On the recordJune 1, 2011
With regard to the rule referenced by the gentleman from Washington, we have many limitations on funds in our appropriations bills. If the decision comes down to whether there is a parliamentary objection or not, I think I could go back through many of these appropriations bills and find limitation after limitation after limitation. The practice of this Congress has been to do so, and there will be other amendments that have not been objected to that limit the utilization of funds within this bill and every other. I would simply make that argument to the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule. The gentleman from Washington makes a point of order against the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa on the ground that it carries a tax measure on a bill reported by a committee, in this case, the Committee on Appropriations, not having jurisdiction to report tax measures, in violation of clause 5(a) of rule XXI. In clause 5(a) of rule XXI, the phrase ``tax or tariff measure'' expressly includes an amendment proposing a limitation on funds in a general appropriation bill for the administration of a tax or tariff. The amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa is in the form of a limitation on the funds in the pending general appropriation bill. That is, it proposes a negative restriction on those funds for a specified purpose.…





