What can be done about the Senate Parliamentarian striking out parts of the Big Beautiful Bill

Vambram · Jun 26, 2025

Senate Parliamentarian Deals Another Big Blow to 'Big, Beautiful Bill' - But There's Something Trump Can Do About It

Unelected staffer Elizabeth MacDonough, who serves as the Senate parliamentarian and was appointed by Democrats, is on a power trip.

www.westernjournal.com

Towards the middle of this article, the author writes about a solution and who has authority over the Senate Parliamentarian.
What say y'all?

Vambram · Jun 26, 2025

The parliamentarian isn’t more powerful than the people | Blaze Media

The GOP holds the gavel. Trump holds the mandate. The parliamentarian holds ... nothing. So why are Republicans acting like she runs the Senate?

www.theblaze.com

Pommer · Jun 26, 2025

Vambram said:
Senate Parliamentarian Deals Another Big Blow to 'Big, Beautiful Bill' - But There's Something Trump Can Do About It

Unelected staffer Elizabeth MacDonough, who serves as the Senate parliamentarian and was appointed by Democrats, is on a power trip.

www.westernjournal.com

Towards the middle of this article, the author writes about a solution and who has authority over the Senate Parliamentarian.
What say y'all?

Changing the rules to get around the rules (which are the “laws“ of the chamber)?
Why have rules at all?

Desk trauma · Jun 26, 2025

Easy, make separate bills covering the items struck from the budget bill.

Vambram · Jun 26, 2025

Pommer said:
Changing the rules to get around the rules (which are the “laws“ of the chamber)?
Why have rules at all?

The solution offered by the authors of the 2 articles which I posted are absolutely legitimate and within the rules of the Senate. The Vice President is the presiding officer of the Senate and thus outranks the unelected parliamentarian person.

Always in His Presence · Jun 26, 2025

Play in the rules and follow guidelines - sounds like they can be over ruled - that is a legal possibility - do they have the wherewithal to do it?

Vambram · Jun 26, 2025

Always in His Presence said:
Play in the rules and follow guidelines - sounds like they can be over ruled - that is a legal possibility - do they have the wherewithal to do it?

I am sincerely praying that they do.

Maria Billingsley · Jun 26, 2025

Vambram said:
Senate Parliamentarian Deals Another Big Blow to 'Big, Beautiful Bill' - But There's Something Trump Can Do About It

Unelected staffer Elizabeth MacDonough, who serves as the Senate parliamentarian and was appointed by Democrats, is on a power trip.

www.westernjournal.com

Towards the middle of this article, the author writes about a solution and who has authority over the Senate Parliamentarian.
What say y'all?

She is trying to make it beautiful. Right now there is a whole lot of ugly. :doh:

ThatRobGuy · Jun 26, 2025

In terms of "what can be done"...

There's a couple of options, The Vice President can simply choose to ignore & overrule them (like Rockefeller did to Riddick), or the Senate Majority leader can fire them (like Trent Lott did to Robert Dove)

...but those kinds of moves aren't without significant political risk, so Vance and Senate Republicans would be wise to make sure this is the hill they want to die on before entertaining either of those nuclear options.

Fantine · Jun 26, 2025

Vambram said:
Senate Parliamentarian Deals Another Big Blow to 'Big, Beautiful Bill' - But There's Something Trump Can Do About It

Unelected staffer Elizabeth MacDonough, who serves as the Senate parliamentarian and was appointed by Democrats, is on a power trip.

www.westernjournal.com

Towards the middle of this article, the author writes about a solution and who has authority over the Senate Parliamentarian.
What say y'all?

It can only contain Financial clauses. If it contains other extraneous Clauses that would be subject to a super majority approval vote of 60, then the whole package must receive 60 votes to be passed in the Senate. We all know that the Senate doesn't have 60 yes votes for the bill so those other clauses which range from bad to horrible to abominable have to go

Vambram · Jun 26, 2025

Fantine said:
It can only contain Financial clauses. If it contains other extraneous Clauses that would be subject to a super majority approval vote of 60, then the whole package must receive 60 votes to be passed in the Senate. We all know that the Senate doesn't have 60 yes votes for the bill so those other clauses which range from bad to horrible to abominable have to go

Perhaps what some might consider to be horrible the rest of the majority of the people in the majority of the states in the USA actually do believe and understand that those are very good and wonderful.

Fantine · Jun 26, 2025

Whatever your view, if you have non financial clauses in the bill you need 60 votes. No exceptions.

Vambram · Jun 26, 2025

Fantine said:
Whatever your view, if you have non financial clauses in the bill you need 60 votes. No exceptions.

It is not always decided like that, IMO, by the Senate parliamentarians.

Fantine · Jun 26, 2025

The reconciliation process can only be used for budgetary items.

DaisyDay · Jun 27, 2025

Vambram said:
It is not always decided like that, IMO, by the Senate parliamentarians.

Huh? What is not always decided like what? Are you saying that reconciliation bills (first what) are not decided by having to be financial (second what)? Do you have a contrary example? What has "IMO" got to do with actual facts?

But "not always" is such an extremely low bar that you may be correct; "always" and "never" are generally less likely than the vast area in between.

iluvatar5150 · Jun 27, 2025

This is only an issue because they're trying to avoid a filibuster. If they wanted to not abide by the parliamentarian's ruling, they could just get rid of the filibuster.

Or they could play by the existing rules regarding reconciliation and only put actual budgetary measures in the bill. Either way, the solution isn't difficult.

Fantine · Jun 27, 2025

The parliamentarian has always been 100% non-partisan.

Just this morning reporters said that when the Infrastrure package was first proposed during the Biden administration, it was over $3 trillion, but after being pummeled into relative insignificance by Manchin's recalcitrance, the parliamentarian weighed in and lowered it further. Final total was about $1.2 trillion, I think.

Hans Blaster · Jun 27, 2025

Vambram said:
It is not always decided like that, IMO, by the Senate parliamentarians.

The entire job of the parliamentarian is to determine what motions, procedures, bills, etc. follow the rules and which ones don't. Same as it ever was.

Valletta · Jun 29, 2025

There certainly should be term limits for a parliamentarian.

Pommer · Monday at 9:36 AM

Valletta said:
There certainly should be term limits for a parliamentarian.

Why?

What can be done about the Senate Parliamentarian striking out parts of the Big Beautiful Bill

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

The pickles are up to something

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Jesus is the only Way

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Dona Quixote

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Dona Quixote

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Dona Quixote

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Well-Known Member

Dona Quixote

Hood was a loser.

Well-Known Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Similar threads