In it, but not of it. TPM DC
Merkley's plan, known as the "talking filibuster," would force obstructing senators to occupy the floor and speak until one side gives in. By contrast, the bipartisan rules change enacted in January eliminated some hurdles in advancing legislation and nominees but fully protected the 60-vote threshold for moving Senate
During filibuster reform deliberations, Merkley clashed with his own leadership for tactics he used in seeking to whip Democrats to support his plan. His spokesman Jamal Raad tells TPM the senator is "has continued the conversation over rules with his colleagues."
Senate Democrats have the option to weaken the filibuster at any time with 51 votes, and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has repeatedly threatened to use that "nuclear option" if Republicans don't stop blocking presidential nominees. Hardly any Democrats have publicly ruled out using that option to fix the Senate. But behind the scenes, despite anger at the GOP now, there is concern that weakening the filibuster could come back to haunt them when Republicans return to power and, for instance, seek to weaken abortion rights.
Merkley insists he'd be just as strong a supporter of his plan if he were in the minority, arguing that the point of the filibuster is to debate, not to obstruct in the dark.
"The Senate is badly broken, and it's not going to get better by wishful thinking or handshake deals," he wrote in his email to supporters. "We can change this -- but only if the American people insist on a Senate that works."