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 requires a new determination. I ask for a ruling from the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does the gentleman from Florida wish to be heard on the point of order?
Rodney Frelinghuysen: “I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in…”
Share
More from Rodney Frelinghuysen
I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the chairman of the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittee on Appropriations.
This legislation before us contains two important Appropriations bills: the Interior and Environmental bill and the Financial Services bill. The first of these two bills, the Interior bill, funds important programs that protect and promote…
This amendment would provide funding to re-create a government agency, as the gentleman mentioned, which was defunded in 1995, 23 years ago. Before we re-create an entire government agency, I believe the most responsible thing to do is to…
On rollcall 374, I am not recorded. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 374. personal explanation





