304 DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL As to the argument of the Senator from Utah [Mr. Kiro] about projects which were adopted, the projects he mentions were adopted on an appropria- tion bill; the appropriation bill carried the items which he mentioned. They were subject to a point of order as legislation on an appropriation bill, I pre- sume, but the point of order was not raised; and so they entered into that bill and were authorized by Congress by reason of the passage of the appropriation bill. (Mr. Connally obtained the floor.) Mr. COPLAND. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator from Missouri a question? Mr. CoNWALLT. I yield. Mr. CorA&DO. Suppose the Chief of Army Engineers were to go to the Director of the Budget and suggest that $20,000,000 be estimated for for a cer- tain purpose and that the estimate should accordingly be made; would that be in accordance with law? Mr. CLAnK. It would not be. I say that under the act creating the Budget Bureau the Director of the Budget has no right to make any estimate for proj- ects not previously authorized by law. Neither the Chief of Engineers nor the Director of the Budget has a right either to appropriate funds or to make estimates for the appropriation of funds-estimates in a technical sense not previously authorized by law. It is perfectly proper for the Chief of Engineers to make any recommendation he may please on any project that may be prop- erly submitted to him, either by the President or by the Congress, to be passed on by him, but the Chief of Engineers has no right to recommend $25,000,000 or $150,000,000 or $1 for projects not previously authorized by law, and neither has the Director of the Budget Mr. ConnAU.. Mr. President, I do not claim to be a parliamentarian, but I wish to submit a few remarks on the theory that this amendment is in order. If the Chair will consult rule XVI, he will note that it provides: "No amendments shall be received to any general appropriation, the effect of which will be to increase an appropriation already contained in the bill, or to add a new item of appropriation unless it be made to carry out the provisions of some existing law"-if it stopped there, the Senator from Missouri might be correct. Mr. CLAx. There is no question that the Senator from Missouri would be correct. Mr. ConNrALT. The Senator would be correct Very well. If the rule stopped there, all right; but It does not stop there. The rule continues-"or treaty stipulation"-if this were a treaty, the Senator would be correct-"or act, or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that session; or unless the same"-in other words, the rule makers were not satisfied with providing that the amendment must be in accordance with some previous authorization, but they said wewant a little more freedom-"or unless the same be moved by direction of a standing or select committee." In other words, if the committee had reported favorably a resolution, although it had not become a law, author- ising this project, even though Congress had not passed on it, an amendment on the subject would still be in order. Mr. BAT r. Mr. President, will the Senator yield there? Mr. CowMi .T. I yield. Mr. HATI. I wish to know if I understand the Senator's position correctly. He has Just stated that under the provision of rule XVI, which he has just read, if any standing committee of.the Senate has reported favorably on one of these projects such report would answer the requirements of the rule. Mr. CONNALLY. It would; that is my understanding of it. Mr. HAT r. I merely wanted to be sure as to the Senator's position. Mr. Cown Au.. In other words, whenever a standing committee of the Senate reports favorably, then the matter is ready for the consideration of the Senate. Mr. BAuzznr. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ConwaLrY. In just a moment I will yield. The rule does not stop there-- Mr. BAuKELr. I want to refer to that very point by pointing to the fact that on numerous occasions amendments have been added to appropriation bills dur- ing their consideration on the foor of the Senate because some standing com- mittee had reported a bill and it was on the calendar but enacted on by the Senate. Mr. ConNArLL. Of course, that is so.