[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 6, Chapter 21]
[Chapter 21. Order of Business; Special Orders]
[D. Types of Special Orders]
[§ 27. Senate Bills and Amendments; Conference Reports]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
[Page 4332-4368]
CHAPTER 21
Order of Business; Special Orders
D. TYPES OF SPECIAL ORDERS
Sec. 27. Senate Bills and Amendments; Conference Reports
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Id. at pp. 11302, 11303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order of business resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules
and pertaining to Senate bills, amendments between the Houses, and
conferences, may take a number of different forms, because of the
possible variations in the parliamentary situation. Where it is desired
to take up and consider a Senate-passed bill, without first considering
and passing a similar bill introduced in the House, the Committee on
Rules may report a resolution making in order the consideration of the
Senate bill and providing procedures for its consideration. Such a
resolution may provide for the consideration of a Senate bill
[[Page 4333]]
on the Speaker's table, or a Senate bill referred to and reported by a
House committee and on the Calendar, or a Senate bill referred to
committee and not yet reported.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. For example, see Sec. Sec. 27.1-27.7, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On most occasions, however, the House first considers and passes a
bill introduced in the House, and then substitutes the text of the
House-passed bill for the text of a similar Senate bill if previously
messaged to the House. The language of the special order, providing for
such a procedure, will depend on whether the Senate measure is on the
Speaker's table or must be discharged from the House
committee,(14) and whether the Senate bill is identical, or
merely similar, to the House reported bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. See Sec. Sec. 27.8-27.11, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain measures, such as general appropriation bills, should
originate in the House (see Ch. 13, supra, for the prerogatives of the
House).
Senate amendments to a House bill usually require consideration in
Committee of the Whole,(15) and are thus not privileged for
consideration in the House unless the stage of disagreement has been
reached. Likewise, House amendments to Senate bills, after passage of
the Senate bill as amended, are not subject to disposition in the House
by privileged motion until the stage of disagreement is reached. Such
measures may be brought up and disposed of by unanimous consent, by
suspension of the rules, by a resolution reported from the Committee on
Rules, by a privileged motion sending the bill to conference by
direction of the committee with jurisdiction,(16) or, with
respect to Senate amendments, by the Speaker's action in referring the
bill to a standing committee.(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. See Rule XX clause 1, House Rules and Manual Sec. 827 and Rule
XXIII clause 3, House Rules and Manual Sec. 865 (1979).
16. See Rule XX clause 1, House Rules and Manual Sec. 827 (1979).
17. See Cannon's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives, p. 117
(1959). The Speaker rarely makes such a reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolutions from the Committee on Rules may take from the Speaker's
table House bills with Senate amendments or Senate bills with House
amendments and direct any disposition which is desired, including
agreeing to or requesting a conference with the Senate.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. For taking House bill with Senate amendment from the table, see
Sec. Sec. 27.12-27.14, infra; for concurring in Senate
amendments to a House bill, see Sec. Sec. 27.15-27.20, infra;
for concurring with amendments, see Sec. Sec. 27.21, 27.22,
infra; for disagreeing to Senate amendments to House bill and
going to conference, see Sec. Sec. 27.23-27.26, infra; for
disagreeing in part, concurring in part and going to
conference, see Sec. 27.27, infra; for insisting upon House
amendment to Senate bill, see Sec. Sec. 27.28-27.30, infra; for
sending to conference generally, see Sec. 27.31, infra.
For a resolution sending a bill to conference and allowing
the House conferees to agree to any Senate amendment,
notwithstanding Rule XX clause 2, House Rules and Manual
Sec. 829 (1979), see Sec. 27.24, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4334]]
Under Rule XXVIII,(19) conference reports themselves are
privileged for consideration, after a three-day layover, but a
resolution from the Committee on Rules may make in order the
consideration of a conference report on the same day on which reported
or any day thereafter, or may alter the method of
consideration.(20) And defects in a conference report which
would subject the report to a point of order in the House, or motions
to be proposed on amendments reported in disagreement, which motions
would be subject to points of order, may be cured by the provisions of
a special order waiving points of order.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 909, 912, (1979).
20. See Sec. Sec. 27.32-27.35, 27.37, 27.38, infra.
1. See Sec. Sec. 27.40-27.45. A conference report which has been
called up and held out of order may be brought up again under
the provisions of a special rule waiving points of order. See
Sec. 27.43, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By analogy to the principle that the Committee on Rules may
recommend making in order the consideration of a bill which has not
even been introduced, the committee may recommend making in order a
conference report where the conference committee has not yet met or
reported.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. See Sec. 27.34, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In certain situations, a conference report may be protected from a
point of order because of the provisions of the special order which
governed the consideration of the bill in the House. For example,
waiving points of order against unauthorized appropriations in a bill
being considered in the House carries over to the conference report on
the bill, since conferees under Rule XX clause 2 are only prohibited
from agreeing to provisions which would have been subject to a point of
order in the House under Rule XXI clause 2 during original
consideration of the bill. Thus, conference reports may contain the
unauthorized provisions (or modifications thereof) originally protected
by the waiver of points of order.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. See Sec. 27.36, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross References
As to bill passage procedure generally, see Ch. 24, infra.
[[Page 4335]]
As to amendments between the Houses, see Ch. 32, infra.
As to conferences and conference reports, see Ch. 33, infra.
As to suspension of the rules in relation to amendments between the
Houses and conference reports, see Sec. 9,
supra. -------------------
Making in Order and Providing for Consideration of Senate Bill
Sec. 27.1 Form of resolution providing for consideration in Committee
of the Whole of a Senate bill at the Speaker's desk (the
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946) and making in order as an
amendment in the nature of a substitute the provisions contained in
a committee print previously inserted in the Congressional Record.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on July 25, 1946: (4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. H. Res. 717, 92 Cong. Rec. 10037, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration
of the bill (S. 2177) to provide for increased efficiency in the
legislative branch of the Government, and all points of order
against said bill are hereby waived. That after general debate,
which shall be confined to the bill and continue not to exceed two
hours, to be equally divided and controlled by the gentleman from
Oklahoma, Mr. Monroney, and the gentleman from Michigan, Mr.
Michener, the bill shall be read for amendment under the five-
minute rule. It shall be in order to consider without the
intervention of any point of order as a substitute for the bill the
provisions contained in the committee print of July 20, 1946, and
printed in the Congressional Record of July 19, 1946, page 9496,
and such substitute for the purpose of amendment shall be
considered under the five-minute rule as an original bill. At the
conclusion of such consideration, the Committee shall rise and
report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been
adopted, and any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on
any of the amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the
bill or committee substitute. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final
passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.
Parliamentarian's Note: The committee print of July 20, 1946, was
the product of an informal special committee on the reorganization of
Congress, without legislative jurisdiction.
Sec. 27.2 Form of special rule providing for the consideration of a
Senate bill, waiving points of order against said
[[Page 4336]]
bill and directing that a committee substitute amendment for said
bill shall be considered under the five-minute rule as an original
bill without intervention of any point of order.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Aug. 18, 1937: (5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. 81 Cong. Rec. 9234, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Resolution 320
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration
of S. 1685, an act to provide financial assistance to the States
and political subdivisions thereof for the elimination of unsafe
and insanitary housing conditions, for the eradication of slums,
for the provision of decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings for
families of low income, and for the reduction of unemployment and
the stimulation of business activity, to create a United States
Housing Authority, and for other purposes, and all points of order
against said bill are hereby waived. That after general debate,
which shall be confined to the bill, and continue not to exceed 3
hours, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Banking and Currency,
the bill shall be read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. It
shall be in order to consider without the intervention of any point
of order the substitute committee amendment recommended by the
Committee on Banking and Currency now in the bill, and such
substitute for the purpose of amendment shall be considered under
the 5-minute rule as an original bill. At the conclusion of such
consideration the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the
House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and
the amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion
except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
Sec. 27.3 Form of resolution providing for the consideration of a
Senate joint resolution in the House as in the Committee of the
Whole and authorizing general debate prior to reading for amendment
under the five-minute rule.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Jan. 6, 1937: (6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. H. Res. 44, 81 Cong. Rec. 90, 75th Cong. 1st Sess. The Senate joint
resolution, prohibiting the exportation of arms and ammunition
to Spain during the Spanish Civil War, had been reported from
committee and referred to the Union Calendar.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution the House
as in the Committee of the Whole House on the
[[Page 4337]]
State of the Union shall consider the joint resolution, Senate
Joint Resolution 3; that there shall be not to exceed 1 hour of
general debate to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs,
whereupon the joint resolution shall be read for amendment under
the 5-minute rule.
