Why the democrats went nuclear: will changing the Senate's long-standing filibuster rule break Washington's gridlock or just make things worse?

• Author: Smith, Patricia
• Position: NATIONAL

How would you like to stand up and give a speech that goes on for hours, maybe even days, with no end in sight?

In a tradition dating back more than two centuries, that's just what U.S. senators--a group of them or even a lone holdout--have been allowed to do to delay or block a Senate vote.

The political party in the minority has long relied on the tactic, known as the filibuster, to force compromise from the party in the majority. In the past two centuries, Senators have used the filibuster more than a thousand times to derail presidential appointments or legislation.

But in November, Democrats--who now hold a 53 to 45* majority over Republicans in the 100-member Senate--did what has long been considered unthinkable: They voted to change the rules to end the minority party's ability to filibuster most presidential nominees.

Democrats say the change--so revolutionary that it's been dubbed "the nuclear option"--was a necessary response to Washington gridlock, which they blame on Republican efforts to stymie President Obama's political agenda.

"There has been unbelievable, unprecedented obstruction," says Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "The Senate is a living thing, and to survive, it must change as it has over the history of this great country."

Republicans see things very differently: They say Democrats are trampling on the minority rights the Founding Fathers worked so hard to protect.

"This is the most important and most dangerous restructuring of Senate rules since Thomas Jefferson wrote them at the beginning of our country," says Republican Senator Lamar Alexander. "It's another raw exercise of political power to permit the majority to do whatever it wants."

The filibuster has been so effective over the centuries because it's been difficult to stop: Senators must first vote to cut off debate before they can even consider approving a bill or nomination. Ending debate--a process known as cloture--has long required a supermajority of 60 votes. But under the new rules, senators can now force a vote on presidential nominations to the federal courts and appointments to federal agencies by a simple majority of 51 votes. The new rules don't apply to Supreme Court nominees or to any legislation.

The use of filibusters has increased dramatically in recent decades. During the 1960s, senators used them an average of seven times a year, usually on critical, game-changing legislation like civil rights bills. In the 109th Congress (2005-06) when...