PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to House Budget
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 16, 2009
Predictable, Equitable, and Transparent (PET) Project Act of 2009 - Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to limit to 1/2 of 1% the allocation solely to appropriation earmarks of the amount allocated to the Senate and House appropriations committees for the first fiscal year of a budget resolution. Entitles each Senator to 1/100th of the Senate earmark allocation and each Member of the House to 1/441 of the House earmark allocation.
Makes it out of order in either chamber to consider any measure that would cause the level of total new budget authority or total outlays for appropriation earmarks, as adjusted, set forth in the applicable budget resolution to exceed or breach such limitations.
Requires a Member or Senator requesting an appropriation earmark, within five legislative days after making such request, to: (1) submit the amount requested, the project name, and a project description of its subject matter to the appropriate Clerk for posting on the Clerk's website; and (2) insert in the Congressional Record a written statement that includes such information and certifies that neither the Member, Senator, or any family member has any financial interest in the earmark.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires each Clerk's website to include an up-to-date, comprehensive, and searchable database comprising all such requests for the current fiscal year and the budget year.
Makes a conforming amendment to Rule XXI (Restrictions on Certain Bills) of the Rules of the House
People & committees
Rep. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY-At Large] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to House Budget
Referred to the Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Rules
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3233 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3233 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3233 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3233 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.