On that point of order—and I may have forgotten now—it seems to me that we dealt with an attempt to change the motion. There was an amendment to cut out the whereas clause per se. Did we not vote on that already? There was a motion—an amendment—made to strike the first clause with the argument made that it was inferring the United States, and Mr. Chong wanted it out. He is now trying to raise an issue that has been dealt with by this committee. Therefore, I would ask the chair to absolutely rule it out of order as something that the committee has dealt with not in the recent past but in the last several hours.
That's the point. It's not relevance. It's actually against the rules of the committee to try to relitigate an issue that has been dealt with in the very recent past. You might want to check with the clerk, but I think I'm right on that.