Sen. Tom Harkin

Senators Tom Udall, Jeff Merkley and Tom Harkin have been extraordinary leaders of a hard-fought effort to reform the Senate rules. ACS, while not taking a position on specific proposals, worked to educate Senators about the constitutional history and the extent of current filibuster abuse. More than sixty organizations involved in an informal Fix the Senate Now coalition joined in supporting their proposals. It is therefore unsurprising that, with the defeat of the Udall, Merkley, and Harkin resolutions yesterday, the initial takeaway is that "reformers lost."

My take: Yesterday was a day of considerable progress in the latest round of a multi-round fight to make the Senate work.

Reformers won modest changes in the rules themselves by way of a deal negotiated between the leadership of both parties. They showed that they had nearly majority support for more substantial reforms. And they won an assurance that instead of Democrats playing by one rulebook when they are in the majority, only to have the Republicans subjugate them with different rules later, both parties will play by the same rules.

Reformers did not prevail on a key procedural issue. They knew that, as in past rules reform battles, those opposed to reform would filibuster the proposed changes. Reformers relied on judicial and Senate precedents affirming that, because a previous Senate can't constitutionally limit the powers of today's Senate, a majority is sufficient to break a filibuster - if it does so before the Senate implicitly ratifies the old rules by operating under them. This procedure, the "Constitutional Option," differed from the 2005 "Nuclear Option," in which the Republicans attempted to throw out the rules in the middle of a session, after the new Congress had already ratified them.

Senators Udall, Merkley and Harkin had put forward a proposal fair to both parties, one that they knew was unlikely to garner unanimous Democratic support. They had hoped to win the support of some Republicans for both the substantive proposals and the Constitutional Option, especially since so many Republicans had supported the far more radical Nuclear Option. In the end, even Republicans who had publicly called for reform refused to back their reform proposals.

But at its heart, the ADA is simple. In the words of one activist, this landmark law is about securing for people with disabilities the most fundamental of rights: "the right to live in the world." It ensures they can go places and do things that other Americans take for granted.

I will always remember a young Iowan named Danette Crawford. In 1990, she was just 14. She used a wheelchair, and lived with great pain. But she campaigned hard for the ADA. When I told her that the ADA would mean better educational opportunities, and prevent workplace discrimination, Danette said: "Those things are very important. But, you know, what I really want to do is just be able to go out and buy a pair of shoes like anybody else."

Two decades later, people with disabilities can do that - and so much more. The ADA has changed America in ways largely invisible to most citizens, but profoundly transformative for tens of millions of Americans with disabilities.