Republican Outrage Explodes Over Senate Parliamentarian’s Rulings on Trump’s Bill
A firestorm has erupted on Capitol Hill as conservative lawmakers express intense frustration and anger over rulings by the Senate Parliamentarian that have forced key provisions out of President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.” The legislation is currently being advanced through the complex budget reconciliation process, which allows certain fiscal measures to pass the Senate with a simple majority rather than the standard 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster.
The conflict centers on the unelected nature and perceived excessive power of the Senate Parliamentarian, often described as the chamber’s “de facto ‘scorekeeper.'” Republicans argue that this procedural official is blocking legislative priorities supported by millions of voters, despite not being directly accountable to the American people.
Understanding the Parliamentarian’s Role and the Byrd Rule
The Senate Parliamentarian is a non-elected official appointed by the Senate Majority Leader. Their role is to provide non-partisan interpretations of Senate rules and procedures. In the context of budget reconciliation, the Parliamentarian is crucial for applying the Byrd Rule. This rule dictates that provisions included in a reconciliation bill must have a direct and significant impact on the federal budget and cannot be merely “extraneous” policy changes disguised as budget items.
The process for challenging provisions under the Byrd Rule is known as the “Byrd Bath,” where opponents can raise points of order against specific parts of the bill they believe violate the rule. Democrats have reportedly vowed to use this process to challenge numerous lines in the GOP bill, aiming to strip away Republican priorities.
GOP Lawmakers Blast Rulings, Demand Action
Following a series of rulings that deemed several key Republican measures out of compliance with the Byrd Rule, lawmakers, particularly in the House, voiced their outrage.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) blasted the Parliamentarian, writing on X (formerly Twitter), “The Senate Parliamentarian is not elected. She is not accountable to the American people. Yet she holds veto power over legislation supported by millions of voters.” He called for elected leaders to “take back control,” even suggesting Vice President JD Vance, in his constitutional role as President of the Senate, could “overrule the Parliamentarian.”
Other Republicans echoed this sentiment of an unelected official overriding the will of the people. Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) stated that while rules matter, respecting voters is paramount, arguing that the power to decide budget content rests with Congress, not “an unelected staffer.” He asserted that Republican senators are “not required to adhere to anything she says.” Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas) went further, comparing the Parliamentarian to “activist judges” who should be overruled.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) called explicitly for the Parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, to be fired. He highlighted a ruling he claimed would make “ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS eligible for federal student loans,” arguing against using taxpayer dollars for such purposes given existing student loan debt concerns. “ZERO taxpayer dollars should go towards student loans for ILLEGALS,” Tuberville wrote.
Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) expressed frustration that hard-fought Medicaid reforms aimed at saving taxpayer billions were struck down by the Parliamentarian, urging the Senate to “act quickly to correct this failure.” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) urged Senate Republicans to simply “heed the advice of the president – don’t change the bill” and disregard the procedural rulings.
Key Provisions Stripped from the Bill
The rulings that triggered the most recent wave of conservative fury specifically targeted numerous proposed changes to the widely-used Medicaid program. Key provisions deemed non-compliant and stripped out by the Parliamentarian include:
A stricter crackdown on the Medicaid provider rate (the amount states pay healthcare providers for services to beneficiaries).
Denying states federal Medicaid funding if they include individuals not legally present in the U.S. on their benefit rolls.
Preventing individuals not legally present in the U.S. from participating in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
Preventing Medicaid and CHIP funding from being used for gender-affirming care.
Beyond the Medicaid changes, previous rulings had already removed other Republican priorities, such as provisions related to oil and gas leasing, public land sales, and changes to the cost-sharing formula for food benefits. Republicans viewed these stripped provisions, particularly the Medicaid reforms, as crucial measures for achieving significant cost savings and advancing core policy goals.
Divide Within the GOP on How to Proceed
Despite the strong calls from many Republicans to challenge or disregard the Parliamentarian’s rulings, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has held firm against seeking to overrule her decisions. Thune argued that such a move “would not be a good outcome for getting a bill done.” While acknowledging the loss of some desired provisions like provider tax reforms, he suggested that alternative legislative avenues might exist to achieve similar outcomes and cost savings.
The removal of these key provisions is seen as a significant setback for the Republican timeline, potentially jeopardizing their stated goal of getting the “mammoth bill” passed and onto President Trump’s desk by the July 4th target date. The clash highlights the ongoing tension between procedural rules in the Senate and the legislative ambitions of elected officials seeking to enact their agenda.
