[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 14,  Chapter 30]
[Chapter 30. Voting]
[E. Postponing Votes; Clustering Votes; Reduced Voting Time; Separate Votes]
[Â§ 54. Postponing Votes]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 11810-11824]
 
                               CHAPTER 30
 
                                 Voting
 
 E. POSTPONING VOTES; CLUSTERING VOTES; REDUCED VOTING TIME; SEPARATE 
                                 VOTES
 
Sec. 54. Postponing Votes

Postponement of Votes to Next Legislative Day

Sec. 54.1 An announcement by the Chair, after midnight on one 
    legislative day, that votes will be taken ``tomorrow'' results in 
    their postponement until the next legislative day. Under Rule I 
    clause 5(b), the period for postponement of votes is measured in 
    legislative, not calendar, days.

    On Oct. 15, 1990,(15) the House remained in session 
until after midnight and considered several motions to suspend the 
rules. When the Speaker Pro Tempore, Romano L. Mazzoli, of Kentucky, 
announced that he would postpone recorded votes ordered on the series 
of motions until ``tomorrow,'' a parliamentary inquiry was directed to 
the Chair as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 136 Cong. Rec. 29286, 101st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Barney] Frank [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Frank: Mr. Speaker, what day is tomorrow?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair would answer the gentleman's 
    question by stating that it is on the next legislative day.

By Speaker's Authority--Postponement of Suspension Votes; Chair's 
    Discretion

Sec. 54.2 Clause 5(b) does not require the Speaker to announce at the 
    beginning of consideration of a motion to suspend the rules his 
    intention to postpone proceedings if roll call votes are demanded.

    Under Rule I clause 5(b), the Speaker may postpone further 
proceedings after a record vote is ordered or a point of no quorum 
raised under Rule XV clause 4.
    While the Chair, as a courtesy to all Members, normally an

[[Page 11811]]

nounces his intention with respect to the postponing of votes before 
exercising his authority under Rule I clause 5(b), the rule does not 
require such prior notification. The proceedings of Feb. 23, 
1993,(16) are illustrative:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 139 Cong. Rec. 3281, 3282, 103d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (17) The question is on the 
    motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Clay] that the 
    House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 20, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Kweisi Mfume (Md.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Wolf) there were--ayes 10, noes 16.
        Mr. [William (Bill)] Clay [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, I object 
    to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the 
    point of order that a quorum is not present.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair announces that pursuant to 
    clause 5 of rule I, further proceedings on this motion will be 
    postponed until tomorrow.
        The point of no quorum is withdrawn.
        Mr. [Frank R.] Wolf [of Virginia]: Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. Wolf: I would ask the Chair if he could tell me why the 
    vote was postponed.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair reserves the right to 
    postpone the vote and has made a determination to do so.
        Mr. Wolf: I thank the Chair.
        Mr. [Robert S.] Walker [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, I offer 
    a privileged motion. . . .
        So the motion to adjourn was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. . . .
        Mr. [Albert R.] Wynn [of Maryland]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that the following Members be permitted to extend 
    their remarks and to include extraneous material in that section of 
    the Record entitled ``Extensions of Remarks'': . . .
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Maryland?
        Mr. Walker: Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I do so 
    in order to make an inquiry of the Chair.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. Walker: Mr. Speaker, my understanding of the rule that was 
    used to postpone the vote on the bill previous was that that 
    particular announcement is to be made prior to the consideration of 
    the bill and is not to come later rather than earlier.
        In this particular case, the minority was not informed of that 
    particular decision until just before the Chair ruled.
        Is it not true that the normal process in the House is to 
    announce when votes are going to be rolled at the beginning of the 
    suspension day rather than just prior to the vote?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will be advised that 
    advance announcement is only a courtesy by the Chair, but that the 
    Chair reserves the right under the rule to

[[Page 11812]]

    make that ruling on the motion at any time once the question is 
    put.
        Mr. Walker: The question here is one of courtesy, not of rules?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman is correct in part. It 
    has been, and will continue to be at times, a courtesy of the Chair 
    to do that, but the courtesy is not mandatory. The Chair reserves 
    the right under the rule to make that ruling.

