Thune Plows Ahead with Big Beautiful Deadline Despite Question Marks

Every couple of years, all eyes are suddenly trained on one of Congress’s most under-the-radar jobs: the Senate parliamentarian. For 13 years, Elizabeth MacDonough has equal parts elated and frustrated parties in their attempts to squeeze major legislation through the reconciliation process. The first-ever woman to hold the job, MacDonough has played the referee through four administrations and an array of different Senate leaders. It’s up to her to settle the bitter disputes over which parts of the Big Beautiful Bill are relevant under the rules and which aren’t. In other words, she’s the most important person to Donald Trump’s agenda that most people have never heard of.

For the last several days, the “parl,” as the position is affectionately nicknamed, has been combing through the fine print of the Senate Finance Committee’s version of the bill to see which parts do, in fact, meet the standards for this specialized budget process. As MacDonough once explained it, “We’re the neutral end of [these partisan battles, which is] very important. Yes, you need to think of that somebody who is not elected, not a party apparatchik.”

That matters, especially now, as the two sides duke it out over what belongs in the president’s signature legislation and what doesn’t. To unlock reconciliation, everything has to abide by the Byrd Rule, which keeps parties from tacking on “extraneous” provisions. Democrats flagged several pieces of the bill that they argue aren’t budget-related, which is the major criterion for surviving the Bryd Bath.

Already, MacDonough has announced some GOP casualties — Byrd droppings — that she’s ruled non-germane. Making matters interesting, some of the victims were programs or provisions that helped sweeten the deal for reluctant House members to sign on. Language that would force the states to pay a bigger share of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or restrictions on temporary restraining orders from lower courts have been struck, at least for now, along with priorities like EPA revisions, overhauls to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, regulatory powers, a mandate to sell the Post Office’s electric vehicles, and more were all struck — sending Seante Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) into a huddle to see which pieces Republicans might rework.

The blows didn’t seem to derail Thune’s timeline, though. “Breitbart News Saturday” asked the majority leader, “Are we still on track for getting the bill out of the Senate by the Fourth of July?” “We are,” Thune replied. Obviously, he pointed out, things are more complicated in the Senate with “laws and restrictions and procedures that we have to operate under that are different than the House. So some of that takes a bit longer,” he conceded, “but as we head into this next week, I’m fully confident that we’re going to be ready to roll, and we have to be,” he said. “We’ve got to deliver.”

One thing he’s learned, Thune admitted, is that “if you don’t put deadlines out there, nothing gets done, and this stuff can drag on and on endlessly. If we want to get the one big, beautiful bill done, the Senate is going to have to act, and we’re going to hopefully act in a way that will enable the House when we send it back over there to them, because they have to pass the same bill that we do.”

Apart from the parliamentarian, the biggest wrench to Trump’s signature bill is getting the House on board with the changes, which were significant. Unlike Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) chamber, the Senate’s version brings the state and local tax deduction (SALT) back to earth from $40,000 to $10,000. Anticipating the House moderates’ anger, Thune tried to tamp down the frustration by pointing out, “We understand that it’s a negotiation. Obviously, there had to be some marker in the bill to start with, but we’re prepared to have discussions with our colleagues here in the Senate and figure out a landing spot.”

Other flashpoints include bigger reforms to Medicaid, a $5 trillion debt ceiling (instead of the House’s $4 trillion), a “gentler” approach to the green energy tax credits that Joe Biden created, and more permanent tax cuts for businesses. Based on the extension of the climate change subsidies alone, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) announced that he wouldn’t vote for the package.

“Rumor is Senate plans to jam the House with its weaker, unacceptable [One Big Beautiful Bill],” Roy vented on X Tuesday. “This is not a surprise but it would be a mistake,” he warned. “The bill in its current Senate form would increase deficits, continue most Green New Scam subsidies, & otherwise fail even a basic smell test… I would not vote for it as it is.”

His Arizona colleague, Andy Harris (R-Md.), agreed. “The currently proposed Senate version of the One Big Beautiful Bill weakens key House priorities,” the chair of the House Freedom Caucus said. “It doesn’t do enough to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid, it backtracks on Green New Scam elimination included in the House bill, and it greatly increases the deficit — taking us even further from a balanced budget.”

Thune responded to critics, stressing, “This is a process whereby everybody doesn’t get everything they want.” Others, like Senator Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), sought to highlight the pros of the bill. “I think we’re going to find more spending cuts,” he explained to Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. “I know that won’t break your heart. … It’s plain and simple. We’re going to make the tax cuts permanent. The SALT thing is probably one of the stickier things. But at the end of the day, this bill is going to be good enough that if you voted for it in the House before, there’s no reason for you not to vote for it this next time, because then you’re given a binary choice. Is it better to pass it or not? And at that point, I think that the House will pass it as well.”

House conservatives like Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) say they’re “hopeful” that “we’ll wind up with a product that every Republican in the House and Senate can vote for. We were close in the House.” But no one is quite sure how many congressmen will fall in line.

At the end of the day, Johnson admitted that there’s heartburn on the aspects where the two chambers aren’t on the same page. “But look,” he told Perkins on Saturday’s “This Week on Capitol Hill,” “we’re giving them the space to do what they need to do. I’m in constant communication with Leader Thune over there, my counterpart, and with individual senators who have expressed concerns or questions about why we did what we did in the House version. And so, look, I think this is going along well,” he agreed. “And I certainly hope they make as many minor modifications as possible and not major modifications, because that will make it more difficult for us to pass it, as you know.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

Like what you’re reading? Donate to The Washington Stand! From now until June 30, your gift will be doubled to fuel bold, biblically-based reporting.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

The post Thune Plows Ahead with Big Beautiful Deadline Despite Question Marks appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.