I don't think that has a future: Senate leader Thune on Bill to curb Trump's tariff power

ANI April 8, 2025 127 views

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has effectively declared a bipartisan tariff control bill dead on arrival in Congress. The legislation, supported by seven Republican senators, would require presidential tariffs to receive congressional approval within 60 days. The Trump administration has strongly signaled it would veto the bill, arguing it would constrain presidential emergency powers. Despite initial momentum, the bill appears unlikely to advance in either the Senate or House.

"I don't think that has a future." - Senator John Thune
Washington DC, April 8: Senate Majority Leader John Thune on Monday stated that a bipartisan bill aimed at limiting US President Donald Trump's tariff powers, supported by seven Republican senators, is unlikely to move forward in Congress due to Trump's veto threat, The Hill reported.

Key Points

1

Bipartisan bill seeks congressional approval for presidential tariffs

2

Seven Republican senators support tariff review legislation

3

White House warns of potential veto

4

Proposed bill requires 60-day congressional review

According to The Hill, Thune, the Senator from South Dakota, dismissed the possibility of bringing the bill, sponsored by Republican Senator from Iowa Chuck Grassley and Democratic Senator from Washington Maria Cantwell, to a vote in the Senate. The bill would require Congress to approve new tariffs within 60 days.

"I don't think that has a future. The president indicated he would veto it. I don't see how they get it on the floor in the House so I think at this point we're kind of waiting to see what's going to happen next," Thune told reporters, as quoted by The Hill.

The legislation mandates that the president notify Congress within 48 hours of imposing or raising tariffs and provide an assessment of the potential impact on US businesses and consumers, as reported by The Hill.

New tariffs would expire after 60 days unless approved by Congress, and lawmakers could cancel them before then by passing a joint resolution of disapproval.

Along with Grassley, other sponsors of the bill include Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Todd Young (R-Ind.), and Susan Collins (R-Maine).

However, the Trump administration has already informed senators that the president would veto the bill if it reached his desk, The Hill reported.

A statement from the White House budget office circulated on Monday expressed strong opposition to the Trade Review Act of 2025, arguing that it would "severely constrain the president's ability to use authorities long recognised by Congress and upheld by the courts to respond to national emergencies and foreign threats," as quoted by The Hill.

"If S. 1272 were presented to the President, he would veto the bill," the statement warned.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) also expressed support for giving Trump space to carry out his strategy, noting that it had been less than a week since the plan was introduced.

Reader Comments

S
Sarah K.
Interesting to see bipartisan support for this, but Thune's probably right about the veto threat. Trump's never been one to give up power easily. 🤷‍♀️
M
Mike T.
Congress should have more oversight on tariffs. They directly impact American businesses and consumers. Surprised to see McConnell supporting this though!
J
James L.
While I generally support Trump's policies, I think this bill has merit. No president should have unlimited tariff powers. Checks and balances exist for a reason.
A
Amanda P.
The 60-day limit seems reasonable. Gives Congress time to review without completely tying the president's hands. Too bad it won't go anywhere.
R
Robert G.
I disagree with Thune here. Just because the president threatens a veto doesn't mean Congress shouldn't do its job. This is about principle, not politics.
T
Tina M.
The White House statement makes some fair points about responding to emergencies, but 60 days is plenty of time for Congress to act in genuine crises. This seems balanced to me.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Your email won't be published

Tags:
You May Like!