Senate parliamentarian strikes key SNAP spending cuts from GOP megabill
The Senate parliamentarian on Friday ruled against several more Republican provisions in President Trump's megabill, including language to bar immigrants who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents from receiving food assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
The parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, also ruled against a key Republican pay-for in the bill, a proposal requiring states to pay for a certain percentage of food assistance under SNAP depending on those states' error rates in delivering aid.
The proposal to shift SNAP costs onto the states was a sticking point with Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Susan Collins (Maine).
The parliamentarian's ruling could make it easier for Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to pick up Murkowski's and Collins's support as the SNAP-related pay-for will now need to be stripped from the legislation.
The Senate bill as drafted would have required states to pay between 5 and 15 percent of food benefits in 2028 on their rate of error in paying out food benefits.
Almost every state in the country has had error rates of 6 percent or higher, which would have shifted a significant percentage of the cost for delivering food assistance onto the states.
The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that the Senate language would have cost North Carolina, for example, to pay up to $438 million for food aid in 2028.
MacDonough struck another blow against the GOP leadership's agenda by ruling against a section to extend the suspension of permanent price support authority, something that traditionally has been part of the farm bill.
Congress passed a one-year extension of the farm bill in December after Democrats and Republicans failed to reach a deal on a multi-year extension of the law due to disagreements over SNAP funding.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, applauded the parliamentarian's decision on Friday.
'The Senate parliamentarian has begun providing guidance that certain provisions in the Republicans' One Big, Beautiful Betrayal will be subject to the Byrd Rule — ultimately meaning they will need to be stripped from the bill or altered to comply with the rules of reconciliation,' Merkley said in a statement.
'As much as Senate Republicans would prefer to throw out the rule book at advance their conservative families lose and billionaires win agenda, this process has rules and Democrats are making sure those rules are enforced,' he added. 'We will be fighting this bill every single day until Republicans bring it to the floor.'
Provisions of the reconciliation package that the parliamentarian decides violate the Senate's Byrd Rule are not eligible to pass with a simple-majority vote.
If Thune and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) don't remove provisions found to be in violation of the Byrd Rule, the Republican package would need to muster 60 votes to advance.
The parliamentarian ruled against several provisions of the bill under the Commerce Committee's jurisdiction, including a section that appropriated $250 million to Coast Guard stations on South Padre Island, Texas, damaged by fire in 2025.
She also ruled that language allocating $85 million to transfer the space shuttle on display at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum to a non-profit group in Texas would not be eligible for the budget reconciliation fast track.
Provisions found not to comply with the Byrd Rule would need at least 60 votes to overcome a point-of-order objection.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Associated Press
4 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Trump's move against Iran may draw more criticism from MAGA's anti-interventionists
President Donald Trump's decision to strike three nuclear sites in Iran will almost assuredly draw more criticism from some of the Republican's supporters, including high-profile backers who had said any such move would run counter to the anti-interventionism he promised to deliver. The lead-up to the strike announced Saturday exposed fissures within Trump's 'Make American Great Again' base as some of that movement's most vocal leaders, with large followings of their own, expressed deep concern about the prospect of U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran war. With the president barred from seeking a third term, what remains unknown is how long-lasting the schism could be for Trump and his current priorities, as well as the overall future of his 'America First' movement. Among the surrogates who spoke out against American involvement were former senior adviser Steve