In Jon’s, commentary on Friday he referenced a story in the Hill that talked about a big loophole concerning earmarks that the Democrats left in the rules package.
Here is what the rule actually states (From page 34 of the House rules):
9. (a) It shall not be in order to consider—
(1) a bill or joint resolution reported
by a committee unless the report
includes a list of congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, and
limited tariff benefits in the bill or in
the report (and the name of any
Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
who submitted a request to
the committee for each respective
item included in such list) or a statement
that the proposition contains
no congressional earmarks, limited
tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits;
In the earmark section of the changes to the House rules that were passed by the Democrats at the beginning of this year, they inserted the section above in order “to bring transparency to the earmark process,” but it leaves in place a big loophole. The very rule that is in place to certify that there are no earmarks can virtually be ignored, by simply writing in the committee report (a document that is not part of the bill, but is written by the committee which approved the bill) that there are no earmarks.
So all you have to do is have the chairman of the committee declare in this report that are no earmarks and the new rule says that there are no earmarks……even if there are earmarks. It’s like declaring the sky to be purple and therefore by law it is purple.
Nothing like having rules that don’t mean anything, huh?