[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 14,  Chapter 30]
[Chapter 30. Voting]
[B. Non-recorded Votes]
[Â§ 15. Voting by the Chair on Division Votes]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 11542-11547]
 
                               CHAPTER 30
 
                                 Voting
 
                         B. NON-RECORDED VOTES
 
Sec. 15. Voting by the Chair on Division Votes

Affirmative Tie-breaking Votes

Sec. 15.1 The Speaker has voted in the affirmative on a division vote 
    to break a tie.

    On July 15, 1937,(8) the House agreed to the conference 
report on the bill (H.R. 6958) making appropriations for the Department 
of the Interior for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1938, and for other 
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 81 Cong. Rec. 7184, 7197, 7198, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the course of the bill's consideration, Senate amendments 
remaining in disagreement were discussed in chronological order. Among 
them was Senate amendment No. 89, which provided funds for a project in 
Arizona to divert certain waters.
    With respect to this amendment, Mr. James G. Scrugham, of Nevada, 
moved that the House recede and concur in the amendment. Mr. Abe 
Murdock, of Utah, then demanded a division of the

[[Page 11543]]

question. The Speaker (9) having honored this request, the 
question before the House was whether or not to recede.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The question was taken; and on a division demanded by Mr. Robert F. 
Rich, of Pennsylvania, there were-ayes 58, noes 58. The Chair then 
immediately voted ``aye,'' breaking the tie.
    The Speaker's vote notwithstanding, the House subsequently decided 
not to recede by a vote by the yeas and nays.

Sec. 15.2 The Chairman has voted in the affirmative, on a division 
    vote, to break a tie.

    On Mar. 8, 1961,(10) the House resolved itself into the 
Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of a bill (H.R. 
4510) to provide a special program for feed grains for 1961.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 107 Cong. Rec. 3491, 3508, 3511, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the course of the bill's consideration, Mr. Ralph Harvey, of 
Indiana, offered an amendment authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture 
to fix price supports for corn up to 75 percent of parity.
    Following some discussion of this amendment, Mr. Harold D. Cooley, 
of North Carolina, moved that all debate on the Harvey amendment close 
in five minutes. The Chairman (11) put the question; it was 
taken; and on a division demanded by Mr. Leslie C. Arends, of Illinois, 
there were-ayes 121, noes 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Frank N. Ikard (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At this point, the Chair immediately voted ``aye.'' (12) 
And, while a teller vote remained to be held,(13) the 
outcome did not change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. For a similar instance, see 101 Cong. Rec. 6244, 84th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., May 12, 1955.
13. See Sec. 15.3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 15.3 Where the Chair had voted in the affirmative on a division 
    vote-thereby breaking a tie on a motion to terminate debate, 
    tellers were demanded, and the motion was agreed to.

    The House having resolved into the Committee of the Whole for the 
further consideration of a bill (H.R. 4510) (14) pertaining 
to feed grain programs,(15) discussion ensued, and a motion 
was ultimately proposed to close debate within five minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. See Sec. 15.2, supra.
15. 107 Cong. Rec. 3491, 3511, 87th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 8, 1961.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The question was taken; a division was demanded by Mr. Leslie C. 
Arends, of Illinois; and there were--ayes 121, noes 121. The

[[Page 11544]]

Chairman voted ``aye,'' immediately thereafter, whereupon Mr. Arends 
demanded tellers.
    Tellers having been ordered, the Committee again divided, and the 
tellers reported that there were-ayes 149, noes 123. Accordingly, the 
motion to close debate was agreed to.

Negative Tie-breaking Votes

Sec. 15.4 The Chairman has voted in the negative, on a division vote, 
    to break a tie.

    On Feb. 26, 1964,(16) the House resolved itself into the 
Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of a bill (H.R. 
9022) to amend the International Development Association Act to 
authorize the United States to participate in an increase in the 
resources of the International Development Association.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 110 Cong. Rec. 3628, 3648, 3649, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following considerable discussion of the bill, Mr. Frank T. Bow, of 
Ohio, offered a preferential motion that the Committee rise and report 
the bill back to the House with the recommendation that the enacting 
clause be stricken out.

    When the question was taken, on a division demanded by Mr. Bow, 
there were--ayes 94, noes 94. The Chair (17) then 
immediately voted ``no,'' thereby breaking the tie, although the 
Chair's vote was not decisive.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. John J. Flynt, Jr. (Ga.).
18. While a teller vote followed, the motion was still rejected; see 
        Sec. 15.5, infra. For a comparable instance in which the teller 
        vote altered the outcome, however, see Sec. 15.8, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 15.5 Where the Chair had voted in the negative on a division vote-
    thereby breaking a tie on a preferential motion-tellers were 
    demanded and the motion was defeated.

