Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken are offering their own ideas to fix the filibuster, a Senate procedure that often results in gridlock in the upper chamber. Klobuchar is a cosponsor of a comprehensive filibuster reform bill introduced by Democratic Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico, Tom Harkin of Iowa and Jeff Merkley of Oregon. The trio said that since 2006, “there have been more filibusters than the total between 1920 and 1980.” Franken is offering a change to the filibuster process as well: Instead of taking 60 votes to break a filibuster, he wants 41 votes to maintain a filibuster.

His plan shifts the responsibility for the filibuster to the minority which would then have the responsibility of maintaining it.

“I respect the right of the minority that feels intensely about a great issue to continue debate,” Franken told MinnPost on Wednesday. “But the burden should be on the minority to continue that debate, not on a supermajority to end it.”

Klobuchar is part of a Democrat-led effort to reform the filibuster. A bill offered on Wednesday would not change the number of votes needed to break a filibuster, but would change the details of how a filibuster could proceed. The changes have five points:

• Eliminate the Filibuster on Motions to Proceed: Makes motions to proceed not subject to a filibuster, but provides for two hours of debate. This proposal has had bipartisan support for decades and is often mentioned as a way to end the abuse of holds.

• Eliminate Secret Holds: Prohibits one senator from objecting on behalf of another, unless he or she discloses the name of the senator with the objection. This is a simple solution to address a longstanding problem.

• Guarantee Consideration of Amendments for both Majority and Minority: Protects the rights of the minority to offer amendments following cloture filing, provided the amendments are germane and have been filed in a timely manner.

• Talking Filibuster: Ensures real debate following a failed cloture vote. Senators opposed to proceeding to final passage will be required to continue debate as long as the subject of the cloture vote or an amendment, motion, point of order, or other related matter is the pending business.

• Expedite Nominations: Provide for two hours of post-cloture debate time for nominees. Post cloture time is meant for debating and voting on amendments – something that is not possible on nominations. Instead, the minority now requires the Senate use this time simply to prevent it from moving on to other business.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar is a part of a movement in the Senate to reform the use of the filibuster, and together with Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York she’s circulating a petition urging changes to the Senate rules.

Until the 1970s, breaking a filibuster required 67 votes, and currently it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster. Senate Democrats want that threshold lowered, possibly as low as 51 votes (Democrats currently have the majority with 53 members). They also want changes to the way senators can filibuster by ending the silent objection which allows the stoppage of legislation to be anonymous.

The Klobuchar petition says:

The current rules in the United States Senate make it far too easy to obstruct. Any senator can halt progress on important bills by threatening to filibuster without explanation.

If a senator wants to block a bill with a filibuster, he or she should stand on the floor of the Senate and make the case to the American people.

This is the month to change the filibuster rules. Please stand with Senators Klobuchar and Gillibrand in asking their Senate colleagues to reform the filibuster now.

Klobuchar has backed filibuster reform at least since last April when she spoke with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on the issue:

Klobuchar: “So, a number of us are saying, well, can we get it down some more? Can we still allow for this debate? Can we allow for people to stand on the floor and push the filibuster so they have to own what they’re doing? If they want to filibuster unemployment benefits for people who are out of work for no fault of their own because Wall Street messed up, are they going to take to the floor and do that day after day after day? That`s another reform that we’d love to see.”

Maddow: “And you’d support that?”

Klobucher: “Yes.”

Supporters of President Obama’s tax cut compromise with GOP Senate leadership defeated a threatened filibuster by mostly liberal Democrats through the use of cloture Monday evening. Minnesota Democratic Sens. Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar were among those voting for cloture. The bill could see an up or down vote as soon as today. Klobuchar said she voted to advance the bill because of the middle-class tax cuts contained in it. Franken said he supports the measure reluctantly, citing an extension of unemployment benefits as a key reason for his support.

Klobuchar said in statement following the vote, “I voted to advance the bill because I don’t think the middle class should be socked with a $3,000 average tax increase right now, and while there are parts of the bill I completely disagree with — I supported bringing the taxes on people making more than $250,000 back to the Clinton levels — but in the end the parts that I disagreed with were outweighed by the benefits for the middle class.”

She added, “I also am going to work on getting potentially some debt reduction language in this, or at least I know we’re going to be working on this next year, we have to.”

Franken was a bit less happy with the bill.

“I don’t like extending the excessive Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, I don’t like the explosion in the deficit it will create, and I don’t like how the President made this deal. But I would hate even more to see Minnesota families get hurt,” he said. “There’s a lot in here to help create jobs and to help middle-class Minnesotans weather this recession: tax cuts for working families, a payroll tax holiday, energy tax credits, and the extension of Recovery Act initiatives that are already making a difference. And a lot of harm would come to working families if unemployment insurance isn’t renewed. So I’m voting for this reluctantly and will continue to fight passionately to get our economic policies on the right track.”

The U.S. Senate rejected two bills aimed at extending the Bush tax cuts for the middle class on Saturday after Republicans filibustered and Democrats couldn’t get the votes to break it. Minnesota Sens. Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar were among those voting to end the filibuster and allow a vote on the tax cuts. An extension of the middle class tax cuts now appears dead in Congress.

The Senate considered two bills: one that would extend the Bush tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 and another that would extend those cuts for people making less than $1 million, which was intended to be a compromise with Republicans. The GOP, however, was able to defeat both bill through the use of filibusters.

Franken and Klobuchar both voted to stop debate and vote on the bills.

Franken took to the Senate floor and chastised Republicans for rejecting an unemployment benefits extension because it adds to the deficit but pushing for tax cuts for the wealthy without regard for the deficit.

