Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Why doesn’t Harry Reid force Republicans who want to engage in filibusters to really filibuster? Read the phone book, recite the constitution, etc. Answer: because he has to keep at least 50 Democrats on the floor at all times to make this happen. Otherwise the filibusterer will just demand a quorum call and then take a nap or go home until enough Dems are rousted out of bed to keep the Senate in session. Basically, a majority of the Democratic caucus has to stay on the Senate floor at all times, while the Republicans can just tag team, each one talking for a few hours and then handing the baton off to a colleague.

Senator Frank Lautenberg wants to change that by making “dilatory quorum calls” out of order after a cloture motion has been filed:

In response to the growing misuse of the filibuster as a tool to obstruct work in Congress, Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today announced introduction of the Mr. Smith Bill to require Senators who want to filibuster a bill to actually show up on the Senate floor and engage in debate. Once debate ends and Senators no longer seek to speak, the vote could be held immediately.

“If a Senator wants to delay our work in the Senate, then that Senator must show up on the floor and debate,” stated Sen. Lautenberg. “Filibusters should happen on Capitol Hill, not from the Capital Grille. If any of my colleagues feel strongly enough about a bill or nomination to stop all work in the Senate, they should have no problem standing on the Senate floor to explain their opposition to the American public.”

The problem, of course, is that Lautenberg’s bill can be filibustered, and since it’s a rule change it would require 67 votes to pass. There’s no chance of that, obviously. But National Review editor Daniel Foster explains how it could be done:

The bar would be lowered significantly at the beginning of the next Congress in January 2011, however. At that point, only a simple majority will be required to change the Senate’s standing rules.

That’s true, though I’m a little surprised to see an NR editor admitting it so candidly. But as near as I can tell, it’s absolutely correct that Senate rules can be changed at the beginning of a new session as long as Democrats retain their majority and the vice president is willing to provide the needed rulings on objections from the minority. Harry Reid has already said he’s willing to consider this, which means the rest is up to Joe Biden and his boss. No word from them, yet, though.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate