[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 14, Chapter 30]
[Chapter 30. Voting]
[D. Division of the Question for Voting]
[§ 49. Propositions Affecting Several Persons]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
[Page 11775-11782]
CHAPTER 30
Voting
D. DIVISION OF THE QUESTION FOR VOTING
Sec. 49. Propositions Affecting Several Persons
The rules of the House confirm that a resolution electing Members
to standing committees of the House is not subject to division (Rule
XVI clause 6). This prohibition is precise but other resolutions naming
more than one person may be subject to a division if drafted in a
manner which makes the proposition susceptible to the
request.
-------------------
Generally
Sec. 49.1 A resolution directing the Speaker to certify a report
containing the names of three persons refusing to testify has been
held to be indivisible.
[[Page 11776]]
On May 28, 1936,(8) Mr. Charles J. Bell, of Missouri,
sought the certification of the Speaker with respect to the report of
the committee (9) he chaired regarding the refusal of three
witnesses to testify before that committee. The resolution embodying
this request read as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. 80 Cong. Rec. 8222, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
9. The Select Committee to Investigate Old Age Pension Plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Resolution 532
Resolved, That the Speaker of the House of Representatives
certify the report of the Select Committee to Investigate Old Age
Pension Plans as to the willful and deliberate refusal of Francis
E. Townsend, Clinton Wunder, and John B. Kiefer to testify before
said committee, together with all the facts in connection
therewith, under seal of the House of Representatives, to the
United States attorney for the District of Columbia, to the end
that the said Francis E. Townsend, Clinton Wunder, and John B.
Kiefer may be proceeded against in the manner and form provided by
law.
Shortly thereafter, Mr. Everett M. Dirksen, of Illinois, inquired
as to the resolution's divisibility.
Mr. Dirksen: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker: (10) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Dirksen: Is the resolution divisible as to the three
gentlemen named?
The Speaker: It is not.
Sec. 49.2 A demand for a division of the question on a resolution
confirming several nominations is in order at any time during the
consideration of the resolution or after the previous question has
been ordered thereon but before the question has been put by the
Chair.
On Mar. 19, 1975,(11) a resolution confirming certain
nominees to the Federal Election Commission was made in order by
unanimous consent. The proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 121 Cong. Rec. 7344, 7345, 7353, 7354, 94th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Wayne L.] Hays of Ohio: Mr. Speaker, by direction of the
Committee on House Administration, I call up House Resolution 314
and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 314
Resolved, That pursuant to the Federal Election Campaign
Act Amendments of 1974, Public Law 93-443, the following named
individuals be confirmed for appointment to the Federal
Election Commission:
(a) Joan D. Aikens of Pennsylvania for a term ending on the
April 30 first occurring more than six months after the date on
which she is appointed;
(b) Robert O. Tiernan of Rhode Island for a term ending one
year after
[[Page 11777]]
the April 30 on which the term of the member referred to in
clause (a) immediate above ends;
(c) Neil O. Staebler of Michigan for a term ending two
years thereafter;
(d) Thomas E. Harris of Virginia for a term ending three
years thereafter;
(e) Vernon W. Thomson of Wisconsin for a term ending four
years thereafter; and
(f) Thomas B. Curtis of Missouri for a term ending five
years thereafter.
Mr. Hays of Ohio (during the reading): Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the resolution be considered as read and
printed in the Record.
The Speaker: (12) Is there objection to the request
of the gentleman from Ohio?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was no objection.
The Speaker: Is there objection to the present consideration of
the resolution?
Mr. [William L.] Dickinson [of Alabama]: Mr. Speaker, reserving
the right to object, and I do not think I will object at this time,
but I would like to ask the distinguished chairman of the committee
a question.
It is my understanding that there will be approximately 1 hour
of debate, which the gentleman from Ohio has agreed to share with
the minority?
Mr. Hays of Ohio: That is correct.
Mr. Dickinson: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
Mr. Dickinson: Mr. Speaker, is this resolution, as it is
presented at this time or later, divisible so that we can demand a
separate vote on one or all of the six nominees?
The Speaker: If consent for the consideration of the resolution
is given, the resolution is subject to a division of the question
with respect to the various nominations.
Mr. Dickinson: And at that time it will be proper for me, or
any other Member, to ask for a separate vote on any one or more of
the nominees?
The Speaker: If consent is granted for the consideration of the
resolution, any Member can ask for a division of the question at
the proper time.
Mr. Dickinson: I thank the Speaker.
Mr. Hays of Ohio: Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Dickinson: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
The Speaker: Does the gentleman from Ohio yield to the
gentleman from Alabama?
Mr. Hays of Ohio: I yield to the gentleman from Alabama.
The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
Mr. Dickinson: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to make sure I understood,
and I would ask the Chair, when is the proper time to ask for a
division of the question?
The Speaker: Now, or when the previous question is ordered.
Mr. Dickinson: Mr. Speaker, I will at this time ask for a
division of the nominees individually.
The Speaker: The gentleman asks for a division on all the
nominations, and the question will be divided when put. . . .
The previous question was ordered.
The Speaker: Pursuant to the request of the gentleman from
Alabama
[[Page 11778]]
(Mr. Dickinson), the question on the adoption of the resolution
will be divided.
The Clerk will report the first portion of the resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
Resolved, That pursuant to the Federal Election Campaign
Act Amendments of 1974, Public Law 93-443, the following named
individuals be confirmed for appointment to the Federal
Election Commission:
(a) Joan D. Aikens of Pennsylvania for a term ending on the
April 30 first occurring more than six months after the date on
which she is appointed;
The Speaker: The question is on the part of the resolution
including the nomination of Joan D. Aikens.
The first part of the resolution was agreed to and the
nomination was confirmed.
The Speaker: The Clerk will report the next portion of the
resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
(b) Robert O. Tiernan of Rhode Island for a term ending one
year after the April 30 on which the term of the member
referred to in clause (a) immediate above ends;
The Speaker: The question is on the portion of the resolution
which includes the nomination of Robert O. Tiernan.
Clause (b) of the resolution was agreed to and the nomination
was confirmed.
The Speaker: The Clerk will report the next portion of the
resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
(c) Neil O. Staebler of Michigan for a term ending two
years thereafter:
The Speaker: The question is on the portion of the resolution
which includes the nomination of Neil O. Staebler.
The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. Dickinson: Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
. . .
Clause (c) of the resolution was agreed to and the nomination
was confirmed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Speaker: The Clerk will report the next portion of the
resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
(d) Thomas E. Harris of Virginia for a term ending three
years thereafter;
The Speaker: The question is on clause (d) of the resolution
including the nomination of Thomas E. Harris.
Clause (d) of the resolution was agreed to and the nomination
was confirmed.
The Speaker: The Clerk will report the next portion of the
resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
(e) Vernon W. Thomson of Wisconsin for a term ending four
years thereafter; and
The Speaker: The question is on clause (e) of the resolution
which includes the nomination of Vernon W. Thomson.
Clause (e) was agreed to and the nomination was confirmed.
The Speaker: The Clerk will report the final portion of the
resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
(f) Thomas B. Curtis of Missouri for a term ending five
years thereafter.
The Speaker: The question is on the final clause of the
resolution including the nomination of Thomas B. Curtis.
[[Page 11779]]
Clause (f) was agreed to and the nomination was confirmed.
A motion to reconsider the votes whereby the various parts of
the resolution were agreed to was laid on the table.
The Speaker: The Clerk will notify the Senate of the action of
the House.
Sec. 49.3 A resolution with two resolve clauses separately directing
the Speaker to certify to the United States attorney the
contemptuous conduct of two individuals is subject to a demand for
a division of the question as to each individual.
