Fact Check: Senate Republicans Call for Firing the Senate Parliamentarian Over Immigration Policies
What We Know
Recently, several Senate Republicans expressed their frustration with Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough after she ruled that certain provisions in their proposed tax and immigration legislation could not be included. Notably, Senator Tommy Tuberville from Alabama tweeted that MacDonough should be fired “ASAP,” reflecting a sentiment shared by some within the party who believe her decisions are politically motivated. Representative Greg Steube from Florida also criticized her, questioning why an “unelected swamp bureaucrat” has the authority to influence legislation supported by millions of voters (AP News, New York Times).
MacDonough's rulings are significant as they impact the legislative process, particularly under the special budgetary rules that allow certain bills to bypass the filibuster. Her role as parliamentarian has become increasingly scrutinized as lawmakers attempt to include various policy priorities in budget reconciliation bills, which must adhere to strict guidelines regarding what can be included (AP News, Politico).
Analysis
The calls for MacDonough's dismissal stem from her recent rulings, which have thwarted key provisions that Republicans aimed to include in their legislation. These provisions included measures related to Medicaid funding and immigration policies, which are central to the GOP's agenda. Tuberville's and Steube's comments suggest a growing frustration among Republicans who feel that MacDonough's interpretations of Senate rules are obstructing their legislative goals.
However, it is crucial to note that the parliamentarian's role is traditionally nonpartisan, and her recommendations are based on established Senate rules rather than political bias. Michael Thorning from the Bipartisan Policy Center emphasized that MacDonough is viewed as an “honest broker” by lawmakers from both parties, and her decisions reflect the procedural integrity of the Senate (AP News, New York Times).
While some Republicans are advocating for her removal, historical precedent shows that the position of the parliamentarian has been retained across party lines, suggesting that calls for dismissal may be more about immediate political frustrations than a genuine assessment of her qualifications or impartiality (New York Times, ABC News).
Conclusion
The claim that Senate Republicans are calling for the firing of the Senate Parliamentarian over immigration policies is True. Multiple Republican lawmakers have publicly expressed their desire to see Elizabeth MacDonough removed from her position due to her rulings against key provisions in their proposed legislation. However, it's important to recognize that her role is to provide nonpartisan advice based on Senate rules, and historical context suggests that such calls for dismissal often arise from political expediency rather than substantive issues with her performance.
