The Beat Goes On: GOP Threatening Shutdown Over Filibuster

      Yes. Same as it's ever done. The GOP is screaming holy hell over Dem plans to reform the filibuster.

      "Here’s what Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is considering: banning filibusters used to prevent debate from even starting and House-Senate conference committees from ever meeting. He also may make filibusters become actual filibusters — to force senators to carry out the nonstop, talkathon sessions."

      "Republicans are threatening even greater retaliation if Reid uses a move rarely used by Senate majorities: changing the chamber’s precedent by 51 votes, rather than the usual 67 votes it takes to overhaul the rules."

      “I think the backlash will be severe,” Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), the conservative firebrand, said sternly. “If you take away minority rights, which is what you’re doing because you’re an ineffective leader, you’ll destroy the place. And if you destroy the place, we’ll do what we have to do to fight back.”

      “It will shut down the Senate,” the incoming Senate GOP whip, Texas Sen. John Cornyn, told POLITICO. “It’s such an abuse of power.”

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84195.html#ixzz2DLd9WHTA

     Shut down the Senate?! What do you think has been going on the last 6 years Senator? As Greg Sargent points out, it's pretty rich for the Repubs to be worrying about shutting down the Senate and abuse of power. Thanks to their abuse of the filibuster nothing can get done, even the most simple procedural votes without a 60 vote supermajority.

     "Senator Cornyn claims reform will “shut down the Senate.” In reality, Republicans used the filibuster itself in an effort to effectively do just that, rendering the Upper Chamber dysfunctional to deny Obama bipartisan victories, pin the blame for ineffectual governance on him, and render him a one-term president. That Republicans adopted this goal is not in doubt. It has been publicly confirmed by Republican Senators themselves, including the Senate GOP leader. "

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line

      There are different ways to reform the filibuster-right up the the "nuclear option" of ending it altogether. It seems to me that the Dems who say we should put all options on the table regarding filibuster reform have it right. It's unlikely that the final package-it seems pretty clear that such a package will be introduced at the start of the next Senate in January-will end it outright. Arguably it shouldn't. The original intent of the filibuster was sound. It was meant to give the minority some power and it did. However, it's become so abused over the last few years.

      Something has to give. While maybe ending it outright would be the wrong move, it's clear that something has to change. The Senate cannot be a 60 vote supermajority vote party for every issue no matter how small. Dick Durbin notes that we've seen 600 filibusters since 2006-this is unprecedented. The filibuster used to be a rarely used option. LBJ passed Medicare with 55 votes-there was no filibuster despite considerable opposition.

     "“We cannot allow the Senate to be dysfunctional by the use of filibusters,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Reid’s No. 2. “We’ve had over 300 filibusters in the last six years — it’s unprecedented. What we’re talking about is very basic — you want to start a filibuster, you want to stop the business of the Senate, by goodness’ sake, park your fanny on the floor of the Senate and speak. If you want to go to dinner and go home over the weekend, be prepared, the Senate is moving forward.”

      Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84195.html#ixzz2DLkBaQen

      That's one thing being considered-requiring that if you filibuster you really have to do it, going up on the floor and speaking for hours like in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington-Ezra Klein said he's come to really hate that movie now with all the filibusters.

      What really upsets the GOP is that Reid may make these changes with a simple 51 votes-rather than the 67 votes normally required for such rule changes. Actually, many call this the nuclear option.

       In the past Reid had stopped any serious filibuster reform. In a way this is natural: after all what about when the GOP has the Senate again? Still how can the status quo be any worse than it is now?

       "By and large, Reid and his caucus are on board with this approach — they are furious at what they see as deliberate attempts by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and his Republican colleagues to threaten filibusters on even the most routine pieces of legislation or noncontroversial nominations simply to stall President Barack Obama’s agenda."

      “They have made it an almost impossible task to get things done,” Reid said

      The GOP tendency to blame the victim underscores the need for it.

       "Republicans say this is a problem of the Democrats’ own making. They blame Reid for quickly attempting to shut down debate without giving Republicans a chance to offer amendments, even on bills that skip the committee process entirely."

       So things can go forward as long as the Democrats do the bidding of Republicans bidding even when they are in the majority. In other words the GOP will work with the Dems as long as the Dems do it their way.

       Filibuster reform is a thing whose time as come. There are other ways to reform it short of total abolition. One thing that would help a lot is loosening the rules on reconciliation. There is also an idea of having one SuperBill a year that can't be filibustered. But the test of any reform is whether or not the Senate remains an effectively 60 vote supermajority body. If it does, then what reforms that are done are not effective.