve the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press, insofar as it applies in Scotland.<ref name="bbcpressregulation"/><ref name="independentpressregulation"/>
====Local authorities====
[[Principal council]]s in Wales are required to pass a resolution with a two-thirds supermajority vote in order to change the system by which they are elected, with the permitted choices being [[First-past-the-post voting|first-past-the-post]] and [[single transferable vote]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asc/2021/1/part/1/crossheading/voting-systems-for-elections-to-principal-councils |title=Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 (2021 asc. 1): Voting systems for elections to principal councils |website=[[legislation.gov.uk]] |publisher=[[The National Archives (United Kingdom)|The National Archives]] |date=20 January 2021 |access-date=7 July 2024}}</ref>
[[Districts of England|District councils in England]] are required to pass a resolution with a two-thirds supermajority vote in order to change their 'electoral scheme,' i.e. what proportion of councillors is elected at each ordinary election, with permitted proportions being one-third, one-half or all councillors.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/28/part/2/chapter/1 |title=Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (2007 c. 28), part 2 chapter 1: Power of district councils in England to change electoral scheme |website=[[legislation.gov.uk]] |publisher=[[The National Archives (United Kingdom)|The National Archives]] |date=30 October 2007 |access-date=7 July 2024}}</ref>
The [[London Assembly]] may, by a two-thirds supermajority vote, veto the [[Mayor of London|mayor's]] draft strategies.<ref>{{cite legislation UK |type=act |year=1999 |chapter=29 |act=Greater London Authority Act 1999 |section=42B |date=11 November 1999 |accessdate=7 July 2024}}</ref>


===United Nations===
===United Nations===
The [[United Nations Security Council]] requires a supermajority of the fixed membership on substantive matters (procedural matters require a simple majority of those present and voting). According to Article 27 of the [[United Nations Charter]], at least nine of the Security Council's 15 members (i.e., a three-fifths supermajority) must vote in favor of a draft [[United Nations Security Council resolution|resolution]] in order to achieve passage. Specifying the fixed membership has the effect of making abstentions count as votes against—absences are not normal but would be treated the same way.
The [[United Nations Security Council]] requires a supermajority of the fixed membership on all matters. According to Article 27 of the [[United Nations Charter]], at least nine of the Security Council's 15 members (i.e., a three-fifths supermajority) must vote in favor of a draft [[United Nations Security Council resolution|resolution]] in order to achieve passage. Furthermore, on a substantive resolution, none of the [[Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council|permanent members]] (the [[People's Republic of China]], [[France]], the [[Russian Federation]], the [[United Kingdom]], and the [[United States]]) can vote against the proposal, otherwise it fails, effectively giving them a [[United Nations Security Council veto power|veto]] which cannot be overridden. Abstentions do not count as votes against, allowing permanent members to express disapproval on a substantive resolution without vetoing it by abstaining from the vote. However, since the supermajority for passage specifies the votes must be for a resolution, abstentions and absences could be considered negative votes if the number of affirmative votes is below nine.


This is useful for the five permanent members of the council ([[China]], [[France]], the [[Russia|Russian Federation]], the [[United Kingdom]], and the [[United States]]) because a vote against from any one of them constitutes a [[United Nations Security Council veto power|veto]], which cannot be overridden. Permanent members who do not support a measure, but are unwilling to be seen to block it against the wishes of the majority of the council, tend to abstain; abstentions by veto powers are generally seen by close observers of the UN{{according to whom|date=September 2016}} as the equivalent of not vetoing votes against and have the same impact on the decision of the Security Council.
The [[United Nations General Assembly]] requires a supermajority of those present and voting on "very important questions" such as admitting new member-states to the [[United Nations]]. According to Article 18 of the Charter, this means two-thirds of votes cast must favor a resolution for it to be adopted. This means that abstentions and absences have no effect on a resolution provided the [[quorum]] is met. On all other votes in the [[United Nations System]] are done by simple majority of those present.


===United States===
===United States===
====Federal government====
====Federal government====
The [[Constitution of the United States]] requires supermajorities in order for certain significant actions to occur.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hudiburg |first1=Jane A. |title=Supermajority Votes in the House |date=July 24, 2018 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |location=Washington, DC |url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/98-778.pdf |access-date=8 September 2018}}</ref>
The [[Constitution of the United States]] requires supermajorities for certain significant actions to occur.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hudiburg |first1=Jane A. |title=Supermajority Votes in the House |date=July 24, 2018 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |location=Washington, DC |url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/98-778.pdf |access-date=8 September 2018}}</ref>


[[Constitutional amendment#United States|Amendments]] to the Constitution may be proposed in one of two ways: a two-thirds supermajority votes of each house of [[United States Congress]] or a [[Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution|convention]] called by Congress on application of two-thirds (currently 34) of the states. Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified by three-quarters (currently 38) of the states (either through the state legislatures, or ratification conventions, whichever "mode of ratification" Congress selects).
[[Constitutional amendment#United States|Amendments]] to the Constitution may be proposed in one of two ways: a two-thirds supermajority votes of each body of [[United States Congress]] or a [[Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution|convention]] called by Congress on application of two-thirds (currently 34) of the states. Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified by three-quarters (currently 38) of the states (either through the state legislatures, or ratification conventions, whichever "mode of ratification" Congress selects).


Congress may pass bills by simple majority votes. If the [[President of the United States|president]] [[Veto#United States|vetoes]] a bill, Congress may [[veto override|override]] the veto by a two-thirds supermajority of both houses.
Congress may pass bills by simple majority votes. If the [[President of the United States|president]] [[Veto#United States|vetoes]] a bill, Congress may [[veto override|override]] the veto by a two-thirds supermajority of both houses.
Line 174: Line 232:
A treaty must be ratified by a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate to [[Entry into force|enter into force and effect]].
A treaty must be ratified by a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate to [[Entry into force|enter into force and effect]].


Section 4 of the [[Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution]] gives Congress a role to play in the event of a presidential disability. If the vice president and a majority of the president's cabinet declare that the president is unable to serve in that role, the vice president becomes acting president. Within 21 days of such a declaration (or, if Congress is in recess when a president is disabled, 21 days after Congress reconvenes), Congress must vote by two-thirds supermajorities to continue the disability declaration; otherwise, such declaration expires after the 21 days and the president would at that time "resume" discharging all the powers and duties of the office. As of 2021, Section 4 has never been invoked.
Section 4 of the [[Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution]] gives Congress a role to play in the event of a presidential disability. If the vice president and a majority of the president's cabinet declare that the president is unable to serve in that role, the vice president becomes acting president. Within 21 days of such a declaration (or, if Congress is in recess when a president is disabled, 21 days after Congress reconvenes), Congress must vote by two-thirds supermajorities to continue the disability declaration; otherwise, such declaration expires after the 21 days and the president would at that time "resume" discharging all the powers and duties of the office. {{Asof|2025|January}}, Section 4 has never been invoked.