Sec. 27.4 By unanimous consent, the House considered a Senate bill
under the terms of a resolution adopted for consideration of a
House bill.
On Mar. 12, 1959,(7) the House agreed to a unanimous-
consent request that it be in order to consider a Senate bill (to
provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union) under
the provisions of a special order adopted on a previous day, for the
consideration of a House bill on the same subject:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. 105 Cong. Rec. 4005, 86th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [John W.] McCormack [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Speaker, I
renew my unanimous-consent request, heretofore made, that it may be
in order for the House to consider the bill S. 50, in lieu of the
bill H.R. 4221, under the terms and provisions of House Resolution
205 adopted yesterday by the House in relation to the Hawaiian
statehood bill.
The Speaker: (8) Is there objection to the request
of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [John R.] Pillion [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I do not
renew my previous objection.
There was no objection.
Sec. 27.5 Instance where, since a private Senate bill resulting in the
expenditure of public funds [and thus requiring consideration in
the Committee of the Whole House] is not privileged and cannot be
taken from the Speaker's table for direct action by the House, the
House adopted a resolution taking the bill from the table and
providing for its consideration in Committee of the Whole House on
the state of the Union.
On Mar. 14, 1961, the House agreed to a resolution reported from
the Committee on Rules providing for the consideration of a private
Senate bill on the Speaker's table: (9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. H. Res. 224, 107 Cong. Rec. 3911, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration
of the bill (S. 1173) to authorize the appointment of Dwight David
Eisenhower to the active list of the Regular Army, and for other
purposes. After general debate, which shall be confined to the
bill, and shall continue not to exceed one hour to be equally di
[[Page 4338]]
vided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of
the Committee on Armed Services, the bill--shall be read for
amendment under the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the
consideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall rise
and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have
been adopted, and the previous question shall be considered as
ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without
intervening motion except one motion to recommit.
Parliamentarian's Note: A private Senate bill requiring
consideration in the Committee of the Whole House, engrossed and sent
to the House after a similar House bill has been reported and referred
to the Private Calendar, is not privileged. A similar private House
bill (H.R. 5174) had been reported to the House.
Sec. 27.6 The House adopted a special order taking two Senate bills
from the Speaker's table (where such bills required consideration
in Committee of the Whole); amending each bill by identical
amendments in the nature of a substitute; providing that each
Senate bill be considered as read a third time and passed; amending
titles of both Senate bills; providing that the House insist on
each amendment, request conferences with the Senate on each bill,
and that the Speaker appoint conferees on the part of the House to
attend each such conference.
On Nov. 18, 1971, a special order was called up by direction of the
Committee on Rules for the consideration of two Senate bills:
Mr. [Richard] Bolling [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, by direction
of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 710 and ask
for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution as follows:
H. Res. 710
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of its resolution
and without the intervention of any point of order the bills of the
Senate S. 2819 and S. 2820 are hereby taken from the Speaker's
table; that said Senate bills are hereby amended by striking out
all after the enacting clause of each such Senate bill and
inserting in lieu thereof the text of the bill H.R. 9910 as passed
by the House on August 3, 1971; that the said Senate bills as so
amended shall be considered as read a third time and passed; that
the title of each such Senate bill shall be amended by striking out
such title and inserting in lieu thereof the title of H.R. 9910;
that the House insists upon its amendments to each Senate bill and
requests conferences with the Senate, and that the Speaker appoint
managers on the part of the House to attend each such
conference.(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 117 Cong. Rec. 42046, 42047, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4339]]
Mr. Bolling explained the purpose and unprecedented nature of the
special order:
Mr. Speaker, some say that this rule is without precedent. I
have not searched the precedents. I do not know. But I do know it
is a very unusual rule, and I think it deserves explanation so that
the Members who are interested will know what the rule does and
what its significance is. Those who listened to the rule will know
that, if the resolution is adopted by the House, the House action
will be as follows: The House will take two Senate bills on foreign
aid, one on foreign economic assistance and one on foreign military
assistance, from the Speaker's table. It will amend each of those
bills by striking out all after the enacting clause and putting in
each of them the text of the bill that the House debated, amended,
and passed on the 3rd of August 1971, and it will then send the
matters, the two bills, to conference.
The resolution provides that the Speaker can appoint conferees.
What this does, in very frank terms, is to get before a
conference the two Senate bills and the House-passed bill. Most of
you will remember that the bill passed the House, went to the
Senate, it was debated at length, amended and defeated. Then the
Senate came back with two separate bills, which were passed by very
substantial majorities.
The House adopted the resolution.
Discharging Committee From Consideration of Senate Bill
Sec. 27.7 Form of resolution providing for the discharge of a House
committee from further consideration of a Senate bill [similar to a
House bill pending on the Union Calendar] and for its immediate
consideration under an ``open'' rule.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Mar. 17, 1970: (11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. H. Res. 874, 116 Cong. Rec. 7691, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the House shall resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(S. 858) to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 with
respect to wheat. After general debate, which shall be confined to
the bill and shall continue not to exceed one hour, to be equally
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Agriculture, the bill shall be read for
amendment under the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the
consideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall rise
and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have
been adopted, and the previous question shall be considered as
ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without
intervening motion except one motion to recommit.
Substituting Text of House-passed Bill for Text of Senate-passed Bill
Sec. 27.8 Form of resolution providing for consideration of a
[[Page 4340]]
House bill, and after passage discharging a House committee from
further consideration of a Senate bill, and making in order a
motion to strike out all after the enacting clause of the Senate
bill and inserting in lieu thereof the provisions of the House bill
as passed by the House.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Sept. 3, 1969: (12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. H. Res. 516, 115 Cong. Rec. 24004, 24005, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration
of the bill (H.R. 7621) to amend the Federal Hazardous Substances
Act to protect children from toys and other articles intended for
use by children which are hazardous due to the presence of
electrical, mechanical, or thermal hazards, and for other purposes.
After general debate, which shall be confined to the bill and shall
continue not to exceed one hour, to be equally divided and
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, the bill shall be
read for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order
to consider the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended
by the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce now printed in
the bill as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the
five-minute rule. At the conclusion of such consideration, the
committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted, and any Member may demand a
separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the
Committee of the Whole to the bill or committee amendment in the
nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or
without instructions. After passage of H.R. 7621, the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce shall be discharged from the
further consideration of the bill S. 1689, and it shall then be in
order in the House to move to strike out all after the enacting
clause of said Senate bill and insert in lieu thereof the
provisions contained in H.R. 7621 as passed by the House.
As a further example, the following resolution, reported from the
Committee on Rules, was considered on Sept. 24, 1969:
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself into
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for
the consideration of the bill (H.R. 850) to designate the
Desolation Wilderness, Eldorado National Forest, in the State
of California. After general debate, which shall be confined to
the bill and shall continue not to exceed one hour, to be
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs, the bill shall be read for amendment under the five-
minute
[[Page 4341]]
rule. At the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for
amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the
House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill
and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit. After the passage of H.R.
850, the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs shall be
discharged from the further consideration of the bill S. 713,
and it shall then be in order in the House to move to strike
out all after the enacting clause of the said Senate bill and
insert in lieu thereof the provisions contained in H.R. 850 as
passed by the House.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. H. Res. 543, 115 Cong. Rec. 26898, 26899, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 27.9 Form of resolution providing for consideration of a bill;
providing that after passage of the House bill, the legislative
committee be discharged from consideration of a similar Senate bill
and the House-passed language substituted as an amendment for all
after the enacting clause therein; and making in order a motion
that the House insist on its amendments to the Senate bill and a
request for a conference, and authorizing the Speaker to appoint
conferees on the part of the House.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Aug. 11, 1959: (14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. H. Res. 338, 105 Cong. Rec. 15512, 86th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration
of the bill, H.R. 8342, a bill to provide for the reporting and
disclosure of certain financial transactions and administrative
practices of labor organizations and employers, to prevent abuses
in the administration of trusteeships by labor organizations, to
provide standards with respect to the election of officers of labor
organizations, and for other purposes, and all points of order
against said bill are hereby waived. After general debate, which
shall be confined to the bill and shall continue not to exceed six
hours, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor,
the bill shall be read for amendment under the five-minute rule. At
the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for amendment, the
Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted and the previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to
recommit, with or without instructions.
