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. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment waives existing law. I ask for a ruling from the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? Seeing none, the Chair is prepared to rule. The Chair finds that this amendment explicitly supersedes existing law. The amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.
On the recordJune 27, 2012
Source
govinfo.govShare
More from Tom Latham
Jun 9, 2014
All this would do is limit the employees of HUD, and it would do nothing to the PHA employees. PHA employees are not HUD employees; and all you are doing is limiting funding to HUD employees, so it would have no effect as far as the PHAs…
Jun 10, 2014
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. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment…
Jun 10, 2014
I withdraw my reservation, and I rise in opposition to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 minutes.
Jun 9, 2014
The gentleman makes a very compelling argument, and we would accept the amendment.





