[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 110 (Tuesday, July 21, 2009)]
[House]
[Page H8434]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY

  Mr. PENCE. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pastor of Arizona). The gentleman from 
Indiana will state his inquiry.
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I would respectfully ask, as both I and my 
record were directly challenged by the distinguished majority leader on 
the floor, and given the fact that I've already utilized my 1 minute 
extended during the debate at the opening of this session, when a 
Member's record is challenged on the floor of the Congress, does a 
Member, under the Rules of the House, have the opportunity to obtain 
time when the distinguished majority leader refuses to yield time?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Only if someone yields to the gentleman.
  Mr. PENCE. Further parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, is it proper for a Member to direct an entire 
address to another Member of the body as opposed to the Chair or the 
Speaker?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members must direct their remarks to the 
Chair, not to others in the second person.
  Mr. PENCE. Further parliamentary inquiry, if I may.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will be heard.
  Mr. PENCE. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, would it have been in order for 
the distinguished majority leader to raise questions about my record 
and the positions that I've taken here in the Congress during the 
course of my career in the context of floor debate under these rules?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot issue an advisory opinion 
on a question of order not timely presented.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the 
gentleman from Indiana be allowed to address the statement that was 
made by the majority leader.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Has the gentleman from Indiana previously 
been recognized for a 1-minute?
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Is there a rule that prohibits this body from 
agreeing to a unanimous consent request to allow a Member to be 
recognized?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman seeking recognition to 
speak for 1 minute?
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I am recognized for a parliamentary 
inquiry, as I understand it. My parliamentary inquiry is: Does there 
exist a rule that prohibits a Member from being recognized to speak 
under a unanimous consent request?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a matter of recognition. As the 
Chair stated before, if the gentleman has already had a 1-minute, he is 
not allowed a second.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair could recognize for a unanimous 
consent request that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out 
of order.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the 
gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out of order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would entertain that request from 
the gentleman from Indiana.

                          ____________________