The House may, by a simple majority vote, [[Impeachment in the United States|impeach]] a federal official (such as, but not limited to, the president, vice president, or a federal judge). Removal from office (and optional disqualification from any federal, state or local office) requires a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate. In 1842, the House failed to impeach president [[John Tyler]]. In 1868, the Senate fell one vote short of removing president [[Andrew Johnson]] following his [[Impeachment of Andrew Johnson|impeachment]]. In 1999, efforts to remove [[Bill Clinton]] following [[Impeachment of Bill Clinton|his impeachment in 1998]] fell just short of a simple majority, and 17 votes short of the two-thirds supermajority. The impeachment procedure was last used in 2021, when former president [[Donald Trump]] was [[Second impeachment of Donald Trump|impeached]] for a second time and subsequently acquitted. Each chamber may expel one of its own members by a two-thirds supermajority vote; this last happened when the House expelled [[James Traficant]] in 2002.
The House may, by a simple majority vote, [[Federal impeachment in the United States|impeach]] a federal official (such as, but not limited to, the president, vice president, or a federal judge). Removal from office requires a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate. In 1842, the House failed to impeach president [[John Tyler]]. In 1868, the Senate fell one vote short of removing president [[Andrew Johnson]] following his [[Impeachment of Andrew Johnson|impeachment]]. In 1999, efforts to remove [[Bill Clinton]] following [[Impeachment of Bill Clinton|his impeachment in 1998]] fell just short of a simple majority, and 17 votes short of the two-thirds supermajority. The impeachment procedure was last used in 2021, when president [[Donald Trump]] was [[Second impeachment of Donald Trump|impeached]] for a second time during his first term and subsequently acquitted. Each chamber may expel one of its own members by a two-thirds supermajority vote; this last happened when the House [[Expulsion from the United States Congress|expelled]] [[George Santos]] in 2023.


The [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|14th Amendment]] (section 3) bars a person from federal or state office if, after having previously taken an [[Oath of office#United States|oath to support the Constitution]] as a federal or state officer, "''shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof''". However, both the House and Senate may jointly override this restriction with a two-thirds supermajority vote each.
The [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|14th Amendment]] (section 3) bars a person from federal or state office if, after having previously taken an [[Oath of office#United States|oath to support the Constitution]] as a federal or state officer, "''shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof''". However, both the House and Senate may jointly override this restriction with a two-thirds supermajority vote each.


A two-thirds supermajority in the [[United States Senate|Senate]] is 67 out of 100 senators, while a two-thirds supermajority in the House is 290 out of 435 representatives. However, since many votes take place without every seat in the House filled and representative participating, it does not often require 67 senators or 290 representatives to achieve this supermajority.
A two-thirds supermajority in the [[United States Senate|Senate]] is 67 out of 100 senators, while a two-thirds supermajority in the House is 290 out of 435 representatives. However, since many votes take place without every seat in the House filled and representatives participating, it does not often require 67 senators or 290 representatives to achieve this supermajority.


Apart from these constitutional requirements, [[Cloture#United States|a Senate rule]] (except in cases covered by the [[nuclear option]], or of a rule change) requires an absolute supermajority of three-fifths to move to a vote through a [[cloture]] motion, which closes debate on a bill or nomination, thus ending a [[filibuster]] by a minority of members. In current practice, the mere threat of a filibuster prevents passing almost any measure that has less than three-fifths agreement in the Senate, 60 of the 100 senators if every seat is filled.
Apart from these constitutional requirements, [[Cloture#United States|a Senate rule]] (except in cases covered by the [[nuclear option]], or of a rule change) requires an absolute supermajority of three-fifths to move to a vote through a [[cloture]] motion, which closes debate on a bill or nomination, thus ending a [[filibuster]] by a minority of members. In current practice, the mere threat of a filibuster prevents passing almost any measure that has less than three-fifths agreement in the Senate, 60 of the 100 senators if every seat is filled.


====State government====
====State government====
For [[State legislature (United States)|state legislatures in the United States]], ''[[Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure|Mason's Manual]]'' says, "A deliberative body cannot by its own act or rule require a two-thirds vote to take any action where the constitution or controlling authority requires only a majority vote. To require a two-thirds vote, for example, to take any action would be to give to any number more than one-third of the members the power to defeat the action and amount to a delegation of the powers of the body to a minority."<ref>{{cite parl |title=MAS |pages=353 |edition=2000 |year=2000}}</ref> Some states require a supermajority for passage of a constitutional amendment or statutory initiative.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/supermajority-vote-requirements.aspx |title=Supermajority Vote Requirements |access-date=December 31, 2015 |website=www.ncsl.org |publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures}}</ref>
[[Image:US governors veto override majorities map.svg|thumb|Governor legislative veto override majority required: {{legend|#ffcc00ff|majority of all members}}{{legend|#5ed360ff|3/5 majority of members present}}{{legend|#008000ff|3/5 majority of all members}}{{legend|#2a7fffff|2/3 majority of members present}}{{legend|#0044aaff|2/3 majority of all members}}{{legend|#808080ff|2/3 majority of all legislature members combined}}]]
[[Image:US state legislatures by majoritarian operation.svg|thumb|Supermajority needed to raise taxes]]
For [[State legislature (United States)|state legislatures in the United States]], ''[[Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure|Mason's Manual]]'' says, "A deliberative body cannot by its own act or rule require a two-thirds vote to take any action where the constitution or controlling authority requires only a majority vote. To require a two-thirds vote, for example, to take any action would be to give to any number more than one-third of the members the power to defeat the action and amount to a delegation of the powers of the body to a minority."<ref>{{Parliamentary manuals|title=MAS |pages=353 |edition=2000 |year=2000}}</ref> Some states require a supermajority for passage of a constitutional amendment or statutory initiative.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/supermajority-vote-requirements.aspx |title=Supermajority Vote Requirements |access-date=December 31, 2015 |website=www.ncsl.org |publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures}}</ref>


Many state constitutions allow or require amendments to their own constitutions to be proposed by supermajorities of the state legislature; these amendments must usually be approved by the voters at one or more subsequent elections. Michigan, for instance, allows the Legislature to propose an amendment to the Michigan Constitution; it must then be ratified by the voters at the next general election (unless a special election is called).<ref>{{Cite web |publisher=Michigan Legislature |title=Article XII § 1 |url=http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(p22jjt45odksm455blth42nj))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-Article-XII-1 |work=[[Constitution of Michigan]] of 1963 |access-date=December 30, 2015}}</ref>
Many state constitutions allow or require amendments to their own constitutions to be proposed by supermajorities of the state legislature; these amendments must usually be approved by the voters at one or more subsequent elections. Michigan, for instance, allows the Legislature to propose an amendment to the Michigan Constitution; it must then be ratified by the voters at the next general election (unless a special election is called).<ref>{{Cite web |publisher=Michigan Legislature |title=Article XII § 1 |url=http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(p22jjt45odksm455blth42nj))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-Article-XII-1 |work=[[Constitution of Michigan]] of 1963 |access-date=December 30, 2015}}</ref>


