[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 16, Chapters 32 - 33]
[Chapter 32. House-Senate Relations]
[A. INTRODUCTORY]
[Â§ 3. House Action on Senate Bills]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 31-44]
 
                House-Senate Relations
 
                  A. INTRODUCTORY
 
Sec.    3. House Action on Senate Bills

Senate bills which are messaged to the House may be subject to a 
variety of legislative actions. Senate bills may be referred to the
appropriate House committees in the same fashion as House-introduced
bills,(19) considered in committee, reported to the House with amendments,
considered in the House, where appropriate,(20) or in Committee of the
Whole.(1) Senate measures may be held at the Speaker's table, awaiting 
later legislative action.(2) Some Senate bills are never acted on and 
remain at the rostrum or in committee until sine die adjournment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
17.     127 CONG. REC. 18884, 18885, 97th Cong. 1st Sess.
18.     Barney Frank (Mass.).
19.     See Sec.Sec. 3.1, 3.12, infra.
20.     See Sec. 3.7, infra.
 1.     See Sec. 3.14, infra.
 2.     See Sec.Sec. 3.3, 3.4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 32]]

The generally accepted principles of comity between the two Houses 
fosters the expectation that a bill of the House which acts first on a
legislative measure is the numbered bill that is formally enrolled and
presented to the President.(3) 

Reference to Committee

Sec.    3.1 The reference of a Senate bill on the Speaker's table is 
within the discretion of the Chair.
On Mar. 27, 1936,(4) the House declined to grant unanimous consent to 
consider Senate Concurrent Resolution 238, providing for cancellation 
of mail contracts.

MR. [FREDERICK R.] LEHLBACH [of New Jersey]: Mr. Speaker, a 
parliamentary inquiry.
THE SPEAKER:(5) The gentleman will state it.
MR. LEHLBACH: Mr. Speaker, unanimous consent for the present 
consideration of the Senate joint resolution having been refused, is 
the resolution now referred to the Committee on Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries?
THE SPEAKER: It is within the discretion of the Chair to refer it.
MR. LEHLBACH: I believe I asked is it now referred?
THE SPEAKER: No; it has not been referred.
Senate Bills Similar to House Bills

Sec.    3.2 A resolution may provide that upon the passage of a House 
bill, a similar Senate bill may be taken from the Speaker's table, all 
after the enacting clause stricken, and in lieu thereof the provisions 
of the House bill as passed be inserted.
On May 6, 1947,(6) Mr. Clarence J. Brown, of Ohio, called up House 
Resolution 205, to make in order the consideration of H.R. 2616, to 
provide for assistance to Greece and Turkey. The resolution contained, 
inter alia, the following provision:

. . . After the passage of the bill H.R. 2616 it shall be in order to 
take from the Speaker's table the bill S. 938 and to move to strike out 
all after the enacting clause of said Senate bill and to insert in lieu
 thereof the provisions contained in H.R. 2616.

Sec.    3.3 Where the rule under which a bill is being considered in 
the House provides 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 3.     See Sec.Sec. 3.4, 3.8, 3.9, 3.13, infra.
 4.     80 CONG. REC. 4547, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
 5.     Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.).
 6.     93 CONG. REC. 4605, 80th Cong. 1st Sess.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 33]]

that upon passage of the bill a similar Senate bill 
at the Speaker's table shall be taken therefrom, making in order a 
motion to strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
provisions of the House bill in lieu thereof, the House proceeds to 
the disposition of the Senate bill immediately after passage of the 
House bill.
On May 9, 1947,(7) the House had completed consideration of H.R. 2616, 
to provide assistance to Greece and Turkey.

THE SPEAKER:(8) The question is on the passage of the [House] 
bill. . . .
The question was taken; and there were-yeas 287, nays 107, answered 
"present" 2, not voting 35. . . .
THE SPEAKER: Under the rule, it is now in order to take from the 
Speaker's table the bill S. 938 and to move to strike out all after 
the enacting clause of said bill and to insert in lieu thereof the 
provisions contained in the bill H.R. 2616.
The Clerk will report the Senate bill.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
MR. [CHARLES A.] EATON [of New Jersey]: Mr. Speaker, I move to strike 
out all after the enacting clause of the bill S. 938 and to insert in 
lieu thereof the provisions contained in the bill H.R. 2616.
The motion was agreed to.
The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third 
time, and passed.
Amending Senate Bill, Prior to Stage of Disagreement

