Who will vote for the next budget reconciliation bill in the Senate?
Short Answer
Both the model and the market overwhelmingly agree that Mitch McConnell is most likely to vote for the next budget reconciliation bill in the Senate, with only minor residual uncertainty.
1. Executive Verdict
- Collins and Murkowski initially opposed major reconciliation bills together.
- Amendments to the DOJ fund are crucial for securing conservative support.
- Late 2026 fiscal deadlines may force McConnell to re-introduce a reconciliation bill.
- House GOP is planning for a potential third reconciliation bill.
- Internal Republican disagreements delay the current immigration reconciliation bill.
Who Wins and Why
| Outcome | Market | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thom Tillis | 79.0% | 72.4% | Likely to support a budget reconciliation bill aligning with party priorities. |
| Susan Collins | 82.0% | 71.1% | May support the bill if it includes moderate provisions she champions. |
| Rand Paul | 34.0% | 21.3% | Is expected to vote against the bill due to his consistent fiscal conservative stance. |
| Mitch McConnell | 92.0% | 89.4% | Will likely support the bill as a reflection of Republican legislative strategy. |
| Lisa Murkowski | 15.0% | 6.9% | Her vote may depend on specific bill details, given her moderate leanings. |
Current Context
The U.S. Senate delayed a key budget reconciliation vote over internal disputes. As of May 27, 2026, the planned $72 billion budget reconciliation bill, intended to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), has not been voted on by the U.S. Senate [^][^]. Republican leadership halted the legislative process before the Memorial Day recess due to internal disagreements regarding a proposed $1.8 billion Department of Justice Anti-Weaponization Fund [^][^]. Consequently, the bill did not reach the floor by the White House's target deadline of June 1 [^].
The bill sought passage via reconciliation, requiring a simple majority. This procedural tool allows legislation to pass with a simple majority of 51 Republican votes, thereby bypassing the usual 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate [^][^][^]. However, the current bill, referred to by some as "Reconciliation 2.0," faced an impasse and failed to advance to a vote, primarily due to the unresolved internal party disputes [^][^][^].
Republicans may attempt a new reconciliation bill later in 2026. Expert and media commentary suggests that despite the current setback, Republican leadership is likely to utilize the reconciliation process again later in 2026, possibly for what is being termed "Reconciliation 3.0" [^]. This future effort could be directed toward addressing other Republican priorities, such as implementing tax cuts or further reductions in the federal budget [^].
2. Market Behavior & Price Dynamics
Historical Price (Probability)
Outcome probability
Date
This market has demonstrated a sideways trend with low volatility, trading within a narrow range between 10.0% and 16.0% probability. The price began at 14.0% before rising to a peak of 16.0% around May 21. This modest increase in perceived probability was short-lived. Following this peak, the price settled back to 15.0% by May 27. This slight decline coincides with recent news that the Senate vote on the budget reconciliation bill was delayed due to internal disputes within the Republican party over a specific Department of Justice fund. The price action suggests the market reacted to the increased legislative uncertainty by slightly lowering its odds.
Trading volume provides insight into market conviction. The move to the 16.0% peak was accompanied by a significant volume spike of 337 contracts, indicating that the temporary rise in optimism was backed by a notable increase in trading activity. However, the overall volume of 1,158 contracts across 50 data points is not exceptionally high, suggesting moderate engagement. The consistent trading within the 10% to 16% band has established these levels as informal support and resistance. Overall, the chart indicates a stable but low market sentiment, with participants consistently pricing the likelihood of a "Yes" vote from this senator at less than 1 in 6. The recent news of the delay appears to have reinforced this low-probability assessment.
3. Significant Price Movements
Notable price changes detected in the chart, along with research into what caused each movement.
Outcome: Rand Paul
📉 May 22, 2026: 30.0pp drop
Price decreased from 64.0% to 34.0%
What happened: The primary driver of the 30.0 percentage point drop was the traditional news that the Senate budget reconciliation bill was stalled and its floor vote cancelled in the week of May 18, 2026 [^][^][^]. Rand Paul and other Republican senators expressed strong opposition to President Trump's proposed $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund, a key part of the bill, rendering it indefinitely delayed or dead [^][^][^]. This significant legislative development directly reduced the probability of any senator, including Rand Paul, voting for the now-stalled bill. Social media was irrelevant, as no related activity was found.