In most states, the state legislature may override a [[Governor (United States)|governor]]'s veto of legislation. In most states, a two-thirds supermajority of both chambers is required.<ref>{{cite web |first=Karen |last= Shanton |url=http://www.ncsl.org/blog/2013/10/28/wrapup-of-veto-overrides-in-states-with-veto-proof-legislatures-and-divided-government.aspx |title=Wrapup of Veto Overrides in States with Veto-Proof Legislatures and Divided Government |work=NCSL Blog |publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures |date = October 28, 2013}}</ref> However, in some states (e.g., [[Illinois]], [[Maryland]] and [[North Carolina]]), only a three-fifths supermajority is required,<ref>{{cite book |first=Dan |last=Friedman |title=The Maryland State Constitution: A Reference Guide |series=Reference Guides to the State Constitutions of the United States, No. 41 |publisher=Praeger |year=2006 |page=75}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Ann M. |last=Lousin |title=The Illinois State Constitution |series=Oxford Commentaries on the State Constitutions of the United States |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2011 |pages=119–21}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/legislation/constitution/ncconstitution.html |title=North Carolina State Constitution |access-date = May 3, 2016}}</ref> while in Kentucky and West Virginia only a normal majority is needed.
In most states, the state legislature may override a [[Governor (United States)|governor]]'s veto of legislation. In most states, a two-thirds supermajority of both chambers is required (of all members or present).<ref>{{cite web |first=Karen |last= Shanton |url=http://www.ncsl.org/blog/2013/10/28/wrapup-of-veto-overrides-in-states-with-veto-proof-legislatures-and-divided-government.aspx |title=Wrapup of Veto Overrides in States with Veto-Proof Legislatures and Divided Government |work=NCSL Blog |publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures |date = October 28, 2013}}</ref> However, in some states (e.g., [[Delaware]], [[Illinois]], [[Kansas]], [[Maryland]], [[North Carolina]] and [[Rhode Island]]), only a three-fifths supermajority is required (of all members or present).<ref>{{cite book |first=Dan |last=Friedman |title=The Maryland State Constitution: A Reference Guide |series=Reference Guides to the State Constitutions of the United States, No. 41 |publisher=Praeger |year=2006 |page=75}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Ann M. |last=Lousin |title=The Illinois State Constitution |series=Oxford Commentaries on the State Constitutions of the United States |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2011 |pages=119–21}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/legislation/constitution/ncconstitution.html |title=North Carolina State Constitution |access-date = May 3, 2016}}</ref> Some of the states mainly east of the Mississippi River like Alabama, Kentucky and West Virginia only a normal majority of all members is needed.


One common provision of so-called "[[taxpayer bill of rights]]" laws (either in state statutes or [[State constitution (United States)|state constitutions]]) is requirement of a supermajority vote in the state legislature to increase taxes. The [[National Conference of State Legislatures]] reported in 2010 that fifteen states required a supermajority vote (either a three-fifths, two-thirds or three-quarters majority vote in both chambers) to pass some or all tax increases.<ref>{{cite web |first = Bert |last = Waisanen |url = http://www.ncsl.org/research/fiscal-policy/state-tax-and-expenditure-limits-2010.aspx |title = State Tax and Expenditure Limits—2010 |publisher = [[National Conference of State Legislatures]] |year = 2010}}</ref>
One common provision of so-called "[[taxpayer bill of rights]]" laws (either in state statutes or [[State constitution (United States)|state constitutions]]) is requirement of a supermajority vote in the state legislature to increase taxes. The [[National Conference of State Legislatures]] reported in 2010 that fifteen states required a supermajority vote (either a three-fifths, two-thirds or three-quarters majority vote in both chambers) to pass some or all tax increases.<ref>{{cite web |first = Bert |last = Waisanen |url = http://www.ncsl.org/research/fiscal-policy/state-tax-and-expenditure-limits-2010.aspx |title = State Tax and Expenditure Limits—2010 |publisher = [[National Conference of State Legislatures]] |year = 2010}}</ref>


Supermajority requirements for tax increases have been criticized as "deeply flawed" by a report by the [[progressivism|progressive]] [[Center on Budget and Policy Priorities]] because such requirements empower a minority of legislators, making it difficult to close [[Tax break|tax loopholes]] or fund transportation [[infrastructure]], and also may encourage [[pork barrel|pork-barrel]] spending as a trade-off to ensure passage of a tax increase (see [[logrolling]]).<ref>{{cite web |first = Nicholas |last = Johnson |url = http://www.cbpp.org/research/a-super-bad-idea-requiring-a-two-thirds-legislative-supermajority-to-raise-taxes-protects |title = A Super Bad Idea: Requiring a Two-thirds Legislative Supermajority to Raise Taxes Protects Special Interest Tax Breaks and Gives Budget Veto Power to a Small Minority of Legislators |publisher = [[Center on Budget and Policy Priorities]] |date = April 25, 2006}}</ref>
Supermajority requirements for tax increases have been criticized as "deeply flawed" by a report by the [[progressivism|progressive]] [[Center on Budget and Policy Priorities]] because such requirements empower a minority of legislators, making it difficult to close [[Tax break|tax loopholes]] or fund transportation [[infrastructure]], and also may encourage [[pork barrel|pork-barrel]] spending as a trade-off to ensure passage of a tax increase (see [[logrolling]]).<ref>{{cite web |first = Nicholas |last = Johnson |url = http://www.cbpp.org/research/a-super-bad-idea-requiring-a-two-thirds-legislative-supermajority-to-raise-taxes-protects |title = A Super Bad Idea: Requiring a Two-thirds Legislative Supermajority to Raise Taxes Protects Special Interest Tax Breaks and Gives Budget Veto Power to a Small Minority of Legislators |publisher = [[Center on Budget and Policy Priorities]] |date = April 25, 2006}}</ref>
==International agreements==
The [[Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court]] requires a seven-eighths majority of participating states to be amended.


==See also==
==See also==
* [[Byzantine Fault Tolerance]] (mathematical proof for {{frac|2|3}} consensus threshold)
* [[Consensus decision-making]]
* [[Consensus decision-making]]
* [[Double majority]]
* [[Double majority]]
Line 213: Line 277:
[[Category:Majority]]
[[Category:Majority]]
[[Category:Power sharing]]
[[Category:Power sharing]]
[[de:Mehrheit#Qualifizierte Mehrheit]]

Latest revision as of 23:00, 25 March 2026


Template:Electoral systems sidebar

A supermajority is a requirement for a proposal to gain a specified level of support which is greater than the threshold of one-half used for a simple majority, the latter sometimes expressed as a "50%Template:Tsp+Template:Hsp1 vote". Supermajority rules in a democracy can help to prevent a majority from eroding fundamental rights of a minority, but can also hamper efforts to respond to problems and encourage corrupt compromises at times when action is taken. Changes to constitutions, especially those with entrenched clauses, commonly require supermajority support in a legislature. In consensus democracy, the supermajority rule is applied in most cases.

History[edit | edit source]

The first known use of a supermajority rule was in juries during the 100s BC in ancient Rome.[1] In some[which?] cases, two thirds of jurors had to confirm they were ready to take a decision before the matter went to a simple majority vote.

