Republicans in the Senate are exploring a controversial path to make President Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent—by bypassing Senate rules and overriding the parliamentarian. The move, which aims to extend the tax cuts, would break with Senate precedents and could set a dangerous new norm for future legislation.
At the center of this push is Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who is working on a plan to argue that extending the tax cuts won’t add to the deficit, based on a scoring method that Republicans believe will support their case. While Republicans insist they’re not “overruling” the Senate parliamentarian, the official responsible for interpreting Senate rules, their actions are already sparking accusations from Democrats that they are undermining the Senate’s procedural norms.
“We think the law is very clear and ultimately the budget committee chairman makes that determination,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), defending Graham’s authority to decide whether extending the Trump tax cuts would require offsetting spending cuts or new revenue.
The stakes couldn’t be higher for Senate Republicans. Making the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act—the centerpiece of Trump’s legislative agenda—permanent is one of their top priorities. But to do so, they need to avoid triggering rules that would force them to offset the costs, which would likely involve painful spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere.
The key issue is whether Republicans can argue that the tax cuts are part of “current policy,” which would allow them to avoid counting them as adding to the deficit. If the tax cuts are seen as part of the current policy, they would not be considered a new expense, thus making them easier to extend permanently.
But this strategy faces significant opposition, particularly from Senate Democrats, who argue that Republicans are playing fast and loose with the rules. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) accused Republicans of pushing for a “nuclear” option by attempting to bypass the parliamentarian. “That would be going nuclear,” Schumer said, “and it shows that Republicans are so hell-bent on giving tax breaks to billionaires they’re willing to break any rules, norms, and things they promised they wouldn’t do.”
Republicans, however, believe they have the legal backing to sidestep the parliamentarian’s usual role in interpreting the budget rules. Senate Republican Whip John Barrasso (Wyo.) argued, “It’s not a ruling by the parliamentarian. The budget chair gets to decide which baseline to use,” referring to Graham’s authority in the matter.
If Senate Republicans move forward with this approach, they risk creating a precedent that could dramatically change how budget reconciliation works in the future. Under the special reconciliation process, legislation can pass with a simple majority if it complies with certain rules, which are typically interpreted by the parliamentarian.
Democrats are already preparing to challenge this move. “We’ll probably make a parliamentary inquiry,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). “Does Graham have the ability [to use a current policy baseline]? She’ll probably say no.”
The heart of the matter is the potential cost of extending the Trump tax cuts. Under a “current law” baseline, extending the tax cuts beyond 2025 would add an estimated $4.6 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to official budget estimates. If the parliamentarian rules that Republicans must use this baseline, it would force Republicans to either find ways to offset the cost or allow the tax cuts to expire.
But if Republicans choose to ignore the parliamentarian’s ruling, they could set a new precedent, allowing them to push through their tax cuts without needing to find ways to cover the cost. This could open the door to future Republican attempts to bypass Senate rules to pass more controversial legislation.
Republicans are adamant that they won’t override the parliamentarian’s decision. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) stressed that the GOP wouldn’t overrule the parliamentarian, but instead would support the interpretation of the budget committee chairman. “The rules allow the budget committee chair to set the budget baseline,” she said.
Still, the possibility of a showdown remains. If the parliamentarian rules against the GOP’s plan, Republicans could vote to ignore the decision, marking a dramatic shift in Senate norms.
The outcome of this battle could have far-reaching consequences. If Republicans succeed in breaking Senate rules to make Trump’s tax cuts permanent, they could fundamentally alter the way major legislation is passed in the Senate, giving the majority party more power to shape fiscal policy without regard for longstanding procedures and precedents.