--Flexibility in Use of Speaker's Postponement Authority

Sec. 54.3 The Speaker's authority to postpone recorded votes (see Rule 
    I clause 5) has been interpreted to provide flexibility in the 
    manner of its execution. The Speaker, for example, has announced 
    that suspension votes on which the yeas and nays have been ordered 
    would be postponed until later that same day. When, by unanimous 
    consent, the ordering of the yeas and nays were later vacated, the 
    Speaker announced that postponed votes would be taken, de novo, on 
    the following day.

    The proceedings of July 30, 1990,(18) were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 136 Cong. Rec. 20370, 20433, 20434, 20458, 20459, 101st Cong. 2d 
        Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (19) Pursuant to the 
    provisions of clause 5 of rule I, the Chair announces that he will 
    postpone further proceedings today on each motion to suspend the 
    rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or 
    on which the vote is objected to under clause 4 of rule XV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Romano L. Mazzoli (Ky.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Such rollcall votes, if postponed, will be taken after 
    consideration of H.R. 5313, the military construction 
    appropriations bill. . . .
        Mr. [G. V. (Sonny)] Montgomery [of Mississippi]: Mr. Speaker, I 
    ask unanimous consent to vacate the ordering of yeas and nays on 
    all of the 11 motions to suspend the rules, and that the Chair be 
    authorized to put the question de novo on each motion.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Mississippi?
        Mr. [Robert S.] Walker [of Pennsylvania]: Reserving the right 
    to object, I would take this time to allow the gentleman from 
    Mississippi to explain his request.
        Mr. Montgomery: Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, 
    basically what that means is that it would put all the suspensions 
    off until tomorrow. We would start all over again. The Chair would 
    put the question on each bill, and if a Member wanted to vote on 
    that suspension, that Member could ask for a vote. . . .
        Mr. Walker: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of 
    objection.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Mississippi?
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair will state that the 
    questions will be put on each suspension on tomorrow de novo to a 
    voice vote. . . .

[[Page 11813]]

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Earlier today, following unanimous 
    consent to vacate the ordering of the yeas and nays on the 
    Suspension Calendar, the Chair announced that he would on tomorrow 
    put the question de novo on the 11 postponed motions to suspend the 
    rules. The Chair wishes to clarify that announcement. Without 
    objection, the Chair will put the question de novo at this point.
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Pursuant to clause 5, rule I, further 
    proceedings on each motion to suspend the rules on which a recorded 
    vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote is 
    objected to under clause 4, rule XV, will be postponed until 
    tomorrow, July 31, 1990.
        Pursuant to the unanimous-consent agreement of earlier today, 
    the pending business is the question of suspending the rules and 
    passing the bill, H.R. 3493, as amended.
        The Clerk read the title of the bill.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the motion offered 
    by the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] that the House suspend 
    the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3493, as amended.
        The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
    thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was 
    passed.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 54.4 Another interpretation of the rule which has allowed 
    flexibility in scheduling is to postpone votes until a time to be 
    announced later.

    The proceedings of Nov. 15, 1983,(20) are illustrative:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 129 Cong. Rec. 32705, 98th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (1) Pursuant to the 
    provisions of clause 5 of rule I, the Chair announces that he will 
    postpone further proceedings today on each motion to suspend the 
    rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or 
    on which the vote is objected to under clause 4 of rule XV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Ronald Coleman (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Such rollcall votes, if postponed, will be taken tomorrow after 
    debate has been concluded on all motions to suspend the rules, or 
    at such other time as subsequently announced by the Chair pursuant 
    to clause 5 of rule I.
        Mr. [Walter B.] Jones [of North Carolina]: Mr. Speaker, I move 
    to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3969) to amend the 
    Panama Canal Act of 1979 to allow the use of proxies by the Board 
    of the Panama Canal Commission.
        The Clerk read as follows: . . .

    Under his postponement authority, now consolidated in Rule I, the 
Speaker may postpone further proceedings on one motion to suspend the 
rules until designated time later in the current day while postponing 
further proceedings on other such motions until the following day. An 
example of the exercise of such authority is found in the proceedings 
of Sept. 17, 1990,(2) when the House

