[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 12, Chapter 29 (Sections 1-34), Volume 13, Chapter 29 (Sections 35-end, plus index)]
[Chapter 29. Consideration and Debate]
[J. Reading Papers and Displaying Exhibits]
[Â§ 84. Use of Exhibits]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 11303-11315]
 
                               CHAPTER 29
 
                        Consideration and Debate
 
               J. READING PAPERS AND DISPLAYING EXHIBITS
 
Sec. 84. Use of Exhibits

    Rule XXX, as amended in the 103d Congress,(3) states:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. House Rules and Manual Sec. 915 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        When the use of any exhibit in debate is objected to by any 
    Member, it shall be determined without debate by a vote of the 
    House.

    The use of exhibits in debate requires the consent of the House if

[[Page 11304]]

objection is made.(4) However, where Members supporting 
certain legislation use relevant exhibits in debate for the information 
of other Members, objection is rarely made to the 
display.(5) But a Member may not have distributed on the 
floor copies of a bill marked with his own interpretations of its 
effect and support.(6) The Chair controls the positioning of 
an exhibit in the well or along the side aisles, in order that his view 
of the floor or the Members' view of the rostrum is not obstructed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See Sec. Sec. 84.1, 84.2, infra; 8 Cannon's Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 2452, 2453.
            See also 118 Cong. Rec. 36133-38, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 
        13, 1972 (Member exhibited several types of military bombs 
        during a ``special-order speech'' on the legality of the 
        Vietnam War).
 5. See Sec. Sec. 84.4, 84.5, infra.
 6. See Sec. 84.7, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In one instance, the Speaker ordered removed from the lobby a 
placard posted by a Member which impugned the motives of 
Members.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See Sec. 84.6, infra. Since the placard contained language subject 
        to a point of order if stated in debate, the placard could not 
        have been read in debate by consent of the 
        House.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Permission To Display Exhibit

Sec. 84.1 Where objection is raised against the use of exhibits in 
    debate, the question is put to a vote in the House or the Committee 
    of the Whole.

    On June 21, 1937,(8) Mr. Maury Maverick, of Texas, made 
a point of order against the display on the floor of the House of an 
object by Mr. Robert F. Rich, of Pennsylvania. Speaker William B. 
Bankhead, of Alabama, put the question on the display to the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 81 Cong. Rec. 6104, 6105, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Maverick: Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that the 
    gentleman has no right to display a liquor bottle in the House of 
    Representatives.
        Mr. Rich: Mr. Speaker, this is Government rum, presented to me 
    by Secretary Ickes.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will suspend. The gentleman from 
    Texas makes the point of order that the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
    has no right to exhibit the bottle without permission of the House. 
    The point of order is well taken. . . .
        As many as are in favor of granting the gentleman from 
    Pennsylvania the right to exhibit the bottle which he now holds in 
    his hand will say ``aye'' and those opposed will say ``no.''
        The vote was taken and the Speaker announced that the ayes have 
    it, and the permission is granted.

    On Aug. 5, 1949,(9) the Chairman of the Committee of the

[[Page 11305]]

Whole, Howard W. Smith, of Virginia, put the question as to the display 
of a chart to the Committee for a decision:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 95 Cong. Rec. 10859, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Oren] Harris [of Arkansas]: Mr. Chairman, I move to strike 
    out the last word, and ask unanimous consent to proceed for five 
    additional minutes. . . .
        Mr. [Eugene D.] O'Sullivan [of Nebraska]: Mr. Chairman, a point 
    of order.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. O'Sullivan: Mr. Chairman, is it in order for an exhibit to 
    be presented to the Committee of the Whole or to the House of 
    Representatives? As I read the rules it is not in order to do so, 
    unless the permission of the Committee of the Whole or of the House 
    is first obtained.
        The Chairman: If the gentleman from Nebraska objects to the use 
    of the exhibit, the Chair will put the question to the Committee of 
    the Whole. Does the gentleman object?
        Mr. O'Sullivan: I object, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: The question is: Shall the use of the exhibit be 
    permitted?
        The question was agreed to.(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. See also 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. Sec. 2452, 2453.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 84.2 A Member used an exhibit while engaged in debate in the 
    Committee of the Whole without objection.