Sec.    3.4 Unanimous consent request making in order, before the stage 
of disagreement, a debatable motion to take a Senate bill from the 
Speaker's table, to insert the text of a House-passed bill with the 
previous question ordered without intervening motion except one motion 
to recommit.
On several occasions in the 104th Congress, the Senate chose to refer 
a House-passed bill to committees of the Senate, then later pass its 
own version of the measure and message the Senate numbered bill to the 
House. This sequence of events ignores the general practice which 
recognizes that the numbered bill which is first messaged to the other 
House is the one which becomes the vehicle for proceeding to conference.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 7.     93 CONG. REC. 4975, 4976, 80th Cong. 1st Sess.
 8.     Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).
----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 34]]

On May 17, 1995,(9) two Senate bills considered in the Senate after 
receipt of the corresponding House bills were taken up in the House. 
S. 4, granting the President power to reduce budget authority (the 
line-item veto bill), and S. 219, the Regulatory Transition Act of 
1995, were called up and amended by motions made in order by such 
unanimous-consent requests. Both measures passed the House, as amended. 
The House then insisted on its amendments to the bills and agreed to the
conferences with the Senate.(10) 
THE SEPARATE ENROLLMENT AND LINE-ITEM VETO ACT OF 1995
MR. [WILLIAM F.] CLINGER [Jr., of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
unanimous consent that: First, it be in order to consider in the House
a motion to take from the Speaker's table the bill (S. 4) to grant the 
power to the President to reduce budget authority, and for other 
purposes, to strike all after the enacting clause of the Senate bill, 
and to insert the text of H.R. 2 as passed by this House; second, that 
the motion be debatable for not to exceed 1 hour, to be equally divided 
and controlled among the chairman and ranking minority members of the
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and the Committee on 
Rules, and third, that the previous question be ordered on the motion 
to final adoption without intervening motion except for one motion to
recommit.
THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE:(11) Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania? . . . 
MR. CLINGER: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Clinger moves that the House take from the Speaker's table the 
bill (S. 4) to grant the power to the President to reduce budget 
authority, and for other purposes, strike all after the enacting 
clause of the Senate bill, and insert the text of H.R. 2, as passed 
by the House.

THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 
Clinger] will be recognized for 15 minutes, the gentleman from West 
Virginia [Mr. Wise] will be recognized for 15 minutes, the gentleman 
from Florida [Mr. Goss] will be recognized for 15 minutes, and the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall] will be recognized for 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Clinger].
MR. CLINGER: Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, on February 6 of this year, this House passed H.R. 2, the 
Line-Item Veto Act, to give the President the power to restrain 
irresponsible Federal spending through a true line-item veto. On March 
23, the Senate followed suit in passing S. 4, which I think we would 
all agree is a weaker

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 9.     141 CONG. REC. 13265, 13266, 104th Cong. 1st Sess.
10.     Id. at p. 24030. S. 4 was the enrolled bill eventually
transmitted to the President.
11.     Fred Upton (Mich.).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 35]]

bill, which nonetheless moves toward greater 
Federal spending control, so both of our bodies have gone on record 
as saying we encourage and desire to enact something that will act as 
a restraint on further Federal spending control.
Since that time, however, Mr. Speaker, both bills have been stalled 
really in parliamentary limbo awaiting further action in preparation 
for conference. That has been some several months now.
Because of the Senate's unusual handling of the House-passed bill,
unfortunately neither body is currently in a position to request the 
needed conference and the legislation has been at a standstill, just 
literally in limbo. . . . 
REGULATORY TRANSITION ACT OF 1995
MR. CLINGER: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that: First, it be 
in order to consider in the House a motion to take from the Speaker's 
table the Senate bill (S. 219) to ensure economy and efficiency of 
Federal Government operations by establishing a moratorium on 
regulatory rulemaking actions, and for other purposes, to strike all 
after the enacting clause of S. 219 and to insert in lieu the text of 
H.R. 450 as passed by the House;
Second, that the motion be debatable for not to exceed 1 hour, to be 
equally divided and controlled among chairmen and ranking minority 
members of the Committees on Government Reform and Oversight and the
Judiciary; and
Third, that the previous question be ordered on the motion to final 
adoption without intervening motion except one motion to commit. . . . 
THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE:(12) Is there objection to the request from the
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
MOTION OFFERED BY MR. CLINGER
MR. CLINGER: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Clinger moves to take from the Speaker's table the bill (S. 219) 
to grant the power to the President to reduce budget authority, and for 
other purposes, strike all after the enacting clause of the Senate 
bill, and insert the text of H.R. 450 as passed by the House.
Amending Senate Bill Before Stage of Disagreement

