Does the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' violate the Byrd Rule?

President Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," passed by the House of Representatives on May 22, 2025, represents a significant legislative effort, encapsulating a wide array of fiscal and non-fiscal provisions chaperoned by the Trump administration. This proposed act aims to address various sectors of our political sphere and economy, including matters related to agriculture, energy, defense, technology and the courts, through both funding allocations and policy amendments. Its significance lies in its comprehensive approach to addressing national priorities through legislative action using the expedited budget reconciliation process. However, it is this comprehensive approach used by Congress, utilizing budget reconciliation as a means for the bill's swift approval, that may just lead to its ultimate failure.

A deep dive: How the budget reconciliation process in the U.S. Congress differs significantly from the normal bill approval process

Under the normal bill approval process, a bill must pass both the House of Representatives and the Senate before being presented to the president for approval. According to Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, if the president approves the bill, he signs it into law. If he disapproves, he returns it with objections to the originating House, which must reconsider it. If two-thirds of that House agree to pass the bill, it is sent to the other Chamber for reconsideration. If two-thirds of the second Chamber also agree, the bill becomes law. If the president does not return the bill within 10 days, it becomes law unless Congress adjourns, preventing its return. Id.

The budget reconciliation process is a special procedure used to expedite the passage of certain budgetary legislation. It begins with the adoption of a concurrent resolution on the budget, which may include reconciliation directives. These directives instruct Congressional standing committees with jurisdiction over a specific congressional subject matter to make changes in spending, revenues, or the debt limit to achieve the budgetary goals set forth in the resolution (2 U.S.C.A. § 632). In the Senate, after the submission of an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) sequestration update report, each standing committee may submit alternatives to the envisioned order affecting laws within its jurisdiction. The Senate Budget Committee then reports a resolution, which may affirm or reject parts of the order and contain instructions to committees to achieve deficit reduction. Committees must respond with recommendations, and the Budget Committee reports a reconciliation bill or resolution carrying out these recommendations without substantive revisions (2 U.S.C.A. § 907d). Debate on reconciliation bills and resolutions in the Senate is limited to 10 hours, and amendments are restricted. The process allows for expedited consideration and limits the ability to amend the legislation, contrasting with the more extensive debate and amendment opportunities in the normal bill approval process (2 U.S.C.A. § 907d).

1. Concurrent resolution: The budget reconciliation process begins with a concurrent resolution on the budget, which sets forth budgetary levels and may include reconciliation directives (2 U.S.C.A. § 632). The normal bill approval process does not involve a concurrent resolution.

2. Committee instructions: Reconciliation directives instruct committees to make specific changes to achieve budgetary goals. These instructions are not part of the normal bill approval process (2 U.S.C.A. § 907d).

3. Expedited consideration: Reconciliation bills and resolutions are subject to expedited consideration, with limited debate and restrictions on amendments. The normal bill approval process allows for more extensive debate and amendment opportunities Id.

4. Presidential role: In the normal bill approval process, the president can veto the bill, requiring Congress to override the veto with a two-thirds majority in both Houses (U.S.C.A. Const. Art. I § 7, cl. 2). In the reconciliation process, the president's role is limited to signing or vetoing the final reconciliation bill or resolution, but the expedited process reduces the likelihood of a veto (2 U.S.C.A. § 907d). These differences highlight the unique nature of the budget reconciliation process, designed to facilitate the passage of budgetary legislation and achieve fiscal goals efficiently.

So, the budget reconciliation process is a legislative procedure primarily used to expedite the passage of budget-related bills in Congress. It was designed to streamline politically challenging fiscal-only matters such as deficit reduction measures as part of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974(according to the Brookings Institution:  https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-congressional-budget-and-impoundment-control-act-at-50/), and includes a process for drafting a joint budget resolution that sets fiscal-only provisions that instructs committees to adjust spending or revenue levels by certain deadlines. Unlike the normal bill process, which requires a supermajority to overcome the usual 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate, reconciliation allows for passage with a simple majority --only 51 votes and no allowance for filibusters-- thus streamlining the legislative process for budgetary measures.

However, the Byrd Rule, a critical component of the reconciliation process, restricts the inclusion of provisions that are not primarily budgetary in nature, ensuring that reconciliation is used solely for fiscal matters. This rule is designed to prevent the inclusion of extraneous non-budgetary items that could otherwise bypass the standard legislative scrutiny.

What is the Bryd Rule?

The Byrd Rule, codified at 2 U.S.C. § 644, restricts the inclusion of extraneous matter in reconciliation bills. ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/2/644) These bills are intended to adjust revenue, spending and the federal debt limit, with the Byrd Rule ensuring that their provisions are relevant to budgetary concerns. Specifically, the Byrd Rule prohibits provisions that do not produce a change in outlays or revenues, that produce changes which are merely incidental to the non-budgetary components of the provision, or that fall outside the jurisdiction of the committee that submitted the reconciliation measure (Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998).

