The Earmark Elimination Act of 2026 would prohibit the House from considering any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that includes a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit. It provides a point of order to strike such provisions when raised and sustained, with the earmark or benefit deemed to be removed from the measure.
The act also introduces special procedures for conference reports and related motions when points of order are sustained, and it amends House Rule XXI to conform with the new prohibition. The definitions in the bill establish what counts as an earmark, what counts as a limited tax benefit, and what counts as a limited tariff benefit, ensuring the scope of the ban is clear and enforceable.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill bars the House from considering any measure that contains a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit. It creates a binding point of order and requires the earmark or benefit to be struck if challenged.
Who It Affects
House Members, floor and committee staff, and any sponsor of legislation on the House floor; fiscal and compliance offices that enforce spending rules; and district offices that previously sought earmarks.
Why It Matters
It establishes a clear, enforceable standard to curb targeted, district-specific spending and preferential tax or tariff provisions, promoting more uniform budgeting and greater transparency on the House floor.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The act targets the legislative process itself. It makes it unconstitutional for the House to consider any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that contains an earmark or certain targeted tax or tariff provisions.
A point of order can be raised to strike the offending language, and if sustained, the earmark or benefit is removed from the measure. The bill also provides a pathway for handling conference reports and related motions when such points of order are sustained, ensuring the rejected portions do not survive behind a procedural back door.
The definitions section clarifies what the bill treats as an earmark, a limited tax benefit, and a limited tariff benefit so there is little ambiguity about what is prohibited.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill prohibits consideration of any measure containing a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit.
A sustained point of order requires the earmark or benefit to be stricken from the measure.
Special procedures apply to conference reports and related motions when points of order are sustained.
Rule XXI, clause 9, is amended to support the new prohibition.
Definitions establish what counts as a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, and a limited tariff benefit.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This act may be cited as the Earmark Elimination Act of 2026. The section establishes the formal title for reference in legal and budgetary discussions and in enforcement contexts.
Prohibition on considering legislation containing earmarks
Section 2(a) lays out the general rule: it shall not be in order to consider any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that includes an earmark or the defined limited benefits. Section 2(b) provides a mechanism by which a sustained point of order results in the earmark or benefit being stricken from the measure. Section 2(c) outlines a special procedure for conference reports and related motions, detailing how such points of order interact with the process of recourse to further conference or rejection; the ultimate disposition follows the new framework after all points are resolved.
Definitions
Section 3 defines the elements the act targets. A congressional earmark is a provision requested by a Member directing discretionary budget authority or other expenditures for a specific entity, typically tailored to a district or locality outside a formula-driven or competitive process. A limited tax benefit is a revenue-losing provision that benefits 10 or fewer beneficiaries or provides temporary relief to a small set of beneficiaries, with nonuniform eligibility criteria. A limited tariff benefit is a provision changing tariff schedules that benefits 10 or fewer entities. These definitions establish the scope of what is prohibited and guide enforcement.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Taxpayers and fiscal oversight advocates who seek reduced pork-barrel spending and greater transparency in the budget process.
- House Rules Committee and appropriations staff who gain a clearer enforcement mechanism for floor action and conference handling.
- Budget and accountability organizations (e.g., oversight groups and compliant budgeting think tanks) that monitor spending controls and enforce consistency across the legislative process.
- Nonpartisan congressional watchdogs and researchers focused on government efficiency and integrity.
Who Bears the Cost
- Members who routinely used earmarks to secure district-level benefits, or their staff and lobbyists who advocated for targeted projects.
- Local governments or contractors whose projects relied on earmarked funding and may see fewer direct opportunities.
- Special interest groups and lobbyists that previously benefited from targeted tax or tariff provisions in legislation.
- Some constituency groups that rely on tailored funding for local priorities could experience funding shortfalls or shifts toward formula funding.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Balancing the desire to curb pork-barrel spending with the need to allow legislators to address local priorities and to maintain a transparent, accountable budget process.
The act foregrounds a significant policy shift: it seeks to reduce discretion in funding by disallowing targeted allocations and certain selective tax or tariff provisions. While this improves transparency and uniformity, it also raises questions about representational feasibility in Congress, particularly how districts’ needs will be addressed without earmarks.
The definitions aim to close loopholes by clarifying what counts as an earmark and what qualifies as a limited tax or tariff benefit, but enforcement will hinge on floor-level points of order and the willingness of House members to raise them. There may be attempts to circumvent the rules through drafting language that skirts the criteria, which would require ongoing vigilance by committees and oversight entities.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.