The passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—a massive ten-year fiscal framework which would fulfill many of President Donald Trump’s campaign promises—is in jeopardy due to disagreements over states’ rights to regulate artificial intelligence.
On Sunday night, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee announced that Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth McDonough (the chamber’s rule keeper) had given the thumbs up to a provision which discourages states from regulating artificial intelligence.
The parliamentarian decides whether or not provisions are allowed to be included in budget reconciliation bills such as the “big, beautiful bill.” This power comes from the Senate’s “Byrd rule,” which weeds out extraneous provisions from the ten-year fiscal plans.
“I sincerely hope the Senate takes out the POISON PILL in the One Big Beautiful Bill that puts a 10 year moratorium on states ability to regulate and make their own laws on AI!” wrote Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., in response to the news Monday.
Greene has previously promised to vote against any bill which includes the moratorium but had held some hope it would be thrown out by the parliamentarian.
The provision passed Senate muster after Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, worked with the Senate Commerce Committee to amend it.
Specifically, Republicans amended the ten-year block on state regulations by making it a requirement for receiving federal broadband funding—a crafty maneuver which made it sufficiently budgetary for the parliamentarian to approve it.
“If this dirty trick is not taken out then those who snuck it in will be responsible for failure,” added Greene.
“The [One Big Beautiful Bill] is supposed to be President Trump’s campaign promises on taxes, energy, and border security & immigration NOT AI.”
If the previous margins hold and the provision is not amended before its Senate passage, then this disagreement could threaten the bill in the House.
House Republicans passed the bill by a 215-214 margin in May, with one Republican voting “present.” House GOP leadership probably cannot afford to lose Greene’s vote.
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., will likely defend the provision. In May, he told The Daily Signal he would not change it for Greene.
“If some of the deep blue states smother it with regulation, as they’re prone to do, then it might hamper our development, and it could put us in a compromised position against our enemies, China and others,” he explained.
Asked then if he would tweak the disputed provision instead of throwing it out, Johnson said, “I like it in its current form. I mean, I know the president supports it in its current form, so we’ll see where that goes.”