Pope Alexander III introduced the use of supermajority rule for papal elections at the Third Lateran Council in 1179.[2]

In the Democratic Party of the United States, a rule requiring the determination of a presidential nominee by the votes of two-thirds of delegates to the Democratic National Convention was adopted at the party's first presidential nominating convention in 1832.[3] The two-thirds rule gave southern Democrats a de facto veto over any presidential nominee after the Civil War, which lasted until the rule was abolished in 1936.[4]

In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison were critical of supermajority requirements. In Federalist 22, Hamilton wrote that while preventing harmful legislation from being passed, such requirements also prevented beneficial legislation from being passed, and "its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority". Hamilton also wrote that such a requirement would encourage "contemptible compromises of the public good".[5] In Federalist 58, Madison wrote that supermajority requirements might help impede the passage of "hasty and partial measures", but "[i]n all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule; the power would be transferred to the minority." Madison also wrote that such requirements would encourage secession.[6]

Common thresholds of supermajority[edit | edit source]

A majority vote, or more than half the votes cast, is a common voting basis. Instead of the basis of a majority, a supermajority can be specified using any fraction or percentage which is greater than one-half.[7][8] Common supermajorities include three-fifths (60%), two-thirds (66.666...%), and three-quarters (75%). In most cases, if the supermajority fraction or percentage of votes yields a non-whole number, it is rounded to the next higher whole number.

Two-thirds[edit | edit source]

A two-thirds vote, when unqualified, means two-thirds or more of the votes cast.[9][10][11] This voting basis is equivalent to the number of votes in favor being at least twice the number of votes against.[12] Abstentions and absences may be excluded when calculating a two-thirds vote.[10]

The two-thirds requirement can be qualified to include the entire membership of a body instead of only those present and voting, but such a requirement must be explicitly stated (such as "two-thirds of those members duly elected and sworn").[9] In this case, abstentions and absences count as votes against the proposal. Alternatively, the voting requirement could be specified as "two-thirds of those present", which has the effect of counting abstentions but not absences as votes against the proposal.[13]

For example, if there are 100 eligible voters, 67 votes are required for a supermajority (two-thirds of 100, rounded up). However, if two voters abstain or are absent, the total decreases to 98, and the required votes for a supermajority drops to 66 (two-thirds of 98, rounded up).[14]

In Italy, between 1948 and 1993, the Senate was divided into a number of single-seat constituencies, where, to get elected in a FPTP vote, a two-thirds majority of votes was required. Usually, it was attainable only for the South Tyrolean People's Party senators representing the German-speaking minority of South Tyrol, thus most other Senators were still elected proportionally in regional constituencies, after being grouped in party lists.[15]

Two-thirds is the most common supermajority requirement in the US Constitution, as set out in: Article I with regard to veto overrides; Article II with regard to treaty ratification and to presidential conviction and removal after an impeachment; and Article V with regard to the proposal of constitutional amendments either by Congress or via petitions by the states.

Systems that exercise consensus based on a minimum threshold of two-thirds super-majority also some-what reflect the technical mathematical attributes of Byzantine Fault Tolerance which requires a super-majority consensus agreement greater than a minimum threshold of two-thirds of a group.

Three-fifths, or 60 percent[edit | edit source]

Another type of supermajority is three-fifths (60 percent). This requirement could also be qualified to include the entire membership or to include those present.

In 2006, the Constitution of Florida was amended to require a 60% majority to pass new constitutional amendments by popular vote.[16]

In Poland, the Sejm (lower house of the bicameral parliament of Poland) requires a three-fifths majority of MPs present to overturn a veto from the President of Poland.[17]

55%[edit | edit source]

For the Montenegrin independence referendum held in 2006 the European Union envoy Miroslav Lajčák proposed independence if a 55% supermajority of votes are cast in favor with a minimum turnout of 50%. Such procedure, ultimately accepted by the government of Montenegro, was somewhat criticized as overriding the traditional practice of requiring a two-thirds supermajority, as practiced in all former Yugoslav countries before (including the previous referendum in Montenegro).[citation needed] The requirement for 50% turnout has also been criticized for causing no-show paradoxes.

In 2016, the Constitution of Colorado was amended to require a 55% majority to pass new constitutional amendments by popular vote. It had previously been a simple majority.[18]

Use in parliamentary procedure[edit | edit source]

Parliamentary procedures can utilize supermajority rules to avoid the tyranny of the majority[19] and increase political stability.[20] The Robert's Rules of Order states:[10]

As a compromise between the rights of the individual and the rights of the assembly, the principle has been established that a two-thirds vote is required to adopt any motion that: (a) suspends or modifies a rule of order previously adopted; (b) prevents the introduction of a question for consideration; (c) closes, limits, or extends the limits of debate; (d) closes nominations or the polls, or otherwise limits the freedom of nominating or voting; or (e) takes away membership.

Supermajority rules can contribute to gridlock and cause the tyranny of the supermajority.[21] Supermajority pivot points[22] can show higher volatility than median pivot points in case of political polarization.[23]

Use in governments around the world[edit | edit source]

Australia[edit | edit source]

To pass an amendment to the Australian Constitution, a referendum is required and must achieve a "double majority": a majority of those voting nationwide, as well as separate majorities in a majority of states (i.e., 4 out of 6 states).[24] Furthermore, in circumstances where a specific state is affected by a referendum, a majority of voters in that state must also agree to the change[25]—referred to as a "triple majority".[citation needed]

Bangladesh[edit | edit source]

Article 142 of the Constitution of Bangladesh stipulates a bill in the Jatiya Sangsad must expressly state in its short title its purpose is to amend a provision of the constitution. Constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority in the unicameral Jatiya Sangsad to become effective.

Canada[edit | edit source]

In Canada, most constitutional amendments can be passed only if identical resolutions are adopted by the House of Commons, the Senate, and two-thirds or more of the provincial legislative assemblies representing at least 50 percent of the national population.

Czech republic[edit | edit source]

Any change of Constitution of the Czech Republic or any other Constitutional act of the Czech Republic require a 3/5 majority of all Deputies in Chamber of Deputies and 3/5 of Senators present. Same supermajority is needed for ratification of the international treaty that transfers part of state sovereignty to some international organization.[26] Same majorities apply for start of impeachment procedure of the President of the republic.[27] Majority of all members in both chambers are needed for: declaration of war, deployment of Czech armed forces outside Czech republic, approval of foreign armed forces movement inside of the country, or for approval of Czech republic membership in defensive international organization.

Chamber of Deputies can order its own dissolution by 3/5 vote of all deputies.[28]

Denmark[edit | edit source]

Article 20 of the Constitution of Denmark states that if the government or parliament wants to cede parts of national sovereignty to an international body such as the European Union or the United Nations, it has to get a five-sixths majority in the Folketing (150 out of 179 seats).[29] If there is only a simple majority, a referendum must be held on the subject.[29]

European Union[edit | edit source]

Council[edit | edit source]

The Council of the European Union uses 'Qualified majority voting' for the majority of issues brought before the institution. However, for matters of extreme importance for individual member states, unanimous voting is implemented.[30] An example of this is Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, whereby a member state can have its rights suspended with the unanimous approval of all other member states.

After the accession of Croatia, on 1 July 2013, at least 260 votes out of a total of 352 by at least 15 member states were required for legislation to be adopted by qualified majority. From 1 July 2013, the pass condition translated into:

  1. At least 15 (or 18, if proposal was not made by the commission) countries,
  2. At least 260 of the total 352 voting weights,
  3. At least 313.6 million people represented by the states that vote in favour.

