Cokie Roberts on "This Week" mentioned that the reason Republicans shouldn't end the filibuster is because sometime they won't be in power and might need to use it.
I find this unpersuasive. I think the argument should be on the merits and not whether it'll be good or bad for Republicans when they're out of power. Because guess what? The so-called nuclear option will be exercised if not now then in the near future because power in politics never goes unexercised, just as money in politics can never be stopped. The reason filibusters are being challenged is the same reason money in politics has exploded: the tremendous power of a branch of the federal government. And because great power (including life and death decision-making) has coalesced in the judiciary, this results (as summer follows spring) in tremendous battles over judges. The actions of usurpatious judges over the past decades have consequences. Giving tremendous power to the federal government has consequences.
End of filibuster.