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 gives affirmative direction in effect. I ask for a ruling from the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule. The Chair finds that this amendment imposes new duties on the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 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. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.…
Share
More from CHARLES W. DENT
They need to move away from that and get serious about negotiating more barriers, more beds, more immigration judges, technology, as Maria said drones.
If we're trying to beat Joe Biden and the Democrats, can you really beat him with a guy who paid off a porn star, absconded with classified material, tried to interfere with the Georgia election results in 2020?
There are Republicans out there... talking about a new direction. You know a party based on truth and honesty and Democracy, rule of law.
This is not a time for Americans that behave like that. We have an obligation. Our leadership has made a difference in Europe. It is peaceful and stable and we shouldn't just assume it is always going to be this way. Putin is trying to…