Non-fiscal items included in the "One Big Beautiful Bill" would likely be deemed extraneous under the Byrd Rule. The rule is designed to prevent the inclusion of provisions that do not directly impact the budget. For example, provisions that relate to policy changes without a direct fiscal impact would be considered extraneous. The Byrd Rule's purpose is to maintain the integrity of the reconciliation process by ensuring that only budget-related items are included Id.

Judicial interpretation and legislative practice reinforce the strict application of the Byrd Rule. In cases such as  Clinton v. City of New York, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of adhering to constitutional procedures for enacting laws, which includes ensuring that reconciliation bills are used appropriately for budgetary purposes. Id. Additionally, legislative history and practice show that attempts to include non-budgetary items in reconciliation bills have been consistently challenged and often removed to comply with the Byrd Rule. Id.

In summary, the inclusion of non-fiscal items in the "One Big Beautiful Bill" violates the Byrd Rule. These provisions cannot be included in the bill as they do not meet the criteria set forth by the rule, which mandates that reconciliation bills must focus solely on budgetary changes. The Byrd Rule's enforcement ensures that reconciliation bills remain true to their purpose of adjusting revenue, spending and the federal debt limit, without being burdened by extraneous, non-budgetary provisions (Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998)), 

Analysis

A. Key components of the proposed act: Fiscal issues

The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" includes numerous fiscal provisions aimed at addressing budgetary needs across various sectors. Key allocations include:

1. Department of Defense: The act allocates $230.48 million for the Marine Corps Barracks 2030 initiative and $2.9 billion to supplement the basic allowance for housing. These fiscal measures are designed to enhance national defense capabilities and support critical infrastructure, reflecting the act's budgetary objectives.

2. Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Administration: Appropriations include $571.5 million for fixed wing aircraft, $1.283 billion for rotary wing aircraft, and $4.3 billion for Offshore Patrol Cutters. These allocations aim to bolster maritime security and aviation safety.

3. Student Loans (Title XI, Sections A through 30061): The bill introduces significant changes to student loan programs, including the transition to income-based repayment plans and the elimination of income-contingent repayment plans. It establishes a Repayment Assistance Plan, offering borrowers options for standard or income-based repayment, and sets new limits on loan rehabilitation and deferment. These changes are intended to simplify repayment processes and provide relief to borrowers.

4. Make American Families and Workers Thrive Again, Part 1. Permanently Preventing Tax Hikes on American Families and Workers: This section extends and enhances various tax credits and deductions, including the child tax credit, adoption credit, and employer-provided childcare credit. It also introduces new deductions for tips and overtime, aiming to provide financial relief to families and workers.

B. Key components of the proposed act: Non-fiscal issues

The act also encompasses several non-fiscal provisions, which focus on policy changes rather than direct budgetary impacts. Notable examples include:

1. Agriculture: Amendments to the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 and the Agricultural Act of 2014, which propose changes to existing agricultural policies.

2. Resource management: Prohibitions on the implementation of certain resource management plans, reflecting policy shifts in environmental and resource management.

3. Artificial intelligence regulation (Section 43201(c)): The bill imposes a 10-year moratorium on state and local governments from enforcing any law or regulation that limits, restricts, or regulates artificial intelligence models, systems, or automated decision systems.

4. Restrictions on enforcement (Section 70302): This section prohibits U.S. courts from enforcing contempt citations for non-compliance with injunctions or temporary restraining orders if no security was given when issued under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c).

Clear Byrd Rule violations

The inclusion of non-fiscal provisions in the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" violates the Byrd Rule, which mandates that reconciliation bills focus solely on budgetary matters. The Byrd Rule is intended to prevent the circumvention of the normal legislative process for non-budgetary policy changes. Including non-fiscal amendments to agricultural policies, prohibitions on resource management plans, barring states and their subdivisions from regulating artificial intelligence for 10 years and seeking to hamstring courts by removing one of their most straightforward contempt enforcement mechanisms in the act risks undermining the integrity of the reconciliation process. These provisions must be scrutinized by the public, policymakers of all stripes and members of Congress, including in the Senate, where the proposed act is now being evaluated, and ultimately excluded from the act to ensure compliance with the Byrd Rule and maintain the legislative process's integrity.

Conclusion

In summary, the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" presents a comprehensive legislative package addressing both fiscal and non-fiscal issues. While its fiscal provisions appear to align with the objectives of the reconciliation process, the inclusion of non-fiscal policy changes raises significant concerns regarding Byrd Rule compliance. To uphold the integrity of the reconciliation process, it is crucial that our elected officials in both Houses of Congress strictly adhere to the Byrd Rule, thereby ensuring that only budgetary measures are advanced through this expedited legislative procedure.