[[Page 11814]]

considered suspensions before and after the consideration of unfinished 
business from a previous day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 136 Cong. Rec. 24695, 24739-41, 24747, 24748, 101st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (3) Pursuant to the 
    provisions of clause 5 of rule I, the Chair announces that he will 
    postpone further proceedings today on each motion to suspend the 
    rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or 
    on which the vote is objected to under clause 4 of rule XV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Romano L. Mazzoli (Ky.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The vote on S. 3033, if postponed, will occur at the end of 
    debate on all suspensions, but no earlier than 4 p.m. The vote on 
    the remaining suspension bills will be postponed until tomorrow. . 
    . .
        Mr. [Charles A.] Hayes of Illinois: Mr. Speaker, I move to 
    suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 3033) to amend title 
    39, United States Code, to allow free mailing privileges to be 
    extended to members of the Armed Forces while engaged in temporary 
    military operations under arduous circumstances.
        The Clerk read as follows:

                                    S. 3033

            Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
        the United States of America in Congress assembled, That 
        section 3401(a)(1)(A) of title 39, United States Code, is 
        amended in inserting ``engaged in temporary military operations 
        under arduous circumstances,'' before ``or serving.''

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is a second demanded?
        Mr. [John T.] Myers of Indiana: Mr. Speaker, I demand a second.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Without objection, a second will be 
    considered as ordered.
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
    Hayes] will be recognized for 20 minutes, and the gentleman from 
    Indiana [Mr. Myers] will be recognized for 20 minutes. . . .
        Mr. [Benjamin A.] Gilman [of New York]: . . . S. 3033 is 
    similar to the measure we debated last Thursday, H.R. 5611 and to 
    which a vote on a motion to recommit is pending in the House. This 
    motion contains instructions for our committee to bring H.R. 5611 
    back to the floor with an amendment authorizing the payment of the 
    postage due portion of the cost of providing this service to be 
    extracted from our franking budget, as contained in the legislative 
    appropriations bill. Existing statutes provide that the Department 
    of Defense shall reimburse the U.S. Postal Service for all 
    expenses, postage due and transportation, that are incurred by the 
    Postal Service in providing this service. . . .
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the motion offered 
    by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hayes] that the House suspend 
    the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 3033.
        The question was taken.
        Mr. Hayes of Illinois: Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas 
    and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Pursuant to the provisions of clause 
    5, rule I, and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings 
    on this motion will be postponed. . . .

[[Page 11815]]

        The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the 
    Speaker pro tempore [Mr. Hoyer] at 5 p.m.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (4) Pursuant to the 
    provisions of clause 5, rule I, the pending business is the 
    question of suspending the rules and passing the Senate bill, S. 
    3033, on which further proceedings were postponed earlier today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the motion offered 
    by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hayes] that the House suspend 
    the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 3033, on which the yeas and 
    nays are ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    368, nays 0, not voting 64. . . .
        So (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were 
    suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. . . .

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Pursuant to the order of the House of 
    Thursday, September 13, 1990, the unfinished business is the 
    question de novo on the motion to recommit the bill H.R. 5611 with 
    instructions, on which further proceedings were postponed on 
    Thursday, September 13, 1990.
        The Clerk read the title of the bill.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the motion to 
    recommit offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Ridge].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Thomas J.] Ridge [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, I demand 
    a recorded vote.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    227, noes 142, not voting 63. . . .
        So the motion to recommit was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        Mr. Hayes of Illinois: Mr. Speaker, in accordance with the 
    instructions of the House, and on behalf of the Committee on Post 
    Office and Civil Service, I report the bill, H.R. 5611, back to the 
    House with an amendment.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the amendment.

Authority of Speaker To Postpone as it Pertains to Approval of 
    Journal--Where Journal Vote Is Postponed; Use of Privileged Motion 
    To Adjourn To Get Roll Call at Beginning of Day

Sec. 54.5 Where, pursuant to clause 5(b) of Rule I, the Chair postpones 
    further proceedings on the question of agreeing to the Speaker's 
    approval of the Journal until later on a legislative day, a Member 
    may immediately offer a privileged motion to adjourn and provoke an 
    ``automatic'' roll call vote fol

[[Page 11816]]

    lowing the Chair's announcement of a negative result thereon.

    On July 30, 1992,(5) Speaker Thomas S. Foley, of 
Washington, postponed the vote on the approval of the Journal until the 
end of the legislative day. The sequence of events was as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 138 Cong. Rec. 20320, 102d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Chair has examined the Journal of the last 
    day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof.
        Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
        Mr. [Curt] Weldon [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to 
    clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's 
    approval of the Journal.
        The Speaker: The question is on the Chair's approval of the 
    Journal.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. Weldon: Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground 
    that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a 
    quorum is not present.
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon] 
    demands a vote on the Speaker's approval of the Journal.
        Accordingly, the Chair will postpone the vote on the approval 
    of the Journal in accordance with rule I. The vote on the Journal 
    will occur at the end of the legislative day.
        Mr. Weldon: Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Weldon moves that the House do now adjourn.

