[Deschler-Brown Precedents, Volume 17, Chapters 34 - 40]
[Ch. 40. Adjournment]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 777-778]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment



[[Page 777]]



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commentary and editing by Charles W. Johnson, III, J.D., Andrew S. 
Neal, J.D., and Robert W. Cover, J.D.; manuscript editing by Deborah 
Woodard Khalili.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less

   Sec. 1. In General
   Sec. 2. Adjournment to Another Place
   Sec. 3. When in Order; Precedence and Privilege of Motion
   Sec. 4. In Committee of the Whole
   Sec. 5. Debate on Motion; Amendments
   Sec. 6. Voting; Effect of Adoption
   Sec. 7. Quorum Requirements
   Sec. 8. Dilatory Motions; Repetition of Motion
   Sec. 9. To a Day Certain; Three-day Limit

 B. Adjournments for More Than Three Days to Date Certain

   Sec. 10. In General; House-Senate Adjournments for Differing Periods
   Sec. 11. Consideration of Concurrent Resolution; Privilege, 
            Amendment, Debate, Budget Act Restrictions
   Sec. 12. August Recess
   Sec. 13. Conditional Adjournments; Recall

 C. Adjournment Sine Die

   Sec. 14. In General; Privilege; Inclusion of Other Matter
   Sec. 15. Conditional Adjournments Sine Die; Recall
   Sec. 16. Where Required or Prohibited by Law
   Sec. 17. Procedure and Business at Adjournment

[[Page 778]]

   Sec. 18. Business Subsequent to





[[Page 779]]

                      

[Page 779-780]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 1. In General



    Art. I, Sec. 5 of the United States Constitution, together with 
clause 4 of Rule XVI of the rules of the House,(1) establish 
the fundamental precedence in parliamentary procedure of the House of 
Representatives of the motion to adjourn. Under the Constitution, the 
motion to adjourn is given such primacy that it is one of only two 
motions (the other being the motion to compel the attendance of 
absentees) which can be adopted in the absence of a quorum. Jefferson's 
Manual states ``A motion to adjourn simply takes place of all others; 
for otherwise the House might be kept sitting against its will, and 
indefinitely. Yet this motion cannot be received after another question 
is actually put and while the House is engaged in 
voting.''(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 911-913 (2007).
 2. Id. at Sec. 439.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Adjournments in the House include: (1) adjournments of three days 
or less, which are taken pursuant to motion (or by unanimous consent 
during pro forma sessions when only the Chair is in the 
Chamber);(3) (2) adjournments for more than three days, 
which require the consent of the Senate;(4) and (3) an 
adjournment sine die, which ends each session of a Congress, and 
requires the consent of the Senate or the arrival of the 
constitutionally prescribed end of session on Jan. 3, and which may be 
combined with either single-House or two-House majority leadership 
recall authority (converting a sine die adjournment to adjournment to a 
day certain specified in (or pursuant to) the recall).(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See Division A, infra.
 4. See Division B, infra.
 5. See Division C, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Adjournment is to be distinguished from recess.(6) 
Adjournments are normally taken from day to day or to a day certain and 
terminate a legislative day, whereas recesses are taken during a 
legislative day. Following an adjournment, the Mace is removed from the 
upper pedestal at the rostrum in the custody of the Sergeant at Arms 
(rather than remain on the rostrum) and the

[[Page 780]]

House is no longer in a receptive mode for business. The hopper is 
removed and bills may not be introduced nor reports filed through the 
hopper. Restrictions on access to the floor are relaxed for invited 
visitors in periods of adjournment as provided in clause 3 of Rule 
IV,(7) but not during recesses. While under clause 4 of Rule 
XVI the motion to adjourn is of the highest privilege, the declaration 
of a recess for a ``short time'' under clause 12(a) of Rule 
I(8) is in order when no question is pending, such as when a 
Member indicates his desire to offer a motion to adjourn but has not 
yet been recognized by the Chair for that purpose.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. See Ch. 39, infra.
 7. House Rules and Manual Sec. 679 (2007).
 8. Id. at Sec. 638.
 9. See Ch. 39 Sec. 2.22, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Beginning in the 108th Congress, declarations of emergency recesses 
pursuant to clause 12(b) of Rule I(10) are in order whenever 
the Speaker is notified of an imminent danger to the safety of the 
House. Such declarations take precedence over pending business and 
could even interrupt a pending motion to adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. House Rules and Manual Sec. 639 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 108th Congress, the rules were amended to permit the Speaker 
to alter the time for reconvening during an adjournment period of three 
days or less, if notified by the Sergeant at Arms of the imminent 
impairment of the place of reconvening and after consultation with the 
Minority Leader, either by postponing or advancing the established time 
for reconvening for a duration within the established three-day period, 
and in an advanced reconvening solely to declare a recess within the 
three-day limit.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Compare this formal authority for early reconvening following 
        overnight adjournment with the twice-used Senate practice of 
        unauthorized early reconvening followed by ratification by 
        unanimous consent. See 109 Cong. Rec. 22697-99, 88th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., Nov. 25, 1963; and 147 Cong. Rec. 16865, 107th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., Sept. 12, 2001. The Senate felt that it had no other 
        option in this circumstance than to ``convene and ratify.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       

[Page 780-784]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 2. Adjournment to Another Place

    While an adjournment normally implies a reconvening in the Chamber 
from which the House adjourned, under clause 12(d) of Rule 
I(1) adopted in the 108th

[[Page 781]]

Congress, the Speaker may convene the House in a place within the seat 
of government, the District of Columbia, other than the Hall of the 
House. Prior to that time and by precedent since 1949, the House could 
by simple resolution adjourn to reconvene at another place within the 
seat of government, the concurrence of the Senate not being 
necessary.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 639 (2007). The seat of government was 
        transferred to the District of Columbia by the Act of July 16, 
        1790 (1 Stat. 30), and provided that ``all offices attached to 
        the said seat of government be removed to the District.''
 2. Ch. 1 Sec. 4.1, supra. See also Sec. 2.3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During any adjournment the President may, by law, convene Congress 
at a place outside the seat of government due to the existence of 
hazardous circumstances within the seat of government.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 2 USC Sec. 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After Sept. 11, 2001, authority contained in concurrent resolutions 
adjourning both Houses for more than three days, or sine die, which 
includes joint leadership authority to recall the two Houses, has 
allowed reassembly at such place as may be designated.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See Sec. 2.2, infra.
            The House, by unanimous consent, has also considered and 
        adopted a concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 449) providing 
        that the Congress ``conduct a special meeting in Federal Hall 
        in New York, New York'' on Sept. 6, 2002, in remembrance of 
        Sept. 11, 2001. The resolution provided for a strictly 
        ceremonial meeting. See Ch. 36 Sec. 16.4, supra. Congress has 
        engaged in ceremonial functions outside the seat of government. 
        For example, Members of both Houses traveled to Philadelphia 
        for organized festivities surrounding the bicentennial 
        anniversary of the Constitution on July 16, 1987. See Ch. 36 
        Sec. 4.5, supra. On that occasion, a concurrent resolution 
        authorized the Speaker and the President pro tempore to appoint 
        an official bicameral delegation to represent the Congress at a 
        ceremonial session. After a preliminary joint ceremony in 
        Independence Hall, delegations met separately in their 
        respective chambers in Congress Hall for ceremonial sessions. 
        At no time was consideration given to making the proceedings be 
        an actual session of Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Jan. 7, 2003, the opening day of the 108th Congress, the House, 
consistent with art. I, Sec. 5 of the Constitution, granted 
anticipatory consent for the two Houses to assemble at a place outside 
the seat of government whenever, in the opinion of the joint leadership 
(or their designees) after bipartisan consultation, the public interest 
shall warrant it. House Concurrent Resolution 1 was called up as 
privileged in the House. The House adopted the concurrent resolution on 
Feb. 13, 2003.(5) This concurrent resolution

[[Page 782]]

allowed the Houses to meet only at the same place outside the seat of 
government. A concurrent resolution rather than a law was thought 
prudent to enable each successive Congress to reaffirm such bicameral 
consent contemporaneously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See Sec. 2.1, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.1 The House adopted a privileged concurrent resolution (offered 
    by the chairman of the Committee on Rules) granting anticipatory 
    consent for the two Houses to assemble at a place outside the seat 
    of government whenever, in the opinion of the joint leadership (or 
    their designees) after bipartisan consultation, the public interest 
    shall warrant it.

    On Jan. 7, 2003,(1) the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 147 Cong. Rec. 21, 107th Cong. 1st Sess. For the Senate concurrence 
        see 147 Cong. Rec. 4080, 108th Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 13, 2003.
            On the opening day of the 109th Congress the House 
        considered as privileged and adopted H. Con. Res. 1 to permit 
        the two Houses to meet outside the seat of government. However, 
        the Senate took no action on either of those concurrent 
        resolutions, although that body had acted in the 108th Congress 
        in 2003. See 151 Cong. Rec. 68, 109th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 4, 
        2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

          REGARDING CONSENT TO ASSEMBLE OUTSIDE THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT

        Mr. [David] DREIER [of California]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 1) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                 H. Con. Res. 1

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That pursuant to clause 4, section 5, article I of 
        the Constitution, during the One Hundred Eighth Congress the 
        Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate or 
        their respective designees, acting jointly after consultation 
        with the Minority Leader of the House and the Minority Leader 
        of the Senate, may notify the Members of the House and the 
        Senate, respectively, to assemble at a place outside the 
        District of Columbia whenever, in their opinion, the public 
        interest shall warrant it.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 2.2 After Sept. 11, 2001, authority contained in concurrent 
    resolutions adjourning both Houses for more than three days, or 
    sine die, which includes joint leadership authority to recall the 
    two Houses, has allowed reassembly during that adjournment period 
    at such place inside or outside the seat of government as may be 
    designated.

[[Page 783]]

    On Nov. 22, 2002,(1) the Speaker pro 
tempore(2) laid the following privileged concurrent 
resolution before the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 148 Cong. Rec. 23512, 107th Cong. 2d Sess.
 2. Brian D. Kerns (IN).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVIDING FOR THE SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT OF THE 107TH CONGRESS, 
                                 SECOND SESSION

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kerns) laid before the House the 
    privileged Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 160) 
    providing for the sine die adjournment of the One Hundred Seventh 
    Congress, Second Session.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 160

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate adjourns at the close of 
        business on any day from Wednesday, November 20, 2002 through 
        Saturday, November 23, 2002, or from Monday, November 25, 2002, 
        through Wednesday, November 27, 2002, or on a motion offered 
        pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader, 
        or his designee, it stand adjourned sine die, or until Members 
        are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this 
        concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
        of the House, or their respective designees, acting jointly 
        after consultation with the Minority Leader of the Senate and 
        the Minority Leader of the House, shall notify the Members of 
        the Senate and the House, respectively, to reassemble at such 
        place and time as they may designate whenever, in their 
        opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

        The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Adjournment to House Caucus Room

Sec. 2.3 The House adopted a resolution providing for adjournment to 
    the caucus room in a House office building for convenings there 
    until otherwise ordered.

    On Nov. 22, 1940,(1) a House resolution was presented 
calling for the House to convene following its adjournment (over the 
weekend) at another place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 86 Cong. Rec. 13715, 76th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer resolution (H. Res. 637) and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

                              House Resolution 637

            Resolved, That when this House adjourns on Friday, November 
        22, 1940, it will adjourn to meet in the caucus room in the New 
        House Office Building on Monday, November 25, 1940, and it 
        shall continue to meet there until otherwise ordered.
            Resolved, That all rules relating to the Hall of the House 
        shall be applicable to the caucus room.
            Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to 
        the President of the United States and to the Senate of the 
        United States.

[[Page 784]]

        The resolution was agreed to.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The House continued to hold its sessions in 
a caucus room in a House office building until the opening of the 77th 
Congress. Likewise, the Senate provided that its meetings should be 
held in the Capitol Chamber formerly occupied by the Supreme Court. 
These actions were necessary because of the precarious condition of the 
roofs in the two Chambers.(2) The Majority Leader inserted 
in the Congressional Record a letter from the Architect of the Capitol 
explaining the urgency of the roof construction in detail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       

[Page 784-820]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 3. When in Order; Precedence and Privilege of Motion

    When the House has fixed the daily hour of meeting (as it normally 
does on the first day of each session by standing order), the motion to 
adjourn, authorized by clause 4 of Rule XVI,(1) is in order 
in simple form only (that the House do now adjourn), and may not direct 
an immediate adjournment to a day or time certain, or to a day beyond 
three days and beyond the constitutional term of that 
Congress.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
 2. Ibid. See also House Rules and Manual Sec. 912; and Sec. 3.27, 
        infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Only in a case in which the hour of daily meeting has not been 
fixed may the simple motion to adjourn fix the hour of 
meeting.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. House Rules and Manual Sec. 912 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to fix the day to which the House should adjourn was 
included within the rule as to the precedence of motions but was 
dropped in 1890 and again in 1895 until 1973, because of its use in 
obstructive tactics.(4) In 1973, clause 4 of Rule XVI was 
revised to restore to the highest privileged status, equal with the 
simple motion to adjourn, the nondebatable motion that when the House 
adjourns on that day it stand adjourned to a day and time certain 
(within three days) but only if the Speaker, in the Speaker's 
discretion, recognized a Member for that purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Ibid. See also 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 6740.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     In the interim between 1895(5) until 1973, the motion 
that the adjournment on that day be one to a day and time certain was 
not privileged against the demand for the regular order.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 5301.
 6. See Sec. 3.2, infra.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 785]]

    The Chair cannot refuse to recognize a Member having the floor for 
a simple motion to adjourn.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See Sec. 3.3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn may be withdrawn.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. See Sec. Sec. 3.31, 3.32, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn not only has the highest precedence when a 
question is under debate, but with certain restrictions, under all 
other conditions as well.(9) The entry of the motion to 
reconsider, while highly privileged, is not preferential to the motion 
to adjourn.(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. See Sec. Sec. 3.4-3.16, 3.26 infra.
10. See Rule XIX clause 3, House Rules and Manual Sec. 1003 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The House may adjourn before the Journal is 
approved.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. See Sec. 3.8, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn may be made during the consideration of a 
rule reported from the Committee on Rules, as long as the motion be not 
made when another Member has the floor, and must be in writing on 
demand of any Member.(12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. See Sec. 3.6, infra. Under clause 1 of Rule XVI, House Rules and 
        Manual Sec. 902 (2007), a motion must be reduced to writing on 
        the demand of any Member, including the motion to adjourn, see 
        Sec. 3.13, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn may not interrupt a Member who has the 
floor.(13) The motion is not in order during time yielded 
for a parliamentary inquiry.(14) The motion may not be 
repeated in the absence of intervening business.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. See also Sec. Sec. 3.15-3.17, infra.
14. See Sec. 3.18, infra.
15. See Sec. 3.19, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn takes precedence over a motion to suspend the 
rules,(16) but only one motion to adjourn is in order 
pending a motion to suspend the rules.(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. See Sec. 3.7, infra.
17. Rule XV clause 1(b), House Rules and Manual Sec. 890 (2007). See 
        also Sec. 3.14, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn is in order pending a point of order that a 
quorum is not present.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. See Sec. Sec. 3.20, 3.25, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn has precedence over a motion for a call of 
the House, but not after a call of the House has been ordered and the 
Clerk directed to call the roll.(19)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. See Sec. Sec.  3.21-3.24, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn takes precedence over questions of 
privilege.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Rule IX clause 2(a), clause 2(b), House Rules and Manual 
        Sec. Sec. 699, 700 (2007). See also Sec. 3.26, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn may not be made prior to a vote on final 
passage when the previous question is ordered by operation of a special 
rule to final passage without intervening motion.(21)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. See Sec. 3.12, infra.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 786]]

    On Sept. 19, 1979,(22) the House rejected a joint 
resolution on final passage, after having by ordinary motion under 
clause 4 of Rule XVI ordered the previous question to ``final 
passage'', and not pursuant to any special rule ordering the previous 
question to final passage without intervening motion except one motion 
to recommit. The House did not dispose of the motion to reconsider on 
that day but later adjourned until the next day. On Sept. 20, 
1979,(23) a Member moved to reconsider the vote of the 
previous day and the House voted to reconsider the vote on final 
passage. Pending the question on final passage, the Speaker entertained 
a motion to adjourn ``as preferential and in order'' pending the 
putting of the question on final passage for the second time. Thus, the 
motion to adjourn was held in order pending final passage where the 
previous question has been ordered by motion ``to final passage''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. 125 Cong. Rec. 25345, 25353, 96th Cong. 1st Sess. (H.J. Res. 399).
23. See Sec. 3.12, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn may be made by any Member, including a 
minority Member.(24)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. See Sec. 3.30, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Chair may declare the House adjourned by unanimous consent when 
no Member is available to offer the motion.(25)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. See Sec. Sec. 3.28, 3.29, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In at least one instance, the House adjourned out of respect for a 
Member's death without adopting a resolution marking the day's 
adjournment.(26)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. See Sec. 3.33, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 3.1 In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Speaker pro 
    tempore indicated that an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
    in the form of a concurrent resolution providing for the sine die 
    adjournment of a session of Congress would not be germane to a 
    simple motion to adjourn.

    On Dec. 30, 1970,(1) during a vote on adjournment, a 
Member attempted to interrupt with a parliamentary inquiry. As soon as 
the result of the vote had been announced, the Speaker permitted the 
Member to make his inquiry, which had to do with amending a simple 
motion to adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 44190, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [W. C.] DANIEL of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mills).(2) The question 
    is on the motion to adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Wilbur D. Mills (AR).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 787]]

        Mr. [Durwood G.] HALL of Missouri. Mr. Speaker--
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would request that the 
    gentleman from Missouri permit the Chair to put the question.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes had it.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, is a privileged amendment in the form of 
    a substitute as a concurrent resolution in order on a motion to 
    adjourn?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will advise the gentleman 
    from Missouri that it is not in order on a simple motion to 
    adjourn.

Sec. 3.2 Between 1895 and 1973,(1) a motion that the 
    adjournment on that day be one to a day and time certain was not in 
    order against a demand for the regular order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. For the current practice, see Rule XVI clause 4(c), House Rules and 
        Manual Sec. Sec. 911, 912 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the early morning hours of the legislative day of Wednesday, 
Feb. 22, 1950,(2) a Member moved that the House adjourn to a 
day certain, the calendar day of Friday, Feb. 24. The subsequent 
objection of another Member served in effect as a demand for the 
regular order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 96 Cong. Rec. 2254, 81st Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 23, 1950 (calendar 
        day).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to meet on Friday 
    next at 12 o'clock noon.
        Mr. [Joseph W.] MARTIN [Jr.] of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, a 
    point of order.
        The SPEAKER.(3) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. The gentleman cannot do that. As I 
    understand it, we must come in at noon today for the Thursday 
    session unless unanimous consent is secured to go over until 
    Friday. Is that the proper parliamentary situation?
        The SPEAKER. If the gentleman makes that point.
        Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. I think the gentleman ought to 
    proceed in the regular way.
        Mr. McCORMACK. Of course, the gentleman is absolutely correct. 
    I was trying to have an adjournment to a definite time.
        Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House 
    adjourns today it adjourn to meet on Friday next at 12 o'clock.
        Mr. [John F.] KENNEDY [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    object.

                                  adjournment

        Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now 
    adjourn until 12 o'clock today.

[[Page 788]]

        The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 3 o'clock and 19 
    minutes a. m.), the House adjourned until 12 o'clock noon of 
    Thursday, February 23, 1950.

Sec. 3.3 The Chair cannot refuse to recognize a Member having the floor 
    for a simple motion to adjourn.

    On Mar. 16, 1945,(1) at the culmination of a series of 
exchanges pertaining to the parliamentary situation at the time, the 
Speaker indicated that the motion to adjourn is always in order, and 
that a Member with the floor is entitled to recognition to so move.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 91 Cong. Rec. 2380, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clare E.] HOFFMAN [of Michigan]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. HOFFMAN. What is the regular order now?
        The SPEAKER. The regular order is to see if a quorum develops.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. Is it in order to adjourn?
        The SPEAKER. That motion is always in order in the House.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. If there is not a quorum, Mr. Speaker, I move we 
    adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. Will the gentleman withhold that for a moment?
        Mr. HOFFMAN. If the Chair is refusing recognition, I will.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair cannot do that.

Precedence

Sec. 3.4 The motion to adjourn, though most preferential under clause 4 
    of Rule XVI,(1) is not available when the previous 
    question has been ordered (by special rule) to final passage 
    without intervening motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 911, 912 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 14, 2001,(2) during debate in the House on an 
amendment to a bill on which the previous question had been ordered, 
the following proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 147 Cong. Rec. 10725, 107th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John J.] LaFALCE [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I make the 
    point of order that a quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cooksey).(3) The Chair 
    is unable to entertain the gentleman's point of order until the 
    Chair has put the question on the amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John Cooksey (PA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. LaFALCE. Would the Chair restate that position? I thought 
    that I would be able at any point that I was recognized to get up 
    and made a point of order that a quorum was not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rules of the House, the 
    Chair may

[[Page 789]]

    not recognize the absence of a quorum during debate. The only time 
    the point of order may be entertained is when the Chair puts the 
    question to the House on the gentleman's amendment.
        Mr. LaFALCE. So you could debate within the House of 
    Representatives without a quorum?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order of no quorum is not 
    permitted during the debate, no.
        Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is unable to recognize the 
    motion.
        The previous question is ordered under the rule without such 
    intervening motion.
        Mr. [Michael G.] OXLEY [of Ohio]. Point of inquiry. Does the 
    request have to be in writing?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. On demand, the motion needs to be in 
    writing.
        Mr. OXLEY. The gentleman from New York was recognized for what 
    particular purpose?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. With the previous question having been 
    ordered to passage without intervening motion pending is the debate 
    on the amendment controlled by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) 
    and the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce). Under the special 
    rule, no other motions are permissible.
        Mr. LaFALCE. A motion to adjourn is not permissible at this 
    time?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry. When 
    is a motion to adjourn permissible?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. With the previous question being 
    ordered to final passage without intervening motion under the rule 
    that motion can be entertained after the question of passage of the 
    bill.
        Mr. LaFALCE. Not before passage of the bill?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is the ruling of the Chair.

Sec. 3.5 Although a motion to instruct conferees is privileged under 
    clause 1(c) of Rule XXVIII(1) a motion to adjourn 
    remains preferential even after the motion to instruct has been 
    read.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Now Rule XXII clause 7(c)(1), House Rules and Manual Sec. 1079 
        (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Sept. 30, 1997,(2) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 143 Cong. Rec. 20886, 20887, 105th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 1757, FOREIGN RELATIONS 
          AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEARS 1998 AND 1999, AND EUROPEAN 
                              SECURITY ACT OF 1997

        Mr. [Lloyd A.] DOGGETT [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged motion.
        The SPEAKER.(3) The Clerk will report the motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Newt Gingrich (GA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Doggett moves that the managers on the part of the 
        House at the conference on the disagreeing votes

[[Page 790]]

        of the two Houses on the bill, H.R. 1757, be instructed to 
        reject section 1601 of the Senate amendment, which provides for 
        payment of all claims against the Iraqi Government before those 
        of U.S. veterans and the U.S. Government (i.e., U.S. 
        taxpayers).                          -------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mr. [C. Joseph] SCARBOROUGH [of Florida]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. A motion to adjourn is in order.
        Mr. SCARBOROUGH. Mr. Speaker, I had asked earlier for a 
    question. We can do a motion to adjourn, if I can ask the gentleman 
    from Texas a question?
        The SPEAKER. A motion to adjourn is not debatable, and the 
    gentleman was not recognized prior to this time.

                                {time}  0015

        Does the gentleman from Florida insist on his motion to 
    adjourn?
        Mr. SCARBOROUGH. Yes, Mr. Speaker.
        Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, has the motion been reduced to 
    writing?
        The SPEAKER. Yes. The question is on the motion to adjourn 
    offered by the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Scarborough].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    206, nays 183, not voting 44, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 479] . . .

        So the motion to adjourn was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        Accordingly (at 12 o'clock and 34 minutes a.m.) the House 
    adjourned until today, Wednesday, October 1, 1997, at 10 a.m.

Sec. 3.6 The motion to adjourn may be made during the consideration of 
    a rule reported from the Committee on Rules pursuant to clause 4(b) 
    of Rule XI,(1) as long as the motion is not made when 
    another Member has the floor and is reduced to writing on demand of 
    any Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Now Rule XIII, clause 6, see House Rules and Manual Sec. 857 
        (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Sept. 27, 1993,(2) where the House adjourned during 
the consideration of a special order reported from the Committee on 
Rules, further consideration of the rule would become the unfinished 
business when the House next reconvened; and when the consideration of 
unfinished business resumed in the House, debate did not begin anew but 
recommenced from the point at which it was interrupted.(3) 
The following occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 139 Cong. Rec. 22608, 22609, 103d Cong. 1st Sess.
 3. 139 Cong. Rec. 22719, 103d Cong. 1st Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 791]]

                               motion to adjourn

        Mr. [Dan] BURTON of Indiana. For that reason, and because of 
    this rule and because I cannot bring it to the floor to debate it, 
    Madam Speaker, I move the House do now adjourn, with apologies to 
    my colleague, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon].
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Meek).(4) Will the 
    gentleman from Indiana withhold that motion momentarily?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Carrie P. Meek (FL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. BURTON of Indiana. As long as it is not going to be 
    overlooked, Madam Speaker.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's debate time has 
    expired. Does the gentleman from Indiana still insist on that 
    motion?
        Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I do insist, Madam Speaker.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. [Gerald B. H.] SOLOMON [of New York]. Madam Speaker, I have 
    a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will please state his 
    inquiry.
        Mr. SOLOMON. Madam Speaker, I do not believe that the motion is 
    in writing.
        I would like to continue the debate, if we could, and let the 
    gentleman make it in a timely manner, if that is all right with the 
    gentleman.
        Mr. BURTON of Indiana. No, Madam Speaker, I do insist on my 
    motion, with apologies to my colleague.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The motion must be in writing.
        The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon].
        Mr. SOLOMON. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
    from Florida [Mr. Mica].
        Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, there is a pending motion 
    on the floor.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has 
    insisted that the motion be in writing. Meanwhile, the gentleman 
    from Florida [Mr. Mica] is recognized for 2 minutes. . . .
        Mr. SOLOMON. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
    distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Walker].

                                 Point of Order

        Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I have a point of order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Meek). The gentleman will state 
    his point of order.
        Mr. BURTON of Indiana. The Speaker in the chair a few moments 
    ago asked if I would defer for a few moments while she talked to 
    somebody up there at the desk. I did defer. Now I want my motion to 
    be voted upon. The gentlewoman in the Chair, the gentlewoman from 
    Florida [Mrs. Meek], has it in writing. She asked me to wait. I did 
    wait. Now I would like the motion to be heard.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Burton of Indiana moves that the House do now adjourn.

                            parliamentary inquiries

        Mr. [George W.] GEKAS [of Pennsylvania]. Madam Speaker, I have 
    a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.

[[Page 792]]

        Mr. GEKAS. Madam Speaker, I assume that if the gentleman's 
    motion is considered by the Chair and put to the House, there would 
    be an immediate vote on it. My parliamentary inquiry then would be:
        If it should be defeated, would we go on with the regular order 
    of business?
        We should. I assume that we would go on with the regular order 
    of business.
        My parliamentary inquiry is:
        In the event that it should not fail, that it should prevail, 
    and this House do adjourn, is it in order to ask prior to the vote 
    being taken that the adjournment be held over until special orders 
    are completed?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will not entertain that 
    request.
        Mr. [Martin] FROST [of Texas]. Regular order, Madam Speaker.
        Mr. GEKAS. Could I ask the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton], 
    in a colloquy pursuant to my parliamentary inquiry----
        Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I ask for regular order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair must put the question on the 
    motion to adjourn.
        Mr. GEKAS. Madam Speaker, I have a point of parliamentary 
    inquiry as to that.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
    please state his parliamentary inquiry?
        Mr. GEKAS. Is it proper, is it within regular order, to ask the 
    sponsor of the motion to adjourn to defer adjournment, even if his 
    motion prevails, until after special orders? Would the gentleman 
    agree to that condition?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Once that motion is agreed to, the 
    House must adjourn immediately.
        Mr. GEKAS. Madam Speaker, I am trying to get across that we 
    have special orders we would like to get to.
        Mr. SOLOMON. Madam Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. SOLOMON. Madam Speaker, is it now true that, if the motion 
    to adjourn is forced on the body, we would have to start this 
    debate on this rule all over, and that we have just 5 minutes left 
    on the debate today, and we could do that without further 
    inconveniencing any of the Members if the gentleman would just 
    withhold for 5 minutes?
        Madam Speaker, we have a lot of very, very important business 
    to take care of on this floor tomorrow, and I would plead with the 
    gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton] to withhold his motion for 5 
    minutes.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. If the House adjourns now, the 
    resolution will be unfinished business tomorrow.
        Mr. SOLOMON. And we would be starting all over again, Madam 
    Speaker?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Not necessarily.
        Mr. [Robert L.] LIVINGSTON [of Louisiana]. Madam Speaker, I 
    have a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. LIVINGSTON. Might I inquire of the Chair if it is possible 
    to vote on a motion to adjourn by voice vote?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Yes. If the ayes have it, then the 
    House could adjourn.

[[Page 793]]

        Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, once again I must ask for regular 
    order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to 
    adjourn offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton].
        The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 5 o'clock and 5 
    minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until 
    tomorrow, Tuesday, September 28, 1993, at 10 a.m.

Sec. 3.7 The motion to adjourn is of the highest privilege under Rule 
    XVI clause 4,(1) and thus takes precedence over the 
    motion to suspend the rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 911, 912 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Aug. 11, 1992,(2) the Speaker entertained 
parliamentary inquiries while counting for a quorum on a negative vote 
on a motion to adjourn:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 138 Cong. Rec. 23085, 23086, 102d Cong. 2d Sess. See also 117 Cong. 
        Rec. 38536, 38537, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 1, 1971.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. McNulty).(3) The 
    question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California 
    [Mr. Miller] that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, 
    H.R. 2144, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Michael R. McNulty (NY).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken.
        Mr. [Ron] MARLENEE [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, on that I 
    demand the yeas and nays.
        The question was taken.
        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the grounds 
    that a quorum is not present, and I make the point of order that a 
    quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present. 
    Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I, and the Chair's prior announcement, 
    further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
        The point of no quorum is considered 
    withdrawn.                          -------------------

                             PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY

        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. Speaker, at this time is a motion to adjourn in order? Is 
    it a privileged motion?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. A motion to adjourn is a privileged 
    motion.                          -------------------

                          FALSE CLAIMS AMENDMENTS ACT

        Mr. [Barney] FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I move to 
    suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4563, with an 
    amendment.                          -------------------

                             PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY

        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, I had a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, I did not receive a response on my 
    parliamentary inquiry.

[[Page 794]]

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman did receive a response. 
    The motion is a privileged 
    motion.                          -------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now 
    adjourn.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.
        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground 
    that a quorum is no present, and make the point of order that a 
    quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will count for a quorum.

                            parliamentary inquiries

        Mr. [George W.] GEKAS [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, is the Chair empowered to declare a 
    recess?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. No; he is not. The Chair is counting 
    for a quorum.
        Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact 
    that the gentleman who is objecting was upset that bills cost 
    money, is it relevant that the next bill is a saving to the 
    taxpayer, according to OMB and CBO, since it is a False Claims 
    Amendment Act? Maybe the gentleman would like to let us save a few 
    million dollars.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot entertain that 
    inquiry, which is not a parliamentary inquiry, when he is counting 
    for a quorum.
        Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I knew that, Mr. Speaker, but the 
    gentleman was listening.

                                {time}  1930

        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. McNulty). The gentleman will 
    state his parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. MARLENEE. Mr. Speaker, what would be the effect of my 
    withdrawing the point of order?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. If the gentleman withdrew his point of 
    order, the Chair would rely on his earlier declaration that the 
    noes had it on the voice vote and the motion would not be agreed 
    to.
        Mr. MARLENEE. . . .
        Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my point of order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman withdraws his point of 
    order of no quorum.
        So the motion to adjourn was rejected.

Sec. 3.8 The motion to adjourn takes precedence over the Chair's 
    putting the question on the Speaker's approval of the Journal. 
    Where less than a quorum rejects a motion to adjourn, the House may 
    not consider business but may dispose of motions to secure the 
    attendance of absent Members.

[[Page 795]]

    On Nov. 2, 1987,(1) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 133 Cong. Rec. 30386-90, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  THE JOURNAL

        The SPEAKER.(2) The Chair has examined the Journal 
    of the proceedings of the second legislative day of Thursday, 
    October 29, 1987.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. James C. Wright, Jr. (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question is on approval of that 
    Journal.                          -------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Thomas S.] FOLEY [of Washington]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged motion.
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion. The Clerk read 
    as follows:

            Mr. Foley moves that the House do now adjourn.

        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Washington [Mr. Foley].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. [F. James] SENSENBRENNER [Jr., of Wisconsin]. Mr. Speaker, 
    I ask for a division.
        The SPEAKER. A division is requested.
        A division was taken; and the Speaker announced that ayes were 
    12 and noes were 15.
        Mr. FOLEY. 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.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I have a point of order.
        Mr. Speaker, that is not a proper motion to make. The House can 
    adjourn without a quorum.
        The SPEAKER. That is true, but when the vote is a negative vote 
    the House is not adjourned unless the vote were established to be 
    an affirmative vote. The Chair counted 12 ayes and 15 noes.
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman can object to the negative division 
    vote on the ground that a quorum is not present, and 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 
    92, nays 100, not voting 241, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 396] . . .

                            parliamentariay inquiry

        Mr. FOLEY (during the voting). Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, is it the case that until a majority 
    appears to adjourn the House may not adjourn? Is that correct.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct.
        Mr. FOLEY. And, Mr. Speaker, is it also true that the House may 
    not do any other business?
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, the House is not in order.

[[Page 796]]

        The SPEAKER. The House is not in order.
        Will all Members of the House please kindly desist from private 
    conversations?
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, is it also correct that the House may 
    not take up any other business pending their conclusion of this 
    vote by rollcall on adjournment?
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct.
        Mr. FOLEY. And the House must remain in session pending an 
    affirmative vote to adjourn, a quorum appearing in support, or a 
    quorum appearing?
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct.

                                 point of order

        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania] (during the voting). 
    Mr. Speaker, I have a point of order.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state his point of order.
        Mr. WALKER. Under what rule are we holding discussion while a 
    vote is still open?
        The SPEAKER. Parliamentary inquiries have been propounded to 
    the Chair. Under the precedents, the Chair is responding to 
    parliamentary inquiries relating to the pending situation.
        Mr. WALKER. While the vote is being taken and that is an 
    appropriate procedure during the course of a vote, is that correct, 
    Mr. Speaker?
        Mr. FOLEY. Point of order, Mr. Speaker. If the parliamentary 
    inquiry is not in order, then the gentleman's point of order is not 
    in order.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I call for the regular order.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will respond to the gentleman's inquiry.
        The precedents hold that it is in order for the Chair to 
    recognize Members for points of parliamentary inquiry if those 
    points of parliamentary inquiry apply to the business at hand.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. WALKER (during the voting). Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, should this vote fail, there is a 
    process by which the House could ask the Sergeant at Arms to round 
    up the absent Members, is that not correct?
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct.
        Mr. WALKER. And that motion would be in order immediately 
    following this vote?
        The SPEAKER. After the Chair has announced the vote, that 
    motion would be in order.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. SENSENBRENNER (during the voting). Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, when would that announcement 
    take place?
        The SPEAKER. The announcement will take place when the Chair 
    announces it, which the Chair is about to do.
        The Chair is advised that there are Members on the way to the 
    Chamber.
        On this vote, the yeas are 92, the nays are 100, and the motion 
    is not agreed to.

[[Page 797]]

        So the motion was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                                {time}  1230

                      motion offered by mr. sensenbrenner

        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Sensenbrenner moves, pursuant to rule XV, clause 2(a), 
        that the Sergeant at Arms be directed to arrest the absent 
        Members.

        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the noes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
    nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    65, nays 130, not voting 238, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 397] . . 
                 .                          -------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a highly privileged motion.
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Foley moves that the House do now adjourn.

        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Washington [Mr. Foley].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the noes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device and there were--yeas 
    95, nays 102, not voting 236, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 398] . . .

        The SPEAKER. Are there other Members in the Chamber who desire 
    to vote?

                          announcement by the speaker

        The SPEAKER. The Chair desires to announce that in the event 
    the Sergeant at Arms were instructed to go and to find and arrest 
    absent Members, the Sergeant at Arms has informed the Chair that he 
    already has enough volunteers to find and arrest Members from 
    Hawaii.
        Are there other Members in the Chamber who desire to vote?
        Are there Members who desire to change their votes?
        Mr. de la Garza changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
        The SPEAKER. Are there in the Chamber those who just have not 
    realized that a vote is being taken?
        Are there other Members who are on the way from their offices?
        Have we received urgent requests from Members to hold the vote 
    open?
        Are there Members in the elevators?
        If there are no other Members who desire to vote or to change 
    their votes, all time has expired.
        So the motion was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                    privileged motion offered by mr. walker

        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion that I 
    send to the desk.

[[Page 798]]

        Mr. [Henry B.] GONZALEZ [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. WALKER. I have a privileged motion, Mr. Speaker.
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion.

            Mr. Walker moves pursuant to clause 2, rule XV that the 
        Speaker be authorized to compel the attendance of absent 
        Members.

        Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the reading of that 
    motion.
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the motion again slowly and in 
    a clear voice.
        The Clerk reread the motion.
        Mr. GONZALEZ. I move to table that motion.
        The SPEAKER. A motion to table is not in order.
        Mr. WALKER. Is that motion at the desk, Mr. Speaker?
        If the motion is not at the desk, Mr. Speaker, it is not in 
    order.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is of the opinion that since this is 
    neither a debatable nor an amendable motion that a motion to table 
    is not in order under the circumstances.
        The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from 
    Pennsylvania [Mr. Walker] that the Chair be instructed to compel 
    the attendance of absent Members.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the noes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    102, nays 96, not voting 235, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 399] . . .

        Mr. Shuster changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
        So the motion was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the motion, the Chair directs that the 
    Sergeant at Arms proceed with such steps as may be necessary and 
    efficacious to compel the attendance of absent Members.
        Members who have not been heretofore recorded will give their 
    names to the Clerk upon arriving, and until the establishment of a 
    quorum no other business can be conducted.

                                {time}  1330

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, would it be in order to grant 
    the Speaker authority to declare a recess today to a time certain 
    at this point?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is advised that in the absence of a 
    quorum no motion which requires unanimous consent may be 
    entertained, and that would be such a motion.
        Therefore, the Chair regrets that the motion would not be in 
    order.
        Members will observe and stand by.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.

[[Page 799]]

        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, will the House be given notice when 
    sufficient Members have arrived to do business?
        Mr. [Larry J.] HOPKINS [of Kentucky]. Mr. Speaker, do we get a 
    15-minute notice?
        The SPEAKER. When a quorum arrives, we will move to dispense 
    with further proceedings under this motion, and at that point 
    additional business may be considered. That is all that can be done 
    under the present circumstances.
        Members will stand by and enjoy one another's conviviality.

                                {time}  1510

        The SPEAKER. Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XV, the names of 
    those Members who have voluntarily appeared subsequent to rollcall 
    No. 399 shall be spread upon the Journal.
        The list of names referred to is as follows:

            Messrs. Shaw; Leath of Texas; Williams; Neal; Walgren; 
        Sabo; Mfume; Traxler; Dixon; St Germain; Bonior of Michigan; 
        Volkmer; Jeffords; Andrews; Edwards of California; Roe; Porter; 
        Dymally; Stenholm; Hatcher; Cheney; and Harris; Mrs. Morella; 
        and Messrs. Yates; Nagle; and Cardin.

        The SPEAKER. Are there other Members who desire to be recorded?
        If not, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. 
    Bonior].                          -------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. BONIOR of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do 
    now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
    nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    116, nays 106, not voting 211, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 400] . . .

        Messrs. FRENZEL, HEFLEY, and LOWERY of California changed their 
    votes from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
        So the motion was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was above recorded.
        Accordingly (at 3 o'clock and 40 minutes p.m.) the House 
    adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, November 3, 1987, at 12 noon.

Sec. 3.9 Under Rule XVI clause 4,(1) the motion to adjourn 
    takes precedence over all other motions and questions, including 
    the filing of a privileged report pursuant to clause 4(a) of Rule 
    XI.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 911, 912 (2007).
 2. Now Rule XIII, clause 5, see Id. at Sec. 853 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Apr. 29, 1985,(3) the motion to adjourn took 
precedence over the filing of a privileged report on a contested 
election from the

[[Page 800]]

Committee on House Administration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 131 Cong. Rec. 9699, 9700, 99th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

              REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO SUBMIT A PRIVILEGED REPORT

        Mr. [Leon E.] PANETTA [of California]. Mr. Speaker, by 
    direction of the Committee on House Administration, I submit a 
    privileged report.
        Mrs. [Lynn] MARTIN [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    privileged resolution at the desk.
        Mr. Speaker. I have a privileged resolution that I sent to the 
    desk.
        Mr. [Charles E.] SCHUMER [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, will the 
    gentlewoman yield?
        Mrs. MARTIN of Illinois. No; the gentlewoman cannot with a 
    privileged resolution.
        Mr. SCHUMER. Did the gentlewoman ask for a privileged 
    revolution or resolution?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(4) The House will be in 
    order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. James C. Wright (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mrs. MARTIN of Illinois. One may lead to the other.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House will be in order.
        The Chair had recognized the gentleman from California [Mr. 
    Panetta], who has sent a privileged report to the desk.
        Has the gentleman from California quite finished with his 
    request?
        Mrs. MARTIN of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I believe that my motion 
    has the highest privilege.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman will be recognized in 
    due course, if the gentlewoman will--
        Mrs. MARTIN of Illinois. But I believe my motion has 
    precedence.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman has not--
        Mrs. MARTIN of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I believe that my motion 
    has precedence.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman will be recognized.
        The gentlewoman will state her privileged 
    motion.                          -------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mrs. MARTIN of Illinois. I thank the Chair.
        Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

                                {time}  1230

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman does state a 
    privileged motion, and the question is on the gentlewoman's motion.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Jim] KOLBE [of Arizona]. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the 
    yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered. The vote was taken by 
    electronic device, and there were--yeas 124, nays 168, not voting 
    141, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 77] . . .

        So the motion to adjourn was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. . . .

[[Page 801]]

                                      -------------------REPORT ON 
         RESOLUTION RELATING TO ELECTION OF A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE 
                    EIGHTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF INDIANA

        Mr. PANETTA, from the Committee on House Administration, 
    submitted a privileged report (Rept. No. 99-58) on the resolution 
    (H. Res. 146) relating to election of a Representative from the 
    Eighth Congressional District of Indiana, which was referred to the 
    House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

Sec. 3.10 While the motion to adjourn takes precedence over any other 
    motion under Rule XVI clause 4(a),(1) the Speaker may, 
    through the power of recognition, recognize the Majority Leader, by 
    unanimous consent, for one minute where no objection is raised to 
    announce the legislative program prior to entertaining the motion 
    to adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Dec. 14, 1982,(2) the following proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 128 Cong. Rec. 30549, 30550, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk announced the following pairs:
        On this vote:

            Mr. Fary for, with Mr. Thomas against.
            Mr. John L. Burton for, with Mr. Chappie against.

        So the joint resolution was passed.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
        The SPEAKER.(3) The Chair recognizes the majority 
    leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Wright).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Denny] SMITH [of Oregon]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    preferential motion to send to the desk.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will be seated. The Speaker has the 
    right of recognition.
        Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I have a preferential motion.
        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Regular order, Mr. 
    Speaker.

                                {time}  2040

        The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the majority leader, the 
    gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
    Wright).                          -------------------

                              LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

        Mr. [James C.] WRIGHT [Jr., of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, let me 
    simply announce for the benefit of the Members that it is our 
    intention now to have no further votes tonight. We plan to take up 
    the things that we put off last night in order that Members might 
    go and attend the reception in the White House, the remaining 
    suspension, and was agreed with the Republican leadership and our 
    leadership last night, but we will not have any votes. We will roll 
    the votes until tomorrow, let the votes be the first thing 
    tomorrow. . . .

[[Page 802]]

                                     -------------------PREFERENTIAL 
                     MOTION OFFERED BY MR. SMITH OF OREGON

        Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I offer a preferential 
    motion.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state his preferential motion.
        Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now 
    adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the preferential motion offered 
    by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Smith).
        The question was taken, and the Speaker announced that the noes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
    nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    122, nays 202, not voting 109, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 452] . . 
                 .                          -------------------

                          ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER

        The SPEAKER. The Chair will make the following statement:
        It is the usual and customary practice in this House that when 
    we come to the end of a proceeding, as we did, that the majority 
    leader then announces the program for the remainder of the night. 
    The majority leader had informed me that he was going to make that 
    announcement. Normally it is a unanimous-consent request, and that 
    is what the Chair anticipated that the majority leader would do.
        It is the prerogative and the duty of the Speaker of the House 
    to run this body in an expeditious manner and he should be informed 
    when motions are going to be made, whether they are privileged or 
    otherwise, and when he is suddenly confronted with a privileged 
    motion, then it is my opinion, while the Chair appreciates that he 
    follows the rules of the House, it does not improve the decorum of 
    the House. The Speaker at all times tries to be fair, and thought 
    he was being fair with the Members when he was recognizing the 
    majority leader to inform the membership what the program was for 
    the remainder of the evening.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Speaker recognized the Majority Leader 
to announce the program for the remainder of the day and declined to 
recognize a Member to offer a motion to adjourn pending that 
announcement, although the Majority Leader had neglected to obtain 
unanimous consent to address the House for one minute. The Speaker then 
suggested that decorum would be maintained by unanimous-consent 
permission to announce the leadership program pending a motion to 
adjourn. Any Member can force an immediate vote on a privileged motion 
to adjourn by objecting to a unanimous-consent request to address the 
House for one minute to announce the program. The Speaker may entertain 
a unanimous-consent request pending a privileged motion, but in this 
instance he merely assumed that the Majority Leader had properly 
obtained the

[[Page 803]]

floor. Once the floor is obtained for one minute, a motion to adjourn 
cannot interrupt.

Sec. 3.11 The motion to adjourn is highly privileged and may be offered 
    after the House rejects a motion to lay on the table a motion to 
    instruct conferees and before the vote occurs on the motion to 
    instruct.

    On May 29, 1980,(1) the House adopted a motion to insist 
on its disagreement to a Senate amendment and to request a further 
conference with the Senate, and then adopted a motion to instruct the 
House conferees, after having rejected a motion to adjourn offered by 
the manager of the conference report:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 126 Cong. Rec. 12717-19, 96th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    motion to instruct offered by mr. latta

        Mr. [Delbert L.] LATTA [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion 
    to instruct.
        The Clerk read as follows:
        Mr. Latta moves to instruct the managers on the part of the 
    House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses 
    on House Concurrent Resolution 307, first concurrent resolution on 
    the budget for fiscal year 1981, to agree to the figures in 
    functional category 050, national security, of $153.7 billion in 
    outlays and $171.3 billion in budget authority.

                     motion to table offered by mr. giaimo

        Mr. [Robert N.] GIAIMO [of Connecticut]. Mr. Speaker, I move to 
    lay the motion on the table.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is on the motion to 
    table offered by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Giaimo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    123, nays 165, not voting 145, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 273] . . .

                             motion for adjournment

        Mr. GIAIMO. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Giaimo).
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    141, nays 145, not voting 147, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 274] . . .

        Mr. TAUZIN changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
        So the motion was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

[[Page 804]]

        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion to instruct offered 
    by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta).
        The motion was agreed to.

          appointment of conferees on house concurrent resolution 307

        The SPEAKER. The Chair appoints the following conferees: 
    Messrs. Giaimo, Wright, Ashley, Simon, Mineta, Jones of Oklahoma, 
    Brodhead, Wirth, Panetta, Gephardt, Nelson, Latta, Conable, Mrs. 
    Holt, Mr. Regula, and Mr. Rudd.

Sec. 3.12 The motion to adjourn takes precedence over a vote on final 
    passage where the House has reconsidered the first vote on final 
    passage and where the previous question has been ordered by motion 
    to final passage.

    On Sept. 20, 1979,(1) the following events occurred in 
the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 125 Cong. Rec. 25512, 25513, 96th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            RECONSIDERATION OF VOTE ON HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 399, 
                        CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, 1980

        Mr. [Harold A.] VOLKMER [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, having 
    voted on the prevailing side, I move to reconsider the vote whereby 
    House Joint Resolution 399 was not passed.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rostenkowski).(2) The 
    Chair will inquire, did the gentleman vote no on final passage?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Dan Rostenkowski (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, I voted no on final passage.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman qualifies.
        The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Volkmer moves to reconsider the vote whereby House 
        Joint Resolution 399 was not passed. . . .

        Mr. [Gerald B. H.] SOLOMON [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that motion, that House Joint Resolution 399 be laid upon the 
    table.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that is not in 
    order. It is not the right motion. The joint resolution itself 
    cannot be laid on the table, the previous question having been 
    ordered yesterday.
        The question is on the motion to reconsider offered by the 
    gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Volkmer).
        As many as are in favor of the motion will say aye.
        Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the motion on the 
    table.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that he has put 
    the question on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri 
    and the question is being taken.
        The motion offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) 
    to lay on the table has come too late.
        The question is on the motion to reconsider offered by the 
    gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Volkmer).
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.

                                 recorded vote

        Mr. [John J.] RHODES [of Arizona]. Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    recorded vote.

[[Page 805]]

        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    214, noes 196, not voting 24, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 490] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                         motion offered by mr. grassley

        Mr. [Charles E.] GRASSLEY [of Iowa]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    motion.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Grassley moves to reconsider the vote whereby House 
        Joint Resolution 399 was read a third time and engrossed.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered 
    by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Grassley).
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.
        Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
        A recorded vote was refused.
        So the motion was rejected.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the 
    joint resolution.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.

                   preferential motion offered by mr. bethune

        Mr. [Ed] BETHUNE [of Arkansas]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The motion to adjourn offered by the 
    gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Bethune) is preferential and in order.
        The question is on the preferential motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Bethune).
        The preferential motion was rejected.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The pending question is on the passage 
    of the joint resolution.
        As many as are in favor will signify by saying ``aye''; as many 
    as are opposed will signify by saying ``no.''
        In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the joint 
    resolution is passed.

                                 recorded vote

        Mr. [Kenneth B.] KRAMER [of Colorado]. Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    recorded vote.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. A recorded vote is demanded.
        Mr. [George E.] DANIELSON [of California]. Mr. Speaker, I make 
    a point of order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The demand for a recorded vote is in 
    order.
        So many as are in favor will stand and remain standing until 
    counted.
        Forty-seven Members have arisen. A recorded vote is ordered.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. [Mario] BIAGGI [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. BIAGGI. Mr. Speaker, we had a voice vote on the previous 
    question,

[[Page 806]]

    and then we had intervening business, a motion to adjourn. This is 
    not in order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question on the passage was never 
    disposed of.
        Forty-seven Members have arisen, a sufficient number. A 
    recorded vote is ordered.
        As many as are in favor of the resolution will vote ``aye''; as 
    many as are opposed will vote ``no.''
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    196, noes 212, not voting 26, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 491] . . .

        So the joint resolution was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

    Parliamentarian's Note: In light of this precedent, the question 
becomes whether the motion to adjourn is in order pending 
reconsideration after an initial vote on final passage where instead 
the previous question has been ordered by adoption of a special order 
governing consideration of the pending measure to final passage without 
intervening motion (except one motion to recommit) and not by the 
ordinary motion for the previous question. It has been held that the 
motion to adjourn is not in order during consideration of a bill where 
by special order ``the previous question shall be considered as ordered 
. . . and final passage of the bill; and then, without intervening 
motion, the vote shall be taken upon the third reading thereof, and 
upon the final passage of the bill, and, should a motion to reconsider 
be made, upon a motion to lay the latter motion on the 
table.''(3) Similarly, the motion to adjourn was held out of 
order pending the question of reconsideration of the vote on third 
reading, under a special rule ordering the previous question on the 
bill ``to its passage whereupon, without intervening motion, votes 
shall be taken on said bill until the same shall have been fully 
disposed of.''(4) These examples address the denial of 
intervening motions, including motions to adjourn not only ``to'' but 
``through'' final disposition of the motion to reconsider. A measure is 
not considered ``finally'' disposed of until the motion to reconsider 
is disposed of.(5) While clause 3 of Rule XIX specifically 
gives the motion to adjourn precedence over the entry of a motion to 
reconsider under the general rules of the House,(6) an 
interpretation of a typical contemporary supervening special order as 
reversing this priority and foreclosing the motion to adjourn

[[Page 807]]

until final passage has been finally voted, rather than merely reached, 
would be appropriate and not governed by the 1979 ruling, consistent 
with the Hinds' Precedents cited above and the proper meaning of 
``final passage'' without intervening motion. Only where a record vote 
on a motion to reconsider is postponed pursuant to clause 8 of Rule 
XX(7) may the motion to adjourn then be entertained (since 
the business of passage of the bill would no longer be 
pending).(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 4 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 3212.
 4. Id. at Sec. 3213.
 5. See Ch. 23 Sec. 33, infra.
 6. House Rules and Manual Sec. 1003 (2007).
 7. Id. at Sec. 1030.
 8. See Sec. 6.5, infra, for discussion of clause 6(c) of Rule XX 
        (House Rules and Manual Sec. 1025 [2007]) on a motion to 
        adjourn pending the result of a yea and nay vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 3.13 A motion to adjourn has the highest privilege in the House, 
    regardless of the lack of Senate action on a collateral matter.

    On Friday, July 30, 1971,(1) a Member inquired whether a 
motion to adjourn would be in order, given the parliamentary situation 
at that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 117 Cong. Rec. 28332, 28333, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY

        Mr. [John] CONYERS [Jr., of Michigan]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. (2) The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
    Conyers) will state his parliamentary inquiry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Senate 
    has put the Lockheed matter over until Monday, would a motion to 
    adjourn be in order?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that of course a motion to 
    adjourn is always in order, and the relevance of side or collateral 
    issues is unimportant.
        Mr. CONYERS. I thank the Speaker.

Sec. 3.14 Only one motion to adjourn is admissible during consideration 
    of a motion to suspend the rules.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Rule XV clause 1(b), House Rules and Manual Sec. 890 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 21, 1947,(2) the following took place in the 
House after a motion to suspend the rules was moved and seconded:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 93 Cong. Rec. 9523, 80th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               motion to adjourn

        Mr. [Tom] PICKETT [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Pickett) there were--ayes 42, noes 261.
        Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, I ask for tellers.
        Tellers were ordered, and the Chair appointed as tellers Mr. 
    Gamble and Mr. Pickett.
        The House again divided; and the tellers reported that there 
    were--ayes, 51, noes 149.

[[Page 808]]

        Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 85, nays 299, not 
    voting 46, as follows:

                                 [Roll No. 126]

    Subsequently, during debate on the motion to suspend the rules, a 
second motion to adjourn was made:(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Id. at p. 9529.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Thomas J.] MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. (4) That motion is not in order. Under 
    the precedents, a motion to adjourn is not in order until the final 
    vote upon the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

When Another Member Has the Floor

Sec. 3.15 While the motion to adjourn is of highest privilege under 
    clause 4 of Rule XVI,(1) it may not be made while 
    another Member has the floor in debate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Mar. 25, 1993,(2) the following proceedings occurred 
on the floor of the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 139 Cong. Rec. 6372, 6373, 103d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

        (Mr. Michel asked and was given permission to address the House 
    for 1 minute.)
        Mr. [Robert H.] MICHEL [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, I ask for 
    this extended moment to inquire of the distinguished majority 
    leader the program for the next week.
        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, will the 
    gentleman yield?
        Mr. MICHEL. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. 
    . . .
        Mr. [Robert K.] DORNAN [of California]. . . .
        What are we doing here? What is this ugliness and rudeness? 
    This is the worst session I have ever seen ever and where is the 
    Speaker, for God's sake? He disappeared a week ago.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Lewis of Georgia).(3) 
    The Chair would advise the gentleman from California, the Speaker 
    is in the chair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John R. Lewis (GA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. MICHEL. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I simply want to say to the minority 
    leader that as he knows, we have had a number of conversations that 
    are continuing. We are trading proposals and ideas for how to 
    reasonably deal with special orders that would be an appropriate 
    way for all the Members and that Members could agree to.
        We will continue to work as hard and as quickly on that as we 
    can and try to bring back to the membership a set of ideas that we 
    hope can gain support.

[[Page 809]]

                                  -------------------REQUEST FOR MOTION 
                                   TO ADJOURN

        Mr. [Gene] TAYLOR [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, there being no 
    further legislative business before this body, I move that we 
    adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
    Michel] has the floor.

Sec. 3.16 A motion to adjourn, while privileged, cannot be entertained 
    while another Member holds the floor but may be offered as soon as 
    the floor is yielded.

    On June 6, 1968,(1) shortly after the House convened at 
noon, Mr. Richard L. Ottinger, of New York, attempted to call up a 
motion to adjourn which he had placed at the desk. However, the 
Minority Leader, Gerald R. Ford, of Michigan, had just been granted the 
floor by unanimous consent for one minute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 114 Cong. Rec. 16225, 16226, 90th Cong. 2d Sess. See also 112 Cong. 
        Rec. 27727, 89th Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 19, 1966.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

        Mr. Gerald R. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to 
    proceed for 1 minute for the purpose of asking the distinguished 
    majority leader the program for today.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Without objection, it is so ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        Mr. OTTINGER. Mr. Speaker, I have a privileged motion at the 
    desk.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that the gentleman from 
    Michigan [Mr. Gerald R. Ford] has the floor at the present time and 
    has been recognized.

    When Mr. Ford's time was up, Mr. Ottinger again offered his 
privileged motion, which was rejected.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 114 Cong. Rec. 16225, 90th Cong. 2d Sess., June 6, 1968.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

              PRIVILEGED MOTION TO ADJOURN OFFERED BY MR. OTTINGER

        Mr. OTTINGER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Ottinger moves that the House do now adjourn.

        The question was taken, and the Speaker announced that the noes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Benjamin S.] ROSENTHAL [of New York]. Mr. Speaker--
        The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York 
    [Mr. Ottinger].
        Mr. OTTINGER. I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum 
    is not present.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will protect the gentleman who is making 
    the motion.
        Mr. OTTINGER. 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.

[[Page 810]]

        The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Ottinger] objects 
    to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and makes 
    the point of order that a quorum is not present. Evidently a quorum 
    is not present.
        The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will 
    notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 70, nays 301, not 
    voting 62. . . .
        So the motion was rejected.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Mr. Ottinger, who offered the motion to 
adjourn shortly after the House convened, had urged the Speaker to 
agree to the early adjournment of the House as a tribute to the late 
Senator Robert F. Kennedy, who had died in the early hours of that 
morning from bullet wounds inflicted in Los Angeles, California, the 
previous evening.
    The Speaker pointed out to Mr. Ottinger that the Senate was 
planning to conduct business prior to its adjournment and that 
precedents of the House indicated that it was customary to proceed with 
business on such occasions. Mr. Ottinger had nonetheless remained most 
anxious to offer the motion and so was recognized.

Sec. 3.17 A motion to adjourn is not in order while another Member 
    holds the floor unless the Member with the floor yields for such 
    motion.

    On Oct. 18, 1945,(1) a Member yielded to another Member, 
who then moved for adjournment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 91 Cong. Rec. 9814, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 109 Cong. Rec. 
        10152, 88th Cong. 1st Sess., June 4, 1963.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John Edward] SHERIDAN [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, will 
    the gentleman yield?
        Mr. [Edward E.] COX [of Georgia]. I yield to the gentleman from 
    Pennsylvania.
        Mr. SHERIDAN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now 
    adjourn.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Does the gentleman from Georgia 
    yield for that purpose?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I do not yield for that purpose, and the 
    gentleman should not have taken advantage of the courtesy I 
    extended to him.

During Parliamentary Inquiries

Sec. 3.18 The motion to adjourn is not in order when offered during 
    time yielded for a parliamentary inquiry.

    On June 3, 1964,(1) a Member who had the floor for 
debate and who yielded for a parliamentary inquiry could not then be 
deprived of the floor by a motion to adjourn:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 110 Cong. Rec. 12522, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Alphonzo] BELL [of California]. Mr. Speaker, it is my 
    feeling that the

[[Page 811]]

    Job Corps proposal does not provide the specialized instruction to 
    meet this need.
        Such retraining must be carried out where the facilities, the 
    equipment, and the trained personnel are available.
        Mr. [Paul C.] JONES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Does the gentleman yield 
    for a parliamentary inquiry?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield.
        Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, is a motion to adjourn now 
    in order?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. If the gentleman yields for that 
    purpose.
        Mr. JONES of Missouri. This is a parliamentary inquiry. I tried 
    to propound a parliamentary inquiry a minute ago, but I could not 
    get any response.
        Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's motion is out of 
    order.
        Mr. JONES of Missouri. It is out of order?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Unless the gentleman yields for that 
    purpose.
        Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I do not yield.

May Not Be Repeated in Absence of Intervening Business

Sec. 3.19 While the motion to adjourn has the highest privilege in the 
    House under clause 4 of Rule XVI,(1) it may not be 
    repeated in the absence of intervening business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 31, 1975,(2) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 121 Cong. Rec. 26243, 94th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles J.] GARNEY [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER.(3) The gentleman from Ohio moves that 
    the House do now adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John J.] RHODES [of Arizona]. Mr. Speaker, on that I 
    demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 184, nays 195, 
    answered ``present'' 1, not voting 54, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 474] . . .

        So the motion was rejected.
        The Clerk announced the following pair:
        On this vote:

            Mr. O'Hara for, with Mr. Ruppe, against.

        Mr. [Philip E.] RUPPE [of Michigan]. Mr. Speaker, I have a live 
    pair with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. O'Hara). If he were 
    present he would have voted ``yea.'' I voted ``nay.'' I withdraw my 
    vote and vote ``present.''
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        Mr. John L. BURTON [of California]. Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House do now adjourn.

[[Page 812]]

        The SPEAKER. The motion is not in order since we just had a 
    vote on a similar motion and there has been no intervening business 
    or debate.
        Mr. John L. BURTON. Mr. Speaker, I thought a motion to adjourn 
    is always in order.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will take unanimous-consent requests.

Calls of the House

Sec. 3.20 A motion to adjourn is in order following a call of the 
    House, and it is not necessary that the Chair announce that a 
    quorum has failed to respond before entertaining the motion to 
    adjourn.

    On Oct. 14, 1969,(1) a quorum not being present, a 
motion to adjourn was made following a call of the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 115 Cong. Rec. 30054, 30055, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Gillespie V.] MONTGOMERY [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Evidently a quorum is not present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I move a call of 
    the House.
        A call of the House was ordered.
        The Clerk called the roll, and the following Members failed to 
    answer to their names:

                              [Roll No. 223] . . .

        Mr. [Donald M.] FRASER [of Minnesota]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. FRASER. I would like to ask, if I may, where the matter 
    stands now of the call of the House which was made by the majority 
    leader. As I understand it, there is not yet a quorum recorded at 
    the desk.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct.
        Mr. FRASER. Now, Mr. Speaker, what are the options open to the 
    House at this point?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is patiently waiting to see. Regular 
    order is the establishment of a quorum. If a quorum is not 
    established, then a motion to adjourn would be in order.
        Mr. FRASER. Mr. Speaker, am I correct that if a quorum is not 
    established, there are only two choices open to the House--either a 
    motion to adjourn or a motion to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to 
    produce the missing Members?
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct.
        Mr. FRASER. Mr. Speaker, so long as a quorum is not produced 
    and in the event the House should instruct the Sergeant at Arms, 
    would it be possible for the House to proceed, or would the House 
    have to stand in abeyance with no further proceedings?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that the House cannot do 
    business without a quorum.
        Mr. FRASER. Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry.

[[Page 813]]

        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. FRASER. Mr. Speaker, in order to see if I have that point 
    clearly in mind, if there were an instruction to bring in absent 
    Members and it did not succeed during the period of time, during 
    that period of time the House could proceed with no other business; 
    is that correct?
        The SPEAKER. The House cannot proceed at all until a quorum is 
    established.
        Mr. [James H.] QUILLEN [of Tennessee]. Mr. Speaker--
        The SPEAKER. For what purpose does the gentleman from Tennessee 
    rise?
        Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, due to the lack of a quorum, I move 
    that the House do now adjourn.
        Mr. [Sidney R.] YATES [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, on that I ask 
    for the yeas and nays.
        Mr. [Hale] BOGGS [of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Louisiana will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, does it require a quorum to adjourn?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will state to the gentleman from 
    Louisiana that it does not require a quorum.

Sec. 3.21 A quorum not being present, no motion is in order but for a 
    call of the House or a motion to adjourn, and the motion to adjourn 
    takes precedence over a motion for a call of the House.

    On June 12, 1963,(1) when a motion for a call of the 
House and a motion to adjourn were both before the House, the Speaker 
announced that the question was on the motion to adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 109 Cong. Rec. 10739, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
            Parliamentarian's Note: Following a point of order that a 
        quorum was not present and prior to the ascertainment thereof 
        by the Chair, a Member moved a call of the House. Another 
        Member immediately moved to adjourn. The Chair recognized the 
        latter and put the question on the higher privileged motion to 
        adjourn. On a division vote, the House refused to adjourn. In 
        response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Chair stated that the 
        point of order that a quorum was not present had not been 
        renewed after the House had refused to adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Frank. J.] BECKER [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I make the 
    point of order a quorum is not present.
        Mr. [Donald C.] BRUCE [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, I move a call 
    of the House.
        Mr. [Wayne L.] HAYS [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The question is on the 
    motion that the House do now adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. W. Homer Thornberry (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Bruce) there were--ayes 23, noes 34.
        So the motion was rejected.

Sec. 3.22 A motion to adjourn in the absence of a quorum is

[[Page 814]]

    not entertained after a call of the House has been ordered by 
    motion.

    On June 4, 1963,(1) time allotted to two Members of the 
minority under previous order of the House was interrupted by seven 
quorum calls, seven division votes, a yea and nay vote, and various 
motions, including a motion to adjourn. The motion to adjourn was not 
entertained because the absence of a quorum had been noted and a quorum 
call had already been ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 109 Cong. Rec. 10152, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John Bell] WILLIAMS [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, since 
    45 or 50 Members have left the floor, I make the point of order a 
    quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER. (2) Evidently a quorum now is not 
    present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I move a call of 
    the House.
        A call of the House was ordered.
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call the roll.
        Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now 
    adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that a call of the House has 
    been ordered.
        The Clerk will call the roll.

Sec. 3.23 A motion to adjourn is in order pending a point of order that 
    a quorum is not present, but is not entertained after the Clerk has 
    commenced to call the roll after a call of the House is ordered and 
    a Member has responded to his name.

    On June 3, 1960,(1) the following took place in the 
House with regard to the timing of a motion to adjourn:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 106 Cong. Rec 11828, 11829, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               CALL OF THE HOUSE

        Mr. [Silvio O.] CONTE [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I make 
    the point of order that a quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Albert).(2) Obviously a 
    quorum is not present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    a call of the House.
        A call of the House was ordered.
        Mr. [Clare E.] HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Is a motion to adjourn in order?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Not now. The Chair will advise that a 
    call of the House has been ordered.
        Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Can a member of the minority--
        The regular order was demanded.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The regular order is demanded. The 
    Clerk will call the roll.

[[Page 815]]

Sec. 3.24 The motion to adjourn takes precedence of a motion for a call 
    of the House.

    On Apr. 24, 1956,(1) a point of order was made that a 
quorum was not present and, prior to ascertainment thereof by the 
Chair, a Member moved a call of the House, and another Member 
immediately moved to adjourn; the Chair recognized the latter and put 
the question on the higher privileged motion to adjourn. The following 
took place in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 102 Cong. Rec. 6891, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Wayne L.] HAYS of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House 
    do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER.(2) If the gentleman from Georgia 
    retains the floor, that motion is not in order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] VINSON [of Georgia]. I retain it, Mr. Speaker. I am 
    just moving around to get a little exercise.
        The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Mississippi insist upon 
    his point of no quorum?
        Mr. [William M.] COLMER [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, I insist 
    upon the point of no quorum.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will count. Evidently there is no quorum 
    present.
        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    a call of the House.
        Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now 
    adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The motion to adjourn is a privileged motion. The 
    question is on the motion.
        The motion was rejected.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Massachusetts.
        A call of the House was ordered.

Sec. 3.25 A motion to adjourn is in order pending a point of order that 
    a quorum is not present.

    On Aug. 24, 1949,(1) after a point of order was made 
that a quorum was not in attendance, but before any action had been 
taken on the point of order, a motion to adjourn was entertained, voted 
on, and agreed to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 95 Cong. Rec. 12191, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  adjournment

        Mr. [Frank B.] KEEFE [of Wisconsin]. Mr. Speaker, I make the 
    point of order that a quorum is not present.
        Mr. [J. Percy] PRIEST [of Tennessee]. Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is on the motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Keefe) there were--ayes 49, noes 38.
        Mr. [Vito] MARCANTONIO [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I demand the 
    yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 186, nays 132, not 
    voting 114, as follows:

[[Page 816]]

                              [Roll No. 197] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.

Precedence Over Questions of Privilege

Sec. 3.26 A question of privilege is not entertained pending a vote on 
    a motion to adjourn.

    On Apr. 15, 1970,(1) a Member moved for adjournment, and 
while that motion was pending, another Member rose to a point of 
privilege.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 11940, 11941, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Wayne L.] HAYS [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The question is on the 
    motion offered by the gentleman from Ohio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Charles M. Price (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken, and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.
        Mr. HAYS. 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.
        Mr. Justice Douglas has been on the Bench for a great many 
    years, and he can wait for one more night. I have not had my 
    dinner.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will count.
        Mr. HAYS. Mr. Speaker, I am willing to withhold my motion if 
    the gentleman wants to ask permission to insert his remarks, but 
    obviously all these speeches were written by the same author, and I 
    do not think we ought to have to sit here and listen to them.
        Mr. [William L.] SCOTT [of Virginia]. Mr. Speaker, if the 
    gentleman will yield, my remarks will not take more than 10 
    minutes.
        Mr. HAYS. I have been hearing that for a long time now.
        Mr. [Louis C.] WYMAN [of New Hampshire]. Mr. Speaker, I rise to 
    a point of special privilege.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. There is a motion pending.
        Mr. HAYS. Mr. Speaker, I insist on the point of order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio insists on the 
    point of order.
        Evidently a quorum is not present.
        The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will 
    notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll.

Beyond Constitutional Term

Sec. 3.27 A motion that when the House adjourns that day it stand 
    adjourned until a date beyond the constitutional term of that 
    Congress is not in order under art. I clause 4 of the Constitution, 
    and under clause 4 of Rule XVI.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Apr. 18, 2002,(2) a motion that the House adjourn to 
a stated

[[Page 817]]

date nine years hence was ruled out of order:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 148 Cong. Rec. 4969, 107th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles B.] RANGEL [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 
    1/2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kleczka), a member 
    of the Committee on Ways and Means.

                         request for motion to adjourn

        Mr. [Gerald D.] KLECZKA [of Wisconsin]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that the House, upon conclusion of today's business, adjourn until 
    noon, January 1, 2011.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) That motion is not in 
    order at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Michael K. Simpson (ID).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. KLECZKA. Well, Mr. Speaker, if it was in order, it would 
    give some rationale to the bill before the House.

By Chair's Initiative

Sec. 3.28 The Speaker pro tempore, the only Member present in the 
    Chamber: (1) convened the House; (2) led the House in the pledge of 
    allegiance; and (3) adjourned the House (by unanimous consent sua 
    sponte).

    On Feb. 3, 2000,(1) the following proceedings took place 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 146 Cong. Rec. 596, 107th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The House met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker 
    pro tempore (Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin). . . 
    .                          -------------------

                              PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The Chair will lead the 
    House in the Pledge of Allegiance. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Paul Ryan (WI).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the House stands 
    adjourned until 2 p.m. on Monday next.
        There was no objection.
        Accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 2 minutes a.m.), under its 
    previous order, the House adjourned until Monday, February 7, 2000, 
    at 2 p.m.

    Parliamentarian's Note: This form of unanimous consent is now 
common practice on ``pro forma days'' when no special orders or one-
minute speeches are scheduled.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. This was the first instance of this kind in the 106th Congress. For 
        similar instances see 144 Cong. Rec. 4297, 4298, 105th Cong. 2d 
        Sess., Mar. 23, 1998; 144 Cong. Rec. 2847, 2848, 105th Cong. 2d 
        Sess., Mar. 9, 1998; 143 Cong. Rec. 19614, 105th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., Sept. 22, 1997; 143 Cong. Rec. 11732, 105th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., June 21, 1997; 143 Cong. Rec. 10344, 105th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., June 7, 1997; 143 Cong. Rec. 9648, 9649, 105th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., May 30, 1997; 143 Cong. Rec. 9646, 105th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., May 27, 1997; 142 Cong. Rec. 2763, 2764, 104th Cong. 2d 
        Sess., Feb. 16, 1996; and 141 Cong. Rec. 28740, 28774, 104th 
        Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 20, 1995.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 818]]

Sec. 3.29 The Speaker has adjourned the House overnight on his own 
    initiative by unanimous consent.

    On Dec. 11, 1944,(1) the following transpired in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 90 Cong. Rec. 9209, 78th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The SPEAKER.(2) Without objection, the House will 
    stand adjourned until 12 o'clock noon tomorrow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection; thereupon (at 5 o'clock and 44 minutes 
    p.m.) the House adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, December 12, 
    1944, at 12 o'clock noon.

By Minority Member

Sec. 3.30 The Speaker pro tempore having attempted by unanimous consent 
    to adjourn the House at the end of special-order speeches and there 
    being an objection, the objecting minority member on the floor was 
    then recognized to move adjournment--there being no majority member 
    on the floor at that time.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. This was customarily the prerogative for recognition through the 
        98th Congress.
            Parliamentarian's Note: While no longer the current 
        practice, in 1984 the Parliamentarian could not recall a recent 
        example of a minority Member moving adjournment at the end of 
        special-order speeches on a day, nor could he recall the Chair 
        adjourning the House by unanimous consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 23, 1984,(2) the following events occurred on the 
floor of the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 130 Cong. Rec. 13960, 98th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) Without objection, the 
    House stands adjourned.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Sander M. Levin (MI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    object.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
    (Mr. Walker) have a motion?
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I have always wanted to do this.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is going to recognize the 
    gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Walker).
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 11 o'clock and 37 
    minutes p.m.) the House adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, May 24, 
    1984, at 10 a.m.

Withdrawal of Motion

Sec. 3.31 A motion to adjourn may be withdrawn by the mover thereof, 
    and unanimous consent for that action is not required.

    On Oct. 14, 1969,(1) when a Member asked unanimous 
consent

[[Page 819]]

to withdraw his motion to adjourn, two Members objected. The Speaker 
ruled unanimous consent unnecessary and allowed the Member to withdraw 
his motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 115 Cong. Rec. 30055, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Sidney R.] YATES [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. YATES. Is there not a motion to adjourn pending upon which 
    I have asked for the yeas and nays?
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman's inquiry is correct.
        Mr. [James H.] QUILLEN [of Tennessee]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent to withdraw my motion to adjourn.
        Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, I object.
        Mr. [William S.] MOORHEAD [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    object.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that it does not require 
    unanimous consent to withdraw the gentleman's motion.
        Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my motion and I yield to 
    the majority leader.

Sec. 3.32 Where a Member moves to adjourn and then withdraws the 
    motion, the Member loses the floor, and the Speaker may then 
    recognize another Member of the House to renew the motion.

    On Oct. 14, 1969,(1) a Member withdrawing his motion to 
adjourn stated his intention to yield to the Majority Leader. The 
Speaker advised the Member that on withdrawing his motion to adjourn he 
would lose the floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 115 Cong. Rec. 30055, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [James H.] QUILLEN [of Tennessee]. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw 
    my motion [to adjourn] and I yield to the majority leader.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The Chair will state the gentleman 
    from Tennessee does not have that privilege. The Chair has the 
    privilege of recognition when the gentleman has withdrawn his 
    motion. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I would prefer 
    not to make this motion at this time, but in view of the 
    parliamentary situation, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        Mr. [Sidney R.] YATES [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, on that I 
    demand the yeas and nays.

In Memory

Sec. 3.33 In at least one instance, a Member has offered a motion to 
    adjourn ``in memory of'' a deceased Member without the House having 
    adopted a resolution so marking the day's adjournment.

    On Oct. 28, 1997,(1) the House adjourned in memory of 
Rep. Walter H. Capps, of California, who had died earlier that day:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 143 Cong. Rec. 23557, 105th Cong. 1st Sess. For additional 
        information on adjourning out of respect for deceased Members, 
        see Ch. 38 infra.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 820]]

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Vic] FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, it is with great 
    regret that I move that the House do now adjourn in memory of the 
    late Honorable Walter H. Capps, our dear departed colleague.
        The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 9 o'clock and 12 
    minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, 
    October 29, 1997, at 10 a.m., in memory of the late Honorable 
    Walter H. Capps of California.


                        

[Page 820]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 4. In Committee of the Whole

Sec. 4.1 The motion to adjourn is not in order in the Committee of the 
    Whole.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 333, 912 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Feb. 22, 1950,(2) the following transpired in the 
Committee of the Whole during consideration of the Federal Fair 
Employment Practices Act (H.R. 4453):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 96 Cong. Rec. 2218, 81st Cong. 2d Sess. See also 95 Cong. Rec. 
        5616, 5617, 81st Cong. 1st Sess., May 4, 1949.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The CHAIRMAN.(3) . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Francis E. Walter (PA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk will read.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Be it enacted, etc.--

                                  short title

            Section 1. This act may be cited as the ``Federal Fair 
        Employment Practices Act.''

        Mr. [Paul W.] SHAFER [of Michigan]. Mr. Chairman, I move that 
    we now adjourn.
        The CHAIRMAN. That motion is not in order in Committee.

    Parliamentarian's Note: In the Committee of the Whole, the proper 
motion is that the Committee ``do now rise'', which motion, if adopted, 
would then permit a motion to adjourn in the House.


                       

[Page 820-824]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 5. Debate on Motion; Amendments

    Because debate on the simple motion to adjourn or on the motion to 
fix the day to which the House shall adjourn is precluded by clause 
4(b) and clause 4(c) of Rule XVI,(1) a prefatory statement 
leading up to the motion is not in order as debate on the motion and is 
not carried in the Congressional Record.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
 2. See Sec. 5.1, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to lay on the table the motion to adjourn is not in 
order since under clause 4 of Rule XVI, the motion to adjourn is not 
debatable.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007). See also Sec. 5.2, infra.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 821]]

    The motion to adjourn is not subject to amendment fixing the time 
of adjournment.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See Sec. 5.3, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 5.1 Pursuant to clause 4 of Rule XVI, the motion to adjourn is not 
    debatable.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Feb. 13, 2002,(2) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 148 Cong. Rec. 1291, 107th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mr. [John] LEWIS [of Georgia]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. [Mark] FOLEY [of Florida]. Mr. Speaker, if this is the most 
    important bill to be sent to the floor by discharge petition by the 
    minority, then why is it they call for adjournment on the day of 
    the bill's presentation on the floor?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Culberson).(3) The 
    gentleman from Florida is recognized for a proper parliamentary 
    inquiry. The gentleman will state his inquiry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John Abney Culberson (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, does the bill, as presented under the 
    rule, comply with the dictates of the discharge petition, or are we 
    operating under a substitute version?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House is operating under the terms 
    of House Resolution 344.
        A motion to adjourn has been offered, and it is not debatable. 
    The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia 
    (Mr. Lewis).
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.

                                 recorded vote

        Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    13, noes 405, not voting 16, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 18] . . .

        So the motion to adjourn was rejected.

Sec. 5.2 A motion under clause 4(c) of Rule XVI that when the House 
    adjourns it stand adjourned to a time certain is not debatable, and 
    thus is not subject to the motion to lay on the 
    table.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Nov. 17, 1981,(2) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 127 Cong. Rec. 27768-71, 97th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            (FIRST LEGISLATIVE DAY)

        The House met at 12 o'clock noon and was called to order by the 
    Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Wright). . . .

[[Page 822]]

                                   -------------------PRIVATE CALENDAR

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Murtha).(3) This is 
    Private Calendar day. The Clerk will call the first individual bill 
    on the Private Calendar. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John P. Murtha, Jr. (PA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
        Mr. [Edward P.] BOLAND [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that further reading of the Private Calendar be 
    dispensed with.
        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    object.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
        Mr. BOLAND. Mr. Speaker, I move further reading of the Private 
    Calendar be dispensed 
    with.                          -------------------

                                 POINT OF ORDER

        Mr. [F. James] SENSENBRENNER [Jr., of Wisconsin]. Mr. Speaker, 
    I make a point of order against the motion.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his point of 
    order.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, clause 6 of rule XXIV, the 
    second paragraph says that--

            On the third Tuesday of each month after the disposal of 
        such business on the Speaker's table as requires reference 
        only, the Speaker may direct the Clerk to call the bills and 
        resolutions on the Private Calendar.

        There is a precedent that the Private Calendar may be dispensed 
    with, but that was only before the first bill was called on the 
    Private Calendar.
        I would state that since the first bill has been called on the 
    Private Calendar, in order to comply with clause 6 of rule XXIV, 
    the complete Private Calendar must be called unless dispensed with 
    by unanimous consent. The unanimous-consent request has been 
    objected to.
        I believe that the point of order should be sustained and the 
    motion should be ruled out of order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will note that under clause 
    6, rule XXIV on the first Tuesday of each month, a two-thirds vote 
    is required to dispense with the call of Private Calendar, that 
    call being automatic. The Speaker's authority to direct the call is 
    discretionary on the third Tuesday, and so the rule is silent on 
    the motion to dispense with the call, and consistent with that 
    discretionary authority and absent any precedent to the contrary, 
    the point of order should be overruled.
        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I appeal the decision of the 
    Chair.
        Mr. [Thomas S.] FOLEY [of Washington]. Mr. Speaker?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington.
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move that the motion to appeal the 
    Chair's decision be laid on the table.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to lay 
    the appeal from the Chair's decision on the table.
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Sensenbrenner) there were--yeas 75, nays 37.

[[Page 823]]

        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the 
    grounds that a quorum is not present and make the point of order 
    that a quorum is not present.
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I have a privileged motion at the desk.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Foley moves that when the House adjourns today it 
        adjourn to meet at 4 p.m. today.

        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I move to table the motion.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the last sentence of clause 4, 
    rule XVI, that motion to adjourn is not debatable and therefore 
    cannot be laid on the table.
        The question is on the motion.

                                {time}  1245

        Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
    nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    191, nays 172, not voting 70, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 306] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. . . .

         {time}  1300                          -------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered 
    by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Foley).
        The question was taken, and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    188, nays 172, not voting 73, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 307] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.
        Accordingly (at 1 o'clock and 19 minutes p.m.) the House 
    adjourned until 4 o'clock p.m.

    Parliamentarian's Note: This was the first occasion on which the 
motion under clause 4 of Rule XVI was utilized to adjourn to a later 
time on the same calendar day, although its use for that purpose has 
been previously discussed. The only other occasions where the House 
held more than one legislative session on the same legislative day 
which appear to be a matter of record occurred in the Second and Fourth 
Congresses.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 6724, fn. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 5.3 A motion to fix the time to adjourn is not a permissible 
    motion and thus does not take precedence over the simple motion to 
    adjourn, and a simple motion to adjourn is not subject to

[[Page 824]]

    amendment fixing the time of adjournment.

    On Feb. 15, 1950,(1) a Member inquired whether it would 
be in order to amend a simple motion to adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 96 Cong. Rec. 1808, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clare E.] HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. (2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Does a motion to fix time to adjourn 
    take precedence over a motion to adjourn?
        The SPEAKER. It does not.
        Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. A further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. 
    Speaker: Is it in order to offer to a motion to adjourn, an 
    amendment seeking to fix the time of adjournment?
        The SPEAKER. It is not.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The motion to set the day and time of 
reconvening is of equal privilege, at the Speaker's discretion, to the 
simple motion to adjourn under clause 4(c) of Rule XVI,(3) 
but is to be distinguished from a motion to ``fix the time of 
adjournment'' which is not in order.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
 4. Id. at Sec. 913.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


                      

[Page 824-828]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 6. Voting; Effect of Adoption

Sec. 6.1 The motion to adjourn is subject to a record vote.

    On Feb. 8, 1964,(1) a Member inquired whether a motion 
to adjourn would be subject to a roll call vote. The exchange between 
the Member and the Speaker was as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 110 Cong. Rec. 2616, 2639, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles A.] HALLECK [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. HALLECK. When the motion to adjourn is made, could that be 
    subject to a rollcall vote?
        The SPEAKER. If a sufficient number stand. . . .
        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion.
        Mr. [William M.] McCULLOCH [of Ohio]. On that, Mr. Speaker, I 
    demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 220, nays 175; not 
    voting 36. . . .
        So the motion to adjourn was agreed to.

Sec. 6.2 Adoption of a concurrent resolution providing for adjournment 
    sine die or adjournment to a day certain

[[Page 825]]

    does not preclude a demand for the yeas and nays on the subsequent 
    motion to adjourn on that day.

    On the legislative day of Sept. 26, 1961,(1) a Member 
called up a privileged Senate concurrent resolution for immediate 
consideration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 107 Cong. Rec. 21528, 21529, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I call up for 
    immediate consideration a privileged Senate resolution, Senate 
    Concurrent Resolution 55.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That the two Houses shall adjourn on Wednesday, 
        the 27th day of September 1961, and that when they adjourn on 
        said day they stand adjourned sine die.

        Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the 
    resolution.
        Mr. [H. Carl] ANDERSEN of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The gentleman will state 
    it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. ANDERSEN of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, in case the privilege 
    is not given to Members to vote by yea and nay on this particular 
    motion will it not be equally possible for a Member of the House to 
    request a yea-and-nay vote on the final adjournment of the House?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The answer to that is in the 
    affirmative; the gentleman can submit the request.
        The question is on ordering the previous question.
        The question was ordered.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Andersen of Minnesota) there were--yeas 192, nays 6.
        Mr. ANDERSEN of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on 
    the ground a quorum is not present, and make the point of order a 
    quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will count. [After 
    counting.] Two hundred and thirty-two Members are present, a 
    quorum.
        Mr. ANDERSEN of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I demand the yeas and 
    nays.
        The yeas and nays were refused.
        Mr. ANDERSEN of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, a point of order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his point of 
    order.
        Mr. ANDERSEN of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, the provisions of the 
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 are applicable to both 
    Houses.
        Mr. Speaker, I quote section 132 as follows:

            Except in time of war or during a national emergency 
        proclaimed by the President, the two Houses shall adjourn sine 
        die not later than the last day (Sundays excepted) in the month 
        of July in each year unless otherwise provided by the Congress.

        Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the resolution.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is aware that we have a 
    state of

[[Page 826]]

    national emergency, and overrules the point of order.
        The resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 6.3 A division vote may be held on a motion to adjourn.

    On June 15, 1951,(1) a Member inquired as to whether a 
division vote would be in order on a question of adjournment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 97 Cong. Rec. 6620, 6621, 82d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Arthur L.] MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I expect to make a point 
    of order that a quorum is not present. Should a motion then be made 
    to adjourn, will it be in order to ask for a division on the 
    question of adjournment?
        The SPEAKER. It will.

Sec. 6.4 Where the Speaker counted the Members rising to second a 
    demand for the yeas and nays on a motion to adjourn and then 
    counted the total number of Members present to determine whether 
    one-fifth seconded such demand, he declined to honor the request of 
    a Member that a new count be taken on the ground that some Members 
    entered the Chamber and were counted after the count of those 
    seconding the demand.

    On Jan. 23, 1950,(1) the following transpired in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 96 Cong. Rec. 785, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that the House do now adjourn.
        Mr. [Vito] MARCANTONIO [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, on that I 
    demand the yeas and nays.
        The SPEAKER(2) [after counting]. Fifty-four Members 
    have arisen, not a sufficient number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Earl] WILSON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, a point of order. 
    There were many Members who came in and were counted after the 
    standing count was taken. I ask that the vote be taken again.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is not going to make the count again 
    because he has just counted both the total number of Members and 
    the number standing to demand the yeas and nays.
        The question is on the motion to adjourn.
        Mr. MARCANTONIO. On that I demand tellers, Mr. Speaker.
        Tellers were ordered, and the Speaker appointed as tellers Mr. 
    McCormack and Mr. Marcantonio.
        The House divided; and the tellers, reported that there were--
    ayes 167, noes 109.
        So the motion was agreed to.

Sec. 6.5 When a quorum fails to vote on a roll call, the Speaker may 
    entertain a motion to

[[Page 827]]

    adjourn, if seconded by a majority of those present, to be 
    ascertained by actual count of the Speaker.

    On Oct. 10, 1940,(1) the following transpired after an 
``automatic'' roll call vote on the issue of referring a vetoed bill to 
the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 86 Cong. Rec. 13535, 76th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker--
        The SPEAKER. (2) The gentleman from Massachusetts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire the result of the 
    roll call just taken?
        The SPEAKER. On this roll call 213 Members have answered--108 
    yeas and 105 nays. This is 3 short of a quorum.

                                  adjournment

        Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, in view of the situation that 
    exists, which is obvious to all of us, and of necessity, I move 
    that the House do now adjourn.
        Mr. [John C.] SCHAFER of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    second to the motion.
        The SPEAKER. Under the rule the demand for a second is in 
    order. The question is on ordering a second.
        The question was taken; and there were--ayes 144, noes 3.
        So a second was ordered.
        Mr. [Samuel] DICKSTEIN [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. DICKSTEIN. The vote on the motion to refer the bill to the 
    committee being yeas 108, nays 105, what will happen to the motion 
    if the House adjourns?
        The SPEAKER. The motion will be the continuing business before 
    the House when it convenes on Monday.
        The question is on the motion to adjourn.
        The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 2 o'clock and 35 
    minutes p.m.) the House, pursuant to its previous order, adjourned 
    until Monday, October 14, 1940, at 12 o'clock noon.

    Parliamentarian's Note: While clause 6(c) of Rule XX(3) 
provides that ``[a]t any time after Members have had the requisite 
opportunity to respond by the yeas and nays, but before a result has 
been announced, a motion that the House adjourn shall be in order if 
seconded by a majority of those present, to be ascertained by actual 
count by the Speaker. If the House adjourns on such a motion, all 
proceedings under this clause shall be considered as vacated.''; this 
clause should be read in light of the analysis in Sec. 3, supra, where 
the availability of a motion to adjourn under the standing rules may be 
foreclosed by a special order of business adopted by

[[Page 828]]

the House which orders the previous question on a (bill) to final 
passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit, with 
or without instructions. The same rationale precluding the motion to 
adjourn where supervening language of a special rule is operative 
should be interpreted to foreclose a motion to adjourn pending the 
announcement of the result of a yea and nay vote during the operation 
of such supervening language, whether ordered by one-fifth of those 
present or automatic under clause 6(a) of Rule XX.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. House Rules and Manual Sec. 1025 (2007). This clause was formerly 
        clause 4 of Rule XV.
 4. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the occasion of Oct. 10, 1940, the general rules of the House 
were operating on the motion to refer a vetoed bill and the House was 
not operating a special order of business ordering the previous 
question to final passage without intervening motion.


                      

[Page 828-831]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 7. Quorum Requirements

    The Constitution provides that ``a majority of each [House] shall 
constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn 
from day to day . . .''(1) Accordingly, a quorum is not 
required to adjourn from day to day, but is required to adjourn to a 
day and time certain.(2) And if the Speaker is to entertain 
a motion to adjourn under clause 6 of Rule XX after the completion of a 
roll call, but before the result has been announced, the motion must be 
seconded by a majority of those present to be ascertained by an actual 
count of the Speaker.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 5, clause 1. See also House Rules and 
        Manual Sec. 52 (2007) and Ch. 20, generally, supra.
 2. House Rules and Manual Sec. 913 (2007).
 3. Id. at Sec. 1025 
        (2007).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 7.1 It is not in order to demand an ``automatic'' roll call under 
    clause 4, Rule XV(1) on an affirmative vote on the 
    motion to adjourn, since the motion to adjourn from day-to-day may 
    be agreed to by less than a quorum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Now Rule XX clause 6, House Rules and Manual Sec. 1025 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Instance where the yeas and nays were ordered on a motion to adjourn, which 
was rejected.

    On Nov. 4, 1983,(2) the following events occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 129 Cong. Rec. 30946, 30947, 98th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mr. [Dan E.] LUNGREN [of California]. Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House do now adjourn.

[[Page 829]]

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) The question is on the 
    motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Lungren).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. David Bonior (MI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken, and on a division demanded by Mr. 
    Lungren there were --ayes 3; noes 1.
        Mr. [Henry B.] GONZALEZ [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I object to 
    the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would advise the gentleman 
    from Texas that he cannot do that on an affirmative vote to 
    adjourn, only on a negative vote.
        Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman cannot get a recorded 
    vote in the House based now on the number now present.
        Does the gentleman demand the yeas and nays?
        Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Those in favor of taking this vote by 
    the yeas and nays will stand.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, it certainly is not my intention to 
    inconvenience Members who on the assurances that there would be no 
    recorded votes have left the premises.
        On the other hand, I think that the gentleman offering the 
    motion to adjourn has acted quite unjustly and capriciously in 
    depriving those of us who have arranged for special orders to be 
    heard, once the gentleman has had his privilege of being heard.
        I would like to ask the gentleman from California if he could 
    withhold that motion to adjourn, if such a request is in order.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from 
    Texas may pursue an inquiry.
        There was no objection. . . .
        Mr. LUNGREN. When the majority leadership decides they will not 
    even show the least courtesy to the minority here, we have to use 
    the rules that are available to us. There are very few rules 
    available to use any more because of the change in rules we had.
        Mr. Speaker, I insist on my motion.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Texas insist 
    on his demand for the yeas and nays?
        Mr. GONZALEZ. I do Mr. Speaker.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    99, nays 120, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 213, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 456] . . .

        So the motion was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above 
    recorded.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. While a quorum is not required on an affirmative motion to adjourn, 
        a negative vote on that motion by division may precipitate an 
        ``automatic'' roll call pursuant to clause 6 of Rule XX (House 
        Rules and Manual Sec. 1025 [2007]). See Sec. 6.3, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 7.2 Where less than a quorum of the House rejects a motion

[[Page 830]]

    to adjourn, the Speaker may not entertain unanimous-consent 
    requests until a quorum is established.

    On Dec. 22, 1973,(1) a Member called attention to the 
absence of a quorum. Another Member moved for adjournment and demanded 
the yeas and nays. The motion to adjourn was rejected but by less than 
a quorum. A parliamentary inquiry was raised as to whether a unanimous-
consent request could be entertained before establishment of a quorum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 119 Cong. Rec. 43321, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Otis G.] PIKE [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I make the point 
    of order that a quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER. (2) The Chair recognizes the gentleman 
    from Massachusetts (Mr. O'Neill).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    MOTION TO ADJOURN OFFERED BY MR. O'NEILL

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    move that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion made by the 
    gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. O'Neill) that the House do now 
    adjourn.
        Mr. PIKE. 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 Chair will inform the gentleman from New York 
    (Mr. Pike) that a quorum is not needed for action upon a motion to 
    adjourn the House.
        Mr. PIKE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device and there were yeas 39, 
    nays 160, not voting 233, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 725] . . .

        So the motion was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Massachusetts will state it.
        Mr. O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, realizing the fact that now a call of 
    the House is in order, is it permissible for me to ask unanimous 
    consent that I may address the House for 1 minute?
        The SPEAKER. Not in the absence of a quorum.

Sec. 7.3 While a quorum is not required to adjourn, a point raised 
    against a negative vote on the motion to adjourn precipitates an 
    automatic roll call under the rule.

    On June 15, 1951,(1) the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 97 Cong. Rec. 6621, 82d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 point of order

        Mr. [A. L.] MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I renew my point 
    of order that a quorum is not present.

[[Page 831]]

        Mr. [Leslie C.] ARENDS [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, will the 
    gentleman from Nebraska withhold that long enough for me to find 
    out what the program will be for next week?
        Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I think we should have a 
    quorum here to hear the program for next week.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Evidently, a quorum is not present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               motion to adjourn

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion.
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Miller of Nebraska) there were--ayes 33, noes 53.
        Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. 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.
        Mr. [John E.] RANKIN [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker a point of 
    order.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. RANKIN. You do not have to have a quorum to adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The vote was negative; ayes 33, noes 53. The Clerk 
    will call the roll.
        Mr. RANKIN. There has been no roll call demanded. The vote has 
    already been taken.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman made the point of order that a 
    quorum was not present on the vote on the motion to adjourn.
        Mr. RANKIN. That point of order is not in order for the simple 
    reason you do not have to have a quorum to adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. But the House refused to adjourn on the vote.
        Mr. RANKIN. I understand, but a roll call is not in order 
    unless it is demanded by the House.
        The SPEAKER. This matter has been up many times since the 
    present occupant has been in the chair, and the decision always has 
    been just what the Chair stated it to be.
        Mr. RANKIN. The Chair is in error.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair has been following the rules and 
    precedents established for over 150 years.
        Mr. RANKIN. The Chair is still wrong; that never has been the 
    rule.
        The SPEAKER. Evidently, a quorum is not present.
        The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will 
    notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 75, nays 161, not 
    voting 198, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 77] . . .

        So the motion to adjourn was rejected.


                        

[Page 831-836]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 8. Dilatory Motions; Repetition of Motion

    A motion to adjourn may be ruled out of order as dilatory--that is, 
made solely for the purpose of delaying the legislative

[[Page 832]]

process--pursuant to a point of order raised against the motion by 
another Member or at the initiative of the Chair. (1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. Sec. 5721, 5731; 8 Cannon's Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 2796, 2813; and House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 902, 
        903 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Repeated motions to adjourn are allowed in the House, if other 
business has intervened.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. See Sec. Sec. 8.1-8.3, 
        infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Repeated Motions to Adjourn

Sec. 8.1 The transaction of a unanimous-consent request to delete a 
    Member's name from the list of cosponsors of a bill is such 
    ``intervening business'' as would enable repetition of the motion 
    to adjourn.

    On Nov. 18, 1999,(1) a Member made a motion that the 
House adjourn:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 145 Cong. Rec. 30644, 30645, 106th Cong. 1st Sess. For an example 
        of how the motion to adjourn may not be repeated in absence of 
        ``intervening business'' see Sec. 3.19, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mr. [Ron] KIND [of Wisconsin]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the noes appeared to have it.

                                 recorded vote

        Mr. [David R.] OBEY [of Wisconsin]. Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    recorded vote.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    25, noes 395, not voting 13, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 603] . . .

        So the motion to adjourn was rejected.
        The result of the vote was announced as above 
    recorded.                          -------------------

              REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER AS COSPONSOR OF H.R. 2420

        Mr. [Sherwood L.] BOEHLERT [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 
    2420.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from New York?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. J. Dennis Hastert (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no 
    objection.                          -------------------

                               MOTION TO ADJOURN

        Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion to adjourn offered 
    by the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the noes 
    appeared to have it.

Sec. 8.2 After the Speaker has entertained a motion that the

[[Page 833]]

    House adjourn, it is too late to make the point of order that the 
    motion is dilatory on the ground that the House rejected such a 
    motion an hour previously.

    On Feb. 22, 1950,(1) the Speaker, having entertained a 
motion to adjourn, did not sustain a point of order that the motion to 
adjourn was dilatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 96 Cong. Rec. 2161, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The SPEAKER. (2) The gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
    Sikes] moves that the House do now adjourn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Vito] MARCANTONIO [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, a point of 
    order on the motion.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. MARCANTONIO. Mr. Speaker, I submit the motion to adjourn is 
    dilatory. While I recognize that intervening business has been 
    transacted, such as voting on the motion to dispense with Calendar 
    Wednesday business, it seems to me that the House has expressed its 
    will on this matter about an hour ago and the House refused to 
    adjourn. I think it is obvious to the Speaker that the House has 
    refused to adjourn and the motion, therefore, is dilatory.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair has already entertained the motion. The 
    question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Florida.

Sec. 8.3 After a motion to adjourn has been made and rejected, a second 
    motion that the House adjourn is held not dilatory and in order if 
    other business has intervened.

    On Feb. 15, 1950,(1) a Member made a point of order 
against a motion to adjourn, claiming it was dilatory:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 96 Cong. Rec. 1809, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               motion to adjourn

        Mr. [Ed] GOSSETT [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House 
    do now adjourn.
        Mr. [Vito] MARCANTONIO [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, a point of 
    order.
        The SPEAKER. (2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. MARCANTONIO. Just preceding the last roll call the House 
    refused to adjourn. I submit that this motion is dilatory. I 
    understand that it is entirely within the Speaker's discretion to 
    rule on these motions, but in view of the fact that we have just 
    had a motion to adjourn this one obviously is dilatory.
        Mr. GOSSETT. Mr. Speaker, if the Chair will hear me on the 
    point of order, other business has been transacted and another roll 
    call has intervened.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is prepared to rule. Business has 
    intervened. The Chair holds the motion to be in order.

Refusal of Recognition

Sec. 8.4 Where a motion to adjourn is rejected pending a

[[Page 834]]

    motion to dispense with further proceedings under a call of the 
    House and that motion is then adopted, recognition for the 
    immediate repetition of a motion to adjourn may be denied pending 
    the calling up of a bill on Calendar Wednesday.

    On Feb. 15, 1950,(1) the Speaker exercised his 
discretion not to recognize Members for motions to adjourn:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 96 Cong. Rec. 1810-12, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               call of the house

        Mr. [J. Percy] PRIEST [of Tennessee]. Mr. Speaker, I move a 
    call of the House.
        A call of the House was ordered.
        The Clerk called the roll, and the following Members failed to 
    answer to their names:

                              [Roll No. 49] . . .

        The SPEAKER.(2) On this roll call 326 Members have 
    answered to their names, a quorum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is there objection to dispensing with further proceedings under 
    the call?
        Mr. [Tom] PICKETT [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I object.
        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that further proceedings under the call be dispensed with.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack.]
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Pickett) there were--ayes, 126, noes 17.
        Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground 
    that a quorum is not present.
        Mr. [Clare E.] HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I move that we 
    do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will count. [After counting.] Evidently 
    a quorum is not present.
        Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, a preferential motion. I 
    move that the House do now adjourn; and on that motion I ask for 
    the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 126, nays 198, not 
    voting 108, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 50] . . .

        So the motion to adjourn was rejected.
        The Clerk announced the following pairs: . . .
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion of the gentleman 
    from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack] to dispense with further 
    proceedings under the call.
        Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, at the time the gentleman from 
    Michigan moved to adjourn, the Speaker had just stated what the 
    question was--which was the motion of the gentleman from 
    Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack] to dispense with further proceedings 
    under a preceding call of the House. I

[[Page 835]]

    objected to the vote, as was revealed by a division on the 
    question, on the ground that a quorum was not present. Is not now 
    the order of business an automatic roll call on the motion of the 
    gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack]?
        The SPEAKER. No; it is not. The vote now comes de novo.
        The question is on the motion of the gentleman from 
    Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack].
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Pickett) there were--ayes 138, noes 6.
        Mr. [William M.] COLMER [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, I object 
    to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present, and I make 
    the point of order that a quorum is not present.
        Mr. [Anthony] CAVALCANTE [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. CAVALCANTE. Under the rules of the House, are the 
    cloakrooms a part of the Hall of the House?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair cannot count any Members that he cannot 
    see.
        The Chair will count. [After counting.] Evidently there is no 
    quorum present.
        The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will 
    notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 243, nays 86, 
    answered ``present'' 1, not voting 102, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 51] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.
        The Clerk announced the following pairs: . . .

                               calendar wednesday

        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call the committees.
        The Clerk called the Committee on the District of Columbia.
        Mr. [Clare E.] HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair does not yield to the gentleman for a 
    parliamentary inquiry at this time.
        Mr. [Howard W.] SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk has called the Committee on the District 
    of Columbia. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina 
    [Mr. McMillian].
        Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do 
    now adjourn. That motion is always in order.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair has recognized the gentleman from South 
    Carolina [Mr. McMillian].
        Mr. [William M.] COLMER [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, I offer 
    a preferential motion.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. McMillan] 
    has been recognized.
        Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. McMillian] 
    has been recognized.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Repeated motions and roll calls were sought 
in this instance in an effort to delay business under the Calendar 
Wednesday rule, and there was no intervening business

[[Page 836]]

at this point prior to the calling up of the bill.


                       

[Page 836-847]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
            A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less
 
Sec. 9. To a Day Certain; Three-day Limit

    The House, in adjourning for not more than three days, must take 
into the count either the day of adjourning or the day of the meeting. 
Sunday is not taken into account in making this computation unless the 
House, by special order, provides for a session on a 
Sunday.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 83 (2007). See also Sec. Sec. 9.7-9.10, 
        infra; and 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. Sec. 6673, 6674.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The House has declared itself in a series of recesses subject to 
the constraint that the House not adjourn for more than three days 
without the consent of the Senate.(2) The Committee on Rules 
also has reported a rule authorizing the Speaker to declare recesses 
subject to the call of the Chair, each consistent with the 
constitutional requirement that neither House adjourn or recess for 
more than three days without the consent of the other 
House.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. See Ch. 39, Sec. 2.21, supra.
 3. See Sec. 9.1, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The House has adopted a resolution reported from the Committee on 
Rules providing that the House meet only Tuesdays and Fridays for a 
stipulated period, whereupon the Speaker advised the House that no 
business on those days would be conducted, including recognition for 
unanimous consent.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See Sec. 9.6, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 9.1 The House adopted a privileged rule reported by the Committee 
    on Rules to authorize, inter alia, the Speaker to declare the House 
    in recesses subject to the call of the Chair during five discrete 
    periods, each consistent with the constitutional constraint that 
    neither House (recess or) adjourn for more than three days without 
    consent of the other House.

    On Jan. 5, 1996,(1) the following proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 142 Cong. Rec. 357, 104th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Ms. [Deborah W.] PRYCE [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, by direction of 
    the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 330 and ask for 
    its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 330

            Resolved, That (a) the Speaker may declare recesses subject 
        to the call of the Chair on the calendar days of Friday, 
        January 5, 1996,

[[Page 837]]

        through Tuesday, January 9, 1996. A recess declared pursuant to 
        this subsection may not extend beyond the calendar day of 
        Tuesday, January 9, 1996.
            (b) The Speaker may declare recesses subject to the call of 
        the Chair on the calendar days of Tuesday, January 9, 1996, 
        through Friday, January 12, 1996. A recess declared pursuant to 
        this subsection may not extend beyond the calendar day of 
        Friday, January 12, 1996.
            (c) The Speaker may declare recesses subject to the call of 
        the Chair on the calendar days of Friday, January 12, 1996, 
        through Tuesday, January 16, 1996. A recess declared pursuant 
        to this subsection may not extend beyond the calendar day of 
        Tuesday, January 16, 1996.
            (d) The Speaker may declare recesses subject to the call of 
        the Chair on the calendar days of Tuesday, January 16, 1996, 
        through Friday, January 19, 1996. A recess declared pursuant to 
        this subsection may not extend beyond the calendar day of 
        Friday, January 19, 1996.
            (e) The Speaker may declare recesses subject to the call of 
        the Chair on the calendar days of Friday, January 19, 1996, 
        through Tuesday, January 23, 1996. A recess declared pursuant 
        to this subsection may not extend beyond the calendar day of 
        Tuesday, January 23, 1996.
            Sec. 2. The requirement of clause 4(b) of rule XI for a 
        two-thirds vote to consider a report from Committee on Rules on 
        the same day it is presented to the House is waived with 
        respect to any resolution reported from that committee before 
        the calendar day of Wednesday, January 24, 1996, and providing 
        for consideration or disposition of any of the following 
        measures: . . .

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The gentlewoman from 
    Ohio [Ms. Pryce] is recognized for 1 hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Jack Kingston (GA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Ms. PRYCE. . . .
        By recessing rather than adjourning, the House will effectively 
    be on standby, ready to return should the White House come to meet 
    its responsibility and submit legislation, as promised, that 
    achieves a balanced budget and puts the Government back into full 
    operation.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Similarly, as in Ch. 39, Sec. 2.21, supra, 
an ``overlap'' between three-day periods (one ending and another 
beginning on the same calendar day) is considered not infirm under art. 
I, Sec. 5 clause 4 of the Constitution. The resolution was within the 
authority of the Committee on Rules to report. It did not violate any 
procedural restriction in the Constitution. It did not permit the House 
to be in adjournment or uninterrupted recess for more than three days 
(excepting Sundays).

Sec. 9.2 The House adopted a privileged concurrent resolution providing 
    for adjournment of the two Houses on any of three days to a day 
    certain in excess of three days on motions of respective Majority 
    Leaders or designees, and the House by

[[Page 838]]

    unanimous consent permitted an adjournment for three days 
    contingent upon Senate action on the concurrent resolution.

    On Nov. 20, 1987,(1) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 133 Cong. Rec. 33029, 33030, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 
         20, 1987, OR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1987, OR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 
        24, 1987, TO MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1987, AND OF THE SENATE FROM 
          FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1987, OR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1987, OR 
            TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1987, TO MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1987

        Mr. [Thomas S.] FOLEY [of Washington]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 220) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 220

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on Friday, November 
        20, 1987, or Monday, November 23, 1987, or Tuesday, November 
        24, 1987, pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader, or 
        his designee, in accordance with this resolution, it stand 
        adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian on Monday, November 30, 
        1987, and that when the Senate adjourns on Friday, November 20, 
        1987, or Monday, November 23, 1987, or Tuesday, November 24, 
        1987, pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader, or his 
        designee, in accordance with the resolution, it stand adjourned 
        until 10 o'clock ante meridiem on Monday, November 30, 1987.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Without objection, the 
    previous question is ordered on the concurrent resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. James J. Howard (NJ).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the concurrent 
    resolution.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.

                                 recorded vote

        Mr. [Steven] GUNDERSON [of Wisconsin]. Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    recorded vote.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    210, noes 181, not voting 42, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 447] . . 
                 .                          -------------------

        PROVIDING FOR POSSIBLE ADJOURNMENT TO MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1987

        Mr. [Tony] COELHO [of California]. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that when the House adjourns today, unless it adjourns 
    pursuant to the provisions of House Concurrent Resolution 220, that 
    it stand adjourned to meet at noon on Monday next.
        The SPEAKER.(3) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from California?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. James C. Wright, Jr. (TX).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 839]]

        Mr. [Robert F.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Reserving the right 
    to object, is that a change in the schedule as previously 
    announced?
        Mr. COELHO. No. This is just in case something would happen 
    that we are protected and can meet if necessary.
        Mr. WALKER. I would like to have an explanation of this.
        The SPEAKER. Let the Chair respond to the inquiry of the 
    gentleman from Pennsylvania.
        This is only a stand-by in the event that the Senate failed to 
    complete the action on the adjournment resolution so that we would 
    have a pro forma session. We do not expect that to occur.
        Mr. WALKER. I thank the Speaker.
        Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from California?
        There was no objection.

Sec. 9.3 On consecutive privileged motions of the Majority Leader, 
    pursuant to clause 4 of Rule XVI(1) and at the Speaker's 
    discretion, the House voted that when it adjourned on that day it 
    adjourn to meet at 3:15 p.m. for a second legislative day on that 
    calendar day, and then adjourned [in order to reconvene a new 
    session and consider a special order reported by the Committee on 
    Rules on the first legislative day without a two-thirds vote on 
    ``same-day'' consideration].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 911 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Oct. 29, 1987,(2) the House was concluding 
consideration of a special order reported from the Committee on Rules, 
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 133 Cong. Rec. 29918, 29919, 29932-35, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Butler] DERRICK [of South Carolina]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    the previous question on the resolution.
        The previous question was ordered.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) The question is on the 
    resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Harold L. Volkmer (MO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.

                                 recorded vote

        Mr. [Trent] LOTT [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    recorded vote.
        A recorded vote was ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 
    203, noes 217, not voting 13, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 385] . . .

        Mr. Watkins changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
        So the resolution was not agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

[[Page 840]]

                                  -------------------THE VOTE ON HOUSE 
                                 RESOLUTION 296

        (Mr. MICHEL asked and was given permission to address the House 
    for 1 minute.)
        Mr. [Robert H.] MICHEL [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, I ask for 
    this 1-minute for the purpose to say that under somewhat otherwise 
    normal conditions, noting our unanimous vote on this side, we would 
    be elated with this victory.
        Mr. Speaker, we do not look upon it that way. The majority in 
    this House has said here there ought not be a quick rush to 
    judgment, that we recognize the urgency of the overall objective, 
    but this procedure would do it harm. It has been my feeling for the 
    last week or so in view of what the President has said and in view 
    of some of our colleagues meeting over in the other body as they 
    have, that men of good will could bring their divergent thoughts 
    together, and reach agreement. Had this scenario unfolded this 
    afternoon the way it was originally described, however, I am just 
    afraid the tenor of that debate would have given the wrong signal.
        I think from the few remarks we might have made earlier and 
    some of the others, this feeling was shared by Members on both 
    sides of the aisle and, so, yes, I for one am grateful for that 
    vote to defeat the rule, but we are not gloating over it.
        I just want to say to the distinguished Speaker that there 
    might be an inclination to quickly go to the Rules Committee, come 
    back with a stripped-down version, but it should be known now the 
    Members have attempted to express their desire to give this 
    bipartisan negotiating team a chance. The distinguished gentleman 
    from Washington [Mr. Foley] serves on that negotiating team. I 
    think he would probably buttress what I have said from the 
    standpoint that there is some movement. There is a good feeling, 
    and frankly maybe in a shorter time span than one might feel is 
    possible, I think agreement can be reached.

                                {time}  1215

        Then out of that meeting I would think would come a much better 
    signal, the kind that all of us would like to project.
        With that, Mr. Speaker, I have nothing further to say other 
    than I would hope that it would signal our intention and certainly 
    our ability to work together, hand and glove, in a bipartisan way 
    to come to a final 
    resolution.                          -------------------

                              LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

        (Mr. WRIGHT asked and was given permission to address the House 
    for 1 minute.)
        Mr. [James C.] WRIGHT [Jr., of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I ask for 
    this time in order to speak to the question of the schedule and 
    program for the balance of the week.
        I appreciate what my friend, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
    Michel], the minority leader, has suggested. He has been 
    consistent, suggesting all along that we delay, and see if we can 
    get some signal as to what the President will accept before we try 
    to pass anything.
        If we do that, it puts the total initiative in the hands of the 
    executive

[[Page 841]]

    branch of Government over something that the Constitution declared 
    was the primary business of the House of Representatives.
        I bow to the majority. That is a part of the business of this 
    chamber. We recognize that when a majority speaks, we owe them our 
    respect. The majority quite obviously did not want to vote on this 
    particular rule. At least 25 or 30 Members have told me personally 
    in the last couple of days that they just did not believe it 
    appropriate to be considering this deficit reduction bill at the 
    same time and in the same package that we were considering a 
    welfare reform bill. A great many of those Members professed that 
    they liked the welfare reform bill and that they believe we need 
    welfare reform, but they thought it inappropriate to consider the 
    two somewhat different matters together.
        The distinguished gentleman from Illinois made that suggestion 
    to me, as a matter of fact, 2 weeks ago. Obviously a substantial 
    number of Members feel that way.
        Therefore, the Rules committee will convene at 12:45 and we 
    will be seeking another rule which separates those two somewhat 
    distinguishable items and takes welfare reform out of it.
        I do believe that we have the responsibility as the U.S. House 
    of Representatives to do our best to come forward with a 
    reasonable, fair, constructive deficit reduction package so that we 
    have something that represents our majority to take and put on the 
    table when we negotiate with the White House. Otherwise, we go 
    bereft of any suggestions, having said in effect that the House 
    cannot make up its mind and has no suggestions to offer.
        Therefore, I am going to ask that the Rules Committee meet and 
    bring us back a rule that bows to the express wishes of a great 
    many Members of the House. I have had a great many Members say to 
    me that they cannot imagine a fairer revenue measure than the one 
    that we have to consider. We will give the House that opportunity 
    and see if a majority of the Members wish to go forward with at 
    least that much deficit reduction action. And we will stay in 
    session here until we do that.
        So I do implore my colleagues, the minority party, to work with 
    us. You have chosen throughout this year a course that I recognize 
    has been a difficult one for you. I could have wished that we would 
    have had more bipartisan cooperation when the Budget Committee was 
    trying to come to a mix. For reasons of your own--and I do not 
    criticize you for it--you chose to stay out of these meetings, to 
    boycott them. And then we invited you to participate and wished you 
    had participated along with other Members of the Ways and Means 
    Committee in putting together a revenue package. And it was your 
    choice and decision to boycott those meetings.
        Notwithstanding that, exactly half the revenues in that bill 
    are out of the President's request--things that he specifically 
    requested. So we do want to be reasonable: we want to be 
    bipartisan. We want to fulfill the wishes of the responsible 
    majority of this House. That is what we have tried to so that we do 
    not go home this week having said that we are incapable or 
    unwilling to face the reality of the need for real deficit 
    reduction.                          -------------------

                   ANNOUNCEMENT OF MEETING OF RULES COMMITTEE

        Mr. DERRICK. Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the Committee on 
    Rules

[[Page 842]]

    has authorized me to announce that the Committee on Rules will meet 
    at 1:15 this afternoon to consider H.R. 3545. . . 
    .                          -------------------

        REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3545, 
                       BUDGET RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1987

        Mr. FROST, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a privileged 
    report (Rept. No. 100-411) on the resolution (H. Res. 298) 
    providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 3545) to provide 
    for reconciliation pursuant to section 4 of the concurrent 
    resolution on the budget for the fiscal year 1988, which was 
    referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                    MOTION TO ADJOURN UNTIL 3:15 P.M. TODAY

        Mr. [Thomas S.] FOLEY [of Washington]. Mr. Speaker, I move, 
    pursuant to clause 4 of rule XVI, that when the House adjourns 
    today it adjourn to meet at 3:15 p.m. today.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Volkmer). The question is on the 
    motion offered by the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Foley].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Trent] LOTT [of Mississippi]. 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 
    243, nays 166, not voting 25, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 386] . . 
                 .                          -------------------

                              LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

        (By unanimous consent, Mr. Foley was allowed to proceed out of 
    order for 1 minute.)
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I take this time to advise the Members 
    on both sides of the aisle of what we intend for the program this 
    afternoon. The Committee on Rules has reported and the rule to 
    provide for consideration of the Guaranteed Deficit Reduction 
    Reconciliation Act has been filed. Because the Rules of the House 
    require a two-thirds vote for it to be brought up on the same day, 
    it was our intention to ask for unanimous consent so that this 
    might occur. Since I have been advised, however, that will not be 
    granted, we now intend to move that the House adjourn today, and, 
    should that motion be adopted, we would reconsider the rule, the 
    general debate, and complete action on the Guaranteed Deficit 
    Reduction Reconciliation Act.
        We feel frankly, that this is in the interest of Members on 
    both sides of the aisle since it avoids the possibility of a 
    prolonged session tomorrow and the inconvenience this would cause 
    because of commitments made earlier on the assumption the House 
    would not be in session this Friday.
        So the purpose of this announcement is to suggest to Members on 
    both sides of the aisle that, assuming adoption of

[[Page 843]]

    the motion, the adjournment of the House will not signal the end of 
    business today. We will reconvene at 3:15.
        Mr. [Edward R.] MADIGAN [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, will the 
    gentleman yield?
        Mr. FOLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
    Madigan].
        Mr. MADIGAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
        Mr. Speaker, do I understand that the purpose of our having 2 
    legislative days in 1 calendar day is so that the House avoids the 
    necessity of having a two-thirds majority to be able to consider 
    this and can consider it only with a simple majority, is that the 
    gentleman's point?
        Mr. FOLEY. Actually, there is not any requirement for a special 
    vote to consider it on the next legislative day. A two-thirds vote 
    is required to consider it on the same day. The rule could be 
    adopted under these circumstances with a majority vote. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Volkmer). The question is on the 
    motion offered by the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Foley].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device and there were--yeas 
    236, nays 171, not voting 27, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 387] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        Accordingly (at 3 o'clock and 15 minutes p.m.), under its 
    previous order, the House adjourned until today, Thursday, October 
    29, 1987, at 3:15 p.m.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Because the Majority Leader held the floor 
beyond 3 p.m. before moving to adjourn, even though the House was to 
reconvene at 3:15 p.m., the east clock (facing the chair) had to be 
stopped to permit the 15-minute vote by electronic device on the motion 
to adjourn to remain open for 15 minutes before 3:15 p.m., the precise 
time at which the House had voted to reconvene.

Sec. 9.4 A motion that when the House adjourns, it stand adjourned to a 
    day and time certain under clause 4 of Rule XVI(1) is 
    only in order if offered on the legislative day to which the 
    adjournment applies and may not merely set a different time for 
    convening on a subsequent day beyond the next legislative day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 911, 912 (2007).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 844]]

    On Sept. 23, 1976,(2) the following unanimous-consent 
request was made:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 122 Cong. Rec. 32104, 94th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John M.] MURPHY [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that when the House convenes on Tuesday, 
    September 28, 1976, it convene at 10 o'clock a.m.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) Is there objection to 
    the request of the gentleman from New York?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clarence E.] MILLER of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I object.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
        Mr. MURPHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I move that when the House 
    convenes on Tuesday next, it convene at 10 o'clock a.m.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that the motion 
    is not in order at this time.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Upon adjourning on Sept. 23, 1976, the 
House met on Monday, Sept. 27, 1976, on which day the motion to set the 
convening time for Sept. 28, 1976, would have been in order.

Sec. 9.5 The motion that the adjournment on that day be one to a day 
    and time certain requires a quorum for adoption.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 911, 912 (2007). See also 4 Hinds' 
        Precedents Sec. 2954. See also Sec. 7, supra, for additional 
        information on quorum requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 19, 1975,(2) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 121 Cong. Rec. 19789, 19790, 94th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    move that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 10 
    o'clock tomorrow morning. . . .
        The SPEAKER.(3) The question is on the motion 
    offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. O'Neill).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. [John M.] ASHBOOK [of Ohio]. 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 
    384, nays 13, not voting 31, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 321] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.

Serial Adjournments to Days Certain

Sec. 9.6 The House agreed to a resolution providing that the House meet 
    only Tuesdays and Fridays for a stipulated

[[Page 845]]

    period. The Speaker advised the membership that when the House met 
    on those days, it would meet only to adjourn.

    On Aug. 25, 1949,(1) the House, by two-thirds vote, 
agreed to consider on that same day a resolution reported out from the 
Committee on Rules. The proceedings on the resolution were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 95 Cong. Rec. 12287, 12288, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Edward E.] COX [of Georgia], from the Committee on Rules, 
    submitted the following resolution (H. Res. 345), which was 
    referred to the House Calendar and ordered printed:

            Resolved, That until Wednesday, September 21, 1949, the 
        House shall meet only on Tuesday and Friday of each week unless 
        otherwise ordered.

        Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I ask for immediate consideration of the 
    resolution.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is, Will the House 
    consider the resolution?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and (two thirds having voted in favor 
    thereof) the House decided to consider the resolution.
        The Clerk read the resolution (H. Res. 345) as follows:

            Resolved, That until Wednesday, September 21, 1949, the 
        House shall meet only on Tuesday and Friday of each week unless 
        otherwise ordered.

        The resolution was agreed to.

    A Member then asked whether business would be permitted on those 
Tuesdays and Fridays.

        Mr. [Earl C.] MICHENER [of Michigan]. Mr. Speaker, it is 
    understood that the House will take 3-day recesses as provided in 
    the resolution.
        What business will be permitted on the days the House meets?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will state, in answer to the inquiry of 
    the gentleman from Michigan, that if the Senate had agreed to 
    cooperate with us and had passed the resolution as the House passed 
    it yesterday, of course, there would have been an adjournment from 
    tomorrow until September 21. The Senate did not see fit to 
    cooperate with us in that. Of course, during that time there would 
    have been no business whatever transacted.
        The Chair thinks, under the circumstances, that when the House 
    meets on Tuesdays and Fridays it will meet only to adjourn. No 
    public business will be transacted; there will be no 1-minute 
    speeches or extensions of remarks.
        And, as the gentleman made this inquiry, the Chair takes the 
    opportunity to give all Members assurance that there will be no 
    business of any kind transacted until the 21st of September.

Adjournments to Sunday Session

Sec. 9.7 By unanimous consent, the House established a Sunday as a 
    legislative day.

    On Aug. 20, 1994,(1) the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 140 Cong. Rec. 23367, 103d Cong. 2d Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 846]]

                     ADJOURNMENT TO SUNDAY, AUGUST 21, 1994

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to 
    meet at 1 p.m. on Sunday, August 21, 1994.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Missouri.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Thomas S. Foley (WA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

Sec. 9.8 By unanimous consent the House ordered a legislative session 
    to convene on a Sunday, ordinarily a ``dies non''.

    On Nov. 17, 1989,(1) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 135 Cong. Rec. 30029, 101st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    ADJOURNMENT TO SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1989

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to 
    meet at 1 p.m. on Sunday, November 19, 1989.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Missouri?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Thomas S. Foley (WA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

Sec. 9.9 By unanimous consent, the House may provide for a session of 
    the House on a Sunday, traditionally a ``dies non'' under the 
    precedents of the House.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. Sec. 6673, 6674.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Dec. 18, 1987,(2) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 133 Cong. Rec. 36352, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM SATURDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1987, TO 
                           SUNDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1987

        Mr. [Thomas S.] FOLEY [of Washington]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that when the House adjourns from any session on 
    Saturday, December 19, 1987, that it adjourn to meet at 1 p.m. on 
    Sunday, December 20, 1987.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) Is there objection to 
    the request of the gentleman from Washington?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Kenneth J. Gray (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

Sec. 9.10 By unanimous-consent request of the Majority Leader, a 
    session of the House on Sunday (a ``dies non'' under the precedents 
    of the House) was made in order (thus permitting a subsequent 
    motion to adjourn from Saturday until Sunday).

    On Dec. 17, 1982,(1) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 128 Cong. Rec. 31946, 31948, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         AUTHORIZING THE HOLDING OF A SESSION ON SUNDAY, DECEMBER 19, 
                                      1982

        Mr. [James C.] WRIGHT [Jr., of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that it shall be in order for a session to be 
    held on Sunday next.

[[Page 847]]

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Is there objection to 
    the request of the gentleman from Texas? . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John P. Murtha, Jr. (PA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Manuel] LUJAN [Jr., of New Mexico]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    withdraw my reservation of objection.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Texas?
        There was no objection.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Parliamentarian's Note: The House has, in recent history, continued 
        in session beyond midnight Saturday into the calendar day of 
        Sunday, but this appears to be the first instance since that 
        recorded in 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. Sec. 6732 (June 29, 1902), 
        7168 (Feb. 1, 1903), 7169 (Apr. 10, 1904), and 7246 (Feb. 8, 
        1903), where the House met on separate legislative days on 
        Sundays for eulogies to deceased Members, although those days 
        were counted as legislative days.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 848]]


                       

[Page 848-857]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
        B. Adjournments for More Than Three Days to Date Certain
 
Sec. 10. In General; House-Senate Adjournments for Differing Periods


    Under art. I, Sec. 5, clause 4 of the Constitution, neither House 
may adjourn (or recess) for more than three days without the consent of 
the other. Thus, while the House may adjourn by motion from Thursday to 
Monday, or from Friday to Tuesday, the House cannot adjourn from Monday 
to Friday without the Senate's consent.(1) Sundays are not 
included in the calculation unless the House has agreed to meet on 
Sunday as a separate legislative day.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 82, 84 (2007).
 2. See Sec. 9, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The form which is used for the two Houses to provide their 
respective consent to the adjournment to the other is the concurrent 
resolution. The concurrent resolution may set forth the times at which 
the adjournment is to begin and end, but frequently the resolution will 
provide optional dates so as to give each House some discretion in 
determining the exact period of its own adjournment.(3) A 
concurrent resolution may grant the consent of the House for 
adjournments or recesses of the Senate for periods of more than three 
days as determined by the Senate during such period,(4) or 
may grant the consent of the Senate to an adjournment of the House for 
more than three days to a day certain, or to any day before that day as 
determined by the House.(5) Often a concurrent resolution 
originating in one House and providing only for an adjournment of that 
House is amended in the other House to provide a separate adjournment 
date and/or times for that House where those arrangements are not 
negotiated in advance.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See, e.g., Sec. 10.7 supra.
 4. See Sec. 10.1, infra.
 5. See Sec. 10.3, infra.
 6. See Sec. 10.4, infra.
            For a discussion of the authority of the President to 
        determine the period of adjournment when the two Houses are 
        unable to agree with respect thereto, see House Rules and 
        Manual Sec. 171 
        (2007).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 10.1 The House has adopted a privileged resolution providing for 
    adjournment sine die  of the House on Monday, Dec. 20, or Tuesday, 
    Dec. 21, pursuant to a motion made by the Majority Leader or his 
    designee in accordance with

[[Page 849]]

    the resolution, and providing the consent of the House to 
    adjournment sine die of the Senate at any time prior to Jan. 3, 
    1983, as determined by the Senate, and the consent of the House for 
    adjournments or recesses of the Senate for periods of more than 
    three days as determined by the Senate during such period.

    On Dec. 20, 1982,(1) the majority whip offered a 
concurrent resolution as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 128 Cong. Rec. 32951, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  adjournment sine die of the house and senate

        Mr. [Thomas S.] FOLEY [of Washington]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 438) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 438

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That the House of Representatives shall adjourn 
        Monday, December 20, 1982, or on Tuesday, December 21, 1982, 
        pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader, or his 
        designee, in accordance with this resolution, and that when it 
        adjourns on said day, it stand adjourned sine die; and be it 
        further
            Resolved, That the consent of the House of Representatives 
        is hereby given to an adjournment sine die of the Senate at any 
        time prior to January 3, 1983, when the Senate shall so 
        determine; and that pending such sine die adjournment, the 
        Senate may adjourn or recess for such period or periods in 
        excess of 3 days as it may determine.

        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, just in order that the Members not 
    believe that this adjournment resolution indicates any imminent 
    action on the part of the leadership to move adjournment sine die, 
    it is done for the purpose of referring it to the other body.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.

Alternative Dates Certain

Sec. 10.2 The House concurred in a privileged Senate concurrent 
    resolution providing adjournments from and to separate days certain 
    in excess of three days (on either of two days in the House on 
    motion by the Majority Leader or his designee) with joint majority 
    leadership recall authority.

    On Mar. 16, 1989,(1) the Speaker(2) laid 
before the House the following Senate concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 135 Cong. Rec. 4480, 4481, 101st Cong. 1st Sess.
 2. James C. Wright, Jr. (TX).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 850]]

        CONDITIONAL RECESS OR ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE FROM MARCH 17, 
         1989, UNTIL APRIL 4, 1989, AND CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT OF THE 
         HOUSE FROM MARCH 23, 1989, OR MARCH 24, 1989, UNTIL APRIL 3, 
                                      1989

        The SPEAKER laid before the House a privileged Senate 
    concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 23) providing for a conditional 
    recess or adjournment of the Senate from March 17, 1989, until 
    April 4, 1989, and a conditional adjournment of the House from 
    March 23 or 24, 1989, until April 3, 1989.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 23

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the 
        close of business on Friday, March 17, 1989, it stand recessed 
        or adjourned until 2:15 post meridiem on Tuesday, April 4, 
        1989, or until 12 o'clock meridian on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of 
        this resolution; and that when the House adjourns on Thursday, 
        March 23, 1989, or on Friday, March 24, 1989, pursuant to a 
        motion made by the Majority Leader, or his designee, in 
        accordance with this resolution, it stand adjourned until 12:00 
        o'clock meridian on Monday, April 3, 1989, or until 12 o'clock 
        meridian on the second day after Members are notified to 
        reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
        of the House, acting jointly after consultation with the 
        Minority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the 
        House, shall notify the Members of the Senate and the House, 
        respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 10.3 A Senate concurrent resolution, providing for adjournment of 
    the Senate to a day certain and giving the Senate consent for House 
    adjournment for more than three days until a day certain or any 
    prior day determined by the House, was taken from the Speaker's 
    table and laid before the House as privileged by the Speaker.

    On May 27, 1982,(1) the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 128 Cong. Rec. 12504, 12505, 97th Cong. 2d Sess.
            Parliamentarian's Note: The Parliamentarian advised that a 
        quorum was required under clause 4 of Rule XVI (House Rules and 
        Manual Sec. 913 [2007]) to adopt a motion setting the day and 
        hour of reconvening and that a simple motion to adjourn 
        pursuant to S. Con. Res. 102 to a day certain specified in the 
        motion would have required a quorum since the concurrent 
        resolution required ``as determined by the House'' and would 
        not have been tantamount to a simple motion to adjourn. 
        Further, any change in the hour of convening was permitted 
        under clause 4 of Rule XVI (House Rules and Manual Sec. 913 
        [2007]) but required a quorum and could not be included in a 
        final simple motion to adjourn. The last time the two Houses 
        agreed to such a concurrent resolution was in the 83d Congress. 
        Such a resolution offers the advantage of flexibility where one 
        House is ready to adjourn but the other cannot yet decide on an 
        adjournment or return date. See 100 Cong. Rec. 15554, 83d Cong. 
        2d Sess., Aug. 20, 1954 (H. Con. Res. 266).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 851]]

        PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE AND GIVING CONSENT FOR 
                            ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE

        The SPEAKER laid before the House a privileged Senate 
    concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 102) providing for an 
    adjournment of the Senate from May 27, 1982, May 28, 1982, or May 
    29, 1982, until June 8, 1982, and giving the consent of the Senate 
    to an adjournment of the House for more than 3 days.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 102

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate adjourns on Thursday, May 27, 
        1982, Friday, May 28, 1982, or Saturday, May 29, 1982, pursuant 
        to a motion made by the Majority Leader in accordance with this 
        resolution, it stand adjourned until 12:00 noon on Tuesday, 
        June 8, 1982.
            Sec. 2. That the consent of the Senate is hereby given to 
        an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain by the 
        House of Representatives to begin on May 27, 1982, or any day 
        thereafter and terminating on June 8, 1982 or any day before 
        that day as determined by the House of Representatives.

        The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                     ADJOURNMENT TO WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2, 1982

        Mr. [James C.] WRIGHT [Jr., of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to 
    the provisions of Senate Concurrent Resolution 102, and clause 4, 
    rule XVI, I move that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to 
    meet at noon on Wednesday, June 2, 1982.
        The motion was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 10.4 A Senate concurrent resolution providing for the adjournment 
    of the two Houses of Congress to a day certain was amended in the 
    House to provide that the House should reconvene a week later than 
    the Senate.

    On July 2, 1960, (1) a Senate concurrent resolution 
providing for an adjournment of the two Houses to Aug. 8, 1960, was 
called up by the Majority Leader as privileged in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 106 Cong. Rec. 15828, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I call 
    up

[[Page 852]]

    Senate Concurrent Resolution 112 and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution as follows:

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That the two Houses shall adjourn on Saturday, 
        July 2, 1960, and that when they adjourn on said day they stand 
        adjourned until 12 o'clock noon on Monday, August 8, 1960.

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

            Amendment offered by Mr. McCormack: Strike out all after 
        the resolving clause and insert: ``That when the two Houses 
        shall adjourn on Sunday, July 3, 1960, the Senate shall stand 
        adjourned until 12 o'clock noon on Monday, August 8, 1960, and 
        the House of Representatives shall stand adjourned until 12 
        o'clock noon on Monday, August 15, 1960.''

        Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question. . . .
        The SPEAKER. (2) Without objection, the previous 
    question is ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the amendment.
        The amendment was agreed to.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the resolution.
        Mr. [H. R.] GROSS [of Iowa]. Mr. Speaker, on that I ask for the 
    yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were refused. . . .
        The resolution was agreed to.

Alternative Departure Dates

Sec. 10.5 The House agreed to a privileged concurrent resolution 
    providing for (recess or) adjournment of each House for more than 
    three days from alternate departure dates to separate dates 
    certain, subject to joint leadership recall at such place and time 
    as they may designate.

    On Feb. 13, 2003,(1) the following took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 149 Cong. Rec. 3917, 108th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            PROVIDING FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OR RECESS OF THE TWO HOUSES

        Mr. [Mark] FOLEY [of Florida]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 41) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 41

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of Thursday, February 13, 2003, or Friday, February 14, 
        2003, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
        adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, February 25, 2003, or until 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of 
        this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that 
        when the Senate recesses or adjourns on Thursday, February 13, 
        2003, Friday, February 14,

[[Page 853]]

        2003, Saturday, February 15, 2003, or any date from Monday, 
        February 17, 2003, through Friday, February 21, 2003, on a 
        motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its 
        Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned 
        until noon on Monday, February 24, 2003, or at such other time 
        on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader or his 
        designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until Members 
        are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this 
        concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, or their respective designees, acting jointly after 
        consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the 
        Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the 
        House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble at such place 
        and time as they may designate whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 10.6 The House agreed to a privileged concurrent resolution 
    providing for the ``August recess'' adjournment of the House from 
    the then-current legislative day of more than three days to a date 
    certain, and of the Senate to recess or adjourn on any day during a 
    week-long period to a different date certain and providing joint 
    majority leadership recall authority.

    On Aug. 3, 1990,(1) a Member offered a privileged 
concurrent resolution as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 136 Cong. Rec. 22182, 101st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM FRIDAY, AUGUST 3, 
           1990, TO WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1990, AND ADJOURNMENT OR 
         RECESS OF THE SENATE FROM ANY DAY BETWEEN AUGUST 3 AND AUGUST 
                        10, 1990, TO SEPTEMBER 10, 1990

        Mr. [William H.] GRAY [III, of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 360) and ask 
    for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 360

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of Friday, August 3, 1990, it stand adjourned until 12 
        o'clock meridian on Wednesday, September 5, 1990, or until 12 
        o'clock meridian on the second day after Members are notified 
        to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
        resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the Senate 
        recesses or adjourns on any day from Friday, August 3, 1990, to 
        Friday, August 10, 1990, pursuant to a motion made by the 
        Majority Leader, or his designee, it stand in recess or stand 
        adjourned until 10 o'clock ante meridian on Monday, September 
        10, 1990, or until 12 o'clock meridian on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of 
        this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.

[[Page 854]]

            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and the Senate, 
        respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 10.7 The House concurred in privileged Senate amendments to a 
    House concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the 
    House for more than three days to a day certain, providing that 
    when the Senate recesses on one of four designated days pursuant to 
    a motion made by the Senate Majority Leader in accordance with the 
    resolution, it stand in recess for more than three days to a day 
    certain.

    On Aug. 17, 1978,(1) the Speaker pro 
tempore(2) laid before the House the following communication 
from the Senate:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 124 Cong. Rec. 26794, 95th Cong. 2d Sess.
 2. Lucien N. Nedzi (MI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

           PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM AUGUST 17 TO 
        SEPTEMBER 6, 1978, AND OF THE SENATE FROM AUGUST 25, 26, 28, OR 
                            29 TO SEPTEMBER 6, 1978

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair lays before the House the 
    following communication from the Senate.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved, That the concurrent resolution from the House of 
        Representatives (H. Con Res. 696) entitled ``concurrent 
        resolution providing for an adjournment of the House from 
        August 17 to September 6, 1978,'' do pass with the following 
        amendments: Page 1, line 4, after ``1978'' insert: ``, and that 
        when the Senate recesses on Friday, August 25, Saturday, August 
        26, Monday, August 28 or Tuesday, August 29, 1978, pursuant to 
        a motion made by the Majority Leader in accordance with this 
        resolution, it stand in recess until 10 o'clock a.m. on 
        Wednesday, September 6, 1979''.
            Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
        providing for an adjournment of the House from August 17 until 
        September 6, 1978, and for a recess of the Senate from August 
        25, 26, 28, or 29 until September 6, 1978.''.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the Senate 
    amendments.
        The Senate amendments were concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Contingent Adjournment Pending Senate Action

Sec. 10.8 The House, by unanimous consent, fixed the time to which it 
    would adjourn as

[[Page 855]]

    the second day hence, unless the House sooner were to receive a 
    message from the Senate transmitting its adoption of (1) a 
    conference report providing omnibus appropriations and, (2) a 
    House-originated concurrent resolution of adjournment, in which 
    case the House would stand adjourned pursuant to that concurrent 
    resolution.

    On Feb. 13, 2003,(1) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 149 Cong. Rec. 3917, 3937, 108th Cong. 1st Sess.
            Parliamentarian's Note: This form of unanimous-consent 
        request has become standard practice in the House where the 
        House has originated action on a concurrent resolution of 
        adjournment and is awaiting concurrence by the Senate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

              CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT TO FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2003

        Mr. [Mark] FOLEY [of Florida]. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourns to meet at 
    2 p.m. on Friday, February 14, 2003, unless it sooner has received 
    a message or messages from the Senate transmitting both its 
    adoption of the conference report to accompany House Joint 
    Resolution 2 and its adoption of House Concurrent Resolution 41, in 
    which case the House shall stand adjourned pursuant to that 
    concurrent resolution.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Is there objection to 
    the request of the gentleman from Florida?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. J. Gresham Barrett (SC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Scott] McINNIS [of Colorado]. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to 
    House Concurrent Resolution 41 of the 108th Congress, I move that 
    the House do now adjourn.
        The motion was agreed to.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Barrett of South Carolina). 
    Accordingly, pursuant to the previous order of the House of today, 
    the House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Friday, February 14, 
    2003, unless it sooner has received a message or messages from the 
    Senate transmitting both its adoption of the conference report to 
    accompany House Joint Resolution 2 and its adoption of House 
    Concurrent Resolution 41, in which case the House shall stand 
    adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, February 25, 2003, pursuant to 
    House Concurrent Resolution 41.
        Thereupon, (at 9 o'clock and 52 minutes p.m.), pursuant to 
    House Concurrent Resolution 41, 108th Congress, and its previous 
    order, the House adjourned until Tuesday, February 25, 2003, at 2 
    p.m.

Sec. 10.9 The Senate amended a House concurrent resolution providing 
    for an adjournment of the House for more than three days to a day 
    certain by providing that when the Senate completed its disposition 
    of a designated bill, it stand in recess until that same date 
    certain.

[[Page 856]]

    On June 29, 1978,(1) the following House concurrent 
resolution with Senate amendments was laid before the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 124 Cong. Rec. 19466, 95th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             ADJOURNMENT OF CONGRESS UNTIL MONDAY, JULY 10, 1978--
               COMMUNICATION FROM THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rostenkowski)(2) laid 
    before the House the following communication from the Secretary of 
    the Senate of the United States:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Dan Rostenkowski (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Resolved, That the concurrent resolution from the House of 
        Representatives (H. Con. Res. 654) entitled ``concurrent 
        resolution providing for an adjournment of the House from June 
        29 until July 10, 1978'', do pass with the following 
        amendments:
            Page 1, line 5, strike out ``1978.'' and insert ``1978, and 
        that when the Senate completes its disposition of H.R. 12426, 
        Calendar No. 883, it stand in recess until 11:00 o'clock a.m. 
        on Monday, July 10, 1978.''.
            Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
        providing for an adjournment of the House from June 29 until 
        July 10, 1978, and for a recess of the Senate from the time 
        H.R. 12426 is disposed of until July 10, 1978''.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the Senate 
    amendments.
        The Senate amendments were concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: While an amendment in the House to render 
an adjournment to a day certain, contingent upon completion of specific 
legislative action, would not normally be germane,(3) when 
the Senate imposes this condition on itself as an amendment, the House 
must dispose of the amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See Sec. 11.2, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concurrent Resolution Amended to Include the House

Sec. 10.10 A Senate concurrent resolution, providing for an adjournment 
    of that body to a day certain, was amended by the House to provide 
    for its adjournment to a different time.

    On Nov. 24, 1969,(1) the two Houses adjourned for a 
five-day period over the Thanksgiving holiday. The proceedings were as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 115 Cong. Rec. 35539, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

           PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT FROM WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 26 TO 
                               MONDAY, DECEMBER 1

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I call up Senate 
    Concurrent Resolution 48 and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 48

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That

[[Page 857]]

        when the Senate adjourns on Wednesday, November 26, 1969, it 
        stand adjourned until 10 a.m. Monday, December 1, 1969.

                        amendment offered by mr. albert

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

            Amendment offered by Mr. Albert: On page 1, line 4, strike 
        out the period and insert the following: ``; and that when the 
        House adjourns on Wednesday, November 26, 1969, it stand 
        adjourned until 12 o'clock noon on Monday, Dec. 1, 1969.''

        The amendment was agreed to.
        The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                      

[Page 857-868]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
        B. Adjournments for More Than Three Days to Date Certain
 
Sec. 11. Consideration of Concurrent Resolution; Privilege, Amendment, 
    Debate, Budget Act Restrictions

    A concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the House 
or of the Senate, or of both Houses, is called up as privileged in the 
House,(1) even though it provides for an adjournment of the 
two Houses to different days certain.(2) Amendments of one 
House to a concurrent resolution of the other are also privileged for 
consideration.(3) An adjournment resolution remains 
privileged, despite its inclusion of additional matter, so long as such 
additional matter would be privileged in its own right, such as a 
declaration asserted as a question of the privileges of the House 
relating to the ability of the House to receive veto messages during 
the adjournment.(4) On the other hand, an adjournment 
resolution including a provision establishing an order of business for 
the following session of the Congress is not privileged.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. House Rules and Manual Sec. 84 (2007).
 2. See Sec. Sec. 10.2-10.4, supra, and Sec. 11.1, infra.
 3. See, e.g., 128 Cong. Rec. 1472, 97th Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 10, 1982.
 4. See Sec. 15.4, infra.
 5. See Sec. 14.13, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1985, Sec. Sec. 309 and 310 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 were amended to prohibit the consideration of concurrent 
resolutions providing adjournments during the month of July in excess 
of three days until the House had passed general annual appropriation 
bills within the jurisdictions of all the appropriations subcommittees 
for the ensuing fiscal year; and until the House had completed action 
on all reconciliation legislation for the ensuing fiscal year required 
to be reported by the final adopted concurrent resolution on the budget 
for that

[[Page 858]]

fiscal year.(6) The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act repealed Sec.  310(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 which had prevented consideration of sine die adjournment 
resolutions until Congress had completed action on the second 
concurrent resolution and reconciliation legislation required by a 
second budget resolution.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. See House Rules and Manual Sec. 1127 (2007).
 7. Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment to a date 
certain is not debatable (except by unanimous consent or by reserving 
objection to a unanimous-consent request to dispense with 
reading)(8) and is not amendable if the previous question is 
ordered thereon.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. Id. at Sec. 84. See also Sec. Sec. 11.3, 11.8, 11.9, 11.11, infra.
 9. See Sec. Sec. 11.2, 11.12, 
        infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 11.1 Consideration by unanimous consent of a concurrent resolution 
    providing for adjournment of both Houses in July on motions of 
    majority leaders or their designees from alternate days to days 
    certain, subject to joint majority leadership recall.

    On June 23, 1989,(1) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 135 Cong. Rec. 13271, 101st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

           PROVIDING CONDITIONAL RECESS OR ADJOURNMENT OF SENATE AND 
           CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT OF HOUSE OVER THE JULY 4TH HOLIDAY

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate 
    concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 50) providing for a conditional 
    recess or adjournment of the Senate and a conditional adjournment 
    of the House over the July 4th holiday, and ask for its immediate 
    consideration in the House.
        The Clerk read the title of the Senate concurrent resolution.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Is there objection to 
    the request of the gentleman from Missouri?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Kweisi Mfume (MD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 50

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the 
        close of business on Thursday, June 22, 1989, Friday, June 23, 
        1989, Saturday, June 24, 1989, Sunday, June 25, 1989, Monday, 
        June 26, 1989, Tuesday, June 27, 1989, Wednesday, June 28, 
        1989, Thursday, June 29, 1989, Friday, June 30, 1989, or 
        Saturday, July 1, 1989, pursuant to a motion made by the 
        Majority Leader, or his designee, in accordance with this 
        resolution, it stand recessed or adjourned until 8:30 a.m. on 
        Tuesday, July 11, 1989, or until 12 o'clock noon on the second 
        day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to 
        section 2 of this resolution, whichever occurs first; and that 
        when the House adjourns on Thursday, June 29, 1989,

[[Page 859]]

        or Friday, June 30, 1989, pursuant to a motion made by the 
        Majority Leader, or his designee, in accordance with this 
        resolution, it stand adjourned until 12:00 o'clock noon on 
        Monday, July 10, 1989, or until 12 o'clock noon on the second 
        day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to 
        section 2 of this resolution, whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
        of the House, acting jointly after consultation with the 
        Minority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the 
        House, shall notify the Members of the Senate and the House, 
        respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Parliamentarian's Note: Unanimous consent was required for 
        consideration of this resolution covering more than three days 
        in July since under Sec.  309 of the Budget Act the House had 
        not passed all general appropriation bills for the ensuing 
        fiscal year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 11.2 Although a Senate concurrent resolution providing for an 
    adjournment of more than three days to a day certain of the House 
    and Senate is not subject to amendment if the previous question is 
    ordered thereon, a motion to commit to a committee with 
    instructions to report back forthwith with an amendment may be 
    offered after the previous question is ordered.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See Rule XIX clause 2,  House Rules and Manual Sec. 1001 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Oct. 1, 1980,(2) a Senate concurrent resolution was 
laid before the House as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 126 Cong. Rec. 28576, 28577, 96th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The SPEAKER laid before the House a privileged Senate 
    concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 126) providing for a recess of 
    the Senate and an adjournment of the House of Representatives until 
    Wednesday, November 12, 1980.
        The Clerk read the title of the Senate concurrent resolution.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 126

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate recesses on any day beginning 
        with Tuesday, September 30, 1980, but no later than Thursday, 
        October 2, 1980, as determined by the majority leader, after 
        consultation with the minority leader, and as so moved by the 
        majority leader in accordance with this resolution, it stand in 
        recess until 11 a.m. on Wednesday, November 12, 1980, and that 
        when the House of Representatives adjourns on Thursday, October 
        2, 1980, it stand adjourned until 12 meridian on Wednesday, 
        November 12, 1980.

        The SPEAKER.(3) Without objection, the previous 
    question is ordered on the Senate concurrent resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

[[Page 860]]

            motion to commit with instructions offered by mr. rhodes

        Mr. [John J.] RHODES [of Arizona]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    preferential motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Rhodes moves to commit Senate Concurrent Resolution 126 
        to the Committee on Rules with instructions that the Committee 
        report the resolution back to the House forthwith with the 
        following amendment:
            Strike out ``when the House of Representatives adjourns on 
        Thursday, October 2, 1980'' and insert in lieu thereof the 
        following, ``when the House of Representatives adjourns on the 
        day following the consideration by the House of a second 
        concurrent resolution on the budget for Fiscal Year 1981 
        pursuant to the provisions of section 305 of Public Law 93-
        344''.

        The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Rhodes).
        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the noes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. RHODES. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    161, nays 231, not voting 40, as follows:

                                 [Roll No. 614]

    Parliamentarian's Note: While normally a concurrent resolution of 
adjournment would not be subject to an amendment making it contingent 
upon prior legislative action, in this case no germaneness point of 
order was raised against the contingency.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See also Sec. 10.9, supra, and Sec. 13, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 11.3 Although a privileged concurrent resolution providing for an 
    adjournment of the House for more than three days to a day certain 
    is not subject to debate, the Chair may entertain a parliamentary 
    inquiry pending the adoption of the resolution.

    On June 28, 1978,(1) the following privileged concurrent 
resolution was considered and agreed to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 124 Cong. Rec. 19390, 95th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         ADJOURNMENT FROM THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 1978 TO MONDAY, JULY 10, 
                                      1978

        Mr. [James C.] WRIGHT [Jr., of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I send to 
    the desk a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 654) and 
    ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 654

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on Thursday, June 29, 
        1979, it stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian on Monday, 
        July 10, 1978.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. [Robert E.] BAUMAN [of Maryland]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The gentleman will state 
    his parliamentary inquiry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Joseph G. Minish (NJ).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 861]]

        Mr. BAUMAN. Mr. Speaker, do I understand correctly from what 
    the majority leader said previously that the terms of this 
    resolution are such that all Members will have to return to their 
    districts to work and they are not allowed on world junkets or to 
    indulge in any taxpayer financed foreign travel; is that correct?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that that is not 
    a parliamentary inquiry, but that is what the majority leader 
    implied.
        Mr. BAUMAN. I thank the Chair and seriously doubt the majority 
    leader's implication although I endorse it.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the concurrent 
    resolution.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 11.4 A House concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of 
    the House to a day certain, with Senate amendments thereto, is laid 
    before the House as privileged by the Speaker.

    On May 23, 1973,(1) Speaker Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, 
laid before the House the following resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 119 Cong. Rec. 16804, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

               ADJOURNMENT OF CONGRESS OVER MEMORIAL DAY HOLIDAY

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the concurrent resolution (H. 
    Con. Res. 221) providing for an adjournment of the House from May 
    24, 1973, until May 29, 1973, together with the Senate amendments 
    thereto.
        The clerk read the Senate amendments, as follows:

            Page 1, line 4, strike out ``1973.'' and insert: ``1973, 
        and that when the Senate adjourns on Wednesday, May 23, 1973, 
        it stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian, Tuesday, May 29, 
        1973.''
            Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
        providing for the adjournment of the two Houses of Congress 
        over the Memorial Day Holiday.''

        The Senate amendments were concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 11.5 The Speaker laid before the House as privileged a House 
    concurrent resolution with a Senate amendment thereto, providing 
    for an adjournment of the two Houses to days certain.

    On Feb. 8, 1973,(1) Speaker Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, 
laid before

[[Page 862]]

the House as privileged House Concurrent Resolution 105. The 
proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 119 Cong. Rec. 3908, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
            Parliamentarian's Note: Under the procedure prior to the 
        92d Congress, the Majority Leader offered a privileged motion 
        to take the concurrent resolution from the Speaker's table, 
        with the Senate amendment, and to concur in the Senate 
        amendment. Either procedure is appropriate, since the Senate 
        amendments are entitled to privileged consideration in the 
        House either by motion or by the Speaker putting the question 
        on their adoption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            ADJOURNMENT OF THE CONGRESS COMMENCING FEBRUARY 8, 1973

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the concurrent resolution (H. 
    Con. Res. 105), providing for an adjournment of the House from 
    Thursday, February 8, 1973, to Monday, February 19, 1973, together 
    with the Senate amendment thereto.
        The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
        The Clerk read the Senate amendment, as follows:

            Page 1, line 4, strike out ``1973.'' and insert: ``1973, 
        and that when the Senate adjourns on Thursday, February 8, 
        1973, it stand adjourned until 11 o'clock antemeridian, 
        Thursday, February 15, 1973.''

        The Senate amendment was concurred in. . . .
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 11.6 A Senate concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment 
    of the Senate to a day certain is laid before the House by the 
    Speaker as privileged and may then be amended by motion to provide 
    for a comparable adjournment by the House.

    On Aug. 18, 1972,(1) Speaker Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, 
laid before the House the following privileged Senate concurrent 
resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 118 Cong. Rec. 29136, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSES FROM AUGUST 18 TO SEPTEMBER 5, 1972

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the Senate concurrent 
    resolution (S. Con. Res. 94) providing for an adjournment of the 
    two Houses from August 18, 1972, to September 5, 1972:
        Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
    concurring), That when the Senate adjourns on Friday, August 18, 
    1972, it stand adjourned until 10 o'clock ante meridian on Tuesday, 
    September 5, 1972.

    An amendment was then offered from the floor by the Majority 
Leader:

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker I 
    offer an amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:
        Amendment offered by Mr. O'Neill: Strike out in page 1, line 
    four, ``1972.'', and insert the following: ``1972, and that when 
    the House adjourns on Friday, August 18, 1972, it stand adjourned 
    until 12 noon on Tuesday, September 5, 1972.''
        The amendment was agreed to.
        The Senate concurrent resolution, as amended, was concurred in.

Sec. 11.7 A Senate concurrent resolution, providing for an adjournment 
    during the month

[[Page 863]]

    of July of the two Houses to a day certain, was called up as 
    privileged.

    On June 30, 1972,(1) the Senate concurrent resolution 
below was called up in the House as privileged and agreed to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 118 Cong. Rec. 23740, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    call up Senate Concurrent Resolution 88 and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 88

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Friday, June 
        30, 1972, they stand adjourned until 12 o'clock noon on Monday, 
        July 17, 1972.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Such a concurrent resolution providing for 
a July adjournment would be liable to a point of order in the House 
under Sec. 309 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended in 
1985, if the House has not completed initial action on all general 
appropriation bills.

Sec. 11.8 While a concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of 
    the House to a day certain is, under the precedents, not debatable, 
    debate under the ``one-minute rule'' has sometimes been allowed to 
    proceed by unanimous consent.

    On May 23, 1972,(1) Speaker Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, 
permitted a unanimous-consent request for the Majority Leader to be 
recognized for one minute while there was pending a House concurrent 
resolution providing for an adjournment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 118 Cong. Rec. 18545, 18546, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Hale] BOGGS [of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 619) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:
        Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
    concurring), That when the House adjourns on Wednesday, May 24, 
    1972, it stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian, Tuesday, May 
    30, 1972.
        (Mr. BOGGS asked and was given permission to address the House 
    for 1 minute.)
        Mr. [H. R.] GROSS [of Iowa]. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman 
    yield?
        Mr. BOGGS. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa. . . .
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the concurrent resolution.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.

    On Nov. 6, 1969,(2) a privileged concurrent resolution 
for adjournment was called up. The Speaker

[[Page 864]]

recognized a Member by unanimous consent for one minute:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 115 Cong. Rec. 33260, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I again offer the 
    concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 441) and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 441

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on Thursday, November 
        6, 1969, it stand adjourned until 12:00 meridian, Wednesday, 
        November 12, 1969.

        Mr. [Durward G.] HALL [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker--
        The SPEAKER.(3) Does the gentleman from Missouri 
    desire to be recognized for 1 minute?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. HALL. I do, Mr. Speaker.
        The SPEAKER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
        There was no objection.
        Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, the majority leader has consulted with 
    me since this joint resolution was first brought up today, but I do 
    not yet understand why we adjourned at 12:26 on Monday and why we 
    have had limited debate and bills programmed this week; and why we 
    are not going to work tomorrow but plan to work into the late hours 
    tonight in order to accomplish the completion of the aviation and 
    airport bill under two separate rules, and then we do not plan to 
    meet Monday. Now, surely no one can object to us going over on 
    Armistice Day, but this is November 7, and we approach the yearend. 
    . . .
        Mr. [H. R.] GROSS [of Iowa] . . .
        There is nothing the gentleman from Missouri or the gentleman 
    from Iowa can do that would be effective for it is not within our 
    power to schedule legislation. But we can protest and serve notice 
    that not only for the remainder of this year and certainly at the 
    beginning of next year we can insist that the legislative machinery 
    operate as the citizens of this country expect it to be operated.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.

Sec. 11.9 Although neither a concurrent resolution providing for an 
    adjournment to a day certain nor an amendment thereto are 
    debatable, the Majority Leader was, by unanimous consent, permitted 
    to proceed for one minute.

    On Mar. 26, 1970,(1) Speaker John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, by unanimous consent, recognized the Majority Leader for 
one minute while a nondebatable proposed House amendment to a 
nondebatable House concurrent resolution was pending.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 9467, 9468, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I call up Senate 
    Concurrent Resolution 59 and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

[[Page 865]]

                                S. Con. Res. 59

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate adjourn on March 26, 1970, it 
        stand in adjournment until 12 o'clock meridian, Tuesday, March 
        31, 1970.

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

            Amendment offered by Mr. Albert: On line 4, page 1, strike 
        out the period and insert: ``; and that when the House adjourns 
        on Thursday, March 26, 1970, it stand adjourned until 12 
        o'clock meridian, Tuesday, March 31, 1970.''

        (Mr. Albert asked and was given permission to address the House 
    for 1 minute.)
        Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the amendment.

Sec. 11.10 A concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the 
    House may be offered as privileged and then withdrawn prior to 
    action thereon.

    On Nov. 6, 1969,(1) the following privileged resolution 
was offered in the House by the Majority Leader:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 115 Cong. Rec. 33255, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
            Parliamentarian's Note: The resolution could have been 
        withdrawn by Mr. Albert without asking unanimous consent since 
        no action had been taken on the resolution. Although a voice 
        vote had been taken, the result had not been finally announced, 
        since the Chair only announced that the ayes ``appeared to have 
        it.''See 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 5349, where an announced 
        division vote on a motion to adjourn was superceded by ordering 
        of tellers, thereby rendering the division vote inoperative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                H. Con. Res. 441

        Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
    concurring), That when the House adjourns on Thursday, November 6, 
    1969, it stand adjourned until 12:00 meridian, Wednesday, November 
    12, 1969.
        The SPEAKER. (2) The question is on the concurrent 
    resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Durward G.] HALL [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. The gentleman from Missouri objects to the vote on 
    the ground that a quorum is not present and makes the point of 
    order that a quorum is not present.
        Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the 
    point of order, provided the other request is withdrawn, until 
    other arrangements can be made.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman can withdraw his point of order.
        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent to withdraw the concurrent resolution temporarily.

[[Page 866]]

        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Oklahoma?
        There was no objection.

Sec. 11.11 A concurrent resolution providing for adjournment of 
    Congress to a day certain is not debatable.

    On Aug. 28, 1967,(1) a Member attempted to debate a 
concurrent resolution providing for adjournment of Congress to a day 
certain:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 113 Cong. Rec. 24201, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I call up House 
    Concurrent Resolution 497 and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 497

        Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
    concurring), That the two Houses shall adjourn on Thursday, August 
    31, 1967, and that when they adjourn on said day they stand 
    adjourned until 12 o'clock noon on Monday, September 11, 1967.
        Mr. [H. R.] GROSS [of Iowa]. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike the 
    last word.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The Chair will state that this is 
    not a debatable resolution. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.

Sec. 11.12 A concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the 
    Congress to a day certain is subject to amendment if the previous 
    question has not been ordered.

    On Sept. 22, 1950,(1) the Speaker clarified for a Member 
the circumstances under which an amendment to a concurrent resolution 
for adjournment to a day certain would be in order:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 96 Cong. Rec. 15635, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [J. Percy] PRIEST [of Tennessee]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged resolution (H. Con. Res. 287), and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Saturday, 
        September 23, 1950, they stand adjourned until 12 o'clock 
        meridian on Monday, November 27, 1950.

        Mr. PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question.
        Mr. [John W.] HESELTON [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, is it possible to offer an amendment 
    to the resolution at this point?
        The SPEAKER. Inasmuch as the previous question has been moved, 
    it is not in order; and, of course, if the previous question is 
    ordered, it is not in

[[Page 867]]

    order to offer amendments to the resolution.
        Mr. HESELTON. If the previous question is not ordered, then 
    would an amendment be in order?
        The SPEAKER. If the previous question is not ordered, then if 
    the gentlemen is recognized he may offer an amendment.
        The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Tennessee 
    [Mr. Priest] for the previous question.

Sec. 11.13 A concurrent resolution providing that the two Houses 
    adjourn to a day certain is not operative until agreed to by both, 
    and where the Senate amends the resolution, the amendment is 
    disposed of by privileged motion which requires a quorum for 
    adoption.

    On Mar. 30, 1944,(1) the House considered a Senate 
amendment to a House concurrent resolution adjourning Congress until 
Apr. 12, 1944:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 90 Cong. Rec. 3318, 78th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. (2) The Chair lays before 
    the House, House Concurrent Resolution No. 75, with a Senate 
    amendment, which the Clerk will report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Senate amendment: On page 2, line 3, strike out ``Thursday, 
        March 30'' and insert ``Saturday, April 1.''

        Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
    providing for the adjournment of Congress from Saturday, April 1, 
    1944, to Wednesday, April 12, 1944.''
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the amendment is 
    agreed to.
        Mr. [Clare E.] HOFFMAN [of Michigan]. Mr. Speaker, reserving 
    the right to object, I make a parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. What is the procedure?
        Mr. [Robert] RAMSPECK [of Georgia]. Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House concur in the Senate amendment.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. Well, Mr. Speaker, I object.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman propounding a 
    parliamentary inquiry?
        Mr. HOFFMAN. Yes, Mr. Speaker.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. What is the procedure on this resolution?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is a privileged resolution, and the 
    procedure would be for some Member--and the gentleman from Georgia 
    [Mr. Ramspeck] has done so--to make a motion that the House concur 
    in the Senate amendment.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. And then a vote is taken on the motion?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. Does that require a quorum?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Any action by the House requires a 
    quorum if

[[Page 868]]

    the one who takes such step raises that question.
        Mr. [John E.] RANKIN [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. RANKIN. As I understand the situation, whether there is a 
    quorum present or not, unless this amendment is agreed to the 
    resolution does not become final until this amendment is disposed 
    of. That is correct, is it not?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.
        Mr. RANKIN. And therefore we would not be in a position to 
    recess for the time mentioned until this amendment is disposed of 
    one way or the other.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The understanding of the Chair is the 
    same as that of the gentleman from Mississippi.
        The gentleman from Georgia moves that the House concur in the 
    Senate amendment.
        The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Georgia.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that a 
    quorum is not present.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will count.
        Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the point of no quorum for 
    the time being.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, further 
    consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 75) will 
    be withdrawn.
        There was no objection.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Speaker pro tempore, having laid the 
Senate amendment before the House as privileged, could have withdrawn 
it as a matter of right without unanimous consent since no action had 
been taken thereon.



[Page 868-877]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
        B. Adjournments for More Than Three Days to Date Certain
 
Sec. 12. August Recess

    The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 provides for a sine die 
adjournment, or (in an odd-numbered year) for an adjournment of 
slightly over a month (from that Friday in August which is at least 30 
days before Labor Day to the Wednesday following Labor Day) unless the 
Nation is in a state of war, declared by Congress.(1) Prior 
to that revision, the 1946 Legislative Reorganization Act provided for 
adjournment sine die of the two Houses not later than the last day of 
July each year, except during time of war or a national emergency 
proclaimed by the President. Presidentially declared emergencies 
negated operation of the provision.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 84 Stat. 11140 Sec. 461(b). See also House Rules and Manual 
        Sec. 1106 (2007).
 2. See Sec. 6.2, supra, and Sec. 16, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress may waive the current requirement and make other 
determinations regarding its August adjournment.(3) In an 
odd-numbered year a concurrent resolution

[[Page 869]]

conforming to this requirement is called up as privileged and requires 
a yea and nay vote for adoption(4) and is not 
debatable,(5) but the House may adjourn by simple motion on 
July 31 to meet on Aug. 1, and so the statute has no binding effect 
absent subsequent action.(6) In even-numbered and some odd-
numbered years, the House has agreed to concurrent resolutions waiving 
the provisions of this law to provide that the two Houses shall not 
adjourn for more than three days or sine die until they have adopted a 
concurrent resolution to that effect.(7) To obviate the 
requirement of a concurrent resolution waiving the requirement, the 
House has included the language ``in consonance with section 132(a)'' 
in its concurrent resolution providing for an August 
adjournment.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. House Rules and Manual Sec. 84 (2007).
 4. See Sec. Sec. 12.2, 12.5, infra.
 5. See Sec. 12.2, infra. See also House Rules and Manual Sec. 1106 
        (2007).
 6. See Sec. 12.3, infra.
 7. House Rules and Manual Sec. 1106 (2007).
 8. See Sec. 12.1, infra. See also House Rules and Manual Sec. 1106 
        (2007).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 12.1 The House adopted an ``August recess'' resolution by the yeas 
    and nays, ``in consonance with'' Sec. 132 of the Legislative 
    Reorganization Act of 1946, on July 31 of an odd-numbered year 
    requiring a roll call vote.

    On July 31, 1997,(1) the House adopted the following 
concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 143 Cong. Rec. 17018, 105th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PROVDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM AUGUST 1, OR AUGUST 
        2, 1997, TO SEPTEMBER 3, 1997, AND ADJOURNMENT OR RECESS OF THE 
        SENATE FROM JULY 31, AUGUST 1, OR AUGUST 2, 1997, TO SEPTEMBER 
                                    2, 1997

        Mr. [Porter J.] GOSS [of Florida]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 136) and I ask for 
    its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 136

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That, in consonance with section 132(a) of the 
        Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, when the House adjourns 
        on the legislative day of Friday, August 1, 1997 or Saturday, 
        August 2, 1997, pursuant to a motion made by the majority 
        leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until noon on 
        Wednesday, September 3, 1997, or until noon on the second day 
        after members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 
        of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that 
        when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of business 
        on Thursday, July 31, 1997, Friday, August 1, 1997, or 
        Saturday, August 2, 1997, pursuant to a motion made by the 
        majority leader

[[Page 870]]

        or his designee in accordance with this concurrent resolution, 
        it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on Tuesday, September 
        2, 1997, or until such time on that day as may be specified by 
        the majority leader or his designee in the motion to recess or 
        adjourn, or until noon on the second day after Members are 
        notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
        resolution, whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the majority leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the minority 
        leader of the House and the minority leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and Senate, respectively, 
        to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public interest 
        shall warrant it.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood).(2) Pursuant to 
    section 132 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, as 
    amended, the yeas and nays are ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Ray LaHood (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    403, nays 16, not voting 15, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 351] . . .

