The chin-strokerati is starting to turn on the U.S. Senate.
First, New York Times Op-Out columnist Paul Krugman, whose latest piece laments the “rule of 60” in the Senate, that is, “the need for 60 votes to cut off Senate debate and end a filibuster — a requirement that appears nowhere in the Constitution, but is simply a self-imposed rule.”
As Krugman further notes:
Remember, the Constitution sets up the Senate as a body with majority — not supermajority — rule. So the rule of 60 can be changed.
Washington Post Op-Odd columnist E.J. Dionne goes even further:
Anyone who wants to change or even abolish the Senate has my full support. But that is not an option now.
So the Senate-as-cooling-saucer that Thomas Jefferson/James Madison characterized (you sort it out) is now too hot to handle?
O tempora.
Campaign Outsider 
Earlier this century, the U.S. Senate used to require a two-thirds vote for cloture, not 60%. Ah, the days.
One thing that Krugman and Dionne have in common is that they had a stint learning in the Peoples’ Republic of Cambridge.