    On June 8, 1966,(11) while the Committee of the Whole 
was considering H.R. 15202, to temporarily increase the public debt 
limit, Mr. Wright Patman, of Texas, was characterizing the actions of 
the banking industry in raising interest rates as ``a loaded dice 
game.'' During his remarks, he displayed, without objection, a pair of 
oversized dice. The following exchange occurred between Mr. Patman and 
Mr. H. R. Gross, of Iowa:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 112 Cong. Rec. 12574, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Gross: Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. Patman: Yes, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
        Mr. Gross: Mr. Chairman, I just walked in. Is the gentleman 
    trying to convert the House Chamber into a gambling establishment 
    with those dice here?
        Mr. Patman: No, I am trying to convert them against a gambling 
    establishment, that is, the Federal Reserve establishment. These 
    are Federal Reserve dice. If you roll them, they will roll 7 or 11 
    every time. Try them.

Use of Exhibits To Explain Legislation

Sec. 84.3 After objection was made, the Committee of the Whole voted to 
    permit a Member to display a chart in explanation of a legislative 
    proposition.

    On Aug. 5, 1949,(12) when objection was made to a 
request by a

[[Page 11306]]

Member to display a chart explaining the provisions of H.R. 1758, 
amending the Natural Gas Act, the Committee of the Whole voted to 
permit the exhibit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 95 Cong. Rec. 10859, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 84.4 The House by unanimous consent permitted the Committee on 
    Science and Astronautics to use models and exhibits in the 
    Committee of the Whole during debate on a bill.

    On Aug. 1, 1963,(13) a unanimous-consent request was 
granted for the Committee on Science and Astronautics to use exhibits 
and models on the floor:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 109 Cong. Rec. 13853, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Olin E.] Teague of Texas: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that the committee may be permitted to use certain models 
    and exhibits on the floor this afternoon to better present the 
    information that we will try to present to the House.

    There was no objection to the request.
    During debate on the pending bill, H.R. 7500, to authorize 
appropriations to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 
members of the committee referred to the models and 
exhibits.(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. See for example id. at p. 13876.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 84.5 In debating a bill or a special rule providing for its 
    consideration, Members may display charts without requesting 
    permission, where no objection is made to the display.

    On Mar. 12, 1974,(15) the House was considering House 
Resolution 963, providing for the consideration of H.R. 69, the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1974. Mr. Peter A. 
Peyser, of New York, referred to a chart which was being displayed 
before the House and which continued to be displayed and referred to 
after the resolution had been adopted and the Committee of the Whole 
was conducting general debate on the bill. (The bill contained complex 
funding formulas suited to graphic description.) (16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 120 Cong. Rec. 6269, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
16. Id. at p. 6279 (see the remarks of Mr. Carl D. Perkins [Ky.]).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Displays Impugning Members

Sec. 84.6 Under authority grant-ed him by House rule, the Speaker 
    ordered removed from the Speaker's lobby a placard posted by a 
    Member containing language which might have been ruled disorderly 
    had it been uttered on the House floor.

[[Page 11307]]

    On June 5, 1930, the House discussed the action of the Speaker in 
ordering removed from the Speaker's lobby placards posted by a Member 
criticizing the action of House conferees on a particular bill (H.R. 
2667, a tariff bill).(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 72 Cong. Rec. 10122, 10123, 71st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Speaker Nicholas Longworth, of Ohio, stated that he ordered removed 
the placard under his authority granted by Rule I clause 3, empowering 
him to exercise control over the corridors and passages and 
unappropriated rooms in the House side of the Capitol. The Speaker also 
stated that ``the Chair was of the opinion that at least two of the 
sentences in that document were sentences which, if pronounced on the 
floor of the House, would have been subject to being taken down, and 
were not in order, and, by analogy, the Chair thinks it is even more 
improper to have such publications posted where no one can criticize 
them.''
    The Speaker read the following objectionable language of the 
placard:

        3. The House conferees, in violation of the gentleman's 
    agreement and in disregard of the positive mandate of the House, 
    voted lumber used by the farmers on the dutiable list and polls and 
    ties used by the public utilities on the free list.
        4. The conferees are the servants of the House, not its 
    masters. Will the Members by their votes condone the violation of 
    the gentleman's agreement and the disregard of the positive mandate 
    of the House on the part of its conferees.