        So the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Sec.  132 of the Legislative Reorganization 
Act of 1946 provides that ``unless otherwise provided by the Congress, 
the two houses shall (1) adjourn sine die not later than July 31 of 
each year; or (2) in the case of an odd-numbered year, provide, not 
later than July 31 of such year, by concurrent resolution adopted in 
each house by rollcall vote, for [an August recess].'' Consideration of 
the adjournment resolution on July 31 meant that (1) the resolution 
could be treated as privileged; (2) the question of adopting the 
resolution required a roll call vote; and (3) a concurrent resolution 
permitting the two Houses to remain in session beyond July 31 in an 
odd-numbered year was not necessary.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. For forms of resolutions permitting the two Houses to remain in 
        session beyond July 31 in an odd-numbered year, see, e.g., 
        Sec. 12.2, infra, and 141 Cong. Rec. 21223, 104th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., July 31, 1995. Notwithstanding the ostensible 
        requirements of Sec. 132, the House could adjourn by simple 
        motion on July 31 to meet on Aug. 1 of an odd-numbered year. 
        See Sec. 12.3, infra.
            For discussion of the sine die requirement in even-numbered 
        years, see Sec. 16, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 12.2 Pursuant to the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, as 
    amended, a concurrent resolution providing in an odd-numbered year 
    for an adjournment for the month of August or until sooner recalled 
    by the joint leadership is called up as privileged, is

[[Page 871]]

    not debatable, and requires a yea and nay vote for adoption if 
    considered prior to Aug. 1.

    On July 31, 1991,(1) the following privileged concurrent 
resolution was laid before the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 137 Cong. Rec. 20675, 20676, 102d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

           ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM FRIDAY, AUGUST 2, SATURDAY, 
           AUGUST 3, SUNDAY, AUGUST 4, OR MONDAY, AUGUST 5, 1991, TO 
                         WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1991

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I send to 
    the desk a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 191) and 
    ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 191

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on Friday, August 2, 
        Saturday, August 3, Sunday, August 4, or Monday, August 5, 
        1991, pursuant to a motion made by the Majority Leader or his 
        designee, in accordance with this resolution, it stand 
        adjourned until noon on Wednesday, September 11, 1991, or until 
        noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
        pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever 
        occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House, after consultation with 
        the Minority Leader of the House, shall notify the Members of 
        the House to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public 
        interest shall warrant it.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Thomas S. Foley (WA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, is the resolution before the House 
    debatable?
        The SPEAKER. No. The Chair will tell the gentleman, it is not 
    debatable. The vote must be taken by the yeas and nays.
        Mr. WALKER. The vote must be taken by the yeas and nays, but 
    the resolution is not subject to an hour's debate?
        The SPEAKER. The resolution is not subject to an hour's debate, 
    the gentleman is correct.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Chair.
        The SPEAKER. Under the statute, this vote must be taken by the 
    yeas and nays.
        The question is on the concurrent resolution.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    406, nays 16, not voting 11, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 246] . . .

        So the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Montgomery).(3) Without 
    objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. G. V. (Sonny) Montgomery (MS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I object.

[[Page 872]]

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
        Ms. [Louise M.] SLAUGHTER of New York. Mr. Speaker, I move to 
    reconsider the vote by which the concurrent resolution was agreed 
    to.
        Mr. [Peter H.] KOSTMAYER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered 
    by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kostmayer], to lay on the 
    table the motion offered by the gentleman [sic] from New York [Mr. 
    [sic] Slaughter].
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand tellers.
        Mr. [Harold L.] VOLKMER [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, on that I 
    demand the yeas and nays.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The demand for the yeas and nays takes 
    precedence.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    391, nays 22, not voting 20, as follows:

                                 [Roll No. 247]

Sec. 12.3 Each House may, under the Constitution, by simple motion on 
    July 31 adjourn ``from day to day'' to meet on Aug. 1, unless 
    provided otherwise by concurrent resolution in accordance with a 
    law requiring an ``August recess''.

    On July 31, 1991,(1) the following proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 137 Cong. Rec. 20677, 20678, 102d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I move 
    that the House do now adjourn.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The question is on the 
    motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Gephardt].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. G. V. (Sonny) Montgomery (MS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Dan] ROSTENKOWSKI [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, on that I 
    demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    342, nays 70, not voting 21, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 248] . . .

        So the motion was agreed to.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        Accordingly (at 7 o'clock and 10 minutes p.m.) under the 
    Constitution, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, August 
    1, 1991, at 10 a.m.

Sec. 12.4 By unanimous consent, the House considered, and by voice vote 
    agreed to, a concurrent resolution providing, notwithstanding the 
    requirements of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 
    1970(1)

[[Page 873]]

    that the two Houses adopt, not later than July 31 of an odd-
    numbered year by roll call vote, a concurrent resolution adjourning 
    for August, that the House and the Senate shall not adjourn for 
    more than three days or sine die until they have adopted a 
    subsequent concurrent resolution to that effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 2 USC Sec. 198.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 29, 1987,(2) the Majority Leader called up by 
unanimous consent House Concurrent Resolution 170, waiving the 
requirement of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 for ``August 
recess'' by roll call by July 31:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 133 Cong. Rec. 21459, 21460, 100th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        RELATIVE TO ADJOURNMENT TO A DATE CERTAIN DURING THE REMAINDER 
                             OF THE 100TH CONGRESS

        Mr. [Thomas S.] FOLEY [of Washington]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 170), and I ask unanimous 
    consent for its immediate consideration.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Traxler).(3) The Clerk 
    will report the concurrent resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Bob Traxler (MI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 170

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That notwithstanding the provisions of section 
        132(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 
        198), as amended by section 461 of the Legislative 
        Reorganization Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-510; 84 Stat. 1193), 
        the House of Representatives and the Senate shall not adjourn 
        for a period in excess of three days, or adjourn sine die, 
        until both Houses to Congress have adopted a concurrent 
        resolution providing either for an adjournment (in excess of 
        three days) to a day certain or for adjournment sine die.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Washington?
        Mr. [Robert H.] MICHEL [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, reserving 
    the right to object, and I do not intend to object, but might I 
    just use this opportunity to ask the gentleman from Washington [Mr. 
    Foley], the distinguished majority leader, how the program unfolds 
    for the balance of this day and tomorrow?
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from 
    Washington.
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, it is hoped that we will adopt this 
    resolution which dispenses with the statutory July 31 sine die 
    adjournment of the act, an anachronism unfortunately of other years 
    and times but still a part of the law.
        After we dispose of this matter, we have no legislative program 
    for tonight. Tomorrow we will continue to consider Price-Anderson, 
    and we would hope to conclude at a fairly early hour tomorrow. . . 
    .
        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, 
    reserving the right to object, if we would fail to pass the 
    resolution before the House, would

[[Page 874]]

    the Congress actually have to adjourn as of the end of this month?
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. WALKER. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
        Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
        That is an interesting question. The gentleman always asks 
    interesting questions.
        I do not have a very interesting answer.
        Mr. WALKER. I would say to the gentleman that I have many 
    constituents who think the country would be better off if in fact 
    we lived within the law.
        Mr. FOLEY. I know there is another theory that a former 
    distinguished Member of the other body, Senator Anderson, held; and 
    that was that the worst mistake that was ever made by the Congress 
    in this century was to air-condition the Capitol in 1938.
        Since we are now air-conditioned, and since this is 
    unfortunately a legal anachronism, we would hope that the Members 
    would treat it as such and not attempt to take a premature 
    departure from the legislative business.
        Mr. WALKER. Further reserving the right to object, why do we 
    not just repeal the anachronism? It seems to me it would make far 
    more sense rather than go through this exercise, if in fact it 
    would cause major problems for the House to carry out what is in 
    the law.
        Mr. FOLEY. I think that is an excellent suggestion, and it was 
    the subject of discussion between the distinguished Republican 
    leader and myself just before this matter was brought forward.
        I think we are in essential agreement that it should be 
    repealed; and except for the proper procedures, I would not want to 
    try to do it tonight.
        The gentleman's suggestion is very well taken. It is a total 
    anachronism and should be repealed.
        Not to engage in further anecdotes, but there was a former 
    Member of this body, I am told, who always adjourned himself 
    personally on the 31st of July in accordance with the statute not 
    regarding the action of the House or the other body.
        The Member used to go to the well and say that it was his 
    purpose to obey the law as well as to make it; and since the 
    statute was in existence, he hereby adjourned himself sine die.
        The distinguished gentleman died in office.
        Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. WALKER. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
        Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
        That gentleman was from my home State of Illinois, and used to 
    sit invariably right where the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 
    Gekas] is sitting now.
        The gentleman's name is Noah Mason, a former schoolteacher, 
    very precise; and I can just about mimic him perfectly as he used 
    to get up, as you indicated, on the floor and say, ``Mr. Speaker, 
    it is July 31, and I just want to inform the membership that this 
    Member is going to abide by the law and return to his home district 
    for the benefit of his constituents'' and so forth like that.

                                {time}  1740

        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of 
    objection.

[[Page 875]]

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Washington?
        There was no objection.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the concurrent 
    resolution.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: While Rep. Foley did not directly respond 
to Rep. Walker's question whether Congress would be forced to adjourn 
at the end of July absent adoption of this concurrent resolution, it 
has been the consistent opinion of House and Senate Parliamentarians 
that the constitutional requirement that neither House can adjourn for 
more than three days without the consent of the other (by concurrent 
resolution) would mandate that the House and Senate would not be forced 
to adjourn sine die under this law. Indeed, each House could by simple 
motion adjourn overnight to meet on Aug. 1 or could by unanimous 
consent or motion adjourn for not more than three days. Neither House 
has treated Sec. 132 as the equivalent of a sine die adjournment 
resolution adopted by both Houses, since no message is transmitted 
between the two Houses establishing that date as the sine die 
adjournment day and essentially because the enactment of such a rule 
separately in each House does not constitute contemporaneous 
``consent'' within the meaning of art. I, Sec. 5 of the Constitution. 
Absent specific incorporation by both Houses of such statutory 
provisions enacted in a prior Congress, constituting contemporaneous 
consent in the current Congress, the Parliamentarians agreed that no 
point of order would lie against a motion on July 31(4) to 
adjourn overnight absent adoption of a Sec. 132 concurrent resolution, 
and that language is directory and not mandatory in nature. Since it is 
not mandatory, no privilege need be attached to the Sec. 132 concurrent 
resolution described herein permitting the two Houses to remain in 
session. In the 101st Congress, the House did pass a joint resolution 
reported from the Committee on Rules repealing this statutory 
requirement, but the Senate did not act on the measure.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See Sec. 12.3, supra.
 5. See 136 Cong. Rec. 20178, 20179, 101st Cong. 2d Sess., July 27, 
        1990 (H.J. Res. 7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 12.5 A Senate concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment 
    of the two Houses from the first Friday in August until the second 
    day after Labor Day in an odd-

[[Page 876]]

    numbered year (see 2 USC Sec. 198), or until notified to reassemble 
    pursuant to a joint agreement of the majority or minority 
    leadership of the two Houses, requires a yea and nay vote for 
    adoption.

    On July 30, 1973,(1) the House adopted the following 
concurrent resolution, called up as privileged from the Speaker's table 
by the Majority Leader:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 119 Cong. Rec. 26657, 26658, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    call up the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 42) 
    providing for a conditional adjournment of the two Houses from 
    August 3 until September 5, 1973, and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 42

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Friday, August 
        3, 1973, they shall stand adjourned until 12:00 noon on 
        Wednesday, September 5, 1973, or until 12:00 noon on the second 
        day after their respective Members are notified to reassemble 
        in accordance with section 2 of this resolution, whichever 
        event first occurs.
            Sec. 2. The President pro tempore of the Senate and the 
        Speaker of the House of Representatives shall notify the 
        Members of the Senate and the House, respectively, to 
        reassemble whenever in their opinion legislative expediency 
        shall warrant it or whenever the majority leader of the Senate 
        and the majority leader of the House, acting jointly, or the 
        minority leader of the Senate and the minority leader of the 
        House, acting jointly, file a written request with the 
        Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House that the 
        Congress reassemble for the consideration of legislation.

        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is on concurring in the 
    Senate concurrent resolution. Under the rules of the House, this 
    vote must be taken by the yeas and nays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    370, nays, 22, not voting 41, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 401] . . .

        So the concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Beginning in 1976, this joint minority 
leadership recall provision was eliminated from concurrent resolutions 
providing joint House-Senate recall authority in subsequent Congresses, 
where the minority role was consultative only.

Sec. 12.6 The vote on a House concurrent resolution providing for an 
    adjournment of the two Houses for the August recess in an odd-
    numbered year must be taken by the yeas and nays.

[[Page 877]]

    On July 30, 1971,(1) the House adopted the concurrent 
resolution called up as privileged by the Majority Leader, the Speaker 
indicating that a roll call vote was required under the applicable 
statute, 2 USC Sec. 198:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 117 Cong. Rec. 28332, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Hale] BOGGS [of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 384) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 384

        Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
    concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Friday, August 6, 
    1971, they stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian on Wednesday, 
    September 8, 1971.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Under the rules and under the law, 
    this vote must be taken by the yeas and nays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question is on the resolution.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 334, nays 41, not 
    voting 58, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 224] . . .

        So the concurrent resolution was agreed to. . . .
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                         

[Page 877-895]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
        B. Adjournments for More Than Three Days to Date Certain
 
Sec. 13. Conditional Adjournments; Recall

    On occasion, a concurrent resolution (or a Senate amendment to a 
concurrent resolution) providing for adjournment to a date certain 
included a condition that a designated legislative action first be 
completed before a motion to adjourn pursuant to the resolution could 
be offered.(1) Inclusion of such a condition does not 
destroy the privilege of the resolution (or of the Senate amendment). 
Such a condition, when included in the original text of the resolution 
(or Senate amendment), is to be distinguished from an amendment offered 
from the floor to a concurrent resolution which does not have such a 
contingency, where the amendment proposes to render the adjournment 
authority provided in the resolution contingent upon completion of a 
legislative action. In such a case, the proposed amendment would be 
subject to a point of order as not being germane to the pending 
concurrent resolution.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See Sec. 10.9, supra.
 2. See Sec. 11.2, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The two Houses have adjourned to a date certain, with a provision 
that they may be reassembled earlier by the joint leadership (the 
Speaker and Majority Leader of

[[Page 878]]

the Senate, acting jointly, upon consultation with the two Minority 
Leaders), subject to a stated standard for the decision to reassemble 
early. The standards used for such a decision to reassemble early have 
included ``if legislative expedience so requires'' and ``wherever the 
public interest shall warrant it.''(3) The two Houses have 
adjourned to a date certain with a provision that the House be subject 
to recall by the Speaker. A concurrent resolution may provide that the 
Senate shall adjourn to a date certain after it has disposed of a 
certain bill.(4) Such recall authority may allow the 
respective designees of the Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker to 
reassemble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See, e.g., Sec. 13.1, infra.
 4. See Sec. 10.9, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 78th and 79th Congresses, the two Houses adopted concurrent 
resolutions adjourning to dates certain for ``summer recesses'' with 
leadership recall provisions permitting either the Speaker and 
President of the Senate acting jointly for legislative expediency, or 
the Majority Leaders of the two Houses, acting jointly, or the Minority 
Leaders of the two Houses, acting jointly, to request the consideration 
of legislation.(5) In the 79th Congress, the form was varied 
to provide for alternative dates of Senate adjournment during the 
months of August and September until the same date certain as the 
House.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See Sec. 13.4, infra.
 6. See Sec. 13.3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 80th Congress, the form of the concurrent resolution was 
varied to eliminate the ability of the Minority Leaders of the two 
Houses, acting jointly, to reconvene the two Houses during a lengthy 
adjournment to a date certain (from the end of July to the day prior to 
the expiration of that session in January) authorizing only the 
presiding officers and the Majority Leaders, all acting jointly, to 
recall the two Houses where the public interest shall 
warrant.(7) In 1974, the two Houses, on one occasion again 
provided for minority leadership joint recall during an adjournment to 
a date certain.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See Sec. 13.2, infra.
 8. See Sec. 13.7, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On an occasion in 1947, the House was required to amend the Senate 
concurrent resolution since it had assumed an adjournment on the 
calendar day of July 26, 1947, and the two Houses had remained in 
session beyond midnight.(9) The modern form of concurrent 
resolutions provides for adjournments on the ``legislative

[[Page 879]]

day of '' a specified date, in order to account for this possibility 
and avoid the necessity for an amendment.(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. See Sec. 13.2, infra.
10. See Sec. 13.6, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1947 precedent was the first use of leadership recall language 
wherein the two Houses had shifted political majorities to the party 
opposite that of the President, and the ability of the President's 
minority party leadership to accomplish a joint recall contained in 
resolutions of the previous two Congresses was eliminated. Thus, 
President Truman, desiring to recall the two Houses on Nov. 17, 1947, 
did so by Presidential Proclamation issued Oct. 23, 1947, pursuant to 
Article I of the Constitution. The session was considered a 
continuation of the first session of the 80th Congress, rather than an 
extra special session, because the two Houses had adjourned to a date 
certain of Jan. 2, 1948, rather than sine die. This is in contrast with 
the reconvening of the Congress by proclamation of President Franklin 
D. Roosevelt on Sept. 13, 1939, in ``extra session'', where the Houses 
had previously adjourned sine die until the next regular session in 
Jan. 1940.
    From the 81st Congress until the 91st Congress, leadership recall 
provisions were not included in concurrent resolutions of adjournment, 
either to a date certain or sine die. Then on July 20, 
1970,(11) the House and Senate for the first time adopted an 
``August recess'' concurrent resolution authorizing the Speaker to 
recall the House if legislative expedience so warranted. That single 
House recall authority was not again contained in a concurrent 
resolution of adjournment until 1998, when the two Houses adjourned 
sine die on Oct. 20, 1998,(12) but also provided for 
alternative joint leadership recall authority of the two Houses by the 
two majority leaderships or for a House-only recall by the Speaker in 
the event the public interest warranted it. That recall authority, of a 
``lame duck'' session of the House, was exercised by Speaker Newt 
Gingrich, of Georgia, to reassemble the House on Dec. 17, 
1998,(13) to consider four Articles of Impeachment of 
President William J. Clinton that had been reported by the Committee on 
the Judiciary.(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. See Sec. 13.1, infra.
12. See Sec. 15.3, infra.
13. See Sec. 15.2, infra.
14. See Sec. 15, infra, for discussion of recall provisions included in 
        sine die adjournment concurrent resolutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Joint leadership recall authority was not exercised pursuant to 
authority provided in a concurrent

[[Page 880]]

resolution of adjournment until the 109th Congress, when such authority 
was used twice during the first session. The first instance was on Mar. 
20, 2005, when the House was recalled during an adjournment to a date 
certain (the Senate having remained in session).(15) The 
second instance was on Sept. 2, 2005, during the annual ``August 
recess'', when the two Houses were reconvened (on consecutive days), to 
consider emergency appropriations legislation for disaster relief 
arising from Hurricane Katrina on Aug. 29, 2005.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. See Sec. 13.11, infra.
16. See Sec. 13.12, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 13.1 A concurrent resolution, providing for an adjournment of the 
    House to a date certain or to such earlier date as the House is 
    reassembled by the Speaker, is called up as privileged.

    On July 20, 1970,(1) the following privileged concurrent 
resolution was called up by the Majority Leader:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 24978, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT FROM FRIDAY, AUGUST 14, TO WEDNESDAY, 
                                  SEPTEMBER 9

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 689) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 689

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on Friday, August 14, 
        1970, it shall stand adjourned until 12 o'clock on Wednesday, 
        September 9, 1970, or until 12 o'clock meridian on the third 
        day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to 
        provisions of section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
        whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. At any time during this adjournment of the House, 
        whenever the Speaker of the House determines that legislative 
        expediency so warrants, he shall notify the Members of the 
        House to reassemble.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The House subsequently, on Aug. 10, 
1970,(2) agreed to a Senate amendment to that concurrent 
resolution providing for a shorter adjournment of the Senate to a date 
certain and leaving unamended the House-only recall authority. This is 
the first instance of Speaker House-only recall authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Id. at p. 28037.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 13.2 The House amended a Senate concurrent resolution to provide 
    that the two

[[Page 881]]

    Houses adjourn from the calendar day of Sunday, July 27, 1947, 
    until Jan. 2, 1948, and providing authority for the joint majority 
    leadership to reassemble the two Houses if legislative expediency 
    shall so warrant it.

    On July 26, 1947,(1) the following Senate concurrent 
resolution was laid before the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 93 Cong. Rec. 10521, 80th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 94 Cong. Rec. 
        10247, 80th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 7, 1948 (H. Con. Res. 222), 
        and 94 Cong. Rec. 9348, 80th Cong. 2d Sess., June 19, 1948 (H. 
        Con. Res. 218).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             adjournment resolution

        The SPEAKER.(2) The Chair lays before the House a 
    Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 33), which the Clerk 
    will report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Saturday, July 
        26, 1947, they shall stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian 
        on Friday, January 2, 1948, or until 12 o'clock meridian on the 
        third day after the respective Members are notified to 
        reassemble in accordance with section 2 of this resolution, 
        whichever event first occurs.
            Sec. 2. The President pro tempore of the Senate, the 
        Speaker of the House of Representatives, the majority leader of 
        the Senate, and the majority leader of the House of 
        Representatives, all acting jointly, shall notify the Members 
        of the Senate and the House respectively, to reassemble 
        whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant 
        it.

        The resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. . . .

                             adjournment resolution

        Mr. [Charles A.] HALLECK [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent to vacate the proceedings by which the House 
    concurred in Senate Concurrent Resolution 33.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Indiana?
        There was no objection.
        Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment to Senate 
    Concurrent Resolution 33 and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Halleck: On page 1 of the 
        amendment strike out ``Saturday, July 26, 1947'' and insert 
        ``Sunday, July 27, 1947.''

        The amendment was agreed to.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The need for this amendment changing the 
calendar day is obviated in modern practice by using ``legislative 
days,'' rather than calendar days, in the original resolution, thereby 
allowing the House to recess or otherwise remain in session beyond 
midnight while still remaining in the same legislative day.

[[Page 882]]

Sec. 13.3 The House agreed to a concurrent resolution providing that 
    the House adjourn from July 21, 1945, to Oct. 8, 1945, giving 
    consent to the Senate to adjourn during the month of August or 
    September until that same date, and making provision for the 
    reassembling of the two Houses upon joint recall from majority or 
    minority leaders if legislative expediency shall so warrant it.

    On July 18, 1945,(1) the Majority Leader offered the 
following concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 91 Cong. Rec. 7733, 7734, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 90 Cong. 
        Rec. 8108, 8109, 78th Cong. 2d Sess., Sept. 21, 1944 (S. Con. 
        Res. 54).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 adjourment of the house until october 8, 1945

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer a privileged resolution (H. Con. Res. 68) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on Saturday, July 21, 
        1945, it stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian on Monday, 
        October 8, 1945, or until 12 o'clock meridian on the third day 
        after Members are notified to reassemble in accordance with 
        section 3 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
        first.
            Sec. 2. That the consent of the House of Representatives is 
        hereby given to an adjournment of the Senate at any time during 
        the month of August or September, 1945, until 12 o'clock 
        meridian on Monday, October 8, 1945, or until 12 o'clock 
        meridian on the third day after Members are notified to 
        reassemble in accordance with section 3 of this concurrent 
        resolution, whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 3. The President pro tempore of the Senate and the 
        Speaker of the House of Representatives shall notify the 
        Members of the Senate and the House, respectively, to 
        reassemble whenever in their opinion legislative expediency 
        shall warrant it or whenever the majority leader of the Senate 
        and the majority leader of the House, acting jointly, or the 
        minority leader of the Senate and the minority leader of the 
        House, acting jointly, file a written request with the 
        Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House that the 
        Congress reassemble for the consideration of legislation. . . .

        The resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 13.4 The House agreed to a Senate concurrent resolution providing 
    for adjournment of the two Houses from July 8, 1943, to Sept. 14, 
    1943, or until a time when Members were notified to reassemble in 
    accordance with a process set out therein for presiding officers or 
    majority or minority party leaders acting jointly to recall them if 
    legislative expediency so warranted.

[[Page 883]]

    On July 8, 1943,(1) the following Senate concurrent 
resolution was called up by unanimous consent in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 89 Cong. Rec. 7516, 78th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 90 Cong. Rec. 
        6667, 78th Cong. 2d Sess., June 23, 1944.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             adjournment resolution

        Mr. [Robert] RAMSPECK [of Georgia]. Mr. Speaker, I call up 
    Senate Concurrent Resolution 17.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Thursday, July 
        8, 1943, they shall stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian 
        on Tuesday, September 14, 1943, or until 12 o'clock meridian on 
        the third day after their respective Members are notified to 
        reassemble in accordance with section 2 of this resolution, 
        whichever event first occurs.
            Sec. 2. The President of the Senate and the Speaker of the 
        House of Representatives shall notify the Members of the Senate 
        and the House, respectively, to reassemble whenever in their 
        opinion legislative expediency shall warrant it or whenever the 
        majority leader of the Senate and the majority leader of the 
        House, acting jointly, or the minority leader of the Senate and 
        the minority leader of the House, acting jointly, file a 
        written request with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk 
        of the House that the Congress reassemble for the consideration 
        of legislation.

        Mr. RAMSPECK. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the 
    resolution.
        Mr. [John E.] RANKIN [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is on ordering the 
    previous question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The previous question was ordered.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. . . .

    Parliamentarian's Note: Because the motion for the previous 
question took precedence over an amendment, Rep. Rankin was unable to 
offer an amendment and was relegated to a subsequent 
explanation(3) of his intent, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 89 Cong. Rec. 7516, 78th Cong. 1st Sess., July 8, 1943.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. RAMSPECK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
    notwithstanding the adjournment of the House until September 14, 
    1943, the Clerk of the House be authorized to receive messages from 
    the Senate.
        Mr. RANKIN. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I wish 
    to explain to the House that the amendment which I proposed to 
    offer a moment ago provided for striking out the words ``September 
    14'' in the adjournment resolution and inserting the date of 
    ``August 10.'' In my opinion, Congress is making a serious mistake 
    in adjourning for 2 months in view of the critical conditions now 
    facing the country.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Georgia?
        There was no objection.

[[Page 884]]

Recall Authority

Sec. 13.5 The House concurred in a Senate concurrent resolution 
    (rendered nonprivileged by Sec. 309 of the Budget Act for 
    noncompletion of House action on 13 regular general appropriation 
    bills but considered pursuant to a special order from the Committee 
    on Rules) providing for adjournment (or recess) for more than three 
    days (1) of the House, from a specific legislative day in July to a 
    date certain in September, and (2) of the Senate, from alternate 
    departure dates to a date certain, each subject to joint leadership 
    recall by the Speaker and the Majority Leader or their designees 
    whom the Speaker then named.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See also Sec. 15.12, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 26, 2002,(2) the Speaker pro tempore laid before 
the House the following Senate concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 148 Cong. Rec. 15138, 15139, 107th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONAL RECESS OR ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE 
                          AND ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson).(3) Pursuant 
    to section 2 of House Resolution 461, the Chair lays before the 
    House the following Senate concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Michael K. Simpson (ID).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 132

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That, in consonance with section 132(a) of the 
        Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, when the Senate 
        recesses or adjourns at the close of business on Thursday, 
        August 1, 2002, Friday, August 2, 2002, or Saturday, August 3, 
        2002, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
        recessed or adjourned until 12:00 noon on Tuesday, September 3, 
        2002, or until such other time on that day as may be specified 
        by its Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to recess 
        or adjourn, or until Members are notified to reassemble 
        pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever 
        occurs first; and that when the House adjourns on the 
        legislative day of Friday, July 26, 2002, on a motion offered 
        by its Majority Leader or his designee pursuant to this 
        concurrent resolution, it stand adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on 
        Wednesday, September 4, 2002, or until Members are notified to 
        reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
        whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
        of the House, or their respective designees, acting jointly 
        after consultation with the Minority Leader of the Senate and 
        the Minority Leader of the House, shall notify the Members of 
        the Senate and House, respectively, to reassemble at such place 
        and time as they may designate whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.

[[Page 885]]

        A motion to reconsider was laid on the 
    table.                          -------------------

                                RECALL DESIGNEE

        The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following 
    communication from the Speaker of the House of Representatives:

                                                   Washington, DC,

                                                    July 27, 2002.

        Pursuant to section 2 of Senate Concurrent Resolution 132, I 
    hereby designate Representative Richard K. Armey of Texas to act 
    jointly with the Majority Leader of the Senate or his designee, in 
    the event of my death or inability, to notify the Members of the 
    House and the Senate, respectively, of any reassembly under that 
    concurrent resolution. In the event of the death or inability of my 
    designee, the alternate Members of the House listed in the letter 
    bearing this date that I have placed with the Clerk are designated, 
    in turn, for the same purpose.

                                                J. Dennis Hastert,

                          Speaker of the House of Representatives.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Because the Senate concurrent resolution 
provided for an adjournment in July, it was in violation of Sec. 309 of 
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and hence was not privileged for 
consideration in the House. It did not require the yeas and nays since 
consideration was in an even-numbered year. On June 27, 
2002,(4) the House adopted House Resolution 461, a special 
order reported from the Committee on Rules, providing as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 148 Cong. Rec. 11754, 107th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Sec. 2. That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall 
        be in order, any rule of the House to the contrary 
        notwithstanding, to consider concurrent resolutions providing 
        for adjournment of the House and Senate during the month of 
        July.

    The special order was necessary to waive points of order against 
Senate Concurrent Resolution 132 as in violation of Sec. 309 of the 
Budget Act.

Sec. 13.6 In October 2001, after the ``9/11'' terrorist attacks, the 
    ``recall'' language in a concurrent resolution of adjournment 
    included for the first time a ``place'' element (in addition to the 
    customary ``time'' element) to authorize, during adjournment to a 
    date certain, a joint recall to another place (other than the seat 
    of Government) consistent with clause 4 of Sec. 5 of Article I of 
    the Constitution.

    On Oct. 17, 2001,(1) the following privileged concurrent 
resolution was offered by the Majority Leader:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 147 Cong. Rec. 20210, 20211, 107th Cong. 1st Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 886]]

    PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 
     2001, TO TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001, AND FOR CONDITIONAL RECESS OR 
      ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE FROM WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2001, OR 
          THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2001, TO TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001

        Mr. [Richard K.] ARMEY [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 251) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 251

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of Wednesday, October 17, 2001, it stand adjourned until 
        12:30 p.m on Tuesday, October 23, 2001, for morning hour 
        debate, or until Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to 
        section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
        first; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the 
        close of business on Wednesday, October 17, 2001, or Thursday, 
        October 18, 2001, on a motion offered pursuant to this 
        concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, 
        it stand recessed or adjourned until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 
        October 23, 2001, or at such other time on that day as may be 
        specified by its Majority Leader or his designee in the motion 
        to recess or adjourn, or until Members are notified to 
        reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
        whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and the Senate, 
        respectively, to reassembly at such place and time as they may 
        designate whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall 
        warrant it.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 13.7 The House concurred in Senate amendments to a House 
    concurrent resolution adding Senate adjournment dates and inserting 
    joint Presiding Officer or separate joint majority or minority 
    leadership recall authority.

    On Apr. 11, 1974,(1) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 120 Cong. Rec. 10775, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CONGRESS FROM APRIL 11, 1974, 
                              UNTIL APRIL 22, 1974

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the concurrent resolution (H. 
    Con. Res. 475), providing for a conditional adjournment of the 
    House from April 11 until April 22, 1974, with the Senate 
    amendments thereto.
        The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
        The Clerk read the Senate amendments, as follows:

            Page 1, strike out line 2 and insert: ``when the two Houses 
        adjourn

[[Page 887]]

        on Thursday, April 11, 1974, they stand''.
            Page 1, line 4, strike out ``its Members'' and insert: 
        ``their respective Members''.
            Page 1, strike out lines 7 to 13, inclusive, and insert:
            ``Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House of Representatives and 
        the President pro tempore of the Senate shall notify the 
        Members of the House and Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
        whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant 
        it, or whenever the majority leader of the Senate, and the 
        majority leader of the House, acting jointly, or the minority 
        leader of the Senate and the minority leader of the House, 
        acting jointly, file a written request with the Secretary of 
        the Senate and the Clerk of the House that the Congress 
        reassemble for the consideration of legislation.''
            Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
        providing for a conditional adjournment of the House and Senate 
        from April 11 until April 22, 1974.''

        The Senate amendments were concurred in.
        The concurrent resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The customary practice in preparing an 
adjournment resolution is for the leadership of the originating House, 
after consultation with the leadership of the other House, to include 
in the resolution alternative or joint adjournment and reconvening 
dates for both Houses so as to avoid the necessity for amendment by the 
second House. However, in the instance set forth above, the House 
originated the concurrent resolution with no Senate dates and without 
joint recall authority.

Theresa Schiavo

Sec. 13.8 The Senate reconvened on a date earlier than the date to 
    which it had adjourned, such reconvening being ordered under 
    authority previously provided the joint Senate leadership in a 
    Senate resolution of the previous Congress which remained in place 
    as a standing order of the Senate.

    Parliamentarian's Note: In March 2005, during the 109th Congress, 
as the time for the beginning of the scheduled two-week Easter recess 
neared, the two Houses became embroiled in events surrounding legal 
challenges to the removal of life support from a woman in Florida named 
Theresa Marie Schiavo.
    Each of the two Houses had adjourned on Thursday, Mar. 17, to meet 
on Monday, Mar. 21. The adjournment of the House to Monday, Mar. 21, 
was conditional: if it sooner received a message transmitting the 
Senate's adoption of a concurrent resolution of adjournment originated 
by the House on that Thursday, then it would have

[[Page 888]]

stood adjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution. However, the 
Senate had adjourned without having adopted the adjournment resolution 
originated by the House.
    As Ms. Schiavo's chances for survival decreased daily, pressure 
built on both Houses to reconvene over the weekend to consider 
legislation relating to her circumstances.
    During the previous year, the Senate had adopted a resolution (S. 
Res. 296 of the 108th Congress) authorizing its Majority and Minority 
Leaders, acting jointly, to ``modify any order for the time or place of 
the convening of the Senate'' when ``such action is warranted by 
intervening circumstances.'' (This resolution was adopted by the Senate 
without advance notice to or consultation with the House, resulting in 
concern by the House leadership that the Senate might use the authority 
provided in the Senate resolution to vary the duration of a Senate 
adjournment of more than three days to which the House had given its 
consent through adoption of a concurrent resolution. The Senate 
resolution also concerned the House leadership because it required the 
``concurrence'' of the two Senate leaders rather than mere 
consultation, thereby tending to raise the standard for bipartisan 
action in such matters.) In the March 2005 instance, the Senate was not 
adjourned for more than three days or pursuant to an adjournment 
resolution. So, its prospective use of Senate Resolution 296 related 
only to an over-the-weekend adjournment.
    Senate Resolution 296 provided that body with very flexible 
authority to vary its reconvening from an adjournment overnight or over 
a weekend. The House has such authority only in the case of an imminent 
impairment at the place of convening (see Rule I clause 12(c), House 
Rules and Manual Sec. 639 [2007]). The Senate leadership used that 
authority to reconvene the Senate on Saturday, Mar. 19, in order to 
adopt the adjournment resolution (H. Con. Res. 103)(1) that, 
in turn, would put the House in adjournment pursuant to that concurrent 
resolution upon receipt by the House Clerk of the formal notification 
of that Senate action. Once the House stood adjourned pursuant to that 
concurrent resolution, the recall authority provided in Sec. 2 thereof 
was available to provide for reassembly of the House on Sunday, Mar. 
20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See 151 Cong. Rec. 5143, 109th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Mar. 17, 2005,(2) the following proceedings occurred 
in the Senate:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Id. at pp. 5391, 5392.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 889]]

                       ORDERS FOR MONDAY, MARCH 21, 2005

        Mr. [William H.] FRIST [of Tennessee]. Mr. President, I ask 
    unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business 
    today, it adjourn until 4 p.m. on Monday, March 21; I further ask 
    that following the prayer and the pledge, the morning hour be 
    deemed to have expired, the Journal of the proceedings be approved 
    to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and the Senate 
    begin a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to 
    speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.
        The PRESIDING OFFICER.(3) Without objection, it is 
    so ordered. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John E. Sununu (NH).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY, MARCH 21, 2005 AT 4 P.M.

        Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, if there is no further business to 
    come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
    stand in adjournment under the previous order.
        There being no objection, the Senate, at 11:48 p.m., adjourned 
    until Monday, March 21, 2005, at 4 p.m.

    On Mar. 19, 2005,(4) the following occurred in the 
Senate:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 151 Cong. Rec. 5444, 109th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO

        Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, the Congress has been working nonstop 
    over the last 3 days to do its part to uphold human dignity and 
    affirm the culture of life. I am pleased to announce that the House 
    and Senate Republican leadership have reached an agreement on a 
    legislative solution. The Senate has come in today to pass an 
    adjournment resolution which we will send shortly to the House of 
    Representatives. Procedurally, this action will have the effect of 
    bringing the House into session so they can either pass compromise 
    legislation by unanimous consent on Sunday or place this 
    legislation on the suspension calendar for consideration early 
    Monday morning. The Senate will be prepared to reconvene as soon as 
    the House passes this new legislation.
        It has been more than 24 hours since Terri Schiavo's feeding 
    tube was removed. Under the legislation we will soon consider, 
    Terri Schiavo will have another chance. It is a simple bill, only 
    two pages long. It allows Terri's case to be heard in Federal 
    court. More specifically, it allows a Federal district judge to 
    consider a claim ``by or on behalf of Theresa Marie Schiavo for the 
    alleged violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the 
    Constitution or laws of the United States relating to the 
    withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment 
    necessary to sustain her life.''
        I am pleased with our progress thus far, and I am committed as 
    leader to see this legislation pass and give Terri Schiavo one last 
    chance at life.

Sec. 13.9 The Senate agreed to a House concurrent resolution of 
    adjournment, thereby enabling the recall authority provided in 
    Sec. 2 of that resolution.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The House adopted House Concurrent

[[Page 890]]

Resolution 103 on Thursday, Mar. 17, 2005, but could not use its recall 
provision until such time as it actually stood adjourned pursuant to 
that concurrent resolution(1) which depended on its receipt 
of a message from the Senate announcing the Senate's concurrence 
therein. A new adjournment resolution (S. Con. Res. 23) was adopted 
Mar. 20, 2005, to provide for an Easter recess after the reassembly 
under House Concurrent Resolution 103.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. For the notice provided to reassemble the House for impeachment 
        proceedings against President Clinton, see Sec. 15.3, infra. 
        For the reassembly of both Houses during an August recess for 
        consideration of legislation relating to Hurricane Katrina, see 
        Sec. 13.12, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Mar. 19, 2005,(2) the following occurred in the 
Senate:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 151 Cong. Rec. 5444, 109th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

        Mr. [William H.] FRIST [of Tennessee]. Mr. President, I ask 
    unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the adjournment 
    resolution (H. Con. Res. 103) which is at the desk, provided that 
    the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid 
    upon the table.
        The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore.(3) Without 
    objection, it is so ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Richard J. Santorum (PA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The resolution was agreed to, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 103

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of Thursday, March 17, 2005, Friday, March 18, 2005, or 
        Saturday, March 19, 2005, on a motion offered pursuant to this 
        concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, 
        it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, April 5, 2005, or 
        until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this 
        concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when 
        the Senate recesses or adjourns on any day from Thursday, March 
        17, 2005, through Saturday, March 26, 2005, on a motion offered 
        pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader 
        or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on 
        Monday, April 4, 2005, or at such other time on that day as may 
        be specified by its Majority Leader or his designee in the 
        motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time of any 
        reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
        whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, or their respective designees, acting jointly after 
        consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the 
        Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the 
        House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble at such place 
        and time as they may designate whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I want to be clear about what we just 
    agreed to.
        Today we will not be adjourning under the authority provided by 
    the resolution that we just considered. This adjournment resolution 
    will now

[[Page 891]]

    allow the House to be called into session to consider legislative 
    matters. At the close of business today, we will adjourn until 
    Sunday. Once we are able to complete our work as it relates to 
    Theresa Marie Schiavo, we are prepared to clear a new adjournment 
    resolution so that we may begin the Easter recess.

Sec. 13.10 The Senate fixed the time to which it would adjourn as 2 
    p.m. on the following day (Sunday) and adjourned under that order 
    (rather than under the concurrent resolution of adjournment just 
    adopted).

    On Mar. 19, 2005,(1) the following proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 151 Cong. Rec. 5445, 109th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       ORDERS FOR SUNDAY, MARCH 20, 2005

        Mr. [William H.] FRIST [of Tennessee]. Mr. President, I ask 
    unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business 
    today, the Senate adjourn until 2 p.m. on Sunday, March 20. I 
    further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour 
    be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, 
    the time of the two leaders be reserved, and the Senate then begin 
    a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for 
    up to 10 minutes each.
        The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore.(2) Without 
    objection, it is so ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Richard J. Santorum 
        (PA).                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                    PROGRAM

        Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, tomorrow the Senate will convene for 
    a short period of morning business. There will be no rollcall votes 
    tomorrow. It appears that we have achieved compromise language with 
    the House with respect to the Schiavo situation. It is my hope that 
    the House will act on this language and send it to us early 
    tomorrow afternoon, and I will have more to say on that 
    tomorrow.                          -------------------

                     ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 2 P.M. TOMORROW

        Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, if there is no further business to 
    come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
    stand in adjournment under the previous order.
        There being no objection, the Senate, at 6:22 p.m., adjourned 
    until Sunday, March 20, 2005, at 2 p.m.

Sec. 13.11 Privileged concurrent resolution providing for adjournment 
    (or recess) of each House for more than three days from separate, 
    alternate dates of departure to separate dates certain, subject to 
    joint leadership recall.

