[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 12, Chapter 29 (Sections 1-34), Volume 13, Chapter 29 (Sections 35-end, plus index)]
[Chapter 29. Consideration and Debate]
[G. References to House, Committees, or Members]
[Â§ 56. Form of Reference to Members]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 10813-10818]
 
                               CHAPTER 29
 
                        Consideration and Debate
 
             G. REFERENCES TO HOUSE, COMMITTEES, OR MEMBERS
 
Sec. 56. Form of Reference to Members

    In delivering remarks on the floor, Members must refer to other 
Members--not by name or by personal pronoun--but by the third-person 
form, ``the gentleman/gentlewoman from -------------- 
[state]''.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See Rule XIV clause 1, House Rules and Manual Sec. 749 (1995). 
        Parliamentary law as to the form of reference to Members is 
        contained in Jefferson's Manual, House Rules and Manual 
        Sec. Sec. 354, 361 (1995). See also 5 Hinds' Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 5131, 5140-5146; and 8 Cannon's Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 2526, 2536.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Form; References to Members by Name

Sec. 56.1 Reference in debate to another Member by name is not in order 
    and Members must be referred to as ``the gentleman from'' or ``the 
    gentlewoman from'' a certain state.

    On Feb. 27, 1946,(6) Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, 
ruled in answer to a parliamentary inquiry that in referring to another 
Member in debate Members should ``refer to the gentleman from a certain 
state or the gentlewoman from a certain state.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 92 Cong. Rec. 1726, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Speaker has so ruled on numerous occasions,(7) and 
the Speaker or the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may on his 
own initiative call a Member to order for violating the 
rule,(8) although the Presiding Officer normally waits for a 
point of order on the subject.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See, for example, 103 Cong. Rec. 4813, 85th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 
        29, 1957; 86 Cong. Rec. 13477, 76th Cong. 3d Sess., Oct. 9, 
        1940; 81 Cong. Rec. 2846, 75th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 29, 1937; 
        80 Cong. Rec. 5075, 5076, 74th Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 7, 1936; 80 
        Cong. Rec. 3577, 74th Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 11, 1936; and 80 
        Cong. Rec. 3286, 74th Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 4, 1936.
            On Mar. 21, 1938 [83 Cong. Rec. 3768, 3769, 75th Cong. 3d 
        Sess.], while the House was discussing the proper form of 
        reference to Members, Mr. Fritz G. Lanham (Tex.), inquired 
        whether it would be proper to mention the name of a Member in 
        debate in order to differentiate between two Members from the 
        same state who had addressed themselves to the same 
        proposition. Speaker William B. Bankhead (Ala.), in discussing 
        that inquiry and several others, stated that a Member could not 
        be referred to by name in debate.
 8. See, for example, 103 Cong. Rec. 4813, 85th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 
        29, 1957; and 80 Cong. Rec. 3577, 74th Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 11, 
        1936 (comment of Speaker Joseph W. Byrns [Tenn.]).
 9. See, for example, 103 Cong. Rec. 4813, 85th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 
        29, 1957 (remarks of Mr. Clare E. Hoffman [Mich.]); and 81 
        Cong. Rec. 2846, 75th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 29, 1937.

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

[[Page 10814]]

Sec. 56.2 It is not in order in debate to address remarks to an 
    individual Member in his seat by use of the personal pronoun 
    ``you.''

    On Apr. 7, 1936,(10) Mr. Marion A. Zioncheck, of 
Washington, was challenging the revision of his remarks by Mr. Thomas 
L. Blanton, of Texas, in the Congressional Record. In the course of 
challenging Mr. Blanton, Mr. Zioncheck interrogated him and repeatedly 
addressed Mr. Blanton as ``you.'' ``Did you write this in or did you 
not? Did you or did you not?'' Mr. John J. O'Connor, of New York, arose 
to make the point of order that the person who has the floor and who is 
addressing the House has no right to address a Member in his seat. 
Speaker Joseph W. Byrns, of Tennessee, sustained the point of order and 
stated that ``the Member who is speaking does not have the right to 
address his remarks to any individual Member in his seat.'' 
(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 80 Cong. Rec. 5075, 5076, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
11. For other occasions where it has been held out of order to address 
        a Member as ``you,'' see 91 Cong. Rec. 9515, 79th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., Oct. 10, 1945; and 80 Cong. Rec. 3286, 74th Cong. 2d 
        Sess., Mar. 4, 1936.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 56.3 A Member in debate may not refer to another by name even 
    though he preface it by referring to him as ``the gentleman from . 
    . .''

