Senate leaders eye ban of filibusters

The Senate's top leaders met yesterday to discuss changing one of the most fundamental and long-standing rules differentiating the upper chamber from the lower house.
Frustrated by two Democrat-led filibusters � one lasting four months � against President Bush's judicial nominees, Republicans have introduced a resolution to, in essence, ban the use of filibusters against executive nominees.
"The United States Senate is tied in a Gordian knot with two filibusters," said Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia, the lone Democrat to publicly support the Republican effort. "And unless we untie this knot ... the confirmation process will be changed forever."

www.washtimes.com...

yes - well that will be filibustered too.
One can sort of see why some would get angry at the filibuster (particularly where judiciary legislation is concerned) but it has shown its value before now, and it must be admitted that one's impression of teh majority of filibusters is that tehy are a sort of gentleman's agreement between both sides to prevent anything very much from ever happening.
One vaguely admires the olf filibusters who essentially had to cross their legs and abandon all thoughts of the lavatory for 24 hours -it's very much easier now.
In the context of actually changing anything, do keep in mind Rule XXII which requires that -in the case of a measure being filibustered, sixty votes are required to shut off debate and vote the matter up or down: i.e. the oppisition needs only to have 41 members at hand to stifle the measure.