In the 74th Congress, Speaker Joseph W. Byrns, of Tennessee, had
held that one contempt resolution certifying three persons in one
resolved clause was not divisible since the resolution was drafted in a
manner that was grammatically indivisible. In the present case, the
Foreign Affairs Committee was advised to draft separate resolved
clauses for each witness, as logically each certification should be
subject to a separate vote. On Feb. 27, 1986,(13) the
chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs sought recognition:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 132 Cong. Rec. 3040, 3048, 3049, 3050, 3061, 3062, 99th Cong. 2d
Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Dante B.] Fascell [of Florida]: Mr. Speaker, by direction
of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, I offer a privileged
resolution (H. Res. 384) and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 384
Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 192 and 194, the
Speaker of the House certify the report of the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, detailing the refusal of Ralph Bernstein to
answer questions of the Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific
Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to the United
States Attorney for the District of Columbia, for him to be
proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law; and
be it further
Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 192 and 194, the
Speaker of the House certify the report of the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, detailing the refusal of Joseph Bernstein to
answer questions of the Subcommittee of Asian and Pacific
Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to the United
States Attorney for the District of Columbia, for him to be
proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law.
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman from Florida [Mr.
Fascell] is recognized for 1 hour. . . .
Mr. Fascell: Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I
yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Leach]. I yield
the remainder of my time for the purposes of debate to the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Solarz], and pending that, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the approval of House Report
99-462, which concerns proceedings against Ralph Bernstein and
Joseph Bernstein. This action is made necessary by the
[[Page 11780]]
refusal of these two individuals to cooperate with the
investigation of the Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs of
the Committee on Foreign Affairs. . . .
Mr. [Jim] Leach of Iowa: Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the
report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs regarding the refusals
of Joseph and Ralph Bernstein to answer certain questions. . . .
The subcommittee's inquiry was well founded in legislative
purpose. Joseph and Ralph Bernstein demonstrated a contempt of
Congress by refusing to cooperate with that inquiry. However, I
would like to emphasize again, and I'm sure the distinguished
chairman of the Subcommittee share this preventive, that the
subcommittee prefers to seek information and not punitive actions
against these witnesses. They hold the keys to their potential
incarceration in their pockets. We continue to hope that Joseph and
Ralph Bernstein will cooperate with the subcommittee in its search
for the truth in this investigation. In the meantime, I urge my
colleagues to support the contempt citation before us to protect
the legislative powers and responsibilities of this institution. In
this regard, however, as they are individuals of differing
circumstances, I demand division of the question.
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman's rights will be
protected. The question will be divided. . . .
Mr. [Stephen J.] Solarz [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
Mr. Leach of Iowa: Mr. Speaker, I renew my demand for a
division.
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the first part
of the resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 192 and 194, the
Speaker of the House certify the report of the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, detailing the refusal of Ralph Bernstein to
answer questions of the Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific
Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to the United
States Attorney for the District of Columbia, for him to be
proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law;
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the first part of
the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced
that the ayes appeared to have it.
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the second part
of the resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 192 and 194, the
Speaker of the House certify the report of the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, detailing the refusal of Joseph Bernstein to
answer questions of the Subcommittee of Asian and Pacific
Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to the United
States Attorney for the District of Columbia, for him to be
proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law.
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the second part of
the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced
that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Leach of Iowa: Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
[[Page 11781]]
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes
343, noes 50, not voting 41, as follows: . . .
Sec. 49.4 Where an amendment in the form of a limitation is offered to
an appropriation bill providing that no part of the appropriation
shall be paid to several individuals named, such amendment is
divisible and a separate vote may be had on each name.
