Filibuster reform: Reid wants to end Senate obstruction

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is absolutely right. The upper chamber of Congress is hopelessly gridlocked by filibusters because the legislative procedure, as the Nevada Democrat put it, has been "abused, abused and abused." The filibuster must be reformed - sooner rather than later.

Sen. Reid made clear the urgency of the matter in an unusual campaign promise to MSNBC's Ed Shultz this month: If voters re-elect President Obama and keep Democrats in control of the Senate, he says he'll change the rules "and make the filibuster more meaningful. ... It came about as a result of our wanting to get legislation passed, and now it's being used to stop legislation from passing."

Sen. Reid told KNPR's "State of Nevada" radio program this month that he would end the practice of holding "motion to proceed" votes, which require 60 senators to agree to consider matters that need only 51 votes to pass. The filibuster would still exist, but senators would have to take the Senate floor and speak for hours or days on end to block a vote.

If Sen. Reid's proposal becomes reality, it would take an extraordinary effort to prevent action on legislation, likely reserving the move for extraordinary occasions. As it should.

The problem for Sen. Reid, however, is that only a few years ago, when his party was in the minority, he held the opposite position. Prior to 2007, he was the one abusing the filibuster, making Republicans tally 60 votes.

In fact, Sen. Reid wrote the obstructionist playbook he now despises. He used the maneuver so frequently that in 2005, majority Republicans devised their own filibuster reform plan - one that would abolish the procedure in the judicial confirmation process. This reasonable proposal was dubbed the "nuclear option." And Sen. Reid went to war to block a move he now says he supports. At the time, Sen. Reid said preserving the filibuster was the "most important issue I've dealt with in my 40 years of public service."

Fast forward to today, and it's easy for voters - not to mention Senate Republicans - to conclude that Sen. Reid is fair weather fan of the filibuster, loving it when it suits him, hating it when it works against him. After all, his MSNBC promise was conditioned on Democrats controlling the Senate.

That led to an open argument on the Senate floor Wednesday between Sen. Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. Sen. Reid ripped Sen. McConnell for grinding the Senate to a halt with the filibuster, and Sen. McConnell blasted Sen. Reid for refusing to bring bills to a vote.

If Sen. Reid really believes the filibuster should be reined in, it shouldn't matter which party is in the majority. Last week, Reid spokesman Adam Jentleson told The Washington Post "his position won't change. He's convinced of the need for change." Good.

The public bickering between Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell is more evidence of the dysfunction in Washington that has public opinion of Congress at an all-time low. Sen. Reid's idea could help change that by bringing legislation forward for passage or rejection, and by giving qualified judicial and Cabinet nominees timely consideration.

Yes, the filibuster has been abused - by both Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell. Sen. Reid's promise is on the record. Regardless of how November's election plays out, voters will expect him to support dialing back the filibuster.