In the theory of pivotal politics, as proposed by Keith Krehbiel, supermajorities are necessary to overcome deadlock, which is the disadvantage of the simple majority. A qualified majority vote is one that comprises more than half of the votes and is used quite often in the United States Congress. Common supermajorities include two-thirds, three-fifths, and three-quarters of the votes. A simple majority vote is one that uses the greatest number of votes for a particular party or candidate and can be a simple solution to decision making. However, using a simple majority often results in two parties launching a filibuster and can lead to stalemate. Therefore, the absolute majority can be very useful since more than half of the total voters must approve the legislative act being passed. The absolute majority can be a way to break politics out of the region's deadlock between filibuster and veto vote on Krehbiel's fundamental political model, while the simple majority keeps politics stuck in this region. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssaySupermajorities have been used throughout history in the United States Congress when passing a bill and are a good way to find balance in bipartisan coalition decision making. Healthcare in the United States has been a long-debated topic, and during the Clinton presidency, both simple and supermajorities were used in crafting healthcare reforms. The Clinton health plan drafted in 1993 was a reform proposed by the Clinton administration and aided by the task force chair, First Lady Hillary Clinton. Clinton's plan was to provide universal health care to all Americans through a health insurance card that would allow every citizen access to medical care regardless of pre-existing conditions. The bill was proposed in the House of Representatives and won with a simple majority vote, easily won by the Senate's Democratic majority. While using a simple majority can be a quick and easy way to pass policy, it can be dangerous since only half of the total voters need to agree on the terms. This can be especially dangerous if a bill is not widely accepted by one party, but can still be easily passed by the other. However, the bill still had to be passed by the Senate with a three-fifths supermajority to become a law. The bill was widely opposed by Republicans, libertarians, and the health insurance industry; the bill faced enormous backlash due to a barrage of advertisements paid for by the pharmaceutical industry. When the Senate voted, the bill did not pass, meaning the status quo would remain the same. Depending on which political side people fall on, supermajority voting can be advantageous, or it can stifle a president's ambitions to realize his visions. While it can prevent parties that tend to have polarities in their view from implementing destructive bills, it can also prevent them from passing bills that will make real change in politics. In some cases the president completely fails to pass a bill or a smaller, less effective one is passed instead of what was originally intended. Before Clinton's plan was proposed, itThe status quo for the health policy used in the following example was Medicare and Medicaid reform in 1965. Until the Clinton plan, these provisions involved the most significant overhaul of coverage in the U.S. health care system. The primary purpose of Medicare is to insure Americans age sixty-five and older and those with disabilities. Medicaid covers the cost of medical care for people with limited income. In the key political chart below, Clinton's policy is too far from the median voter to win policy approval and the status quo remains. After the initial bill was proposed, conservatives filibustered and the bill did not pass. Then the Clinton administration returned to discuss a new proposal that would gain sixty votes in the Senate. Senator Jay Rockeller supported expanded coverage for children and pregnant women and saw infant health care as a way to gain bipartisan support for a new bill. First Lady Hillary Clinton and Senators Kennedy and Hatch created a program in 1997 to encourage states to expand access to affordable health coverage called the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP. This would give states more flexibility to expand Medicaid for children, establish separate CHIP programs, or both. While this plan wasn't exactly what Clinton originally wanted, it still included the same principles as his previous plan and got the votes needed to pass a qualified majority in the Senate. Because the programs are run by individual states, not all states have to offer all the benefits, but they still allow you to move policy closer to your preferred location. In the key policy chart below, the status quo is the original Medicaid/Medicare plan, and the new policy is Clinton's health care reform bill after revisions to include CHIP. Since this new policy is closer to the median voter than the status quo, the policy will be approved and moved to the new location. While this new policy is less representative of what the Clinton administration was originally trying to achieve, it is more bipartisan and appeals to more moderate voters. Another more recent example of cornerstone policy, supermajority and simple majority used in the healthcare system was in 2010 when the Obama administration proposed the Affordable Healthcare Act, or ACA. The ACA retained much of what had been outlined in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, but wanted to expand to cover all adults below the poverty line and generally reduce health care costs. As part of the bill, an individual mandate was given to ensure that adverse selection did not take place. When it was introduced in the House of Representatives, a simple majority of 220 members voted to approve the bill by moving it to the Senate for a vote. Once again the House of Representatives was used to examine how simple majority voting may be a simple solution for decision making, but does not require sufficient votes to determine whether or not a piece of legislation is eligible to become law. Once the bill passed the House, the Republican minority in the Senate was determined to obstruct the bill and sixty votes would be needed to keep the bill from dying. The Democratic Party received only fifty-eight votes and began negotiating even before the vote. After compromising abortion rules and eliminating the public option from the bill, the Democratic Party.