Shame on everyone involved for thinking that a single vote will be swung by this goofy procedural nonsense. The apparent belief of backbench House members that the American people understand or care about these procedural gimmicks is bizarre. It was bizarre during the “deem and pass” controversy of January and it’s bizarre today.Now, all that said, the other obvious thing here is that there's actually no good reason for the current practice of linking the Get Out Of Jail Free Card -- that is, the one major bill a year that's filibuster-free -- to the budget process. That is, there's a historical reason, but no strong logical reason. That's why I recommend the simple reform of de-linking them, by creating a new Superbill: one bill every year that would need just a simple majority to cut off debate. The filibuster allows minority intensity to be heard; Superbill would allow an intense majority to get their way. And by de-linking from the budget process, Superbill avoids the kinds of messy policy outcomes that the Byrd rule creates.
As I've said before, there are all kinds of reasons, both practical and theoretical, for the filibuster to survive. Good reform should, in my view, respect the principle that individual Senators should be influential, and all party minorities far more influence than they have in the party-ruled House, but should also allow the Senate to function more smoothly than it currently does. For legislation, the best solution to that is: Superbill!