    Parliamentarian's Note: In the 109th Congress, first session, the 
first ``Easter recess'' adjournment resolution (H. Con. Res. 103), 
adopted by the House on Mar. 17, 2005, and by the Senate on Mar. 19, 
2005, was exhausted by reassembly thereunder on Mar. 20,

[[Page 892]]

2005. When the Senate originated Senate Concurrent Resolution 23, it 
included a multitude of get-away days for the House in case it was 
unable to pass S. 686, the measure the House was recalled to consider.
    On Sunday, Mar, 20, 2005,(1) two reports were filed from 
the Committee on Rules, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 151 Cong. Rec. 5481, 5482, 109th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        REPORT ON RESOLUTION WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE 
           XXIII WITH RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS

        Mr. GINGREY, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a 
    privileged report (Rept. No. 109-27) on the resolution (H. Res. 
    181) waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect 
    to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee 
    on Rules, which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to 
    be printed.                          -------------------

        REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF S. 686, FOR 
               THE RELIEF OF THE PARENTS OF THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO

        Mr. GINGREY, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a 
    privileged report (Rept. No. 109-28) on the resolution (H. Res. 
    182) providing for consideration of the Senate bill (S. 686) for 
    the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo, which was 
    referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
    printed.                          -------------------

         PROVIDING FOR A CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT OR RECESS OF THE TWO 
                                     HOUSES

        The Speaker laid before the House the following privileged 
    Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 23) providing for a 
    conditional adjournment or recess of the Senate, and a conditional 
    adjournment of the House of Representatives.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 23

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate recesses or adjourns on any 
        day from Sunday, March 20, 2005, through Sunday, April 3, 2005, 
        on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by 
        its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or 
        adjourned until noon on Monday, April 4, 2005, or until such 
        other time as may be specified by the Majority Leader or his 
        designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time 
        of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
        resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the House 
        adjourns on any day from Sunday, March 20, 2005, through 
        Monday, April 4, 2005, on a motion offered pursuant to this 
        concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, 
        it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, April 5, 2005, or 
        until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this 
        concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
        of the House, or their respective designees, acting jointly 
        after consultation with the Minority Leader of the Senate and 
        the Minority Leader of the House, shall notify the Members of 
        the Senate and House, respectively,

[[Page 893]]

        to reassemble at such place and time as they may designate 
        whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant 
        it.

        The SPEAKER.(2) Without objection, the concurrent 
    resolution is concurred in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. J. Dennis Hastert (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                                ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Tom] DeLAY [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Senate 
    Concurrent Resolution 23, 109th Congress, I move that the House do 
    now adjourn.
        The motion was agreed to.
        The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the provisions of Senate Concurrent 
    Resolution 23, 109th Congress, the House stands adjourned until 2 
    p.m. Tuesday, April 5, 2005.
        Thereupon (at 12 o'clock and 46 minutes a.m., Monday, March 21, 
    2005), pursuant to Senate Concurrent Resolution 23, 109th Congress, 
    the House adjourned until Tuesday, April 5, 2005, at 2 p.m.

Hurricane Katrina

Sec. 13.12 Pursuant to notice issued jointly by the Speaker and the 
    Senate Majority Leader under the recall authority conferred in a 
    concurrent resolution of adjournment, the House reassembled from 
    its adjournment pursuant to that concurrent resolution.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Senate had reassembled on the previous 
day. As with the previous recall during the first session of the 109th 
Congress (see Sec. 13.9, supra), Members were given minimal notice of 
the reassembly. The bicameral leadership decided on Thursday, Sept. 1, 
2005, that both Houses would have to come back early from the summer 
recess to address disaster-relief legislation relating to Hurricane 
Katrina. The Senate reassembled at 10 p.m. that night, and the House at 
1 p.m. the next day, Friday, Sept. 2.
    Thus Members had official notice of (at most) 19 hours (compared to 
about 17 hours for the reassembly of Mar. 20, 2005, and about three 
days for the House-only recall for impeachment proceedings on Dec. 17, 
1998).
    The Senate and the House reassembled on different days. In 
subsequent resolutions the language used for recall authority in 
concurrent resolutions of adjournment was modified to provide explicit 
authority to reassemble on separate days, by alluding to reassembly of 
the two Houses ``at such place and respective time'' as the joint 
leadership may designate.

[[Page 894]]

    On Sept. 2, 2005,(1) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 151 Cong. Rec. 19424, 109th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Pursuant to section 2 of House Concurrent Resolution 225, 109th 
    Congress, the House met at 1 p.m. and was called to order by the 
    Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
    DeLay).                          -------------------

                     DESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        The Speaker pro tempore laid before the House the following 
    communication from the Speaker:

                                                   Washington, DC,
                                                September 2, 2005.

            I hereby appoint the Honorable Tom Delay to act as Speaker 
        pro tempore on this day.

                                                J. Dennis Hastert,

                                          Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives.                          -------------------

                    NOTIFICATION OF REASSEMBLING OF CONGRESS

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair lays before the House the 
    text of the formal notification sent to Members on Thursday, 
    September 1, 2005, of the reassembling of the House.

                                    Congress of the United States,
                                Washington, DC, September 1, 2005.

        Dear Colleague: Pursuant to section 2 of House Concurrent 
    Resolution 225, after consultation with the Minority Leader of the 
    House of Representatives and the Minority Leader of the Senate, we 
    hereby notify the Members of the Senate to reassemble at 10:00 p.m. 
    on Thursday, September 1, 2005, and the members of the House of 
    Representatives to reassemble at 1:00 p.m. on Friday, September 2, 
    2005.

              Sincerely,

                                                J. Dennis Hastert,

                                             Speaker of the House.

                                           William H. Frist, M.D.,

                                    Majority Leader of the Senate.

Sec. 13.13 The two Houses adopted a concurrent resolution providing for 
    adjournment (or recess) of each House, the Senate from alternate 
    departure dates, to a common date certain, subject to joint 
    leadership recall authority.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Although the contemplated period of 
adjournment for the House would not exceed three constitutional days, a 
concurrent resolution was used not only to permit the Senate to span 
Thursday and Tuesday but also to enable a further recall during the 
three-day Labor Day weekend, should the need arise.
    On Sept. 2, 2005,(1) the following occurred in the 
House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Id. at p. 19443.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PROVIDING FOR A CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT OR RECESS OF THE TWO HOUSES

        The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following 
    privileged Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con.

[[Page 895]]

    Res. 51) providing for a conditional adjournment or recess of the 
    Senate, and a conditional adjournment of the House of 
    Representatives.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 51

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the 
        close of business on Thursday, September 1, or on Friday, 
        September 2, 2005, on a motion offered pursuant to this 
        concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, 
        it stand recessed or adjourned until 12 noon on Tuesday, 
        September 6, 2005, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant 
        to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
        first; and that when the House adjourns on the legislative day 
        of Friday, September 2, 2005, on a motion offered pursuant to 
        this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his 
        designee, it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, September 
        6, 2005, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to 
        section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
        first.
            Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
        of the House, or their respective designees, acting jointly 
        after consultation with the Minority Leader of the Senate and 
        the Minority Leader of the House, shall notify the Members of 
        the Senate and House, respectively, to reassemble at such place 
        and time as they may designate whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Without objection, the 
    Senate concurrent resolution is concurred in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Tom DeLay (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

[[Page 896]]

                       

[Page 896-916]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
                        C. Adjournment Sine Die
 
Sec. 14. In General; Privilege; Inclusion of Other Matter


    Adjournment sine die (literally ``without day,'' that is, without 
setting the date for reconvening in the concurrent resolution) is used 
to terminate a session of a Congress. Since under art. I, Sec. 5, 
clause 4 of the Constitution neither House may adjourn for more than 
three days without the consent of the other House, and since Congress 
normally completes its work for a session more than three days prior to 
the constitutional date for the convening of the next session, in the 
usual practice adjournment sine die is accomplished by the adoption of 
a concurrent resolution. This is the practice even where the final 
adjournment of a session is only one or two days before the 
constitutional end of term.(1) A sine die adjournment 
resolution need not specify the date of reconvening because under 
Sec. 2 of the 20th Amendment, a regular session of a Congress begins at 
noon of Jan. 3 of every year, unless Congress sets a different date by 
law.(2) A session terminates automatically at the end of the 
constitutional term.(3) Until recent years, sine die 
adjournments in even-numbered (election) years were normally taken by 
October (under the assumption that the business of the Congress be 
completed before Members to the next Congress are elected), and usually 
somewhat later in nonelection odd-numbered years. In more recent 
(105th-108th) Congresses, however, the final sine die adjournment of 
Congress has come after a ``lame-duck'' session following the election 
of Members to the Congress beginning in January of the subsequent odd-
numbered year.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See Sec. 14.1, infra.
 2. See Ch. 1, Sec. 3, supra.
 3. See Sec. Sec. 14.11, 14.12, infra.
 4. See 150 Cong. Rec. 25728, 108th Cong. 2d Sess., Dec. 7, 2004 (H. 
        Con. Res. 531); 148 Cong. Rec. 23523, 107th Cong. 2d Sess., 
        Nov. 22, 2002 (S Con. Res. 160); 146 Cong. Rec. 27111, 106th 
        Cong. 2d Sess., Dec. 15, 2000 (H. Con. Res. 446); and 144 Cong. 
        Rec. 28113, 105th Cong. 2d Sess., Dec. 19, 1998 (H. Con. Res. 
        353). See also House Rules and Manual Sec. 84 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sine die adjournment concurrent resolutions may be called up from 
the floor as privileged, or if originating in the Senate, may be laid 
before the House from the Speaker's table as privileged. While such a 
resolution is not debatable, a Member may be recognized during its 
consideration either by unanimous consent or

[[Page 897]]

under a reservation of objection to a unanimous-consent request that 
the resolution be agreed to.(5) The resolution requires a 
quorum for adoption.(6) Unless called up as privileged, a 
measure relating to ``final'' adjournment of Congress is within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules.(7) Once a session of 
Congress has been adjourned sine die, it may be reconvened either 
pursuant to leadership recall provisions contained in the concurrent 
resolution(8) or by the President under the Constitution 
``on extraordinary Occasions''.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See Sec. 14.9, infra.
 6. See Sec. 14.2, infra.
 7. Rule X clause 1(n)(2), House Rules and Manual Sec. 733 (2007).
 8. See Sec. 15, infra.
 9. U.S. Const. art. II, Sec.  3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A sine die resolution may specify the particular legislative or 
calendar day of adjournment or may specify two or more optional dates, 
in the latter case effected by a motion of the Majority Leader or the 
Majority Leader's designee, and may be amended to provide for an 
adjournment on a date other than that specified.(10) A 
resolution may provide for an adjournment to a date certain, unless the 
House sooner received a specified message from the Senate that it has 
adopted a House-passed sine die adjournment resolution, in which case 
it would stand adjourned sine die.(11) A resolution 
providing sine die adjournment of a first session may include a 
provision that when the second session convenes, the two Houses may not 
conduct organizational or legislative business but shall adjourn on 
that day to a date certain, unless sooner recalled. However, such a 
resolution is not privileged since containing an order of business in 
addition to the sine die adjournment.(12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. See, e.g., Sec. 14.6, infra.
11. See Sec. Sec. 14.14, 15.1, infra.
12. See Sec. 14.13, infra; but see Sec. 14.14, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Inclusion in such a resolution of a section asserting congressional 
prerogatives regarding ``pocket vetoes'' during sine die periods does 
not destroy the privilege of the concurrent resolution, since 
constituting a separate question of privilege.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. See also Sec. Sec. 14.15, 14.16, 
        infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Privileged Status

Sec. 14.1 A concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the 
    two Houses sine die is called up as privileged.

    On Dec. 31, 1970,(1) the concurrent resolution below was 
called

[[Page 898]]

up as privileged by the Majority Leader:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 44308, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 799) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 799

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That the two Houses of Congress shall adjourn on 
        Saturday, January 2, 1971, and that when they adjourn on said 
        day, they stand adjourned sine die.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. For additional instances of first session adjournments, see 
        Sec. 14.6, infra. See also 117 Cong. Rec. 47676, 92d Cong. 1st 
        Sess., Dec. 17, 1971 (H. Con. Res. 498); and 107 Cong. Rec. 
        21528, 87th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 27, 1961 (Calendar Day) (S. 
        Con. Res. 55).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quorum Requirement

Sec. 14.2 A quorum is required for the adoption of a concurrent 
    resolution providing for a sine die adjournment of the two Houses.

    On Oct. 18, 1972,(1) when a concurrent resolution to the 
effect that Congress adjourn sine die was offered in the House, a point 
of order was made that a quorum was not present on the question of 
adoption:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 118 Cong. Rec. 37061, 37062, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 726) and ask 
    for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 726

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That the two Houses of Congress shall adjourn on 
        Wednesday, October 18, 1972, and that when they adjourn on said 
        day, they stand adjourned sine die.

        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is on the concurrent 
    resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. [James G.] O'HARA [of Michigan]. 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, and the Clerk 
    will call the roll.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 240, nays 21, not 
    voting 170, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 460] . . .

        So the concurrent resolution was agreed to.

Rejection of Resolution

Sec. 14.3 The House has rejected a concurrent resolution providing for 
    adjournment sine die.

[[Page 899]]

    On July 29, 1954,(1) the House by a yea and nay vote 
rejected a concurrent resolution providing for adjournment sine die:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 100 Cong. Rec. 12561, 12562, 83d Cong. 2d Sess. See also H. Jour. 
        pp. 812, 813 (1954).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles A.] HALLECK [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged resolution (H. Con. Res. 265) and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring therein), That the two Houses of Congress shall 
        adjourn on Saturday, July 31, 1954, and that when they adjourn 
        on said day they stand adjourned sine die.

        Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the 
    resolution.
        The previous question was ordered.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is on the passage of 
    the resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, on 
    that I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 183, nays 193, not 
    voting 56, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 126] . . .

        So the concurrent resolution was rejected.

Effect of Rejection of Previous Resolution

Sec. 14.4 Where the House rejected a concurrent resolution providing 
    for adjournment sine die, a second identical concurrent resolution 
    providing for adjournment sine die was in order during the same 
    week inasmuch as there had been intervening business.

    On July 30, 1954,(1) a Member objected to a second 
concurrent resolution for adjournment sine die:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 100 Cong. Rec. 12810, 12811, 83d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


        Mr. [Charles A.] HALLECK [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    concurrent resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

                        House Concurrent Resolution 266

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring therein), That the two Houses of Congress shall 
        adjourn on Saturday, July 31, 1954, and that when they adjourn 
        on said day they stand adjourned sine die. . . .

        Mr. [Herman P.] EBERHARTER [of Pennsylvania]. My parliamentary 
    inquiry is this: Within this week the House voted on an exactly 
    similar resolution. Thereafter a motion to reconsider was laid on 
    the table. I make the point of order, Mr. Speaker, that the motion 
    to reconsider having been laid on the table on exactly the same 
    resolution, it is not again in order at this time.

[[Page 900]]

        The SPEAKER.(2) In reply to the gentleman from 
    Pennsylvania, the Chair will say that the House has transacted 
    considerable legislative business since the last resolution was 
    defeated on a preceding day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question is on the concurrent resolution.

Changing Date of Adjournment

Sec. 14.5 The House agreed to a Senate amendment in the nature of a 
    substitute to a concurrent resolution providing for adjournment 
    sine die, changing the date of adjournment from Oct. 11, 1984, to 
    that date or Oct. 12, 1984.

    On Oct. 11, 1984,(1) the Speaker laid before the House 
as privileged a Senate amendment to a concurrent resolution providing 
for adjournment sine die:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 130 Cong. Rec. 32314, 98th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The Chair lays before 
    the House the following privileged message from the Senate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Frank Harrison (PA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved, That the concurrent resolution from the House of 
        Representatives (H. Con. Res. 377) entitled ``Concurrent 
        resolution providing for the sine die adjournment of the 
        Ninety-eighth Congress''.

        The Clerk read the Senate amendment, as follows:

            Strike out all after the resolving clause and insert:
        That the two Houses of Congress shall adjourn on Thursday, 
        October 11, 1984, or on Friday October 12, 1984, and that when 
        they adjourn on said day, they stand adjourned sine die.

                             parliamentary inquiry

        Mr. [Tom] LOEFFLER [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, for the 
    clarification of the body, is it correct to assume that this 
    technical amendment to the sine die resolution does not include the 
    so-called call-back provision but, rather, addresses the dates of 
    today and tomorrow so that we might conclude our work without 
    having to stop the clock?
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's assumption is correct.
        Mr. LOEFFLER. I thank the Chair.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the Senate 
    amendment.
        The Senate amendment was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 14.6 A House concurrent resolution providing for adjournment sine 
    die was amended by the Senate to provide for adjournment on a later 
    day than that originally proposed in the resolution.

[[Page 901]]

    On the legislative day of Sept. 14, 1959,(1) Speaker Sam 
Rayburn, of Texas, laid before the House as privileged, Senate 
amendments to a House concurrent resolution, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 105 Cong. Rec. 19746, 86th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 15, 1959 
        (Calendar Day).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        House Concurrent Resolution 440

        Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
    concurring), That the two Houses of Congress shall adjourn on 
    Monday, September 14, 1959, and that when they adjourn on said day, 
    they stand adjourned sine die.

            With the following Senate amendments:
            Line 3, strike out ``Monday, September 14,'' and insert 
        ``Tuesday, September 15.''

        Amend the title so as to read: ``Establishing that when the two 
    Houses adjourn on Tuesday, September 15, 1959, they stand adjourned 
    sine die.''
        The Senate amendments were concurred in.

Sec. 14.7 The House agreed to a concurrent resolution adjourning the 
    first session of the 80th Congress sine die on Dec. 19, 1947, 
    notwithstanding a concurrent resolution adopted at an earlier date 
    adjourning the Congress until Jan. 2, 1948.

    On Dec. 19, 1947,(1) the House agreed to a concurrent 
resolution changing the date for adjournment sine die. The Congress had 
adjourned from July 27, 1947, until Jan. 2, 1948, but the President 
called the Congress back into session on Nov. 17, 1947, thus resuming 
the first session on a date earlier than that to which it had 
adjourned. Hence the language of the following adjournment resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 93 Cong. Rec. 11738, 80th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles A.] HALLECK [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    [privileged] House concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 127) which I 
    send to the Clerk's desk.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That notwithstanding the provisions of the Senate 
        Concurrent Resolution 33, Eightieth Congress, the two Houses of 
        Congress shall adjourn on Friday, December 19, 1947, and that 
        when they adjourn on said day, they stand adjourned sine die.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.

House Consent to Subsequent Senate Adjournment

Sec. 14.8 The House adopted a concurrent resolution providing for an 
    adjournment sine die of the House and giving the consent of the 
    House to a subsequent adjournment sine die of the Senate, and in 
    the interim, to such Senate adjournments in excess of

[[Page 902]]

    three days as it might determine.

    On Aug. 20, 1954,(1) a House concurrent resolution 
affecting dates of adjournment sine die of the two Houses was called up 
with an amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 100 Cong. Rec. 15554, 83d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Leo E.] ALLEN of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I call up the 
    concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 266) providing for adjournment 
    sine die of the 83d Congress, 2d session, with an amendment of the 
    Senate thereto, and move that the House concur in the Senate 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
        The Clerk read the Senate amendment, as follows:

            Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert ``That 
        the House of Representatives shall adjourn on August 20, 1954, 
        and that when it adjourns on said day, it stand adjourned sine 
        die.
            ``Resolved further, That the consent of the House of 
        Representatives is hereby given to an adjournment sine die of 
        the Senate at any time prior to December 25, 1954, when the 
        Senate shall so determine; and that the Senate, in the meantime 
        may adjourn or recess for such periods in excess of 3 days as 
        it may determine.''

        The Senate amendment was concurred in, and a motion to 
    reconsider was laid on the table.

Debate on Resolution

Sec. 14.9 Although a concurrent resolution providing for the 
    adjournment of the second session of a Congress sine die is not 
    debatable, a Member may be recognized during the consideration of 
    such a concurrent resolution under a reservation of objection to a 
    unanimous-consent request propounded by the Chair that the 
    concurrent resolution be agreed to.

    On Oct. 27, 1990,(1) the House, for the first time since 
the 93d Congress,(2) included recall language in a 
privileged concurrent resolution providing for the adjournment of a 
second session sine die:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 136 Cong. Rec. 36850, 101st Cong. 2d Sess.
 2. See 15.7, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM SATURDAY, OCTOBER 
            27, 1990, SINE DIE, AND ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE FROM 
         SATURDAY, OCTOBER 27, SUNDAY, OCTOBER 28, OR MONDAY, OCTOBER 
                               29, 1990, SINE DIE

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 399) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 399

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on

[[Page 903]]

        the legislative day of October 27, 1990, and the Senate 
        adjourns on Saturday, October 27, Sunday, October 28 or Monday, 
        October 29, 1990, they stand adjourned sine die or until noon 
        on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
        pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and Senate, respectively, 
        to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public interest 
        shall warrant it.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) Is there objection to 
    agreeing to the resolution?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Michael R. McNulty (NY).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, 
    reserving the right to object, I shall not object, but I just want 
    to inquire of the majority leader: there was some question on our 
    side about the recall provision of this that I have been asked 
    about. The minority leader is here now.
        Mr. Leader, reserving the right to object, have we cleared that 
    language?
        Mr. [Robert H.] MICHEL [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, will the 
    gentleman yield?
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I yield 
    to the gentleman from Illinois.
        Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, to respond to the gentleman, of 
    course, the administration would prefer that there be no reference 
    whatsoever, but, quite frankly, it is not a joint resolution and 
    does not require the President's signature.
        There is ample precedent for it, I think, in 1974 when 
    President Ford, during one of those sessions, and also in 1943, 
    and, quite frankly, it says, in effect, that if the Speaker and the 
    majority leader of the Senate after consultation with the minority 
    leader of both the House and the Senate feel that there ought to be 
    a reconvening of the Members for whatever purpose that, from my 
    point of view, I think it is well in order, and that we ought to 
    approve it as it is written.
        Mr. WALKER. Further reserving the right to object, under that 
    provision, since we adjourn sine die, would that be a 
    reconstitution then of the 101st Congress at that point, or would 
    we have a new session if this Congress was adjourned sine die?
        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. WALKER. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I believe such recall would be a 
    reassembling of this session of the 101st Congress.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
        Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the adoption of 
    the concurrent resolution? . . .
        Is there objection to agreeing to the resolution?
        There was no objection.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 14.10 A concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment sine 
    die is ordinarily

[[Page 904]]

    not debatable; however, debate has been permitted where no point of 
    order was raised against it. A resolution appointing a committee to 
    notify the President of an impending sine die adjournment is 
    debatable.

    In the Senate, on Oct. 11, 1968,(1) a Senate concurrent 
resolution (S. Con. Res. 83) was called up and agreed to. This 
concurrent resolution provided for the sine die adjournment of both 
Houses of Congress at the close of business on Friday, Oct. 11, 1968. 
The resolution was not taken up on this date in the House as certain 
Members of the House hoped that those Senators opposed to a bill 
permitting nationally televised debates between Presidential candidates 
might reconsider their position. (The matter was not, however, brought 
to a vote in the Senate.) The House did agree to a resolution 
authorizing the appointment of a committee to join a similar Senate 
committee to notify the President of plans to adjourn sine 
die.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 114 Cong. Rec. 31103, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
 2. Id. at p. 30767.
            For discussion of House agreement to Senate concurrent 
        resolutions, see Chs. 24, 32, 33, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    resolution (H. Res. 1320) and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 1320

            Resolved, That a committee of two Members be appointed by 
        the House to join a similar committee appointed by the Senate, 
        to wait upon the President of the United States and inform him 
        that the two Houses have completed their business of the 
        session and are ready to adjourn, unless the President has some 
        other communication to make to them.

        Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield one-half minute to the 
    gentleman from Michigan [Mr. O'Hara] to make a statement.
        Mr. [James G.] O'HARA of Michigan, Mr. Speaker, as many Members 
    of the House are aware, I am not in agreement with the statement in 
    the resolution that both Houses have completed their business. I am 
    very strongly of the opinion that the Senate has very important 
    business remaining, but on this resolution I would not attempt to 
    make that judgment for the Senate. I hope that they will reach that 
    decision for themselves. I will, therefore, not oppose this 
    resolution, Mr. Speaker, but I will, of course, reserve the right 
    to oppose a motion to adjourn sine die.
        The resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
        The SPEAKER.(3) The Chair appoints as members on the 
    part of the House of the committee to notify the President, the 
    gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Albert, and the gentleman from 
    Michigan, Mr. Gerald R. Ford.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the absence of House concurrence to the Senate resolution for

[[Page 905]]

adjournment sine die, the Senate adjourned until Monday noon, Oct. 14, 
1968.(4) The House adjourned at 7:53 p.m. on Friday, Oct. 
11, 1968,(5) to reconvene Saturday, Oct. 12, 1968, at noon. 
On Saturday, Oct. 12, 1968,(6) the House convened at 12 
noon, and at 1:06 p.m., adjourned until Monday, Oct. 14, at 
noon.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 114 Cong. Rec. 31115, 90th Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 11, 1968.
 5. Id. at p. 30817.
 6. Id. at p. 31116.
 7. Id. at p. 31154.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the House convened on Monday, Oct. 14,(8) the 
Senate resolution was called up in the House, and an amendment was 
offered changing the date to conform with the date anticipated for 
adjournment, that same Monday, the 14th.(9) Mr. James G. 
O'Hara, of Michigan, was yielded five minutes for debate by the 
Majority Leader, who was recognized for debate without objection:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. Id. at p. 31311.
 9. Id. at pp. 31312, 31313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, I call up Senate 
    Concurrent Resolution 83, and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 83

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That the two Houses of Congress shall adjourn on 
        Friday, October 11, 1968, and that when they adjourn on said 
        day, they stand adjourned sine die.

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

            Amendment offered by Mr. Albert: Page 1, line 3, strike out 
        ``Friday, October 11, 1968,'' and insert ``Monday, October 14, 
        1968.''

        Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes for the purpose of 
    debate to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. O'Hara]. . . .
        The SPEAKER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
        There was no objection.
        Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I had announced on Friday 
    of last week that I would attempt to prevent the adjournment of 
    this session of Congress until the Senate had considered what I 
    believe to be, in terms of the functioning of our political system, 
    one of the most important bills that we have considered in the last 
    4 years. That proposal, Mr. Speaker, was the proposal that would 
    have permitted network TV debates among the major candidates, for 
    the Presidency of the United States. . . .
        I have also had an opportunity to carefully review the 
    situation in which the U.S. Senate finds itself. I have come to the 
    reluctant conclusion that it will probably not be possible to 
    acquire a quorum for the consideration of this legislation. I have 
    become convinced that the minority will persist in its 
    obstructionist tactics; that it is desperate to avoid this 
    confrontation.
        For these reasons and because I certainly do not want to 
    inconvenience

[[Page 906]]

    Members of the House of Representatives, I wish to announce that I 
    will not attempt to prevent the passage of the sine die adjournment 
    resolution. But I remain convinced, Mr. Speaker, that the other 
    body has done a disservice to the country, that the Congress has an 
    unfulfilled obligation to the American people and that we ought to 
    be dealing with that obligation rather than going home.

    Then, Mr. Albert, who had yielded the time to Mr. O'Hara, yielded 
himself one minute to concur with Mr. O'Hara's statements regarding the 
House's position on televised debates, the situation in the Senate, and 
the adjournment:(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Id. at p. 31313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute only for the 
    purpose of observing that the bill which has precipitated this 
    discussion came to this body from the Senate. It was a Senate bill. 
    The House amended the bill and sent it back to the Senate. It seems 
    to us, therefore, that the Senate should have taken action under 
    the circumstances. The statement made by our distinguish colleague, 
    the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. O'Hara], amply sets forth the 
    numerous reasons why we on this side of the aisle feel as we do 
    about this matter.
        Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution.
        The previous question was ordered.
        The SPEAKER. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
    gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Albert].
        The amendment was agreed to.
        The resolution was agreed to.

Declaration at Constitutional End of Session

Sec. 14.11 Because Sec. 2 of the 20th Amendment requires that a regular 
    session of a Congress begin at noon on Jan. 3 of each year (unless 
    a different date is set by law), then if the House is in session at 
    that time the Speaker declares the pending session adjourned sine 
    die so that the next regular session may begin at noon.

    On Jan. 3, 1996,(1) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 142 Cong. Rec. 38609, 38610, 104th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  AFTER RECESS

        The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the 
    Speaker at 11 o'clock and 55 minutes 
    a.m.                          -------------------

                                     PRAYER

        The Chaplain, Rev. James David Ford, D.D., offered the . . . 
    prayer[.] . . .                          -------------------

                              PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

        The SPEAKER.(2) Will the gentleman from New York 
    [Mr. Solomon]

[[Page 907]]

    come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Newt Gingrich (GA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Solomon led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:

            I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of 
        America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation 
        under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for 
        all.                          -------------------

                            MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

        A message from the Senate by Mr. Lundregan, one of its clerks, 
    announced that the Senate had passed with an amendment a bill of 
    the House of the following title:

            H.R. 1643. An act to authorize the extension of 
        nondiscriminatory treatment (most-favored-nation treatment) to 
        the products of Bulgaria. . . 
        .                          -------------------

           COMMUNICATION FROM THE HONORABLE TOM DELAY, MAJORITY WHIP

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the following communication 
    from the Honorable Tom DeLay, majority whip: . . .

              COMMUNICATION FROM THE SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE HOUSE

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the following communication 
    from the Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives: . . .

                                  -------------------COMMUNICATION FROM 
                             THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the following message from 
    the Clerk of the House of Representatives.

                                         House of Representatives,
                                              Office of the Clerk,
                                Washington, DC, December 29, 1995.

                                                 Hon. Newt Gingrich,
                          House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

        Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in clause 
    5 of rule III of the Rules of the House of Representatives, I have 
    the honor to transmit a sealed envelope received from the White 
    House on Friday, December 29, 1995, at 12:10 p.m. and said to 
    contain a message from the President whereby he submits a 
    semiannual report on the Russian Federation's continued compliance 
    with emigration criteria as required by sections 402 and 409 of the 
    Trade Act of 1974.

              Sincerely,
                                                   Robin H. Carle,
               Clerk.                          -------------------

         CONTINUED MOST-FAVORED-NATION STATUS FOR RUSSIAN FEDERATION--
         MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (H. DOC. NO. 
                                    104-154)

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the following message from 
    the President of the United States; which was read and, together 
    with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Ways and 
    Means and ordered to be printed: . . .

[[Page 908]]

                                    -------------------PARLIAMENTARY 
                                    INQUIRY

        Mr. [Steny H.] HOYER [of Maryland]. Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, would it be in order for me at this 
    time to ask unanimous consent to take up H.R. 1643, the bill just 
    reported to us by the other body?
        The SPEAKER. The Chair asks the gentleman to suspend. The House 
    will come right back in session. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                              SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT

        The SPEAKER. Pursuant to the 20th amendment of the Constitution 
    of the United States, the Chair declares the 1st session of the 
    104th Congress adjourned sine die.
        Thereupon (at 12 noon) pursuant to the 20th amendment of the 
    Constitution of the United States, the House adjourned.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Speaker laid these matters before the 
House within the five minutes remaining in the session, but could have 
waited until the second session, beginning at noon. On Jan. 3, 1992, 
the House adjourned by motion, but it seemed more prudent to adjourn by 
the Speaker's declaration, since a recorded vote on the motion, if 
ordered, might have taken the House beyond the noon expiration time for 
the session, requiring the clock to be stopped to avoid a point of 
order under the Constitution.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 137 Cong. Rec. 36367, 102d Cong. 1st Sess. See also 126 Cong. Rec. 
        3, 6, 96th Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 3, 1980; and House Rules and 
        Manual Sec. 242 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 14.12 Pursuant to Sec. 2 of the 20th Amendment to the 
    Constitution, a regular session of a Congress must begin at noon on 
    Jan. 3 of every year, unless Congress establishes a different date 
    by law, and if the House is in session at that time the Speaker 
    declares the House adjourned sine die without a motion being made 
    from the floor, so that the next regular session of that Congress, 
    or the first regular session of the next Congress, as the case may 
    be, may assemble at noon on that day.

    On Jan. 3, 1980,(1) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 126 Cong. Rec. 37773, 37774, 96th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The House met at 11:55 a.m. and was called to order by the 
    Speaker pro tempore (Mr.  Moakley).
        The Chaplain, Rev. James David Ford, D.D., offered the . . . 
    prayer[.] . . .

[[Page 909]]

                                      -------------------THE JOURNAL

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The Chair has examined 
    the Journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the 
    House his approval thereof.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John Joseph Moakley (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, and without objection, the 
    Journal stands approved.
        There was no objection. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The hour of 12 noon having arrived, 
    pursuant to the 20th amendment of the Constitution, the Chair 
    declares the first session of the 96th Congress adjourned sine die.
        Thereupon (at 12 o'clock noon), pursuant to the 20th amendment 
    of the Constitution, the House adjourned sine die.

    Parliamentarian's Note: There are two prior instances wherein the 
House or both Houses adjourned at the constitutional expiration of the 
session. On Dec. 1, 1913, the House adjourned sine die on the final day 
by declaration.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 3375. See also The Congressional 
        Globe, 816, 817, 40th Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 2, 1867.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inclusion of Nonprivileged Matter

Sec. 14.13 By unanimous consent the House considered a nonprivileged 
    concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the House and 
    the Senate to 11:55 a.m. on Jan. 3 or until recalled by joint 
    leadership; providing that the House shall not conduct 
    organizational or legislative business when reconvening the second 
    session on Jan. 3; and providing for an adjournment from Jan. 3 to 
    Jan. 22 or until recalled by joint leadership.

    On Nov. 26, 1991,(1) the Majority Leader offered the 
following concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 137 Cong. Rec. 35840, 35841, 102d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 260) and I ask unanimous 
    consent for its immediate consideration.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The Clerk will report 
    the concurrent resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Steny H. Hoyer (MD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 260

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House and Senate adjourn on the 
        calendar day of Wednesday, November 27, 1991, in accordance 
        with this resolution, they stand adjourned until 11:55 a.m. on 
        Friday, January 3, 1992, or until noon on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble, whichever occurs first.

[[Page 910]]

            Sec. 2. That when the Congress convenes on January 3, 1992, 
        for the second session of the 102d Congress, the House shall 
        not conduct organizational or legislative business and when it 
        adjourns on that day, it stand adjourned until noon on 
        Wednesday, January 22, 1992, or until noon on the second day 
        after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 3 
        of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 3. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the House and 
        the Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their 
        opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

                              legislative program

        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I ask for this time to explain the 
    resolution and give the Members a sense of the schedule.
        Let me first say on the schedule that there obviously could be 
    a vote on this adjournment resolution in the next few moments. It 
    is not debatable, and we will move to vote very rapidly if there is 
    a vote.
        After that, there is one additional matter that I am aware of 
    that may require a vote, and that has to do with the Medicaid 
    legislation which is here, and we will be coming forward with a 
    rule, and there could be a vote on it at the end of its 
    consideration.
        Other than that, there should not be further votes, assuming 
    the adjournment resolution passes.
        Let me say this: This concurrent resolution provides that the 
    House will, when we finish business today, recess until 11:55 a.m., 
    January 3, 1992, at which time we will conclude the first session 
    of this, the 102d Congress. At 12 noon that day, January 3, 1992, 
    we will convene the second session of the 102d Congress and will 
    then immediately proceed to recess until January 22, 1992.
        During these recess periods, the House will be subject to the 
    call of the Chair. If it becomes necessary or desirable to 
    reconvene the two Houses to act on the President's returned veto of 
    legislation we are sending to him for his consideration or because 
    the scheduled work of the committees which has been described 
    produces economic legislation which is ready for floor action or 
    for other reasons, we will be able to reconvene in a timely manner.
        Any such reconvening of the House will be done in the 
    consultation with the leadership on both sides of the aisle.
        That concludes my explanation of the concurrent resolution.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The prohibition of business in the next 
session, stipulated in Sec. 2 of the concurrent resolution, destroyed 
its privilege.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See 125 Cong. Rec. 37317, 96th Cong. 2d Sess., Dec. 20, 1979 (H. 
        Con. Res. 232), for the last time (which was also the first 
        time) a sine die adjournment and an adjournment to a date 
        certain in the next session were combined in a single 
        resolution (although, here, it was not technically a sine die 
        adjournment). But see Sec. 14.14, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 14.14 The House agreed to a concurrent resolution providing for 
    adjournment of

[[Page 911]]

    the first session of the 106th Congress sine die and providing that 
    the House conduct no organizational or legislative business on the 
    first day of the second session.

    On Nov. 18, 1999,(1) the Majority Leader offered the 
following concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 145 Cong. Rec. 30734, 30735, 106th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE AFTER COMPLETION OF BUSINESS 
         OF FIRST SESSION OF 106TH CONGRESS AND SETTING FORTH SCHEDULE 
            FOR CERTAIN DATES DURING JANUARY 2000 OF SECOND SESSION

        Mr. [Richard K.] ARMEY [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 235), and ask for 
    its immediate consideration.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) The Clerk will report 
    the concurrent resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Ed Pease (IN).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            That when the House adjourns on any legislative day from 
        Thursday, November 18, 1999, through Monday, November 22, 1999, 
        on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by 
        its Majority Leader or his designee, it shall stand adjourned 
        until noon on Thursday, December 2, 1999 (unless it sooner has 
        received a message from the Senate transmitting its concurrence 
        in the conference report to accompany H.R. 3194, in which case 
        the House shall stand adjourned sine die), or until noon on the 
        second day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to 
        section 3 of this concurrent resolution; and that when the 
        Senate adjourns on any day from Thursday, November 18, 1999, 
        through Thursday, December 2, 1999, on a motion offered 
        pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader 
        or his designee, it shall stand adjourned sine die, or until 
        noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
        pursuant to section 3 of this concurrent resolution.
            Sec. 2. When the House convenes for the second session of 
        the One Hundred Sixth Congress, it shall conduct no 
        organizational or legislative business on that day and, when 
        the House adjourns on that day, it shall stand adjourned until 
        noon on January 27, 2000, or until noon on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 3 of 
        this concurrent resolution.
            Sec. 3. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and Senate, respectively, 
        to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public interest 
        shall warrant it.
            Sec. 4. The Congress declares that clause 2(h) of rule II 
        of the Rules of the House of Representatives and the order of 
        the Senate of January 6, 1999, authorize for the duration of 
        the One Hundred Sixth Congress the Clerk of the House of 
        Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate, respectively, 
        to receive messages from the President during periods when the 
        House and Senate are not in session, and thereby preserve until 
        adjournment sine die of the final regular session of the One 
        Hundred Sixth Congress the constitutional prerogative of the 
        House and

[[Page 912]]

        Senate to reconsider vetoed measures in light of the objections 
        of the President, since the availability of the Clerk and the 
        Secretary during any earlier adjournment of either House during 
        the current Congress does not prevent the return by the 
        President of any bill presented to him for approval.
            Sec. 5. The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall 
        inform the President of the United States of the adoption of 
        this concurrent resolution.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Although Majority Leader Armey claimed to 
be calling up the resolution as privileged, it was not privileged as 
indicated in Sec. 14.13, supra, since it included a special order of 
business.

Pocket Vetoes During Sine Die and Intrasession Periods

Sec. 14.15 The President's return to the House by message under seal of 
    a bill previously presented to him, together with a statement of 
    his objections thereto, in which he asserted the power to ``pocket 
    veto'' the bill during an intrasession adjournment of the 
    originating House by withholding his approval, was laid before the 
    House by the Speaker accompanied by an announcement from the chair 
    regarding prior correspondence in the Congressional Record.

    On Nov. 13, 2000,(1) the House, by unanimous consent, 
referred a veto message and bill to committee:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 147 Cong. Rec. 26022, 26023, 107th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 
        Sec. 14.16, infra, for the complete Extension of Remarks 
        carried in the Congressional Record.
            See also Ch. 24, supra, for further discussion on pocket 
        vetoes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

           INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001--VETO 
                MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

        The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following 
    veto message from the President of the United States:

    To the House of Representatives:

        Today, I am disapproving H.R. 4392, the ``Intelligence 
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001,'' because of one badly 
    flawed provision that would have made a felony of unauthorized 
    disclosures of classified information. Although well intentioned, 
    that provision is overbroad and may unnecessarily chill legitimate 
    activities that are at the heart of a democracy. . . .
        Since the adjournment of the congress has prevented my return 
    of H.R. 4392 within the meaning of Article I, section 7, clause 2 
    of the Constitution, my withholding of approval from the bill 
    precludes its becoming law. The

[[Page 913]]

    Pocket Veto Case, 279 U.S. 655 (1929). In addition to withholding 
    my signature and thereby invoking my constitutional power to 
    ``pocket veto'' bills during an adjournment of the Congress, to 
    avoid litigation, I am also sending H.R. 4392 to the House of 
    Representatives with my objections, to leave no possible doubt that 
    I have vetoed the measure.

              Sincerely,
                                               William J. Clinton.
                                The White House, November 4, 2000.

                                {time}  1845

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. PEASE).(2) The 
    objections of the President will be spread at large upon the 
    Journal, and the veto message and the bill will be printed as a 
    House document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Ed Pease (IN).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        On September 19, 2000, the Speaker inserted in the Extensions 
    of Remarks portion of the Record a copy of a letter dated September 
    7, 2000, signed jointly by him and the Democratic leader and 
    addressed to the President of the United States, expressing their 
    views on the limits of the ``pocket-veto'' power and including a 
    similar letter from Speaker Foley and Republican leader Michel sent 
    to President Bush on November 21, 1989. Without objection, that 
    correspondence is reinserted at this point in the Record, since no 
    response has been received to the September 7, 2000, letter and the 
    same assertion by the President of ``pocket-veto'' power during an 
    intrasession adjournment of Congress to a day certain is contained 
    in the veto message just read to the House.

    Parliamentarian's Note: While treatment of pocket vetoes is also 
included in Ch. 24, supra, it is included here as related to 
congressional adjournments.

Sec. 14.16 Under permission to extend remarks, the Speaker inserted in 
    the Congressional Record correspondence dated Sept. 7, 2000, to 
    President Clinton from Speaker Hastert and Minority Leader 
    Gephardt, and dated Nov. 21, 1989, to President Bush from Speaker 
    Foley and Minority Leader Michel, expressing views on the extent of 
    the President's ``pocket veto'' authority during sine die and 
    intrasession adjournment periods.

