I insist on my point of order and 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 appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment requires a new determination, and I ask for a ruling from the Chair. The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Alan Simpson: “I insist on my point of order and make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law…”
Share
More from Alan Simpson
This bipartisan en bloc amendment was developed in coordination with the minority. It contains noncontroversial amendments addressing important issues at the agencies funded in this bill that have been agreed to by both sides. It provides…
I claim the time in opposition to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Donalds). The gentleman from Idaho is recognized for 5 minutes.
In your country club, your church and business, about 15% of the people are screwballs, lightweights and boobs, and you would not want those people unrepresented in Congress.
I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time. Madam Speaker, I rise today in reluctant opposition to H.R. 4502, the seven-bill fiscal year 2022 appropriations package that includes the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill. I had…





