The hold up in our congress is not in the House. It's in the Senate.
As soon as the GOP starts allowing straight up-or-down 51% votes in the Senate, this statement will carry some weight.
I'll take that seriously the second you find me a post from yourself on this forum arguing to remove the filibuster dated anytime between 2001 and 2005. Until then, can we safely assume that this is complete BS?
I'll also point out that these are bills passed by the GOP in the House and handed to the Senate. The question of a filibuster (by the GOP) isn't relevant. The reason Reid doesn't want these coming to a vote is because it would force his own party members to have to vote on the record against balancing the budget, or cutting taxes, or whatever other publicly popular things the GOP is proposing but the Democrats don't want to pass. The reality is that the bills the GOP is passing in the House have greater public support than what the Dems are doing right now. But the Dems don't want to appear to be the ones blocking the will of the people, so they just don't bring them to a vote and hope no one notices.
It's not a filibuster thing. It's a "we don't want to be seen on the record opposing what the people want, cause it'll cost us votes" thing. The Democrats aren't governing, they are campaigning. And that's why nothing is getting done. There are hard choices which need to be made, and they've realized that they look better by doing nothing at all than by taking any position at all on those choices. That's why nothing has gotten done.