I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. That rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law'' One of the provisions is that it ``requires a new determination.'' I ask for a ruling from the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Sam Farr: “I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in…”
Share
More from Sam Farr
Yes, I presume that the decision to move sort of out of the Washington area was a strategic one, plus probably cost-effective for real estate purposes.
First, whoever wrote your statement is wrong on the facts. I was here. This report that was done by the Bush administration was brought to the United States Congress, to the Natural Resources Committee. I was a member. Mr. Pombo was the…
I am embarrassed that Congress is going home today for 2 months after having done nothing about this outrageous use of guns in America. We are going home because it is an election year. We have 2 months to be with our constituents. I hope…
We finally got around to realizing that the military is an institution of government.





