COLUMBIA, S.C. - State Senate Republicans have agreed to a handful of rule changes designed to prevent their calendar from becoming a minefield of legislation-stalling procedural traps.

"We came up with, I think, with some really solid rules that will allow the Senate to move forward in an orderly fashion to do the people's business," Senate Majority Leader Hugh Leatherman said.

The Senate will vote on dozens of rule changes when the legislative session begins in January, when rules changes can be made with a simple majority. Republicans hold a 26-20 majority in the Senate.

"If that's true, it's a tremendous step forward for advancing ideas here in South Carolina," Will Folks, spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford, said.

Sanford criticized the Senate after his legislative agenda, which sailed through the House last year, became mired on the calendar and died.

The problems have increased over the years, but routinely ended in gridlock this year. For example, senators were kept from discussing bills on their packed calendar because rules required them first to deal with legislation from the House.

One rule change that will be proposed in January would move House business to the end of the day, Senate Rules Committee Chairman Larry Martin, R-Pickens said. That also "would give you time to look at it before it comes up on the calendar," Martin said.

There's also a new limit to the so-called single-senator veto, which Sanford has frequently complained about.

Under Senate custom, a single senator could keep a bill from coming up for debate by objecting to it and saying he wanted to be in the chamber when it came up for discussion. But when the bill came up, the senator would simply leave the room.

While the practice wasn't part of the rules, curbing it will be, Martin said. "After a period of time, no longer will a single senator be able to hold up a bill indefinitely" if a majority of the Senate wants to bring it to a vote, Martin said.

Senate filibusters also would be easier to break. Filibusters there can stretch into weeks because senators frequently adjourn and leave the person opposed to the bill with the power to keep speaking the next day. At the same time, people wanting to end the filibuster need to muster 28 votes to force the issue to a vote.

The rules change would require 60 percent of the members present in the chamber and voting to end a filibuster, Martin said. For instance, if 30 members were present and voting, just 18 votes would be needed to end a filibuster.

The new rules also would narrow what could be included in amendments. That's an effort to rein in the practice of bob-tailing different pieces of legislation onto an unrelated bill.

The Senate has long been a place where members have a high regard for preserving the ability of dissenting voices in the minority to have their say. Leatherman said the rule changes wouldn't change that. "The minority can be heard," he said.

The changes likely will put more emphasis on work done in the Senate's committees, Leatherman said. Too often in the past, committees have sent bills to the floor hoping compromises would be worked out there, he said. The rules will encourage members to work out difference in committees, Leatherman said.