    On June 7, 1933,(12) Mr. Bertrand H. Snell, of New York, 
made the point of order that Mr. Thomas L. Blanton, of Texas, was 
referring to him by name. Speaker Henry T. Rainey, of Illinois, 
sustained the point of order, ruling that Mr. Blanton could not refer 
to Mr. Snell by name even if he used the form ``the gentleman from New 
York, Mr. Snell.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 77 Cong. Rec. 5206, 5207, 73d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 56.4 A statement in debate using a word which was also the name of 
    a Member was held not to be a breach of the rule requiring Members 
    to address colleagues in the third person where the Member speaking 
    assured the Speaker that he was not referring to a Member of the 
    House.

    On Oct. 9, 1940,(13) Mr. Sol Bloom, of New York, 
objected to the alleged use by Mr. John C. Schafer, of Wisconsin, of 
Mr.

[[Page 10815]]

Bloom's name in debate rather than referring to him as the gentleman 
from New York. Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, ruled, on the assurance 
of Mr. Schafer he was not referring to his colleague Mr. Bloom, that he 
was not speaking out of order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 86 Cong. Rec. 13477, 76th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 56.5 In referring to another Member in debate the proper reference 
    is ``the gentleman from `the state from which he comes' '' and not 
    ``the 
    Jewish gentleman from New York.''

    On Oct. 24, 1945,(14) Mr. John E. Rankin, of 
Mississippi, in debate referred to Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New York, as 
``the Jewish gentleman from New York.'' The words were demanded to be 
taken down by Mr. Celler, and Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, ruled as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 91 Cong. Rec. 10032, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        If the gentleman will allow the Chair, there is one way to 
    refer to a Member of the House of Representatives and that is, 
    ``the gentleman from'' the State from which he comes. Any other 
    appellation is a violation of the rules.

    The Speaker then ruled that Mr. Rankin could refer to Mr. Celler as 
a member of a minority group without violating House rules.

Sec. 56.6 Where a Member referred in debate to a Member as ``another 
    guy,'' a question of personal privilege was stated, the reference 
    was stricken from the Record, and the phrase ``the gentleman from 
    Massachusetts'' substituted therefor.

    On Aug. 4, 1970,(15) Mr. Page H. Belcher, of Oklahoma, 
referred to Mr. Silvio O. Conte, of Massachusetts, in debate as 
``another guy'' who was ``horning in on the act'' in relation to a 
certain measure before the House. Rather than demand that the words be 
taken down, Mr. Conte rose to a point of personal privilege and 
requested a definition from Mr. Belcher of ``another guy'' and 
``horning in.'' After some discussion, Mr. Thomas G. Abernethy, of 
Mississippi, stated the point of order that the proper procedure was to 
take the words down and have a ruling by the Chair on whether they were 
in order. Speaker Pro Tempore Edward P. Boland, of Massachusetts, ruled 
that the point of order came too late and entertained a unanimous-
consent request that the words ``another guy'' used by Mr. Belcher be 
stricken from the

[[Page 10816]]

Record and be replaced by ``the gentleman from Massachusetts.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 116 Cong. Rec. 27130, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Responding to a ``Colleague''

Sec. 56.7 The Speaker advised a Member as to the use of the term 
    ``colleague'' in replying to the question of a Member.

    On Mar. 1, 1940,(16) Speaker William B. Bankhead, of 
Alabama, ruled that certain words used in debate by Mr. Clare E. 
Hoffman, of Michigan, in relation to Mr. Frank E. Hook, of Michigan, 
were out of order, being directed to personality. Mr. Hoffman stated 
that he had been attempting to reply to a question of Mr. Hook and 
submitted the parliamentary inquiry to the Speaker as to how he could 
reply to a question by another Member without referring to him 
personally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 86 Cong. Rec. 2229, 76th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Speaker Bankhead ruled as follows:

        In reply to the question, the Chair suggests that the gentleman 
    might say, ``In response to the inquiry of my colleague from 
    Michigan.''