    The Speaker stated that the truth or falsity of the document was 
not material; he added that whether the document cast doubt upon the 
worthiness of the motives of the conferees was relevant to his 
decision.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Rule I clause 3, House Rules and Manual Sec. 623 (1995) provides: 
        ``He [the Speaker] shall have general control, except as 
        provided by rule or law, of the Hall of the House, and of the 
        corridors and passages and the disposal of the unappropriated 
        rooms in that part of the Capitol assigned to the use of the 
        House, until further order.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Bills Edited With Interpretation

Sec. 84.7 It is not in order for a Member to have distributed on the 
    floor of the House copies of a bill marked with his own 
    interpretations of its provisions.

    On Aug. 16, 1935,(19) Speaker Joseph W. Byrns, of 
Tennessee, ruled that a Member could not distribute in the Chamber 
copies

[[Page 11308]]

of a bill marked with his own interpretation thereof, and instructed 
the House pages not to distribute any such documents:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 79 Cong. Rec. 13433, 74th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Claude A.] Fuller [of Arkansas]: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a 
    parliamentary inquiry. I just sent a page for the bill under 
    consideration, H.R. 9100, and received the copy which I have in my 
    hand. At the top of the bill, pasted onto it is a pink slip, and on 
    that pink slip in typewriting are the words:

            Bituminous-coal bill as amended and reprinted--
        controversial phases largely eliminated. Two-thirds of tonnage 
        output operators favor bill and more than 95 percent of labor.

        My inquiry is to know whether it is proper for anybody to paste 
    such a thing as that on a document of the House and whether it is 
    proper for it to be circulated in the House. This is the first time 
    in my experience that I have ever seen any advertisement on an 
    official document or bill pending in the House. I rise for the 
    purpose of ascertaining how it came there and whether or not it is 
    proper to be on this bill.
        The Speaker: The Chair has no information on the subject. Where 
    did the gentleman get his copy of the bill?
        Mr. Fuller: From a page. I send this copy to the desk so that 
    the Speaker may examine it.
        Mr. [J. Buell] Snyder [of Pennsylvania]: I can tell the 
    gentleman how that came there.
        The Speaker: The gentleman may state.
        Mr. Snyder: Mr. Speaker, I had so many of these bills sent to 
    my office, and with my secretarial help we wrote those words on 
    that pink slip and pasted the slip on the bill. That is how that 
    happens to be there. I sent copies of these bills with the slip on 
    them to those interested and sent some of them to the desk back 
    here, to be handed out upon request. It is altogether fitting and 
    proper that I should do so. . . .
        The Speaker: The Chair knows of no rule or authority for 
    inserting a statement like that to which the gentleman has called 
    attention on a bill, and the Chair instructs the pages of the House 
    not to distribute any more bills carrying this sort of inscription 
    to Members on the floor of the House.

Proper Time To Use Displays

Sec. 84.8 The Member having the floor in Committee of the Whole may 
    display charts or exhibits by permission of the Committee, but if 
    objection is made, the question is put, without debate, as to 
    whether such Member should be permitted to use displays; but 
    exhibits are only to be displayed during the debate, and the Chair 
    can direct their removal when they are not being utilized.

