House Moves Against Backdoor Riches

United States Capitol dome framed by a tree-lined street — Photo: Volodymyr TVERDOKHLIB / Shutterstock

House Republicans and two cross-party allies moved to close an earmark loophole that could let lawmakers boost their own wealth.

Story Highlights

Rep. Young Kim introduced a House rule change to block self-enrichment via earmarks.
The plan expands conflict checks to include family members and related entities.
Current House rules only cover a member and spouse in certification language.
The resolution follows a broader push to curb financial abuses in Congress.

What Kim’s Resolution Would Change

Representative Young Kim of California introduced the Stop Congressional Self-Enrichment Resolution on September 17, 2026. The measure targets how members request Community Project Funding, often called earmarks. It would bar direct or indirect financial gains tied to a member’s requests. It would also require disclosures that capture benefits to immediate family members and to entities they control. Kim introduced the plan with Representative Jared Golden and Representative Brian Fitzpatrick in a bipartisan push.

Current House ethics rules require a member who asks for an earmark to certify that neither the member nor the spouse has a financial interest in the request. That leaves gray areas. It does not spell out what happens when a child, sibling, or a company linked to the family gains. It also does not define indirect gains, such as nearby land that rises in value after a road goes in.

The Rule Gap Kim Aims to Close

Representative Brian Fitzpatrick’s summary of the joint effort states that the change would extend the no-benefit rule to immediate family and to entities they own or control. It also aims to capture indirect financial effects, not just a payment to the lawmaker. That broader sweep tries to answer a common concern: members can shape local projects that lift property values or steer work to allies, while staying inside the old rule’s narrow wording.

A draft resolution posted on Congress.gov shows the proposed update to House Rule XXIII, clause 17. The text would strike the old certification language and insert a standard that covers a member, a spouse, any immediate family member, and any entity those parties hold an interest in. This is aimed at closing routes for personal or family gain from taxpayer funds, even when not paid straight to the member.

How This Fits Long-Running Earmark Battles

House guides on earmarks have long focused on a “direct and foreseeable” financial interest test. The Kim plan tries to move that fence line to include indirect gains that people can reasonably expect. Reformers return to this fight often. When trust dips, Congress tightens rules on pork-barrel spending and conflicts. Critics argue earmarks help members claim credit and build image, even when no clear corruption is shown.

After the House cracked down on congressional stock trading, a California Republican is pushing to close what she calls the next loophole lawmakers can use to enrich themselves.

Rep. Young Kim's new resolution would expand current House rules to cover indirect financial… pic.twitter.com/JvoslTkTLO

— FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) September 21, 2026

Congressional reference manuals detail what members must disclose when they request a project. The current process asks for the name of the requester, who would receive funds, and a statement that the member and spouse will not benefit. The new effort would keep those steps but broaden who counts as a beneficiary. That change would make it harder to route public money in ways that help a member’s household or business ties.

Why Both Sides May Care

Taxpayers across the political spectrum worry that insiders play by different rules. Many believe well-connected people cash in while costs rise and basic needs go unmet. Supporters of this change say it is a clear, concrete step. It does not end earmarks. It sets a wider, easier-to-understand line against self-dealing. It also gives voters and watchdogs a stronger tool to judge members’ requests and to flag conflicts that once hid in the fine print.

What Comes Next in the House

The resolution is a House rule change, not a statute. If adopted, it would govern how members file and certify their requests. Committees would still vet submissions. Members would still have to post project details online. The real shift would be in ethics compliance and disclosure reach. Enforcement would depend on House ethics processes and on public scrutiny once broader relationships must be declared on the record.

Limits and Open Questions

The proposal does not describe new criminal penalties. It uses House rules to create clear lines and raise costs for unethical behavior. It may force members to map complex family and business links, which takes time and care. That said, expanding the circle to family and controlled entities matches how conflicts work in real life. Many past abuses moved through indirect routes rather than a direct payment to a member.