Rare progress on Senate reform

One way nominations can be stalled is by threats to use 30 allocated hours of time after debate is ended. The possibility of multiple filibusters on one bill has also been a big problem.

Majority Leader Harry Reid's reforms should make a difference in this second type of obstruction. They would minimize the likelihood of procedural delays in getting bills to the Senate floor and in moving passed bills to a conference with the House. All this can become even more effective if senators are made to actually speak when they want to continue delaying after losing a vote to end debate.

Overall, Reid's package has good and bad elements. Uncontroversial nominations and perhaps uncontroversial bills should get through much more easily. That's significant, even if nothing else changes.

On the other hand, the proposal appears to give more influence to party leaders. I'd rather preserve the influence of individual senators and have that power used responsibly, but that's not something that can be imposed by rule.

That Reid's package does nothing about the 60-vote Senate might, paradoxically, be the worst thing for minority rights in the Senate. If the members can't agree to some middle ground, the odds increase that a frustrated majority party will simply impose radical change (or invoke the "nuclear option," as it's been called).

The good news is that the obstruction of large majorities should be reduced by this set of reforms. So, yes, some may be disappointed that the 60-vote Senate survives, and that the Senate won't be moving to majority-party rule. But there are still real changes coming.