📈 May 21, 2026: 45.0pp spike
Price increased from 19.0% to 64.0%
What happened: The primary driver for the 45.0 percentage point spike in Rand Paul's outcome on May 21, 2026, was his active leadership in advancing the budget reconciliation bill. On May 20, 2026, Rand Paul, as Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, led his committee in advancing the reconciliation bill by an 8-5 party-line vote [^]. This action, immediately preceding the market movement, strongly signaled his intent to vote for the bill. While the Senate vote was subsequently cancelled on May 21, 2026, due to internal Republican disputes [^][^], Paul's demonstrated commitment likely solidified market confidence in his support for the bill whenever it eventually comes to a vote. Social media was irrelevant, as no relevant social media activity was identified in the provided sources.
Outcome: Thom Tillis
📈 May 20, 2026: 21.0pp spike
Price increased from 71.0% to 92.0%
What happened: The 21.0 percentage point spike for "Thom Tillis" in the "Who will vote for the next budget reconciliation bill in the Senate?" market on May 20, 2026, appears to contradict the available traditional news. Reports from as recently as May 18, 2026, indicated Senator Tillis was expected to be a "no" vote due to his opposition to specific White House funding in the budget reconciliation package [^][^][^]. Such opposition would logically cause a decrease, not an increase, in the market's price for him voting for the bill. Therefore, the provided traditional news does not explain this upward price movement, and no social media activity was found to drive the spike.
📈 May 18, 2026: 30.0pp spike
Price increased from 40.0% to 70.0%
What happened: On May 18, 2026, the primary driver identified in the research was a traditional news event: Senator Thom Tillis reportedly informed his Republican colleagues that he would not vote for the budget reconciliation bill if it were considered that week [^]. This announcement, reported by Axios, stemmed from his concerns about a $1 billion proposal for the White House ballroom and the bill being rushed [^][^]. This explicit statement of opposition would logically lead to a significant decrease in the prediction market price for "Thom Tillis" voting for the bill, directly contradicting the described 30.0 percentage point spike. Therefore, the provided information does not explain the stated price increase, and no social media activity was identified as a driver.
Outcome: Susan Collins
📉 May 19, 2026: 11.0pp drop
Price decreased from 72.0% to 61.0%
What happened: The primary driver of the 11.0 percentage point drop was likely the widespread awareness or impending public release of a Pan Atlantic Research survey in May 2026, which indicated Senator Collins' approval rating was 18 points underwater, and she trailed her Democratic challenger by 7 percentage points [^]. Facing deeply unfavorable poll numbers, Collins would appear less likely to cast a politically contentious vote for a budget reconciliation bill, especially given her past opposition to similar measures [^]. No specific social media catalyst for this precise market movement on May 19, 2026, was identified [^]. Therefore, traditional news concerning her declining political viability and public standing was the primary driver.
4. Market Data
Contract Snapshot
This market resolves to "Yes" if Senator Rand Paul votes for the next budget reconciliation bill in the Senate before January 1, 2027; otherwise, it resolves to "No", closing by January 1, 2027, at 10:00 AM EST. The qualifying vote must be the first final vote in the full Senate, not a procedural motion, and will be verified by Congress.gov. Post-announcement changes to the vote tally are not considered for resolution.
Available Contracts
Market options and current pricing
| Outcome bucket | Yes (price) | No (price) | Last trade probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mitch McConnell | $0.96 | $0.08 | 92% |
| Susan Collins | $0.86 | $0.19 | 82% |
| Thom Tillis | $0.83 | $0.21 | 79% |
| Bill Cassidy | $0.74 | $0.31 | 67% |
| Rand Paul | $0.39 | $0.62 | 34% |
| Lisa Murkowski | $0.21 | $0.85 | 15% |
| John Fetterman | $0.13 | $0.93 | 9% |
Market Discussion
The list of individual senators expected to vote for the next budget reconciliation bill is not yet established by the FY2026 budget resolution [^], and Senate Republicans have postponed a planned reconciliation vote due to internal disputes over specific funding proposals [^]. While Senate Republicans largely voted cohesively on April 23, 2026, to adopt the resolution to begin the reconciliation process (50-48, with only two reported defections), internal disagreements indicate the final set of "for" votes may not be fixed until a floor vote occurs [^].