        The Speaker: The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon].
        Mr. Weldon: Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground 
    that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a 
    quorum is not present.
        The Speaker: Evidently a quorum is not present.
        The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.

    The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 11, 
nays 368, not voting 57.

--Postponing Vote on Speaker's Announced Approval of Journal

Sec. 54.6 The authority of the Speaker to postpone the vote on agreeing 
    to his announced approval of the Journal was added to the rules at 
    the beginning of the 98th Congress. It was first utilized in 
    November of 1983 to postpone the vote on approval so that a newly 
    elected Member could be sworn before the question was put.

[[Page 11817]]

    House Resolution 5, adopted on Jan. 3, 1983,(6) 
introduced into the rules the authority of the Speaker to postpone a 
record vote on the question of his approval of the Journal until a 
later time on the same legislative day. Rule I clause (b)(1), which had 
earlier listed those votes which could be postponed at the discretion 
of the Speaker, was at that time amended to read as follows: 
(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 129 Cong. Rec. 51, 98th Cong. 1st Sess.
 7. Id. at p. 34. Rule I clause 5(b)(1), House Rules and Manual 
        Sec. 631 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 H. Res. 5

        Resolved, That the Rules of the House of Representatives of the 
    Ninety-seventh Congress, including all applicable provisions of law 
    and concurrent resolutions adopted pursuant thereto which 
    constituted the Rules of the House at the end of the Ninety-seventh 
    Congress, be, and they are hereby, adopted as the Rules of the 
    House of Representatives of the Ninety-eighth Congress, with the 
    following amendments included therein as part thereof, to wit:
        (1) In rule I, clause 5(b)(1) is amended to read as follows:
        ``(b)(1) On any legislative day whenever a recorded vote is 
    ordered or the yeas and nays are ordered, or a vote is objected to 
    under clause 4 of rule XV on any of the following questions, the 
    Speaker may, in his discretion, postpone further proceedings on 
    each such question to a designated time or place in the legislative 
    schedule on that legislative day, in the case of the question of 
    agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal, or within two 
    legislative days, in the case of the other questions listed herein:
        ``(A) the question of passing bills;
        ``(B) the question of adopting resolutions;
        ``(C) the question of ordering the previous question on 
    privileged resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules;

        ``(D) the question of agreeing to conference reports; and
        ``(E) the question of agreeing to motions to suspend the 
    Rules.''.

    The first use of the Speaker's authority to postpone a vote on his 
announced approval of the Journal occurred some nine months following 
its inclusion in Rule I clause 5. The proceedings were as indicated: 
(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 129 Cong. Rec. 32097, 98th Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 10, 1983.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (9) The Chair has examined the Journal 
    of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House his 
    approval thereof.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
        Mr. [Howard C.] Nielson of Utah: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to 
    clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's 
    approval of the Journal.
        The Speaker: The question is on the Chair's approval of the 
    Journal.
        Mr. Nielson of Utah: Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the 
    ground that

[[Page 11818]]

    a quorum is not present, and make the point of order that a quorum 
    is not present.
        The Speaker: The Chair will postpone the vote until after we 
    have sworn in the new Member from Georgia.
        The Speaker laid before the House the following communication 
    from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:

                                            Washington, D.C.
                                              November 10, 1983.
    Hon. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr.
    The Speaker, House of Representatives,
    Washington, D.C.

        Dear Mr. Speaker: I have the honor to transmit herewith a copy 
    of the Certificate of Election received from the Honorable Joe 
    Frank Harris, Governor of the State of Georgia, indicating that the 
    Honorable George (Buddy) Darden was elected to the Office of 
    Representative in Congress from the Seventh District of Georgia in 
    a Special Election held on November 8, 1983.
        With kind regards I am,
            Sincerely,
                                        Benjamin J. Guthrie,
                                  Clerk, House of Representatives.

        The Speaker: Will the Member-elect kindly step forward with the 
    dean of the Georgia delegation and the members of the Georgia 
    delegation?
        Mr. Darden appeared at the bar of the House and took the oath 
    of office.
        The Speaker: The gentleman is now a Member of the Congress of 
    the United States and we welcome you.