    On Sept. 20, 1977,(20) the following proceedings 
occurred in the Committee of the Whole during consideration of H.R. 
6796 (the

[[Page 11309]]

Energy Research and Development appropriations):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 123 Cong. Rec. 29927, 95th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Olin E.] Teague [of Texas]: Madam Chairman, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Chairman: (1) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Barbara Jordan (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Teague: Madam Chairman, I am not going to have a lot to 
    say, but I do not care to have what I do have to say distracted by 
    a bunch of charts here. I think the gentleman from California 
    should not bring those in. I ask the Chair if that is not proper.
        The Chairman: The Chair would advise the gentleman from Texas 
    that if he does object to the demonstrations or displays before the 
    committee, he may do so. If he does object, the Chair would then 
    put the question as to whether the Member having the floor should 
    be permitted to use displays.
        Mr. Teague: Madam Chairman, I object to them until the 
    gentleman is ready to speak. Then, I will ask unanimous consent 
    that he be permitted to bring them in.
        Mr. [George E.] Brown [Jr.] of California: Madam Chairman, will 
    the gentleman yield?
        Mr. Teague: I yield.
        Mr. Brown of California: Madam Chairman, I want to do whatever 
    the chairman thinks is fair. I want to point out that these charts 
    were prepared for the purpose of assisting a number of speakers. We 
    would be happy to put them all together and have them brought out 
    one by one as the speakers prefer. I will not be able to use them, 
    but others will.
        Mr. Teague: I think it is proper, as they come to the charts, 
    to use them. I will not object to that, but I do think that if 
    other people are making speeches, the charts should not be there.
        Mr. Brown of California: I will be happy to accede to the 
    gentleman's objection.
        The Chairman: That, the Chair thinks, resolves the question.

Sec. 84.9 While Members are permitted to use exhibits such as charts 
    during debate (subject to the permission of the House under Rule 
    XXX), the Speaker may under Rule I direct the removal of a chart 
    from the well if not being utilized during debate.

    The following proceedings occurred in the House on Apr. 1, 1982: 
(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 128 Cong. Rec. 6303, 6304, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        (Mr. Gregg asked and was given permission to address the House 
    for 1 minute, and to revise and extend his remarks.)
        Mr. [Judd] Gregg [of New Hampshire]: Mr. Speaker, with the 
    Congress having allegedly been in session now for approximately 4 
    months and about to go on recess for the month of April, I felt 
    that we should review the ``report card'' of the liberal leadership 
    of this Congress. So it has been prepared here on this chart. . . .
        The Speaker: (3) If there are no other Members who 
    will use the chart in the well at this time during 1-minute 
    speeches, it will be removed until such time as it is needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair recognized the Republican leader, the gentleman from 
    Illinois (Mr. Michel).

[[Page 11310]]

Sec. 84.10 The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may direct the 
    removal from the well of charts and other displays if not currently 
    being utilized in debate.

    During consideration of the first concurrent resolution on the 
budget for fiscal year 1983 (H. Con. Res. 345) in Committee of the 
Whole on May 25, 1982,(4) the following proceedings 
occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 128 Cong. Rec. 11752, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Leon E.] Panetta [of California]: Mr. Chairman, I move to 
    strike the requisite number of words.
        The Chairman: (5) The gentleman from California (Mr. 
    Panetta) is recognized, but first the charts will be removed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Panetta: Please, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: Perhaps from the laughter, it might be worth 
    having the Chair remind the Members that charts are always brought 
    forward for a particular speaker. They are present entirely at the 
    sufferance of the Committee.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. See Sec. 84.9, supra, where the Speaker pursuant to his general 
        authority under Rule I, directed the removal from the well of a 
        chart that was not being utilized at the time. Under Rule XXX, 
        the House or Committee of the Whole controls the use of 
        displays during debate, upon the objection of any Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Displays Should Not Detract From Good Order and Decorum

Sec. 84.11 Recognition is within the discretion of the Chair, who may 
    deny a Member recognition to speak under the ``one-minute rule'' in 
    order to uphold order and decorum in the House as required under 
    clause 2 of Rule I; thus, the Speaker inquired of a Member in the 
    well seeking recognition, as to his purpose in utilizing an object 
    for demonstration in debate, and then denied that Member 
    recognition pursuant to his authority under clause 2 of Rule XIV, 
    when he determined that the object might subject the House to 
    ridicule.

