Young Kim (R-CA)
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.
A Republican resolution with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Ethics.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution changes the Rules of the House of Representatives regarding congressional earmarks and limited tax or tariff benefits. It updates the current certification requirements that members of Congress must follow. Specifically, it broadens the scope of financial interest restrictions that apply to officials and their families. The goal is to tighten the rules on who cannot have a financial stake in these special provisions. It was introduced in the House on September 17, 2026, by Mrs. Kim, along with Mr. Golden of Maine and Mr. Fitzpatrick. The text was referred to the Committee on Ethics for review.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +5
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill enhances oversight by requiring certification that immediate family members do not have financial interests in earmarks.
- Scored +3
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill increases transparency regarding potential conflicts of interest in tax and tariff benefits.
- Scored +2
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill creates more stringent ethical standards for congressional members regarding financial conflicts.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this cut taxes for small businesses?
The expansion of disclosure requirements may increase the regulatory burden on entities with financial ties to officials' families.
- Scored -1
Would high-income households be better off under this?
Increased scrutiny on entities held by family members could affect high-net-worth business interests linked to officials.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Section 1 expands the certification requirement under clause 17(a)(5) of rule XXIII to state that a member or their spouse, any immediate family member, or any entity in which they hold a material financial interest must have no direct or indirect financial interest in a congressional earmark or limited tax or tariff benefit. This is a positive outcome because it holds our elected officials to a stricter standard and ensures that business assets expected to appreciate due to proximity to an earmark are also restricted, preventing conflicts of interest and holding officials accountable for their actions.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Based on the provided text, there are no specific sections or provisions identified that create negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill enhances oversight by requiring certification that immediate family members do not have financial interests in earmarks. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill creates more stringent ethical standards for congressional members regarding financial conflicts.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in cities be better off under this? — The rule prevents officials from benefiting from property appreciation via business assets near earmarked locations. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Increased scrutiny on entities held by family members could affect high-net-worth business interests linked to officials.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill increases transparency regarding potential conflicts of interest in tax and tariff benefits. Does this cut taxes for small businesses? — The expansion of disclosure requirements may increase the regulatory burden on entities with financial ties to officials' families.
- 9/24/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/17/2026
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on Ethics.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Jared GoldenDemocrat · Maine
Victoria SpartzRepublican · Indiana