Bannon, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., commentator Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk, the founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point. Part of their consternation was rooted in Trump's own vocalized antipathy for what he and others have termed the 'forever wars' fomented in previous administrations. As the possibility of military action neared, some of those voices tamped down their rhetoric. According to Trump, Carlson even called to 'apologize.' Here's a look at what some of Trump's biggest advocates had said about U.S. military involvement in Iran: Steve Bannon On Wednesday, Bannon, one of top advisers in Trump's 2016 campaign, told an audience in Washington that bitter feelings over Iraq were a driving force for Trump's first presidential candidacy and the MAGA movement. 'One of the core tenets is no forever wars,' Bannon said. But the longtime Trump ally, who served a four-month sentence for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, went on to suggest that Trump will maintain loyalty from his base no matter what. On Wednesday, Bannon acknowledged that while he and others will argue against military intervention until the end, 'the MAGA movement will back Trump.' Ultimately, Bannon said that Trump would have to make the case to the American people if he wanted to get involved in Iran. 'We don't like it. Maybe we hate it,' Bannon said, predicting what the MAGA response would be. 'But, you know, we'll get on board.' Tucker Carlson The commentator's rhetoric toward Trump was increasingly critical. Carlson, who headlined large rallies with the Republican during the 2024 campaign, earlier this month suggested that the president's posture was breaking his pledge to keep the U.S. out of new foreign entanglements. Trump clapped back at Carlson on social media, calling him 'kooky.' During an event at the White House on Wednesday, Trump said that Carlson had 'called and apologized' for calling him out. Trump said Carlson 'is a nice guy.' Carlson's conversation with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that day laid bare the divides among many Republicans. The two sparred for two hours over a variety of issues, primarily about possible U.S. involvement in Iran. Carlson accused Cruz of placing too much emphasis on protecting Israel in his foreign policy worldview. 'You don't know anything about Iran,' Carlson said to Cruz, after the senator said he didn't know Iran's population or its ethnic composition. 'You're a senator who's calling for the overthrow of a government, and you don't know anything about the country.' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene The Georgia Republican, who wore the signature red MAGA cap for Democratic President Joe Biden's State of the Union address in 2024, publicly sided with Carlson, criticizing Trump for deriding 'one of my favorite people.' Saying the former Fox News commentator 'unapologetically believes the same things I do,' Greene wrote on X this past week that those beliefs include that 'foreign wars/intervention/regime change put America last, kill innocent people, are making us broke, and will ultimately lead to our destruction.' 'That's not kooky,' Greene added, using the same word Trump used to describe Carlson. 'That's what millions of Americans voted for. It's what we believe is America First.' Alex Jones The far-right conspiracy theorist and Infowars host posted on social media earlier in the week a side-by-side of Trump's official presidential headshot and an artificial intelligence-generated composite of Trump and former Republican President George W. Bush. Trump and many of his allies have long disparaged Bush for involving the United States in the 'forever wars' in Iraq and Afghanistan. Writing 'What you voted for' above Trump's image and 'What you got' above the composite, Jones added: 'I hope this is not the case…' Charlie Kirk Kirk said in a Fox News interview at the start of the week that 'this is the moment that President Trump was elected for.' But he had warned of a potential MAGA divide over Iran. Days later, Kirk said that 'Trump voters, especially young people, supported President Trump because he was the first president in my lifetime to not start a new war.' He also wrote that 'there is historically little support for America to be actively engaged in yet another offensive war in the Middle East. We must work for and pray for peace.' In Kirk's view, 'The last thing America needs right now is a new war. Our number one desire must be peace, as quickly as possible.' ___ Kinnard can be reached at
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Are the Maga isolationists losing influence over Trump's Iran deliberations?