    On Aug. 27, 1980,(7) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 126 Cong. Rec. 23456, 96th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (8) The Chair would ask the gentleman 
    from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) what he intends to do with the 
    doll. The Chair is not going to allow the Congress to be held up to 
    ridicule and will object to any such exhibit being used in debate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [E. G.] Shuster [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, if I may 
    respond, I simply want to introduce this duck as

[[Page 11311]]

    a symbol of the lameduck session that I want to speak to.
        The Speaker: The Chair is of the opinion the Member would be 
    holding the House up to ridicule and would ask the gentleman to 
    make the speech without utilizing the apparatus or the doll or 
    anything of that nature.
        Mr. Shuster: Mr. Speaker, this is certainly not the intention.
        The Speaker: That is the way the Chair feels about it and the 
    Chair so rules.
        (Mr. Shuster asked and was given permission to address the 
    House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

    Parliamentarian's Note: The original transcript shows that the 
Speaker first inquired as to Mr. Shuster's purpose and then denied him 
recognition, and that Mr. Shuster was then recognized for one minute. 
Thus, the Speaker was exercising his power of recognition, and was not 
unilaterally preventing the use of a demonstration during debate, which 
would be a matter to be determined by a vote of the House, under Rule 
XXX.

Sec. 84.12 Where the Speaker, pursuant to his authority and 
    responsibility to preserve decorum in debate un-der clause 2 of 
    Rule I, had informally requested a Member not to wear a mask in 
    debate, that Member utilized the mask as a display while mentioning 
    the Speaker's admonition.

    On Oct. 6, 1983,(9) during consideration of H.R. 3958 
(water resources development appropriations for fiscal 1984) in the 
House, the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 129 Cong. Rec. 27629, 98th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Silvio O.] Conte [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Chairman, I move 
    to strike the requisite number of words.
        (Mr. Conte asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
    his remarks.)
        Mr. Conte: Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. I 
    was going to start out this debate today by wearing this pig mask 
    because I think it is the only way we can properly describe this 
    bill.
        But I was asked by my dear friend the Speaker not to wear it, 
    and I am not going to put it on. But I wish I could wear it.
        Because all this amendment would do is trim a little of the 
    fat. If this amendment is adopted it will not keep anyone from 
    bringing the bacon back home.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Speaker may deny recognition or 
continued recognition when an improper display is utilized. A different 
question would be raised by a Member's use of a politically provocative 
display which is not inherently disruptive or demeaning. In such a case 
the House, on objection of a Member, would decide the issue.

[[Page 11312]]

Sec. 84.13 The Speaker's responsibility under clause 2 of Rule I to 
    preserve decorum during debate in the House requires that he not 
    permit exhibits to be utilized in debate which would be demeaning 
    to the House, and the Chair may inquire as to the Member's 
    intentions before conferring recognition.

    The following proceedings occurred in the House on Mar. 21, 1984: 
(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 130 Cong. Rec. 6187, 6188, 98th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert S.] Walker [of Pennsylvania]: I ask unanimous 
    consent to proceed for 1 minute, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: (11) What has the gentleman got in his 
    hand?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Walker: Mr. Speaker, this is a demonstration of what I 
    have. I am not certain I am going to be able to use it under the 
    rules.
        The Speaker: If the gentleman does not think so, why is he 
    trying?
        Mr. Walker: I will explain that in my speech, but I certainly 
    would not want to violate the rules.
        The Speaker: Without objection, the Speaker recognizes the 
    gentleman and will be watching carefully.
        Mr. Walker: I thank the Speaker, and I know that the Speaker 
    always watches very carefully everything that I do. . . .
        Mr. Speaker, we have to be amused by an article in this 
    morning's Washington Post, but I am pleased to see that two of my 
    distinguished colleagues have gone on record supporting one of the 
    major industries in my congressional district.
        If we take everything they had to say, fold it between two 
    pieces of bread, slap on a little mustard, we have the biggest 
    bologna sandwich in history. The Lebanon bologna industry in my 
    district is going to be forever grateful.
        Mr. Speaker, what I have here is a real live Lebanon bologna, 
    and I noticed in the rules, in reading the rules, that I probably 
    would not be able to show that. What we are allowed to show on this 
    floor is ``verbal bologna'' but not real bologna.
        . . . Mr. Speaker, I did not violate the rules. I kept it in 
    the bag.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Reference to certain debate in the House as 
``baloney'' has never been ruled unparliamentary, but to characterize 
all House debate as such might be ruled out as demeaning to the House.

