Fact Check: "MacDonough's ruling eliminated key provisions of the GOP's agenda"
What We Know
On June 26, 2025, Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled against several significant provisions in a sweeping domestic policy bill proposed by Senate Republicans. This ruling effectively eliminated key elements of the GOP's agenda, particularly those aimed at achieving substantial budgetary savings through changes to Medicaid and student loan repayment options (New York Times). MacDonough's decisions came just a week before a deadline set by President Trump for the bill's enactment, creating urgency among Republican leaders to salvage the legislation (AP News).
The provisions struck down included measures that would have limited repayment options for student loan borrowers and targeted strategies used by states to obtain additional federal Medicaid funds. If all provisions ruled against by MacDonough are removed, it could result in a loss of over $500 billion in intended spending cuts from the bill (ABC News).
Analysis
MacDonough's role as the Senate parliamentarian is crucial in determining which provisions can be included in legislation that is subject to special budgetary rules, such as reconciliation, which allows for expedited passage without a filibuster. Her rulings are based on whether the provisions adhere to strict fiscal guidelines (The Hill).
The reliability of the sources reporting on MacDonough's rulings is high, with major news outlets like the New York Times, AP News, and ABC News providing detailed coverage of the events. These sources are known for their journalistic integrity and thorough fact-checking processes. The implications of her rulings have been met with frustration from Republican lawmakers, some of whom have called for her removal, citing her decisions as partisan interference (AP News).
However, it is important to note that the parliamentarian's recommendations are not binding; they serve as guidance for the presiding officer of the Senate. Despite this, the political ramifications of her rulings are significant, as they can derail major legislative efforts (ABC News).
Conclusion
The claim that "MacDonough's ruling eliminated key provisions of the GOP's agenda" is True. The evidence clearly indicates that her rulings on the proposed legislation have indeed removed critical components aimed at achieving substantial budgetary savings, thereby significantly impacting the GOP's legislative agenda. The urgency expressed by Republican leaders in response to her decisions further supports this conclusion.
