Filubuster Reform

There appears to be a lot of discussion on the blogosphere right now about how the filibuster.

Some are calling for outright abolition, and some are calling for significant changes in the rules governing the filibuster.

I made a graph of cloture motions (Data from the Senate web site), and it speaks volumes.

The first thing to notice is that cloture votes did not break double digits until the 1971-1972 session.

I it was at some point in the 1970s (I'm unable to find it on "the Google", but it was at some point in the 1970s^*), that people no longer had to talk to filibuster: It became a courtesy, not a rule, just the magnanimity of the Majority Leader that if a cloture vote failed, the legislation was pulled.

In addition, the requirements for the filibuster where changed in 1975 from 2/3 of those present and voting to 60% of all Senators in good standing (hence the issues with Kennedy having to show up on the stimulus).

There are a number of problems:

• A non vote should never be counted as a no
• What had been a measure of last resort until the end of the 60s has expanded to become a tool of electoral gamesmanship, and so has created a de facto 60 % supermajority to pass anything.

This is further complicated by the fact that there are times where we want the minority to be able to obstruct the majority.
vote. (*cough* Janice Rogers Brown *cough*)^†

So, what do we do about a process that has created the disgusting spectacle of a man with a brain tumor, another one having to rush home from his mother's funeral to break the filibuster, and Republicans admitting paying off the losing candidate in order to tie up the appointment of a Senator in court.

My opinion is that we start by enforcing the rules as they actually exist, and not accord the minority power that they do not have.

Courtesy is a two way street, and the abuse of the filibuster shuts that down.

Make them talk, and let them go hoarse, and have to stay in the Senate.

What's more with CSPAN covering Congress, the spectacle of Senators talking for hours and days will not only be broadcast locally on cable, it will find its way to Leno, and Letterman, and Jon Stewart, and they will look like complete tools.

If it's that important, they will still talk. If it isn't, they will STFU.

As to actual rules changes, that is a difficult thing to do, at least until one side or the other breaks 60 Senators, but I would suggest that the 60% be retained, but that it be of the votes cast, which means that those who support the filibuster need to stay in order to thwart it.

^*Another reason to hate the decade, along with Disco, Polyester leisure suits, and pet rocks.
^†F%$# you, gang of 14.