That after the passage of H.R. 8342, the Committee on Education
and Labor shall be discharged from the further consideration of the
bill, S. 1555;
[[Page 4342]]
that it shall then be in order in the House to move to strike out
all after the enacting clause of said Senate bill and insert in
lieu thereof the provisions contained in H.R. 8342 as passed; that
it shall then be in order to move that the House insist upon its
amendment to said Senate bill S. 1555 and request a conference with
the Senate; and that the Speaker shall thereupon appoint the
conferees on the part of the House.
Sec. 27.10 The House agreed to a resolution providing for the
consideration of a bill reported from the Committee on Merchant
Marine and Fisheries, making it in order, after passage, to take
from the Speaker's table a similar Senate bill which, under the
precedents, would have fallen within the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs had it been referred to
committee, and to insert the House language as an amendment.
On Sept. 23, 1969, the House agreed to a special order, called up
by Mr. Spark M. Matsunaga, of Hawaii, by direction of the Committee on
Rules, which resolution made in order the consideration of a bill
reported by the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries; the
resolution also provided for the disposition of a Senate bill after
passage of the House bill: (15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 115 Cong. Rec. 26569, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 544
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration
of the bill (H.R. 12549) to amend the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act to provide for the establishment of a Council on
Environmental Quality, and for other purposes. After general
debate, which shall be confined to the bill and shall continue not
to exceed one hour, to be equally divided and controlled by the
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Merchant
Marine and Fisheries, the bill shall be read for amendment under
the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the consideration of the
bill for amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the bill to
the House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and
amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion
except one motion to recommit. After the passage of H.R. 12549, it
shall be in order in the House to take from the Speaker's table the
bill S. 1075 and to move to strike out all after the enacting
clause of said Senate bill and insert in lieu thereof of provisions
contained in H.R. 12549 as passed by the House.
Parliamentarian's Note: The Senate bill (S. 1075) which the
[[Page 4343]]
resolution provided for taking from the Speaker's table was properly
within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs in the House. Accommodation had been reached in the House,
however, in order that certain amendments would be offered to the House
bill on behalf of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
Sec. 27.11 A resolution making in order the disposition of a Senate
bill on the Speaker's table after passage of a House bill reported
by the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, was amended to
delete all reference to the Senate bill, and the Senate bill was
then referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency.
On Sept. 9, 1970,(16) Mr. Spark M. Matsunaga, of Hawaii,
offered by direction of the Committee on Rules a special order
providing for the consideration of a House bill and providing for the
disposition of a similar Senate bill on the Speaker's table. He offered
an amendment recommended (but not reported) by the Committee on Rules
deleting the provision for disposition of the Senate bill:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 116 Cong. Rec. 30873, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Matsunaga: Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on
Rules, I call up House Resolution 1046 and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution as follows:
H. Res. 1046
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself into
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for
the consideration of the bill (H.R. 16542) to amend title 39,
United States Code, to regulate the mailing of unsolicited
credit cards, and for other purposes. After general debate,
which shall be confined to the bill and shall continue not to
exceed two hours, to be equally divided and controlled by the
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Post
Office and Civil Service, the bill shall be read for amendment
under the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the
consideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall
rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as
may have been adopted, and the previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to
recommit. After the passage of H.R. 16542, it shall then be in
order in the House to take from the Speaker's table the bill S.
721 and to move to strike all after the enacting clause of the
said Senate bill and insert in lieu thereof the provisions
contained in H.R. 16542 as passed by the House.
The Speaker: (17) The gentleman from Hawaii is
recognized for 1 hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Matsunaga: Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Matsunaga: On page 2, strike out
all of the
[[Page 4344]]
last sentence, beginning with ``After the passage of'' in line
6 and ending with the period in line 11.
Mr. Smith's remarks on the bill explained the purpose of the
amendment to the special order: (18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 116 Cong. Rec. 30874, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [H. Allen] Smith of California: Mr. Speaker, I yield myself
such time as I may use.
Mr. Speaker, in the interest of saving time I will say that the
gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Matsunaga) has adequately explained this
bill and I will extend my remarks on the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Erlenborn) for bringing to our attention a matter which I have been
more or less fussing about for the last year; that is, the language
which we have agreed to strike from the rule, which says that after
the passage of the bill, ``it shall then be in order in the House
to take from the Speaker's table the bil1 S. 721 and to move to
strike all after the enacting clause of the said Senate bill and
insert in lieu thereof the provisions contained in H.R. 16542 as
passed by the House.''
If Members will read the second paragraph under clause 3, rule
XXVIII, the second paragraph has to do with precedents and they
will find that once this happens then the conferees can put most
anything in the bill they wish to, whether it is germane to
anything passed by the House or by the Senate, and it will come
back to us, and it is made in order. . . .
Mr. [John N.] Erlenborn [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, I thank the
gentleman for yielding.
I want to commend the gentleman from Hawaii for offering the
amendment which I intended to offer if the members of the Rules
Committee themselves did not.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Smith) I believe has quite
thoroughly described the effect of the language which has been
stricken from the rule. If this language had been left in the rule
and the Senate bill were then amended by substituting the language
of the House bill and sent to conference, under the rules and under
the precedents, the conference committee would have been free to
put in this bill almost anything that would have been germane and
that could have been offered in either the House or the Senate. It
would not have been at all limited to the bill passed by the House
or passed by the Senate.
I believe most of us have felt that the conference committee
had these restraints, that the conference committee could not write
new legislation in the conference. But in the past several years
there have been too many instances in which altogether new
legislation was written by the conference committee, and the House
and the Senate have had only two alternatives--to accept the new
legislation as written by the conference committee or to reject the
conference report and send the whole matter back to conference.
I hope this will be a precedent of the House now, so that we
will not include this sort of language in the rules sent by the
Rules Committee to the House for the consideration of bills in the
future. Or, as suggested by the gentleman from California, that the
rules of the House themselves may be
[[Page 4345]]
amended in the reorganization bill to see that the kinds of
restraints we all understand to be imposed upon the conference
committee will be imposed in the future to protect us in our
legislative function.
The resolution as amended was adopted and the Senate bill was then
referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency.
Parliamentarian's Note: At the time of these proceedings, the
precedents of the House indicated that where one House struck out of a
bill of the other all after the enacting clause and inserted a new
text, conferees could discard language occurring both in the bill and
the substitute, and exercise broad discretion in incorporating new
germane matter. Clause 3 of Rule XXVIII was amended Jan. 22, 1971
(incorporating provisions of the Legislative Reorganization Act of
1970, 84 Stat. 1140), to prohibit House conferees from agreeing to
language in a conference report presenting topics, questions, issues,
or propositions not committed to conference.
Taking House Bill With Senate Amendments From Table
Sec. 27.12 Form of resolution taking a House bill with the Senate
amendments thereto from the Speaker's table and making it in order
to consider the amendments in the House.
The following resolution was under consideration on July 2, 1960:
(19)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. H. Res. 596, 106 Cong. Rec. 15775, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this
resolution, the bill H.R. 12740 making supplemental appropriations
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1961, and for other purposes,
with the Senate amendments thereto, shall be taken from the
Speaker's table and the Senate amendments considered in the House.
Parliamentarian's Note: Under this procedure, motions to dispose of
each Senate amendment are then in order and subject to separate votes
(as if the stage of disagreement had been reached).
Sec. 27.13 Any Member may request that the Chairman of the Committee on
Rules call a meeting of that committee to consider reporting a
resolution making in order disposition from the Speaker's table of
a House bill, with Senate amendments that require consideration in
the Committee of the Whole, notwithstanding Rule XXIV clause 2.
On Aug. 13, 1957,(20) a unanimous-consent request, to
take
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 103 Cong. Rec. 14568, 85th Cong.1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4346]]
from the Speaker's table a House bill with Senate amendments, was
objected to. Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, then answered a
parliamentary inquiry:
Mr. [Kenneth B.] Keating [of New York]: Would the Speaker
recognize me to move to send the bill to the Rules Committee?
The Speaker: The Chair would not. It is not necessary to do
that.
Mr. Keating: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
Mr. Keating: Would the Speaker advise what action is necessary
now in order to get the bill to the Committee on Rules?
THE SPEAKER: Anyone can make the request of the chairman of the
Committee on Rules to call a meeting of the committee to consider
the whole matter.
Mr. Keating: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
Mr. Keating: Mr. Speaker, if that were done, would the bill
which is now on the Speaker's desk be before the Rules Committee?
The Speaker: It would not be before the Committee on Rules. The
Committee on Rules could consider the matter of what procedure to
recommend to the House for the disposition of this whole matter.
Sec. 27.14 In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Speaker pro
tempore stated that the Committee on Rules could report out a
resolution taking a House bill with Senate amendments (requiring
consideration in Committee of the Whole) from the Speaker's table
and sending it to the legislative committee of the House having
jurisdiction thereof.