5. How do the voting records of moderate Republicans Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski compare on contentious fiscal bills since 2021?
| 117th Congress Reconciliation Bills | Both Senators Collins and Murkowski voted against the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 [^][^] |
|---|---|
| H.R. 1 (July 2025) | Senator Lisa Murkowski voted in favor, while Senator Susan Collins voted against it [^][^] |
| S.Con.Res.33 (April 2026) | Senator Lisa Murkowski voted in favor, Senator Susan Collins likely voted against [^] |
Collins and Murkowski initially opposed major reconciliation bills together. During the 117th Congress, Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins demonstrated unified opposition on significant fiscal measures passed through the reconciliation process. Both senators cast votes against the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 [^] and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 [^].
This divergence continued with a subsequent budget resolution. In April 2026, the senators again took different stances on S.Con.Res.33, a budget resolution initiating a new reconciliation process. Senator Lisa Murkowski was one of only two Republican senators to vote for S.Con.Res.33 [^]. Senator Susan Collins likely voted against the resolution or aligned with the majority of her Republican caucus [^].
6. What specific amendments to the DOJ 'anti-weaponization' fund could secure support from fiscal conservatives like Rand Paul for a 'Reconciliation 3.0' vote in 2026?
| Required Fund Amendments | Strict guardrails and transparent reporting on the source and expenditure of funds [^][^][^][^][^] |
|---|---|
| Payout Prohibitions | Prohibit payouts to individuals convicted of violent crimes [^][^][^][^][^] |
| Key Concerns for Support | Transparency of purpose, taxpayer-funded payouts to political allies, and DOJ settling personal lawsuits [^][^] |
Amendments to the Department of Justice's 'anti-weaponization' fund are crucial for securing support from fiscal conservatives like Rand Paul for a 'Reconciliation 3.0' vote. These necessary amendments would implement strict guardrails and mandate transparent reporting on both the source and expenditure of funds [^][^][^][^][^]. The objective of these changes is to prevent payouts to individuals convicted of violent crimes and to ensure the fund is not exploited as a 'slush fund' for political allies [^][^][^][^][^].
Rand Paul's concerns require transparent restrictions and comprehensive fund oversight for the 'anti-weaponization' fund. His primary objections involve the perceived lack of transparency in its purpose, the potential for taxpayer-funded payouts benefiting political allies, and the notion of the DOJ acting outside its traditional authority to settle a personal lawsuit for the President [^][^]. Consequently, any amendments must directly address these points by establishing clear restrictions and comprehensive oversight. The establishment of legislative 'guardrails' or explicit statutory prohibitions on the fund's uses is a fundamental condition for reviving the budget reconciliation bill, which includes critical funding for agencies such as ICE and CBP [^][^][^].
7. What is Bill Cassidy's track record on using the budget reconciliation process for partisan policy goals since joining the Senate Finance Committee?
| Reconciliation Track Record | Willingness to employ the budget reconciliation legislative tool for partisan goals [^][^][^] |
|---|---|
| Key Policy Areas | Supported reconciliation for immigration, border control, education, and fiscal policy goals [^][^][^][^] |
| Current Stance | Proactive embrace of budget reconciliation to push Republican policy priorities [^] |
Bill Cassidy consistently uses budget reconciliation for partisan policy goals. His track record demonstrates a willingness to employ this legislative tool across various policy areas [^][^][^]. While Cassidy previously voiced concerns in January 2020 regarding the budget process's transparency, rushed nature, and potential to increase deficits, voting against a particular appropriations deal, his more recent actions show a proactive embrace of budget reconciliation to advance Republican priorities [^].
Cassidy has advanced partisan reconciliation efforts across key policy areas. He has supported using reconciliation for partisan policy goals related to immigration and border control, describing such an effort as crucial for border security and preventing a "Democrat shutdown" [^]. This engagement included unveiling the Senate's education portion of reconciliation, which proposed significant changes to Pell Grant eligibility and federal student loan programs [^][^]. Cassidy has also underscored the importance of balancing the budget to preserve the "American Dream," indicating his support for using the reconciliation process to achieve fiscal policy goals [^].
