Plaintiff fails to satisfy the first prong ofFlast because he challenges actions that are not "exercises of congressional power" and because the challenged actions are not accomplished under Congress' tax and spending power. Plaintiffs Article VI claims challenge the selection criteria for choosing the Senate and House Chaplains and various statements in the Chaplains' daily prayers before each House. The Chaplains are elected by the Senate and House under each House's Article I power to choose its "Officers," see U.S. Const. art. I, § 2, cl. 5 ("The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers ..."); U.S. Const. art. I, § 3, cl. 5 ("The Senate shall chuse their other Officers..."), and the Chaplains' daily prayers are provided for by the rules of the Senate and House, see Senate Rule IV. 1 (a), reprinted in Senate Manual, S. Doc. No. 106-1, at 4 (2000); House of Representatives Rule n, clause 5, reprinted in H. R. Doc. No. 106-320, at 360, which are adopted under the constitutional power of each House to "determine the Rules of its proceedings." U.S. Const. art. I, § 5, cl. 2. The D.C. Circuit has held that such internal action by one House of Congress does not constitute an "exercise of congressional power" required byFlast for taxpayer standing. Kurtz v. Baker, 829 F.2d 1133, 1140 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (holding that plaintiff could not establish taxpayer standing to challenge guest chaplain practice because, in part, that practice was not exercise of congressional power but merely internal action of each House of Congress). As the Court of Appeals explained in Kurtz:
Because the power rests only with each house, there exists no enactment by Congress, which would require inter alia passage in both houses and presentment to the President.... Therefore, appellant cannot satisfy Flast's first requirement for taxpayer standing, namely that the challenge be directed "at exercises of congressional power."
Id. The election of the Senate and House Chaplains and the prayers offered by those Chaplains constitute the separate, internal action and proceedings of one House, which, under Kurtz, cannot constitute the requisite "exercise of congressional power" for taxpayer standing purposes. -19-