                                THE JOURNAL

        The Speaker: The question now is on the approval of the 
    Journal.
        Those in favor will vote ``aye''; those opposed will vote 
    ``no.'' Voting will be by electronic device, and the gentleman from 
    Georgia (Mr. Darden) is entitled to vote.

                        announcement by the speaker

        The Speaker: The Chair will announce that following the vote we 
    will go directly to consideration of the continuing resolution. 
    Following the completion of the continuing resolution, we will then 
    take the 1-minute addresses for the day.

By Unanimous Consent

Sec. 54.7 The House has postponed all roll call votes on legislation or 
    amendments for five days by unanimous consent.

    On Apr. 11, 1957,(10) Mr. John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, made the following request:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 103 Cong. Rec. 5541, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McCormack: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in 
    connection with the consideration of any legislation on Monday 
    [April 15, 1957] and Tuesday [April 16, 1957] of next week, if 
    there should be occasion for any rollcalls on such legislation, or 
    any amendments thereto, further consideration of such legislation 
    be postponed until the following Wednesday [April 17, 1957].
        The Speaker: (11) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

[[Page 11819]]

Sec. 54.8 The House has agreed, by unanimous consent, that a 
    prospective vote on the final passage of a bill would be taken by 
    the yeas and nays on the following day.

    On Mar. 31, 1941,(12) after debate on a bill (H.R. 968) 
pertaining to net weights in interstate and foreign commerce 
transactions in cotton, the Speaker (13) made the following 
statement:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 87 Cong. Rec. 2754, 77th Cong. 1st Sess.
13. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Permit the Chair to make a statement. The Chair has told 20 or 
    30 Members, both on the Republican side and on the Democratic side, 
    that if he could prevent it there would not be a roll call today on 
    any bill, so may the Chair suggest that the request be made that 
    when the House meets tomorrow and this vote is taken it be taken by 
    the yeas and nays.

    A brief discussion ensued, after which Mr. John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, offered a unanimous-consent request that the vote be 
postponed until the next day and that when the vote came on the final 
passage of the bill, such vote be taken by the yeas and nays. No 
objection was heard.
    Accordingly, the next day, Apr. 1, 1941,(14) the Speaker 
stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 87 Cong. Rec. 2799, 77th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The unfinished business of the day is the vote on the bill H.R. 
    968. Before the House adjourned yesterday unanimous consent was 
    granted for a yea-and-nay vote on the bill.
        The question is on the passage of the bill.

    The question was then taken; and there were--yeas 145, nays 168, 
not voting 116. So, the bill was not passed.

Sec. 54.9 A unanimous-consent agreement providing that yea and nay 
    votes on scheduled bills should be postponed until a day certain 
    was interpreted not to apply to procedural matters such as 
    resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules providing for the 
    consideration of a bill.

    On Mar. 3, 1960,(15) Mr. John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, rose to address the Speaker Pro Tempore (16) 
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 106 Cong. Rec. 4389, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
16. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the event of any 
    rollcall being ordered on Monday [Mar. 7, 1960] or Tuesday [Mar. 8, 
    1960] that further proceedings on the bill on which such call is 
    ordered be postponed to Wednesday [Mar. 9, 1960] of next week.

    Following a brief statement by Mr. H. R. Gross, of Iowa, with 
respect to another matter, the

[[Page 11820]]

Speaker Pro Tempore asked if there was any objection to the McCormack 
request, and none was heard.
    Four days later,(17) the question was put on a 
resolution (H. Res. 467) providing that upon adoption of the 
resolution, the House would resolve itself into the Committee of the 
Whole for the purpose of considering a bill (H.R. 10777) to authorize 
certain construction at military installations, and for other purposes. 
The question was taken; and the Speaker Pro Tempore announced that the 
yeas appeared to have it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 106 Cong. Rec. 4787, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 7, 1960.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Immediately thereafter, the following proceedings occurred:

        Mr. [John Bell] Williams [of Mississippi]: Mr. Speaker, I 
    object to the vote on the ground a quorum is not present and make 
    the point of order that a quorum is not present.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair will count. [After 
    counting.] One hundred sixty-eight Members are present, not a 
    quorum.
        A rollcall is automatic.
        Mr. Williams: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Williams: Mr. Speaker, is it not a fact that under an order 
    of this House by unanimous consent all yea and nay votes have been 
    ordered to be put over?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Only votes on the passage of bills. 
    This is a procedural matter on a resolution and does not come 
    within the order of the House of Thursday last.
        The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will 
    notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll.

