[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 10, Chapter 28 (Sections 1-24), Volume 11, Chapter 28 (Sections 25-end, plus index)]
[Chapter 28. Amendments and the Germaneness Rule]
[A. General Principles]
[Â§ 10. Specific Amendments to General Propositions; Amendments as Within Scope]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 8033-8064]
 
                               CHAPTER 28
 
                  Amendments and the Germaneness Rule
 
                         A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
[[Page 7385]]
 
Sec. 10. Specific Amendments to General Propositions; Amendments as 
    Within Scope

    A general subject may be amended by specific propositions of the 
same class.(14) Thus, where a bill has a broad objective, an 
amendment prescribing a specific endeavor may be germane; 
(15) and where a bill seeks to accomplish a general purpose, 
by diverse methods, an amendment providing a specific method has been 
held germane.(16) Similarly, to a proposition conferring a 
broad authority to accomplish a particular result, an amendment 
authorizing and directing a specific approach to be taken in the 
exercise of such authority is germane.(17) The precedents 
included in this section are those in which the issue of germaneness 
was raised following the introduction of an amendment, relatively 
narrow in its terms, during consideration of a proposition of a more 
comprehensive nature. The question to be decided in such cases, of 
course, is whether the amendment falls within the scope of the broader 
subject or subjects addressed in the proposition sought to be amended. 
The section includes several examples of amendments which can be seen 
to comprise subtopics of the broader topic covered in the bill to which 
offered. (18)

[[Page 8034]]

                          -------------------14. Compare the principles 
        stated in Sec. 9, supra.
15. See Sec. 10.10, infra.
16. See Sec. 10.12, infra.
17. See Sec. 10.10, infra.
18. See, for example, Sec. 10.14, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Defining a Term in Bill

Sec. 10.1 An amendment defining a term in a bill may be germane so long 
    as it relates to the bill and not to portions of laws being amended 
    which are not the subject of the bill; thus, to a bill amending 
    several laws only to clarify the definition of a recipient of 
    federal financial assistance who by practicing discrimination 
    becomes subject to the penalties of those laws, an amendment to 
    expand the definition of recipient persons to include unborn 
    children from the moment of conception, but not expanding the 
    definition of persons who are the objects of discrimination, was 
    held germane as merely defining a term in the bill and not relating 
    to terms of the law not amended by the bill.

    During consideration of the Civil Rights Act of 1984 
(19) in the Committee of the Whole on June 26, 1984, the 
Chair held the following amendment to be germane:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. H.R. 5490.
20. 130 Cong. Rec. 18865, 18866, 98th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Mark] Siljander [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Siljander: Page 10, after line 22, 
        insert the following:
            Sec. 6. For the purposes of this act, the term ``person'' 
        shall include unborn children from the moment of conception.

        Mr. [Paul] Simon [of Illinois]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of 
    order against the amendment.
        This is different in wording from the previous amendment 
    (1) but the same point of order rests against this 
    amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. The previous amendment was ruled out as not germane since it 
        enlarged the class of persons covered under the Act being 
        amended by the bill. See Sec. 35.65, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        It is an attempt to expand with a new definition beyond the 
    scope of this act. It is not germane as the previous amendment was 
    not germane. . . .
        Mr. Siljander: Chapter 28 of the procedures of the House, 
    section 9.12, says ``. . . to a bill containing definitions of 
    several of the terms used therein, an amendment modifying one of 
    the definitions and adding another may be germane.''
        On page 3, on page 6 and page 8 and page 10 the word ``person'' 
    is used, which is substantially different from the former 
    amendment.
        I yield to the chairman.
        The Chairman: (2) The Chair is prepared to rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Al Swift (Wash.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        On page 8, line 24, the bill uses the term ``person.''
        In the gentleman's amendment he says for the purposes of this 
    bill the term ``person'' shall, and defines the term ``person'' 
    and, therefore, the amendment is germane.

[[Page 8035]]

Bill Admitting Displaced Persons as Permanent Residents--Amendment 
    Defining ``Displaced Persons''

Sec. 10.2 To a bill to authorize the admission of displaced persons 
    into the United States for permanent residence, an amendment 
    providing that the term ``displaced person'' include persons of 
    German ethnic origin, who prior to Apr. 21, 1947, were transferred 
    or fled to Germany or Austria from Poland or certain other 
    countries was held germane.

    In the 80th Congress, a bill (3) was under consideration 
to authorize admission into the United States of displaced persons. The 
following amendment was offered to the bill: (4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. H.R. 6396 (Committee on the Judiciary).
 4. 94 Cong. Rec. 7871, 80th Cong. 2d Sess., June 11, 1948.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Charles J.] Kersten of Wisconsin:
        Amend H.R. 6396 on page 2 by inserting after the semicolon in 
    line 14, the following: . . . [T]he term ``displaced person'' shall 
    also include a person of German ethnic origin, who prior to April 
    21, 1947, was transferred or fled to Germany or Austria from 
    Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, or Yugoslavia, provided 
    that such person is otherwise qualified as a displaced person under 
    the provisions of this act.
        And further amend H.R. 6396 by [providing that] for the 
    purposes of this subsection persons of German ethnic origin who are 
    referred to in paragraph 4 of part II of annex I of the 
    constitution of the International Refugee Organization shall be 
    included as one of such elements or groups; and (that) the number 
    of such persons to whom visas may be issued shall not exceed 
    100,000.

    A point of order was raised against the amendment, as follows:

        Mr. [Emanuel] Celler [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I make the 
    point of order that the amendment is not germane to the bill. In a 
    word, it provides that those of German ethnic origin, regardless of 
    their place of birth, shall be admissible under our quota laws. Our 
    quota laws are based upon the theory of national origin, and that 
    the place of birth governs the quota. This amendment would change 
    the theory of our immigration laws and provide that ethnic blood 
    would determine the quota rather than place of birth.
        For that reason the amendment is not germane to this bill which 
    has for its purpose the solving of the displaced-persons problem 
    regardless of quotas.

    In defending the amendment, the proponent, Mr. Kersten, stated:

        Mr. Chairman, there is no reference whatsoever in my amendment 
    to

[[Page 8036]]

    quotas. There is merely a reference to the definition as contained 
    in the Fellows bill of the International Refugee Organization. It 
    merely pertains to the description of displaced persons. There is 
    no attempt to alter the immigration laws whatsoever. It merely 
    pertains to the definition of displaced persons.
        The Chair will note that in the bill as it is presented to the 
    House the description of a displaced person refers to the 
    definition contained in the IRO. My amendment merely affects that 
    section of the bill and is not an attempt to alter the immigration 
    laws.

    The Chairman, (5) in ruling on the point of order, 
stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. George A. Dondero (Mich.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair is of the opinion that the language of the 
    gentleman's amendment does apply to displaced persons.
        The point of order is overruled.

Armed Services: More Precise Definition or Description of Terms in Bill

Sec. 10.3 To that paragraph of the Selective Service Act of 1948 
    declaring that the obligation of military service should be shared 
    generally in accordance with a fair and just system of selection, 
    an amendment proposing to add the words, ``and without 
    discrimination in selection or service, or segregation on account 
    of race, creed, color, or national origin'' was held to be germane.

    In the 80th Congress, a bill (6) was under consideration 
which stated in part: (7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. H.R. 6401 (Committee on Armed Services).
 7. See 94 Cong. Rec. 8388, 80th Cong. 2d Sess., June 15, 1948.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        (e) The Congress further declares that in a free society the 
    obligations and privileges of (military) service should be shared 
    generally in accordance with a fair and just system of selection as 
    hereinafter provided.

    An amendment was offered (8) as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. Id. at p. 8389.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mississippi, raised the point of order that 
the amendment was not germane. In defense of the amendment, the 
proponent stated as follows:

        Mr. [Jacob K.] Javits [of New York]: . . . (T)he bill itself 
    provides that service should be shared in accordance with a fair 
    and just system of selection. I respectfully submit that the 
    amendment I have offered stated in more specific terms what is a 
    fair and just system of selection.

    The Chairman,(9) in ruling on the point of order, 
stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Francis H. Case (S.D.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair is of the opinion that the language proposed by the 
    amendment clearly follows the suggestion of a fair and just system 
    in the declaration of policy. The Chair therefore overrules the 
    point of order.

[[Page 8037]]

Adding Another Finding to Bill Containing Diverse Findings and Purposes

Sec. 10.4 To that portion of a bill containing diverse findings and 
    purposes related to a general subject, an amendment adding another 
    finding or purpose related to that subject is germane; thus, to a 
    title of a bill establishing a new Department of Education, stating 
    a wide range of findings and educational purposes for the creation 
    of the Department, including a finding that there is a need to 
    insure equal access to educational opportunities, an amendment 
    adding the finding that no individual should be denied such 
    opportunities by regulations which utilize quotas or other 
    numerical formulas based on race, creed, color, national origin or 
    sex, was held germane as adding a related finding to the diverse 
    class of educational policies stated in the title.

    On June 12, 1979,(10) during consideration of the 
Department of Education Organization Act of 1979 (11) in the 
Committee of the Whole, the Chair overruled a point of order and held 
the following amendment to be germane:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 125 Cong. Rec. 14460, 96th Cong. 1st Sess.
11. H.R. 2444.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert S.] Walker [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Chairman, I offer 
    an amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Walker: On page 54, in line 21, 
        strike out the ``;'', and insert the following: ``and that no 
        individual should be denied such education opportunities by 
        rules, regulations, standards, guidelines, and orders which 
        utilize any ratio, quota, or other numerical requirement 
        related to race, creed, color, national origin or sex.''. . .

        Mr. [Frank] Horton [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I raise a point 
    of order against this amendment, since it is on a subject that is 
    different from that which is under consideration and, thus, it 
    fails to meet the test that is imposed by rule 16, clause 7.
        We are considering a reorganization statute, that is H.R. 2444, 
    within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Government Operations. 
    That committee has reported this bill.
        The gentleman is introducing a new subject by way of his 
    amendment which affects education programs. If such an amendment 
    were introduced as a bill, it would not even be referred to the 
    Committee on Government Operations.
        In order to be germane, an amendment must have the same 
    fundamental purpose as the bill under consideration. The purpose of 
    H.R. 2444 deals only with the organizational structure of a new 
    Department of Education.

[[Page 8038]]

        The amendment raises a controversial subject of public policy 
    and gets into substantive issues. Thus, the fundamental purpose of 
    the amendment is not germane to the fundamental purpose of the 
    bill. . . .
        This amendment goes into substantive issues which are not 
    involved in this committee. We have had no hearings on this 
    subject; we have had no opportunity to discuss it; we have had no 
    testimony on it. Whether I agree with the position of the gentleman 
    is something else. I tend to agree with the gentleman's personal 
    views. However, it is not something that is involved in the bill in 
    the creation of a new Department. Somewhere we must draw the line 
    as to what is germane in this bill. This in my judgment is not 
    germane, it is not involved with the organization of this 
    Department and therefore I urge that the amendment be ruled out of 
    order. . . .
        Mr. Walker: . . . I would say that [the amendment] is germane 
    in its own right. What I am simply doing in this particular 
    amendment is further defining findings which are already stated 
    under the findings and purposes section of this bill.
        The present findings says:

            There is a continuous need to insure equal access for all 
        Americans to educational opportunities of high quality.

        All this language does is expand upon that particular 
    phraseology by saying that no individual should be denied such 
    educational opportunities by rules, regulations, standards, 
    guidelines, or orders which utilize any ratio, quota, or other 
    numerical requirement related to race, creed, color, national 
    origin or sex.
        It simply defines material which is already stated in the bill. 
    . . .
        The Chairman: (12) The Chair is prepared to rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Lucien N. Nedzi (Mich.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair would like to remind the Member that title I of H.R. 
    2444 in section 102 contains a diverse statement of purposes and 
    findings applicable to the newly created Department of Education. 
    These findings, while not affecting or creating new authorities 
    which are to be transferred to the Department, are extremely 
    diverse in character and emphasize several aspects of the question 
    of the extent of Federal Government involvement in educational 
    programs. Since it is difficult to group into one class all of the 
    stated purposes and findings for the new Department, and since the 
    pending amendment does not directly address new substantive 
    authorities to be conferred upon or withheld from the Department, 
    the Chair will rule that the amendment stating an additional 
    finding relative to Federal educational policy is germane to title 
    I of the bill.
        The Chair would cite a relevant precedent contained in Cannon's 
    precedents, volume VIII, section 3011, where, to a section 
    embodying a declaration of policy and including a number of 
    purposes, an amendment proposing to incorporate an additional 
    purpose was held germane. There, the Chair emphasized that the 
    declaration of policy section did not have any particular effect 
    upon the bill, and that the section contained several diverse 
    proposals.
        Accordingly, the Chair overrules the point of order, and the 
    gentleman from

[[Page 8039]]

    Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his 
    amendment.

Military Procurement, Including Food--Establishment of Department of 
    Defense Grain Reserve

Sec. 10.5 To an amendment in the nature of a substitute authorizing 
    appropriations for diverse military procurement programs for one 
    fiscal year, including provisions relating to purchase of food 
    supplies, an amendment authorizing establishment in that fiscal 
    year of a military preparedness grain reserve was held germane as 
    confined to military procurement and as a more specific 
    authorization within the general authorization contained in the 
    substitute.

    During consideration of H.R. 6030 (13) in the Committee 
of the Whole on July 20, 1982,(14) the Chair, in overruling 
a point of order against an amendment, demonstrated that a general 
proposition may be amended by a proposition more specific in scope if 
within the same class:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. The Military Procurement Authorization, fiscal 1983.
14.  128 Cong. Rec. 17073, 17074, 17092, 17093, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Ronald V.] Dellums [of California]: Mr. Chairman, I offer 
    an amendment in the nature of a substitute.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. 
        Dellums. Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in 
        lieu thereof the following:

                                  short title

            Section 1. This Act may be cited as the ``Department of 
        Defense Authorization Act, 1983''.

                      TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                        authorization of appropriations

            Sec. 301. (a) Funds are hereby authorized to be 
        appropriated for fiscal year 1983 for the military functions of 
        the Department of Defense for operation and maintenance in the 
        amount of $62,267,000,000. . . .

        Mr. [James] Weaver [of Oregon]: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Weaver to the amendment in the 
        nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Dellums: On page 14, 
        after line 21, insert a new section 902:
            The Secretary is hereby authorized to establish a military 
        preparedness grain reserve. The sum of $2,000,000,000 is hereby 
        authorized to be appropriated in fiscal year 1983 to purchase 
        corn, wheat, and soybeans and to construct storage facilities. 
        The Secretary may use for guidance in such purchases the 
        amounts of corn, wheat, and soybeans purchased by the Union of 
        Soviet Socialist Republics in calendar year 1982. . . .

        Mr. [William L.] Dickinson [of Alabama]: I make the point of 
    order, Mr.

[[Page 8040]]

    Chairman, that the amendment is not germane to the authorization 
    bill now under discussion.
        Mr. Chairman, I can hardly add to that. This authorizes the 
    Secretary to establish a grain reserve of some $2 billion for the 
    purchase of grain. As a matter of fact, if the soybeans are bought 
    from the Second District of Alabama, it might improve our economy, 
    but I think this is not germane to the authorization matters under 
    discussion, and I make a point of order against it. . . .
        Mr. Weaver: Mr. Chairman, I simply say that the amendment in 
    the nature of a substitute contains, as does the bill before us, 
    authorization to purchase food supplies for the military. This is 
    just an additional procurement, a reserve of food supplies for the 
    military.
        The Chairman Pro Tempore: (15) The Chair is prepared 
    to rule on the gentleman's point of order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Les AuCoin (Ore.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair views the amendment as described by its author as an 
    additional fiscal year 1983 military procurement amendment which 
    does not affect any law or program within another committee's 
    jurisdiction. The amendment is germane, the point of order is 
    overruled and the gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes 
    in support of his amendment.

Bill Mandating Diverse Studies--Amendment Directing Specific 
    Investigations

Sec. 10.6 To a bill requiring that a certain percentage of automobiles 
    sold in the United States be manufactured domestically, imposing an 
    import restriction on any person violating that requirement, and 
    including diverse studies of the impact of the bill and of factors 
    that affect domestic production of automobile products, an 
    amendment directing the study of the impact of currency exchange 
    rates on vehicle manufacturers and on domestic production of 
    automotive products was held germane as a further study requirement 
    within the more general class of study already contained in the 
    bill.

    An example of the principle that a specific proposition may be 
germane to a proposition of the same class which is more general in 
scope may be found in the proceedings of Nov. 3, 1983,(16) 
during consideration of the Fair Practices and Procedures in Automotive 
Products Act of 1983. (17) The proceedings, wherein the 
Chair overruled a point of order against the amendment described above, 
were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 129 Cong. Rec. 30782, 30783, 98th Cong. 1st Sess.
17. H.R. 1234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [James J.] Florio [of New Jersey]: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.

[[Page 8041]]

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Florio: Page 36, after line 4 
        insert the following:

            sec. 11. study of impact of currency exchange rates on 
                  competitiveness among vehicle manufacturers.

            The Secretary shall promptly appoint a task force 
        consisting of the chief officers of the appropriate Federal 
        agencies to study the impact of unbalanced and fluctuating 
        rates of currency exchange on vehicle manufacturers and on the 
        extent to which such rates affect domestic production of 
        automotive products for sale and distribution in interstate 
        commerce. The Secretary shall report to the Congress, within 
        one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, on 
        findings of the task force. The report shall include such 
        recommendations as the task force deems appropriate for 
        promoting fair competition among vehicle manufacturers. . . .

