[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 14,  Chapter 30]
[Chapter 30. Voting]
[E. Postponing Votes; Clustering Votes; Reduced Voting Time; Separate Votes]
[Â§ 58. Separate Votes on Amendments in the House]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 11857-11868]
 
                               CHAPTER 30
 
                                 Voting
 
 E. POSTPONING VOTES; CLUSTERING VOTES; REDUCED VOTING TIME; SEPARATE 
                                 VOTES
 
Sec. 58. Separate Votes on Amendments in the House

Amendments Adopted in Committee of the Whole and Reported Back to the 
    House

Sec. 58.1 Where demand is made for separate votes in the House on 
    several amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole, the 
    amendments are voted on in the order in which they appeared in the 
    bill.

    The order of voting in the House on amendments reported from the 
Committee of the Whole normally mirrors that of their sequence in the 
bill. However, the order may be varied by terms of a special rule 
providing for the consideration of the bill and structuring the 
amendment process.
    One frequently utilized form of special order occurs where a bill 
being considered in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
the Union has a complete amendment in the nature of a substitute. The 
customary rule

[[Page 11858]]

would permit the substitute to be read as the original bill and would 
provide that amendments adopted to it be reported to the House for 
separate votes. Such a rule was utilized for the consideration of H.R. 
3950, the Food and Agricultural Resources Act of 1990. When the 
Committee of the Whole had completed its consideration of the measure, 
the Chairman (12) reported the bill back to the House, 
pursuant to the rule, as follows: (13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. David E. Bonior (Mich.).
13. 136 Cong. Rec. 21593, 101st Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 1, 1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: Under the rule, the Committee rises.
        Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore 
    [Mr. Hughes] having assumed the chair, Mr. Bonior, Chairman of the 
    Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported 
    that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
    3950) entitled the ``Food and Agricultural Resources Act of 1990,'' 
    pursuant to House Resolution 439, he reported the bill back to the 
    House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (14) Under the rule, the 
    previous question is ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. William J. Hughes (N.J.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee 
    amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of 
    the Whole?
        Mr. [Harold L.] Volkmer [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the amendments offered by the gentleman from 
    Illinois [Mr. Madigan to titles IX and X adopted in the Committee 
    of the Whole en bloc.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is a separate vote demanded on any 
    other amendment?
        Mr. [Richard (Dick)] Armey [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on every amendment adopted in the Committee of the 
    Whole after titles IX and X.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is a separate vote demanded on any 
    other amendment? If not, the Clerk will report the first amendments 
    on which a separate vote has been demanded in the order appearing 
    in the bill.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendments en bloc: Section 107A of the Agricultural Act of 
        1949, as amended by section 901 of the bill, is amended by:

        In subsection (a)(3)(C) (page 193, lines 4 and 5) striking 
    ``not to exceed 5 percent'' and inserting ``not to exceed 10 
    percent''; and

            In subsection (c)(1)(E)(ii) (page 200, at lines 11 and 12 
        and at lines 16 and 17) striking ``7.5 percent (10 percent in 
        the case of the 1994 and 1995 crops)'' and inserting at those 
        two points ``22.5 percent''.

        Section 105A of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended by 
    section 1001 of the bill, is amended by:
        In subsection (a)(3)(C) (page 226, lines 16 and 17) striking 
    ``not to exceed 5 percent'' and inserting ``not to exceed 10 
    percent''; and

            In subsection (c)(1)(E)(ii) (page 233, lines 17 and 18, and 
        line 22)

[[Page 11859]]

        striking ``15 percent and inserting at those two points ``17.5 
        percent''. . . .

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the amendment en 
    bloc.
        The amendments en bloc were agreed to.
        Mr. Armey: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
    earlier request.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. See the proceedings at 133 Cong. Rec. 14030, 100th Cong. 1st Sess., 
        May 28, 1987.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Texas?
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the committee 
    amendment in the nature of a substitute, as modified, as amended.
        The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as 
    modified, as amended, was agreed to.

To Withdraw Demand for Separate Vote

Sec. 58.2 Where separate votes are demanded on several amendments 
    reported from the Committee of the Whole, the Speaker puts the 
    question on each amendment in the order in which it appears in the 
    bill, and not in the order in which a separate vote is demanded.

