[gutnor]

That seems to be the rule. Whatever past government set a lower standard, the new government can take that as useful approved governing tool.

Really people wonder why politician sometimes fight for nonsensical minor tweaks that look like a waste a taxpayer money, but that's exactly it. Most of the government way of working is ruled by tradition rather than law and new laws are created in case of abuse.

After a few cycle of those little games affecting both big parties, they will most likely get tired of it and vote a law that prevent that to ever happen again.

[koolba]

Exactly my point. A "nuclear" level of the same standoff is regarding changing cloture rules. The party in power can do it as a rule change (which can't be filibustered) but nobody has done so till now because they don't want to not be in power when that goes in effect.

[anigbrowl]

Amusingly enough now I am the one to tell you that Harry Reid did in fact do this in 2013, albeit for lower-court appointments. So I guess it was more of a tactical nuke than a strategic one, but that may well be cited as precedent next month. I think there's a high likelihood of the Senate doing exactly that at the beginning of the next term or soon after.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option#Events_of_Novem...