        Mr. [Bill] Frenzel [of Minnesota]: . . . Mr. Chairman, I 
    believe this amendment is subject to a point of order. Again, I 
    cite rule XVI, clause 7, the germaneness rule.
        Under the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
    (Mr. Florio), we have a Secretary of Transportation appointing a 
    task force of the chief officers of the appropriate Federal 
    agencies to study the impact of fluctuating rates of currency on 
    vehicle manufacturers, and on the extent to which rates affect 
    competition.
        This business of the rates of currency and the fluctuation 
    thereof is a matter that has been studied by competent agencies: 
    The Department of the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and others.
        It is not within the competence of the Secretary of 
    Transportation, nor is it within this committee's jurisdiction.
        As a matter of fact, the exchange rate is something that is a 
    shared jurisdiction among a number of committees, probably Banking, 
    undoubtedly Foreign Affairs, and certainly the gentleman's own 
    committee and probably Ways and Means as well.
        In any case, it does not direct itself toward the bill which 
    again is talking about domestic content, not about the yen-dollar 
    rate.
        As a matter of fact, the bill solves the yen-dollar problem by 
    simply not admitting Japanese automobiles. . . .
        [The amendment] is not germane to the item in question which is 
    the domestic content of automobiles sold in the United States.
        The purpose of this bill is to keep any yen values out of the 
    United States, and, therefore, this amendment can have no 
    relationship to the main bill. . . .
        Mr. Florio: . . . Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that section 4 
    provides for an advisory council to undertake an analysis for the 
    factors impacting on the domestic production of the automobile 
    products for sale and distribution in interstate commerce. That 
    language is tracked in this amendment and accordingly, it is within 
    the scope of the bill and is germane. . . .
        Mr. [James T.] Broyhill [of North Carolina]: . . . Mr. 
    Chairman, the issues concerning currencies are not within the 
    purview of this bill as presently contained in this bill, and the 
    studies that are requested by this amendment are not consistent 
    with the studies that are requested by the bill.

[[Page 8042]]

        As has been pointed out already, the bill deals with the 
    production of the automobiles and deals with the percentage of 
    domestic content of those automobiles that are produced in the 
    United States, and has nothing to do with any determination of the 
    value of the dollar versus foreign currencies.
        The Chairman: (18) . . . [T]he test of germaneness 
    is whether the amendment relates to the basic subject matter 
    covered by the bill. The bill on page 20, section 4, calls for a 
    domestic automotive product strategy study. In part, the strategy 
    that is to be developed by the Secretary is to consider on a 
    regular basis, and I quote section (B) of section 4:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Leon E. Panetta (Calif.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Those factors that significantly affect domestic production 
        of automotive products for sale and distribution in interstate 
        commerce.

        The amendment that has been presented by the gentleman from New 
    Jersey (Mr. Florio) refers to a study on currency rates that, and 
    again, I quote from the amendment: ``. . . affect domestic 
    production of automotive products for sale and distribution in 
    interstate commerce,'' and, therefore, tracks the same language 
    that is included within the bill itself.

        Therefore, it is the finding of the Chair that the amendment is 
    germane, and the point of order is not sustained.

Bill Funding Diverse Studies--Amendment Authorizing Specific Inquiry

Sec. 10.7 Where existing law requires a Department to study and 
    recommend changes in all laws on an annual basis to encourage 
    energy conservation, an amendment to an annual authorization bill 
    for that Department directing it to study and recommend changes in 
    one category of laws with funds covered by the bill was held 
    germane as confined to the fiscal year covered by the bill and as a 
    specific direction within the general category of duties required 
    by existing law.

    On Oct. 18, 1979, (19) the Committee of the Whole had 
under consideration a bill (20) authorizing appropriations 
for the Department of Energy for one fiscal year, including funds for 
conservation programs of the Department. An amendment was offered to 
the bill, adding a new title authorizing appropriations for the same 
fiscal year for a study of legislative proposals for energy tax credits 
introduced in the 96th Congress, including an assessment of the costs 
to the United States and the savings in energy through such proposals. 
The amendment was held to be germane since confined to the use of funds 
for the

[[Page 8043]]

appropriate fiscal year, and since the Department of Energy had the 
responsibility under existing law, in carrying out its conservation 
programs, to annually study and recommend changes in all laws to 
encourage energy conservation. The amendment stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 125 Cong. Rec. 28763, 28764, 96th Cong. 1st Sess.
20. H.R. 3000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. Clinger: Page 41, after line 24, 
    insert a new title IV as follows and renumber the following titles 
    accordingly.

                                  TITLE IV

                              tax credit study

        Sec. 401. (a) There is authorized to be appropriated to the 
    Department of Energy for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1980, 
    not to exceed $38,500 to conduct the study under subsection (b).
        (b) The Secretary of Energy shall conduct a study to assess the 
    various proposals for Federal tax credits for residential coal-
    heating equipment, as contained in legislation introduced in the 
    Congress during the 96th session. The study shall include an 
    estimate of the costs to the United States of the various tax 
    credit proposals and an evaluation of the possible savings in 
    consumption of heating oil and natural gas that would result from 
    the proposals. Not later than one year after the date of the 
    enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the 
    Congress a report of the results of the study. . . .
        Mr. [John D.] Dingell [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order that the amendment is not germane.
        Mr. Chairman, the legislation before us, H.R. 4839, is a 1-year 
    authorization bill for the Department of Energy. It is an 
    authorization bill which relates to the energy activities of the 
    Department of Energy, as opposed to taxable matters and taxes.
        The amendment is not germane for several reasons. The first is 
    that it relates to matters other than energy, in that it directs a 
    study with regard to tax credits. Nowhere in the proposal before 
    us, Mr. Chairman, do we find anything relating to tax credits in 
    the legislation. . . .
        I would point out that the Secretary of Energy, according to 
    the language of the amendment in paragraph (b) is directed to 
    conduct a study to assess various proposals for Federal tax credits 
    for residential coal heating equipment as contained in the 
    legislation in the Congress. I now quote: ``During the 96th 
    session.''
        Now, I assume that refers to the 96th Congress. The 96th 
    Congress will be for this fiscal year, plus portions of the 
    succeeding fiscal year.
        I would observe that if the study includes matters which were 
    introduced during the 96th Congress, it will include matters which 
    were introduced after the conclusion of the fiscal year in which we 
    find ourselves and after the conclusion of the period covered by 
    the authorization proposal.
        The amendment further in its last three lines says as follows:

            Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act, . . .

        That mandates actions by the Secretary of Energy 1 year after 
    the date of enactment of this statute, which

[[Page 8044]]

    would be whatever date it might be, but it would be 1 year after at 
    least probably the conclusion of the fiscal year in question. Again 
    I recall to the Chair the fact that the proposal before us is a 1-
    year authorization bill and that this mandates actions by the 
    Secretary well after the conclusion of the period covered in the 1-
    year authorization bill which is before the committee.
        For that reason, I believe that the amendment is nongermane. I 
    would urge that position on the Chair. . . .
        Mr. [Abraham] Kazen [Jr., of Texas]: Mr. Chairman, I would . . 
    . urge upon the Chair the fact that this proposal is very vague and 
    indefinite, in that the study shall be based on all legislation 
    which may be introduced in the 96th Congress, which is an 
    impossibility for the Secretary to undertake, since all of the 
    proposals in the 96th Congress have not yet been introduced and 
    there is no limit to when they can be introduced before the end of 
    the 96th Congress and the impossibility of meeting this 1-year 
    deadline is within the ambiguity of this amendment.
        Therefore, for that reason, Mr. Chairman, I urge that the point 
    of order be sustained. . . .
        The Chairman Pro Tempore: (1) The Chair is prepared 
    to rule. The amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
    directs the Secretary of Energy with funds separately authorized by 
    the amendment for fiscal year 1980 to conduct a study to assess 
    legislative proposals introduced in the 96th Congress which 
    provides Federal tax credits for residential coat heating equipment 
    in order to evaluate the costs of those proposals and possible 
    savings in the consumption of heating oil and natural gas that 
    would result therefrom.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Gerry E. Studds (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Secretary shall report his findings not later than 1 year 
    after enactment.
        The possibility that the study might not be completed within 
    the fiscal year 1980 does not seem to the Chair to be crucial in 
    this case, since the study is only to be funded by fiscal year 1980 
    funds and since other activities of the Department of Energy funded 
    by the bill for fiscal year 1980 are ongoing in nature and could 
    also involve continued participation beyond September 30, 1980.
        A more central question is the issue of the tax study. While 
    ordinarily revenue matters are within the jurisdiction of the 
    Committee on Ways and Means and would not be germane to a bill 
    reported by another committee, in the present case the Department 
    of Energy is mandated by its organic statute (Public Law 95-91) to 
    annually study and recommend changes in all laws and regulations 
    needed to encourage more conservation of energy.
        The Chair would also observe that title III, which the 
    committee has already dealt with, does address the issue of energy 
    conservation programs in the Department.
        As a new title, the amendment imposes upon the Secretary of 
    Energy for fiscal year 1980 a more specific responsibility to study 
    energy conservation consequences of certain tax proposals than 
    those currently required by law, but nevertheless a responsibility 
    within the ambit of the Secretary's existing authority and confined 
    to the fiscal year covered by the titles of the bill read to this 
    point.

[[Page 8045]]

        The Chair would further observe that the observation made by 
    the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Kazen) are addressed to the merits 
    and the substance of the amendment rather than to its germaneness.
        The Chair, therefore, overrules the point of order.

