The CWA makes the case for reform.

According to Politico , Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is not likely to keep a requirement that opposing senators maintain a talking filibuster in his reform plan. He is, however, willing to move forward with the constitutional option—passing reforms with a simple, 51-majority vote. Which is kind of ridiculous. Using the constitutional option (the "nuclear option" in GOP-speak) is going to make the Republicans irate. If he's going to go so far as to use it, then he needs to make it really count, make it work for the strongest possible reform that includes the talking filibuster.

There is one idea he's considering, though, that's a good one.



Reid’s most pressing demand is to eliminate filibusters used to prevent debate on legislation from starting. He also wants to end filibusters used to prevent the Senate from convening conference committees with the House. And he’s eager to pare back the use of filibusters on certain presidential nominations. Senators could still filibuster in any number of situations under this approach. But Reid is weighing whether to shift the burden of the filibuster from those who are seeking to defeat it onto those who are threatening to wage one. Rather than requiring 60 votes to break a filibuster, Reid is considering requiring at least 41 senators to sustain a filibuster. That would amount to a subtle shift to force opponents to ensure every senator is present in order to mount a filibuster.

The talking filibuster is certainly the most democratic approach, in a small-d sense. It creates more accountability, more transparency in the opposing party by making them stand up before the C-SPAN cameras and the American public and make their case. It's also hard work, something that far too few senators have actually had to do in their careers. It should simply be a part of their job description, to have to stand before the chamber and actually debate.

But forcing an opposing senator to line up 40 of his or her colleagues to join in a filibuster would also be an effective tool. This is especially the case on nominations, which are often filibustered for reasons completely unrelated to the nominee, but almost always pass with far more than the necessary 60 votes. Either one of these reforms would help, but in combination they would make the Senate function again.

Please send an email to your Democratic senator/s urging them to pass real filibuster reform including the talking filibuster and/or flipping the burden.

If you don't have a Democratic senator, call Reid's office at 202-224-3542, and tell him to include the talking filibuster and/or flipping the burden of the filibuster.

