With less than a week remaining before U.S. Senators return to their home states for the summer, there is still work to do. The Senate has not yet passed a version of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA), and once it does, it must precisely match the House-passed version to become law. Republicans in the Senate remain optimistic about their chances, but they first need to wait for the final word on what’s allowed in the bill before voting. Elizabeth MacDonough, the Senate Parliamentarian, has been reviewing the hundreds of pages in the proposed bill and has already flagged several problematic provisions that would be prohibited under the Byrd Rule.
(You can find a summary of the House-passed version of OBBBA here.)
Some of those getting thumbs down were expected, but others—including efforts to transfer the Space Shuttle from the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum to a nonprofit in Houston, Texas—were a surprise. The sheer number of “extras” found to be unrelated to the budget in the Senate bill (shared by the House) gives you a good idea of the scope of the bill and how very likely it is that members of Congress have not completely read it, as confirmed by several members of Congress, including Marjorie Taylor Green (R-Ga.) in the House.
Banking
The majority of provisions in the early stages that have been found to be in violation come from Sen. Tim Scott’s (R-S.C.) Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, one of 20 Senate committees tasked with conducting Senate business related to specialized areas of legislative interest.
Those included attempts to eliminate funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which Senate Republicans claim would save nearly $6.4 billion. The CFPB was established as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, following the 2008 economic crisis, to protect American consumers from financial fraud and bad actors. Republicans now oppose the CFPB, calling it another example of government overregulation.
Another banking committee provision, one that would end the Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Research (OFR), was also found to be in violation of the Byrd Rule. The creation of the OFR was also a result of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The move to change Federal Reserve employees to a new pay scale calculated at just 70% of the pay of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) employees shouldn’t be allowed in the final version of the bill, according to MacDonough.
Finally, an effort to transfer the functions and duties of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to the Securities and Exchange Commission was also deemed inappropriate. The PCAOB was created by the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 to oversee the audits of U.S. public companies following the multi-billion-dollar accounting scandals at Enron and WorldCom.
(You can find out more about the Enron scandal and whistleblower Sherron Watkins here.)
Environment
At least three provisions from Sen. Shelley Moore Capito’s (R-W.V.) Committee on Environment and Public Works are in line to be stricken. Those include efforts to repeal authorizations for Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) programs (this is separate from the clawback of unobligated IRA funds, which would not be prohibited), the repeal of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) vehicle tailpipe emissions rules for new cars put into service after 2027, and an attempt to amend the National Environmental Policy Act to prevent judicial reviews of environmental assessments or environmental impact statements when a one-time fast-track fee is paid (the fee provision may stand, but barring judicial review may not).
Military
Part of Roger F. Wicker’s (R-Miss.) Armed Services Committee proposal would also have to be rewritten. As proposed, it would require the Defense Secretary to provide a plan explaining how previously approved funds would be spent, with quarterly updates, or face dramatic budget reductions of $100,000 per day—a move found to be in violation of the Byrd Rule.
Judiciary
An effort to limit the power of the courts was also deemed out of order. The controversial language, which Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) famously acknowledged he didn’t know was in the bill when he voted for it, limits the ability of federal judges to hold government officials in contempt for flouting court rulings. Typically, if federal officials defy a court order, judges may hold them in contempt (that can look like fines, jail time, or other penalties to induce compliance), but as proposed, federal courts may not issue those contempt penalties against anyone who disobeys preliminary injunctions or temporary restraining orders if the party seeking the order did not post a monetary bond, or financial guarantee that would cover damages if a party is found to have been wrongfully enjoined. Since the federal government has far more resources than average citizens, this creates a potential hardship for those bringing actions, leaving judges with few options to demand compliance—and creating an imbalance of power.
A provision limiting grant funding for “sanctuary cities,” and cities where the Attorney General disagrees with states’ and localities’ immigration enforcement was found to be out of scope, as was language that gives state and local officials the authority to arrest any noncitizen suspected of being in the U.S. unlawfully.
Finally, a section that limits when the federal government can enter into or enforce settlement agreements that provide for payments to third parties was found to be subject to the Byrd Rule.
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
A provision that appropriates $250 million to Coast Guard stations significantly damaged by fire in 2025 (referring to South Padre Island, Texas) was found to be in violation, as was an effort to transfer the Space Shuttle currently on display at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum to a nonprofit in Houston, Texas.
