PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 29, 2015
Earmark Elimination Act of 2015
Makes it out of order in the Senate to consider a bill or resolution introduced in either chamber or any other measure that includes an earmark.
Permits waiver of a point of order against an earmark only by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Senators.
Makes this Act inapplicable to any authorization of appropriations to a federal entity if the authorization is not specifically targeted to a state, locality, or congressional district.
People & committees
Sen. Toomey, Patrick [R-PA] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Introduced in Senate
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: Aug 12, 2025. 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 S.309 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 S.309 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 S.309 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 S.309 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.