By Special Order

Sec. 54.10 A special order providing for the consideration of a bill in 
    Committee of the Whole may specify the order in which amendments 
    are to be considered, determine the debate time on any or all 
    amendments, and provide the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole 
    with authority to postpone any request for a recorded vote and 
    cluster such requests so that votes will occur back-to-back at a 
    later time during the consideration of the bill in Committee.

    An example of such a grant of authority is shown below: 
(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 139 Cong. Rec. p. ______, 103d Cong. 1st Sess., June 16, 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Tony P.] Hall of Ohio: Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
    Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 197 and ask for its 
    immediate consideration. [The portion of the special order 
    delineating the amendment process is italicized.]

[[Page 11821]]

        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 197

            Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
        resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
        XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
        Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration 
        of the bill (H.R. 2333) to authorize appropriations for the 
        Department of State, the United States Information Agency, and 
        related agencies, to authorize appropriations for foreign 
        assistance programs, and for other purposes. No further general 
        debate shall be in order. The bill shall be considered for 
        amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to 
        consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under 
        the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a 
        substitute recommended by the Committee on Foreign Affairs now 
        printed in the bill, modified by the amendments printed in part 
        1 of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
        resolution. The committee amendment in the nature of a 
        substitute, as modified, shall be considered as read. All 
        points of order against the committee amendment in the nature 
        of a substitute, as modified, are waived. No amendment to the 
        committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as modified, 
        shall be in order except those printed in part 2 of the report 
        of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution and 
        amendments en bloc described in this resolution. Amendments 
        printed in part 2 of the report may be offered only in the 
        order printed, may be offered only by the named proponent or a 
        designee, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
        the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled 
        by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to 
        amendment except as specified in the report, and shall not be 
        subject to a demand for division of the question in the House 
        or in the Committee of the Whole. . . .
            Sec. 3. The chairman of the Committee of the Whole may 
        postpone until a time during further consideration in the 
        Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any 
        amendment made in order by this resolution. The chairman of the 
        Committee of the Whole may reduce to not less than five minutes 
        the time for voting by electronic device on any postponed 
        question that immediately follows another vote by electronic 
        device without intervening business: Provided, That the time 
        for voting by electronic device on the first in any series of 
        questions shall be not less than fifteen minutes.

--Postponement and Clustering Authority in Committee of the Whole

Sec. 54.11 Where a special order permitted the Chairman of the 
    Committee of the Whole to postpone recorded votes, if ordered, on 
    certain first degree amendments offered in an ``issue cluster'' 
    until the consideration of the last such amendment, the Chair 
    announced his intention to use the postponement authority and to 
    reduce voting time to five minutes on the second and subsequent 
    ordered recorded votes.

    The first example in the House where postponement of votes on a 
series of amendments was per

[[Page 11822]]

mitted in Committee of the Whole occurred on May 20, 
1987.(19) Before exercising the authority, the Chair stated 
the provisions of the special order previously adopted by the House 
which bestowed this authority:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 133 Cong. Rec. 13042, 13071, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        . . . It is in order for the Chairman of the Committee of the 
    Whole to postpone recorded votes, if ordered, on any said first 
    degree amendment, and the Chair may reduce to a minimum of 5 
    minutes the period of time within which a vote by electronic device 
    may be taken on all additional amendments following the first vote 
    in the series. The Chair announces that he will postpone said 
    recorded votes, if ordered, until completion of consideration of 
    the amendment offered by Representative Davis of Illinois. . . .
        The Chairman Pro Tempore: (20) The question is on 
    the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Davis].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Marty Russo (Ill.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Dan] Burton of Indiana: Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded 
    vote.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The Chairman Pro Tempore: Pursuant to House Resolution 160, and 
    the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this vote 
    will be postponed.
        Mr. [Les] Aspin [of Wisconsin]: Mr. Chairman, I think it would 
    be useful to all of us if the Chair would delineate the order of 
    voting and how much time and what the sequence is on these cluster 
    votes coming up.
        The Chairman Pro Tempore: The Chair was in the process of doing 
    that.
        Debate has been concluded on the amendments printed in section 
    1 of House Report 100-84, relating to Central America.
        Pursuant to House Resolution 160, and the Chair's prior 
    announcement, the Chair will now put the question on the adoption 
    of each amendment on which further proceedings were postponed, in 
    the order designated in paragraph (5) of section 2 of House 
    Resolution 160.
        Votes will be taken in the following order:
        The amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
    Mrazek], a 15-minute vote; the amendment offered by the gentlewoman 
    from California [Mrs. Boxer], a 5-minute vote; the amendment 
    offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Foglietta], a 5-
    minute vote; and
        The amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
    Davis], a 5-minute vote.
        The first order of business is the recorded vote on the 
    amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Mrazek].
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    197, noes 225, not voting 10. . . .

