From the NYT, in a piece over the weekend on the Democrats' effort to get a vote on "the Buffett rule." The merits of that rule aren't the point at the moment. (It is supposed to guarantee that even very rich taxpayers pay at least 30 percent of their income in tax.) Instead, emphasis added:
The push comes ahead of a procedural vote on April 16 that will decide whether the Senate will even debate the bill, and Democrats give it little chance of reaching the necessary 60-vote threshold.
No larger point here. Just an ongoing reminder and illustration that it is
possible to acknowledge the operating reality of today's Senate under the 28th
-- ie, the reality that any proposal of consequence will be blocked by filibuster -- without advancing the destructive fiction
that the Senate was designed
to require 60 votes to "pass"
any bill. And you don't even need to use the word "filibuster" to clarify that the 60-vote threshold is a special procedural hurdle.
If you're interested in other, more deserving candidates for enactment as the 28th Amendment, you could stroll back down memory lane. Also see previous entry in the "how you do it" series.
* Update: See the next post for explanation of this change.