#rsrh Why the filibuster will probably survive.

(H/T Instapundit) Senator Harkin of Iowa and the two Senator Udalls of Colorado and New Mexico are trying to push a last-minute, lame-duck change in the filibuster rules, presumably so that the President will find it easier to push through appointments between now and 2012.  James Taranto points out the obvious flaw in that plan: which is that once the rule is changed, it stays changed.  And, given that the Class I Senatorial class (the ones up in 2012) consists of 23 Democrats/pretend-independents to 10 Republicans, the odds of the GOP getting a net of at least +3 are pretty good.  Couple that with a win in the White House, and you get the Democrats’ Nightmare Scenario:

Imagine a Senate split 50-50, along party lines, on the ObamaCare Repeal Act of 2013, with Vice President Marco Rubio casting the deciding vote. That would be a satisfying outcome of the Harkin-Udall-Udall effort.

Indeed it would.  Fortunately or unfortunately (depends on how you look at it), there are enough Democratic Senators out there with the wit (or the staff with the wit) to see the aforementioned flaw.  Including possibly the plan’s sponsors: it’s instructive that all of the three Senators involved are up for re-election in 2014, not 2012.  That’s plenty of time for the backlash to fade.

Moe Lane