Mr. Chairman, the amendments propose a net increase in budget authority in the bill. The amendments are not in order under section 3(j)(3) of House Resolution 5, 112th Congress which states, ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease of such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.'' The amendments propose a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section. I ask for a ruling. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky makes a point of order that the amendments offered en bloc by the gentlewoman from Ohio violate section 3(j)(3) of House Resolution 5. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order? The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized.
Share & report
More from Hal Rogers
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. I rise today in strong support of the continuing resolution. With government funding set to expire on Friday, this legislation is necessary to ensure we avoid a harmful…
Mr. Speaker, I claim time in support of the amendments, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendments en bloc contains a number of good proposals by both sides of the aisle. I want to highlight just a few. It includes…
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would ensure that veteran- and service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses are able to effectively compete for State Department contracts and grants. We have a moral obligation to help our veterans, and…
Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. {time} 1515





