Senate Republicans have been optimistic for a while now that they could approve a budget for their reconciliation bill by the middle of this week. That’s virtually impossible at this point.
Senators are instead facing the prospect of staying in session into the weekend to work on the House-adopted budget, after their colleagues on the other side of the Capitol headed home on a Tuesday afternoon.
But more than just questions about timing, many GOP senators are still in the dark on key pieces of the budget that have yet to be resolved.
“At this point, you guys probably know more about the structure of the resolution than I do,” Sen. Josh Hawley told reporters after leaving the Republican conference meeting on Tuesday.
Trending
As conversations continue between GOP leaders and the Senate parliamentarian, Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated that Republicans have settled on one controversial point: using a current policy baseline to extend tax provisions.
“We think the law is very clear, and ultimately, the Budget Committee chairman makes that determination,” Thune told reporters after a meeting on Tuesday.
The idea with using a current policy baseline is that, with tax cuts expiring, Republicans can make renewing those tax rates appear to have less of a budgetary impact if they treat an extension as having zero impact on the deficit, rather than taking into account that the tax cuts are expiring, and therefore, renewing them would cost trillions.
Republicans are essentially using a new accounting trick to act as if their reconciliation bill will cost trillions less than the actual price tag.
Sen. Kevin Cramer reiterated his support for the plan, which has been discussed among Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee for months. Cramer said the conference is moving toward a consensus, arguing that Republicans would be removing a burden from the parliamentarian by not asking her to weigh in on whether it’s appropriate to use a current policy baseline for reconciliation numbers.
“The law is pretty clear,” Cramer said. “Traditions around here become so statute in the minds of people who have been here too long.”
With Wednesday effectively off the table, the budget resolution’s timeline remains a question mark. The text of the resolution hasn’t been released. Members haven’t negotiated amendments. They haven’t settled on a number of important provisions. And then there’s the problem of floor time.
Even if leadership was miraculously ready to move forward with the budget now, other business would take priority on the Senate floor. Democratic Sen. Cory Booker’s speech protesting the actions of the Trump administration halted votes on nominees, further backing up the calendar, and the Senate plans to vote on those nominations before moving forward with the budget.
“We’ve got a number of items that have got to go first,” Sen. Mike Rounds said. He added that there wasn’t a firm timeline for when the resolution’s text would be released. “Just waiting,” he said. “There wasn’t a discussion focused on a particular time or anything yet.”
Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso told reporters Tuesday that a vote would happen as soon as possible, even if it bled into the weekend.
(When Cramer was asked about the prospect of Saturday votes, he said he thought that was now the case after Booker’s speech. “Congratulations,” he said.)
Speaker Mike Johnson previously aimed to finish the initial budget process before Easter. To meet that deadline, the Senate would likely need to take the next step in the process this week, sending a reconfigured resolution back to the House so lawmakers there could either accept the Senate’s changes or make more amendments themselves before sending it back to the upper chamber.
But a game of legislative ping pong could create its own set of problems. Mere reports of potential changes the Senate might make have House fiscal hawks already threatening to reject whatever the Senate sends over.
“Obviously we’re going to have to work that out, but we’ve got to start somewhere,” Sen. John Cornyn said. “It’s going to be hard work.”
The debt ceiling remains a key sticking point. Thune has lobbied for its inclusion, and many in the conference are aligned with him. Trump and House Republican leadership consider it a necessary part of the one-bill strategy. Still, there are kinks to work out.
The House included a $4 trillion debt ceiling increase in its budget resolution. The Senate has discussed a $5 trillion boost. Its advocates argue that the added room would prevent the debt ceiling from becoming an issue before the 2026 elections.
“There’s concern about the debt ceiling expiring before the midterms,” Cornyn said. “That doesn’t make much sense, but obviously it’s going to have to get worked out.”
A small group of lawmakers huddled with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Monday night, and Cornyn told reporters that Bessent encouraged urgency.
“The treasury secretary made the point that this was something we need to do and do quickly,” Cornyn said Monday, referencing the tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of the year.
The House resolution aimed for a reduction of at least $1.5 trillion in spending, with language included that ties spending levels to spending cuts. For parliamentary purposes, the Senate currently plans to include a drastically lower target: $3 billion.
Senate Republicans insist cuts would reach beyond the billions of dollars; a couple are even aiming for more than the House number. So far, House Republicans aren’t buying it.
One of their former colleagues showed more sympathy for House members who are stuck between a rock and a fiscal cliff.
“I do have empathy for their frustration,” Cramer told reporters, mentioning his time in the House. “I didn’t think much of the Senate then.”
Whether or not the House would take up a new Senate-approved resolution was discussed in the Senate GOP’s closed-door lunch on Tuesday, according to Hawley.
“I took it that the answer to that question was yes,” Hawley said. “Yes, that the House would vote for it, despite what they’re currently saying.”
With almost all of Trump’s legislative agenda resting on one bill, Cramer doubted that House quibbles over a couple changes would amount to much.
“If they feel really strongly about something, they want to fight for it, they can do that,” Cramer said. “But at some point, the speaker lowers the boom and says, ‘OK, now we’re going to vote.’”
“And you either vote for a $4.3 trillion dollar tax increase, or you don’t,” he said.
—
Ben T.N. Mause is a NOTUS reporter and an Allbritton Journalism Institute fellow.
Ursula Perano, who is a reporter at NOTUS, contributed to this report.
Author
