I think that vote is irrelevant because this type of motion requires a 60 vote threshold.

Klobuchar’s Motion to Waive a Point of Order:A post by @ByMonaSalama on June 30, 2025, at 12:11 EDT states: “Amendment # Motion to waive Sen. Klobuchar (D-MN) Amendment ‘point of order’ (prohibitions against certain types of legislation to be recommitted for further consideration) in OBBB bill regarding measure containing unfunded intergovernmental mandate/SNAP benefits.”

Interpretation: This indicates Klobuchar proposed an amendment to H.R. 1 addressing SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits, likely aiming to protect or modify provisions related to food assistance. A point of order was raised against her amendment, possibly for violating the Byrd Rule (which requires reconciliation bill provisions to be budget-related) or for imposing an unfunded intergovernmental mandate (a cost on state/local governments without federal funding). Klobuchar’s motion was to waive this point of order, which would allow her amendment to proceed despite the objection. This aligns with your earlier question about a “motion to waive the Budget Act” (though here it’s likely a Byrd Rule or mandate issue), as such waivers require a 60-vote majority in the Senate.

Outcome: The post does not specify the vote result, and no other X posts or web sources confirm whether the motion passed or failed. Given the 60-vote threshold and the polarized 51-49 vote on the motion to proceed, it’s likely this motion faced challenges, as Democrats (47 senators) would need at least 13 Republican votes, which is rare for partisan amendments.

Bottom line is any of these amendments would require a 60 vote majority to succeed.