        On May 28, 1987,(16) the House received the report 
    of the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole on the bill H.R. 
    1451, the Older Americans Act Amendments of 1987. Separate votes 
    were demanded on 10 amendments, but the requests were later 
    withdrawn. The proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 133 Cong. Rec. 14030, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (17) Under the rule, the 
    previous question is ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. John P. Murtha (Pa.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee 
    amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of 
    the Whole?
        Mr. [Dale E.] Kildee [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the Armey amendment, as amended.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is a separate vote demanded on any 
    other amendment?
        Mr. [F. James] Sensenbrenner [Jr., of Wisconsin]: Mr. Speaker, 
    I demand separate votes on each of the following amendments; the 
    Kildee technical amendments; the Tauke amendment relating to 
    repealing title VII; the Roybal amendment clarifying minority 
    targeting provisions; the Snowe amendment, including adult day care 
    as possible activities; the Pepper amendment requiring States that 
    receive funds under the act to have an elder abuse and prevention 
    program; the Biaggi amendment, reducing the transfer authority; the 
    Gunderson amendment to require technical data collection on rural/
    urban participation; the Bonker amendment and the Roybal amendment 
    authorizing $2 million more.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is the gentleman asking for a separate 
    vote

[[Page 11860]]

    on each of the amendments he has named?
        Mr. Sensenbrenner: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
        Mr. Kildee: Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. Kildee: To ask for the yeas and nays, one-fifth of those 
    will have to stand for the yeas and nays; is that not the case? We 
    will put the question on the Armey amendment first, and then if 
    enough Members stand for the yeas and nays, then a recorded vote 
    will be called for?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The amendments will be put in the 
    order in which they appear in the bill.
        Mr. Kildee: In each case, then, the Speaker will ask for a 
    sufficient number to stand to see whether or not the yeas and nays 
    will be ordered?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: That is correct.
        Mr. Kildee: Mr. Speaker, I have another parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.

        Mr. Kildee: At that point, does the Chair have it within his 
    power to reduce the interim between votes to 5 minutes?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Not without unanimous consent.
        Mr. Kildee: I thank the Chair.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the first 
    amendment appearing in the bill on which a separate vote has been 
    demanded. . . .
        Mr. Kildee . . . So for that reason, I withdraw my request for 
    a separate vote on the Armey amendment, as amended, in the House.
        Mr. [Barney] Frank [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Speaker, objection.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Unanimous consent is not required.
        The gentleman from Michigan withdraws his request.
        Does the gentleman from Wisconsin withdraw his requests?
        Mr. Sensenbrenner: Mr. Speaker, based upon the request of the 
    gentleman from Michigan and with the understanding that we will not 
    be having a separate vote on the Armey amendment--
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman has already made the 
    withdrawal.
        Mr. Sensenbrenner: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my request for a 
    separate vote on the other nine amendments.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman from Wisconsin withdraws 
    his requests.
        The question is on the amendment.
        The amendment was agreed to.

Varying Order of Voting by Unanimous Consent

Sec. 58.3 Separate votes in the House on amendments reported from the 
    Committee of the Whole are taken in the order in which they appear 
    in the bill, but by unanimous consent that order of voting may be 
    changed.

    On June 23, 1987,(18) in the first session of the 100th 
Congress,

[[Page 11861]]

separate votes were demanded in the House on all amendments reported to 
the House from the Committee of the Whole. The proceedings were as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 133 Cong. Rec. 17090, 17091, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (19) Under the rule, the 
    previous question is ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Tony Coehlo (Calif.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee 
    amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of 
    the Whole?
        Mr. [John] Miller of Washington: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the so-called Herger amendment.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is a separate vote demanded on any 
    other amendment?
        Mr. [Wally] Herger [of California]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the following amendments:
        The Levine amendment regarding the Pan American Health 
    Organization;
        The Richardson amendment regarding Cuban political prisoners;
        The Richardson amendment concerning human rights abuses in 
    Ethiopia and Paraguay;
        The Oberstar amendment regarding consulates in Germany, Sweden, 
    Italy, France, and Austria; and
        The Neal amendment, as amended, regarding Japanese defense 
    expenditures.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is a separate vote demanded on any 
    other amendment?
        The Chair will put the votes in the following order; first, the 
    Levine amendment; second, the Oberstar amendment; third, the 
    Richardson amendment No. 6; fourth, the Richardson amendment No. 8; 
    fifth, the Her-ger amendment; and sixth, the Neal amendment.
        Mr. [Bill] Frenzel [of Minnesota]: Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. Frenzel: Will the Clerk read the amendments prior to the 
    vote on each?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report each amendment 
    in the order in which they appear in the bill.
        Mr. Frenzel: I thank the Chair.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the first 
    amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded.
        Mr. [Daniel A.] Mica [of Florida]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that following a record vote on this amendment the time for 
    record votes on the remaining amendments be reduced to 5 minutes.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Florida?
        Mr. Herger: Mr. Speaker, I object.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Objection is heard. . . .
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the next 
    amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded.
        Mr. Mica: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Herger 
    amendment, which would have been the last amendment, be voted on 
    out of order