Sec. 56.8 Under section 361 of Jefferson's Manual, it is not in order 
    in debate to refer to or to address a Member by his or her first 
    name.

    The Chairman (17) made the following statement on Sept. 
29, 1977,(18) during consideration of H.R. 6566 (the ERDA 
military authorization for fiscal 1978) in the Committee of the Whole:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. John Brademas (Ind.).
18. 123 Cong. Rec. 31515, 95th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: . . . The Chair would advise the Members it is 
    against the rules to use first names and would advise the Members 
    not to further use first names.

Sec. 56.9 Clause 1 of Rule XIV and section 361 of Jefferson's Manual 
    prohibit a Member from engaging in personalities in debate and 
    specifically require references to another Member only ``by his 
    seat in the House, or who spoke last, or on the other side of the 
    question'', and not by name or in the second person.

    During debate on the Military Procurement Authorization for fiscal 
year 1983 (H.R. 6030) in Committee of the Whole on July 21, 
1982,(19) the following exchange occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 128 Cong. Rec. 17314, 17315, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Samuel S.] Stratton [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, the 
    gentleman is in a sense remaking his speech again and not 
    responding to my point.
        Mr. [Nicholas] Mavroules [of Massachusetts]: Well, Sam, I am 
    responding to you. I am going to ask a basic question.

[[Page 10817]]

        If we are going to discuss basic defense posture for this 
    country, why 
    is it always we go on to the MX missile . . . .
        The Chairman Pro Tempore: (20) The Chair will state 
    to the gentleman that references to Members should not be by 
    familiar name but by reference to the gentleman from the State of 
    New York or the gentleman from the State of Massachusetts, rather 
    than their familiar names. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Les AuCoin (Oreg.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair will . . . advise all Members that references to 
    Members shall not be by their familiar names, under House rules. . 
    . .
        The Chair is not addressing the gentleman from New York. The 
    Chair is addressing all Members, on the basis of what he has heard 
    in the discussion.

Sec. 56.10 The proper form of reference to another Member is to the 
    ``gentleman (or gentlewoman) from (state),'' and not any other 
    appellation or characterization.

    On Oct. 2, 1984,(1) during consideration of the balanced 
budget bill (H.R. 6300) in the House, the Chair, in responding to a 
parliamentary inquiry, reminded the Members of the proper form of 
reference to other Members:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 130 Cong. Rec. 28519, 28520, 98th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Daniel E.] Lungren [of California]: Well, Mr. Speaker, 
    thank God this is not a medical research center, because if you 
    believe laetrile cures cancer, you think that Dr. ``Feelgood's'' 
    bill here on the floor is going to do something, but the fact of 
    the matter is that it has nothing to do with the legislation on the 
    floor; it has to do with the will of the Members of Congress. . . .
        Mr. [Ronald V.] Dellums [of California]: Mr. Speaker, is it a 
    violation of the comity and custom of the House to refer to a 
    Member of this body in terms other than as the gentleman from a 
    particular State?
        The Chairman of this committee was referred to as ``Dr. 
    Feelgood Jones,'' and I would think that is in violation of the 
    comity and custom of the House. . . .
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (2) The gentleman is 
    correct in stating that it is the custom and practice and tradition 
    of the body that Members of the body should be referred to as the 
    gentleman or gentlewoman from a certain State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 56.11 Members in debate should not refer to other Members by their 
    first names; rather such references should be in the third person, 
    by state delegation.

    The following proceedings occurred in the House on Mar. 7, 1985: 
(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 131 Cong. Rec. 5028, 99th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert S.] Walker [of Pennsylvania]: Sure, I do very much, 
    and

[[Page 10818]]

    that is the reason why I want every one of those votes counted to 
    determine the result. . . .
        Mr. [Mickey] Leland [of Texas]: Yes, but now, Bob, you will 
    admit----
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (4) Will the gentleman 
    refrain from using personal names and use formal address in 
    addressing another Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Dale E. Kildee (Mich.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------