“Now, frankly, I’m a little tired of being lectured by Republicans on the deficit,” he said. “We all know that Bill Clinton inherited the largest deficit in history from George H. W. Bush and then handed George W. Bush the largest surplus in history. And George W. Bush nearly doubled the national debt. He also handed Barack Obama the largest deficit in history. And, of course, my friends on the other side of the aisle controlled the Congress for most of those Bush years.”

He continued, “So Republicans say that these unemployment benefits are too expensive and will add to the deficit. They demand that these unemployment benefits must be paid for. Tax cuts for the richest people in America? No need to pay for those. Adding $700 billion to the deficit-or actually $830 billion when you factor in extra interest payments? No problem.”

Here are Franken’s full remarks:

Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., engaged in a filibuster today because he opposes a law being considered by the Canadian Parliament related to tobacco regulation. Franken rose to speak against Bunning’s filibuster.

“This is a perversion of the filibuster and a perversion of the role of the Senate. It used to be that the filibuster was reserved for matters of great principle, today it has become a way to play out the clock,” Franken said. “Some of my colleagues seem more interested in using every procedural method possible to keep the Senate from doing anything than they are in creating jobs or helping Americans struggling in a difficult economy.”

Both men spoke of the graciousness of the other, of their devotion to Minnesota and the need to put their eight-month election dispute behind them. But the topic on which they said almost the same thing was Franken’s status as the 60th Democratic vote in the U.S. Senate. Both Coleman and Franken were dismissive of the significance of the number 60 — despite its vaunted quality of rendering Democratic legislation filibuster-proof — and for almost the same stated reasons. (Their unspoken reasons may differ.) 

Coleman, after his concession:

Sixty is a magic number, but not everyone always votes in lockstep. …I think a lot of folks are putting a lot into this 60 number. When it comes to the big issues, there are a lot of Democrats that don’t always vote with the Democrat party line, and there are some Republicans that don’t always vote with the Republican party line. 

Franken, after his victory speech:

Sixty is a magic number, but it isn’t. Because we know that we have senators who — Republicans who are going to vote with the Democrats, with a majority of Democrats on certain votes, and Democrats that are going to vote with majority Republicans on others. So it’s not quite a magic number as some people may say.

The C-SPAN2 video clip is here (Franken line comes at the 7:35 mark).

David Hayes will be confirmed. If I have to wait until Al Franken comes, he’s going to be confirmed. We are going to confirm David Hayes. Everyone should understand that. If we happen to lose this today, I will just move to reconsider until we have the votes.

Having the votes may not actually require Franken. Yesterday’s vote was 57-39, with Reid strategically voting against Hayes so he could more easily bring his nomination back on a future day.

Three Democrats were out sick, and two Republicans voted for the nomination. With all Democrats on hand the filibuster could fall — if Reid can keep at least one GOP defector.

But that may not be easy, since one of the Democrats is Edward Kennedy, whose battle with brain cancer keeps him away from the Capitol for most votes. Errant Republicans will feel strong pressure to close ranks.

And that’s where the wait for Franken could come in.

Should his 312-vote lead survive review by the Minnesota Supreme Court after oral arguments set for June 1, Franken could be seated in the Senate quickly — as long as Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty issues him an election certificate.

Five state Supreme Court justices begin reading briefs this week in Coleman’s appeal of a lower court’s finding that Franken won the 2008 election by 312 votes.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty is responsible for issuing the election certificate required for being seated in the U.S. Senate — and he has made statements indicating he might apply his own decision-making to the situation, even after a state Supreme Court ruling.

Here is the full statement by Specter (note that his position against the Employee Free Choice Act won’t change):

I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank especially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

Magnuson, Schumer, Cornyn

Here are three quotes from the last 24 hours on the Minnesota recount between Al Franken and former U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman:

“Everything’s been looked at and looked at carefully,” is how Minnesota Supreme Court Justice and State Canvassing Board Member Eric Magnuson sees it, according to a news report this morning. “If there were any nits to be picked, they’ve been picked.”

“It is now clear that Al Franken won the election. The Canvassing Board will meet tomorrow to wrap up its work and certify him the winner,” U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, former chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said in a statement Sunday. “With the Senate set to begin meeting on Tuesday to address the important issues facing the nation, it is crucial that Minnesota’s seat not remain empty.”

“Senator Schumer will likely play a key role in determining who ultimately assumes this Senate seat,” responded U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “Pre-judging the outcome while litigation is still pending calls into question his ability to impartially preside over this matter when it comes before the Committee, as it most certainly will.”

Cornyn elaborated on his position and the likelihood of a filibuster over seating Franken this morning on CNN’s “American Morning.” Excerpts after the jump. Here are excerpts from Cornyn’s Monday appearance on CNN’s “American Morning” program:

CNN: So you’re saying that the legal avenues for Norm Coleman have not been exhausted. You don’t want Al — Al Franken to be seated, or anyone to be seated, until all the legal challenges in Minnesota are up?

CORNYN: That’s correct. And the — and the the rules to the Senate — Rule Two of the rules of the Senate require an election certificate. In Minnesota, that has to be signed by both the secretary of state and the governor, and it can’t be issued before seven days have expired after the canvassing board’s decision. So we’re getting closer to a resolution but we’re not there yet. …

CNN: Are you guys going to filibuster?

CORNYN: Well, in filibuster, of course, in the Senate means unless you can get 60 votes to proceed, then — then you don’t. We continue debating it. And I think that is the likelihood here if the Democrats try to ignore the Senate Rule Two and Minnesota law and try to short-circuit this process.