[[Page 11862]]

    as the next amendment, and that after that, without prejudice to 
    the outcome of that vote, each of the remaining votes on amendments 
    be reduced to 5 minutes.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Florida?
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the Herger 
    amendment.

Order of Voting Altered by Special Rule

Sec. 58.4 Where a ``modified closed'' rule prescribes the order for 
    consideration of amendments with the bill considered as read in the 
    Committee of the Whole, then separate votes demand-ed in the House 
    on adopted amendments are taken in that same order, regardless of 
    the order in which the amendments appear in the bill.

    Where a special order determines the order of consideration of 
amendments in Committee of the Whole, the Speaker, in putting the 
question on separate votes on the adopted amendments back in the House, 
follows the dictates of the rule. An example of such a rule and of the 
pattern of voting occurred on Mar. 25, 1993.(20) On this 
occasion, the order for voting and the order of appearance of the 
amendments in the bill coincided, but the numbers given the amendments 
in the rule (numbers 1, 2, and 3) would govern if there were a 
conflict. The proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 139 Cong. Rec. 6358, 6359, 103d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (1) Under the rule, the 
    previous question is ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1.  Owen B. Pickett (Va.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment adopted by the 
    Committee of the Whole?
        Mr. [Gerald B. H.] Solomon [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I demand 
    a separate vote on the following amendments adopted in the 
    Committee of the Whole: No. 1, the DeLay amendment requiring 
    counselors to be professionals who have degrees in medicine or 
    mental health, as amended by the Waxman amendment; No. 2, the so-
    called Waxman amendment regarding the conscience clause; and No. 3, 
    the so-called Burton of Indiana amendment regarding condom 
    standards, as amended by the Waxman amendment.
        Mr. Speaker, I demand separate votes on those three amendments.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the first 
    amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment: Page 2, line 18, insert before the period the 
        following: ``, and that such information will be provided only 
        through individuals holding professional degrees in medicine or 
        osteopathic medicine, nursing, clinical psychology, the allied 
        health professions, or social work,

[[Page 11863]]

        through individuals meeting such other criteria as the 
        Secretary determines to be appropriate for providing such 
        information, or through individuals allowed under State law to 
        provide such information''.

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the amendment.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it. . . .
        So the amendment was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the next 
    amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment: Page 3, strike lines 1 through 5 and insert the 
        following:
            ``(B) the project refers the individual seeking services to 
        another provider in the project, or to another project in the 
        geographic area involved, as the case may be, that will provide 
        such information.

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the amendment. . . 
    .
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the final 
    amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment: Page 4, after line 3, insert the following 
        subsection:
            (c) Information on Condoms.--Section 1001 of the Public 
        Health Service Act, as amended by subsection (a) of this 
        section, is amended by inserting after subsection (b) the 
        following subsection:
            ``(c) The Secretary may not make an award of a grant or 
        contract under this section unless the applicant for the award 
        agrees that the family planning project involved will--

Order of Voting Where Special Order Provides ``King of the Mountain'' 
    Process

Sec. 58.5 Under the ``King of the Mountain'' amendment procedure, if 
    more than one amendment in the nature of a substitute is adopted, 
    only the last such amendment adopted will be considered as finally 
    adopted and voted on for final passage.