Sec. 84.14 Prior to a special-order speech in which several Members 
    intended to use photographic exhibits of missing children, the 
    Chair reminded all Members to address the Chair and to avoid direct 
    references to the television audience.

    On Apr. 2, 1985,(12) the Speaker Pro Tempore made an 
announcement, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 131 Cong. Rec. 7221, 99th Cong. 1st Sess.

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

[[Page 11313]]

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (13) The Chair will ask 
    that all Members who wish to exhibit pictures to address the Chair 
    and avoid direct references to the television audience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Kenneth J. Gray (Ill.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from 
    Oklahoma (Mr. Edwards) is recognized for 60 minutes.
        Mr. [Mickey] Edwards of Oklahoma: Mr. Speaker, last summer I 
    began a project to use the televised proceedings of the House of 
    Representatives to help find some of the 160,000 children who each 
    year are reported kidnaped either by strangers or by a parent who 
    does not have custody.

Sec. 84.15 During a special-order speech, a Member on one occasion 
    utilized cartoon caricatures as an exhibit to ridicule the 
    Administration, particularly statements made by the Secretary of 
    the Interior.

    The following proceedings occurred in the House on June 2, 
1987,(14) during the period designated for special-order 
speeches:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 133 Cong. Rec. 14255, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (15) Under a previous order 
    of the House, 
    the gentleman from New York [Mr. Scheuer] is recognized for 60 
    minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. James A. Hayes (La.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mrs. [Patricia] Schroeder [of Colorado]: Mr. Speaker, will the 
    gentleman yield?
        Mr. [James H.] Scheuer [of New York]: Of course, I would be 
    happy to yield to the gentlewoman from Colorado.
        Mrs. Schroeder: Mr. Speaker, I would like the gentleman to 
    explain some of the [exhibits] that the gentleman has down there. I 
    can tell the gentleman from New York has worked very hard on this.
        I take it that right beside the gentleman he has these [figures 
    of] cats wearing hats and glasses and then the fish. The gentleman 
    does not have a hat on the fish, but my understanding is that it is 
    just as dangerous to the fish.
        Mr. Scheuer: There is a hat on the fish, but it is a plastic 
    hat and it sticks very close to its scales.
        Mrs. Schroeder: Oh, I see. So the gentleman is pointing out 
    that the first thing we would have to do is start catching all 
    these animals. . . .

    Parliamentarian's Note: The display of exhibits in debate is always 
subject to the will of the House and any Member may object by 
requesting the Chair to put the question of propriety to the House. In 
particular instances, a question may arise as to whether the Chair 
should take the initiative and deny recognition for breaches of 
decorum.(16) The exhibit here consisted of large photographs 
of animals dressed up in sunglasses, straw hats, and the like, and was 
intended to ridicule a statement by the Secretary of the Interior that 
depletion of the

[[Page 11314]]

ozone layer could be countered by such protective devices. Especially 
since it was probably aimed at the television audience during special 
orders, it was arguably such breach of decorum as the Chair has the 
authority under Rule I, clause 2, to prevent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. See 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 2452.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 84.16 In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Chair rendered 
    an anticipatory ruling that he would utilize his authority under 
    Rule I, clause 2, to prevent the display of exhibits in the Chamber 
    during debate which might disrupt order or impair decorum in the 
    Chamber, without ruling that the exhibits were necessarily obscene 
    or offensive.