    On Sept. 19, 2000,(1) the following was inserted into 
the Extension of Remarks section of the Congressional Record:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 136 Cong. Rec. 18594, 107th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               POCKET-VETO POWER

                             HON. J. DENNIS HASTERT

                                of illinois

                      in the house of representatives

                          Tuesday, September 19, 2000

        Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record a copy of a 
    letter signed jointly by myself and the Democratic Leader, Mr. 
    Gephardt. It is addressed to President Clinton. In it, we

[[Page 914]]

    express our views on the limits of the ``pocket-veto'' power. I 
    also submit a copy of the letter referenced therein, which was sent 
    to President Bush on November 21, 1989, by Speaker Foley and 
    Republican Leader Michel.

                                    Congress of the United States,
                                          House of Representatives
                                Washington, DC, September 7, 2000.

                                            Hon. William J. Clinton,
                     The President, The White House, Washington, DC.

        Dear Mr. President: This is in response to your actions on H.R. 
    4810, the Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2000, and H.R. 
    8, the Death Tax Elimination Act of 2000. On August 5, 2000, you 
    returned H.R. 4810 to the House of Representatives without your 
    approval and with a message stating your objections to its 
    enactment. On August 31, 2000, you returned H.R. 8 to the House of 
    Representatives without your approval and with a message stating 
    your objections to its enactment. In addition, however, in both 
    cases you included near the end of your message the following:
        [``]Since the adjournment of the Congress has prevented my 
    return of [the respective bill] within the meaning of Article I, 
    section 7, clause 2 of the Constitution, my withholding of approval 
    from the bill precludes its becoming law. The Pocket Veto Case, 279 
    U.S. 655 (1929). In addition to withholding my signature and 
    thereby invoking my constitutional power to ``pocket veto'' bills 
    during an adjournment of the Congress, to avoid litigation, I am 
    also sending [the respective bill] to the House of Representatives 
    with my objections, to leave no possible doubt that I have vetoed 
    the measure.['']
        President Bush similarly asserted a pocket-veto authority 
    during an intersession adjournment with respect to H.R. 2712 of the 
    101st Congress but, by nevertheless returning the enrollment, 
    similarly permitted the Congress to reconsider it in light of his 
    objections, as contemplated by the Constitution. Your allusion to 
    the existence of a pocket-veto power during even an intrasession 
    adjournment continues to be most troubling. We find that assertion 
    to be inconsistent with the return-veto that it accompanies. We 
    also find that assertion to be inconsistent with your previous use 
    of the return-veto under similar circumstances but without similar 
    dictum concerning the pocket-veto. On January 9, 1996, you stated 
    your disapproval of H.R. 4 of the 104th Congress and, on January 
    10, 1996--the tenth Constitutional day after its presentment--
    returned the bill to the Clerk of the House. At the time, the House 
    stood adjourned to a date certain 12 days hence. Your message 
    included no dictum concerning the pocket-veto.
        We enclose a copy of a letter dated November 21, 1989, from 
    Speaker Foley and Minority Leader Michel to President Bush. That 
    letter expressed the profound concern of the bipartisan leaderships 
    over the assertion of a pocket veto during an intrasession 
    adjournment. That letter states in pertinent part that 
    ``[s]uccessive Presidential administrations since 1974 have, in 
    accommodation of Kennedy v. Sampson, exercised the veto power 
    during intrasession adjournments only by messages returning 
    measures to the Congress.'' It also states our belief that it is 
    not ``constructive to resurrect constitutional controversies long 
    considered as settled, especially without notice or consultation.'' 
    The Congress, on

[[Page 915]]

    numerous occasions, has reinforced the stance taken in that letter 
    by including in certain resolutions of adjournment language 
    affirming to the President the absence of ``pocket veto'' authority 
    during adjournments between its first and second sessions. The 
    House and the Senate continue to designate the Clerk of the House 
    and the Secretary of the Senate, respectively, as their agents to 
    receive messages from the President during periods of adjournment. 
    Clause 2(h) of rule II, Rules of the House of Representatives; 
    House Resolution 5, 106th Congress, January 6, 1999; the standing 
    order of the Senate of January 6, 1999. In Kennedy v. Sampson, 511 
    F.2d 430 (D.C. Cir. 1974), the court held that the ``pocket veto'' 
    is not constitutionally available during an intrasession 
    adjournment of the Congress if a congressional agent is appointed 
    to receive veto messages from the President during such 
    adjournment.
        On these premises we find your assertion of a pocket veto power 
    during an intrasession adjournment extremely troublesome. Such 
    assertions should be avoided, in appropriate deference to such 
    judicial resolution of the question as has been possible within the 
    bounds of justifiability.
        Meanwhile, citing the precedent of January 23, 1990, relating 
    to H.R. 2712 of the 101st Congress, the House yesterday treated 
    both H.R. 4810 and H.R. 8 as having been returned to the 
    originating House, their respective returns not having been 
    prevented by an adjournment within the meaning of article I, 
    section 7, clause 2 of the Constitution.

              Sincerely,
                                                J. Dennis Hastert,
                                                          Speaker.
                                              Richard A. Gephardt,
                                                 Democratic Leader

                                    Congress of the United States,
                                Washington, DC, November 21, 1989.

                                                   Hon. George Bush,
        President of the United States, The White House, Washington, 
                                                                 DC.

        Dear Mr. President: This is in response to your action on House 
    Joint Resolution 390. On August 16, 1989, you issued a memorandum 
    of disapproval asserting that you would ``prevent H.J. Res. 390 
    from becoming a law by withholding (your) signature from it.'' You 
    did not return the bill to the House of Representatives.
        House Joint Resolution 390 authorized a ``hand enrollment'' of 
    H.R. 1278, the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and 
    Enforcement Act of 1989, by waiving the requirement that the bill 
    be printed on parchment. The hand enrollment option was requested 
    by the Department of the Treasury to insure that the mounting daily 
    costs of the savings-and-loan crisis could be stemmed by the 
    earliest practicable enactment of H.R. 1278. In the end, a hand 
    enrollment was not necessary since the bill was printed on 
    parchment in time to be presented to you in that form.
        We appreciate your judgment that House Joint Resolution 390 
    was, in the end, unnecessary. We believe, however, that you should 
    communicate any such veto by a message returning the resolution to 
    the Congress since the intrasession pocket veto is constitutionally 
    infirm.
        In Kennedy v. Sampson, the United States Court of Appeals held 
    that ``pocket veto'' is not constitutionally available during an 
    intrasession adjournment of the Congress if a congressional agent 
    is appointed to receive veto messages from the President during 
    such adjournment. 511 F.2d 430

[[Page 916]]

    (D.C. Cir. 1974). In the standing rules of the House, the Clerk is 
    duly authorized to receive messages from the President at any time 
    that the House is not in session. (Clause 5, Rule III, Rules of the 
    House of Representatives; House Resolution 5, 101st Congress, 
    January 3, 1989.)
        Successive Presidential administrations since 1974 have, in 
    accommodation of Kennedy v. Sampson, exercised the veto power 
    during intrasession adjournments only by messages returning 
    measures to the Congress.
        We therefore find your assertion of a pocket veto power during 
    an intrasession adjournment extremely troublesome. We do not think 
    it constructive to resurrect constitutional controversies long 
    considered as settled, especially without notice of consultation. 
    It is our hope that you might join us in urging the Archivist to 
    assign a public law number to House Joint Resolution 390, and that 
    you might eschew the notion of an intrasession pocket veto power, 
    in appropriate deference to the judicial resolution of that 
    question.

              Sincerely,
                                                  Thomas S. Foley,
                                                          Speaker.

                                                 Robert H. Michel,
                                                Republican Leader.


                     

[Page 916-929]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
                        C. Adjournment Sine Die
 
Sec. 15. Conditional Adjournments Sine Die; Recall

    The first examples of coupling sine die adjournment with the 
conferral of leadership recall authority during the sine die period 
were in the 93d Congress, on Dec. 22, 1973, and on Dec. 20, 
1974.(1) Inclusion of leadership recall authority in 
adjournment resolutions was discontinued in 1975 and reinstituted in 
the 101st Congress, second session, when the joint recall authority was 
conferred only on the majority leaderships (not separately on the joint 
minority leaderships, who merely had to be consulted).(2) 
The form of leadership recall authority as reinstituted in the 101st 
Congress remained the practice through the 108th 
Congress.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See Sec. Sec. 15.10, 15.11, infra.
 2. See Sec. 15.7, infra.
 3. See Sec. Sec. 15.1, 15.15, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Before the inclusion of leadership recall authority, only the 
President could reconvene either or both Houses after sine die 
adjournment, pursuant to art. II, Sec. 3 of the Constitution. The 
President's authority in the same section to adjourn the two Houses to 
such time as he shall think proper, where there is a disagreement 
between the two Houses, has never been used.
    See also Sec. 13, supra, for discussion of leadership recall 
authority included in concurrent resolutions providing for adjournment 
to a day certain. The now-standard recall language allowing reassembly 
at another ``place'' was first used

[[Page 917]]

on Oct. 17, 2001,(4) and the language empowering designees 
of the Speaker and the Senate Majority Leader to exercise the recall 
authority in exigent circumstances was first included on July 26, 
2002.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See Sec. 13.6, supra.
 5. See Sec. 13.5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    See also Sec. 13, supra, for discussion of adjournments to a day 
and time certain immediately before the constitutional end of a 
Congress on Jan. 3 of an odd-numbered year with recall authority, in 
effect tantamount to a sine die adjournment with recall, but treated as 
continuation of the existing session rather than a new (third) session 
upon the recall.                          -------------------

Sec. 15.1 The House agreed to a privileged concurrent resolution 
    providing for adjournment of the Congress sine die including 
    alternate departure dates for each House and provision for joint-
    leadership recall.

    On Dec. 7, 2004,(1) the Majority Leader offered the 
following privileged concurrent resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 150 Cong. Rec. 25708, 108th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVIDING FOR SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT OF SECOND SESSION OF 108TH 
                                    CONGRESS

        Mr. [Tom] DeLAY [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged 
    concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 531) and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 531

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on any legislative 
        day from Tuesday, December 7, 2004, through Friday, December 
        10, 2004, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
        adjourned sine die, or until the time of any reassembly 
        pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution; and that 
        when the Senate adjourns on any day from Tuesday, December 7, 
        2004, through Saturday, December 11, 2004, on a motion offered 
        pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader 
        or his designee, it stand adjourned sine die, or until the time 
        of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
        resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, or their respective designees, acting jointly after 
        consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the 
        Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the 
        House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble at such place 
        and time as they may designate whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 15.2 Pursuant to notice issued by the Speaker under

[[Page 918]]

    authority conferred in a concurrent resolution of adjournment, the 
    House reassembled from a second session adjournment sine die as a 
    continuation of that session.

    On Dec. 17, 1998,(1) the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 144 Cong. Rec. 27770, 105th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Pursuant to section 3 of House Concurrent Resolution 353, One 
    Hundred Fifth Congress, the House met at 10 a.m. and was called to 
    order by the Speaker, Hon. Newt 
    Gingrich.                          -------------------

                    NOTIFICATION OF REASSEMBLING OF CONGRESS

        The SPEAKER.(2) The Chair lays before the House the 
    text of the formal notification sent to Members on Monday, December 
    14, 1998, of the reassembling of the House, which the Clerk will 
    read.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Newt Gingrich (GA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

                                            Office of the Speaker,

                                Washington, DC, December 14, 1998.

            Pursuant to section 3 of House Concurrent Resolution 353 
        and after consultation with the Minority Leader, the public 
        interest requires the Members of the House of Representatives 
        to reassemble at 10 a.m. on Thursday, December 17, 1998. The 
        Sergeant at Arms is directed to notify all Members of the 
        reassembly of the House of Representatives for the second 
        session of the One Hundred Fifth Congress.
              Sincerely yours,

                                                    Newt Gingrich,
                                                          Speaker.

    Parliamentarian's Note: As the Speaker's notification itself 
indicates, the reassembly of the House (the House and Senate having 
adjourned sine die) became a continuation of the second session rather 
than a new third session, under the terms of the concurrent resolution.

Sec. 15.3 Form of privileged concurrent resolution of adjournment sine 
    die providing both joint-leadership recall authority and House-only 
    recall authority with subsequent sine die House adjournment if 
    utilized.

    On Oct. 20, 1998,(1) the following privileged concurrent 
resolution was considered in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 144 Cong. Rec. 27348, 105th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE OF THE CONGRESS ON 
           WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1998, OR THURSDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1998

        Mr. [Gerald B. H.] SOLOMON [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, I offer 
    a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 353) and ask for 
    its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

[[Page 919]]

                                H. Con. Res. 353

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of Wednesday, October 21, 1998, or Thursday, October 22, 
        1998, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
        adjourned sine die or until noon on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of 
        this concurrent resolution, or until a time designated pursuant 
        to section 2 of this resolution; and that when the Senate 
        adjourns on Wednesday, October 21, 1998, or Thursday, October 
        22, 1998, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
        adjourned sine die, or until noon on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of 
        this concurrent resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and the Senate, 
        respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.
            Sec. 3. During any adjournment of the House pursuant to 
        this concurrent resolution, the Speaker, acting after 
        consultation with the Minority Leader, may notify the Members 
        of the House to reassemble whenever, in his opinion, the public 
        interest shall warrant it. After reassembling pursuant to this 
        section, when the House adjourns on any day on a motion offered 
        pursuant to this section by its Majority Leader or his 
        designee, the House shall again stand adjourned pursuant to the 
        first section of this concurrent resolution.

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The House needed separate recall authority, 
independent of the Senate, in order to be prepared to consider 
potential articles of impeachment reported from the Committee on the 
Judiciary following the sine die adjournment. The House was recalled by 
Speaker Gingrich on Dec. 17, 1998.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. See Sec. 15.2, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequently, on Oct. 21, 1998,(3) the House adjourned 
sine die.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 144 Cong. Rec. 27410, 105th Cong. 2d Sess. See also Sec. 17.3, 
        infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Gerald B. H. SOLOMON] [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, pursuant 
    to House concurrent resolution 353 and as the designee of the 
    majority leader, I move that the House do now adjourn.
        The motion was agreed to.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(4) In accordance with the 
    provisions of House Concurrent Resolution 353, the Chair declares 
    the second session of the 105th Congress adjourned sine die.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Edward A. Pease (IN).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Thereupon (at 5 o'clock and 56 minutes p.m.), pursuant to House 
    Concurrent Resolution 353, the House adjourned.

Sec. 15.4 The House agreed to a privileged Senate concurrent resolution 
    providing for the

[[Page 920]]

    adjournment sine die of the first session of a Congress (subject to 
    recall by the joint House-Senate majority leaderships) and 
    declaring the position of the Congress with respect to the 
    assertion by the President of a ``pocket veto'' power between 
    sessions of a Congress.

    On Nov. 13, 1997,(1) the Speaker pro 
tempore(2) laid before the House a privileged Senate 
concurrent resolution on the Speaker's table providing for an 
adjournment sine die of the first session and an assertion that the 
``pocket veto'' not be used during a first session sine die 
adjournment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 143 Cong. Rec. 26538, 26539, 105th Cong. 1st Sess. See Ch. 24, 
        infra, for additional information on pocket vetoes.
 2. Ray LaHood (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

          ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE OF FIRST SESSION OF ONE HUNDRED FIFTH 
                                    CONGRESS

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The Chair lays before the 
    House a Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 68) to adjourn 
    sine die the First Session of the One Hundred Fifth Congress, as a 
    question of the privileges of the House.
        The Clerk read the Senate Concurrent Resolution as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 68

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of Thursday, November 13, 1997, or Friday, November 14, 
        1997, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution by the Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
        adjourned sine die, or until noon on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of 
        this concurrent resolution, and that when the Senate adjourns 
        on Thursday, November 13, 1997, or Friday, November 14, 1997, 
        on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by 
        the Majority Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned sine 
        die, or until noon on the second day after Members are notified 
        to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
        resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority of the Senate, shall 
        notify the Members of the House and Senate, respectively, to 
        reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public interest 
        shall warrant it.
            Sec. 3. The Congress declares that clause 5 of rule III of 
        the Rules of the House of Representatives and the order of the 
        Senate of January 7, 1997, authorize for the duration of the 
        One Hundred Fifth Congress the Clerk of the House of 
        Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate, respectively: 
        To receive messages from the President during periods when the 
        House and Senate are not in session and thereby preserve until 
        adjournment sine die of the final regular session of the One 
        Hundred Fifth Congress the constitutional prerogative of the 
        House and Senate to reconsider vetoed measures in light of the 
        objections of the President, since the availability of the 
        Clerk and the Secretary during any earlier adjournment of 
        either House during the Congress does not

[[Page 921]]

        prevent the return by the President of any bill presented to 
        him for approval.
            Sec. 4. The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall 
        inform the President of the United States of the adoption of 
        this concurrent resolution.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the Senate 
    concurrent resolution.
        The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced 
    that the ayes appeared to have it.
        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, on that, 
    I demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 
    205, nays 193, not voting 34, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 638] . . .

        So the Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 15.5 The Senate agreed to a motion that the Senate adjourn to meet 
    the following evening unless the House sooner adopted the 
    concurrent resolution of sine die adjournment (as amended by the 
    Senate), in which case the Senate would stand adjourned sine die 
    pursuant to that concurrent resolution.

    On Oct. 3, 1996,(1) the following proceedings occurred 
in the Senate:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 142 Cong. Rec. 27335, 104th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE

        Mr. [Trent] LOTT [of Mississippi]. Mr. President, if there is 
    no further business to come before the Senate, I now move that the 
    Senate stand in adjournment sine die under the provisions of House 
    Concurrent Resolution 230, or until 6 p.m., Friday, October 4, if 
    the House fails to adopt House Concurrent Resolution 230. And God 
    be with you all.
        The motion was agreed to, and at 6:54 p.m., the Senate 
    adjourned sine die, conditioned on the House concurrence in the 
    Senate amendment to House Concurrent Resolution 230.

Sec. 15.6 Second instance since the 93d Congress in which the House 
    included recall language in a concurrent resolution providing for 
    the adjournment of a second session sine die.

    On Oct. 5, 1992,(1) the Majority Leader called up a 
privileged concurrent resolution as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 138 Cong. Rec. 32340, 102d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PROVIDING FOR THE SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT OF THE 2D SESSION, 102D 
                                    CONGRESS

        [Mr. Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I send to 
    the

[[Page 922]]

    desk a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 384) and ask 
    unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 384

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of Thursday, October 8, 1992, or Friday, October 9, 1992, 
        pursuant to a motion by the Majority Leader, or his designee, 
        it stand adjourned sine die, and that when the Senate adjourns 
        on the calendar day of Thursday, October 8, 1992, or any day 
        thereafter, pursuant to a motion made by the Majority Leader, 
        or his designee, in accordance with this resolution, it stand 
        adjourned sine die or until noon on the second day after 
        Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of 
        this resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and Senate, respectively, 
        to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public interest 
        shall warrant it.

        The SPEAKER.(2) Without objection, the concurrent 
    resolution is agreed to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Thomas S. Foley (WA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 15.7 For the first time since the 93d Congress, the House included 
    recall language in a concurrent resolution providing for the 
    adjournment of a second session sine die.

    On Oct. 27, 1990,(1) the House, for the first time since 
the 93d Congress, included recall language in a privileged concurrent 
resolution providing for the adjournment of a second session sine die:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 136 Cong. Rec. 36850, 101st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE FROM SATURDAY, OCTOBER 
            27, 1990, SINE DIE, AND ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE FROM 
         SATURDAY, OCTOBER 27, SUNDAY, OCTOBER 28, OR MONDAY, OCTOBER 
                               29, 1990, SINE DIE

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 399) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 399

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative 
        day of October 27, 1990, and the Senate adjourns on Saturday, 
        October 27, Sunday, October 28 or Monday, October 29, 1990, 
        they stand adjourned sine die or until noon on the second day 
        after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 
        of this concurrent resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members

[[Page 923]]

        of the House and Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, 
        in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Is there objection to 
    agreeing to the resolution?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Michael R. McNulty (NY).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, 
    reserving the right to object, I shall not object, but I just want 
    to inquire of the majority leader: there was some question on our 
    side about the recall provision of this that I have been asked 
    about. The minority leader is here now.
        Mr. Leader, reserving the right to object, have we cleared that 
    language?
        Mr. [Robert H.] MICHEL [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, will the 
    gentleman yield?
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I yield 
    to the gentleman from Illinois.
        Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, to respond to the gentleman, of 
    course, the administration would prefer that there be no reference 
    whatsoever, but, quite frankly, it is not a joint resolution and 
    does not require the President's signature.
        There is ample precedent for it, I think, in 1974 when 
    President Ford, during one of those sessions, and also in 1943, 
    and, quite frankly, it says, in effect, that if the Speaker and the 
    majority leader of the Senate after consultation with the minority 
    leader of both the House and the Senate feel that there ought to be 
    a reconvening of the Members for whatever purpose that, from my 
    point of view, I think it is well in order, and that we ought to 
    approve it as it is written.
        Mr. WALKER. Further reserving the right to object, under that 
    provision, since we adjourn sine die, would that be a 
    reconstitution then of the 101st Congress at that point, or would 
    we have a new session if this Congress was adjourned sine die?
        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. WALKER. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I believe such recall would be a 
    reassembling of this session of the 101st Congress.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
        Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection. . . .
        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. McNulty). Is there objection to 
    agreeing to the resolution?
        There was no objection.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    On Dec. 20, 1974,(3) the House agreed to a privileged 
concurrent resolution, offered by the Majority Leader, providing for 
the sine die adjournment of the 93d Congress, second session, or for an 
adjournment until reconvened by the leadership:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 120 Cong. Rec. 41815, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer a concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 697)

[[Page 924]]

    and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 697

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Friday, 
        December 20, 1974, they shall stand adjourned sine die or until 
        12:00 noon on the second day after their respective Members are 
        notified to reassemble in accordance with Section 2 of this 
        resolution, whichever event first occurs.
            Sec. 2 The Speaker of the House of Representatives and the 
        President of the Senate or the President pro tempore of the 
        Senate shall notify the Members of the House and the Senate, 
        respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it, or whenever the majority 
        leader of the Senate and the majority leader of the House, 
        acting jointly or the minority leader of the House, acting 
        jointly, file a written request with the Secretary of the 
        Senate and the Clerk of the House that the Congress reassemble 
        for the consideration of legislation.

        The SPEAKER.(4) The question is on the concurrent 
    resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question was taken and the Speaker announced that the ayes 
    appeared to have it.
        Mr. [John] ASHBROOK [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand 
    the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were refused.
        (Mr. ASHBROOK asked and was given permission to address the 
    House for 1 minute, and to revise and extend his remarks.)
        Mr. ASHBROOK. Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity of asking 
    the distinguished majority leader what all that means. It was read 
    rather rapidly. It seemed to have quite a few clauses. I did not 
    quite catch all of it.
        Mr. O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, I feel certain the gentleman from 
    Ohio is aware of the fact that this is a sine die resolution, which 
    gives the right to the Speaker of the House and the Presiding 
    Officer of the Senate, the majority leader of the House, and the 
    minority leader of the Senate and the minority leader of the House, 
    and the President of the United States, would have the right, to 
    call the Members back into session before January 3 if they thought 
    there was an emergency, and the Congress should be called back.
        After the date of January 3 we will extend it to January 14. . 
    . .
        So the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 15.8 The House agreed to a privileged House concurrent resolution 
    providing for the adjournment sine die of the first session of a 
    Congress (subject to recall by the joint House-Senate majority 
    leadership) and declaring the position of the Congress with respect 
    to the assertion by the President of a pocket veto between sessions 
    of a Congress.

[[Page 925]]

    On Nov. 21, 1989,(1) the Majority Leader offered a 
privileged concurrent resolution as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 135 Cong. Rec. 31156, 101st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PROVIDING FOR SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT OF THE FIRST SESSION OF THE 
                 101ST CONGRESS ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1989

        Mr. [Richard A.] GEPHARDT [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 239) and ask for its 
    immediate consideration, and I ask unanimous consent that I be 
    permitted to address the House for 1 minute on the resolution.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 239

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the House and Senate adjourn on 
        Wednesday, November 22, 1989, they stand adjourned sine die, or 
        until 12 o'clock meridian on the second day after Members are 
        notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
        resolution.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of 
        the Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority 
        Leader of the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, 
        shall notify the Members of the House and Senate, respectively, 
        to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public interest 
        shall warrant it.
            Sec. 3. The Congress declares--
            (1) that clause 5 of rule III of the Rules of the House of 
        Representatives, adopted for the One Hundred First Congress in 
        House Resolution 5 on January 3, 1989, authorizes the Clerk of 
        the House of Representatives to receive messages from the 
        President during periods when the House of Representatives is 
        not in session;
            (2) that the House of Representatives intends by such rule 
        to preserve until its adjournment sine die from the final 
        session of the One Hundred First Congress the constitutional 
        prerogative of the House to reconsider vetoed measures in light 
        of the objections of the President;
            (3) that the order of the Senate of January 3, 1989, 
        effective for the duration of the One Hundred First Congress, 
        authorizes the Secretary of the Senate to receive messages from 
        the President during periods when the Senate is not in session; 
        and
            (4) that the Senate intends by such order to preserve until 
        its adjournment sine die from the final session of the One 
        Hundred First Congress the constitutional prerogatives of the 
        Senate to reconsider vetoed measures in light of the objections 
        of the President.
            Sec. 4. The Congress reaffirms its intent that the 
        availability of the Clerk of the House of Representatives to 
        receive messages from the President during periods when the 
        House is not in session and the availability of the Secretary 
        of the Senate to receive messages from the President during 
        periods when the Senate is not in session ensure that the 
        adjournment of either House pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution shall not prevent the return by the President of any 
        bill presented to him for approval.
            Sec. 5. The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall 
        inform the President of the United States of the adoption of 
        this resolution.

        Mr. [Robert S.] WALKER [of Pennsylvania]. Mr. Speaker, 
    reserving the right to object, there is a question on

[[Page 926]]

    our side as to whether or not this would interfere with the 
    President's constitutional prerogatives to pocket-veto bills. As I 
    understand it, this is a concurrent resolution which would have no 
    impact on the President's constitutional prerogative to do that if 
    he so chose? Is that correct?
        Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, as I 
    understand it, this resolution would inform the President that the 
    Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate are available 
    under their rules to receive messages from the President during the 
    adjournment. It makes it clear that this adjournment will not 
    prevent the return of any bill and reserves the constitutional 
    prerogative to reconsider vetoed measures in light of the 
    President's objections.
        Mr. WALKER. But if the President chooses to pocket-veto a bill 
    rather than send a veto message up even though we have clerks in 
    place, it is my understanding that the President would still be 
    permitted to do that under this resolution since it is a concurrent 
    resolution? Is that correct?
        Mr. GEPHARDT. If the gentleman will yield further, the 
    President can exercise his constitutional prerogative. This 
    resolution simply expresses the sentiment of the House and Senate 
    as to the appropriate congressional prerogatives.
        Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of 
    objection, and I thank the majority leader.

                                {time}  1340

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mazzoli).(2) The 
    question is on the concurrent resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Romano L. Mazzoli (KY).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 15.9 The Speaker laid before the House a privileged Senate 
    concurrent resolution providing for the sine die adjournment of 
    both Houses.

    On Oct. 1, 1976,(1) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 122 Cong. Rec. 35336, 94th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       PROVISION FOR SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT

        The SPEAKER laid before the House the Senate concurrent 
    resolution (S. Con. Res. 211), providing for a sine die adjournment 
    of the Congress on Friday, October 1, 1976.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution.
        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 211

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That the two Houses of Congress shall adjourn on 
        Friday, October 1, 1976, and that when they adjourn on said 
        day, they stand adjourned sine die.

        The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Sec. 15.10 The House rejected a privileged concurrent resolution, 
    offered by the Majority

[[Page 927]]

    Leader, providing for the sine die adjournment of the two Houses or 
    for adjournment until reconvened by the joint House-Senate majority 
    or minority leadership prior to Jan. 3, 1974.

    On the legislative day of Dec. 21, 1973,(1) the House 
rejected a privileged concurrent resolution providing for adjournment 
sine die:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 119 Cong. Rec. 43294, 43295, 43318, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       PROVIDING FOR SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 411) and ask 
    for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 411

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That when the two Houses adjourn on Saturday, 
        December 22, 1973, they shall stand adjourned sine die or until 
        12:00 noon on the second day after their respective Members are 
        notified to reassemble in accordance with Section 2 of this 
        resolution, whichever event first occurs.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House of Representatives and the 
        President pro tempore of the Senate shall notify the Members of 
        the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, 
        in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it, or 
        whenever the majority leader of the Senate and the majority 
        leader of the House, acting jointly, or the minority leader of 
        the Senate and the minority leader of the House, acting 
        jointly, file a written request with the Secretary of the 
        Senate and the Clerk of the House that the Congress reassemble 
        for the consideration of legislation.

        Mr. O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the 
    concurrent resolution.
        The previous question was ordered.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The question is on the concurrent 
    resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. James V. STANTON [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand 
    the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 74, nays 171, not 
    voting 187, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 724] . . .

        So the concurrent resolution was rejected. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                      ADJOURNMENT TO 12 O'CLOCK NOON TODAY

        Mr. O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the 
    House adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 12 o'clock noon today, 
    Dec. 22, 1973.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Massachusetts?
        There was no objection. . . 
    .                          -------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [John B.] BREAUX [of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House do now adjourn.

[[Page 928]]

        The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 1 o'clock and 32 
    minutes a.m.) the House adjourned until today, Saturday, December 
    22, 1973, at 12 o'clock noon.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The next day, the House adopted House 
Concurrent Resolution 412, adjourning the session sine die. The Senate 
amended it to include joint majority or minority leadership recall 
authority.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See also Sec. 15.11, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 15.11 The Speaker laid before the House a House concurrent 
    resolution providing for sine die adjournment of the two Houses 
    with a Senate amendment thereto permitting the joint House-Senate 
    leadership to reconvene Congress prior to Jan. 3, 1974.

    On Dec. 22, 1973,(1) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 119 Cong. Rec. 43327, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        FURTHER MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

        A further message from the Senate by Mr. Arrington, one of its 
    clerks, announced that the Senate had passed a concurrent 
    resolution of the House (H. Con. Res. 412) entitled ``Concurrent 
    resolution providing for the sine die adjournment of the 1st 
    session of the 93d Congress,'' with amendments in which concurrence 
    is requested.                          -------------------

         PROVIDING FOR THE SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT OF THE 1ST SESSION OF 
                                THE 93D CONGRESS

        The SPEAKER.(2) The Clerk will report the concurrent 
    resolution (H. Con. Res. 412) providing for the sine die 
    adjournment of the 1st session of the 93rd Congress, with a Senate 
    amendment thereto, and report the Senate amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read the Senate amendment, as follows:

            Page 1, line 4, strike out ``die.'' and insert ``die or 
        until 12:00 noon on the second day after their respective 
        Members are notified to reassemble in accordance with section 2 
        of this resolution, whichever event first occurs.''.
            Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House of Representatives and the 
        President pro tempore of the Senate shall notify the Members of 
        the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, 
        in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it, or 
        whenever the majority leader of the Senate and the majority 
        leader of the House, acting jointly, or the minority leader of 
        the Senate and the minority leader of the House, acting 
        jointly, files a written request with the Secretary of the 
        Senate and the Clerk of the House that the Congress reassemble 
        for the consideration of legislation.

        The Senate amendment was concurred in.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the 
    table.                          -------------------

                              SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'NEILL [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    move that the House do now adjourn.

[[Page 929]]

        The motion was agreed to.
        The SPEAKER. In accordance with the provisions of House 
    Concurrent Resolution 412, the Chair declares the 1st session of 
    the 93d Congress adjourned sine die.
        Thereupon (at 2 o'clock and 2 minutes p.m.), pursuant to House 
    Concurrent Resolution 412, the House adjourned sine die.

Speaker's Designees to Exercise Recall Authority

Sec. 15.12 A Speaker pro tempore, by unanimous consent, announced the 
    Speaker's designations of (1) the Majority Leader to exercise 
    recall authority under the concurrent resolution of adjournment in 
    the event of the death or inability of the Speaker, and (2) certain 
    alternates in a letter placed with the Clerk to, in turn, exercise 
    the same authority in the event of the death or inability of the 
    primary designee.

    On Nov. 22, 2002,(1) the following occurred in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 148 Cong. Rec. 23517, 23518, 107th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                RECALL DESIGNEE

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kerns).(2) Without 
    objection, and pursuant to section 2 of Senate Concurrent 
    Resolution 160, the Chair announces the Speaker's designation of 
    Representative Richard K. Armey of Texas to act jointly with the 
    majority leader of the Senate or his designee, in the event of the 
    death or inability of the Speaker, to notify the Members of the 
    House and the Senate, respectively, of any reassembly under that 
    concurrent resolution, and further, in the event of the death or 
    inability of that designee, the alternate Members of the House 
    listed in the letter bearing this date that the Speaker has placed 
    with the Clerk are designed, in turn, for that same purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Brian Kerns (IN).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Beginning in the 108th Congress, clause 
8(b)(3) of Rule I was added to confer this designation authority on the 
Speaker.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. House Rules and Manual Sec. 632 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


                        

[Page 929-945]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
                        C. Adjournment Sine Die
 
Sec. 16. Where Required or Prohibited by Law

    The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 provides for a sine die 
adjournment of ``not later than July 31 of each year; or (2) in case of 
an odd-numbered year, provide, not later than July 31 of such year, by 
concurrent resolution adopted in each House by roll call vote, for the 
adjournment of the two Houses from that Friday in August which occurs 
at least thirty days before the first Monday in

[[Page 930]]

September (Labor Day) of such year to the second day after Labor 
Day.''(1) The section is not applicable if the Nation is in 
a state of war declared by Congress.(2) In even-numbered 
years and some odd-numbered years, the House has agreed to concurrent 
resolutions waiving the provisions of this law to provide that the two 
Houses shall not adjourn for more than three days or sine die until 
they have adopted a concurrent resolution to that effect.(3) 
To obviate the necessity of adoption of such a concurrent resolution 
waiving Sec. 132 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, the two 
Houses have included language ``in consonance with section 132(a)'' in 
its concurrent resolutions providing for adjournments from July until 
September.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 1105, 1106 (2007); 2 USC 
        Sec. 198.
 2. Ibid.
 3. See Sec. 16.2, infra. See also 145 Cong. Rec. 18763, 106th Cong. 
        1st Sess., July 30, 1999 (H. Con. 266); 140 Cong. Rec. 18611-
        15, 103d Cong. 2d Sess., July 29, 1994 (H. Con. Res. 275); 132 
        Cong. Rec. 18146, 18147, 99th Cong. 2d Sess., July 30, 1986 (H. 
        Con. Res. 374); 128 Cong. Rec. 18562, 18563, 97th Cong. 2d 
        Sess., July 29, 1982 (H. Con. Res. 386); and 120 Cong. Rec. 
        25008, 93th Cong. 2d Sess., July 24, 1974 (H. Con. Res. 568).
 4. See Sec. 16.1, infra. See also Sec. 12.1, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1970 Act superseded the provisions of the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946 which required that Congress adjourn sine 
die by the end of July each year unless there existed a state of war or 
national emergency declared by the President. Presidentially declared 
national emergencies of Sept. 8, 1939,(5) May 27, 
1941,(6) and Dec 16, 1950,(7) made the July 31 
adjournment provision moot.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Presidential Proclamation 2352 (54 Stat. 2643).
 6. Presidential Proclamation 2487 (55 Stat. 1647).
 7. Presidential Proclamation 2914 (64 Stat. A454).
 8. See, e.g., Sec. 16.3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The requirement in former Sec. 310(f) of the Congressional Budget 
Act of 1974 that sine die adjournment resolutions cannot be considered 
until Congress has completed action on the second concurrent resolution 
on the budget and on any required reconciliation legislation was 
repealed by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
1985.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. See House Rules and Manual Sec. 1127 (2007); 2 USC Sec. Sec. 601 et 
        seq.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970

Sec. 16.1 The House by unanimous consent considered a

[[Page 931]]

    concurrent resolution of adjournment for its ``August'' recess 
    rendered unprivileged by Sec. 309 and Sec. 310 of the Budget Act.

    On July 27, 2000,(1) the Speaker pro tempore laid before 
the House a Senate concurrent resolution providing for adjournment (or 
recess) of each House for more than three days, from separate alternate 
departure dates, to separate dates certain, subject to joint leadership 
recall. The proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 146 Cong. Rec. 16620, 16621, 106th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT OR RECESS OF THE SENATE 
          AND CONDITIONAL ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Without objection, the 
    Chair lays before the House the following Senate concurrent 
    resolution (S. Con. Res. 132), providing for a conditional 
    adjournment or recess of the Senate and conditional adjournment of 
    the House of Representatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Edward A. Pease (IN).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:

                                S. Con. Res. 132

            Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
        concurring), That, in consonance with section 132(a) of the 
        Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, when the Senate 
        recesses or adjourns at the close of business on Thursday, July 
        27, 2000, Friday, July 28, 2000, or on Saturday, July 29, 2000, 
        on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by 
        its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or 
        adjourned until noon on Tuesday, September 5, 2000, or until 
        noon on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, or until such time on 
        either day as may be specified by its Majority Leader or his 
        designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until noon on 
        the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
        pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever 
        occurs first; and that when the House adjourns on the 
        legislative day of Thursday, July 27, 2000, or Friday, July 28, 
        2000, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent 
        resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
        adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, or 
        until noon on the second day after Members are notified to 
        reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
        whichever occurs first.
            Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
        of the House, acting jointly after consultation with the 
        Minority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the 
        House, shall notify the Members of the Senate and House, 
        respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the 
        public interest shall warrant it.

                                {time}  1815

        The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Without objection, the 
    concurrent resolution is agreed to.
        There was no objection.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, House Resolution 
    567 is laid on the table.
        There was no objection.

[[Page 932]]

Sec. 16.2 By unanimous consent, the House considered and then agreed to 
    a concurrent resolution providing that notwithstanding the 
    requirement of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (2 USC 
    Sec. 198) that the two Houses adjourn sine die by July 31 in an 
    even-numbered year, the House and Senate not adjourn for more than 
    three days or sine die until they had adopted a concurrent 
    resolution to that effect.

    On July 25, 1972,(1) the House, by unanimous consent, 
took up a concurrent resolution providing that the two Houses would 
remain in session beyond the day specified by the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1970. The relevant section of the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1970 (2 USC Sec. 198) to which the concurrent 
resolution addressed itself states that unless otherwise provided by 
Congress, the two Houses shall either (a) adjourn sine die by July 31 
of each year; or (b) in odd-numbered years, adjourn from the first 
Friday in August until the second day after Labor Day pursuant to a 
concurrent resolution adopted by roll call vote in each House. The 
following proceedings then occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 118 Cong. Rec. 25145, 25146, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Hale] BOGGS [of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 648) and ask unanimous consent 
    for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as. follows:

                                H. Con. Res. 648

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That notwithstanding the provisions of Sec. 132(a) 
        of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 USC 198), as 
        amended by Section 461 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 
        1970 [Pub. Law 91-510; 84 Stat. 1193], the House of 
        Representatives and the Senate shall not adjourn for a period 
        in excess of three days, or adjourn sine die, until both Houses 
        of Congress have adopted a concurrent resolution providing 
        either for an adjournment (in excess of three days) to a day 
        certain, or for adjournment sine die.

        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Louisiana?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Durward G.] HALL [of Missouri]. Mr. Speaker, reserving the 
    right to object--as I understand the Clerk's reading of this 
    resolution, and from contact with the distinguished majority leader 
    just prior to its presentation, this requested approval will for 
    all intents and purposes obviate the intent of the Joint Commission 
    on the Reorganization of Congress and indeed the statute evolving 
    from the Reorganization Act of 1970.
        It was the hope of that Commission, which held 3 years of 
    hearings, and of

[[Page 933]]

    the Committee on Rules, which later submitted the bill that became 
    the Reorganization Act of 1970, that the Congress could obviate the 
    impasse between the legislative and/or authorizing committees vis-
    a-vis the operating or appropriations committees to the place where 
    we could accomplish our work in a so-called constitutionally 
    defined short session of any given Congress, and be out of here at 
    least by the end of July.
        I understand the need and the necessity for the House-Senate 
    concurrent resolution as submitted by the gentleman from Louisiana. 
    I do not understand why it needs to be open ended as to date.
        I wonder if the distinguished majority leader can explain, Mr. 
    Speaker, why it is until such time as subsequent concurrent action 
    or joint action sets a date certain, or adjourns for over 3 days.
        Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. HALL. I am glad to yield to my friend from Louisiana.
        Mr. BOGGS. The gentleman is, of course, correct in his 
    principal statement that under the terms of the so-called 
    Reorganization Act passed several years ago, unless some action is 
    taken, the Congress would be forced to adjourn by July 31. The 
    gentleman, of course, is well aware of the fact that there are a 
    number of very important authorization bills, and still a series of 
    appropriation bills that have not cleared one body or the other.
        The idea at this time of attempting to set a date certain for 
    adjournment is something that is just without the knowledge either 
    of the Speaker or of the majority leader. We just do not know.
        As the gentleman has been informed heretofore, we do not expect 
    to complete the work of this session prior to the Friday before the 
    Republican National Convention, which convenes, I believe, on 
    August 21.
        So the best answer I can give the gentleman is we just do not 
    have a date certain. Until such time as we were in a position to 
    write a date certain, it would be a vain and useless thing to do so 
    now.
        Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I 
    appreciate the gentleman's efforts, and those of the leadership[.] 
    . . .
        Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Louisiana?
        Mr. [H. R.] GROSS [of Iowa]. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the 
    right to object, could the House have any assurance, the slightest 
    assurance, that having returned after Labor Day, following the 
    Republican Convention, there will be a sine die adjournment of 
    Congress sometime in September?
        Mr. BOGGS. Will the gentleman yield?
        Mr. GROSS. I am happy to yield to the gentleman.
        Mr. BOGGS. The gentleman knows that the leadership prepared a 
    schedule of days off for this session and, if the gentleman will 
    refer to this, he will note that we expressed the hope then that we 
    would have completed the business of this session by August 18, 
    which is the Friday before the Republican National Convention.