On the legislative day of Sept. 25, 1961, Mr. Albert Thomas, of
Texas, asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table a House
bill making appropriations with Senate amendments thereto, disagree to
the Senate amendments and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.
The Senate amendments required consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Frank T. Bow, of Ohio, reserved the right to object to the
request and propounded parliamentary inquiries which were answered by
Speaker pro tempore John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts:
Mr. Bow: Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as these amendments of the
Senate are in the nature of charges against the Treasury of the
United States, I ask this parliamentary inquiry:
Is it not then necessary under the rules and procedures as
found in volume 5 of the Procedure of the House of Representatives
that the bill be sent to the committee and then considered in the
Committee of the Whole before sending it to conference?
[[Page 4347]]
The Speaker Pro Tempore: It is the opinion of the Chair that
the answer which the Chair gave to the first part of the
gentleman's parliamentary inquiry also answers this inquiry: that
if objection is made, the Chair would feel constrained, insofar as
the Chair is capable of accomplishing it, to have the bill taken
from the Speaker's desk and sent to conference under the rules
without reference to the committee.
Mr. Bow: I thank the Chair, and withdraw my reservation.
Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, further reserving the
right to object, if the [matter] should go to the Rules Committee
for a rule, would it be possible for the Rules Committee to vote
out a rule sending the bill to a committee?
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The answer is in the affirmative to
that parliamentary inquiry.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 107 Cong. Rec. 21476, 87th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 26, 1961
(Calendar Day).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concurring in Senate Amendment
Sec. 27.15 Form of resolution providing that the House shall proceed to
consideration of Senate amendments to a House joint resolution and
that the motion to concur be pending, fixing debate on the motion
to concur and ordering the previous question.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Nov. 12, 1941: (2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. H. Res. 334, 87 Cong. Rec. 8763, 77th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the House shall proceed to consider the Senate amendments to the
joint resolution (H.J. Res. 237) to repeal section 6 of the
Neutrality Act of 1939, and for other purposes; that the motion to
concur in the said Senate amendments shall be considered as pending
and that debate on said motion shall be limited to not to exceed 8
hours, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs; and
that at the conclusion of such debate the previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the motion to concur.
Parliamentarian's Note: This special rule precluded a preferential
motion (to concur with an amendment) from being first offered.
Sec. 27.16 Where a resolution provides for taking a House bill with
Senate amendments from the Speaker's table to the end that the
Senate amendments are agreed to, adoption of the resolution means
that the House concurs in the Senate amendments.
On Mar. 24, 1948, a special order for the disposition of busi
[[Page 4348]]
ness on the Speaker's table was called up: (3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. 94 Cong. Rec. 3399, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Leo E.] Allen of Illinois: Mr. Speaker, I call up House
Resolution 510 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this
resolution the bill (H.R. 4790) to reduce individual income tax
payments, and for other purposes, with Senate amendments
thereto, be, and the same is hereby, taken from the Speaker's
table to the end that all Senate amendments be, and the same
are hereby, agreed to.
Speaker Joseph W. Martin, Jr., of Massachusetts, answered a
parliamentary inquiry as to the effect of the resolution should it be
adopted: (4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Id. at p. 3413.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Sam] Rayburn [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary
inquiry.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
Mr. Rayburn: As I understand the parliamentary situation, Mr.
Speaker, there is to be one vote only; and if the resolution is
agreed to, it means that the House concurs in the Senate amendments
to the so-called Knutson bill.
The Speaker: The gentleman has stated the situation correctly.
Sec. 27.17 Where the House has before it a resolution providing for
concurrence in a Senate amendment, such Senate amendment may be
read by unanimous consent.
On Mar. 31, 1950, the House had under consideration House
Resolution 531 reported from the Committee on Rules, taking from the
Speaker's table a House bill with Senate amendment and concurring in
the Senate amendment. Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, answered a
parliamentary inquiry as to whether the Senate amendment could be read:
(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. 96 Cong. Rec. 4553, 4554, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Leo E.] Allen of Illinois: I yield to the gentleman from
Illinois.
Mr. [Sidney R.] Yates [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, under the
terms of this rule we are asked to approve an amendment which has
been added by the other body. Is it in order to request that that
amendment, which has not been read to the House, be read at this
time?
The Speaker: It may be done by unanimous consent.
Mr. Yates: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment added by the other body be read to the House at this
time.
The Speaker: That will come out of the time of the gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. Allen].
Mr. Allen of Illinois: I yield for that purpose, Mr. Speaker.
Sec. 27.18 In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the
[[Page 4349]]
Speaker stated that if the previous question were voted down on a
resolution providing for agreeing to Senate amendments to a House
bill, the resolution would be open to amendment.
On June 17, 1970,(6) the House had under consideration
House Resolution 914 reported from the Committee on Rules, taking from
the Speaker's table H.R. 4249 (to extend the Voting Rights Act) with
Senate amendments, and concurring in the Senate amendments. Speaker
John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, answered an inquiry on the status
of the resolution should the previous question be voted down:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. 116 Cong. Rec. 20198, 20199, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Spark M.] Matsunaga [of Hawaii]: Is my understanding
correct that an ``aye'' vote on House Resolution 914 is a vote to
agree to the Senate amendments to H.R. 4249, the Voting Rights
Extension Act, so that the bill may then be sent to the President
for his signature before the existing act expires on August 6 of
this year?
The Speaker: The Chair will state to the gentleman from Hawaii
that while that is not a parliamentary inquiry, the statement made
by the gentleman from Hawaii is accurate.
Mr. Matsunaga: I thank the Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution.
Mr. Gerald R. Ford [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary
inquiry.
The Speaker: The gentleman from Michigan will state his
parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. Gerald R. Ford Mr. Speaker, a ``no'' vote on the previous
question does give an opportunity for one of those who led the
fight against the resolution to amend the resolution now pending
before the House?
The Speaker: The Chair will state in response to the
parliamentary inquiry of the gentleman from Michigan that if the
previous question is voted down, the resolution is open to
amendment. The Chair's response is the same response as given to
the gentleman from Hawaii.
Sec. 27.19 Where the House adopts a resolution which by its terms
provides for taking a House bill with Senate amendments from the
Speaker's table and agreeing to the Senate amendments, no further
action by the House is required.
On Mar. 16, 1933, a special order reported from the Committee on
Rules relating to the disposition from the Speaker's table of a House
bill with Senate amendments was offered:
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the bill H.R. 2820, with Senate amendments thereto, be, and the
same hereby is, taken from the Speaker's table to the end that all
Senate amendments be, and the same are hereby, agreed
to.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. H. Res. 63, 77 Cong. Rec. 546, 73d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4350]]
Speaker Henry T. Rainey, of Illinois, answered a parliamentary
inquiry on the effect of the resolution should it be adopted:
Mr. [Bertrand H.] Snell [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
Mr. Snell: Mr. Speaker, it would seem to me that if we adopt
this resolution that ends the bill and there is no further vote on
the bill itself.
The Speaker: That is correct.
Mr. Snell: I understood the gentleman from Alabama to say that
we would then vote for or against the bill.
Mr. [John] McDuffie [of Alabama]: No; the gentleman from
Alabama was mistaken.
Mr. Snell: If we adopt this resolution, we pass the bill.
Mr. McDuffie: We have then concurred in the Senate amendment,
and, therefore, the bill is passed, so far as the House is
concerned.
Mr. Snell: And there is no other vote on the bill.
Mr. McDuffie: No other vote on the bill, as I understand it.
The Speaker: That is correct.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Id. at p. 548.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 27.20 The Chair indicated in response to a parliamentary inquiry
that should a resolution providing for concurring in Senate
amendments to a House bill be rejected, the bill and amendments
would remain on the Speaker's table for further action by the
House.
On June 17, 1970, the House had under consideration a special order
reported from the Committee on Rules taking from the Speaker's table a
House bill with Senate amendments and concurring in the amendments (H.
Res. 914). Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, answered an
inquiry on the effect of rejecting the resolution: (9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. 116 Cong. Rec. 20199, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Speaker: The gentleman will state his parliamentary
inquiry.
Mr. [Albert W.] Watson [of South Carolina]: Mr. Speaker, if
this resolution is voted down then, further, it will mean we will
follow the orderly procedure and let this matter go to conference
and reconcile the differences?
The Speaker: The Chair will state that if the resolution is
voted down the matter will lie on the Speaker's desk until the
House determines what it wants to do with the matter.