Sec.    3.5 Proceedings in the House pursuant to a special rule which 
provided for: (1) taking up a Senate bill; (2) waiving points of order 
against its  consideration; (3) amending the Senate bill in several 
discrete particulars by one indivisible motion; and (4) making in order 
a motion to insist and request a conference with the Senate. 
House Resolution 197, the special order establishing the procedure for 
sending to conference the bill S. 395, the Alaska Power Administration 
Asset Sale and Ter-

----------------------------------------------------------------------
12.     Bill Emerson (Mo.).
----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 36]]

mination Act of 1995, was adopted on July 24, 1995. 
The rule provided, first, for the consideration of H.R. 70, relating to
exports of Alaskan North Slope oil. The proceedings to follow passage 
of H.R. 70 were carried in section 2 of that resolution, the text of 
which is set forth here.

SEC. 2. (a) After passage of H.R. 70, it shall be in order to take from 
the Speaker's table the bill S. 395 and to consider the Senate bill 
in the House. All points of order against the Senate bill and against 
its consideration are waived. It shall be in order to consider in the 
House, any rule of the House to the contrary notwithstanding, the 
motion to amend described in subsection (b). The motion to amend shall 
not be subject to a demand for division of the question. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to amend and on 
the Senate bill without intervening motion except one motion to 
recommit the bill with or without instructions. If the motion to amend 
is adopted and the Senate bill, as amended, is passed, then it shall 
be in order to move that the House insist on its amendments to S. 395 
and request a conference with the Senate thereon.
(b) The motion to amend the Senate bill made in order by subsection 
(a) is as follows:
"(1) Strike title I.
"(2) Strike sections 201 through 204 and insert the text of H.R. 70, 
as passed by the House.
"(3) Strike section 205.
"(4) Strike section 206.
"(5) Strike title III.".

The proceedings in the House on July 25, 1995,(13) following the 
passage of H.R. 70, are carried here. Noteworthy is the Speaker's 
appointment of specific conferees from the House for each of the five 
House amendments.
ALASKA POWER ADMINISTRATION ASSET SALE AND TERMINATION ACT
MR. [DON] YOUNG of Alaska: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 2 of House
Resolution 197, I call up the Senate bill (S. 395) to authorize and 
direct the Secretary of Energy to sell the Alaska Power Administration, 
and to authorize the export of Alaska North Slope crude oil, and for 
other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The text of the Senate bill is as follows:

                S. 395
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,

                 TITLE I
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the "Alaska Power Administration Asset Sale 
and Termination Act". . . .
SEC. 102. SALE OF SNETTISHAM AND EKLUTNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS. . . . 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
13.     141 CONG. REC. 20286-89, 20298, 104th Cong. 1st Sess.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 37]]

                  TITLE II
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE. 
This title may be cited as "Trans-Alaska Pipeline Amendment Act of 
1995". . . . 
SEC. 205. RETIREMENT OF CERTAIN COSTS INCURRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 
NON-FEDERAL PUBLICLY OWNED SHIPYARDS.
(a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Energy shall-
(1) deposit proceeds of sales out of the Naval Petroleum Reserve in a 
special account in amounts sufficient to make payments under 
subsections (b) and (c); and
(2) out of the account described in paragraph (1), provide, in 
accordance with subsections (b) and (c), financial assistance to a port
authority that-
(A) manages a non-Federal publicly owned shipyard on the United States 
west coast that is capable of handling very large crude carrier 
tankers . . . . 
SEC. 206. OIL POLLUTION ACT OF 1990.
Title VI of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-380; 104 
Stat. 554) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
section:
"SEC. 6005. TOWING VESSEL REQUIRED. . . . 

                  TITLE III

SEC. 301. SHORT TITLE.
This Title may be referred to as the "Outer Continental Shelf Deep 
Water Royalty Relief Act".
SEC. 302. AMENDMENTS TO THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS ACT. . . . 
AMENDMENTS OFFERED BY MR. YOUNG OF ALASKA
MR. YOUNG of Alaska: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 2(b) of House 
Resolution 197, I offer amendments.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendments offered by Mr. Young of Alaska: (1) Strike title I.
(2) Strike sections 201 through 204 and insert the text of H.R. 70, 
as passed by the House.
(3) Strike section 205.
(4) Strike section 206.
(5) Strike title III.

THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE:(14) The question is on the amendments offered 
by the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young].
The amendments were agreed to.
The Senate bill was read a third time and passed, and a motion to 
reconsider was laid on the table.
The title of the Senate bill was amended so as to read: "A bill to 
permit exports of certain domestically produced crude oil, and for other purposes."
APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES
MR. YOUNG of Alaska: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Young moves pursuant to House Resolution 197 that the House insist 
on its amendment to S. 395 and request a conference with the Senate thereon.

THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young].
The motion was agreed to.
MOTION TO INSTRUCT OFFERED BY MR. MILLER OF CALIFORNIA
MR. [DAN] MILLER of California: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct.
The Clerk read as follows:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
14.     Scott McInnis (Colo.).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 38]]

Mr. Miller of California moves that the managers on the part of the 
House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on 
the House amendments to the bill S. 395 be instructed to insist upon 
the provisions of the House amendments which strike Title III of S. 395.

THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Under the rule, the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Miller] will be recognized for 30 minutes, and the gentleman from 
Alaska [Mr. Young] will be recognized for 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller]. . . .

After the motion to instruct was agreed to, the Speaker named managers 
on the part of the House.

Without objection, the Chair appoints the following conferees on 
S. 395: On House amendment No. 1: Messrs. Young of Alaska, Calvert, 
Bliley, Miller of California, and Dingell.
On House amendment No. 2: Messrs. Young of Alaska, Calvert, Thomas, 
Roth, Bliley, Coble, Miller of California, Hamilton, Dingell, and 
Mineta.
On House amendment No. 3: Messrs. Spence, Kasich, and Dellums.
On House amendment No. 4: Mr. Coble, Mrs. Fowler, and Mr. Mineta.
On House amendment No. 5: Messrs. Young of Alaska, Calvert, and Miller 
of California.
There was no objection.

Sec.    3.6 A resolution (reported from the Committee on Rules) making 
in order the disposition of a Senate bill on the Speaker's table after 
passage of a House bill reported by the Committee on Post Office and 
Civil Service, was amended to delete all references to the Senate bill.
On Sept. 9, 1970,(15) Mr. Spark M. Matsunaga, of Hawaii, was recognized 
on the floor of the House.

MR. MATSUNAGA: Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1046 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution as follows:
H. RES. 1046
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 16542) to amend title 39, United States Code, to regulate 
the mailing of unsolicited credit cards, and for other purposes. . . . 
After the passage of H.R. 16542, it shall then be in order in the House 
to take from the Speaker's table the bill S. 721 and to move to strike 
all after the enacting clause of the said Senate bill and insert in 
lieu thereof the provisions contained in H.R. 16542 as passed by the 
House.

THE SPEAKER:(16) The gentleman from Hawaii is recognized for 1 hour.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
15.     116 CONG. REC. 30873, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
16.     John W. McCormack (Mass.).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 39]]

MR. MATSUNAGA: Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Matsunaga: On page 2, strike out all of the 
last sentence, beginning with "After the passage of" in line 6 and 
ending with the period in line 11.

THE SPEAKER: The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Hawaii.
The amendment was agreed to.(17) 

Sec.    3.7 By unanimous consent, the House considered a Senate bill 
under the terms of a resolution adopted for consideration of a similar 
House bill.
On Mar. 12, 1959,(18) the Committee of the Whole rose and reported to 
the House that it had come to no resolution on the bill H.R. 4221.

MR. [JOHN W.] MCCORMACK [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Speaker, I renew my 
unanimous-consent request, heretofore made, that it may be in order for 
the House to consider the bill S. 50, in lieu of the bill H.R. 4221, 
under the terms and provisions of House Resolution 205 adopted 
yesterday by the House in relation to the Hawaiian statehood bill.(19) 
THE SPEAKER:(20) Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Massachusetts?
MR. [JOHN R.] PILLION [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I do not renew my 
previous objection.
There was no objection. 

After some intervening business, the House again resumed consideration 
of the Hawaiian statehood bill pursuant to the following motion:
HAWAII STATEHOOD
MR. [LEO W.] O'BRIEN of New York: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House 
resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
the Union for the consideration of the bill (S. 50) to provide for the
admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union, in lieu of the bill 
H.R. 4221.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole 
House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
S. 50, with Mr. Kilday in the chair.

