On the recordMay 10, 2007
It is clear that there may be some confusion as to exactly what was or what was not discussed, but the process between staff, the process that is outlined in the committee is clearly that the chairman and the ranking member will go through and review those items that are identified as earmarks, and we will agree on them, and we will agree upon their inclusion in the bill. The bill that was submitted and filed with Rules had at least one, I don't know about the full details, but had at least one earmark that the chairman and myself never discussed and also that, as a ranking member, I had never received what would have been identified as the paperwork that went along with it. The chairman knows that that particular earmark was one that was not discussed as an earmark. I don't think the inclusion and the identification of it as being an earmark in committee when we debated this specific provision was brought up. And so it is a cause of concern.
Source
govinfo.gov