Bill Relating to Conversion From Oil and Gas to Coal--Amendment 
    Providing for Assistance to Industry for Construction of Coal 
    Liquefaction Facilities

Sec. 10.8 To a bill designed to increase supplies of fossil fuels, and 
    increase the use of domestic energy supplies other than petroleum 
    through conversion to coal, and containing an entire title dealing 
    with industrial conversion from oil and gas to coal, an amendment 
    adding a new title providing government loans and other assistance 
    to private industry for the construction and operation of 
    facilities for the liquefaction and gasification of coal was held 
    germane as within the scope of the bill.

    On Sept. 18, 1975, (2) the Committee of the Whole having 
under consideration the Energy Conservation and Oil Policy Act of 1975 
(H.R. 7014), an amendment was offered to add a new title to the bill to 
which a point of order was raised and overruled. The proceedings were 
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 121 Cong. Rec. 29338-41, 94th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Tim Lee] Carter [of Kentucky]: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment in the form of a new title to title VIII.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Carter: On page 356, line 6, 
        insert the following new Title and renumber subsequent Titles 
        accordingly:

         TITLE VIII--COAL GASIFICATION AND LIQUEFACTION DEVELOPMENT

            Sec. 801. (a) The Administrator shall establish a program 
        of assistance to private industry for the construction and 
        operation of one or more facilities for the liquefaction and 
        gasification of coal. In order to effectuate such program, the 
        Administrator may make loans and issue guarantees to any person 
        for the purpose of engaging in the commercial operation of 
        facilities designed for the liquefaction or gasification of 
        coal.
            (b)(1) For the purpose of making loans or issuing 
        guarantees under this section, the Administrator shall consider 
        (A) the technology to be used by the person to whom the loan or 
        guarantee is made or issued, (B) the production expected, (C) 
        reasonable prospect for repayment of the loans. . . .
            Sec. 802. (a) The Administrator is authorized . . .
            (3) Each lease shall further provide that the lessee shall 
        have options to purchase the facilities at any time within ten 
        years after the date of the respective lease at a price to be 
        agreed upon by the parties. Each

[[Page 8046]]

        option shall be conditioned, however, upon the right of the 
        Administrator within the ten-year term to offer the facilities 
        for sale at public auction and the lessee shall be entitled to 
        purchase the facilities if he meets the highest bona fide offer 
        in excess of the agreed option price. In order that an offer 
        may be considered bona fide, it shall be offered by a bidder 
        who shall have been determined by the Administrator to be 
        financially and technically qualified to purchase and operate 
        the facilities. . . .

        Mr. [John D.] Dingell [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I raise a 
    point of order that the amendment is not germane. . . .
        The point of order is as follows: A reading of the amendment 
    will show that under subsection 801(a), it would authorize a very 
    large program of loans and grants for the construction and 
    operation of facilities for the liquefaction and gasification of 
    coal.
        Nowhere else in the bill are there loans and grants, and 
    nowhere else in the bill are there provisions for that kind of 
    stimulus for the construction of facilities for the liquefaction or 
    gasification of coal.
        In addition to these loans and guarantees, the Administrator is 
    vested with authority to guarantee performance of contracts of 
    persons receiving loans from the administration for the purchase, 
    construction, and acquisition of equipment and supplies necessary 
    to construct and operate such a facility. This again, Mr. Chairman, 
    is not within the purview of the bill.
        In addition to this, construction plans and construction of 
    facilities, further down under (d)(2), could be financed in whole 
    or in part, including exploration and development.
        In addition to this, the possibility of exemptions and 
    exceptions from the air and water pollution laws are included under 
    (c)(2)(d), or, rather, under paragraph (d).
        To go along further, by no stretch of the imagination could my 
    colleagues be anticipated to anticipate an amendment of this kind 
    and character coming to this bill and relating to the air and water 
    pollution laws. Indeed the language is sufficiently broad to make 
    this exempt from State statutes, as well as from Federal statutes, 
    and that is a matter clearly not before the committee at this 
    particular time. Then we have the question of compliance with 
    Federal and State air pollution laws. . . .
        In addition to this, under section 802(a)(3), the amendment 
    provides for acquisition of private interests in all such 
    facilities as may have heretofore been constructed or acquired 
    relating to gasification of coal and other types of energy uses. 
    Again this goes far beyond the scope and sweep of the bill before 
    the committee.
        Again, under section 802(b)(1), these facilities could then be 
    leased or rented under conditions and terms as agreed on by and 
    between the parties, apparently without regard to existing Federal 
    statutes relating to the sale, leasing, or disposal of real estate, 
    and that is a matter which is under the jurisdiction of other 
    committees and which is the subject of control under other statutes 
    not presently before the House and not mentioned or alluded to in 
    the provisions of H.R. 7014 now before the committee. . . .
        Mr. [Clarence J.] Brown of Ohio: As much as I am reluctant to 
    do so, I

[[Page 8047]]

    would have to suggest to the chairman of the subcommittee that I 
    think that the gentleman's amendment is germane.
        I would like to cite the provisions of the purposes of the act, 
    section 102. Item (3) in that section says, ``to increase the 
    supply of fossil fuels in the United States, through price 
    incentives and production requirements.''

        The gentleman's amendment squares, it seems to me, specifically 
    with that. As the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Carter) has pointed 
    out, item (6) says ``to increase the use of domestic energy 
    supplies other than petroleum products and natural gas through 
    conversion to the use of coal.''
        This would certainly encourage the use of coal.
        Section 606 in the bill provides similar incentives to those 
    provided by the amendment of the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
    Carter) for coal mines. Pollution requirements would not be 
    overridden by the legislation or the legislative modification of 
    the gentleman from Kentucky unless specified, that is, those 
    existing pollution requirements would not be overridden unless they 
    were specified in the amendment, and they are not specified in the 
    amendment. They would, therefore, continue to apply.
        It seems to me that the amendment of the gentleman from 
    Kentucky specifically does encourage the development and use of 
    additional fossil fuels by the various provisions in his amendment 
    and that those provisions are in the bill and have been added by 
    other amendments, and, therefore, would be germane to this 
    legislation.
        The Chairman: (3) The Chair is ready to rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        For substantially the reasons just outlined by the gentleman 
    from Ohio (Mr. Brown), and in view of the fact that title III has 
    several provisions going to the general issue of maximizing 
    availability of energy supplies, including coal, and, as pointed 
    out, title VI encourages industrial conversion from oil and gas to 
    coal, for example, by a similar loan guarantee mechanism as 
    proposed in the amendment, the Chair finds that the amendment 
    inserting a new title is germane to the bill under consideration 
    and overrules the point of order.

Bill Authorizing Broad Program of Energy Research and Development--
    Amendment Directing Specific Emphasis

Sec. 10.9 To a bill authorizing a broad program of research and 
    development, an amendment directing specific emphasis during the 
    administration of that program is germane; thus, to a portion of a 
    bill directing the Administrator of Energy Research and Development 
    to undertake research and development of the uses of energy from 
    several enumerated or other energy sources, an amendment directing 
    a fully funded program of research and development in 
    ``unconventional energy sources and technologies'' and further 
    delineating those energy

[[Page 8048]]

    sources to be emphasized was held germane.

    During consideration of H.R. 11510 (4) in the Committee 
of the Whole on Dec. 19, 1973,(5) Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, 
of Illinois, overruled a point of order against the following 
amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. The Energy Reorganization Act of 1973.
 5. 119 Cong. Rec. 42607, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Morris K.] Udall [of Arizona]: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Udall: Page 33, lines 11-15, 
        strike subsection (3) and insert in lieu thereof a new 
        subsection (3) as follows:
            (3) conducting an aggressive and fully funded program of 
        energy research and development, including demonstration 
        projects, in unconventional energy sources and technologies 
        including but not limited to solar energy, geothermal energy, 
        magnetohydrodynamics, fuel cells, low head hydroelectric power, 
        use of agricultural products for energy, tidal power and 
        thermal gradient power, wind power, automated mining methods, 
        in situ conversion of fuels, cryogenic transmission of electric 
        power, electric energy storage methods, alternatives to the 
        internal combustion engine, solvent refined coal, shale oil, 
        coal gasification and liquefaction, utilization of waste 
        products for fuel, hydrogen gas systems, advanced power cycles 
        including gas turbines, and stack gas cleanup. . . .

        Mr. [Craig] Hosmer [of California]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order against the amendment on the ground it is not 
    germane, and seeks to invade the province of another committee, to 
    wit, the Committee on Appropriations and an authorizing committee, 
    in that it requires that such programs as are listed be fully 
    funded, and full funding is the province of another committee, or 
    partial funding or no funding. . . .
        The Chairman: The Chair will rule the amendment goes to the 
    sources of energy and to the types of research and development that 
    are in the bill and delineates further sources and programs. In 
    view of the broad scope of the legislation, the amendment is 
    germane.
        The Chair, therefore, overrules the point of order.