8. What upcoming fiscal deadlines in late 2026 could force Mitch McConnell to re-introduce a budget reconciliation bill?
| Government funding expiration | September 30, 2026 [^][^] |
|---|---|
| Surface transportation authorization expiration | September 30, 2026 [^][^] |
| Farm bill provisions expiration | September 30, 2026 [^][^] |
Several significant fiscal deadlines loom for Congress in late 2026. These include the expiration of government funding, surface transportation authorization, and farm bill provisions, all scheduled for September 30, 2026 [^][^]. This collective expiration creates substantial legislative pressure as Congress approaches the midterms and must address these critical FY26 deadlines [^][^].
Budget reconciliation is an optional legislative tool, not a mandatory response to fiscal deadlines. While frequently utilized to address impending fiscal cliffs, such as funding expirations, this process is not inherently triggered by them [^][^][^]. The primary benefit of budget reconciliation is its ability to bypass the Senate's 60-vote filibuster threshold, which helps to expedite legislative passage [^][^][^].
Research does not indicate conditions compelling Mitch McConnell to use reconciliation for upcoming deadlines. The process of budget reconciliation is initiated by a budget resolution, and no specific condition has been identified that would force its re-introduction by McConnell [^][^][^]. Furthermore, Congress is currently managing a separate reconciliation bill that has already stalled in the Senate [^][^].
9. What public statements or voting records indicate how John Fetterman might vote on a Republican-led reconciliation bill focused on DHS and border security funding?
| Government Shutdown Stance | Will never vote to shut down the government [^][^][^][^] |
|---|---|
| Border Security Investment | Supports increased investments in border security [^][^][^][^] |
| DHS Funding Votes | Consistently voted with Republicans on procedural motions for DHS funding or to prevent shutdowns [^][^] |
Fetterman consistently opposes shutdowns, supporting continuous government and DHS funding. He has repeatedly stated his unwavering opposition to government shutdowns, asserting he will never vote in favor of one, viewing government functions as essential and closures as counterproductive [^][^][^][^]. This commitment is evident in his voting record, where he has frequently broken with his Democratic party, often as the sole Democrat, to vote with Republicans on procedural motions intended to advance Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding or prevent government closures [^][^].
Fetterman advocates for border security but with policy reservations. He has publicly called for increased investments in border security and criticized his own party's management of the border crisis [^][^][^][^]. Fetterman describes the high volume of illegal border crossings as unacceptable and a national security concern [^][^][^][^]. Despite his support for robust border security, he has opposed certain Republican-led legislative packages, such as the 2025 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' due to broader policy disagreements, even while striving to maintain Department of Homeland Security funding [^][^][^].
10. What Could Change the Odds
Key Catalysts
House Republican leadership is planning for a potential third reconciliation bill, with discussions focusing on initiatives to tackle fraud and improve the affordability of everyday goods [^] . A current reconciliation bill focused on immigration enforcement (DHS/CBP funding) is facing delays due to internal Republican disagreements regarding a controversial $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund, with votes stalled as of late May 2026 [^][^]. Reconciliation bills in the Senate require only a simple majority (51 votes) to pass, bypassing the 60-vote filibuster threshold [^][^].
The Trump administration has requested $350 billion in additional defense funding for FY 2027 to be passed through the reconciliation process [^] [^] . Control of the Senate in January 2027 is highly contested, with current forecasting models and prediction markets showing significant uncertainty, including scenarios where Democrats potentially regain a majority [^][^].
Key Dates & Catalysts
- Expiration: January 01, 2027
- Closes: January 01, 2027
11. Decision-Flipping Events
- Trigger: House Republican leadership is planning for a potential third reconciliation bill, with discussions focusing on initiatives to tackle fraud and improve the affordability of everyday goods [^] .
- Trigger: A current reconciliation bill focused on immigration enforcement (DHS/CBP funding) is facing delays due to internal Republican disagreements regarding a controversial $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund, with votes stalled as of late May 2026 [^] [^] .
- Trigger: Reconciliation bills in the Senate require only a simple majority (51 votes) to pass, bypassing the 60-vote filibuster threshold [^] [^] .
- Trigger: The Trump administration has requested $350 billion in additional defense funding for FY 2027 to be passed through the reconciliation process [^] [^] .
13. Historical Resolutions
No historical resolution data available for this series.
Get Real-Time Research Updates
Sign up for early access to live reports, historical data, and AI-powered market insights delivered to your inbox.
