On the recordMarch 7, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I am attempting to set forward the question of the privileges of the House on a privileged resolution, and this is a part of it. I believe the only way to determine whether these dealings represent violations of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution is by fully examining the President's tax records. Contrary to the Chair's ruling last Monday, there is no direct precedent in section 706 of the House Practice manual for the situation because the current situation is unprecedented. The President's business empire makes him more susceptible to conflicts of interest than any President in our history. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized. The Chair is prepared to rule on the question. The gentlewoman from California seeks to offer a resolution as a question of the privileges of the House under rule IX. As the Chair ruled on February 27, 2017, and as demonstrated by section 706 of the House Rules and Manual, a resolution directing a committee to meet and conduct certain business does not qualify as a question of the privileges of the House. The resolution offered by the gentlewoman from California directs the Committee on Ways and Means to meet and consider an item of business under the procedures set forth in 26 U.S. Code 6103. Accordingly, the resolution does not qualify as a question of the privileges of the House.





