https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PDH_zoY1R8

Correct. This one is on Thune, not Vance.

After the GOP got control of the Senate in 1981 (after decades of Dem control of both houses), they fired the Dem-appointed parliamentarian and installed one of their own, For the next three decades, every time there was a change in which party controlled the Senate, this process repeated, with the same two men swapping in and out of the job. In 2012, Harry Reid appointed the current parliamentarian, but when the GOP regained Senate control in 2015 Mitch McConnell bizarrely decided to let her stay in her position. Similarly, Thune could (and should) have nuked her on Day 1 this term, but apparently he and squishes like John Cornyn went on record to say they were supporting her staying on.

And like the scorpion, of course she reverted to her nature when it counted.

Politics ain’t beanbag. We need leaders who are more interested in results than playing patty cake with the DC denizens.

Schumer Changes Name of ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ in Last Minute Snit Fit.

”
…
We wrote about how Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) played schoolyard games Saturday by forcing the Senate clerk to read the over 900-page-plus “One Big Beautiful Bill” out loud for 16 straight hours in a bid to delay the proceedings. Well it didn’t work, Chuck, because the measure passed the Senate Tuesday by a tie 50-50 vote broken by Vice President JD Vance.

It now goes back to the House, where unless things go seriously off the rails, a final bill will pass and head to President Trump’s desk.
…”
https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2025/07/01/schumer-changes-name-of-the-one-big-beautiful-bill-in-last-minute-snit-fit-n2191133

“And now it goes back to the House again, correct? So there’s still a chance?”

Yes.

“I’m curious about this:

If they only remove the tax, then would HPA & SHORT still fit within the Byrd rule in the future?”

probably not as written now.

Here’s the thing. The Byrd rule doesn’t allow ‘extraneous’ stuff if the Byrd rule is strictly applied. The creator of the rule never really intended it to be so strictly applied, he knew that sometimes things can not be directly related but still have an effect. So in some cases ‘extraneous’ can be included if Byrd is not strictly applied if what-ever is tangentially related to tax or budget. That’s what the HPA & SHORT are and were the way they were written, tangentially related to budget and tax. Over the years there have been many tangentially related things passed under the Byrd rule by both republican and democrat, some so remote from tax and budget that its like trying to see through a solid wall to see it yet it still passed and it was the accepted and legitimate and ‘traditional’ norm and without that ‘flexibility’ we would not have some of the beneficial programs we have today.

But, the democrats have forgotten they were the biggest abusers of the Byrd rule in the past. They put in stuff that seemed ‘tangentially related’ the way it was written to get past the Byrd rule, but when it got passed they exploited it to continue funding fraud and waste and abuse and now DEI and illegal aliens, and as a result the cost for benefits programs went up beyond what it would have been funded at that was sustainable. The bill now seeks to remove that funding of fraud and waste and abuse by cuts in some programs, for example, cuts in the funding for medicare to bring it back to where its suppose to be funded so the program can continue to provide benefits without cutting out benefits for American citizens that are entitled to receive those benefits.

But now the democrats are in such a fugue state of mental illness TDS they are actually no longer voting against the bill but rather against the American people – ALL of the American people, left or right wing or liberal or moderate or center or trans or not no matter the race or age as the effects of their attempts to kill this if they are successful will end up hurting all. And to do that they are grasping at anything they can to tear it down, and one of these things was demanding a strict adherence to the Byrd rule and the HPA & SHORT didn’t pass.

Now the democrats are no longer only voting against this bill ’cause of their mentally ill delusional TDS that ‘orange man bad’ – they are voting against the American people, ALL of the American people, left or right wing or liberal or moderate or center or, trans or not, no matter the race or age.

proof you don’t need a dopey avatar to spew nonsense.

I’m curious about this:

If they only remove the tax, then would HPA & SHORT still fit within the Byrd rule in the future?

And now it goes back to the House again, correct? So there’s still a chance?

It went back to the senate after all, and got voted out of senate again.

All 45 Senate Dems Just Voted For A $4 Trillion Tax Increase.

“The Big Beautiful Bill was dragged over the Senate finish line with the support of just half the chamber, plus one tiebreaking vote from Vice President J.D. Vance. …” (again…)

” ‘Failure to pass this legislation would result in a $4 trillion tax hike,’ ”

“Tuesday’s vote was passed with 50 Republican senators in favor. All 45 Democrats voted no.”

(The republicans that voted against the bill are Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, and Rand Paul of Kentucky. Also, two independents voted no, Sen. Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Bill back in the house home court.)

https://thefederalist.com/2025/07/02/all-45-senate-dems-just-voted-for-a-4-trillion-tax-increase/

(its like watching a ping pong game – back-n-forth the ball goes trying to hit the sweet spot so the other player misses enough and ends up loosing the game)

And, as citizens, we need to be very careful with what changes in the Senate we advocate for – the basis for the USS has already been adulterated with direct election of senators, changing the Senate rules to make it more “responsive” would be a huge misstep. The Senate is supposed to be resistant to current popular public opinion, it was originally designed to represent each individual state as a whole, to look out for each state’s unique positions and interests – not to act as some “super” House of Representatives. The Senate rules need to be as “conservative” – as in based on historical precedents and resistant to whimsy – as possible.

I’m hip to the fragility of using budget reconciliations as a path to changing the laws – it’s not as sound as new laws to change or succeed prior laws and can be undone by future reconciliations. Getting the taxes on NFA items zeroed out is a massive step towards normalizing in the public’s mind firearms and related items that we in the RTKABA community know are no more “dangerous” than any other gun or accessory – we should celebrate when the BBB passes! And then start the work to get the NFA either repealed or aligned with the 2nd Amendment.