[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 96 (Wednesday, June 26, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H6854-H6855]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRIES

  Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Greene of Utah). The gentleman will 
state it.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, if no motion to table is filed to 
immediately cut off debate on the privileged motion this afternoon on 
this matter about the Speaker's ethics, then will the gentleman from 
Georgia [Mr. Linder] and all of his side have an opportunity to speak 
and ask questions at that time?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is not ruling on that at this 
point. It would be appropriate to bring up at a later time.
  Mr. LINDER. Madam Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. LINDER. Madam Speaker, I have just heard several Members speak on 
the floor of the House with respect to matters that they claim the 
Ethics Committee is doing or not doing with regard to claims made 
against the Speaker. Is it appropriate, under the rules of the House, 
to refer to matters that are before the Ethics Committee when no one is 
supposed to know what they are discussing?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will respond to the gentleman's 
parliamentary inquiry as follows:
  It is an essential rule of decorum in debate that Members should 
refrain from references in debate to the conduct of other Members where 
such conduct is not the question actually pending before the House by 
way of a report from the Committee on Standards of Official conduct or 
by way of another question of the privileges of the House. This 
principle is documented on pages 168 and 526 of the House Rules and 
Manual and reflects the consistent rulings of the Chair in this and in 
prior Congresses and applies to 1-minute and special order speeches.
  Neither the filing of a complaint before the Committee on Standards 
of Official Conduct, nor the publication in another forum of charges 
that are personally critical of another Member, justify the references 
to such charges on the floor of the House. This includes references to 
the motivations of Members who file complaints and to Members of the 
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

  Clause 1 of rule 14 is a prohibition against engaging in personality 
in debate. It derives from article I, section 5 of the Constitution, 
which authorizes each House to make its own rules and to punish its 
Members for disorderly behavior, and has been part of the rules of the 
House in some relevant form since 1789. This rule supersedes any claim 
of a Member to be free from questioning in any other place.

[[Page H6855]]

  On January 27, 1909, the House adopted a report that stated the 
following:

       It is ... the duty of the House to require its Members in 
     speech or debate to preserve that proper restraint which will 
     permit the House to conduct its business in an orderly manner 
     and without unnecessarily and unduly exciting animosity among 
     its Members--(Cannon's Precedents, volume 8, at section 
     2497).

  This report was in response to improper references in debate to the 
President, but clearly reiterated a principle that all occupants of the 
Chair in this and in prior Congresses have held to be equally 
applicable to members's remarks in debate toward each other.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, I have a further parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, in view of the Chair's statement, what 
mechanism exists under the rules for a Member of the House to bring to 
the attention here on the floor of the House the failure of the Ethics 
Committee to explore fully and thoroughly ethical complaints that have 
been pending for over 6 months against Speaker Gingrich?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Proper questions of privilege may be brought 
before the House. This is not now a forum, however, to restate 
allegations where there is not pending a parliamentary privilege.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, is the privileged resolution that the 
gentleman from Florida, Mr. Harry Johnston, has filed for consideration 
later today regarding the failure of the committee to thoroughly 
investigate these charges and refer them to a special counsel the type 
of motion that would be proper for presentation of these matters?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will rule on that at the time the 
resolution is brought to the floor. It is not properly before the House 
at this time.

                          ____________________