On the recordMay 31, 2012
I insist on my point of order. I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing statutory law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing law . . . '' In this case the amendment directly amends existing law. I ask for a ruling from the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order? If not, the Chair will rule. The Chair finds that the amendment proposes directly to change existing law, to wit: section 107 of title 38. As such, it constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2(c) of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained. The Clerk will read. The Clerk read as follows: spending reduction account Sec. 518. The amount by which the applicable allocation of new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives under section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the amount of proposed new budget authority is $0. Amendment Offered by Mr. Fitzpatrick