Provision Conferring Broad Authority--Amendment Directing Specific 
    Approach

Sec. 10.10 To a proposition conferring a broad authority to accomplish 
    a particular result, an amendment authorizing and directing a 
    specific approach to be taken in the exercise of such authority is 
    germane; thus, to a section of an amendment in the nature of a 
    substitute directing the president to minimize any adverse impact 
    upon employment because of actions taken under that Act to conserve 
    energy resources, an amendment authorizing grants to states for 
    assistance to individuals unem

[[Page 8049]]

    ployed as the result of administration of that Act and not eligible 
    for assistance under other unemployment compensation programs was 
    held to be germane.

    On Dec. 14, 1973,(6) during consideration of H.R. 11450 
(7) in the Committee of the Whole, it was demonstrated that 
a specific proposition is germane to a proposition more general in 
scope, Chairman Richard Bolling, of Missouri, holding an amendment to 
an amendment in the nature of a substitute to be germane, as indicated 
below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 119 Cong. Rec. 41732, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
 7. The Energy Emergency Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Sec. 122. Employment Impact and Worker Assistance

        (a) Carrying out his responsibilities under this Act, the 
    President shall take into consideration and shall minimize, to the 
    fullest extent practicable, any adverse impact of actions taken 
    pursuant to this Act upon employment. All agencies of government 
    shall cooperate fully under their existing statutory authority to 
    minimize any such adverse impact.
        (b) On or before the sixtieth day following the date of 
    enactment of this Act, the President shall report to the Congress 
    concerning the present and prospective impact of energy shortages 
    upon employment. Such report shall contain an assessment of the 
    adequacy of existing programs in meeting the needs of adversely 
    affected workers and shall include legislative recommendations 
    which the President deems appropriate to meet such needs, including 
    revisions in the unemployment insurance laws.
        Mr. [Ronald A.] Sarasin [of Connecticut]: Mr. Chairman, I offer 
    an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered 
    by the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Staggers).
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Sarasin to the amendment in the 
        nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Staggers: Page 44, after 
        line 12, insert the following:
            (b) The President is authorized and directed to make grants 
        to States to provide to any individual unemployed, if such 
        unemployment resulted from the administration and enforcement 
        of this Act and was in no way due to the fault of such 
        individual, such assistance as the President deems appropriate 
        while such individual is unemployed. Such assistance as a State 
        shall provide under such a grant shall be available to 
        individuals not otherwise eligible for unemployment 
        compensation and individuals who have otherwise exhausted their 
        eligibility for such unemployment compensation, and shall 
        continue as long as unemployment in the area caused by such 
        administration and enforcement continues (but not less than six 
        months) or until the individual is reemployed in a suitable 
        position, but not longer than two years after the individual 
        becomes eligible for such assistance. Such assistance shall not 
        exceed the maximum weekly amount under the unemployment 
        compensation program of the State in which the employment loss 
        occurred. . . .

        Mr. [John D.] Dingell [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of

[[Page 8050]]

    order against the amendment, that the amendment is not germane to 
    the bill.
        I make a point of order that the amendment is not germane to 
    the section. . . .
        Mr. [Sam M.] Gibbons [of Florida]: Mr. Chairman, my point in 
    supporting the point of order raised by the gentleman from Michigan 
    is that the Unemployment Compensation Act is not being amended in 
    any place in this act. The gentleman in the well is attempting to 
    amend the Unemployment Compensation Act.
        I happen to be rather familiar with it; it is one of the acts 
    that is within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means, 
    and I am sure it is not within the scope of this act at all. . . .
        Mr. Dingell: . . . As the Chair will note, the bill in 
    subsection (a) of section 122, which is amended, provides for the 
    President taking certain actions to minimize the impact of the 
    adverse effect of the act. In the second part, the President is 
    directed to perform a study.
        As the Chair will note, the amendment offered by my good friend 
    from Connecticut--and I commend him for offering it; it is an 
    amendment that appears to have a great deal of merit--but I would 
    point out it is not an amendment which is germane, because the 
    amendment directs the President and the States to provide for 
    individual unemployed and to make payments for unemployment.
        It relates to the eligibility of unemployed for compensation 
    and Federal grants which in turn support the unemployment 
    compensation, and also authorizes appropriations, which is not 
    authorized in the act before us.
        It is for those reasons, since some of the provisions are 
    carried elsewhere in the bill or in the section before us, it is 
    obvious the amendment is not germane. . . .
        Mr. Sarasin: . . . On line 7, page 44, the first section of 
    paragraph A, it says:

            Carrying out his responsibilities under this Act, the 
        President shall take into consideration and shall minimize, to 
        the fullest extent practicable, any adverse impact of actions 
        taken pursuant to this Act upon employment.

        It is the responsibility of various agencies. I do not see that 
    this amendment I have offered to authorize the President to make 
    grants to States providing assistance to any individual unemployed, 
    if such unemployment is resulting from the administration and 
    enforcement of this act, is nongermane.
        It would seem to me that it certainly is a logical extension of 
    what is in here within section 122 as it now stands.
        The Chairman: The Chair is ready to rule.
        The Chair will state that the section sought to be amended by 
    the amendment offered by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. 
    Sarasin), as he has just read it, directs the President, in 
    carrying out his responsibilities under this act, that he shall 
    take into consideration and shall minimize, to the fullest extent 
    practicable, any adverse impact of actions taken pursuant to this 
    act upon unemployment.
        The amendment does not amend another act. It seeks to provide 
    an authorization for a specific approach for the carrying out of 
    the broad authority bestowed upon the President to ``minimize'' 
    adverse impact of actions taken under the act.

[[Page 8051]]

        Therefore, the Chair overrules the point of order, and, under 
    clause 6 of rule XXIII, recognizes the gentleman for 5 minutes.

Mandate for Restrictive Policy in Purchase of Government Vehicles--
    Amendment Imposing Numerical Limitation

Sec. 10.11 To a portion of an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
    directing the president to require all government agencies to use 
    economy model motor vehicles, an amendment limiting the number of 
    ``fuel inefficient'' passenger motor vehicles which the government 
    could purchase was held germane as a further delineation of the 
    broad restriction imposed by the amendment in the nature of a 
    substitute.

    On Dec. 14, 1973,(8) during consideration of H.R. 11450 
(9) in the Committee of the Whole, Chairman Richard Bolling, 
of Missouri, overruled a point of order against the following 
amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 119 Cong. Rec. 41722, 41723, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
 9. The Energy Emergency Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Glenn M.] Anderson of California: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by 
    the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Staggers).
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Anderson of California to the 
        amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. 
        Staggers: On page 31, line 21, strike out the period and insert 
        the following:'', Provided, That the aggregate number of fuel 
        inefficient passenger motor vehicles purchased by all executive 
        agencies in fiscal year 1975 may not exceed 30 per centum of 
        the aggregate number of passenger motor vehicles purchased by 
        all executive agencies in such year; and the aggregate number 
        of fuel inefficient passenger motor vehicles purchased by all 
        executive agencies in fiscal year 1976 may not exceed 10 per 
        centum of the aggregate number of passenger motor vehicles 
        purchased by all executive agencies in such year. For purposes 
        of this subsection, the term ``fuel inefficient passenger motor 
        vehicle'' for fiscal year 1975 means an automobile which does 
        not achieve at least seventeen miles per gallon as certified by 
        the Department of Transportation; for fiscal year 1976, and 
        thereafter, the term ``fuel inefficient passenger motor 
        vehicle'' means an automobile which does not achieve at least 
        twenty miles per gallon, as certified by the Department of 
        Transportation.''. . .

        Mr. [James T.] Broyhill of North Carolina: . . . Mr. Chairman, 
    I make a point of order against this amendment, inasmuch as it 
    deals with the specifications of certain equipment on American-made 
    automobiles, and it is not under the jurisdiction of this 
    committee, nor under the jurisdiction of any committee of the 
    House. . . .
        Mr. Anderson of California: . . . Mr. Chairman, I would just 
    like to read a portion of the present bill. All we are doing is 
    extending the provisions of the bill.

[[Page 8052]]

        The present bill provides as follows:

            As an example to the rest of our Nation's automobile users, 
        the President of the United States shall take such action as is 
        necessary to require all agencies of government, where 
        practical, to use economy model motor vehicles.

        Mr. Chairman, we are simply amending and extending the same 
    provision.
        The Chairman: The Chair is prepared to rule.
        The Chair points out that taken as an isolated point, the 
    argument made by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Broyhill) 
    might have some validity, but the answer made by the gentleman from 
    California (Mr. Anderson) is in direct response to the point. The 
    subject is in the bill.
        The Chair, therefore, overrules the point of order.

Bill Creating Task Force To Investigate Relationship Between 
    Environmental Pollution and Certain Diseases--Amendment Directing 
    Task Force To Consider Impact of Personal Health Habits

Sec. 10.12 To that portion of a bill creating a task force to 
    investigate the relationship between environmental pollution and 
    cancer and heart and lung diseases, an amendment directing that 
    task force to consider the impact of personal health habits, 
    including cigarette smoking, on that relationship was held germane.