--Distinction Between Postponing a Request for a Recorded Vote and 
    Postponing the Vote Itself

Sec. 54.12 Where a special order permits the postponement of the 
    request (or demand) for a

[[Page 11823]]

    recorded vote, the ordering of a second to the request (support of 
    25 Members in Committee of the Whole) is deferred until the 
    postponed proceedings are again before the Committee as unfinished 
    business.

    The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole explained that under the 
special order governing the consideration of the bill H.R. 4, the 
Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, in Committee of the Whole, he 
would be postponing requests for recorded votes but not entertaining 
seconds to such demands until the Chair puts the question after the 
postponement. The pertinent part of the very complex rule governing the 
consideration of the bill was as follows: (1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 141 Cong. Rec. p. ______, 104th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 22, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Sec. 4. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone 
    until a time during further consideration in the Committee of the 
    Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment made in order 
    by this resolution. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may 
    reduce to not less than five minutes the time for voting by 
    electronic device on any postponed question that immediately 
    follows another vote by electronic device without intervening 
    business, provided that the time for voting by electronic device on 
    the first in any series of questions shall be not less than fifteen 
    minutes. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may recognize 
    for consideration of any amendment printed in the report of the 
    Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution out of the order 
    printed, but not sooner than one hour after the chairman of the 
    Committee on Ways and Means or a designee announces from the floor 
    a request to that effect.

    The Chair's explanation of the procedure was as indicated: 
(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: (3) All time has expired on the 
    amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John Linder (Ga.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
    Missouri [Mr. Talent].
        The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the 
    ``noes'' appeared to have it.
        Mr. [James M.] Talent [of Missouri]: Mr. Chairman, I demand a 
    recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a 
    quorum is not present.
        The Chairman: Pursuant to the rule, further proceedings on the 
    amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Talent] will 
    be postponed.
        The point of order no quorum is considered withdrawn.
        The Chair would like to take this opportunity to remind Members 
    that under the rule, the authority granted under the rule for this 
    bill, the Chair is merely postponing requests for recorded votes 
    until after consideration of amendment No. 8.

[[Page 11824]]

        At that time the request for a recorded vote on amendment No. 1 
    will be the unfinished business of the House. Twenty-five Members 
    will need to stand at that time in order to obtain a recorded vote 
    on that amendment as well as the other postponed questions in turn. 
    There is no need for a Member making a request for a recorded vote 
    to renew the request.
        The Chair would also like to remind the Members that the first 
    vote taken on the first amendment will be a 15-minute vote, and 
    subsequent votes may be reduced to 5 minutes, if no business 
    interferes between the votes.
        It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in House 
    Report 104-85. . . .
        The Chairman: All time has expired on this amendment.

        The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
    New Jersey [Mr. Smith].
        The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the 
    noes appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Christopher H.] Smith of New Jersey: Mr. Chairman, I 
    demand a recorded vote.
        The Chairman: Pursuant to the rule, further proceedings on the 
    amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Smith] will 
    be postponed.
        Pursuant to the rule, proceedings will now resume on those 
    amendments on which further proceedings were postponed, in the 
    following order: Amendment No. 1 offered by the gentleman from 
    Texas [Mr. Archer]; amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman 
    from Texas [Mr. Archer]; amendment No. 3 offered by the gentleman 
    from Missouri [Mr. Talent]; amendment No. 7 offered by the 
    gentleman from Oregon [Mr. Bunn]; and amendment No. 8 offered by 
    the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Smith]. . . .
        The Chairman: The pending business is the demand for a recorded 
    vote on amendment No. 1 printed in House Report No. 104-85 offered 
    by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Archer] on which further 
    proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice 
    vote.
        The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
        The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
        The Chairman: A recorded vote has been demanded.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    228, noes 203, not voting 3. . . .