Niels Lesniewski, “‘Nuclear’ fallout in Senate might take some time to register,” Roll Call:

“The Senate’s Geiger counters hardly registered Wednesday afternoon after the most recent deployments of the “nuclear option” to speed up confirmation of President Donald Trump’s nominees, although the long-term effects on the institution may very well be significant.”

Jason Dick, “Why we should care that the Senate will debate less,” Roll Call Podcast:

“The Senate has changed its rules again, and it will result in less debate on many judicial and executive nominations. Who cares? The public should, if it wants a responsive government at least. James Wallner of the R Street Institute and Roll Call’s Niels Lesniewski discuss the ramifications.”

Yuval Levin, “A Word for the Filibuster,” National Review:

“Put simply, our system of government has at its center a Congress that requires a fair amount of bipartisan accommodation in order to function but that is subject at this point to a set of circumstances and incentives that mean we don’t have much bipartisan accommodation. This means the Congress isn’t functioning.”

Paul Kane, “With little fallout from nuclear option, Senate’s legislative filibuster is in jeopardy,” Washington Post:

“If one side is willing to “go nuclear” just to more quickly confirm the assistant secretary of Commerce — that’s the nomination that will start the process Wednesday — some Senate majority leader in the not too distant future seems certain to push to eliminate the 60-vote threshold so they can pass a major legislative proposal.”

Mark Tapscott, “Democrat Urges Congress to Pay Staff Better,” The Epoch Times:

“Hiring a bigger and better-paid staff is “the first step” to reversing the many years Congress has “intentionally transferred more and more power to the executive branch,” according to a Massachusetts Democrat.”

Heather Caygle and Burgess Everett, “McConnell stiff-arms the Pelosi agenda,” Politico:

“House Democrats are eager to boast about all they’re doing with their new majority. The only problem? Most of it’s headed for Mitch McConnell’s dustbin.”

Andrew Egger, “Pelosi Could Rein in Trump. Why Won’t She?” The Bulwark:

“Again, the strategy here is obvious: Pelosi has Republicans in a chokehold, and the prospect of genuine legislative reform sure won’t be enough to get her to relinquish it.”

Derek W. Black, “Congressional oversight is at the heart of America’s democracy,” The Conversation:

“Presidential power to override Congress is limited to a very small set of circumstances. As for everything else, the Constitution empowers Congress to set the nation’s course and keep it on track through oversight.”

Katherine Tully-McManus, “House members call for Office of Technology Assessment revival,” Roll Call:

“Reps. Sean Casten and Mark Takano appealed to their colleagues Tuesday to fund and restore a Capitol Hill technology agency that was defunded more than 20 years ago, as advocates say it could help Congress’s capacity to understand emerging technology and its social and policy implications.”

Lindsey McPherson, “House Democrats make habit of voting on legislation that doesn’t change any laws,” Roll Call:

“House Democrats are forming a nonbinding habit. For four legislative weeks in a row, the new majority has held votes on resolutions that do not carry the force of law and are designed simply to send a message.”

Andrew J. Taylor, “Reforming the Appropriations Process,” National Affairs:

“The current annual appropriations system is ill-suited to strategic budgeting and the regular deliberation of the nation’s spending priorities. And it is particularly disastrous for fiscal conservatives. Lawmakers wary of shutdowns and the zeroing out of federal dollars for government operations inevitably reach rushed agreements that almost always raise government spending. As a result, discretionary spending, and thus annual deficits and the national debt, continue to rise.”

Lindsey McPherson, “House Democratic women flex muscles with formal caucus, plus a political arm,” Roll Call:

“House Democratic women, armed with more numbers and the power of the majority, are getting  organized, switching their working group to a more formal caucus and launching a political action committee to help further grow their ranks.”

EVENT: “Choosing the Leader:  Leadership Elections in the House of Representatives,” Wednesday, April 10, 12-1pm.“Party leaders in Congress wield considerable influence, but how are they actually chosen? On April 10, in the first study of its kind, Matthew Green and Douglas Harris draw upon interviews and decades of archival data to explain how members of Congress decide whom to vote for in leadership elections. RSVP here.”