Concurring in Senate Amendment With Amendment
Sec. 27.21 Form of resolution waiving points of order against a
conference report on a general appropriation bill and making in
order a motion to recede from disagreement to any Senate
[[Page 4351]]
amendment reported in disagreement and concur therein with an
amendment inserting in the proper place in the bill any or all
parts of the provisions of another (legislative) bill and any
amendments thereto, as agreed upon by the House conferees on the
bill on which the conference was held.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Aug. 2, 1955: (10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. H. Res. 337, 101 Cong. Rec. 13051, 84th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report on the bill H.R. 7117,
making appropriations for the legislative branch for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1956, and for other purposes, and all points
of order against the conference report are hereby waived; that
during the consideration of the amendments of the Senate to the
bill H.R. 7117 reported from the conference committee in
disagreement it shall be in order, notwithstanding any rule of the
House to the contrary, to move that the House recede from its
disagreement to any such amendment and concur therein with an
amendment inserting in the proper place in the bill any or all of
the parts of the provisions of the bill H.R. 7440 and any
amendments thereto as agreed upon by the House conferees on the
bill H.R. 7117.
Parliamentarian's Note: H.R. 7440 was a bill reported by the
Committee on House Administration, authorizing salary increases for
House employees (the Senate had amended the House bill with legislative
language authorizing salary increases for Senate employees). The
various provisions of H.R. 7440 would not have been germane as
amendments to the Senate amendments, and a waiver of points of order
was therefore necessary.
Sec. 27.22 Form of special order taking from the Speaker's table a
House bill with Senate amendments before the stage of disagreement;
disagreeing to all Senate amendments except one; providing that the
House immediately proceed to the consideration of the remaining
amendment and that in the consideration of said amendment a motion
to concur with a specified amendment should be in order without any
intervening motion.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on June 10, 1933: (11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 77 Cong. Rec. 5654, 73d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Resolution 185
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the bill H.R.
[[Page 4352]]
5389 with Senate amendments thereto be, and the same hereby is,
taken from the Speaker's table; that Senate amendments Nos. 1 to
46, inclusive, and Senate amendment No. 48 be, and the same are
hereby, disagreed to; that the House shall immediately proceed to
the consideration of Senate amendment No. 47, and that in the
consideration of said Senate amendment No. 47 the following motion
to concur with an amendment shall be in order, and no other
intervening motion shall be in order until said motion is fully
disposed of:
In lieu of the matter inserted by said Senate amendment No. 47
insert the following:
``The President is hereby authorized under the provisions
of Public Law No. 2, Seventy-third Congress, to establish such
number of special boards (the majority of the members of which
were not in the employ of the Veterans' Administration at the
date of enactment of this act), as he may deem necessary to
review all claims (where the veteran entered service prior to
November 11, 1918, and whose disability is not the result of
his own misconduct), in which presumptive service connection
has heretofore been granted under the World War Veterans' Act,
1924, as amended, wherein payments were being made on March 20,
1933, and which are held not service connected under the
regulations issued pursuant to Public Law No. 2, Seventy-third
Congress. Members of such boards may be appointed without
regard to the Civil Service laws and regulations, and their
compensation fixed without regard to the Classification Act of
1923.''.
Disagreeing to Senate Amendments, Going to Conference
Sec. 27.23 Form of resolution taking from the Speaker's table an
appropriation bill with Senate amendments, disagreeing to the
amendments, agreeing to a conference, providing that the Speaker
appoint conferees without intervening motion (thus precluding a
motion to instruct conferees) and providing that it be in order to
consider the conference report when reported without regard to the
rule requiring printing in the Record.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on June 30, 1951: (12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. H. Res. 309, 97 Cong. Rec. 7538, 82d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 277) making temporary
appropriations for the fiscal year 1952, and for other purposes,
with the Senate amendments thereto be, and the same hereby is,
taken from the Speaker's table; that the Senate amendments be, and
they are hereby, disagreed to by the House; that the conference
requested by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses
on the said joint resolution be, and hereby is, agreed to by the
House, and that the Speaker shall imme
[[Page 4353]]
diately appoint conferees without intervening motion.
Sec. 2. It shall be in order to consider the conference report
on the said joint resolution when reported notwithstanding the
provisions of clause 2, rule XXVIII.
Sec. 27.24 Form of special order taking a House appropriations bill
with Senate amendments from the Speaker's table, disagreeing to the
amendments, agreeing to the conference requested by the Senate,
directing the Speaker to immediately appoint conferees without
intervening motion, and giving specific authority to the conferees
on the part of the House to agree or disagree to any Senate
amendment containing legislation or unauthorized appropriations.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Mar. 26, 1935: (13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. H. Res. 174, 79 Cong. Rec. 4465, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. H.J. Res.
117 was a bill making relief appropriations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the joint resolution, House Joint Resolution 117, with Senate
amendments thereto, be, and the same is hereby, taken from the
Speaker's table; that the Senate amendments be, and they are
hereby, disagreed to by the House; that the conference requested by
the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the said
joint resolution be, and hereby is, agreed to by the House; that
the Speaker shall immediately appoint managers on the part of the
House without intervening motion; and that the managers on the part
of the House are hereby given specific authority to agree, with or
without amendment, or disagree to any amendment of the Senate to
the said joint resolution notwithstanding the provisions of clause
2 of rule XX.
Sec. 27.25 Form of special order discharging the Committee of the Whole
from the further consideration of an appropriation bill with Senate
amendments thereto; disagreeing to all Senate amendments; agreeing
to a conference asked by the Senate; authorizing the Speaker
without any intervening motion to appoint conferees; and empowering
the conferees on the part of the House to agree to any Senate
amendment containing legislation or unauthorized appropriations.
The following resolution was under consideration on Mar. 14, 1934:
(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 78 Cong. Rec. 4509, 73d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4354]]
House Resolution 299
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union be, and
it is hereby, discharged from the further consideration of the bill
H.R. 6663 and the Senate amendments thereto; that the said Senate
amendments be, and hereby are, disagreed to by the House; that the
conference requested by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the said bill be, and hereby is, agreed to by the
House; that the Speaker shall immediately appoint the conferees
without intervening motion; and that the conferees on the part of
the House are hereby given specific authority to agree, with or
without amendment, or disagree to any amendment of the Senate to
the bill H.R. 6663 notwithstanding the provisions of clause 2 of
rule XX.
Sec. 27.26 To a resolution providing that the House disagree to Senate
amendments, including an amendment directing the Committee on Ways
and Means of the House and Finance Committee of the Senate to
conduct a study of excess-profits tax legislation, and sending the
bill to conference, an amendment providing that the House concur in
such amendment with an amendment enacting excess-profits
legislation was held to be not germane.
On Sept. 14, 1950,(15) a special order was called up:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 96 Cong. Rec. 14832, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Adolph J.] Sabath [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, I call up
House Resolution 842 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read as follows:
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this
resolution the bill (H.R. 8920) to reduce excise taxes, and for
other purposes, with Senate amendments thereto, be, and the
same is hereby, taken from the Speaker's table; that the Senate
amendments be, and they are hereby, disagreed to; that the
conference requested by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of
the two Houses on the said bill be, and hereby is, agreed to;
and that the Speaker shall immediately appoint conferees
without intervening motion.
The previous question was rejected on the resolution, and Mr.
Herman P. Eberharter, of Pennsylvania, offered an amendment to the
resolution:
Mr. Eberharter: Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature
of a substitute.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Eberharter: Strike out all after
the word ``Resolved'' and insert in lieu thereof the following:
``That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution,
the bill H.R. 8920 with Senate amendments thereto be, and the
same is hereby, taken from the Speaker's table to the end--
``(1) That all Senate amendments other than amendment No.
191 be,
[[Page 4355]]
and the same are hereby, disagreed to and the conference
requested thereon by the Senate is agreed to; and
``(2) That Senate amendment No. 191 be, and the same is
hereby, agreed to with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the
matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate insert the
following:
`` `title vii--excess-profits tax
`` `Sec. 701. Excess-profits tax applied to taxable years
ending after June 30, 1950.
`` `Notwithstanding section 122(a) of the Revenue Act of
1945, the provisions of subchapter E of chapter 2 of the
Internal Revenue Code shall apply to taxable years ending after
June 30, 1950.
`` `Sec. 702. Computation of tax in case of taxable year
beginning before July 1, 1950, and ending after June 30, 1950.'