    Where a special rule reported from the Committee on Rules limits 
the number of amendments and defines their order of consideration, it 
may also specify that if more than one amendment to the same text is 
adopted, only the last such amendment shall be considered as finally 
adopted. The procedure has been utilized both for consideration of 
bills in Committee of the Whole or in the House. The rule adopted on 
Nov. 8, 1993,(2) providing for the consideration in the 
House of H. Con. Res. 170, directing the President to the War Powers 
Act to remove U.S. Armed Forces from Somalia by a date certain, 
provides an example of the ``King of the Mountain'' procedure. The text 
of the

[[Page 11864]]

special rule reported from the Committee on Rules and adopted by the 
House was as follows (emphasis added):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. H. Res. 293, 139 Cong. Rec. p. ______, 103d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Tony P.] Hall of Ohio: Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
    Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 293 and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 293

            Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
        shall be in order to consider in the House the concurrent 
        resolution (H. Con. Res. 170) directing the President pursuant 
        to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United 
        States Armed Forces from Somalia by January 31, 1994. The 
        amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
        Committee on Foreign Affairs now printed in the concurrent 
        resolution shall be considered as adopted. The previous 
        question shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent 
        resolution, as so amended, to final adoption without 
        intervening motion except: (1) the further amendment in the 
        nature of a substitute printed in part 1 of the report of the 
        Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution; (2) the 
        further amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part 
        2 of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
        resolution; and (3) one motion to recommit. Each of the 
        amendments printed in the report of the Committee on Rules may 
        be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
        offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
        considered as read, and shall be debatable for the time 
        specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the 
        proponent and an opponent. All points of order against the 
        amendments printed in the report are waived. If more than one 
        of the amendments printed in the report is adopted, only the 
        last to be adopted shall be considered as finally adopted.
            Sec. 2. The provisions of section 7 of the War Powers 
        Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1546) shall not apply during the 
        remainder of the first session of the One Hundred Third 
        Congress to a concurrent resolution introduced pursuant to 
        section 5 of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544) with 
        respect to Somalia.

    In his explanation of the rule of Nov. 8, 1993, Mr. Hall, managing 
the rule for the Committee on Rules, explained the provisions of the 
rule.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Hall of Ohio: Mr. Speaker, the rule provides that the 
    Foreign Affairs Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute 
    shall be considered as adopted. Under the rule, only two substitute 
    amendments printed in the report to accompany the rule shall be in 
    order. These amendments may be offered by Mr. Gilman or his 
    designee, and Mr. Hamilton or his designee, and shall be considered 
    in the order and manner specified. . . .
        If more than one of the two amendments made in order is 
    adopted, only the last amendment to be adopted shall be considered 
    as finally adopted. This is in keeping with the agreed upon king-
    of-the-hill procedure. . . .

    On the following day, when the House concurrent resolution was 
called up for consideration, the Speaker Pro Tempore (4) 
described

[[Page 11865]]

the operation of the amendment procedure as follows: (5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Jim McDermott (Wash.).
 5. 139 Cong. Rec. p. ______, 103d Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 9, 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: All time for general debate has 
    expired.
        It is in order to consider the amendments in the nature of a 
    substitute printed in House Report 103-328. The amendments may be 
    offered only in the order printed and by a Member designated in the 
    report, and shall be considered as read. Debate on each amendment 
    shall be equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
    opponent of the amendment.
        If more than one of the amendments printed in the report is 
    adopted, only the last to be adopted shall be considered as finally 
    adopted.
        Pursuant to the rule, it is now in order to consider the 
    amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part 1 of House 
    Report 103-328.
        For what purpose does the gentleman from New York rise?
        Mr. [Benjamin A.] Gilman [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I offer an 
    amendment in the nature of a substitute.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will designate the 
    amendment.
        The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as 
    follows:

            Amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. 
        Gilman: Strike all after the resolving clause and insert in 
        lieu thereof the following:

           section 1. finding that the united states armed forces in 
                      somalia are engaged in hostilities.

        For purposes of sections 5(c) and 7 of the War Powers 
    Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(c) and 1546), the Congress finds that 
    the United States Armed Forces in Somalia are engaged in 
    hostilities without a declaration of war or specific statutory 
    authorization.

                 sec. 2. removal of armed forces from somalia.

            Pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 
        U.S.C. 1544(c)), the Congress hereby directs the President to 
        remove the United States Armed Forces from Somalia by January 
        31, 1994.

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman 
    from New York [Mr. Gilman] will be recognized for 15 minutes and a 
    Member opposed will be recognized for 15 minutes.
        The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].
        Mr. Gilman: Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
    from Wisconsin [Mr. Roth], a senior member of the Committee on 
    Foreign Affairs.