Parliament[edit | edit source]

Requirements to reach an absolute majority is a common feature of voting in the European Parliament (EP) where under the ordinary legislative procedure the EP is required to act by an absolute majority if it is to either amend or reject proposed legislation.[31]

Finland[edit | edit source]

According to Finnish Law, when a new legislative proposal would in some way add, alter or remove a part of the Finnish constitution, a bill requires a 2/3 majority approval (or 134 out of 200 representatives) in the Parliament of Finland. The voting takes place in the first session after the parliamentary elections following the original proposal. Alternatively, the proposition may be declared urgent, in which case the voting takes place before the next elections, requiring an approval of a 5/6 majority.[32]

India[edit | edit source]

Article 368 of the Indian Constitution requires a supermajority of two-thirds of members present and voting in each house of the Indian Parliament, subject to at least by a majority of the total membership of each House of Parliament, to amend the constitution. In addition, in matters affecting the states and judiciary, at least above half of all the states need to ratify the amendment.

Italy[edit | edit source]

The President of Italy is elected by an electoral college consisting of both chambers of Parliament sitting in joint session with 58 electors from the country's 20 regions. In the first three rounds of voting, a candidate must get two-thirds of the votes to win, but from the fourth round onwards only an absolute majority is needed. Reforms to the Constitution need to achieve a supermajority of two-thirds of the votes both in the Chamber and in the Senate to avoid the possibility of being sent to popular vote in order to be confirmed through a referendum.

Japan[edit | edit source]

Amendments to the constitution require a two-thirds majority in both houses of the National Diet and a simple majority in a referendum.[33]

New Zealand[edit | edit source]

Section 268 of the Electoral Act sets out a number of 'reserved provisions'. These provisions include section 17(1) of the Constitution Act 1986 (regarding Parliament's term length), section 35 of the Electoral Act (regarding the drawing of electoral boundaries), and section 74 of the Electoral Act (designating 18 as the minimum voting age). For a 'reserved provision' to be amended or repealed, a three-quarters majority is required in the House of Representatives or a majority is needed in a national referendum.[34]

Nigeria[edit | edit source]

Under the Constitution of Nigeria a two-thirds majority is required in the National Assembly to alter the Constitution, enact legislation in a few areas, or remove office holders from some positions, such as Speaker. Legislative override or impeachment of the executive at either the state or federal government level also requires a two-thirds majority of the corresponding legislative assembly.[35]

Philippines[edit | edit source]

Under the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, a two-thirds majority of both chambers of the Congress of the Philippines (the House of Representatives and the Senate) meeting in joint session is required to declare war.[36] A two-thirds majority of both chambers is required to override a presidential veto.[36][37] A two-thirds vote of both chambers of Congress voting separately is required to designate the vice president as acting president in the event that a majority of the Cabinet certifies that the president is "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" but the president declares that no such inability exists.[36] A two-thirds vote of either chamber is required to suspend or expel a member from that chamber.[36]

Under the 1987 Constitution, "The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members, call a constitutional convention, or by a majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention."[36] A three-quarters vote of all the members of the Congress is required to propose an amendment to the Constitution; the proposed amendment is submitted to the people for ratification (by a majority of the votes cast) in a plebiscite.[36]

A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to ratify treaties, and to remove an impeached official from office.[36] Impeachment by the House, which is the required first step in the removal process, only requires one-third of Representatives to sign a petition (specifically a verified complaint or resolution of impeachment).[36][38][39]

Poland[edit | edit source]

To amend the Constitution the Sejm need to approve the change with at least two-thirds majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Deputies, and then by the Senate by an absolute majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Senators. Changes of the chapters 1, 2 and 12 of the Constitution have to be approved by majority of participating voters in referendum.[40] For ratification of the international treaty that transfers part of state sovereignty to some international organization two-thirds majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Sejm Deputies and two-thirds majority of votes in the presence of at least half of all Senators is needed.[41]

Sejm can order its own dissolution by two-thirds vote majority of all deputies (Senate is then also automatically dissolved).[42]

The president may return the bill to the Sejm in a standard package veto, the Sejm can override the bill by a three-fifths majority of members present (at least half of all members have to be present).[43]

Singapore[edit | edit source]

Different amendment procedures apply to different parts of the Constitution. Most of the Articles of the Constitution may be amended by a bill enacted by Parliament if there is at least a supermajority of two-thirds of all elected MPs voting in favour of the bill during its Second and Third Readings in Parliament.[44] This is in contrast to ordinary bills, which only need to be approved by at least a simple majority of all the MPs present and voting.[45]

However, the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) has commanded a majority of more than two-thirds of the seats in Parliament since 1968. Thus, the more stringent amendment requirement has not imposed any major limitation on Parliament's ability to amend the Constitution.[46][failed verification]

South Korea[edit | edit source]

Legislation[edit | edit source]

A three-fifths majority of legislators is required for a bill to be put to a vote in the National Assembly in order to prevent the ruling party from passing laws without the support of opposition parties.[47] However, if a bill does not achieve the required three-fifths majority at one session without also being rejected, it must then be voted on at the next session even if less than three-fifths of legislators agree to do so.[48] Additionally, if the President vetoes a bill, the veto can be overridden by a two-thirds vote in congress, provided that an absolute majority of legislators are in attendance.[49]

Impeachment[edit | edit source]

According to Article 65 of the Constitution of South Korea, impeachment of the President requires a two-third majority of legislators to be effective.[49]

Judicial review[edit | edit source]

According to Article 113 of the Constitution of South Korea, the Constitutional Court requires a two-thirds majority of its judges to issue rulings nullifying laws, removing impeached officials or dissolving a political party.[49]

Constitutional amendments[edit | edit source]

According to Article 130 of the Constitution of South Korea, amendments to the constitution must be passed by a two-thirds majority of legislators and then approved by voters at a referendum in order to become effective.[49]

Spain[edit | edit source]

Constitutional reform[edit | edit source]

The 1978 Constitution states that a three-fifths majority in both Congress of Deputies and Senate of Spain is needed to pass a constitutional reform, but if a two-thirds majority is reached in the Congress of Deputies, an absolute majority of senators is enough to pass the proposal.[50]

Nevertheless, when a new Constitution is proposed or the proposal's goal is to reform the Preliminary Title, the Chapter on Fundamental Rights and Freedoms or the Title on the Crown, the supermajority becomes significantly harder:

  • A supermajority of two-thirds must be reached in both Congress of Deputies and Senate.
  • Both chambers must be dissolved.
  • The new elected chambers must approve the proposal by a new two-thirds supermajority.
  • Finally, the proposal is passed by majority in referendum.

The first way has been used twice (1992 and 2011), but the second has never been used.

