Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives with respect to the certification requirement in the case of a congressional earmark or limited tax or tariff benefit.
Sponsored By: Representative Kim, Young [R-CA-40]
Introduced
Summary
Stronger conflict-of-interest rules for congressional earmarks and limited tax or tariff benefits. This resolution would expand disqualifying financial interests beyond a spouse to include immediate family members, entities where they hold a material financial interest, and business assets that could reasonably be expected to appreciate because of an earmark's location.
Show full summary
- Members of Congress would face a broader certification rule that bars seeking earmarks or limited tax or tariff benefits when a spouse, immediate family member, or a related entity holds a material financial interest.
- Immediate family members and any entity in which they hold a material financial interest would be barred from having direct or indirect financial interests tied to those earmarks or benefits.
- Owners of nearby business assets would be covered if an asset's value could reasonably be expected to rise due to the earmark's intended location.
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
1 provisions identified: 0 benefits, 1 costs, 0 mixed.
Stricter conflict rules for earmarks
This resolution would expand the House rule on congressional earmark and limited tax or tariff benefit certifications. It would bar a Member from certifying an earmark or limited tax or tariff benefit when the Member, the Member’s spouse, any immediate family member, or any entity in which those people hold a material financial interest has a direct or indirect financial interest. It would explicitly cover interests from owning a business asset that could reasonably be expected to increase in value because the earmark is near that asset. If adopted, the change would take effect upon adoption by the House. This would be a procedural ethics change and would not create new programs or funding.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Kim, Young [R-CA-40]
CA • R
Cosponsors
Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2]
ME • D
Sponsored 9/17/2026
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]
PA • R
Sponsored 9/17/2026
Rep. Spartz, Victoria [R-IN-5]
IN • R
Sponsored 9/24/2026
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.gov