Let's consider history as we analyze the current crisis:
1. The Republicans were the first
ever to filibuster judicial nominees during the 60s.
2. Democrats, who, in the 40s - 60s, held majority in the Senate, were infuriated that Republicans tried to slow down business by threatening filibusters. One of their
actions was to reduce cloture from 67 to 60. One of their
options was to eliminate the filibuster. And aren't they glad now that they didn't do that three or four decades ago. Of course, no one has ever credited the GOP for brains when it comes to political history.
From what I know, nowadays filibusters and Senate business can occur at the same time (wheras in olden times, a filibuster stopped all other work in the Senate).
Filibusters only halt discussion on one topic, which ties up business, but not permanently. However, most other business, such as voting to vote on a bill or voting to execute parlimentary procedures, requires unanimous consent. This is where the Senate will stop. Without unanimous consent, no business may carry forward, a consequence 50 times worse than what the GOP is squabbling about.
