Yes. If it were up to me to create new rules, I'd give each side (so long as there are only two parties) X number of filibuster opportunities to use on whatever bills they want and that's it. Think of it like the red-flag challenges coaches get in the NFL. If you blow your chances to challenge a bill early on in the year then later on the majority can pass what they want if they have the votes for it (i.e. 51).
It's crazy that the Democrats own the house, have 59 votes in the Senate, and hold the White House yet can't pass some of the signature legislation in their platform. The same would be true for republicans...remember when President Bush wanted an "up or down vote" on his judicial nominees? I agreed with him...even if these judges were off their rockers (some may have been), they were qualified judges and if the President wanted to appoint them to higher positions that was his perogative. The Senate can "consult" to the point of weeding out people who are clearly unqualified, but if a majority of Senators thinks a person is qualified he/she should be confirmed.
Filibusters should be used rarely and the threat of a filibuster can no effectively shut down the government. If I was the majority leader, I'd let the minority physically filibuster a bill. It makes them look stupid and obstructionist when they're trying to read the phone book for 24 hours straight and it rarely works...people physically can't stand and talk for more than 24 hours without stopping or having to pee.