The powerful politician no one's heard of who can torpedo Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill'

Daily Mail​

2 days ago

A rarely-talked-about, unelected bureaucrat within the Senate may have the power to tank President Donald Trump 's big beautiful bill.
The Senate Parliamentarian, a position held by Elizabeth MacDonough since 2012, is about to weigh in on whether the House-passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act runs afoul of the upper chamber's rules.
The parliamentarian is more often than not an afterthought, typically because their role is to be the Senate's hall monitor, essentially making sure mundane processes on the floor are adhered to.
However, the parliamentarian is thrust into the spotlight every time senators try to pass a bill through budget reconciliation, a process that allows the Senate to pass items with a simple majority instead of the usual 60 votes needed to overcome the filibuster.
Since Trump's big beautiful bill is going through reconciliation, MacDonough has the power to veto certain provisions that she feels aren't related to the budget or are solely policy objectives.
The appeal of the reconciliation process is obvious. Since Republicans control 53 seats in the Senate, a united GOP can essentially pass the bill without input from a single Democratic senator.
The catch is, MacDonough can pick and choose which line items in the bill need to be slashed with red ink. She will be responsible for interpreting whether the Big Beautiful Bill complies with something called the Byrd Rule, which has been around since 1985.
If MacDonough decides to exercise her veto power, key provisions of President Donald Trump's Big Beautiful Bill could be deleted
The Byrd Rule is named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd, who was a key figure in instituting the guardrails around reconciliation packages like the one Trump is trying to ram through.
The most important facet of the Byrd Rule states that reconciliation bills cannot have provisions in them that don't have an effect on the budget.
Put simply, if a provision doesn't meaningfully increase or decrease federal spending, it can be considered extraneous and be tossed out of the bill.
The Byrd Rule also prohibits reconciliation bills from overhauling Social Security or increasing the deficit for a fiscal year not included in the bill's purview.
The test to see whether a bill complies with the rule has been referred to as the 'Byrd Bath.'
MacDonough last used the 'Byrd Bath' to water down President Joe Biden's Build Back Better package in 2022.
Specifically, she struck down three separate attempts by the Democrats to provide a pathway to citizenship for eight million immigrants living in the United States illegally.
Now, she's in the position to take a major bite out of Trump's agenda, though its not entirely clear what she might take aim at.
Many have speculated MacDonough will rule against a provision buried deep within the bill that will upend the US judicial system.
Section 70302 of the bill would severely limit the power of federal courts to enforce injunctions or hold government officials in contempt.
This comes as federal judges have slapped the second Trump administration with an unprecedented 25 nationwide injunctions in its first 100 days, most of which curtailed the government's ability to deport illegal migrants.
During a townhall on Friday, Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, told a constituent that she believed this provision has no chance of getting through the Senate.
'I don't see any argument that could ever be made that this affects mandatory spending or revenues, so I just don't see that I don't see that getting into the Senate bills,' Ernst said.
The big beautiful bill also contains a section that prohibits Medicaid funds from going to any clinic that provides abortions.
Back in 2017, the parliamentarian found that a similar provision in a reconciliation bill violated the Byrd Rule, which could mean she'll strike it down again this time.
The current bill's regulations on AI could also be cast aside in the impending Byrd Bath.
There is precedent for firing the parliamentarian. In May 2001, then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss. (left), fired the parliamentarian at the time, Robert Dove (right), because he was getting in the way of President George W. Bush's budget bill
There is precedent for the Senate simply ignoring the parliamentarian. The declarations of MacDonough and all the other parliamentarians before her have been non-binding and lacking in actual enforcement power.
Just two weeks ago, the Senate voted 51-44 to repeal a federal waiver that allowed California to institute an electric vehicle mandate, completely disregarding the parliamentarian's guidance on the issue.
Democrats condemned the move by Republicans, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer saying, 'Republicans, I believe, I am certain, will come to regret the ill-considered step they take tonight.'
Going back a bit further, there is also precedent of Senate leaders getting rid of the parliamentarian over disagreements on the Byrd Rule.
On May 7, 2001, then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., fired the parliamentarian at the time, Robert Dove, because he was getting in the way of President George W. Bush's budget bill.
Exactly one month later, with a new parliamentarian in place, Bush was able to sign his first landmark tax cut into law.
This scenario appears unlikely to repeat, since Senate Majority Leader John Thune has indicated that he isn't even willing to overrule the parliamentarian, let alone fire her.
'We're not going there,' Thune told reporters on Monday.