    In this instance, the second amendment considered under the ``King 
of the Hill'' procedure had more affirmative votes than the first 
amendment which was considered and which was also decided in the 
affirmative, but the result under the rule would have been the same 
even if the first amendment debated and voted on had received a larger 
number of ``aye'' votes than the second. The final proceedings on the 
concurrent resolution were as follows: (6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. Id. at p. ______.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The question is on the amendment in 
    the

[[Page 11866]]

    nature of a substitute offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
    Gilman].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.
        Mr. Gilman: 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: 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 
    224, nays 203, not voting 7. . . .
        So the amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Pursuant to the rule it is now in 
    order to consider the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
    printed in part 2 of House Report 103-328.

                           parliamentary inquiry
    Mr. Gilman: Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. Gilman: Mr. Speaker, would the Chair explain to the House 
    the procedure we are about to follow?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair will reread his statement. 
    Pursuant to the rule, it is now in order to consider the amendment 
    in the nature of a substitute printed in part 2 of House Report 
    103-328.
        Mr. Gilman: Mr. Speaker, am I correct--and I submit a 
    rhetorical question--that if there is a vote against the Hamilton 
    amendment, it would be perceived to be support for the Gilman 
    amendment, is that correct?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair cannot characterize the 
    meaning of Members' votes.

      amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by mr. hamilton

        Mr. [Lee H.] Hamilton [of Indiana]: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to 
    the rule I offer the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
    printed in part 2 of the report to accompany House Resolution 293.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will designate the amendment 
    in the nature of a substitute. The text of the amendment in the 
    nature of a substitute is as follows:

            Amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. 
        Hamilton: Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
        following:

         section 1. removal of united states armed forces from somalia.

            Pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 
        U.S.C. 1544(c)), the Congress hereby directs the President to 
        remove United States Armed Forces from Somalia by March 31, 
        1994 (unless the President requests and the Congress authorizes 
        a later date), except for a limited number of members of the 
        Armed Forces sufficient only to protect United States 
        diplomatic facilities and citizens and noncombatant personnel 
        to advise the United Nations commander in Somalia.

                          parliamentary inquiries

        Mr. [John] Linder [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.

[[Page 11867]]

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.

        Mr. Linder: Mr. Speaker, is it correct to say that a vote in 
    favor of the Hamilton amendment will negate the Gilman amendment?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Under the rule, if both amendments are 
    adopted, only the last amendment will be finally adopted. . . .
        All time has expired.
        The question is on the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
    offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Hamilton].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.

                               recorded vote

        Mr. Gilman: Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    226, noes 201, not voting 7. . . .
        So the amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Pursuant to House Resolution 293, the 
    previous question is ordered on the concurrent resolution, as 
    amended.
        The question is on the concurrent resolution, as amended.
        The concurrent resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
        The title of the concurrent resolution was amended so as to 
    read: Concurrent resolution directing the President pursuant to 
    section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States 
    Armed Forces from Somalia.''.

    A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Committee of the Whole Cannot Determine or Set Length of Votes in House

Sec. 58.6 The Committee of the Whole may not, even by unanimous 
    consent, order that votes in the House on recommittal and final 
    passage be conducted as five-minute votes following a 15-minute 
    vote on a final amendment in Committee of the Whole.

    On Oct. 3, 1990,(7) the House had under consideration in 
Committee of the Whole the bill H.R. 4300, the Family Unity and 
Employment Opportunity Immigration Act of 1990. At the conclusion of 
the amendment process, an inquiry was addressed to Chairman George 
(Buddy) Darden, of Georgia: (8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 136 Cong. Rec. 27273, 101st Cong. 2d Sess.
 8. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Paul B.] Henry [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Henry: Mr. Chairman, there are a number of meetings back 
    and forth with the White House and all. I understand we have a 
    series of three

[[Page 11868]]

    votes, a vote on this Bryant amendment, then a vote on recommittal, 
    and on final passage. Would it be possible to have the other two 
    votes be 5-minute votes?
        The Chairman: The Chair does not have the authority in the 
    Committee of the Whole. Under the rules pertaining to the 
    Committee, the Chair respectfully denies the request of the 
    gentleman.
        Mr. Henry: I thank the Chair.
        The Chairman: The question is on the amendment in the nature of 
    a substitute offered by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bryant].
        The question was taken, and the Chairman announced that the 
    noes appeared to have it.