No. There's a parliamentary procedure involving a point-of-order that would allow them to do away with the filibuster. It goes WAY back to the early 1800s. This is what is known as the actual "nuclear option"
If they do this, it will destroy the comity in the Senate for the next two generation - perhaps permanently.
“If they do this, it will destroy the comity in the Senate for the next two generation - perhaps permanently”
Is there any comity in the Senate today on the Democrat side?
Let’s suppose they go ahead and end the filibuster. They then vote in financial reform, immigration reform, cap’n trade, and union card check. They also vote to give the President the authority to declare a national emergency and suspend elections. Obama takes advantage of this “emergency” power and cancels the November election. Do you really believe the American people will rise up?
I'm torn! One side says go for it! The other say nooooooo!
The "nuclear option" would have involved VP Cheney ruling that the filibuster rule did not apply to a vote to confirm, or reject, a judicial nomination. The Senate rules are silent on the point, and the filibuster was not routinely used against judicial nominees until recent years. It would have been a hardball move, but the chair does have the power to resolve disputes.
This, if true, is very different. This is an attempt to overturn by trickery a rule that every Democrat in the Senate (including then RINO Specter, minus Franken who was not seated), specifically voted in favor of just back in January of 2009.
Back when the nuclear option was being talked about, I said that the Republicans ought to go ahead and do it, as the first time the filibuster kept the Democrats from doing something they wanted, when they had a majority, and a the Presidency, they would just change the rules themselves.
Depressing to (apparently) be proven right.