Sec.    3.8 Senate bills substantially the same as House bills al-

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
17.     Parliamentarian's Note: The Senate bill, S. 721, to amend the 
Truth-in-Lending Act," which was not similar to H.R. 16542, was then 
referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency.
18.     105 CONG. REC. 4005, 86th Cong. 1st Sess.
19.     H. Res. 205 had been reported from the Committee on Rules on Mar.
10, 1959. The Senate passed its version of the Hawaiian statehood bill 
S. 50) on Mar. 11, 1959, too late for the rule to reflect its 
availability.
20.     Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 40]]

ready favorably reported by a committee of the House, and not required
to be considered in Committee of the Whole, may be disposed of as the 
House may determine on motion directed to be made by such committee.
On Jan. 1, 1951,(1) the following occurred on the floor of the House:

MR. [LINDLEY] BECKWORTH [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, I call up from the 
Speaker's table the bill (S. 3295) to amend the Railway Labor Act and 
to authorize agreements providing for union membership and agreements 
for deductions from the wages of carriers' employees for certain 
purposes and under certain conditions, a bill substantially the same 
(H.R. 7789) being on the House Calendar.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
MR. [HOWARD W.] SMITH of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, I raise the question 
of consideration.
THE SPEAKER:(2) The gentleman from Virginia raises the question of
consideration.
The question is, Will the House consider the bill? . . .
The question was taken; and there were-yeas 286, nays 48, not voting 
94. . . .
Amending Special Rule for Disposition of Senate Bill

Sec.    3.9 On the day following passage of a House bill, the Committee 
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce was discharged, by unanimous 
consent, from further consideration of a similar Senate bill (which 
had been messaged to the House prior to the reporting of the House 
bill); the Senate bill was then considered, amended to conform to the
provisions of the House bill, passed, and the proceedings whereby the 
House bill was passed were vacated by unanimous consent.
On May 18, 1961,(3) Mr. Oren Harris, of Arkansas, made the following 
request:

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for the immediate consideration 
of the bill S. 610, to strengthen the domestic and foreign commerce 
of the United States by providing for Service within the Department of
Commerce and a Travel Advisory Board, strike out all after the enacting
clause, and insert the provisions of H.R. 4614 as passed by the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 1.     96 CONG. REC. 17046, 17047, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
 2.     Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
 3.     107 CONG. REC. 8367, 8368, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 41]]

THE SPEAKER:(4) Is there objection to the present consideration of the 
bill?
There was no objection.

Mr. Harris then offered as an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
for S. 610 the provisions of H.R. 4614 as passed by the House.

The amendment was agreed to.
The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the 
third time, and passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. . . .
By unanimous consent the proceedings by which the bill (H.R. 4614) was 
passed were vacated, and that bill was laid on the table.(5) 
Passage of Senate Bill Vacated

Sec.    3.10 By unanimous consent, the House may vacate proceedings 
whereby it has amended and passed a Senate bill.
On Aug. 31, 1962,(6) Mr. John J. McFall, of California, sought unanimous
consent to correct a mistake whereby an amendment to a Senate bill, 
S. 919, removed certain penalties under the Hatch Act instead of merely
modifying those penalties.

MR. MCFALL: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the proceedings 
whereby the House passed S. 919, with an amendment, be vacated, and 
that the House proceed to the further consideration of the Senate bill 
for the purpose of considering an amendment thereto.(7) 
THE SPEAKER:(8) Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from California? . . .
There was no objection. 
Senate Bill Identical to Provision in Conference Report

Sec.    3.11 During debate on a conference report, the House by 
unanimous consent considered and passed a Senate bill which was 
identical to a provision in the conference report then under 
consideration.
On Oct. 18, 1972, the House was considering the conference report 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 4.     Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
 5.     See also 80 CONG. REC. 5897, 5898, 74th Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 22, 
1936. Compare 105 CONG. REC. 15512, 86th Cong. 1st Sess., Aug. 11, 
1959, where a similar result was accomplished by use of a special 
order.
 6.     108 CONG. REC. 18300, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
 7.     S. 919 had passed the House on the preceding day, Aug. 30, 1962. 
It had not yet been messaged to the Senate so the House did not have to 
request the return of the papers before taking this action.
 8.     John W. McCormack (Mass.).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 42]]

on S. 3939, authorizing appropriations for the construction of certain 
highways in accordance with title 23 of the United States Code. Mr. 
John C. Culver, of Iowa, was then recognized.(9)

