The legislation was withdrawn. Interesting reason why it was introduced to begin with though. I can see where he's coming from but bringing back earmarks is not the way to do it.
In his own words.
"The congressman said he decided to propose the rule change because he was thwarted in his attempts to have more funding directed towards enforcing the southern border and his attempt to have the Pentagon build a missile defense facility on the East Coast
In each case, he was told that his instructions were banned as earmarks.
Another example is how the federal government uses funds for dredging to support maritime commerce at the port of Long Beach, California, where the residents and voters are Democrats, yet the federal government ignores silt built up at ports in Republican parts of country, he said.
The experience convinced him to end the earmark ban and put the full responsibility and authority for spending back in the Congress, as stated in the Constitution’s Article 1, Section 9, he said.
“You’ve got to be able to tell these agencies what to do,” Culberson said.
“Virtually every problem that you have seen in government is the result of unelected, unaccountable, invisible bureaucrats making decisions instead of elected officials,” he added."
Exclusive-Rep. John Culberson Pulls Proposal to Bring Back Earmarks for a 'Better Process' - Breitbart