Other legal procedures[edit | edit source]

The Spanish Constitution states other supermajorities:

  • Members of the General Council of the Judiciary are appointed by the Congress of Deputies and Senate of Spain, and each appointment needs a three-fifths majority.[51]
  • Members of the Constitutional Court are also appointed by both Congress of Deputies and Senate of Spain, and each appointment needs a three-fifths majority.[51]
  • The president of the RTVE, the public radio and television broadcaster, must be elected by two-thirds majority of the Congress of Deputies.[52]

Autonomous communities[edit | edit source]

Each Spanish autonomous community has its own Statute of Autonomy, working like a local constitution that is subject to the 1978 Constitution and national powers.

The Statute of Autonomy of the Canary Islands states that its economic and fiscal regime and electoral law need a two-thirds majority of the Parliament to be modified.[53] On its behalf, the Ombudsman needs a three-fifths majority to be appointed. Also, if a two-thirds majority votes against a law project, it must be proposed to the following session.

Taiwan[edit | edit source]

Before the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China in 2005, constitutional amendments needed to be passed by the National Assembly. Since the Additional Articles were ratified on June 7, 2005, the National Assembly was abolished. Amendments of the constitution need to be proposed by more than one-quarter of members of the Legislative Yuan, passed by three-quarters of those present in the meeting, the presence of which must surpass three-quarters of all members of the Legislative Yuan, followed by the approval of more than half (50%) of all eligible voters in a referendum.

Turkey[edit | edit source]

In Turkey, constitutional amendments need a three fifths majority (360 votes) to be put forward to a referendum and a two-thirds majority (400 votes) to be ratified directly.

Ukraine[edit | edit source]

Legislative veto[edit | edit source]

The president of Ukraine may refuse to sign a bill and return it to the Verkhovna Rada with proposed amendments. The Verkhovna Rada may override a veto by a two-thirds majority.

Constitutional amendments[edit | edit source]

According to Article 155 of the Constitution of Ukraine, amendments to the constitution, except for Chapter I — "General Principles," Chapter III — "Elections. Referendum", and Chapter XIII — "Introducing Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine", must be previously approved by a simple majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and then passed by a two-thirds majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine at the succeeding regular session of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

According to Article 156 of the Constitution of Ukraine, amendments to Chapter I — "General Principles," Chapter III — "Elections. Referendum", and Chapter XIII — "Introducing Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine" must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and then approved by voters at a referendum in order to become effective.

United Kingdom[edit | edit source]

UK Parliament[edit | edit source]

A rare example of a supermajority requirement affecting the Parliament of the United Kingdom is the need for a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords to amend or dissolve the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press, insofar as it applies in England and Wales.[54][55]

Before its repeal, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 provided that the United Kingdom House of Commons could be dissolved and an election held before the expiry of its 5-year term by a vote of two-thirds of the membership of the House of Commons. The Act also provided that Parliament could alternatively be dissolved if the House of Commons passed a motion of no-confidence in the government and no new government were to win a motion of confidence within two weeks of the original vote of no-confidence.

The two-thirds supermajority provision for an early dissolution and election was triggered only once, resulting in the 2017 United Kingdom General Election. The previous election in 2015 had occurred due to the natural expiry of the 5-year term of the House of Commons.

Parliamentary supremacy meant that theoretically the Act could be circumvented by a government with a majority that wanted to bypass the requirement for a two-thirds vote by passing an act that stated, "Notwithstanding the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, a general election will be called on DATE". This was precisely what was done to initiate the election in 2019, the final election held whilst the Fixed-term Parliaments Act was in effect.

During the 2019 election, both the governing Conservative Party and the opposition Labour Party expressed a desire to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act and restore the traditional, centuries-old system under which elections could be held at any time, subject to the 5-year maximum term limit established by the Parliament Act 1911. Such a repeal would only require a simple majority.

Ultimately, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act was repealed by the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, thereby removing any supermajority requirement and restoring the previous royal prerogative power to dissolve the House of Commons at any time during its 5-year term.

Devolved parliaments[edit | edit source]

The devolved legislatures in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales all usually operate with fixed intervals between ordinary elections. However, the acts governing the operation of those legislatures all allow for an early election to take place if a motion to that effect is approved by two-thirds of the total number of members of the legislature in question.[56][57][58]

Section 31A of the Scotland Act 1998[59] and Section 111A of the Government of Wales Act 2006[60] provide that certain provisions of those Acts relating to the functions of and elections to the respective Scottish and Welsh devolved legislatures are protected from amendment by those legislatures, unless a two-thirds supermajority of the total number of members votes in favour.

Regarding Scotland, the protected provisions are:[61]

  • Who may vote at Scottish Parliament elections
  • The system of election for members of the Scottish Parliament
  • The number of Scottish Parliament constituencies
  • The number of members returned by each constituency

The protected provisions regarding Wales are the same as those in Scotland; in addition, there are two Wales-specific provisions:[60]

  • The name of the legislature
  • The number of individuals permitted to be appointed Welsh Minister or Deputy Welsh Minister

A two-thirds supermajority vote is required in the Scottish Parliament in order to amend or dissolve the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press, insofar as it applies in Scotland.[54][55]

Local authorities[edit | edit source]

Principal councils in Wales are required to pass a resolution with a two-thirds supermajority vote in order to change the system by which they are elected, with the permitted choices being first-past-the-post and single transferable vote.[62]

District councils in England are required to pass a resolution with a two-thirds supermajority vote in order to change their 'electoral scheme,' i.e. what proportion of councillors is elected at each ordinary election, with permitted proportions being one-third, one-half or all councillors.[63]

The London Assembly may, by a two-thirds supermajority vote, veto the mayor's draft strategies.[64]

United Nations[edit | edit source]

The United Nations Security Council requires a supermajority of the fixed membership on all matters. According to Article 27 of the United Nations Charter, at least nine of the Security Council's 15 members (i.e., a three-fifths supermajority) must vote in favor of a draft resolution in order to achieve passage. Furthermore, on a substantive resolution, none of the permanent members (the People's Republic of China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States) can vote against the proposal, otherwise it fails, effectively giving them a veto which cannot be overridden. Abstentions do not count as votes against, allowing permanent members to express disapproval on a substantive resolution without vetoing it by abstaining from the vote. However, since the supermajority for passage specifies the votes must be for a resolution, abstentions and absences could be considered negative votes if the number of affirmative votes is below nine.

The United Nations General Assembly requires a supermajority of those present and voting on "very important questions" such as admitting new member-states to the United Nations. According to Article 18 of the Charter, this means two-thirds of votes cast must favor a resolution for it to be adopted. This means that abstentions and absences have no effect on a resolution provided the quorum is met. On all other votes in the United Nations System are done by simple majority of those present.

United States[edit | edit source]

Federal government[edit | edit source]

The Constitution of the United States requires supermajorities for certain significant actions to occur.[65]

Amendments to the Constitution may be proposed in one of two ways: a two-thirds supermajority votes of each body of United States Congress or a convention called by Congress on application of two-thirds (currently 34) of the states. Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified by three-quarters (currently 38) of the states (either through the state legislatures, or ratification conventions, whichever "mode of ratification" Congress selects).

Congress may pass bills by simple majority votes. If the president vetoes a bill, Congress may override the veto by a two-thirds supermajority of both houses.

A treaty must be ratified by a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate to enter into force and effect.

