June 2, 2025 | Capitol Hill Weekly

This update reflects facts as of Monday morning, June 2, 2025. The situation is fluid and may change.

The House-passed budget reconciliation bill—the One Big Beautiful Bill—now moves to the Senate, where significant changes are expected and the process is uncertain. Some Senate Republicans have expressed concern about spending cuts in the House bill, some of the tax changes, and the overall effect on deficits and the debt. There nevertheless, remains a stated goal of passing the legislation by Independence Day, with the added imperative on acting to increase the debt ceiling before the scheduled August recess.

Regular Order

Regular order in the Senate would call for each committee of jurisdiction to hold hearings and vote to approve (or not)—that is, “mark up”—the parts of budget reconciliation legislation with its jurisdiction. For tax and healthcare issues that are critical parts of the pending bill, the relevant committee is Finance. The committee-approved parts of the reconciliation bill would then be combined by the Budget Committee and submitted to the full Senate for vote.

It is unclear whether that regular order will be followed. One practical consideration is that Senators (unlike House members) typically serve on more than one committee. With nine committees of jurisdiction in the Senate, it’s not clear whether committees could mark up the bill simultaneously. Spreading the markups out over several weeks to accommodate overlapping committee assignments is not a luxury the legislative calendar can afford.

In addition to slowing the process, committee hearings also provide an opportunity for the minority to make political points. Still, there are advantages to marking up the legislation, including allowing majority members an opportunity to help shape the legislation. Consequently, only if there is broad agreement among the majority Republicans might they insist upon regular order through Committee action. 

The Reconciliation Process

As reconciliation legislation, the bill is privileged under Budget Act rules: it cannot be filibustered, requiring only a majority vote for passage. As a budget bill, it also cannot, however, contain “extraneous” provisions, that is, provisions that do not have more than an incidental effect on revenue or expenditures. Such provisions, primarily addressing matters of policy rather than budget, are subject to a point of order and removal on the Senate floor under what is known as the “Byrd Rule.” So, prior to floor consideration, managers of the bill will review provisions of the bill with the Senate parliamentarian and remove objectionable provisions prior to floor consideration.

Another element of the Byrd Rule is that a budget reconciliation bill cannot increase deficits beyond the 10-year Congressional budget accounting window. Senate instructions in the joint budget resolution governing the bill contemplate making this determination based on a so-called “current policy” baseline. Under a policy baseline, current tax policy would be considered permanent, regardless of the expiration of tax provisions under law. Utilization of a tax policy baseline for budget reconciliation purposes is novel and untested. Indications are that Republican leadership intends to take the position that the choice of baseline is within the discretion of the chairman of the Budget Committee. A simple majority in the Senate can sustain that position on a point of order. Consequently, assuming no Democratic votes for that position, it will be sustained unless at least four Republican members vote against it.

Floor debate on a budget reconciliation bill is limited under the rules to 20 hours, equally divided between the two parties. Senators may, however, offer amendments without limit, leading to what is popularly known as a “vote-a-rama” often lasting many hours. Many are often offered without prospects of passage, but instead for the minority members to highlight political objections to provisions in the bill.

Substantively, passage by July 4 (or any date) depends ultimately on resolving House-Senate and intraparty differences on key issues. Among those are principally the repeal and phase out of the Inflation Reduction Act energy credits, the limit on the state and local tax deduction, and the proposed reductions in funding for Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. An overarching issue is the effect of the bill and proposed changes on future deficits and the national debt, which many believe is on an unsustainable trajectory. Balancing these and other concerns is made more difficult by the very thin Republican majorities in both House and Senate.