MR. CULVER: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for the immediate
consideration of the Senate bill (S. 3822) authorizing the City of 
Clinton Bridge Commission to convey its bridge structures and other 
assets to the State of Iowa and to provide for the completion of a 
partially constructed bridge across the Mississippi River at or near 
Clinton, Iowa, by the State Highway Commission of the State of Iowa.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
THE SPEAKER:(10) Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Iowa? . . .
MR. [DURWARD G.] HALL [of Missouri]: It would be redundant if they 
were both to pass, but the gentleman's concern is we might not be in 
a position to operate, and if there are no objections to the bill, I 
have no objection to it. . . .
Mr. Speaker, I have no further objection, and I withdraw my 
reservation of objection.
THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Iowa?
There was no objection. . . .
The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the 
third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

The consideration of the conference report was then resumed.
Referral of Senate Bill After Recommittal of House Bill

Sec.    3.12 Where a House bill was recommitted, a similar Senate bill 
(which had been held at the Speaker's table pending disposition of the 
House measure) was referred by the Speaker to the appropriate committee 
of the House.
On June 22, 1962,(11) the following entry appeared in the Record:

A bill of the Senate of the following title was taken from the 
Speaker's table and, under the rule, referred as follows:

S. 3225. An act to improve and protect farm income, to reduce costs of 
farm programs to the Federal Government, to reduce the Federal 
Government's excessive stocks of agricultural commodities, to maintain
reasonable and stable prices of agricultural commodities and products 
to consumers, to provide adequate supplies of agricultural commodities 
for domestic and foreign needs, to conserve natural resources, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 9.     118 CONG. REC. 37115, 37135-37, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
10.     Carl Albert (Okla.).
11.     108 CONG. REC. 11433, 11434, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 43]]

Parliamentarian's Note: H.R. 11222, the food and agricultural bill of 
1962, had been acted on by the House the preceding day and had been
recommitted to the Committee on Agriculture.
Resolution Discharging House Committee and Providing for Consideration 
of Senate Bill Similar to House Measure Already Reported

Sec.    3.13 The House discharged its committee from further 
consideration of a Senate bill, considered and passed the bill, and 
then laid on the table a similar House bill which had been reported 
by the committee.
On Mar. 29, 1961,(12) Mr. Richard Bolling, of Missouri, by direction 
of the Committee on Rules, called up House Resolution 238, which 
provided, inter alia:

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the 
bill (S. 153) to further amend the Reorganization Act of 1949, as 
amended, so that such Act will apply to reorganization plans 
transmitted to the Congress at any time before June 1, 1963, and all 
points of order against said bill are hereby waived. . . . 
THE SPEAKER:(13) The question is on the resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.

After considering S. 153, the Committee of the Whole reported that 
bill back to the House.

THE SPEAKER: The question is on the passage of the bill.
The bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
A similar House bill (H.R. 5742) was laid on the table.
Consideration of Private Senate Bill in Committee of the Whole

Sec.    3.14 The House may adopt a resolution taking a private Senate 
bill from the Speaker's table and providing for its consideration in
Committee of the Whole.
On Mar. 14, 1961,(14) Mr. William M. Colmer, of Mississippi, called up 
House Resolution 224.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consid-

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
12.     107 CONG. REC. 5267, 5268, 5273, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
13.     Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
14.     107 CONG. REC. 3911, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 44]

eration of the 
bill (S. 1173) to authorize the appointment of Dwight David Eisenhower 
to the active list of the Regular Army, and for other purposes.(15) 
Senate Bills Included in Omnibus Bills

Sec.    3.15 Where an omnibus private bill is passed containing House 
bills similar to Senate bills on the Speaker's table, the Speaker may
recognize Members for unanimous-consent requests to take up such Senate 
bills for consideration.
On Aug. 21, 1935,(16) Speaker Joseph W. Byrns, of Tennessee, made the
following statement:

Permit the Chair to make a statement. In the omnibus bills which were 
passed on yesterday there were included several bills which had 
previously passed the Senate and were on the Speaker's table. The Chair 
feels that those Members who are interested in those particular bills 
should have an opportunity to ask unanimous consent for the immediate
consideration of the Senate bills, so that they can be taken out of the
omnibus bills when they are reported to the Senate. The Chair will 
therefore first recognize Members who have such bills. The Chair 
understands there are a number of Members on the floor who have such 
bills.

Parliamentarian's Note: The provisions of Rule XXIV clause 6, provide a
 procedure for the consideration of private bills and resolutions on 
the first and third Tuesdays of the month. On the third Tuesday of the 
month, the Speak-er may entertain omnibus bills, which may contain 
measures objected to when called previously on the Calendar. It was 
within the context of this rule(17) that the Speaker made the statement
carried above.