Section 4 of the Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution gives Congress a role to play in the event of a presidential disability. If the vice president and a majority of the president's cabinet declare that the president is unable to serve in that role, the vice president becomes acting president. Within 21 days of such a declaration (or, if Congress is in recess when a president is disabled, 21 days after Congress reconvenes), Congress must vote by two-thirds supermajorities to continue the disability declaration; otherwise, such declaration expires after the 21 days and the president would at that time "resume" discharging all the powers and duties of the office. As of January 2025, Section 4 has never been invoked.

The House may, by a simple majority vote, impeach a federal official (such as, but not limited to, the president, vice president, or a federal judge). Removal from office requires a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate. In 1842, the House failed to impeach president John Tyler. In 1868, the Senate fell one vote short of removing president Andrew Johnson following his impeachment. In 1999, efforts to remove Bill Clinton following his impeachment in 1998 fell just short of a simple majority, and 17 votes short of the two-thirds supermajority. The impeachment procedure was last used in 2021, when president Donald Trump was impeached for a second time during his first term and subsequently acquitted. Each chamber may expel one of its own members by a two-thirds supermajority vote; this last happened when the House expelled George Santos in 2023.

The 14th Amendment (section 3) bars a person from federal or state office if, after having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution as a federal or state officer, "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof". However, both the House and Senate may jointly override this restriction with a two-thirds supermajority vote each.

A two-thirds supermajority in the Senate is 67 out of 100 senators, while a two-thirds supermajority in the House is 290 out of 435 representatives. However, since many votes take place without every seat in the House filled and representatives participating, it does not often require 67 senators or 290 representatives to achieve this supermajority.

Apart from these constitutional requirements, a Senate rule (except in cases covered by the nuclear option, or of a rule change) requires an absolute supermajority of three-fifths to move to a vote through a cloture motion, which closes debate on a bill or nomination, thus ending a filibuster by a minority of members. In current practice, the mere threat of a filibuster prevents passing almost any measure that has less than three-fifths agreement in the Senate, 60 of the 100 senators if every seat is filled.

State government[edit | edit source]

Governor legislative veto override majority required:
  majority of all members
  3/5 majority of members present
  3/5 majority of all members
  2/3 majority of members present
  2/3 majority of all members
  2/3 majority of all legislature members combined
Supermajority needed to raise taxes

For state legislatures in the United States, Mason's Manual says, "A deliberative body cannot by its own act or rule require a two-thirds vote to take any action where the constitution or controlling authority requires only a majority vote. To require a two-thirds vote, for example, to take any action would be to give to any number more than one-third of the members the power to defeat the action and amount to a delegation of the powers of the body to a minority."[66] Some states require a supermajority for passage of a constitutional amendment or statutory initiative.[67]

Many state constitutions allow or require amendments to their own constitutions to be proposed by supermajorities of the state legislature; these amendments must usually be approved by the voters at one or more subsequent elections. Michigan, for instance, allows the Legislature to propose an amendment to the Michigan Constitution; it must then be ratified by the voters at the next general election (unless a special election is called).[68]

In most states, the state legislature may override a governor's veto of legislation. In most states, a two-thirds supermajority of both chambers is required (of all members or present).[69] However, in some states (e.g., Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, North Carolina and Rhode Island), only a three-fifths supermajority is required (of all members or present).[70][71][72] Some of the states mainly east of the Mississippi River like Alabama, Kentucky and West Virginia only a normal majority of all members is needed.

One common provision of so-called "taxpayer bill of rights" laws (either in state statutes or state constitutions) is requirement of a supermajority vote in the state legislature to increase taxes. The National Conference of State Legislatures reported in 2010 that fifteen states required a supermajority vote (either a three-fifths, two-thirds or three-quarters majority vote in both chambers) to pass some or all tax increases.[73]

Supermajority requirements for tax increases have been criticized as "deeply flawed" by a report by the progressive Center on Budget and Policy Priorities because such requirements empower a minority of legislators, making it difficult to close tax loopholes or fund transportation infrastructure, and also may encourage pork-barrel spending as a trade-off to ensure passage of a tax increase (see logrolling).[74]

International agreements[edit | edit source]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court requires a seven-eighths majority of participating states to be amended.

See also[edit | edit source]

References[edit | edit source]

