There's a few diaries on the nonsense of letting a very small minority of the country dictate terms to the majority, but nothing on the rec page yet. In real life, some of the Democratic leadership are, in fact, starting to lead for a change. Hopefully this trend continues:
Vice President Joe Biden said at a Florida fundraiser Sunday that the 60-seat threshold for passing legislation in the Senate put a dangerous new roadblock in the way of American government.
"As long as I have served, ... I've never seen, as my uncle once said, the constitution stood on its head as they've done. This is the first time every single solitary decision has required 60 senators," Biden said. "No democracy has survived needing a supermajority."VP: Constitution 'on its head'
"Even when a party loses (an election), it too easily can prevent the majority elected to govern from legislating," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, told Sunday's Los Angeles Times.
Harkin wants to reduce the number of votes needed to end debate from 60 votes on the first attempt, to 57 votes if another vote is held two days later, to 51 votes if debate drags on, the Times reported.Harkin seeks change to filibuster rules
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) suggested that the Senate abolish the filibuster in recent interview with Air America Radio.
"It is time to shut it down," Frank said. "God didn't create the filibuster, it's part of the Senate rules."
He continued: "We have a serious constitutional problem. There has been a de facto amendment of the U.S. Constitution in an anti-small-D democratic direction."Barney Frank: 'God Didn't Create The Filibuster'
In the negative column,
But a senior Democratic aide this week said that isn’t likely, given the rancorous debate in 2005, when Republicans then controlled the Senate and considered changing the filibuster rules in light of a fight over judicial nominations. The so-called “nuclear option” was eventually dismissed.
“You would be changing the institution,” the Democratic aide said of the idea. “This can be a frustrating place, but the minority still has its rights. I don’t know that that’s ever been on the table.”
Changing filibuster rules not an option, say Dem aides — plus Reid and Obama
To that I say this is bi-partisan change that we can agree upon as a country. Clearly government is not working very well for either party, and independents have no say at all. The Senate is the voice for the smaller states, which is why Wyoming has as large a vote as California. If they can't use that equal vote to get a majority, too bad. If we can't stop a vote with a majority when the Republicans are in power, then we should accept that reality, if it means our country can function again.
***UPDATE***
To clarify, when I say "end the filibuster", I mean end the current form of the filibuster, supporting something like Sen. Harkin's proposal. I'm pretty sure most people on the poll assume the same meaning, but a few have said "no" due to my poor phrasing of the question. Sorry about that. I should have said "Amend the Filibuster?" or "Change the Filibuster?"...