My guess is that there won't be a vote.

We will hear a fffft, the Rs win again and get to kill everything for 2 years without ever taking responsibility.

Sorry.
It's just hard to expect any real change based on history.

Now, unlike the House which ends and a new one starts on January 3rd of each year.

See Section 2, of the the 20th Amendment to the US Constitution:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html


http://www.rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=RuleV

Complete rules of the US Senate:
http://www.rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=RulesOfSenateHome

What the talk is about is the adoption of the Rules of the Senate. At the start of each Congress, each House re-adopts its rules from the previous session. What is being discussed is that the Senate NOT adopt the previous rules, instead adopt new rules that forbid the Filibuster. An argument can be made that Reid is already to late, the US Senate is operating under its old rules and under those rules Reid need 60 votes to change those rules.

On the other hand, the only activity done on January 4th, 2013 were either done without objection OR continued to January 22nd, 2013. Thus an argument can be made that the legislative day is NOT done and that these were mere housekeeping tasks and thus the main house keeping tasks of adopting the Rules have NOT yet been done. Thus the rules have to be adopted sometime this week.

Senate activity on 1-4-2013: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r113:@FIELD(FLD003+s)+@FIELD(DDATE+
20130104)



http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r113:@FIELD(FLD003+s)+@FIELD(DDATE+20130104)http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r113:@FIELD(FLD003+s)+@FIELD(DDATE+
20130104)

So by taking up the relief bill first we are going to move from a simple majority to a 60 vote change.


Guessing that they do have a bipartisan solution or none at all.

Up until the first bill is brought to a vote the rules can be modified. Once the Sandy aid bill is brought to a vote the existing rules are locked in place for another 2 years. That means the vote on filibuster reform must occur prior to the vote on Sandy aid. But that would permit work on the Sandy aid bill all of the way up to bringing it to the floor for a vote. That could be done within minutes after the filibuster vote. Reid needs to bring the filibuster rule change up for a vote even if it is defeated because we deserve to know who killed the change. Note: it means that at least 5 Democrats are opposed to changing the filibuster rule.

...he'd catch Hell for not prioritizing Sandy funding.

... he could have changed the filibuster rules, and gotten to Sandy funding after lunch. No big delay.

He must not have had the votes.

Rules of the Senate specify that this must be the first order of business of the new Senate. If he takes up the Sandy aid bill first the window closes on changing the filibuster rule. That is not to say that they can't work on both at the same time but that the actual vote must be on filibuster first and then Sandy aid. Reid knows this so his statement here is foolish. Bring it to a vote Sen. Reid because we need to know who the enemies are that are standing in the way of filibuster reform.