Congressional Republicans intend to enact President Donald Trump’s core agenda of cutting taxes and reducing federal spending. (Reuters)
'WOKE IS THEIR GOD': EX-DEM FUNDRAISER SAYS PARTY 'IN SHAMBLES' AFTER 2024 ELECTION LOSSES
"Budget reconciliation" isn’t a trick or scheme. It’s a time-honored parliamentary method used by both parties to enact their agenda when they can’t vault the filibuster.
Democrats used budget reconciliation to clear filibuster hurdles to approve Obamacare in 2009-2010. Republicans deployed the reconciliation gambit to try to undo Obamacare in 2017. However, Republicans were more successful in approving President Trump’s tax cuts later that year via reconciliation. The issue is that you must have a budget in place in order to use reconciliation in the Senate. And, the House and Senate must approve the same budget vehicle for reconciliation.
Let me say that again: it has to be the same budget vehicle for reconciliation.
That lays the groundwork. Here’s what unfolded last week.
House Republicans initially struggled to assemble a budget chassis for their eventual legislative plan. What they had to do first was construct and approve the legislative structure for this in the Budget Committee.
That took a Herculean lift, but after six weeks of meetings, House Republicans finally advanced their plan through committee. It cuts $4.5 trillion in taxes, $2 trillion in "mandatory" spending (like entitlements) and lifts the debt limit by $4 trillion.
TRUMP FBI DIRECTOR NOMINEE KASH PATEL PICKS UP SUPPORT FROM KEY GOP SENATOR
Republicans specifically designed this measure to make it out of the Budget Committee and appeal to conservatives.
Hold that thought for a moment about whom the committee targeted the bill for.
House Republicans could no longer dither. That’s because Senate Republicans were marching ahead with their own plan. It was slimmer and didn’t focus on some of the same priorities demanded by the House.
The Senate Republican package didn’t touch tax cuts. Instead, it bolstered military spending and infused the Department of Homeland Security and other related agencies with $175 billion to finish the border wall. It also increased energy production. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., long argued that voters elected President Trump and awarded Congressional Republicans the House and Senate because their message about border security resonated with them. Graham believes it’s a fool’s errand to deal with tax and spending cuts first. He says the border should be up first. Then move to other things.
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) listens to testimony from Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, during a hearing of the House Select Committee on the Coronavirus in Washington, D.C., on June 3, 2024. (ALLISON BAILEY/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images)
One option Republicans are talking about is offsetting some of the tax cuts with money brought in via tariffs. It’s argued they could bring in up to $1 trillion in tariffs annually. But the total goods imported was only a little over $3 trillion.
There is no plan right now to slap a 33% tariff on all goods. So that figure seems to be ambitious.
Also, Republicans can’t technically "count" revenue generated by tariffs toward deficit reduction – unless it’s in the bill. Yes, tariffs could impact the bottom line. Favorably, even. But it’s something the Congressional Budget Office would not evaluate unless it was part of the legislation.
So could lawmakers put tariffs in the bill? Sure. But some Republicans would be loath to vote for that provision. That’s because some would interpret the tariffs as a tax on the public.
But even as the Senate moved ahead, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., referred to Graham’s approach as "a non-starter" in the House.
ONE MONTH IN TO HIS SECOND TERM, NEW POLLS SUGGEST TRUMP'S POLL NUMBERS SLIPPING
This is the parliamentary problem facing Republicans.
"If the House can pass one big beautiful bill and get 218 on it and send it to the Senate, I will tell you right now, we can get 51 votes on that," said Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., on Fox Business. "I'm just not sure they can do it."
Mullin went on to characterize the House approach as "having all of our eggs in one basket."
President Donald Trump speaks at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, Feb. 18, 2025. (Pool via AP)
The president also called out Graham by name for failing to craft a comprehensive bill. President Trump noted that the House approach "implements my FULL America first agenda."
Mr. Trump then dispatched Vice President JD Vance to Capitol Hill to meet with Senate Republicans at their weekly luncheon.
"What the post seemed to suggest that we shouldn't move forward. That was cleared up today. JD says we prefer one bill. I prefer one bill. But we go forward," said Graham.
So, the Senate moves ahead. However, this is just the first of many steps to implement the president’s agenda.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
And here are the biggest questions on the table right now.
Will the president’s decision to weigh in compel skeptical House Republicans to support the House package?
Can the House approve a plan?
And, can the House and Senate ever approve the same framework – just so they can eventually move ahead to the actual bill?
All answers are unclear.
Chad Pergram currently serves as a senior congressional correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC). He joined the network in September 2007 and is based out of Washington, D.C.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hitchhikers-guide-senate-trying-advance-trumps-agenda