On Feb. 5, 1943,(14) Mr. Joseph E. Hendricks, of
Florida, offered an amendment to an appropriation bill then before the
Committee of the Whole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 89 Cong. Rec. 645, 646, 78th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Hendricks: Page 12, line 22, after
the word ``Treasury'', strike out the period and insert a colon
and the following: ``Provided further, That no part of any
appropriation contained in this act shall be used to pay the
compensation of William Pickens, Frederick L. Schuman, Goodwin
B. Watson, William E. Dodd, Jr., Paul R. Porter, John Herling,
Paul F. Brissenden, David J. Saposs, Maurice Parmelee, Harold
Loeb, Sam Schmerler, Emil Jack Lever, David Lasser, Tom
Tippett, Henry C. Alsberg, David Karr, Guiseppi Facci, David
Wahl, Hugh Miller, Walter Gellhorn, Karl Borders, Jack Fahy,
Nathaniel Weyl, Robert Morss Lovett, Merle Vincent, Alice
Barrows, Arthur F. Goldschmidt, Marcus I. Goldman, Leonard Emil
Mins, Henry T. Hunt, Mary McLeod Bethune, Harry C. Lamberton,
T. A. Bisson, Katherine Kellock, Jay Deiss, Milton V. Freeman,
George Slaff, A. C. Shire, and Edward Scheunemann.''
Mr. John H. Folger, of North Carolina, rose subsequently to make a
point of order and stated:
. . . Thirty-eight or forty names are included within the
amendment, and I make the point of order that it is out of order
for that reason. Each one must be taken separately. It is a
divisible amendment.
The Chairman (15) subsequently overruled Mr. Folger's
point of order, noting that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. William W. Courtney (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . [W]hen it comes to voting on the amendment, should the
House so desire, the amendment is divisible and a separate vote
could be had with respect to each individual name.
Sec. 49.5 A resolution reported from an elections committee providing
that one individual is not entitled to a seat in the House and that
another individual is entitled to a seat has been held to be
divisible.
On June 9, 1938,(16) Mr. John H. Kerr, of North
Carolina, called up House Resolution 482, which stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 83 Cong. Rec. 8642, 8660, 75th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, That Arthur B. Jenks is not entitled to a seat in the
House of
[[Page 11782]]
Representatives in the Seventy-fifth Congress from the First
Congressional District of the State of New Hampshire; and be it
further
Resolved, That Alphonse Roy is entitled to a seat in the House
of Representatives in the Seventy-fifth Congress from the First
Congressional District of the State of New Hampshire.
After debate, Mr. Bertrand H. Snell, of New York, demanded a
division of the question.
The Speaker (17) ruled that Mr. Snell was ``entitled to
ask for a division of the question.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to Election of House Officers
Sec. 49.6 Prior to adoption of the rules, a resolution providing for
the election of the officers of the House is divisible.
On Jan. 21, 1971,(18) Mr. Olin E. Teague, of Texas,
sought immediate consideration of the following resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 117 Cong. Rec. 13, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 1
Resolved, That W. Pat Jennings, of the Commonwealth of
Virginia, be, and he is hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
That Zeake W. Johnson, Jr., of the State of Tennessee, be, and
he is hereby, chosen Sergeant at Arms of the House of
Representatives;
That William M. Miller, of the State of Mississippi, be, and he
is hereby, chosen Doorkeeper of the House of Representatives;
That H. H. Morris, of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, be, and he
is hereby, chosen Postmaster of the House of Representatives;
That Reverend Edward G. Latch, D.D., of the District of
Columbia, be, and he is hereby, chosen Chaplain of the House of
Representatives.
Mr. John B. Anderson, of Illinois, then requested a division of the
question so that a separate vote could be obtained with respect to the
Office of the Chaplain. The Speaker (19) honored Mr.
Anderson's request, and that portion of the resolution was voted on and
agreed to.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Carl Albert (Okla.).
20. For a similar instance, see 113 Cong. Rec. 27, 90th Cong. 1st
Sess., Jan. 10, 1967. This procedure is usually followed on
opening day of each Congress in order to show unanimity of
support for the Chaplain of the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------