''
Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, sustained a point of order against
the amendment, on the grounds that it was not germane to the
resolution:
Mr. [Wilbur D.] Mills [of Arkansas]: Mr. Speaker, I make the
point of order against the amendment on the ground that the
amendment is neither germane to the resolution sought to be
amended, nor to the Senate amendment No. 191. The language of the
Senate amendment would direct the Committee on Ways and Means of
the House and the Finance Committee of the Senate to conduct a
study of excess-profits-tax legislation during the Eighty-second
Congress, ostensibly to report back to the House and Senate for
passage with a retroactive date of July 1, 1950, or October 1,
1950.
The provision of the bill does not in any way attempt to
legislate an excess-profits tax in connection with H.R. 8920. The
amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania proposes an
excess-profits tax in connection with H.R. 8920. The amendment is a
specific provision for an excess-profits tax. Therefore, Mr.
Speaker, it seems to me that the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania is not in order, that it is not germane either to
the resolution before the House or to the section of the bill on
which the instructions are sought to be given. . . .
Mr. Eberharter: In the first place, Mr. Speaker, this amendment
seeks to amend the resolution reported out by the Committee on
Rules. This resolution waives points of order with respect to other
rules of the House. Under the rules of the House when a bill comes
from the other body with amendments containing matter which would
have been subject to a point of order in the House then the
amendments must be considered in the Committee of the Whole. The
resolution reported out by the Committee on Rules seeks to waive
that rule.
If a resolution reported out by the Committee on Rules can
waive one rule of the House, why cannot the House by the adoption
of a substitute resolution, which this is, waive other rules? I
contend, Mr. Speaker, that this substitute for the resolution
reported out by the Committee on Rules is just as germane and just
as much in order as the actual resolution reported out by the
Committee on Rules; they are similar. . . .
The Speaker: The Chair is ready to rule.
The Chair agrees with a great deal that the gentleman from
Pennsylvania
[[Page 4356]]
and the gentleman from Colorado say about history, but that is not
the question before the Chair to decide at this time.
It is a rule long established that a resolution from the
Committee on Rules providing for the consideration of a bill
relating to a certain subject may not be amended by a proposition
providing for the consideration of another and not germane subject
or matter.
It is true that in Senate amendment No. 191 to the bill, which
came from the Senate, there is a caption ``Title VII,'' which
states ``Excess Profits Tax.'' But in the amendment which the
Senate adopted to the House bill there is no excess-profits tax.
The Chair is compelled to hold under a long line of rulings
that this matter, not being germane if offered to the Senate
amendment it is not germane here. The Chair sustains the point of
order.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Id. at pp. 14841-44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disagreeing in Part, Concurring in Part. Going to Conference
Sec. 27.27 Form of special order taking a House bill with Senate
amendments from the Speaker's table, waiving all points of order
against the bill and any Senate amendment, disagreeing to a number
of Senate amendments, concurring in others, and agreeing to a
conference requested by the Senate on the amendments in
disagreement.
The following resolution was under consideration on May 2, 1933:
(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 77 Cong. Rec. 2693, 73d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Resolution 124
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the bill H.R. 3835 with Senate amendments thereto be, and the same
is hereby, taken from the Speaker's table; that all points of order
against said bill or Senate amendments thereto shall be considered
as waived; that Senate amendments nos. l to 84, inclusive, be, and
the same are hereby, disagreed to; that Senate amendment no. 85 be,
and the same is hereby, concurred in; that the conference requested
by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses be, and
the same is hereby, agreed to.
Insisting Upon House Amendment, Going to Conference
Sec. 27.28 Form of resolution providing that the House insist upon its
amendment to a Senate bill, ask a conference with the Senate on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses, and that the Speaker
immediately appoint conferees.
The following resolution was called up under a motion to suspend
the rules on June 18, 1948: (18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. H. Res. 690, 94 Cong. Rec. 8829, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4357]]
Resolved, That the House insist upon its amendment to S. 2655,
ask a conference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes, and that
the Speaker immediately appoint conferees.
Sec. 27.29 Form of resolution taking Senate bill with House amendments
from Speaker's table; insisting on House amendments, and agreeing
to further conference.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Aug. 12, 1964: (19)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. H. Res. 818, 110 Cong. Rec. 19194, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the bill (S. 1007) to guarantee electric consumers in the Pacific
Northwest first call on electric energy generated at Federal
hydroelectric plants in that region and to guarantee electric
consumers in other regions reciprocal priority, and for other
purposes, with House amendments thereto, be, and the same is
hereby, taken from the Speaker's table; that the House insists on
its amendments to said bill and agrees to the further conference
requested by the Senate on the disagreeing votes thereon.
Sec. 27.30 Form of resolution taking two Senate bills from Speaker's
table, amending and passing such bills, insisting on such
amendments, and requesting a conference with the Senate.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Nov. 18, 1971: (20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 117 Cong. Rec. 42046, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 710
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of its resolution
and without the intervention of any point of order the bills of the
Senate S. 2819 and S. 2820 are hereby taken from the Speaker's
table; that said Senate bills are hereby amended by striking out
all after the enacting clause of each such Senate bill and
inserting in lieu thereof the text of the bill H.R. 9910 as passed
by the House on August 3, 1971; that the said Senate bills as so
amended shall be considered as read a third time and passed; that
the title of each such Senate bill shall be amended by striking out
such title and inserting in lieu thereof the title of H.R. 9910;
that the House insists upon its amendments to each Senate bill and
requests conferences with the Senate, and that the Speaker appoint
managers on the part of the House to attend each such conference.
Sending Bill to Conference
Sec. 27.31 In answer to a series of parliamentary inquiries, the
Speaker explained that: (1) where objection is raised to a
unanimous-consent request to send a bill to conference, the bill
does not automatically ``go to the Rules Com
[[Page 4358]]
mittee'' but remains on the Speaker's table and may be sent to
conference by motion authorized by the standing committee under
Rule XX clause 1; (2) the Committee on Rules has jurisdiction over
resolutions providing for the disposition of Senate amendments; and
(3) if conferees have failed to file a report within 20 days of
their appointment, a motion to instruct the conferees, or discharge
them and appoint new ones, would be in order.
On May 29, 1968,(1) Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New York,
asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's tab]e H.R. 5037 (Law
Enforcement and Criminal Justice Assistance Act of 1967) with a Senate
amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment and request a
conference with the Senate. Under a reservation of the right to object,
Mr. Richard H. Poff, of Virginia, propounded a series of parliamentary
inquiries to Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 114 Cong. Rec. 15499, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Poff: If no objection is registered to the unanimous-
consent request, will the effect be to send the bill either to the
Committee on Rules or to the Committee on the Judiciary for a
resolution instructing the chairman of the Committee on the
Judiciary to make a motion that the bill go to conference?
The Speaker: In response the Chair will say if objection is
made to the unanimous-consent request the bill will remain on the
Speaker's desk. The Committee on the Judiciary could take action to
authorize the chairman or any Member to make a motion to take the
bill from the Speaker's desk for the purpose of sending it to
conference. . . .
Mr. Poff: If the motion to go to conference is not adopted by
the House, in such case would it be in order for the Committee on
Rules to report a resolution making it in order to move to recede
and concur?
The Speaker: Under the rules of the House it is within the
authority and jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules to report a
resolution providing for the disposition of the Senate amendments.
. . .
Mr. Poff: If the conference is appointed and has not agreed
within a 21-day period, will it then be in order to move to
discharge the House conferees?
The Speaker: Under rule XXVIII, it would be in order to move
either to discharge or to instruct the managers on the part of the
House after 20 days.
Making in Order Consideration of Conference Reports When Reported
Sec. 27.32 Form of resolution agreeing to a conference with the Senate,
providing that the Speaker imme
[[Page 4359]]
diately appoint conferees, and making in order the consideration of
the conference report when reported.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on June 30, 1951: (2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. H. Res. 667, 97 Cong. Rec. 7538, 82d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 277) making temporary
appropriations for the fiscal year 1952, and for other purposes,
with the Senate amendments thereto be, and the same hereby is,
taken from the Speaker's table; that the Senate amendments be, and
they are hereby, disagreed to by the House; that the conference
requested by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses
on the said joint resolution be, and hereby is, agreed to by the
House, and that the Speaker shall immediately appoint conferees
without intervening motion.
Sec. 2. It shall be in order to consider the conference report
on the said joint resolution when reported notwithstanding the
provisions of clause 2, rule XXVIII.
Sec. 27.33 Form of resolution providing that during the remainder of
the week it shall be in order to consider conference reports the
same day reported, and authorizing the Speaker to entertain the
motions to suspend the rules.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on July 25, 1956: (3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. H. Res. 630, 102 Cong. Rec. 14456, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That during the remainder of this week it shall be in
order to consider conference reports the same day reported
notwithstanding the provisions of clause 2, rule XXVIII; that it
shall also be in order during the remainder of this week for the
Speaker at any time to entertain motions to suspend the rules,
notwithstanding the provisions of clause 1 rule XXVII.
