Last night, the Senate finally ended the filibuster reform saga. In a move that surprised some Senate commentators, two minor changes were made to the chamber's standing orders, but tThree far-reaching alterations were defeated.
During the long recess between 5 January and this Tuesday, Senate leaders from both parties attempted to negotiate an agreement on the rules that govern the passing of legislation. The expectation yesterday morning was that the Senate would reject the five resolutions before them, insteading adopt the principles of an informal deal reached between Sen. Harry Reid, Democrat Majority Leader, and Sen. Mitch McConnell, Republican Minority Leader.
This non-binding agreement would see Republicans filibuster less bills in return for being allowed to add amendments to legislation (in the last Senate, they argue, Sen. Reid filled the "amendment tree"). The GOP members had argued that they had little choice but to oppose legislation, as they had been given no opportunity to make changes to it. They contended that the Democrats had made legislation a partisan issue by not allowing the Republicans to revise sections of a bill to bring compromise and were only allowing debate on Democrat-approved measures.
Last night, by a majority of 92-4, "secret" holds were virtually abolished, with the time limit reduced before a Senator must reveal their holding-up legislation (or be named in the Congressional Record). And by 81-15, the Senators approved a resolution that amendments to a bill could not be read out on the floor, as long as 24 hours for reading the new bill had been allowed.
But the attempt to secure substantial revision of the the requirements for a filibuster were frustrated. S. Res. 8, which automatically raised the numbers to sustain a filibuster as debate on a bill progressed, was defeated 84-12. S. Res 10, which attempted to speed up consideration of a bill while retaining the current rules on filibuster, lost 51-44. Even the "talking filibuster" S. Res. 21, or the "Mr Smith Goes To Washington" option, narrowly lost 49-46.
So little has changed in the way that a minority can delay a final, simple-majority vote on legislation in the Senate. It is still possible for 41 senators to stop the other 59 from enacting a law.
By passing up filibuster reform this session, the Senate has shown its desire to remain the "cooling saucer", where the heat of hastily considered or intemperate measures passed in the House is allowed to cool in careful deliberation in the Senate.
The cynic in all of us will note that changing the filibuster in this session would not really have benefited either party. Democrats are likely to receive very little in the way of legislation from a Republican-controlled House of Representatives. that they will agree enough with to break a Republican filibuster in the Senate. And Republicans in the Senate have little chance of persuading even four Democrats to join them in repealing health care reform.
The real confrontations this Congressional session will occur between the Democratic Obama Administration and the House Republicans, and between the House and the Democratic majority in the Senate. Debate for the foreseeable future is likely to revolve around the core topic of government spending and taxes.
So there will be few dramas on legislation. That is, unless a Democratic minority in the Senate –--where some fiscally conservative members could join a united Republican caucus –-- endorses cuts in government spending. And then we start talking reconciliation for finance bills and Presidential vetoes.
But enough speculation; the filibuster remains largely as it was, and along with it the nearly impenetrable rules of the Senate. "Cooling saucer" or "tar pit"? You decide.