Joseph Knollenberg: “I insist on my point of order, and I would like to respond in this fashion. I raise a point of order against the…”

“I insist on my point of order, and I would like to respond in this fashion. I raise a point of order against the amendment. The amendment proposes to increase an appropriation not authorized by law and, therefore, is in violation of clause 2(a) of rule XXI. Although the original account funding for FAA operations is unauthorized, it was permitted to remain in the bill pursuant to the provisions of the rule that provided for the consideration of this bill. When an authorized appropriation is permitted to remain in a general appropriations bill, an amendment merely changing that amount is in order; but the rules of the House apply a ``merely perfecting standard'' to the items permitted to remain and do not allow the insertion of a new paragraph, not part of the original text permitted to remain, to increase a figure permitted to remain. The amendment cannot be construed as merely perfecting and, therefore, Mr. Chairman, I ask that the Chair rule the amendment out of order. The Acting CHAIRMAN. Does anyone wish to speak on the point of order?”