The filibuster... keep it or trash it?

[dsc]

4. I have consistently felt it should go

As the population of states gets more out of balance, the case of it to go only grows and grows. The 50 Democratic Senators represent 41 million more people than the 50 GOP Senators yet under the current rules we can have all 50 Democrats, plus the GOP Senators from TX (2), FL (2), NC (2), and PA, OH, WI (1 each) and still not get a bill passed. That is insane. On top of that, it is all but a completely one sided weapon. There is only arguably two things that Trump wanted that the filibuster nuked. One was ACA repeal (since they couldn't do a full repeal with reconciliation they had to do that horrible skinny one which failed) and the other was the border wall. But even those it is arguable not certain that he could have gotten those but for the filibuster. In comparison, Obama had at least Immigration reform and card check blocked by it for sure. Also ENDA would have passed in 1998 but for it. When one side wants to pass laws and the other doesn't which is where we are now for the most part then the filibuster is a one sided weapon. If we must compromise all of the following should be red lines.

1) Rule changed so that either you have senators voting that represent at least half of the population, or got at least half the votes cast in the three elections seating that senate or 60 senators.

2) To successfully filibuster you need either 40 no votes or have enough senators to represent 50% of the population for who got 50% of the votes cast in the elections seating that senate.

3) No more bs of lazy filibusters. If you are going to filibuster, you have to speak, occupy the floor, and have the senators for point 2 the entire time. If you fall short of that at any time the filibuster is over.