    On Sept. 15, 1976,(10) during consideration of the Clean 
Air Act Amendments of 1976 (11) in the Committee of the 
Whole, the Chair overruled a point of order against an amendment, 
demonstrating that to a proposition general in scope an amendment more 
limited and specific may be germane:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 122 Cong. Rec. 30496-98, 94th Cong. 2d Sess.
11. H.R. 10498.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Sec. 310. Title I of the Clean Air Act as amended by sections 
    107 and 108 is further amended by adding the following new subtitle 
    at the end thereof:

    ``Subtitle D--Prevention of Environmental Cancer and Heart and Lung 
                                  Disease

      ``PREVENTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CANCER AND HEART AND LUNG DISEASE

        ``Sec. 170. (a) Not later than three months after date of 
    enactment of this section, there shall be established a Task Force 
    on Environmental Cancer and Heart and Lung Disease (hereinafter 
    referred to as the ``Task Force''). The Task Force shall include 
    representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency, the 
    National Cancer Institute, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
    Institute, and the National Institute on Environmental Health 
    Sciences, and shall be chaired by the Administrator (or his 
    delegate).

[[Page 8053]]

        ``(b) The Task Force shall--
        ``(1) develop and implement a comprehensive research program to 
    determine and quantify the relationship between environmental 
    pollution and human cancer and heart and lung disease;
        ``(2) make recommendations for comprehensive strategies to 
    reduce or eliminate the risks of cancer (or such diseases) 
    associated with environmental pollution;
        ``(3) engage in such other research and recommend such other 
    measures as may be appropriate to prevent or reduce the incidence 
    of environmentally related cancer and heart and lung diseases. . . 
    .
        Mr. [Gary] Myers of Pennsylvania: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Myers of Pennsylvania: Page 331, 
        line 24, strike out the closing quotation marks and period and 
        insert:
            ``(c) In developing and implementing its research program 
        and making its recommendations, the Task Force shall consider 
        the impact of personal health habits, including tabacco 
        smoking, on the relationship between environmental pollution 
        and human cancer and heart and lung disease.''.
            Renumber succeeding sections accordingly. . . .

        Mr. [James T.] Broyhill [of North Carolina]: . . . [T]his 
    amendment would apply not to the standards and regulations that are 
    being promulgated by the Administrator of EPA, that is in regard to 
    the ambient air quality standards, but it would apply to 
    agricultural products such as tobacco. Thus I make the point of 
    order that the amendment is not germane to the title or to the bill 
    as written in that it imposes additional duties and functions on 
    the Administrator and directs him to make regulations on certain 
    products which are not within the purview of this bill and also 
    products which are generally thought to be under the jurisdiction 
    of other committees. . . .
        Mr. Myers of Pennsylvania: . . . This amendment deals with the 
    section of the bill which mandates a comprehensive study, and I 
    read from the section of the bill numbered section 170 which 
    indicates as follows:

            Not later than three months after date of enactment of this 
        section, there shall be established a Task Force on 
        Environmental Cancer and Heart and Lung Disease . . .

        On page 331 the bill goes on and some of the directions to the 
    task force are stated in this way:

            The Task Force shall--
            (1) develop and implement a comprehensive research program 
        to determine and quantify the relationship between 
        environmental pollution and human cancer and heart and lung 
        disease;

        Paragraph (2) indicates once again as follows, that the task 
    force shall:

            (2) make recommendations for comprehensive strategies to 
        reduce or eliminate the risks of cancer (or such diseases) 
        associated with environmental pollution;

        Also paragraph (3) of the bill says that the task force shall:

            (3) engage in such other research and recommend such other 
        measures as may be appropriate to prevent or reduce the 
        incidence of environmentally related cancer and heart and lung 
        diseases;

        Also paragraph (4) once again mentions appropriate studies and 
    says they

[[Page 8054]]

    shall be made to evaluate environmentally related cancer and heart 
    and lung diseases.
        Last week when we discussed the bill before the House I brought 
    up the fact that there appears to be a relationship between the use 
    of tobacco and habits such as smoking and the interrelationship of 
    environmental pollutants with the incidence of cancer. I see no way 
    in which a comprehensive study could be made without the outright 
    assumption by the Congress at this point that there is an 
    interrelationship because of the fact that there appear to be 
    statistics showing some relationship, and I do not think this 
    amendment directs the task force to do anything other than to be as 
    comprehensive as possible and not to ignore this facet. . . .
        The Chairman: (12) The Chair is prepared to rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. J. Edward Roush (Ind.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        A point of order has been made against an amendment offered by 
    the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Myers). The amendment inserts 
    the following language:

            (c) In developing and implementing its research program and 
        making its recommendations, the Task Force shall consider the 
        impact of personal health habits, including tobacco smoking, on 
        the relationship between environmental pollution and human 
        cancer and heart and lung disease.

        The section which this seeks to amend is entitled ``Prevention 
    of Environmental Cancer and Heart and Lung Disease.'' This section 
    imposes upon a task force a duty to make certain general findings.
        It occurs to the Chair that the amendment is a specific 
    proposition which is germane to a more general requirement imposed 
    within the bill itself and that it is within the categories of 
    findings which must be made by the task force.
        Therefore, the Chair is constrained to overrule the point of 
    order and does overrule the point of order.

Bill Providing Loan Guarantees to All States--Amendment Concerning 
    Loans to One State

Sec. 10.13 A general proposition may be amended by a related 
    proposition which is more limited or restricted in nature; thus, to 
    a bill providing loan guarantee programs for all states and 
    subdivisions, an amendment in the nature of a substitute providing 
    direct loans and limited to New York was held germane.

    The proceedings of Dec. 2, 1975, relating to H.R. 10481, the 
Intergovernmental Emergency Assistance Act, are discussed in 6.4, 
supra.

Comprehensive Grant Program--Restriction on State Funding Until 
    Specific Program Has Been Put in Operation

Sec. 10.14 To a bill authorizing the funding of a variety of

[[Page 8055]]

    programs which satisfy several stated requirements, in order to 
    accomplish a general purpose, an amendment conditioning the 
    availability of those funds upon implementation by their recipients 
    of another program related to that general purpose is germane; 
    thus, to a bill providing a comprehensive grant program for 
    improvement of state and local law enforcement and criminal justice 
    systems, including within its scope the subject of welfare of law 
    enforcement officers, an amendment requiring states to enact a law 
    enforcement officers' grievance system as a prerequisite to 
    receiving grants under the bill was held to come within the general 
    subject of law enforcement improvement covered by the bill and was 
    held germane.

    During consideration of the Law Enforcement Assistance 
authorization bill (13) in the Committee of the Whole on 
June 18, 1973,(14) the Chair overruled a point of order 
against the following amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. H.R. 8152.
14. 119 Cong. Rec. 20099-101, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendments offered by Mr. Biaggi: Page 15, line 8, strike 
        out ``and''.
            Page 15, immediately after line 8, insert the following:
            ``(13) provide a system for the receipt, investigation, and 
        determination of complaints and grievances submitted by law 
        enforcement officers of the State, units of general local 
        government and public agencies. . . .

        ``Part J--Law Enforcement Officers'' Grievance System and Bill 
                                   of Rights

            ``Sec. 701. Beginning one year after the date of enactment 
        of this section, no grant under part B or part C of this title 
        shall be made to any State, unit of general local government or 
        public agency unless such State, unit of general local 
        government, or public agency has established and put into 
        operation a system for the receipt, investigation, and 
        determination of complaints and grievances submitted by law 
        enforcement officers of the State, units of general local 
        government, and public agencies operating within the State and 
        has enacted into law a ``law enforcement officers'' bill of 
        rights' which includes in its coverage all law enforcement 
        officers of the State, units of general local government and 
        public agencies operating within the State.

                                ``Bill of Rights

            ``The law enforcement officers' bill of rights shall 
        provide law enforcement officers of such State, units of 
        general local government, and public agencies statutory 
        protection for certain rights enjoyed by other citizens. The 
        bill of rights shall provide, but shall not be limited to, the 
        following:
            ``(a) Political Activity by Law Enforcement Officers.--
        Except when on duty or when acting in his official capacity, no 
        law enforcement officer shall be prohibited from engaging in

[[Page 8056]]

        political activity or be denied the right to refrain from 
        engaging in political activity. . . .
            ``(i) In addition to any procedures available to law 
        enforcement officers regarding the filing of complaints and 
        grievances as established in this section, any law enforcement 
        officer may institute an action in a civil court to obtain 
        redress of such grievances.''. . .

