An excellent analysis.
I hope Republicans in the Senate read it.
Instead of calling it the Nuclear Option, why not call it the Constitutional Option.
Barbara Boxer said she had to do it.
Well, Mr. Frist - so do you.
It is the contention of most conservatives, myself included, that because the authors of the Constitution specified the circumstances under which a supermajority was required, they obviously intended that a simple consensus should be all that is necessary to conduct the Senate's business in every other respect, including the confirmation of judicial nominees. (emphasis added)
This logic, then, would seem to apply in every case. In other words, it would seem to say that all filibusters are unconstitutional. Is that the intent?