    On Sept. 13, 1989,(17) it was demonstrated that the 
Chair may in his discretion make an anticipatory ruling that the 
exhibition of certain materials during debate should be precluded as 
disruptive of decorum. The proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 135 Cong. Rec. 20362, 101st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert S.] Walker [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (18) The gentleman will 
    state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. George E. Brown, Jr. (Calif.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Walker: Mr. Speaker, we are 
    in the process of discussing certain artworks which have been paid 
    for by taxpayers' money. What would be the ruling of the Chair 
    should those particular artworks be brought on the floor for 
    display as a part of the debate? Can the Chair tell me that?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair would respond that it would 
    be the intention of the Chair under rule I to prevent any activity 
    which would disrupt the decorum of the Chamber and he would rule 
    such action to be a disruption of the proper decorum of the 
    Chamber.
        Mr. Walker: I have a further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. 
    Speaker.
        So, in other words, the material that we are talking about is 
    so bad that it would disrupt the decorum of the House if this were 
    displayed and so, therefore, the Chair would have to rule against 
    that display, is that correct?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair would rule as the Chair has 
    already stated.

Various Types of Displays

Sec. 84.17 On one occasion, a Member utilized dismantled weapons as an 
    exhibit during debate.

    The following proceedings occurred in the Committee of the Whole on 
Apr. 23, 1985,(19) during consideration of House Joint 
Resolution 239 (appropriations for aid to Nicaragua):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 131 Cong. Rec. 9024, 99th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Newt] Gingrich [of Georgia]: . . . I want to specifically 
    pick up on

[[Page 11315]]

    the arguments of an earlier speaker, the gentleman from Arkansas, 
    who in a sense was asking what are these votes in Nicaragua really 
    all about.
        There are a number of ostrich Democrats who would have us 
    believe 
    that there is no danger from Nicaragua. . . .
        Let me offer the physical proof of the Soviet-Cuban-Nicaraguan 
    Communist offensive in El Salvador and Honduras. Let me say in 
    advance to my colleagues, these exhibits are all harmless but they 
    have been harmful. These 
    exhibits are authenticated captured weapons from El Salvador. They 
    are on loan from the El Salvadoran Government to the U.S. Defense 
    Department. They have been dismantled. They meet every kind of rule 
    of safety.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Under Rule XXX, the Committee of the Whole 
or the House may, on demand of any Member, vote to permit a Member to 
utilize an exhibit during debate. In this instance, the Speaker had 
denied use of the Speaker's Lobby for the exhibition of the dismantled 
weapons, in accordance with his consistent policy; the Speaker could 
have precluded their display during debate in order to preserve decorum 
if he believed the display to pose a problem.

--Badges as Exhibits

Sec. 84.18 Clause 1 of Rule XIV, requiring Members desiring to ``speak 
    or deliver any matter to the House'' to rise and address the 
    Speaker to be recognized, proscribes, in effect, the wearing of 
    badges by Members to communicate messages; thus, the Speaker, 
    exercising his authority to preserve order and decorum, has advised 
    Members that the wearing of badges is inappropriate under the rules 
    of the House.

    The following statement was made by the Speaker (20) 
during proceedings on Apr. 15, 1986: (1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (Mass.).
 1. k132 Cong. Rec. 7525, 99th Cong. 2d

Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        All Members wearing yellow badges should be advised that they 
    are inappropriate under the rules of the House.

    The badges in question urged support of military assistance to the 
Nicaraguan Contras. In recent years, some Members and staff have worn 
various badges on the floor to convey political messages to their 
colleagues and to the TV audience. Under the definition of decorum and 
debate in clause 1 of Rule XIV, a Member must first seek recognition 
and then speak his message, or use exhibits as provided in Rule XXX 
subject to approval of the House if objection is made.

[[Page 11316]]