Sec. 27.34 The Committee on Rules may report to the House a resolution
making in order the consideration of a conference report which has
not yet been submitted to the House.
On many occasions, the Committee on Rules has reported resolutions
making in order the consideration of conference reports on the same day
reported. For example, on July 25, 1956, the House adopted a resolution
from the Committee on Rules providing as follows:
Resolved, That during the remainder of this week it shall be in
order to consider conference reports the same day reported
notwithstanding the provisions of clause 2, rule XXVIII; that it
shall also be in order during the re
[[Page 4360]]
mainder of this week for the Speaker at any time to entertain
motions to suspend the rules, notwithstanding the provisions of
clause 1, rule XXVII.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. H. Res. 630, 102 Cong. Rec. 14456, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 30, 1951, the House adopted a resolution from the Committee
on Rules which not only provided for a conference on an appropriation
bil1 but also provided for the consideration of the conference report
when reported:
Mr. [Adolph J.] Sabath [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, by direction
of the Committee on Rules I submit a privileged report (H. Res.
309, Rept. No. 667) and ask for its immediate consideration.
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this
resolution the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 277) making
temporary appropriations for the fiscal year 1952, and for
other purposes, with the Senate amendments thereto be, and the
same hereby is, taken from the Speaker's table; that the Senate
amendments be, and they are hereby, disagreed to by the House;
that the conference requested by the Senate on the disagreeing
votes of the two Houses on the said joint resolution be, and
hereby is, agreed to by the House, and that the Speaker shall
immediately appoint conferees without intervening motion.
Sec. 2. It shall be in order to consider the conference
report on the said joint resolution when reported
notwithstanding the provisions of clause 2, rule
XXVIII.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. 97 Cong. Rec. 7538, 82d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 27.35 Notwithstanding the adoption by the House of a resolution
making in order the consideration of conference reports on the day
reported (on that day), the Speaker indicated, in response to a
parliamentary inquiry, that legislative history which prompted the
Committee on Rules to meet and report that, resolution restricted
his authority to recognize Members to call up three designated
reports.
On Oct. 18, 1972,(6) Mr. William M. Colmer, of
Mississippi, called up by direction of the Committee on Rules House
Resolution 1168, providing for the consideration, on a certain day, of
any reports from the Committee on Rules and any conference reports
reported on that day. Mr. Colmer explained that the resolution was a
product of an informal leadership agreement of the preceding day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. 118 Cong. Rec. 37063, 37064, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaker Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, then answered parliamentary
inquiries on his exercise of the power of recognition under the
resolution:
Mr. [Peter W.] Rodino [Jr., of New Jersey]: Mr. Speaker, under
the resolution just agreed to, would it be in order for the House
to consider the conference report when it is ready on S. 2087,
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
[[Page 4361]]
Streets Act of 1968, benefits to survivors of police officers
killed in line of duty, which was agreed upon and which was filed
yesterday?
The Speaker: The Chair must answer the gentleman in accordance
with the language which the Chair used when this matter was before
the House on yesterday. At that time the Chair stated, and no
specific reference was made to any bill because it has been
informally mentioned to the Members who were seeking the rule, that
this rule would not be used for any other bill except those dealing
with three items. Under that interpretation it would be in order to
bring those conference reports up on the day on which they were
filed. As the Chair understands his own language and his own
informal agreement, which was a part of the history, the Chair
would very much like to recognize the gentleman, but the Chair
feels constrained to hold that the legislative history restricts
all action under House Resolution 1168 to three measures, the
highway bill, the debt ceiling bill, and the continuing resolution.
Mr. Rodino: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
Mr. Rodino: Mr. Speaker, referring again to the rule adopted,
was not the language strictly stated, and this is the language that
I heard stated, the language referred to in the course of debate
notwithstanding legislative history of yesterday, to consider
conference reports the same day reported, notwithstanding the
provisions of clause 2, rule XXVIII?
The Speaker: The gentleman is referring to three conference
reports which precipitated the action which brought into existence
this resolution.
The Chair would like to recognize the gentleman, but the Chair
feels that its own promise is at stake here.
The Chair will try to find some other method of recognizing the
gentleman. The Chair does not feel that in good faith or in good
conscience it can recognize the gentleman under the circumstances.
. . .
The Chair feels constrained to say--and the Chair hates to make
a statement from the Chair on issues like this--it was suggested
these three bills which the Chair has mentioned be listed in the
resolution. The Chair said that was not necessary; that was the
understanding, and it would simply complicate the resolution by
naming the three bills. That is what happened.
The Chair recognizes that had it not been for that
understanding and legislative history, which is in the Record, this
would have been eligible under the clear language of the
resolution.
The Chair would gladly recognize the gentleman for a unanimous-
consent request to bring it up now.
Unauthorized Appropriations in Conference Report Protected by Special
Order Waiving Points of Order Against House Bill
Sec. 27.36 Where an appropriation bill is considered in the House under
a rule waiving points of order against a provision therein which is
unauthorized by law, and the Senate then amends the unau
[[Page 4362]]
thorized provision, reducing the sum of money involved and striking
out a portion of the language, conferees may (without violating the
provisions of Rule XX clause 2) agree to a sum between the two and
restore the House language.
On Dec. 20, 1969, Mr. Otto E. Passman, of Louisiana, called up a
conference report on H.R. 15149, making appropriations for foreign
assistance for fiscal 1970. The House had originally considered the
bill on Dec. 9, 1969, pursuant to a special order from the Committee on
Rules (H. Res. 742) which waived all points of order against the bill.
The resolution had been reported and adopted since many items in the
Foreign Assistance Appropriations Act were unauthorized by law (the
authorization not having been enacted into law) and therefore in
violation of Rule XXI clause 2.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. For the special order and its adoption, see 115 Cong. Rec. 37948,
91st Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 9, 1969.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parliamentarian's Note: Where a special rule in the House waives
points of order against portions of an appropriation bill which are
unauthorized by law, and the bill passes the House with those
provisions included therein and goes to conference, the conferees may
report back their agreement to those provisions (and Senate
modifications thereof) even though they remain unauthorized, since
waiver of points of order under Rule XXI clause 2, carries over to the
consideration of the same provisions when the conference report is
before the House.
When the conference report was called up on Dec. 20, Speaker John
W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, overruled two points of order against
the conference report, since the waiver of points of order during the
original consideration of the bill carried over to provisions in the
conference report protected by the resolution: (8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Id. at pp. 40445-48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Passman: Mr. Speaker, 1 can up the conference report on the
bill (H.R. 15149) making appropriations for foreign assistance and
related programs for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1970, and for
other purposes, and ask unanimous consent that the statement of the
managers on the part of the House be read in lieu of the report. .
. .
Mr. [Sidney R.] Yates [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, I make a
point of order against that portion of the conference report which
provides funds for the purchase of planes for the Republic of China
on the ground that it is an appropriation that is not authorized by
law.
I read from the conference report on the authorization bill
which appears in
[[Page 4363]]
the Congressional Record of December 18 on page 39841 relating to
the military assistance, section 504 of the act.
The House bill authorized a total of $454,500,000 for military
assistance of which $350,000,000 was for worldwide allocation;
$50,000,000 for Korea; $54,500,000 for the Republic of China.
The Senate amendment authorized a total of $325,000,000 without
any allocation to specified countries.
The managers on the part of the House agreed to the
authorization of $350,000,000 without specifying any country
allocation. They found it impossible to obtain agreement to a
larger total for military assistance and believe that any specific
additional allocation for Korea or for the Republic of China would
result in a drastic curtailment of the worldwide authorization
which would be detrimental to our national security.
So in the basic law, in the authorization law there is no
allocation specifically of funds for any country and I suggest that
the appropriation of funds in a specific amount for military
assistance to a particular country is without authorization of law.
. . .
Mr. Passman: Mr. Speaker, may I be heard further on the point
of order?
Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the lateness of the
so-called authorization bill, which does not exist in fact, as yet,
and the very fact that the majority leader of the other body said
there would be no authorization bill, and the chairman of the
Foreign Relations Committee said there would be no authorization
bill, made it necessary for us to move this bill through the
Appropriations Committee, the Rules Committee, and the Rules
Committee gave us a rule waiving points of order. We have moved the
bill, as I understand it, according to the rules of the House, and
this appropriation bill became an authorization bill also, in the
absence of any authorization act. Even at this late hour we still
do not have an authorization bill because the conference report on
the authorization bill was only adopted yesterday by both Houses
and has not yet reached the President for his signature. . . .
