If the GOP keeps this up, I'm beginning to think there's some really great lemonade that can be made out of these lemons.
The idea here is to use the current bit of GOP obstruction as a way of re-establishing the Senate majority's right to rewrite its rules, over an issue that nobody outside the Beltway could possibly get exercised over, and that even the Villagers can't get too worked up about without sounding even more silly than usual.
Suppose the GOP, under section 5a of Senate Rule 26, keeps on shutting down all Senate committees at 2pm each day for the rest of this week, and into the beginning of next week.
Then suppose it goes like this: after another GOP refusal to consent to the normal order of committee business, Harry Reid decides to hold a vote on changing Section 5a of Rule 26 so that the minority can't shut down the business of the Senate on a whim.
The GOP protests, but Reid invokes the Senate's authority to set its own rules under Article I, Section 5.
The parliamentarian rules against Reid, but VP Biden, called in to chair the Senate for just this purpose, overrules the parliamentarian. A vote is held to amend Rule 26, it passes by a simple majority, and from then on, nobody asks for unanimous consent to hold committee meetings as usual because nobody needs it.
So how would things fall out in the court of public opinion?
Fox and Rush and all would make a hullabaloo over the 'nuclear option.'
Reid, Biden, et al would calmly go on the Sunday shows and reply that, "wasn't budget reconciliation supposed to be the nuclear option? Oh, that was last week. You know those Republicans - always calling something the 'nuclear option.' Heck, just five years ago, they called something or other the 'nuclear option' that they were trying to push through - remember what that was about? Slipped my mind for the moment."
"Besides, we're not trying to do anything nuclear; we're just trying to make sure that the minority party can't shut down the business of every single Senate subcommittee every time they get their panties in a wad. You've probably noticed that we have business we really need to accomplish, and we can't just knock off at 2pm every time someone throws a hissy fit around here."
The GOP also might well raise the specter of the Dems getting rid of the filibuster.
Same sort of response: calm, patient, a little bit weary. "Filibuster? Nah, we're just trying to hold regular committee meetings. Maybe the Republicans have a point - maybe the filibuster really does have some problems - but right now we just want to be able to hold committee meetings, and be able to work until 5pm like most of our constituents have to."
And the public at large can't get particularly concerned, the Dems get to hold committee meetings whether or not the GOP likes it, life goes on, and the precedent is established. Then when the Dems rewrite the filibuster rules at the beginning of the next Congress, it'll be "what's the big deal - we did the same sort of thing last year."
I know, it won't happen. But a more opportunistic party would see an opportunity here