    The House having resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole in 
order to consider a bill (H.R. 9022) (19) pertaining to the 
International Development Association,(20) Mr. Frank T. Bow, 
of Ohio, ultimately offered a preferential motion that the Committee 
rise and report the bill back to the House with the recommendation that 
the enacting clause be stricken out.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. See also Sec. 15.4, supra.
20. 110 Cong. Rec. 3628, 3648, 3649, 88th Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 26, 
        1964.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The question was put and, a division having been demanded by Mr. 
Bow, there were--ayes 93, noes 94. Chairman John J. Flynt, Jr., of 
Georgia, then announced that he was voting in the negative, although 
his vote was not decisive, whereupon Mr. Bow demanded tellers.

[[Page 11545]]

    Tellers having been ordered, the Committee again divided; and the 
tellers reported that there were--ayes 120, noes 128. Accordingly, the 
motion was rejected.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. For a comparable instance in which the Chairman also cast a 
        negative division vote to break a tie, see 106 Cong. Rec. 
        11301, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., May 26, 1960, where a subsequent 
        teller vote reversed the outcome, thereby resulting in the 
        adoption of the amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tie-creating Vote

Sec. 15.6 The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole has voted by 
    division to make a tie and thus defeat an amendment.

    On June 16, 1966,(2) the House resolved itself into the 
Committee of the Whole for the consideration of a bill (H.R. 14025) to 
extend the Defense Production Act of 1950, and for other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 112 Cong. Rec. 13351, 13366, 13367, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the course of the bill's consideration, Mr. H. R. Gross, of 
Iowa, offered an amendment and, following brief debate, the Chairman 
(3) put the question before the Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The question was taken and, on a division demanded by Mr. Gross, 
there were--ayes 30, noes 29. The Chair voted ``no,'' thereby forcing a 
tie, and preventing adoption. A subsequent teller vote obtained similar 
results, and the amendment was rejected.

Sec. 15.7 A division vote on a motion to recede and concur having 
    resulted in a tie, the Speaker Pro Tempore abstained from voting, 
    and the motion was rejected.

    On Sept. 18, 1962,(4) the House had under consideration 
the conference report on a bill (H.R. 12648) making appropriations for 
the Department of Agriculture and related agencies for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1964, and for other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 108 Cong. Rec. 19708, 19714, 19715, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During these proceedings, the Senate amendments in disagreement 
were taken up, one of which was Senate amendment No. 2 which mandated 
an increase in the funding of research on agricultural production and 
product uti-lization. Mr. Jamie L. Whitten, of Mississippi, who opposed 
the amendment, offered a motion to insist upon disagreement. Mr. James 
F. Battin, of Montana, then offered a preferential motion that the 
House recede and concur in the amendment and that motion was put to a 
vote.

[[Page 11546]]

    On a division demanded by Mr. Battin, there were--ayes 37, noes 37. 
The Speaker Pro Tempore (5) chose not to vote and the motion 
to recede and concur was therefore rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: It is apparent from the rule (6) 
that the Speaker, as Presiding Officer of the House, would be required 
to vote to break a tie if his vote were intended to result in the 
question being agreed to, and to make a tie if his vote were intended 
to result in the question being lost. In oth-er words, the Speaker's 
vote is ``decisive'' only if the result would be different were he to 
refrain from voting. The language of the rule is intended to reach all 
situations where the Speaker's vote would change the result. Similarly, 
a Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the 
Union, appointed by the Speaker to preside over the consideration of a 
bill, must vote to make or break a tie where his vote would be 
decisive. But, although both the Speaker and the Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole may exercise their prerogatives as 
constitutional Members of the House to vote on any question, the 
traditional approach was to refrain. Since the advent of electronic 
voting in the House and recorded votes in Committee of the Whole, 
Members serving in the chair routinely exercise the right to vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. Rule I clause 6, House Rules and Manual Sec. 632 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nondecisive Votes

Sec. 15.8 The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole has voted by 
    division even though his vote was not decisive.

    On Nov. 16, 1967,(7) the House resolved itself into the 
Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of a bill (S. 
2388) to amend the Economic Opportunity Act, to authorize funds for the 
continued operation of economic opportunity programs, and to authorize 
emergency employment legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 113 Cong. Rec. 32636, 32687-89, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the course of the bill's consideration, Mr. John M. Ashbrook, of 
Ohio, offered an amendment to limit the number of ``supergrades,'' 
i.e., GS-16, 17, and 18 positions to be approved for the Office of 
Economic Opportunity. Following debate, on a division vote demanded by 
Mr. Ashbrook, there were-ayes 74, noes 74. The Chairman (8) 
then voted ``no,'' (9) and Mr. Ashbrook

[[Page 11547]]

immediately demanded a teller vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. John J. Rooney (N.Y.).
 9. While the Chair's action broke a tie on the issue, since his vote 
        was cast in the negative, its practical effect on the 
        amendment's adoption, of course, was no different from a 
        decision to abstain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tellers having been ordered, the Committee again divided, and the 
tellers reported that there were-ayes 118, noes 110. Accordingly, the 
amendment was agreed to, and the Chairman's division vote did not prove 
to be dispositive of the issue.