Filibuster gone?

Not sure, but it seems like from this article, Reid and Democrats passed the 'nuclear option' to overturn the filibuster after cloture has been passed.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65439.html


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s sudden decision to force a narrow change in the chamber’s procedures could backfire.

First, it could make it harder for Democrats to break GOP filibusters because Republicans may be even less willing to close off debate on legislation.

Even worse for Democrats, the tactics Reid employed to change a Senate precedent could make it easier for Republicans to justify using similar procedures to force simple-majority votes on hugely contentious issues, such as repealing Democratic priorities like health care reform and Wall Street regulations, Senate experts on both sides of the aisle said Friday.

The chaos began Thursday night when Senate Democrats voted 51-48 to effectively overturn the Senate parliamentarian on a ruling regarding amendments offered after the Senate invokes cloture — which shuts off debate. It was the first time in 11 years the parliamentarian had been voted down. While the rules in play are arcane, the impact could be significant — future Senate majorities may be encouraged to more regularly employ a similar procedure if their will is being blocked by the minority party on hot-button policy fights.

“Changing the precedence of the Senate is a big deal,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.).

The new precedent limits how senators can force a vote on amendments in the 30 hours of debate after a filibuster is defeated. During that time, senators can no longer ask to suspend the rules so their amendments can be considered, a process that ordinarily would have required two-thirds of the Senate’s support to succeed. Now only amendments that both parties agree to can be considered for a vote after a filibuster is defeated.

As a result, Republicans in the minority party may now be far less willing to break a filibuster if Reid does not allow their amendments for votes beforehand or allow them to shape the bill sufficiently to their liking.

“One of the obvious fallouts is that it will be tougher and tougher to get cloture,” said Marty Paone, who spent more than a decade in the critical position of Democratic secretary, serving as his caucus’ point person on the floor proceedings and the arcane rules of the Senate. It requires 60 votes to invoke cloture, which effectively limits debate and ends a filibuster.

Asked about the move employed by Reid to force a rules change, Paone said: “It’s a can of worms they took down off the shelf — it’s always been there. … Hopefully they’ll put it on the back shelf and forget about it again.”

The Constitution grants each house of Congress the right to create its own rules - but the Senate rarely changes its procedures, which are designed to protect the rights of the minority party. Changing the rules requires the support of two-thirds of the Senate, a very high hurdle to clear. But overturning the ruling of the presiding officer only requires a simple majority — which would then create a new precedent governing floor procedures.

It’s this lower threshold - and the potential for major changes that could ensue — that has some senators, aides and procedural experts worried about the potential repercussions.

“Every time somebody uses one of these tactics, then it reminds people that that’s a tactic that you can use – so it might used against you in the future,” said Don Ritchie, the Senate’s historian.

The fight erupted unexpectedly Thursday night after Democrats had grown frustrated at GOP demands to have a series of unrelated amendments considered to a Chinese currency bill that had overcome a filibuster and was on track for final passage. Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) had agreed to consider seven amendments, including one under a suspension of the rules on whether to bring up Obama’s original jobs plan that had turned off some moderate Democratic members because of its tax hikes.

But it was a demand by McConnell that the Senate attempt to vote on an amendment by Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.), which he said would target an Environmental Protection Agency air pollution effort that would impact farmers. The amendment had a serious chance of passing, and Democrats were angry that the GOP was trying to attach it to a bill with broad bipartisan support - after the Senate agreed to effectively shut down debate and move to final passage.

“What just took place here is an effort to try to expedite what goes on around here,” Reid said on the floor Thursday night, with dozens of his colleagues watching in anticipation. “Am I 100 percent sure that I’m right? No, but I feel pretty comfortable with what we’ve done. There has to be some end to the dilatory tactics to stop things. Cloture means end. It’s over.”

McConnell, who would become majority leader if Republicans retake the Senate next year, warned about the dire consequences ahead.

“I think we made a big mistake tonight,” McConnell said. “And as soon as we all kind of cool off and think about it over the weekend, I hope we’ll undo what we did tonight because it’s not in the best interest of this institution or the American people.”

With a divided Congress and major national fights unresolved, the frustration has been building in the Senate, where legislation has been moving exceedingly slow and fewer votes have been taken amid partisan bickering.

“It’s far worse to break the precedent of the Senate, rather than having to risk having a vote,” said a leading Senate expert, who asked not to be named to speak candidly.

But it’s unclear even how Republicans will deal with a similar situation if they are in charge in 2013. It was in 2005 that then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) tried to invoke the so-called “nuclear option” to limit Democratic filibusters against President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees, by employing a similar tactic to force a change by a simple majority. He decided against it after a last-minute compromise was reached.

It remains to be seen whether Republicans will try to replicate the move. But some Hill insiders were already questioning what it could mean for major policy fights, like Obama’s health care law.

For instance, if a senator tries to offer an amendment repealing the health care law to a bill - after a filibuster has been defeated - and it’s ruled out of order by the parliamentarian, the chamber could presumably vote by a simple majority to overturn that ruling. And the amendment could stay pending to the bill, which could be then be adopted by a vote in the full Senate.

And if there’s a Republican president and Republican Congress in 2013, the GOP could be in a position to run roughshod over the Senate minority.

“It’s not highly unusual,” said Sarah Binder, an expert on the Senate at the Brookings Institution, referring to a change in precedent. “Of course it raises the specter that other majorities will aggressively try to reinterpret the rules.”

From what I got from this is, You still need 60 votes to invoke cloture but after cloture you aren't allow to make any amendments to slow down the progress to get to a final vote. This really doesn't do anything to help pass the dream act , we would still need those 60 votes to invoke cloture , the votes we don't have.

If Reid did this earlier, Dream Act would had been passed.

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheYoung.../6/LEy4KBhqJFA

Watch this video, it explains the whole thing.

Even if the rules were suspended, I don't think the Dream Act has 51 votes now

He didn't implement the nuclear option... He simply forced debate to end after the Senate reached cloture on an issue by overruling the parliamentarian.

Not to say that The Young Turks don't have a good point. All I mean is that they got the 60 votes anyway.

that video did a good explanation. i think dream act would have 51 votes in senate now. They got 51 votes to pass this, it passed 51-48

Well if you figure all of the new elected Republicans would vote against it, the same Democrats that didn't vote for it last time wouldn't vote for it this time, and it had 55 votes with a 60 democrat majority that is down to 53..no it doesn't have 51votes

Well, it doesn't really matter now. The senate is not the biggest problem now, it's the house.

No, no, the video's misleading. The bill they were discussing already got cloture. It got the sixty votes, and Republicans were essentially trying to filibuster it after cloture, which is why Reid pressed on and overruled the parliamentarian. The DREAM Act never got cloture anyhow.