On the recordApril 30, 2015
I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing 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.'' The amendment requires a new determination. 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 finds that this amendment includes language requiring a new determination as to the meaning of inspections that qualify as ``anytime, anywhere.'' The proponent has failed to fulfill his burden as to the meaning of that term. 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. Amendment Offered by Mr. Hudson
