[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 209 (Wednesday, December 27, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H15638]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRIES

  Mr. HOYER. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. HOYER. It is my understanding that that is subject to a vote; am 
I correct?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has just declared the resolution 
adopted by unanimous consent and the motion to reconsider has been laid 
upon the table.
  Mr. HOYER. That was during the time that I was asking for this 
parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The answer to the gentleman's question is 
that the resolution has now been dealt with.
  Mr. HOYER. If I may continue my parliamentary inquiry, based upon 
that, that was a voice vote, I take it.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. No. It was adopted by unanimous consent. The 
motion to reconsider was laid upon the table.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, let me say that I was asking for the 
parliamentary inquiry during the course of your talking, and you did 
not stop for me to make my parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman asked for a parliamentary 
inquiry during the time that the Clerk was reporting the resolution, 
and he is not eligible to be recognized during the time that the Clerk 
is reporting the resolution. The gentleman did not reserve the right to 
object when the Chair made that particular representation to the House.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. Is not the Speaker 
required to enunciate the proper procedure to determine whether there, 
in fact, is unanimous consent? This Member did not hear unanimous 
consent requested, and thus was not able to respond.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair said that without objection, the 
resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid upon the 
table. That was the point that the Chair made. It is the gentleman's 
duty to follow the proceedings of the House.
  Mr. MORAN. This Member was waiting for a response from the Speaker, 
assuming that a parliamentary inquiry had to be responded to before any 
further determinative action by the body could take place.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair, in a timely manner when the 
gentleman asked for a parliamentary inquiry, did, in fact, take the 
gentleman's parliamentary inquiry. The gentleman could have reserved 
the right to object at the point that the Chair put the issue of 
adoption.
  Mr. MORAN. In other words, just to understand the Speaker's 
interpretation, if a Member is asking for a parliamentary inquiry, they 
would first have to reserve the right to object in order to state their 
parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has explained. The gentleman had 
propounded his parliamentary inquiry during the time that the Clerk was 
reporting the resolution. That is not a timely parliamentary inquiry. 
The Chair, upon the reporting of the resolution, did, in fact, allow 
the House to respond to the Chair's presentation to the House that this 
was being adopted by unanimous consent. This is in line with the way 
that other resolutions regarding the election of Members to committees 
are handled in the House.
  The Chair did not deviate at all from the way in which this matter is 
handled on all other cases where the caucus is bringing to the Chamber 
a resolution electing Members to committees, so that this was all 
handled in the normal process.

                          ____________________