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
The Parliamentarian ruled that a requirement for states to cover part of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, with a growing contribution as error rates increase, violated the Byrd Rule. SNAP, sometimes referred to as food stamps, provides food assistance to low-income families to help with their grocery costs. Another effort to regulate SNAP, including removing eligibility for immigrants who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents, was found to be inappropriate under the Byrd rule.
An extension of the suspension of permanent price support authority, which has traditionally been addressed in the Farm Bill, was found to be out of scope. The permanent price support authority dictates how the government supports the prices of certain agricultural commodities like corn, cotton, rice, and wheat, through loans, purchases, or other operations.
A Surprise Save
A proposed 10-year ban on state-level artificial intelligence (AI) regulations was found not to be subject to the Byrd Rule. Under the rule, states that establish their own AI regulations would risk losing access to federal broadband funds—a step intended to pull the provision into compliance with the Byrd Rule. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who voted for the bill in the House, later said she never would have voted for the provision, posting on X (formerly Twitter), “Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there.”
Why Does It Matter?
Since agreeing on a final budget can be slow, to speed things up, the Senate often jumps straight to a process called reconciliation. Reconciliation is especially beneficial when one party has the majority (more than 50 votes) but not a filibuster-proof majority (60 votes). The process can be complicated, but generally, under reconciliation, the goal is to combine spending and revenue provisions into a single bill.
Reconciliation bills are subject to special rules in the Senate. First, debate is limited to 20 hours, which can help a reconciliation bill get to a vote quickly. More importantly, the bill cannot be filibustered—the 60 votes necessary to stop a filibuster are not required.
Republicans currently hold the majority in the Senate, with 53 seats, compared to the Democrats’ 47 seats, including two independents (Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine) who caucus with the Democrats.
The Byrd Rule
Thanks to the Byrd Rule, named after the late Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), there are limits to reconciliation. For example, under the Byrd Rule, you can’t tack on policy changes that are unrelated to the budget or have only “incidental” effects on the budget. (Congress often tacks on extras to push potentially unpopular measures through on the coattails of government funding, but that’s not allowed with reconciliation.)
Also notable, any bill under reconciliation cannot increase the deficit beyond the fiscal years covered—that’s usually limited to 10 years (and why tax cuts rarely last forever). To avoid violating the Byrd rule, key provisions of reconciliation bills—typically tax cuts—are written to expire. That’s why certain provisions in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)—like those lower income tax rates or the $10,000 limit on the deduction for state and local taxes (SALT)—will, unless they are renewed, “sunset” at the end of 2025. They were passed originally with an expiration date—you can thank reconciliation and the Byrd Rule for that.
The Byrd rule would also apply if a reconciliation bill recommended a change in Social Security.
The Parliamentarian and The Byrd Rule
Since the reconciliation rules can be tricky, the Parliamentarian is often called upon to determine what is—and isn’t—allowed, especially when it comes to interpreting the Byrd Rule. If the Parliamentarian determines a provision in a bill violates the Byrd Rule, the provision must be removed from the bill unless the Senators vote to waive the rule—that requires 60 votes.
The presiding officer of the Senate (currently J.D. Vance, since the Vice President serves as the presiding Officer of the Senate) can overrule the Parliamentarian, though this is extremely rare. And simply ignoring the Parliamentarian has the potential to become a political landmine.
Keep In Mind
It’s important to note that these provisions aren’t “illegal”—they’re violations of Senate rules. If the Senate opted out of reconciliation, the Byrd rule wouldn’t apply, and the Senate would vote as it would on any other bill. It sounds like a simple solution, but there’s one big problem: Republicans don’t have enough votes to make that happen.
The Senate Republicans currently hold a slim majority, and at least four of their 53 senators, have publicly expressed concerns over parts of the bill (they include Rand Paul, Ron Johnson, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski). And there’s yet another complication: Changes forced by the Byrd rule could tip the balance of votes in the House—the original OBBBA passed with a squeaky close 215-214 vote.
(Some of these provisions, if removed, could still return as stand-alone votes and be subject to the 60-vote filibuster.)
Still In Dispute
The Parliamentarian is still scrutinizing the bill, and more provisions are certain to get a look, including efforts to make Trump-era tax cuts permanent by relying on a “current‑policy” baseline rather than current law, and provisions related to Medicaid. Check back as we continue to update this information accordingly.
Read the full article here
