Now That Dems Are Facing Senate Losses They Want to "Reform" The Filibuster Rules

Imagine that.  When they had 60 votes in the Senate they had no interest whatsoever in changing the filibuster rules that requires 60 votes on many procedural matters.  However, with losses of anywhere from 7 to 13 seats likely in November the Dems suddenly have gotten the ole filibuster religion:

“It was already virtually certain that we would do something,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). “The gridlock has been so frustrating already that the prospect of it getting worse only adds additional logic to try and help the filibuster problem … This is an unprecedented abuse of the filibuster that is completely out of conformity with the traditions of the Senate, and all we’re trying to do is to get it back to its traditional use … The question is about how we do it, not whether we do it.”

Last week, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said that filibuster reform has been boosted as a top prerogative of Democratic leaders after the failed vote on his defense measure.

“These filibusters, on motions to proceed, cannot be allowed to succeed,” Levin said. “We cannot, to get our work done, allow filibusters to prevent us from getting to a bill. Those filibusters … have been used more than ever, by far, and they’ve resulted in slowing down legislation.”

Changing the filibuster rules will be an uphill climb — even though it would likely only require 51 votes in the new Congress. Several Democratic centrists oppose changing the chamber's rules. Furthermore, Republicans may capture control of the House and/or Senate this fall, rendering filibuster reform dead. Republicans have vowed not to pass such a measure.

Regardless, Democrats clearly need to convince more of their colleagues to back the effort if it has any chance to get 51 votes in 2011.

No one in the GOP should agree to any of this. And chances are several Democrats who will face the voters in 2012 will be reluctant to get involved in something like this because it won't play real well back home.

The filibuster rules have kept a lot of bad stuff from getting through Congress and there's no reason to change them now.  They protect the people from a majority gone out-of-control.