        Mr. [Walter] Flowers [of Alabama]: Mr. Chairman, my point of 
    order is based on the nongermaneness of the amendment offered by 
    the gentleman from New York. . . .
        On the point of order, Mr. Chairman, on germaneness, this 
    embarks on an entirely new direction. It establishes rights and 
    duties for law enforcement officers and personnel which are not a 
    part of the thrust of the LEAA law. . . .
        Mr. [Mario] Biaggi [of New York]: . . . The fact of the matter 
    is that this is consistent with the proposal being made today, as 
    to establishing guidelines. Guidelines have been established in the 
    past. . . .
        This is a question of civil rights as much as any other 
    question is, as it relates to anybody else.
        So far as germaneness is concerned, I obviously have to 
    disagree with the gentleman. We have many guidelines already 
    established. This will establish another guideline. There is no 
    imposition here on any State or political subdivision. It is a 
    prerogative they can exercise.
        If they seek Federal funds they must comply. Right now the same 
    obligation is imposed upon them. If they seek Federal funds they 
    must comply with the civil rights law and all the prohibitions we 
    have imposed upon them. All we are doing is including the law-
    enforcement officers. . . .
        The Chairman: (15) The Chair is ready to rule on the 
    point of order raised by the gentleman from Alabama.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Dan Rostenkowski (Ill.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        As indicated on page 4 of the committee report, a fundamental 
    purpose of H.R. 8152 is to authorize Federal funding of approved 
    State plans for law enforcement and criminal justice improvement 
    programs. The bill attempts to address ``all aspects of the 
    criminal justice and law enforcement system--not merely police, and 
    not merely the purchase of police hardware' and requires State 
    plans to develop ``a total and integrated analysis of the problems 
    regarding the law enforcement and criminal justice system within 
    the State.''
        The amendment offered by the gentleman from New York would 
    require that State plans submitted for LEAA approval contain, in 
    addition to the 13 requirements spelled out in the committee bill 
    as amended, provisions for a system of receipt, investigation, and 
    determination of grievances submitted by State and local law 
    enforcement officers. The second amendment would insert on page 52 
    a provision spelling out a ``law enforcement officers' bill of 
    rights'' which must be enacted into law by any State seeking LEAA 
    grants under that act in order to be eligible for such grants.
        The committee bill seeks to establish a comprehensive approach 
    to the financing of programs aimed at improving State and local law 
    enforcement systems. Included in this comprehen

[[Page 8057]]

    sive approach is the subject of the welfare of law enforcement 
    officers as it relates to their official duties, including their 
    salaries, equipment, et cetera. The issue of a grievance system for 
    law enforcement officers is within the general subject of the 
    improvement of State and local law enforcement systems, and the 
    amendments are, therefore, germane to the pending bill.
        The Chair overrules the point of order.

Bill Authorizing Reorganization of Government Agencies--Amendment 
    Relating To One Agency

Sec. 10.15 To a bill authorizing the President to submit to the 
    Congress plans for the reorganization of agencies of the 
    government, an amendment was held to be germane which provided in 
    part that ``in the first such plan submitted the President shall 
    include an agency wherein shall be consolidated . . . all functions 
    relating to relief and rehabilitation of foreign countries,'' and 
    which required the President to transfer to such agency certain 
    functions of specified agencies and offices.

    In the 79th Congress, a bill(16) was under consideration 
which provided in part: (17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. H.R. 4129 (Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments).
17. See 91 Cong. Rec. 9419, 79th Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 4, 1945.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Sec. 4. Any reorganization plan, transmitted by the President 
    under section 3-- . . .
        (3) shall make provisions for the transfer or other disposition 
    of the records, property (including office equipment), and 
    personnel affected by such transfer, consolidation, or abolition . 
    . .
        (5) shall make provisions for winding up the affairs of any 
    agency abolished.

    An amendment was offered (18) as described above. Mr. 
William M. Whittington, of Mississippi, made the point of order that 
the amendment was not germane to the bill and not germane to the 
section under consideration. In the course of the debate on the point 
of order, he stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Id. at p. 9420 (Dirksen amendment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        This amendment was never presented to the committee. It is a 
    most far-reaching amendment. . . .
        Moreover . . . this amendment deals with . . . agencies 
    established . . . under the First War Powers Act. The bill under 
    consideration does not provide for the consideration of those 
    agencies. We deal with the permanent executive agencies of the 
    Government, rather than the war agencies of the Government.

[[Page 8058]]

    Mr. Everett M. Dirksen, of Illinois, responding to the point of 
order, stated:

        The first point is that the amendment deals with nothing except 
    executive agencies. The second point is that on page 2 of the 
    pending bill there is this language:

            To create, coordinate, and consolidate agencies and 
        functions of the Government as nearly as can be according to 
        major purposes.

        This is an effort to coordinate activities in consonance with a 
    major purpose.

    The Chairman(19) in ruling on the point of order, 
stated: (20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
20. 91 Cong. Rec. 9420, 9421, 79th Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 4, 1945.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair has examined the amendment in comparison with 
    language contained in the pending bill and invites attention to the 
    fact that under ``Definition of Agencies'', as provided in section 
    7 on page 9 of the pending bill, it is observed:

            When used in this act the term ``agency'' means any 
        executive department, commission, independent establishment, 
        corporation wholly or partly owned by the United States which 
        is an instrumentality of the United States, board, bureau, 
        division, service, office, officer, authority, or 
        administration, in the executive branch of the Government.

        The Chair is of the opinion that the agencies enumerated in the 
    amendment would come within the scope of the definition stated in 
    the bill to which the Chair has invited attention. The Chair feels 
    that the amendment is germane, and therefore overrules the point of 
    order.

Government Employees in Executive Branch--Amendment Relating to 
    Specific Department

Sec. 10.16 To that title of a government reorganization bill 
    authorizing inclusion in the civil service of officers and 
    employees of the government, and exempting certain positions from 
    the operation of the title's provisions, an amendment prescribing 
    standards to be followed in making selections for positions in the 
    Post Office Department was held to be germane.

    In the 75th Congress, during consideration of a government 
reorganization bill,(1) the following amendment was offered: 
(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. S. 3331 (Select Committee on Government Operations).
 2. 83 Cong. Rec. 5103, 75th Cong. 3d Sess., Apr. 8, 1938.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Claude A.] Fuller [of Arkansas]: Page 
    77, line 7, after the period at the end of the sentence, insert a 
    new paragraph, as follows:
        (a) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, 
    hereafter all vacancies in the offices of postmasters of

[[Page 8059]]

    the first, second, and third classes shall be filled as hereinafter 
    provided, by appointment by the President, by and with the advice 
    and consent of the Senate, and such postmasters so appointed shall 
    hold their offices for a term of 4 years. Whenever a vacancy occurs 
    in the office of postmaster of the first, second, or third class . 
    . . [the President] may appoint a classified civil-service employee 
    serving in the post office in which the vacancy occurs and having 
    qualified in a noncompetitive examination held by the Civil Service 
    Commission, to fill the vacancy, or the President . . . may request 
    the Civil Service Commission to hold an open competitive 
    examination and the Civil Service Commission shall certify the 
    results thereof to the President who shall appoint, by and with the 
    advice and consent of the Senate, one of the three highest 
    eligibles to fill the vacancy. . . .

    A point of order was raised against the amendment, as follows:

        Mr. [Robert] Ramspeck [of Georgia]: Mr. Chairman, I make the 
    point of order that the amendment is not germane to the title to 
    which it is offered or to the bill itself. The title refers to the 
    civil-service classification. The amendment deals with appointments 
    not made by the civil service but made on a patronage basis. . . .

    The Chairman,(3) in ruling on the point of order, 
stated: (4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
 4. 83 Cong. Rec. 5104, 75th Cong. 3d Sess., Apr. 8, 1938.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        This title deals generally with the personnel of the executive 
    departments of the Government. . . .
        The title now under consideration authorizes the covering into 
    the civil service of officers and employees of the Government, as 
    well as exempting from the operations of the provisions of the 
    title certain other positions. The pending amendment pertains to 
    the appointment of personnel in the Post Office Department and 
    provides the standards to be followed in making selections for 
    positions in that Department.
        It is the opinion of the Chair that the amendment is germane to 
    the title. . . .

Bill Providing for Methods of Disposition of Surplus Government 
    Property--Amendment Relating to Specific Kind of Property

Sec. 10.17 To that paragraph of a bill providing for methods of 
    disposition of surplus government property, an amendment providing 
    that certain property appropriated for educational use be disposed 
    of under regulations prescribed by the Commissioner of Education 
    was held germane.

    In the 78th Congress, a bill (5) was under consideration 
which related to disposal of surplus government property and which 
stated in part: (6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. H.R. 5125 (Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments).
 6. See 90 Cong. Rec. 7123, 78th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 18, 1944.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 8060]]

                           Methods of Disposition

        Sec. 10. (a) Wherever any Government agency is authorized to 
    dispose of property under this act, then, notwithstanding the 
    provisions of any other law but subject to the provisions of this 
    act, the agency may dispose of such property by sale, exchange [and 
    the like].

    The following amendment was offered:

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Malcolm C.] Tarver [of New York]: On 
    page 32, after line 6, insert the following:
        Surplus property that is appropriate for educational use . . . 
    may be transferred to the United States Office of Education for 
    allocation . . . to the public schools and educational 
    institutions. . . .

    Mr. John Taber, of New York, raised the point of order that the 
amendment was not germane to that part of the bill. The Chairman 
(7) overruled the point of order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Robert E. Thomason (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Making Appropriations for Public Works--Amendment To Make 
    Appropriation for Post Office Buildings

Sec. 10.18 To a bill making appropriations for work relief and public 
    works, including provisions relating to highways, roads, public 
    buildings, and other facilities, an amendment proposing an 
    appropriation for obtaining sites and erecting public buildings for 
    post offices was held germane.