The Trump administration is managing internal dissent over deliberations on whether to launch a strike against Iran, breaking what many supporters saw as a campaign pledge not to involve the US in new conflicts in the Middle East. Trump for the second time this week disregarded testimony by his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, that Iran had not been seeking to build a nuclear weapon as of March this year. 'She's wrong,' Trump said, then added: 'My intelligence community is wrong.' In a striking about-face, Gabbard late on Friday said her March testimony had been taken 'out of context' by the media and claimed there was no difference between her opinion and Trump's. 'The dishonest media is intentionally taking my testimony out of context and spreading fake news as a way to manufacture division,' she said in a post on X. 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalise the assembly. President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree.' Gabbard was nominated to her position in large part because of her scepticism of the US intelligence community and its role in the US involvement in a series of 'forever wars' in the Middle East, especially the Iraq war. Her transition from Democrat to Trump supporter is indicative of the broad coalition that the president has united under his America First movement – and the potential for a schism as the US grows closer to launching an attack on Iran. Steve Bannon, an influential adviser who has been critical of the potential for a US-Iran war, was seen having lunch at the White House with Trump this week, after a series of podcast episodes in which he and other popular Maga pundits criticised what they saw as preparations for a preemptive US strike against Iran. Bannon came to lunch armed with talking points that the Iran strike would be a bad idea and the massive 30,000lb bunker-buster bombs that could target the Iranian uranium enrichment facility at Fordow may not destroy the target. The Guardian previously reported that Trump was not fully convinced the bombs would destroy the target, and has held off authorising strikes as he also awaits the possibility that the threat of US involvement would lead Iran to talks. Others close to the administration have pushed back forcefully in support of a strike on Iran. Republican congressmen including Mitch McConnell and Tom Cotton have lashed out against the isolationist wing of Trump's support; the radio host Mark Levin has personally spoken with Trump in support of stronger backing for Israel; and other top members of the administration – including secretary of state Marco Rubio – are avowed Iran hawks. Others, such as vice-president JD Vance, are public anti-interventionists but have limited their criticism of potential strikes to allow Trump the space to make a decision. But Bannon is believed to have an outsized influence on Trump's decision-making on the war. According to US media, he has warned the president he shouldn't trust Israeli intelligence that the Iranian government was seeking a nuclear weapon imminently. Others in the Maga wing of Trump's support have sought to rebuild ties after sharply criticising the president's positioning on the Israeli strikes against Iran. Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News host, had called Trump earlier this week in order to apologise after blasting those advising Trump to launch strikes against Iran as 'warmongers'. 'Tucker is a nice guy,' Trump said from the Oval Office on Wednesday. 'He called and apologised the other day because he thought he said things that were a little bit too strong, and I appreciated that.'
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sen. Padilla claps back after JD Vance calls him 'Jose': 'He knows my name'
Sen. Alex Padilla blasted the Trump administration Saturday, calling it "petty and unserious" after Vice President JD Vance referred to him as "Jose" during a news conference in Los Angeles the previous day. "He knows my name," Padilla said in an appearance on MSNBC on Saturday morning. Vance visited Los Angeles on Friday for less than five hours after several weeks of federal immigration raids in the city and surrounding areas, sparking protests and backlash from state and local officials. Padilla was thrown into the heated nationwide immigration debate when he was dragged to the ground by federal law enforcement officers and briefly detained when he attempted to ask U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem a question during a news conference earlier this month. Vance characterized the move by California's first Latino senator as "political theater" in his remarks. Read more: Arellano: Sen. Alex Padilla's crime? Being Mexican in MAGA America 'I was hoping Jose Padilla would be here to ask a question, but unfortunately I guess he decided not to show up because there wasn't a theater, and that's all it is,' Vance said. Vance served alongside Padilla in the Senate and is now the president of the upper chamber of Congress. Vance's press secretary, Taylor Van Kirk, told Politico that the vice president misspoke and "must have mixed up two people who have broken the law." Padilla, in his TV interview, said he broke no laws. He suggested the misnaming was intentional — and a reflection of the administration's skewed priorities. "He's the vice president of the United States." Padilla said. "You think he'd take the the situation in Los Angeles more seriously." Padilla said Vance might instead have taken the opportunity to talk to families or employers affected by raids carried out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Other California Democrats rallied behind Padilla after the misnaming incident. "Calling him 'Jose Padilla' is not an accident," California Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a Friday post on the social media platform X. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass highlighted racial undertones in Vance's comments. 'I guess he just looked like anybody to you, but he's not just anybody to us," she said during a press conference on Friday. "He is our senator." Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.