I wish I had more confidence in Harry Reid ~ but since he's made this public, I'm fairly certain he will follow thru ~ and for those wondering, he's been able to extend the time for this by recessing [not adjourning] prior days' sessions ~ recessing keeps the clock running ~ Sooz

Reid to Senate Republicans: Filibuster deal in 36 hours or face nuclear option
By Alexander Bolton - 01/22/13 03:29 PM ET

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is giving Republican colleagues 36 hours to agree to a deal on filibuster reform or he will move forward with the nuclear option.

“I hope in the next 24, 36 hours we can get something we agree on. If not, we’re going to move forward on what I think needs to be done,” Reid told reporters.

Reid’s trump card in negotiations with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) is the threat he will change Senate rules with a simple majority vote, a tactic known as the nuclear option. This maneuver would allow Reid to change the Senate rules with a simple majority vote, something that has never been done, according to parliamentary experts.

Critics call it the nuclear option but proponents, such as Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) say it is more accurate to describe it as the “Constitutional option” because the Constitution empowers each chamber to set its own rules.

Reid predicted the Democratic caucus would support him in reforming the Senate’s filibuster rule unilaterally.

If he did so, he would likely implement a relatively modest change, such as eliminating the filibuster on motions to proceed to new business.

Reid said talks with McConnell are not close to a resolution.

“We’re making progress. Not done yet, we got a long way to go,” he told reporters while walking into the Senate chamber.

A senator briefed on the talks said it appears McConnell will have trouble rounding up enough Republican votes to support any deal he forges with Reid. Changing the rules under regular order requires 67 votes. Reforming Senate procedures through a standing order would need 60 votes.

A Democratic aide said McConnell could have difficulty mustering 12 Republicans to vote to change the standing rules under regular order.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/278591-reid-to-goip-36-hours-for-filibuster-deal-or-nuclear-option

Some cojones this time 'round.

Yeah... apparently that uppity boy in their WHITE house is sticking around for a few more years and he's got some extra help.

Viva uppityness!

yes. hear hear! tomorrow is a very big day.

Oh boy! I think Reid is an idiot.
Let's make McConnell run the show and democrats can take their ball and go home!

Edit: Talking filibuster is out after Reid had a talk with McConnell. I just bet McConnell "promised" him to be really nice this time.

I am disappointed, but I'm not surprised given Reid's prior reluctance to embrace the "talking filibuster" ~ and I do agree that "something is better than nothing" ~ Sooz

Reid, McConnell strike a deal on Senate reform
By Steve Benen - Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:36 PM EST

The good news for proponents of improving the Senate's dysfunctional rules is that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) struck an agreement that will bring new reforms to the chamber. The bad news is, these reforms are modest, narrow, and leave most of the Senate's most glaring flaws untouched.

Ryan Grim and Sam Stein have the scoop this morning.


The problem is not that the apparent agreement includes misguided reforms, but rather, that these reforms simply don't go far enough. The provisions reached in this deal have real merit, but so do other proposals that will have to wait for another day (and another Congress).

For example, what happened to the "talking filibuster" sought by many reform advocates? As expected, it's not part of the deal. Grim and Stein note, however, a related change: "First, senators who wish to object or threaten a filibuster must actually come to the floor to do so. And second, the two leaders will make sure that debate time post-cloture is actually used in debate. If senators seeking to slow down business simply put in quorum calls to delay action, the Senate will go live, force votes to produce a quorum, and otherwise work to make sure senators actually show up and debate."

Of course, the "talking filibuster" isn't the only proposed change that was left on the negotiating-room floor. Reform-minded Democrats also wanted to change filibuster procedure to force the minority to produce 41 votes to block action on a bill or nomination, as opposed to forcing the majority to produce 60 votes. That was scuttled, too.

But there are some improvements that will make the chamber at least somewhat more efficient.

For example, filibusters on motions to proceed -- demanding unlimited debate on whether to have a debate -- have always been the hardest thing for obstructionists to defend, and they will be largely eliminated going forward.

Similarly, post-cloture delays on district court nominees will be curtailed -- under the current rules, after a filibuster on a district court nominee is defeated, the minority could bring the chamber to a halt for 30 hours, but under the new reforms, it's just two hours. (Update: for sub-cabinet nominees, it's eight hours, and for cabinet and appeals court nominees, it's still 30.)

When I talked to some Democratic staffers on the Hill, they seemed eager to defend these changes, and I'll gladly concede something is better than nothing. I can remember plenty of times in the last four years in which Reid would bring an uncontroversial judicial nominee to the floor and the confirmation process would take four or five days -- Republicans just wanted to run the clock, stopping the Senate from working on something else, even on nominees they intended to support. Often, Reid just wouldn't bother bringing up nominees at all, because he couldn't afford to kill a whole legislative week for one judge.

This new agreement will largely prevent this from happening, and I'm glad.

But filibuster abuses have broken the Senate, and this deal barely touches filibuster rules at all. Republicans will still demand mandatory supermajorities to pass every bill of any consequence, which is an untenable system -- the Senate wasn't designed to work this way, for generations it didn't work this way, and as has become obvious, it can't work this way.

And yet, that status quo remains unaffected.

There will be ample discussion over why Reid chose this narrow path, as opposed to forcing sweeping reforms through the "constitutional option" (or "nuclear option") he'd already threatened to use, and at this point, we don't know exactly why the Majority Leader didn't pull the trigger. It's possible he just didn't want to deal with the likely fallout, in the form of GOP apoplexy, and it's possible reformers didn't have quite as many votes as they'd hoped.

Either way, I should also note that incremental steps forward can in time lead to more meaningful change. The effort to reform the Senate's dysfunction drew more attention in recent months than it's ever generated before, and more Americans are now engaged on a procedural issue that, in the very recent past, was invisible to the mainstream. I'd like to think senators and Senate candidates will start to be asked about their opinions on reform in future primaries and elections, too.

There is, in other words, a growing public appetite for improving the broken Senate. Here's hoping today's small step is the first of many more in the near future.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/01/24/16680388-reid-mcconnell-strike-a-deal-on-senate-reform

crap. oh well. not all invertebrates can grow spines.