    In the 76th Congress, during consideration of the Work Relief and 
Public Works Appropriations of 1939,(8) an amendment was 
offered (9) as described above. A point of order was raised 
against the amendment, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. H.J. Res. 326 (Committee on Appropriations).
 9. 84 Cong. Rec. 7304, 76th Cong. 1st Sess., June 16, 1939.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clifton A.] Woodrum of Virginia: [The amendment] provides 
    for a project that calls for the purchase of land, which does not 
    furnish employment of people. It is not within the purpose of the 
    concepts of the bill; it is not germane to the general principles 
    of the bill.

    The Chairman,(10) in ruling on the point of order, 
stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair is of the opinion that the present bill covers a very 
    broad field. For example, paragraph (b) of section 1 relates to 
    highways . . . public buildings, parks, and other recreational 
    facilities, including buildings thereon, public utilities, electric 
    transmission and distribution lines or systems to serve persons in 
    rural areas, and so forth, and in another section of the bill it 
    provides for the allocation of funds for public-works purposes. The 
    amendment . . . provides for further alloca

[[Page 8061]]

    tions, the administration to be carried on through the agency 
    provided for in the pending bill. The Chair is of the opinion that 
    the amendment is germane. . . .

Provisions Describing Requirements for Receiving Social Security 
    Benefits--Amendment Adding Requirement

Sec. 10.19 To that title of a bill containing miscellaneous provisions 
    and describing several requirements for receiving benefits under 
    the Social Security Act, an amendment adding another requirement 
    was held germane.

    In the 76th Congress, during consideration of a bill 
(11) to amend the Social Security Act, the following 
amendment was offered:  (12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. H.R. 6635 (Committee on Ways and Means).
12. 84 Cong. Rec. 6969, 76th Cong. 1st Sess., June 10, 1939.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Karl E.] Mundt [of South Dakota]: 
    Page 104, line 3, insert a new section, as follows:
        Sec. 904. Beginning with January 1, 1941, no provisions of the 
    Social Security Act shall be operative or effective for foreign-
    born aliens who have not taken out their full American citizenship 
    papers by that date. . . .

    Mr. Jere Cooper, of Tennessee, raised the point of order that the 
amendment was not germane to the bill. The Chairman (13) 
overruled the point of order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Lindsay C. Warren (N.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Authorizing Construction of Channel as Part of Intracoastal 
    Waterway--Amendment To Authorize Additional Channel

Sec. 10.20 To a bill authorizing construction of a pipe line and 
    navigable barge channel across Florida as part of the Intracoastal 
    Waterway, an amendment proposing to construct another channel as 
    part of the same Intracoastal Waterway was held to be germane.

    In the 77th Congress, a bill (14) was under 
consideration authorizing construction of a pipe line and navigable 
barge channel across Florida. An amendment was offered (15) 
as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. H.R. 6999 (Committee on Rivers and Harbors).
15. 88 Cong. Rec. 5305, 77th Cong. 2d Sess., June 17, 1942.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mississippi, raised the point of order that 
the amendment was not germane.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Id. at p. 5306.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Chairman,(17) in ruling on the point of order, 
stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. John M. Costello (Calif.).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 8062]]

        [T]he amendment provides an additional location for an 
    additional canal. It is, however, part of the same waterway, as the 
    gentleman from Florida has so well pointed out, part of the 
    Intracoastal Waterway. The amendment simply provides for a second 
    connecting link in the waterways. The Chair is therefore 
    constrained . . . to overrule the point of order.

Bill To Strengthen Relations With Greece and Turkey in Diverse Ways--
    Amendment Adding Negotiations Relating to Opium Trade

Sec. 10.21 A section of a bill designed to strengthen the United 
    States-North Atlantic Treaty Organization relationships with Turkey 
    and Greece in diverse ways by promoting a peaceful solution to the 
    Cyprus dispute, by easing the embargo on arms shipments to Turkey, 
    by requesting negotiations with Greece to determine its economic 
    and military needs, and by providing refugee assistance to Cyprus, 
    was held sufficiently broad in scope to admit as germane an 
    amendment requesting negotiations with Turkey to prevent diversion 
    of opium poppy into illicit channels.

    During consideration of S. 2230 (18) in the Committee of 
the Whole on Oct. 2, 1975,(19) the Chair overruled a point 
of order against the following amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. A bill authorizing appropriations for the Board for International 
        Broadcasting for fiscal 1976, and to promote improved relations 
        between the United States, Greece and Turkey.
19. 121 Cong. Rec. 31492, 94th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. Rangel: Page 4, line 9, strike out 
    ``(2)'' and all that follows thereafter up to and including line 15 
    on page 4, and insert in lieu thereof the following:
        ``(C) the President is requested to initiate discussions with 
    the Government of Turkey concerning effective means of preventing 
    the diversion of opium poppy into illicit channels.
        ``(2) The President is directed to submit to the Speaker of the 
    House of Representatives and to the Foreign Relations and 
    Appropriations Committees of the Senate within sixty days after the 
    enactment of this Act a report on discussions conducted under 
    subsections (b)(1)(B) and (C), together with his recommendations 
    for economic and military assistance to Greece for the fiscal year 
    1976.''
        Mr. [Clement J.] Zablocki [of Wisconsin]: Mr. Chairman, I make 
    a point of order against the amendment. . . .
        Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from New York has presented an 
    amendment similar to one that was defeated earlier today. . . .
        [The] amendment, Mr. Chairman, I submit is not in order 
    because, as I

[[Page 8063]]

    said in the argument on the point of order raised earlier, it 
    violates rule XVI, clause 7 of the Rules of the House of 
    Representatives. In the precedents cited under rule XVI, clause 7 
    there is contained a perfect example to sustain this point of 
    order. On December 11, 1973, the Chair ruled that an amendment to 
    the bill authorizing military assistance to Israel and funds for 
    the U.N. emergency force in the Middle East, which expressed the 
    sense of Congress that the President conduct negotiations to obtain 
    a peace treaty in the Middle East and the resumption of diplomatic 
    and trade relations between the Arab nations and the United States, 
    was out of order.
        This amendment attempts to address issues which are equally 
    dissimilar. The title of the bill clearly states that the endeavor 
    is to promote improved relations between the United States, Greece, 
    and Turkey, to assist in the solution of the refugee problem on 
    Cyprus, and to otherwise strengthen the North Atlantic Alliance. . 
    . .
        Mr. [Charles B.] Rangel [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, the 
    previous point of order was ruled in favor of the gentleman 
    (20) but that related to an amendment to an amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. See Sec. 8.23, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Here we have an amendment to the bill which clearly in section 
    2 indicates that this bill is to improve and harmonize the 
    relations among the allies of the United States and between the 
    United States and its allies in the interest of mutual defense and 
    national security. . . .
        [The] amendment indicates that the Congress is directing the 
    President of the United States to initiate discussions with the 
    Government of Greece for the purpose of determining their military 
    and economic needs.
        It appears to me that there is no more serious question that is 
    affecting our urban communities than drugs. This amendment merely 
    directs the President to initiate discussions with the Government 
    of Turkey for the purpose of or concerning the effective means of 
    preventing the diversion of opium poppies into this country.
        It is the same language. We are asking the President of the 
    United States to initiate discussions with the Government of Greece 
    in order to determine their needs. So I believe this is germane to 
    the bill. I have discussed it with other members of the committee 
    and I believe they share with me in my understanding of the germane 
    question.
        The Chairman: (1) The Chair is ready to rule. The 
    question is whether or not the amendment offered by the gentleman 
    from New York (Mr. Rangel) is germane to the text of the bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. William H. Natcher (Ky.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair observes on page 4 of the bill, subsection (2), the 
    following language:

            (B) the President is requested to initiate discussions with 
        the Government of Greece to determine the most urgent needs of 
        Greece for economic and military assistance.
            (2) The President is directed to submit to the Speaker of 
        the House of Representatives and to the Foreign Relations and 
        Appropriations Committees of the Senate within sixty days after 
        the enactment of this Act a report on discussions conducted 
        under subsection (b)(1)(B), together with his recommendations 
        for

[[Page 8064]]

        economics and military assistance to Greece for the fiscal year 
        1976.

        The language of the gentleman's amendment is similar to 
    paragraph (B).

        Now, as to the germaneness of the amendment to the text of 
    section 2 of the bill the principal purposes of that section are 
    stated in paragraphs 1 through 6 on page 5 of the committee report, 
    and they are fairly diverse in scope to the extent that they all 
    have as their primary purpose continuation of our NATO relationship 
    with Turkey and Greece. Viewed in that context, and in the context 
    of section 2, the Chair feels that the amendment of the gentleman 
    from New York adds a further requirement of negotiations to that 
    already contained in section 2, which does not go beyond the 
    purposes outlined in the bill.

        Therefore, the Chair overrules the point of order and holds 
    that the amendment is germane to section 2.