  1. Schwartzberg, Melissa (2013). "Prelude: Acclamation and Aggregation in the Ancient World - The Origin of Supermajority Rules". Counting the Many: The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 44–46. ISBN 978-0-521-19823-3. Retrieved December 5, 2016. Although a supermajority was necessary to demonstrate the sufficiency of the case – the presence of adequate information to form a judgment – a majority sufficed to convict. (p. 46)
  2. Schwartzberg (2013), pp. 51, 58–59
  3. Bensel, Richard Franklin (2008). Passion and Preferences: William Jennings Bryan and the 1896 Democratic Convention. Cambridge University Press. p. 131.
  4. Schulman, Bruce J. (1994). From Cotton Belt to Sunbelt: Federal Policy, Economic Development, and the Transformation of the South, 1938–1980. Duke University Press. p. 45.
  5. "Founders Online: The Federalist No. 22, [14 December 1787]".
  6. "Founders Online: The Federalist No. 58, [20 February 1788]".
  7. See dictionary definition of "supermajority" at thefreedictionary.com. "Qualified majority" redirects to this definition.
  8. Schermers, Henry G.; Blokker, Niels M. (2011). International Institutional Law: Unity Within Diversity (Fifth Revised ed.). Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. pp. 561–563. ISBN 978-90-04-18798-6.
  9. 9.0 9.1 Robert (2011), p. 402.p
  10. 10.0 10.1 10.2 Robert, Henry M.; et al. (2011). Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (in zen) (11th ed.). Philadelphia: Da Capo Press. p. 401. ISBN 978-0-306-82020-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link)
  11. "Frequently Asked Questions about RONR (Question 5)". The Official Robert's Rules of Order Web Site. The Robert's Rules Association. Archived from the original on December 24, 2018. Retrieved December 30, 2015.
  12. Robert (2011), p. 406
  13. "Frequently Asked Questions about RONR (Question 6)". The Official Robert's Rules of Order Web Site. The Robert's Rules Association. Archived from the original on December 24, 2018. Retrieved December 30, 2015.
  14. Robert (2011), p. 403
  15. "Il sistema elettorale per il Senato". web2003.senato.it (in italiano). Archived from the original on June 18, 2009. Retrieved June 5, 2025.
  16. "Florida Amendment 3, 60% Majority Requirement for Constitutional Amendments Amendment (2006)". Ballotpedia.
  17. "Konwencja PO. Budka proponuje Koalicję 276. "Tyle głosów potrzebnych do przejęcia władzy"". gazetapl (in polski). February 6, 2021. Retrieved July 6, 2021.
  18. "Colorado Imposition of Distribution and Supermajority Requirements for Citizen-Initiated Constitutional Amendments, Amendment 71 (2016)". Ballotpedia. Retrieved January 15, 2017.
  19. Bradbury, John Charles; Johnson, Joseph M. (2006). "Do Supermajority Rules Limit or Enhance Majority Tyranny? Evidence from the US States, 1960-1997". Public Choice. 127 (3/4). Springer: 437–449. ISSN 0048-5829. JSTOR 30026598. Retrieved February 4, 2026.
  20. Tsebelis, George (2011). "Veto Players". Princeton University Press. Retrieved February 4, 2026.
  21. McGann, A. J. (2004). "The Tyranny of the Supermajority: How Majority Rule Protects Minorities". Journal of Theoretical Politics. 16 (1): 53–77. doi:10.1177/0951629804038902. ISSN 0951-6298. Retrieved February 4, 2026.
  22. Krehbiel, Keith (1998). Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  23. Brunell, Thomas L.; Grofman, Bernard; Merrill, Samuel (2016). "The volatility of median and supermajoritarian pivots in the U.S. Congress and the effects of party polarization". Public Choice. 166 (1–2): 183–204. doi:10.1007/s11127-016-0320-0. ISSN 0048-5829. Retrieved February 4, 2026.
  24. "Referendums and plebiscites". Parliamentary Education Office. June 16, 2023. Archived from the original on August 8, 2023. Retrieved August 25, 2023. Section 128 of the Constitution says a referendum is passed if it is approved by a majority of voters across the nation and a majority of voters in a majority of states — a double majority.
  25. "COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 128. Mode of altering the Constitution". Australasian Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on June 24, 2023. Retrieved August 25, 2023. No alteration diminishing the proportionate representation of any State in either House of the Parliament, or the minimum number of representatives of a State in the House of Representatives, or increasing, diminishing, or otherwise altering the limits of the State, or in any manner affecting the provisions of the Constitution in relation thereto, shall become law unless the majority of the electors voting in that State approve the proposed law.
  26. Constitution of the Czech Republic, Art. 39
  27. Constitution of the Czech Republic, Art. 65
  28. Constitution of the Czech Republic, Art. 35
  29. 29.0 29.1 Pedersen, Susannah; Christensen, Jens Peter (November 2015). "03 - Regeringen". Min grundlov - Grundloven med forklaringer (PDF) (13 ed.). Folketingets Kommunikationsenhed. pp. 27–28. ISBN 978-87-7982-172-9. Til vedtagelse af lovforslag herom kræves et flertal på fem sjettedele af Folketingets medlemmer. Opnås et sådant flertal ikke, men dog det til vedtagelse af almindelige lovforslag nødvendige flertal, og opretholder regeringen forslaget, forelægges det folketingsvælgerne til godkendelse eller forkastelse efter de for folkeafstemninger i §42 fastsatte regler.
  30. "Intergovernmental decision-making procedures - EU fact sheets - European Parliament". www.europarl.europa.eu. Archived from the original on December 1, 2017. Retrieved May 9, 2017.
  31. See Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.
  32. "The Constitution of Finland (731/1999, amendments up to 817/2018 included, English translation)" (PDF). Page 15, chapter 6, section 73. Retrieved February 22, 2026.
  33. "The Constitution of Japan". japan.kantei.go.jp. Retrieved December 30, 2015.
  34. "Electoral Act 1993". New Zealand Legislation. Retrieved September 10, 2021.
  35. "Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria". Nigeria law. Retrieved November 12, 2018.
  36. 36.0 36.1 36.2 36.3 36.4 36.5 36.6 36.7 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, Official Gazette.
  37. Elliot Bulmer, International IDEA Constitution-Building Primer 14: Presidential Veto Powers Primer, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, 2d ed. 2017, p. 14.
  38. Impeachment in the Philippines: Joseph Estrada faces a tough fight to hold on to his presidency, The Economist (November 9, 2000).
  39. Seth Mydans, Philippine Congress Impeaches President on Graft Charges, New York Times (November 14, 2000).
  40. Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 235
  41. Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 90
  42. Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 98
  43. Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Art. 122
  44. Constitution, Art. 5(2).
  45. Constitution, Art. 57(1).
  46. Neo & Lee, p. 165.
  47. "The Tyranny of the Minority in South Korea". The Diplomat. Retrieved December 30, 2015.
  48. "Controversial South Korean 'anti-leaflet' bill delayed after filibuster attempt". NK News. December 9, 2020.
  49. 49.0 49.1 49.2 49.3 "Constitution of the Republic of Korea". Refworld.
  50. "Title X of the Constitution: Constitutional Reform (in Spanish)". Constitución.es. Retrieved June 9, 2018.
  51. 51.0 51.1 "The Constitution (in Spanish)". Constitución.es. Retrieved June 9, 2018.
  52. "The Congress passes that the president RTVE will be appointed by consensus again (in Spanish)". eldiario.es. June 22, 2017. Retrieved June 9, 2018.
  53. "Statute of Autonomy of the Canary Islands (in Spanish)" (PDF). Retrieved June 9, 2018.
  54. 54.0 54.1 "Press regulation: What you need to know". BBC News. April 13, 2016. Retrieved July 7, 2024. While an act of parliament can be amended with a simple majority, it was possible to insert a clause in the Royal Charter requiring any changes to be approved by a two-thirds majority.
  55. 55.0 55.1 Burrell, Ian (October 29, 2013). "Press regulation: Judge for yourself - the Royal Charter in full". The Independent. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  56. Template:Cite legislation UK
  57. Template:Cite legislation UK
  58. Template:Cite legislation UK
  59. Template:Cite legislation UK
  60. 60.0 60.1 Template:Cite legislation UK
  61. Template:Cite legislation UK
  62. "Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 (2021 asc. 1): Voting systems for elections to principal councils". legislation.gov.uk. The National Archives. January 20, 2021. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  63. "Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (2007 c. 28), part 2 chapter 1: Power of district councils in England to change electoral scheme". legislation.gov.uk. The National Archives. October 30, 2007. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  64. Template:Cite legislation UK
  65. Hudiburg, Jane A. (July 24, 2018). Supermajority Votes in the House (PDF). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Retrieved September 8, 2018.
  66. Template:Parliamentary manuals
  67. "Supermajority Vote Requirements". www.ncsl.org. National Conference of State Legislatures. Retrieved December 31, 2015.
  68. "Article XII § 1". Constitution of Michigan of 1963. Michigan Legislature. Retrieved December 30, 2015.
  69. Shanton, Karen (October 28, 2013). "Wrapup of Veto Overrides in States with Veto-Proof Legislatures and Divided Government". NCSL Blog. National Conference of State Legislatures.
  70. Friedman, Dan (2006). The Maryland State Constitution: A Reference Guide. Reference Guides to the State Constitutions of the United States, No. 41. Praeger. p. 75.
  71. Lousin, Ann M. (2011). The Illinois State Constitution. Oxford Commentaries on the State Constitutions of the United States. Oxford University Press. pp. 119–21.
  72. "North Carolina State Constitution". Retrieved May 3, 2016.
  73. Waisanen, Bert (2010). "State Tax and Expenditure Limits—2010". National Conference of State Legislatures.
  74. Johnson, Nicholas (April 25, 2006). "A Super Bad Idea: Requiring a Two-thirds Legislative Supermajority to Raise Taxes Protects Special Interest Tax Breaks and Gives Budget Veto Power to a Small Minority of Legislators". Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Template:Majorities Template:Parliamentary procedure