McConnell Filibusters Himself

Perhaps, stuck out here away from the 24-hour news cycle, I'm the last person to hear about this story, because I had to read it.

You may remember that during the last crisis over the raising the debt ceiling, Mitch McConnell introduced a bill allowing the president to raise the debt ceiling on his own. Never mind that there were many people arguing that the president already has that authority, McConnell's idea was to embarrass the president by making him alone responsible for the inevitable raising of the ceiling. Obama had already indicated that he would not raise the debt ceiling on his own.

Last Thursday, McConnell tried to introduce this same bill as an amendment to another totally unrelated bill, and Harry Reid did not allow it.

But there is a difference this time around, because Obama has said he wants the authority to raise the debt ceiling on his own when the issue comes back again in a few weeks. I don't know if he is claiming to have that authority already, as some constitutional scholars insist he does, or if he wants congressional authority,but I am assuming the latter. Reid, after rejecting McConnell's amendment attempt, did a headcount and realized he had 51 votes to pass the measure, so he brought it back up as a separate bill.

And McConnell filibustered it. His attempt at gamesmanship failed and he filibustered his  own bill....for the 385th+ filibuster of the current Senate.

There is another story here because the Republicans are constantly complaining that the Democratic majority will not allow amendments to bills. As if that were something new. I recall that Democrats had the same complaint when the House was controlled by Dick Armey and Tom DeLay.

And then there is the need for filibuster reform. Since majorities today will be minorities tomorrow, one has to be careful what changes one makes. But one thing that seems basic to me is that filibusters should require Senators to actually get on the floor and talk...and talk and talk, as opposed to the procedure nowadays where they just have to "announce" it. It would be used a lot less regularly, to state the obvious, if they not only had to speak, but tie up all other Senate business in the process.

Just saying.