On the recordApril 30, 2014
I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and, therefore, constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The rules states in pertinent part that an amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if it changes existing law. This amendment, Mr. Chairman, requires a new determination, and I would ask for a ruling from the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does anyone else wish to speak on the point of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule. In pertinent part, the amendment restricts funds for marketing activities. Absent a showing of a statutory or regulatory definition of marketing activities, the amendment would require a Federal official to define what activities constitute marketing activities. Such a requirement constitutes a new duty in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order. Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar
