WASHINGTON _ Senate Republicans are still considering who would benefit from their planned changes to the U.S. tax code.
When asked, many were unable to communicate exactly which income brackets they would want to see reductions directed toward, instead using use catchall phrases such as "hard-working Americans" or "ordinary people."
The lack of specificity on the overall goal recalls the Republicans' failed health care effort, when they had difficulty agreeing on a unified objective beyond just repealing the Affordable Care Act.
Others said the focus was more on improving the overall economy and spurring job creation, which could lead to relief in nearly every income bracket.
And some took the blanket approach of urging tax cuts for all, which could be difficult given the constraints Republicans are under with their slim margin in the Senate.
Some had more direct answers.
"Well-to-do people are going to be paying a lot more taxes," said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas.
Republicans are using the fast-track budget procedure known as reconciliation to advance the tax legislation, which would allow the Senate to pass a bill with a simple majority support.
But with just 52 seats, Senate Republicans can only afford to lose the backing of two members and still call in Vice President Mike Pence to break a tie. And several members have warned the Republican leadership of their limits.
One of the most critical aspects would be the impact of the proposal on the deficit.
Lawmakers like Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., have said they would not vote for the measure if it adds to the deficit. Others have said they would prefer not to operate under that constraint.
If Republicans do aim for a deficit-neutral plan, it would make it much more difficult to advance a bill that would rely on the theory that short-term deficits can lead to long-term economic growth.
Instead, they would be forced to find ways to pay for the tax cuts, inevitably creating a "winners and losers" situation in which some taxpayers in some income brackets would pay less, while others might pay more.
When asked how they would determine which brackets would be affected _ either positively or negatively _ several Republicans were unable to say exactly.
"Hardworking men and women of America. The wonderful middle class," said Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan.. "It depends on a lot of different things, but I think if you say middle class, everybody's got it pretty well figured out."
"It should benefit everybody, but including and especially ordinary people," said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La. "The middle class, the people who get up every day and go to work and obey the law and try to teach their kids morals."
"Working people, people who are out there working, that's who I am focused on," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "It depends on what part of the country you live in. South Carolina is different than it would be in New York."
One of the difficulties Republicans face is navigating the effect certain proposals would have on different states.
Removing the state and local tax deduction, for example, has become a huge point of debate in the party because some states, like Pennsylvania and New York, might be more adversely affected than others.
And without an exact idea of which income brackets should get the most relief, decisions on policy could be even harder.
The effort is still in the early stages and there is no legislative text available yet, making it more difficult to make definitive decisions on which income levels might be hit the hardest _ or which would stand to benefit the most.
"We haven't established what the break points are yet," said Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio. "The focus has been middle-class tax cuts and people who are in that middle range."
Portman said the cuts would most probably be felt in households that make over $100,000 a year.
But lawmakers are already seeking to force leadership to outline how the final plan would affect various income brackets.
Corker, for example, expressed support for a Democratic amendment to the fiscal 2018 budget that would require an in-depth analysis on the effect of the tax plan on each income level.
"What I want to do is cause our economy to grow, and I want that to cause people's wages to go up. And that to me should be the focus of tax reform," Corker said. "I'm interested in the broad outlines of it not increasing our deficit, that it's permanent, that it creates growth."
Others were more open to a plan that would create a deficit, in the anticipation that the proposal would ignite economic growth and ultimately pay for itself.
"It's far more complicated if you have senators endeavoring to put forward a plan that is deficit-neutral on a static score. That inevitably involves taking away from some to give to another," said Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. "I think that's a mistake. I think we need a tax cut."
Republicans, based on a broad framework released last month, are looking to double the standard deduction and provide an enhanced child tax credit, measures that several senators said could provide tax relief to several different income brackets.
But some are waiting for the full outline before making any final decision.
"I want to see the whole package," said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va. "I think we want to make sure that the hardworking people in those middle income brackets are the ones getting the relief."