The Speaker: The Chair can only rule upon the point of order
which is made, and the Chair is prepared to rule.
The gentleman from Illinois has raised a point of order against
the conference report on the bill H. R. 15149.
The Chair is aware of the fact pointed out by the gentleman
from Illinois--that the authorization bill for fiscal 1970, while
passed by both Houses, has not yet become law. As pointed out in
the debate on this point of order, the conference report now before
the House does carry an amount for military assistance that is
$54,500,000 above the figure which would be authorized by H.R.
14580, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1969.
However, the Chair recalls that when this appropriation bill
passed the House, it was considered under a rule waiving points of
order. The House agreed to a total figure for military assistance
of $454,500,000. The Senate reduced this figure to $350 million.
The conferees have reached an agreement between these two amounts,
as they had the authority to do.
The Chair holds that the conferees have not exceeded their
authority and overrules the point of order. . . .
[[Page 4364]]
Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, I make a point of
order against consideration of the conference report in toto.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. Gross: Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against
consideration of the conference report on the basis that none of
the appropriations contained in the bill H.R. 15149 have been
authorized by law.
Mr. Passman: May I be heard on that, Mr. Speaker?
The Speaker: Of course, the Chair will hear the gentleman.
Mr. Passman: It is my understanding that the Chair just ruled
on that specific point a moment ago. I ask for a ruling, Mr.
Speaker.
The Speaker: The Chair will state that it overrules the point
of order made by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Gross), on the ground
that the special rule waived points of order against the provisions
of the House bill.
Consideration of Conference Reports
Sec. 27.37 Form of resolution providing for consideration of a
conference report, fixing debate thereon at four hours, and
providing that the previous question be considered as ordered at
expiration of debate.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Feb. 8, 1938: (9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. H. Res. 416, 83 Cong. Rec. 1645, 75th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution
the House shall proceed to the consideration of the conference
report on the bill H.R. 8505, an act to provide for the
conservation of national soil resources and to provide an adequate
and balanced flow of agricultural commodities in interstate and
foreign commerce, and for other purposes; that all points of order
against said conference report are hereby waived; and that after
debate on said conference report, which may continue not to exceed
4 hours, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Agriculture, the
previous question shall be considered as ordered on agreeing to the
conference report.
Sec. 27.38 Form of special order providing for the consideration of two
conference reports on the same bill together, for the purposes of
debate and vote.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on June 14, 1930: (10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. H. Res. 253, 72 Cong. Rec. 10694, 71st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That for the purpose of the vote and debate the two
conference reports on the bill H.R. 2667 shall be considered as one
report. The reading of the two reports shall be waived, and the
statements of the managers on the part of the House shall be read
in lieu thereof. There shall be three hours of debate, which shall
be confined to the
[[Page 4365]]
reports, to equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means. In the
consideration of the reports all points of order shall be waived.
At the conclusion of debate the previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the adoption of the reports.
Sec. 27.39 Adoption of a special order providing for the consideration
of two conference reports together for the purposes of debate and
vote suspends the rule providing for the division of the question.
On June 14, 1930, the House adopted House Resolution 253, reported
from the Committee on Rules, providing that two conference reports on
the same bill be considered together. The rule provided for three hours
of debate on the reports and provided that at the conclusion of debate
the previous question be considered as ordered on the adoption of the
reports. Speaker Nicholas Longworth, of Ohio, answered a parliamentary
inquiry as to the effect of the special order on voting on the reports:
Mr. [Charles R.] Crisp [of Georgia]: The rule as reported
provides that for the purpose of vote and debate the two conference
reports on the bill shall be considered as one report. Section 774
of the rules of the House provides:
On the demand of any Member, before the question is put, a
question shall be divided if it include propositions so
distinct in substance that one being taken away a substantive
proposition shall remain.
This rule provides that the two conference reports, each one
distinct and substantive, shall be considered as one report. Now,
my inquiry is: Does that take away the right of any Member to ask
for a division and a separate vote on the two conference reports?
The Speaker: The Chair thinks that if the resolution is adopted
by a majority, that suspends the rule quoted by the gentleman for
today in connection with this bill.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 72 Cong. Rec. 10694, 71st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parliamentarian's Note: Conferees filed two conference reports on
this bill on June 13, 1930 (H. Rept. 1892 and H. Rept. 1893). One
report dealt with certain of the many numbered Senate amendments, and
the second dealt with the others. In current practice, only one
conference report is filed per conference, to dispose of, or to report
in disagreement on, all the amendments in disagreement.
Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Reports and Motions on
Amendments in Disagreement
Sec. 27.40 Form of resolution reported from the Committee on Rules,
waiving points of
[[Page 4366]]
order against a conference report where House conferees had: (1)
included provisions beyond the scope of the differences between the
House bill and Senate amendment in the nature of a substitute; (2)
agreed to an appropriation in the Senate amendment; and (3) agreed
to certain nongermane provisions therein.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on July 27, 1972: (12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. H. Res. 1057, 118 Cong. Rec. 25822, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report on the bill (H.R. 12931)
to provide for improving the economy and living conditions in rural
America, and all points of order against the conference report for
failure to comply with the provisions of clauses 2 and 3, rule XX
and clause 3, rule XXVIII are hereby waived.
Sec. 27.41 Form of resolution waiving all points of order against a
conference report.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on July 31, 1963: (13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. H. Res. 453, 109 Cong. Rec. 13816, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report on the bill, H.R. 5207,
to amend the Foreign Service Buildings Act, 1926, to authorize
additional appropriations, and for other purposes, and all points
of order against the conference report are hereby waived.
Sec. 27.42 Form of resolution waiving all points of order against the
consideration of a conference report (where conferees had exceeded
the scope of their authority in violation of Rule XXVIII clause 3).
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Aug. 3, 1973: (14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. H. Res. 517, 119 Cong. Rec. 28089, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report on the bill (S. 502) to
authorize appropriations for the construction of certain highways
in accordance with title 23 of the United States Code, and for
other purposes, and all points of order against said conference
report are hereby waived.
Sec. 27.43 Form of special order making in order the consideration of,
and waiving points of order against, a conference report previously
ruled out on a point of order.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on
[[Page 4367]]
Rules, was under consideration on May 9, 1933: (15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. H. Res. 136, 77 Cong. Rec. 3060, 73d Cong. 1st Sess. The conference
report had been previously held out of order because the
conferees had agreed to certain matter not committed to
conference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That notwithstanding the previous action of the House
relative to the conference report on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the bill H.R. 3835, immediately upon the adoption of
this resolution the House shall consider said conference report
without the intervention of points of order against the same.
Sec. 27.44 Form of resolution making in order a conference report and
making in order and waiving points of order against a motion to
recede and concur in a designated Senate amendment, reported in
disagreement, with an amendment (constituting legislation on
approriation bill).
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Dec. 23, 1963: (16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. H. Res. 600, 109 Cong. Rec. 25495, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider without the intervention of any point of order
the conference report on the bill (H.R. 9499) making appropriations
for foreign aid and related agencies for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1964, and for other purposes, and that during the
consideration of the amendment of the Senate numbered 20 to the
bill, it shall be in order to consider, without the intervention of
any point of order, a motion by the Chairman of the Managers on the
part of the House to recede and concur in said Senate amendment
numbered 20 with an amendment.
Sec. 27.45 Form of resolution waiving points of order against a
conference report and making in order a motion to recede from
disagreement to a Senate amendment and concur therein with an
amendment inserting in the proper place in the bill any or all
parts of the provisions of another bill and any amendments thereto,
as agreed upon by the House conferees on the bill on which the
conference was had.
The following resolution, reported from the Committee on Rules, was
under consideration on Aug. 2, 1955: (17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. H. Res. 337, 101 Cong. Rec. 13051, 84th Cong. 1st Sess. The bill
H.R. 7440 was a bill reported from the Committee on House
Administration, providing for increased salaries of certain
employees of the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to
[[Page 4368]]
consider the conference report on the bill H.R. 7117, making
appropriations for the legislative branch for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1956, and for other purposes, and all points of
order against the conference report are hereby waived; that during
the consideration of the amendments of the Senate to the bill H.R.
7117 reported from the conference committee in disagreement it
shall be in order, notwithstanding any rule of the House to the
contrary, to move that the House recede from its disagreement to
any such amendment and concur therein with an amendment inserting
in the proper place in the bill any or all of the parts of the
provisions of the bill H.R. 7440 and any amendments thereto as
agreed upon by the House conferees on the bill H.R. 7117.