1. United States
2. Ariz.
3. Letter

I'm asking you to request that the Senate Parliamentarian review whether ballroom funding provisions qualify under reconciliation rules when included in immigration-related legislation. Reconciliation is meant for budget measures with direct fiscal impact, not for policy riders that stretch the Byrd Rule. If this ballroom funding is being packaged with immigration appropriations, we need an official determination on whether it meets the strict requirements for reconciliation: does it change spending or revenue in a way that's not merely incidental to broader policy goals? This matters because reconciliation bypasses the filibuster. If provisions don't legitimately belong in the bill, they shouldn't get the procedural advantage. The Parliamentarian exists precisely to make these calls and protect the integrity of the process. Get clarity now before this moves forward. Ask for a ruling on whether the ballroom funding survives Byrd Rule scrutiny when tied to immigration spending.