[[Page 934]]

        Now, in truth and in fact, the House has done, in my judgment, 
    quite well. But we still have the foreign aid bills, the foreign 
    aid authorization and the foreign aid appropriation, the military 
    construction appropriation bill, and the defense appropriation. 
    These are very important matters, particularly the defense 
    appropriation bill. There is also the Water Quality Act which is 
    still in conference and there is the debt limit extension and a 
    housing bill.
        I will not seek to enumerate all of them, but there are matters 
    of importance pending before this body. . . .
        Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Iowa?
        Mr. [Joe D.] WAGGONNER [Jr., of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, 
    reserving the right to object, I want to ask my distinguished 
    colleague from Louisiana if he meant he was taking the position 
    that as majority leader he was not going to allow this House to 
    adjourn or this Congress to adjourn sine die until all of the 
    legislative proposals he recommended had been signed into law.
        Mr. BOGGS. No. Not at all. . . .
        Mr. WAGGONNER. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of 
    objection.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Louisiana?
        There was no objection.
        The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946

Sec. 16.3 The Speaker responded to parliamentary inquiries as to 
    whether it was necessary for the Congress to provide for the 
    continuance of its session beyond July 1949, and whether committees 
    may sit and act in view of the provisions of Sec. 132 of the 
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, requiring that adjournment 
    take place the last of July unless otherwise provided by the 
    Congress.

    The Speaker stated that a concurrent resolution to continue the 
session beyond July 1949 was not necessary inasmuch as the United 
States was still at war and that the national emergencies proclaimed by 
the President in 1939 and in 1941 were still in effect.
    There was inserted in the Congressional Record opinion and 
supporting evidence of the Legislative Reference Service of the Library 
of Congress to the effect that a concurrent resolution to continue the 
session beyond July 1949 was not necessary because of the current state 
of war and the national emergencies proclaimed by the President in 1939 
and in 1941.
    On July 27, 1949,(1) the Minority Leader posed the 
following parliamentary inquiry:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 95 Cong. Rec. 10290-93, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 935]]

                 continuation of sessions beyond july 31, 1949

        Mr. [Joseph W.] Martin, [Jr., of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I rise to propound an 
    inquiry to the Speaker and the majority leader.
        Three years ago in response to a wide public demand the then 
    Democratic Congress passed what was known as the reorganization 
    bill. The purpose of the legislation was to initiate legislative 
    reforms. The bill was warmly supported by the press, magazines, 
    labor leaders, business executives, eminent educators, and students 
    of public affairs. One of the reforms particularly stressed was the 
    establishment of a fixed date for the adjournment of Congress.
        In that bill was a paragraph, which I read:

            Sec. 132. Except in time of war in a national emergency 
        proclaimed by the President, the two Houses shall adjourn sine 
        die not later than the last day (Sundays excepted) in the month 
        of July in each year unless otherwise provided by the Congress.

        You will note that this is mandatory language, subject only to 
    emergencies. Unless the House is ready to accept the flimsy excuse 
    that 4 years after the ending of a shooting war we are still at 
    war, there are only two other ways we can continue legally to 
    legislate after August 1. One is through the passage of a 
    concurrent resolution, and the other the proclaiming by the 
    President of an emergency. There may be emergencies at this time, 
    and if so, I would like to have them specified.
        As I stated, there has been talk of keeping the Congress in 
    session on the pretext we are in war. Technically that, of course, 
    is true, but I submit, Mr. Speaker, that will not ring true with 
    the American people. It is doubtful from the progress we are making 
    toward the ending of the war that we will ever reach the time when 
    the war shall be officially ended. Certainly there will never be 
    peace if we are obliged to get the consent of Russia.
        I further submit that to continue without a resolution will 
    place in jeopardy legislation which we pass after August 1. The 
    Supreme Court only the other day in the Christoffel case said a 
    tribunal that is not competent is no tribunal. It might say in this 
    instance that a Congress sitting without a legal right to sit is 
    not qualified to enact legislation. Surely we are playing risky and 
    throwing a ``cloud'' over our work.
        Now, as to the war-emergency excuse. The President and the 
    Congress have both given adequate evidence that they do not believe 
    there is now an emergency. This has been indicated through the 
    frequent relaxation of emergency controls.
        President Truman, in his message to Congress on February 19, 
    1947, said:

        To the Congress of the United States:

            During the year and a half that have elapsed since the 
        defeat of our last enemy in battle we have progressively 
        eliminated the great majority of emergency controls over the 
        Nation's economy. The progress of reconversion now makes it 
        possible to take an additional step toward freeing our economy 
        of wartime controls.

[[Page 936]]

            Accordingly I am recommending that the Congress repeal 
        certain temporary statutes still in effect by virtue of the 
        emergencies proclaimed by the President in 1939 and 1941, and I 
        have requested the executive departments and agencies to cease 
        operations under powers derived from certain permanent statutes 
        that are effective only during emergencies, to the extent that 
        such operations are related to the 1939 and 1941 emergencies.

        Note that he ordered those powers should be suspended which 
    were effective only during emergencies.

            The recommendations I have present for the consideration of 
        the Congress will, if accepted materially assist in further 
        freeing the country of war controls and will help make possible 
        an early ending of the emergencies. I have under continuing 
        study the question of terminating the emergencies proclaimed in 
        1939 and 1941, and intend to take action as soon as 
        circumstances permit.
            In my recent message to the Congress on the state of the 
        Union I outlined the following program with respect to the 
        termination of emergency and wartime powers:
            ``Two groups of temporary laws still remain: The first are 
        those which by congressional mandate are to last during the 
        `emergency'; the second are those which are to continue until 
        the `termination of the war.'
            ``I shall submit to the Congress recommendations for the 
        repeal of certain of the statutes which by their terms continue 
        for the duration of the `emergency.' I shall at the same time 
        recommend that others within this classification be extended 
        until the state of war has been ended by treaty or by 
        legislative action. As to those statutes which continue until 
        the state of war has been terminated, I urge that the Congress 
        promptly consider each statute individually, and repeal such 
        emergency legislation where advisable.''
            Accordingly, I now submit recommendations with respect to 
        more than 100 laws which are affected by the limited emergency 
        declared September 8, 1939, or the unlimited emergency declared 
        May 27, 1941.
            In the case of those statutes that remain in force until 
        termination of the war, I have directed the executive 
        departments and agencies to assist the Congress in its 
        consideration of these statutes, individually, by making 
        available full information concerning them to the appropriate 
        congressional committees. The work done on this subject in the 
        Seventy-ninth Congress by the Committee on the Judiciary of 
        both Houses, with the assistance of the Office of War 
        Mobilization and Reconversion, the Department of Justice, and 
        other Government agencies, should offer valuable aid to the 
        Congress in accomplishing the task which remains. At a later 
        date it may prove desirable to send a further communication to 
        the Congress concerning these statutes.
            Emergency laws dealt with in this message fall into five 
        broad classes: (a) Temporary statutes which are no longer 
        needed, and which consequently should be repealed forthwith; 
        (b) permanent statutes under which operations related to the 
        1939 or 1941 emergencies have been or are being discontinued, 
        but which should remain for possible use during future 
        emergencies; (c) statutes appropriating funds, which should, 
        when the funds are no longer required be handled by rescission 
        of funds rather than by repeal of the statutes; (d) statutes 
        which should be temporarily extended by the Congress pending 
        consideration of permanent legislation or other disposition as 
        indicated below; (e) statutes which should continue in force 
        for the period or purpose stipulated.

[[Page 937]]

            In appendixes to this message the statutes under reference 
        are enumerated according to the above classifications.

        It will be observed there is no mention of this particular 
    restriction in Congress adjournment. Furthermore, I am informed 
    that the committee which framed this resolution in 1946 came very 
    nearly omitting the reference to emergencies. It was only included 
    by the House as an extreme precautionary measure. At the time the 
    reorganization bill was adopted there was no emergency in their 
    minds, and we are now 3 years later.
        On January 1, 1947, the President said:

            Although a state of war still exists, it is at this time 
        possible to declare, and I find it to be in the public interest 
        to declare, that hostilities are terminated.

        Then he went on to talk about the controls that should be 
    eliminated.
        The President on February 19, 1947, sent another message to the 
    Congress, and he said:

            During the year and a half that have elapsed since the 
        defeat of our last enemy in battle, we have progressively 
        eliminated the great majority of emergency controls over the 
        Nation's economy. The progress of reconversion now makes it 
        possible to take an additional step toward freeing our economy 
        of wartime controls.
            Accordingly, I am recommending that the Congress repeal 
        certain temporary statutes still in effect by virtue of the 
        emergencies proclaimed by the President in 1939 and 1941, and I 
        have requested the executive departments and agencies to cease 
        operations under powers derived from certain permanent statutes 
        that are effective only during emergencies, to the extent that 
        such operations are related to the 1939 and 1941 emergencies.
            The recommendations I here present for the consideration of 
        the Congress will, if accepted, materially assist in further 
        freeing the country of war controls and will help make possible 
        an early ending of the emergencies. I have under continuing 
        study the question of terminating the emergencies proclaimed in 
        1939 and 1941, and intend to take action as soon as 
        circumstances permit.
            In my recent message to the Congress on the state of the 
        Union I outlined the following program with respect to the 
        termination of emergency and wartime powers:
            ``Two groups of temporary laws still remain: The first are 
        those which by Congressional mandate are to last during the 
        `emergency'; the second are those which are to continue until 
        the `termination of the war'.
            ``Accordingly, I now submit these recommendations.''

        You will note from that the President had progressively ended 
    war controls because the emergencies were over.
        Mr. Speaker, I bring this up, I assure you, not in any partisan 
    manner; not in any manner except to clarify the situation, that we 
    may know properly where we stand. I want to remove if possible the 
    cloud over our legislative acts. I believe that this can only 
    legally be assured through the adoption of a resolution by both 
    branches of the Congress. The fact it is so easy for Congress to 
    continue its session by resolution is sufficient reason that 
    emergency wartime proposals should not be utilized to keep Congress 
    in session. If the Congress by any chance was in such a position 
    that it could not help

[[Page 938]]

    itself, there might be some reason to defend the restriction. 
    Congress is here. Congress could simply pass a resolution extending 
    it indefinitely or to a given date. But I submit, Mr. Speaker, that 
    not only for today but for the years to come, unless we exercise 
    common sense and reason we will go on indefinitely being deprived 
    of one of the essential reforms of the reorganization act because 
    we are at war.
        Mr. Speaker, I submit this question to you with confidence in 
    your integrity. I do it as a contribution to orderly procedure and 
    in an effort to clarify a grave doubt.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is prepared to answer the parliamentary 
    inquiry of the gentleman from Massachusetts. The gentleman from 
    Massachusetts was kind enough to advise the Chair on last Monday 
    that he intended to raise this question so that the House might 
    have an interpretation for its guidance.
        Section 132 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 
    provides:

            Sec. 132. Except in time of war or during a national 
        emergency proclaimed by the President, the two Houses shall 
        adjourn sine die not later than the last day (Sundays excepted) 
        in the month of July in each year unless otherwise provided by 
        the Congress.

        It is indisputable that we were on August 2, 1946, the time the 
    Legislative Reorganization Act was passed, in a state of war, and 
    that the national emergencies declared by the President on 
    September 8, 1939, and May 27, 1941, were still in effect. That 
    same state of affairs continues today. The state of war still 
    exists, and the national emergencies declared by the President 
    still exist.
        That fact--that the state of war and national emergencies have 
    continued to exist--has been recognized on numerous occasions. 
    Following the passage of the Legislative Reorganization Act the 
    President on December 31, 1946, issued his proclamation declaring 
    the cessation of hostilities of World War II. At that time the 
    President stated that his proclamation did not effect the 
    termination of the national emergencies or of the state of war.
        The Supreme Court on at least two occasions since the passage 
    of the Legislative Reorganization Act, and as recently as February 
    1948, recognized the distinction between the termination of 
    hostilities and the termination of the war itself.
        In Fleming v. Mohawk Wrecking & Lumber Co. (331 U. S. 111), 
    decided in 1947, the Supreme Court unanimously upholding the 
    exercise of authority by the President under title I of the First 
    War Powers Act of 1941, which the President was authorized to use 
    only in matters relating to the conduct of the present war, said:

            The cessation of hostilities does not necessarily end the 
        war power.

        In Woods v. Miller Co. (333 U. S. 138), decided in 1948, the 
    Supreme Court again, and once more unanimously, upheld the 
    constitutionality of the Housing and Rent Act of 1947 as a valid 
    exercise by the Congress of its war powers, saying:

            Whatever may be the consequences when war is officially 
        terminated, the war power does not necessarily end with the 
        cessation of hostilities.

        The Congress itself in enacting Senate Joint Resolution 123, 
    Eightieth

[[Page 939]]

    Congress, a year after the passage of the Legislative 
    Reorganization Act, recognized the continued existence of the state 
    of war and of the emergencies.
        It will be recalled that Senate Joint Resolution 123, which 
    became Public Law 239 of the Eightieth Congress, provided that with 
    respect to a number of specified statutory provisions the war and 
    the emergencies should be considered terminated. But the central 
    principle--that the state of war and the national emergencies 
    continued to exist--was clearly recognized and reinforced.
        The Chair is not aware that either the Congress or the 
    President has taken any step whatever which would have the effect 
    of terminating World War II as such or the national emergencies as 
    such. For the foregoing reasons it is clear that section 132 of the 
    Legislative Reorganization Act has no effect at this time because 
    in its own words it is not effective ``in time of war or during a 
    national emergency proclaimed by the President.''
        Mr. [Charles A.] HALLECK [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. HALLECK. I assume, of course, from the response of the 
    Speaker that we are to continue with the session after August 1, 
    with no further action in the way of a resolution by the Congress.
        The SPEAKER. That would be the interpretation of the Chair, 
    that it would not be necessary to pass a concurrent resolution for 
    the continuance of the Congress beyond the 1st of August.
        Mr. HALLECK. Then, Mr. Speaker, since it is apparent that we 
    are going to go beyond the 1st of August, I wonder if the Speaker 
    can give us any information as to when we may reasonably expect 
    that the work of the House of Representatives may be concluded in 
    order that we may be in a little better position to make our plans 
    for the rest of the year and, I believe, to make some 
    determinations as to the legislative program. I understand, that it 
    may well be that the Speaker is not in any position at this time to 
    say anything to us about this matter about which I am inquiring, 
    but I can see around me what I am sure is a lot of interest in the 
    matter about which I have inquired. I am quite sure that my 
    colleagues will join with me in expressing the hope that very 
    shortly we can come to the end of the labors of this session and 
    get back home.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair may say, in response to the inquiry of 
    the gentleman from Indiana, that anything he may say about the 
    length of this session would be only the expression of a hope.
        Mr. [John E.] RANKIN [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, if the Supreme Court should decide 
    that the war has terminated, would that not vitiate every law that 
    we would pass from now on without passing a resolution?
        May I say to the Speaker that I am somewhat alarmed at a recent 
    decision of the Supreme Court setting aside the conviction of a man 
    for committing perjury before a committee of the House

[[Page 940]]

    on the ground there was not a quorum present. Suppose the Supreme 
    Court should go off on a similar tangent and decide that the war 
    has been terminated, would that not vitiate any legislation we 
    might pass unless we passed a resolution to continue the session, 
    as the law provides, and would it not be a simple matter to bring 
    in a resolution extending the regular session as provided by law 
    and thus eliminate that danger?
        The SPEAKER. Of course, the Chair is not in position or not of 
    a disposition to guess or prognosticate on what the Supreme Court 
    of the United States will do.
        Mr. RANKIN. I would not impose that burden on the Chair, of 
    course.
        The SPEAKER. But if and when that time comes the Congress could 
    by its own action clear up those things.
        Mr. RANKIN. The trouble is, Mr. Speaker, that after we have 
    legislated for 6 weeks more, and I think we will be here until the 
    middle of September, if the Supreme Court were to hold that the war 
    had terminated and that we were sitting without authority, it might 
    affect every law that we would pass in the next 6 weeks.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair would think that the Supreme Court of 
    the United States reads the Congressional Record.
        Mr. [Earl C.] MICHENER [of Michigan]. Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, we all appreciate that this is a 
    very vital question, that it is a question of law and in the final 
    analysis has to be decided by the Supreme Court of the United 
    States.
        The Chair has made his ruling and that ruling is binding upon 
    the House and can only be challenged in the courts.
        This question gave me some concern and on yesterday I asked the 
    American Law Division of the Legislative Reference Service to 
    prepare a brief for me on the questions involved. That brief was 
    delivered to me a few minutes ago. I have not had time to 
    thoroughly digest it. Some of the brief is not in keeping with what 
    my views were; however, I may possibly be wrong.
        Inasmuch as this is a legal proposition to be decided by the 
    law and the precedents, I think the entire membership of the House 
    is entitled to the conclusion of this agency which the Congress has 
    set up in the Library of Congress for the express purpose of 
    advising the Congress as to what the decisions indicate, as well as 
    its conclusions.
        I therefore ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, that the 
    opinion rendered by Mr. Frank B. Horne, American Law Section, of 
    July 26, be included at this point in the Record.
        The SPEAKER. Would the gentleman be willing to have that 
    inserted in the Appendix of the Record?
        Mr. MICHENER. If the Speaker desires, I would be willing, but 
    inasmuch as this whole question is so vital and should all be 
    considered together, I believe it should be inserted at this point. 
    I may say to the Chair that the opinion is not at variance with the 
    ruling which the Speaker has made, even though it is not in keeping 
    with my preconceived views.

[[Page 941]]

        The cases to which the Speaker has referred are cited as well 
    as many others. I think it would be for the benefit of all those 
    interested to have these views at one spot in the Congresssional 
    Record. Of course, I shall be pleased to abide by whatever the 
    Speaker says.
        Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I 
    shall not object, I would like to say to the gentleman from 
    Michigan, and to the House, that it seems to me that the wise thing 
    to do is to pass a continuing resolution immediately. I do not 
    think there would be any particular objection to it, and it would 
    eliminate the danger of having the laws we pass during the rest of 
    the session set aside by the Supreme Court.
        Mr. MICHENER. There is no question about that. I was on the 
    Reorganization Committee, and the intent and the purpose was to fix 
    a final and a definite date which would control the annual sine die 
    adjournment unless the Congress, in its wisdom, decided otherwise 
    before the date specified, on the 31st day of July in each year, 
    arrived. The Speakers ruling holds that we are still at war 
    technically, that an emergency declared by the President in 1937 
    and another one declared in 1941 still exists. Therefore, the only 
    solution, if we want to adjourn, is to pass a resolution of 
    adjournment, fixing the date. That will remove all doubt.
        The SPEAKER. As to the request of the gentleman from Michigan, 
    of course, the gentleman from Michigan knows that the Chair has no 
    more respect for any other Member of the House than he has for him, 
    but the Chair would prefer, if the gentleman does not object, that 
    the matter he speaks of be extended in the Appendix of the Record.
        Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, may I suggest, in view of what I 
    said, that if it is not objectionable, that the decision be 
    inserted immediately preceding the ruling of the Chair? It is not 
    at variance with the ruling; it is amplifying.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair, of course, would not object to that 
    himself.
        Mr. [Clare E.] HOFFMAN of Michigan. I object, Mr. Speaker.
        The SPEAKER. But the Chair thinks that that would hardly be the 
    place for it to go.
        Mr. [John M.] VORYS [of Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. VORYS. The Chair has given an expression of his views, but 
    is this not the case, that the only way in which the Chair could 
    rule on the point would be if a point of order were made after July 
    31 to some action of the House on the ground that the House is not 
    in session? The Chair cannot rule in advance.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair assumes that the gentleman from 
    Massachusetts [Mr. Martin] made his parliamentary inquiry today in 
    order to obviate a thing like that.

    The proceedings continued in the House on Aug. 1, 
1949:(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 95 Cong. Rec. 10486, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The House met at 12 o'clock noon.
        The Acting Chaplain, Rev. James P. Wesberry, LL. D., offered 
    the . . . prayer[.]. . .

[[Page 942]]

        Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, a point of order.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that the 
    House is not legally in session. I make it at this time because I 
    am quite sure that the point should be made before the Journal is 
    read.
        I make the point of order for the reason that under the 
    Reorganization Act recently passed by the Congress which is now the 
    law of the land, it is provided that Congress shall adjourn on the 
    last day of July unless the Nation is at war, or there is a 
    national emergency proclaimed by the President, or unless the 
    Congress determines otherwise.
        The Congress has not determined otherwise. No action has been 
    taken by the Congress in line with the provisions of the 
    Reorganization Act. I insist, Mr. Speaker, that there is no such 
    state of war existing, and there is no such national emergency 
    declared by the President existing as contemplated by the 
    Reorganization Act, which would avoid the necessity of the Congress 
    acting affirmatively as provided in the act if we are to be legally 
    in session.
        Mr. Speaker, I am, of course, familiar with the Speaker's 
    response of last week to the inquiry addressed to the Chair by the 
    minority leader, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Martin]. 
    Being so convinced, however, that there should be no cloud whatever 
    upon the legality of the action of the Congress that may hereafter 
    be taken, and because I am convinced that the only way to remove 
    any threat to such legality is for the Congress to act 
    affirmatively, I am constrained at this time to raise the point of 
    order.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is prepared to rule.
        In response to the parliamentary inquiry propounded by the 
    gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Martin] on last July 27, the 
    Chair stated what the Chair thought and still thinks is the law: 
    that the Congress is legally in session. The Chair therefore 
    overrules the point of order made by the gentleman from Indiana.
        Mr. [Ralph E.] CHURCH [of Illinois]. Mr. Speaker, a point of 
    order.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Speaker, I make a further point of order. This 
    goes beyond what the Speaker has ruled with reference to the point 
    of order just made by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Halleck]. 
    First, let me say that there is nothing to prevent the President 
    from calling a special session today, or any day, to begin 
    immediately.
        Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that the House is not 
    legally in session, that when the House adjourned last Thursday and 
    the Senate adjourned last Friday the adjournment constituted a sine 
    die adjournment pursuant to section 132 of the Legislative 
    Reorganization Act of 1946.
        Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact, not merely that Congress has 
    not by concurrent resolution adjourned, but in addition thereto, 
    that the President has not yet called us today or on tomorrow into 
    special session, I raise this further point of order and insist on 
    my objection with respect to every measure before the Congress.

[[Page 943]]

        While the Speaker has ruled that no formal action is necessary 
    to prevent a sine die adjournment as provided by section 132 of the 
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, there is nonetheless some 
    doubt as to the validity of our proceedings. The ruling of the 
    Speaker can be challenged in the courts should occasion arise where 
    any of the measures we pass should be challenged.
        In order to remove all possible doubt as to the validity of our 
    proceedings after the last day of July, I had hoped that the 
    leadership would bring in a formal resolution. Such action not 
    having been taken, I believe that the President should call a 
    special session. He should do this in order to give formal legal 
    status to our proceedings. He should do this in order that the 
    question may never arise at some future date as to the validity 
    under our Constitution of what we may attempt to do in the coming 
    days that it is proposed we continue in session.
        I repeat that there is nothing to prevent the President from 
    calling a special session today to begin immediately.
        Mr. Speaker, I do this with a view to certainty and for the 
    dignity of this Congress. The people who sent us here, expect the 
    Congress to legislate, and not a President and not a Speaker. I do 
    this in all seriousness in order that the President may, before the 
    day is over, instanter, now, call us in special session.
        I make that point of order.
        The SPEAKER. In response to the point of order, the Chair has 
    already held that the Congress is legally assembled and in session; 
    therefore, there is no reason for the President to call a special 
    session of the Congress at this time.
        The Chair overrules the point of order.

    On Aug. 2, 1949,(4) Rep. Church raised the following 
point of order:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Id. at p. 10591.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        legality of session of congress

        Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Speaker, a point of order.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that the 
    House is not legally in session, and again cite section 132 of the 
    Reorganization Act passed by the Congress. Today, Mr. Speaker, the 
    situation is different in one particular from the situation on 
    yesterday, when the two points of order were raised by the 
    gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Halleck] and myself.
        Mr. Speaker, section 132 reads as follows:

                           congressional adjournment

            Sec. 132. Except in time of war or during a national 
        emergency proclaimed by the President, the two Houses shall 
        adjourn sine die not later than the last day (Sundays excepted) 
        in the month of July in each year unless otherwise provided by 
        Congress.

        Mr. Speaker, I emphasize the words in parenthesis ``Sundays 
    excepted.'' If through any interpretation the words ``Sundays 
    excepted'' give legality to the session of yesterday, then, Mr. 
    Speaker, that interpretation could not carry

[[Page 944]]

    that legality to include today. Therefore, I renew my point of 
    order that the House is not legally in session, for the reasons 
    stated by the gentleman from Massachusetts last July 27 and by the 
    gentleman from Indiana and me on yesterday, and in addition for the 
    reason that I have just stated, namely, that the words ``Sundays 
    excepted'' cannot carry a legal session into today. Mr. Speaker, 
    the President can instanter call a ``special session'' to meet 
    immediately, and thereby remove the doubt as to the legality of the 
    future proceedings of the Congress.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair is ready to rule.
        The Chair makes the statement again that on July 27, in 
    response to the parliamentary inquiry propounded by the gentleman 
    from Massachusetts [Mr. Martin], the Chair held, and he so holds 
    today, that the Congress is in session.
        The point of order is overruled.

    On Aug. 4, 1949,(5) Mr. John E. Lyle, Jr., of Texas, 
called up, by direction of the Committee on Rules, House Resolution 
310, providing for the consideration of H. R. 1758, a bill to amend the 
Natural Gas Act approved June 21, 1938, as amended, and asked for its 
immediate consideration. The following point of order was then made:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Id. at pp. 10777, 10778.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] HESELTON [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, a point 
    of order.
        The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that the 
    House is not legally in session.
        I recognize that this matter has been raised in a general sense 
    on at least two occasions. I do not wish to burden the Speaker, the 
    membership or the record with repetition. Therefore, I would like 
    to recognize and incorporate by references the parliamentary 
    inquiry of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Martin] on July 
    27, the further parliamentary inquiries of the gentlemen from 
    Indiana [Mr. Halleck], from Mississippi [Mr. Rankin], from Michigan 
    [Mr. Michener], and from Ohio [Mr. Vorys], as well as the several 
    rulings of the Speaker; also the points of order of August 1 by the 
    gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Halleck], and the gentleman from 
    Illinois [Mr. Church], as well as the rulings of the Speaker on 
    those occasions.
        My reason for making this point of order at this time is more 
    specific. I have been advised upon what I believe to be reliable 
    authority that if H. R. 1758, the resolution we will now consider, 
    is enacted into law, with or without the proposed amendments, its 
    legality will be challenged. Obviously, this might have a far-
    reaching effect not only upon the industry concerned but upon the 
    entire problem of developing an effective fuel policy involving our 
    energy resources.
        In view of this possibility, it would seem to me that I would 
    be derelict in my obligations as a Member of this body if I did not 
    raise the point of order in terms of the consideration of this 
    specific legislation.
        Moreover, another problem is involved by reason of the recent 
    decision

[[Page 945]]

    of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Christoffel case. 
    It seems to me that it is the primary responsibility of proponents 
    of H. R. 1758, particularly during the reading of the bill for 
    amendment, to establish affirmatively at all times that a quorum is 
    present and voting. However, I do not think that this is of major 
    importance in terms of the point of order which I have raised and 
    wish to submit to the Speaker.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair will repeat, as he will repeatedly 
    repeat when questions of this kind are raised, that on July 27, in 
    answer to a parliamentary inquiry by the gentleman from 
    Massachusetts [Mr. Martin] the Chair ruled that the House is 
    legally in session, committees may legally meet, and may legally 
    report bills.
        The Chair overrules the point of order.

    On Aug. 5, 1949,(6) Mr. Heselton was recognized for the 
following parliamentary inquiry in the Committee of the Whole:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. Id. at p. 10858.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Chairman, yesterday, when the resolution 
    reporting the rule was before the House, I made the point of order 
    that the House was not legally in session, which point of order was 
    overruled. I have been advised that in order to properly present 
    the matter in terms of the consideration of this bill, now that we 
    have it at the point where it is being read for amendment, I should 
    renew the point of order.
        I would like to inquire whether that is in order or whether it 
    should be submitted at the conclusion of the reading of the bill 
    and when it is reported back to the House?
        The CHAIRMAN.(7) The point raised by the gentleman 
    from Massachusetts is not for the Committee of the Whole to pass 
    on. If he will reserve the point of order, it should be propounded 
    in the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Brooks Hays (AR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       

[Page 945-948]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
                        C. Adjournment Sine Die
 
Sec. 17. Procedure and Business at Adjournment

    The House customarily authorizes the Speaker to appoint a committee 
to notify the President of the completion of business and the intention 
of the two Houses to adjourn sine die unless the President has some 
further communication to make.(1) This authority is provided 
by a simple resolution called up as privileged following adoption of 
the concurrent resolution to adjourn sine die. The committee is usually 
composed of the Majority and Minority Leaders of the House and joins a 
similar committee from the Senate if appointed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See Sec. 17.1, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Between the adoption of a sine die concurrent resolution and the 
actual sine die adjournment of the House by motion, the House 
customarily gives permission to facilitate the conduct of some items of

[[Page 946]]

business during adjournment and, at the end of the second session, the 
preparation of necessary documents for the next Congress. Once 
customary concurrent resolutions or separate unanimous-consent requests 
to permit the receipt of messages between the Houses and enrollments to 
be signed after adjournment have been superseded by changes in the 
standing rules at the beginning of the 97th Congress in 1981 which 
permit the Speaker or the Speaker pro tempore and the Clerk to 
accomplish these responsibilities.(2) Unanimous-consent 
requests or resolutions for printing the House Rules and Manual for the 
next Congress,(3) for the acceptance of resignations and for 
appointments to commissions and committees,(4) and for 
insertions in the Congressional Record by chairmen and ranking minority 
Members of standing committees(5) and by Members on matters 
occurring prior to sine die adjournment, are necessary prior to sine 
die adjournment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Rule I clause 4, House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 624-626 (2007); 
        and Rule II clause 2(h) House Rules and Manual Sec. 652 (2007). 
        See Sec. 18.1, infra.
 3. Ibid.
 4. Ibid.
 5. Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motion to adjourn sine die is in order notwithstanding the 
absence of a quorum if both Houses have adopted a concurrent resolution 
providing sine die adjournment on the date.(6) The yeas and 
nays may be ordered on this motion.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. See Sec. 14.2, supra.
 7. See Sec. 6.2, supra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appointment of House Committee

Sec. 17.1 By privileged resolution the House authorized the Speaker to 
    appoint a committee to notify the President of the completion of 
    business and the intention of the two Houses to adjourn sine die 
    unless the President has some further communication to make.

    On Sept. 1, 1960,(1) a committee was appointed to notify 
the President of an impending adjournment, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 106 Cong. Rec. 19128, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The SPEAKER.(2) The Chair recognizes the gentleman 
    from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer a preferential resolution (H. Res. 643).
        The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the resolution.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

[[Page 947]]

        Resolved, That a committee of two Members be appointed by the 
    House to join a similar committee appointed by the Senate, to wait 
    upon the President of the United States and inform him that the two 
    Houses have completed their business of the session and are ready 
    to adjourn, unless the President has some other communication to 
    make to them.
        The resolution was agreed to.
        The SPEAKER. The Chair appoints the gentleman from 
    Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack] and the gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. 
    Halleck] to wait on the President.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See also 118 Cong. Rec. 37051, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 18, 1972 
        (H. Res. 1169); 117 Cong. Rec. 47668, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 
        17, 1971 (H. Res. 756); and 112 Cong. Rec. 28881, 89th Cong. 2d 
        Sess., Oct. 22, 1966 (H. Res. 1074).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: Such a resolution is privileged after a 
sine die resolution has been adopted, since it is considered to be a 
formality integral to concluding the business of the House.

Report of Committee to Notify the President

Sec. 17.2 The committee appointed by the Speaker to notify the 
    President of the impending adjournment of the two Houses reported 
    that it had so informed the President and that the President had no 
    further communication to make.

    On Sept. 26, 1961,(1) the following report was made in 
the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 107 Cong. Rec. 21528, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. (S. Con. Res. 55).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]. Mr. Speaker, your committee 
    appointed to join a committee of the Senate to inform the President 
    that the Congress is ready to adjourn, and to ask him if he has any 
    further communications to make to the Congress, has performed that 
    duty. The President has directed us to say that he has no further 
    communication to make to the Congress.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. See also 118 Cong. Rec. 37065, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 18, 1972; 
        and 111 Cong. Rec. 28563, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 22, 1965.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In General

Sec. 17.3 On motion of the designee of the Majority Leader pursuant to 
    Sec. 3 of House Concurrent Resolution 353, the House (for the 
    second time) adjourned the second session of the 105th Congress.

    On Dec. 19, 1998,(1) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 144 Cong. Rec. 28113, 105th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [B. H.] SOLOMON [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to 
    section 3 of House Concurrent Resolution 353, and as the designee 
    for the Majority Leader, I move that the House do now adjourn.

[[Page 948]]

        The motion was agreed to.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) In accordance with the 
    provisions of House Concurrent Resolution 353, the Chair declares 
    the second session of the 105th Congress adjourned sine die.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Ray H. LaHood (IL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Thereupon (at 2 o'clock and 36 minutes p.m.), pursuant to 
    section 3 of House Concurrent Resolution 353, the House adjourned.

Printing of House Rules and Manual

Sec. 17.4 The House by unanimous consent agreed to a resolution 
    providing for printing of revised House Rules and Manual for 108th 
    Congress (3000 additional copies, 900 leatherbound with thumb 
    index).

    On Nov. 14, 2002,(1) the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 148 Cong. Rec. 22599, 107th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        PROVIDING FOR PRINTING AND BINDING OF REVISED EDITION OF RULES 
                     AND MANUAL OF HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

        Mr. [Richard] ARMEY [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    resolution (H. Res. 614) and ask unanimous consent for its 
    immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 614

        Resolved, That a revised edition of the Rules and Manual of the 
    House of Representatives for the One Hundred Eighth Congress be 
    printed as a House document, and that three thousand additional 
    copies shall be printed and bound for the use of the House of 
    Representatives, of which nine hundred copies shall be bound in 
    leather with thumb index and delivered as may be directed by the 
    Parliamentarian of the House.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Is there objection to 
    the request of the gentleman from Texas?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Michael Simpson (ID).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                       

[Page 948-954]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
                        C. Adjournment Sine Die
 
Sec. 18. Business Subsequent to

    Certain administrative items of business are authorized to be 
undertaken as described in Sec. 17, supra. Standing rules do not permit 
committees to file legislative reports, other than oversight, 
investigative, or biannual activities reports(1) following 
sine die adjournment without specific permission of the House. Standing 
rules do permit all committees to sit and act whether or not the House 
has adjourned,(2) up to the

[[Page 949]]

constitutional end of term at noon on Jan. 3 of an odd-numbered year. 
Proceedings of the House subsequent to sine die adjournment of a 
Congress, including signing of enrollments and receipt of messages, are 
printed in a separate portion of the Congressional Record during the 
sine die period, or if there is no separate edition, in a separate 
portion of the next printed Congressional Record.(3) Of 
course, business conducted during adjournments to a day certain, 
including the receipt of messages, signing of enrollments, and 
appointments is shown in the Congressional Record of the day the House 
reconvenes.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Rule XI clauses 1(b)(4) and 1(d)(4), House Rules and Manual 
        Sec. Sec. 788, 790 (2007). See Sec. 18.7, infra.
 2. Rule XI clause 2(m)(1)(A), House Rules and Manual Sec. 805 (2007).
 3. See, e.g., 148 Cong. Rec. 23555-59, 107th Cong. 2d Sess., Dec. 16, 
        2002.
 4. For a discussion of the effect of a sine die adjournment or an 
        adjournment to a day certain on the authority of the President 
        to ``pocket veto'' a measure, see Ch. 24, Sec. 18, 
        supra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Making Appointments and Accepting Resignations

Sec. 18.1 The House by unanimous consent authorized the Speaker and 
    Minority Leader to accept resignations and make appointments to 
    commissions, boards, and committees following adjournment sine die 
    as authorized by law or by the House.

    On Nov. 14, 2002,(1) the House by unanimous consent also 
provided that the chairman and ranking minority Member of each standing 
committee and subcommittee may extend remarks in the Congressional 
Record and include summary of work of committee or subcommittee. The 
House by unanimous consent authorized all Members until the publication 
of the last edition of the Congressional Record to revise and extend 
their remarks and include brief extraneous material on any matter 
occurring before adjournment sine die.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 148 Cong. Rec. 22600 107th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         AUTHORIZING SPEAKER, MAJORITY LEADER, AND MINORITY LEADER TO 
        ACCEPT RESIGNATIONS AND TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS AUTHORIZED BY LAW 
             OR BY THE HOUSE NOT WITHSTANDING SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT

        Mr. [Richard] ARMEY [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that notwithstanding the adjournment of the second session 
    of the 107th Congress, the Speaker, the majority leader, and the 
    minority leader be authorized to accept resignations and to make 
    appointments authorized by law or by the House.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Is there objection to 
    the request of the gentleman from Texas?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Michael Simpson (ID).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

[[Page 950]]

           AUTHORIZING CHAIRMAN AND RANKING MINORITY MEMBER OF EACH
       STANDING COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE TO EXTEND REMARKS IN RECORD

        Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the 
    chairman and ranking minority member of each standing committee and 
    each subcommittee be permitted to extend their remarks in the 
    Record, up to and including the Record's last publication, and to 
    include a summary of the work of that committee or subcommittee.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Texas?
        There was no 
    objection.                          -------------------

         GRANTING MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE PRIVILEGE TO REVISE AND EXTEND 
        REMARKS IN CONGRESSIONAL RECORD UNTIL LAST EDITION IS PUBLISHED

        Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members 
    may have until publication of the last edition of the Congressional 
    Record authorized for the second session of the 107th Congress by 
    the Joint Committee on Printing to revise and extend their remarks 
    and to include brief, related extraneous material on any matter 
    occurring before the adjournment of the second session sine die.
        The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Texas?
        There was no objection.

Sec. 18.2 By unanimous consent, the Speaker was authorized to accept 
    resignations and to appoint commissions, boards, and committees 
    authorized by law, notwithstanding adjournment sine die.

    On Dec. 17, 1971,(1) the following transpired in the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 117 Cong. Rec. 47676, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Hale] BOGGS [of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that notwithstanding the adjournment of the first session 
    of the 92d Congress, the Speaker be authorized to accept 
    resignations, and to appoint commissions, boards, and committees 
    authorized by law or by the House.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Louisiana?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See also 119 Cong. Rec. 43292, 43293, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 21, 
        1973; and 118 Cong. Rec. 37062, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 18, 
        1972.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Signing Bills and Resolutions

Sec. 18.3 Prior to standing rules changes in 1981 authorizing such 
    procedure considered by unanimous consent, the Speaker of the House 
    and the President of the Senate were authorized by unanimous 
    consent to sign enrolled bills and joint resolutions, 
    notwithstanding adjournment sine die.

[[Page 951]]

    On Sept. 12, 1959,(1) preceding the sine die adjournment 
of Congress, a concurrent resolution was worded so as to include both 
the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate in the 
authorization to sign enrolled bills and joint resolutions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 105 Cong. Rec. 19365, 86th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I 
    offer a House concurrent resolution and ask unanimous consent for 
    its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

                        House Concurrent Resolution 439

        Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
    concurring), That notwithstanding the sine die adjournment of the 
    two Houses, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the 
    President of the Senate be, and they are hereby, authorized to sign 
    enrolled bills and joint resolutions duly passed by the two Houses 
    and found truly enrolled.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Massachusetts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The House concurrent resolution was agreed to, and a motion to 
    reconsider was laid on the table.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See also 106 Cong. Rec. 19132, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., Sept. 1, 1960 
        (calendar day).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, on Aug. 30, 1957,(4) the following transpired 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 103 Cong. Rec. 16759, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I offer a House concurrent 
    resolution (H. Con. Res. 230) and ask for its immediate 
    consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
        concurring), That notwithstanding the sine die adjournment of 
        the two Houses, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and 
        the President of the Senate be, and they are hereby, authorized 
        to sign enrolled bills and joint resolutions duly passed by the 
        two Houses and found truly enrolled.

        The SPEAKER. The question is on the resolution.
        The resolution was agreed to.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Standing rules were amended in the 97th 
Congress to obviate the need for these unanimous-consent 
requests.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Rule I clause 4, House Rules and Manual Sec. 624 (2007); Rule II 
        clause 2, House Rules and Manual Sec. 652 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 18.4 By unanimous consent, the Clerk may be authorized to receive 
    messages from the Senate, and the Speaker authorized to sign 
    enrollments notwithstanding an adjournment sine die.

    On Dec. 17, 1971,(1) the following authorizations were 
made in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 117 Cong. Rec. 47676, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Hale] BOGGS [of Louisiana]. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent

[[Page 952]]

    that notwithstanding the sine die adjournment of the House, the 
    Clerk be authorized to receive messages from the Senate and that 
    the Speaker be authorized to sign any enrolled bills and joint 
    resolutions duly passed by the two Houses and found truly enrolled.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Louisiana?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Carl Albert (OK).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

Receiving Messages From the Senate

Sec. 18.5 The Clerk of the House may be authorized by unanimous consent 
    to receive messages from the Senate during an adjournment from 
    Friday to Monday, but such authorization does not mandate that the 
    House adjourn during that period.

    On Dec. 13, 1963,(1) as the House prepared to adjourn 
from Friday to Monday, unanimous consent was granted for the Clerk to 
receive messages from the Senate and for the Speaker to sign enrolled 
bills and joint resolutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 109 Cong. Rec. 24553, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. (Carl) ALBERT (of Oklahoma). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that notwithstanding any adjournment of the House until 
    Monday next the Clerk may be authorized to receive messages from 
    the Senate and the Speaker may be authorized to sign any enrolled 
    bills and joint resolutions duly passed by the two Houses and found 
    truly enrolled.
        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Oklahoma?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (MA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. (Durward G.) HALL (of Missouri). Reserving the right to 
    object, Mr. Speaker, may I ask the distinguished majority leader if 
    this request implies that the House is going to adjourn over until 
    Monday next, thereby missing tomorrow, Saturday?
        Mr. ALBERT. It implies that a request will be made later for 
    that purpose.
        Mr. HALL. But it is not inherent in this request?
        Mr. ALBERT. This does not bind the House not to meet tomorrow, 
    no.
        Mr. HALL. Then I withdraw my reservation of objection, Mr. 
    Speaker.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Oklahoma?
        There was no objection.

Comptroller General Reports

Sec. 18.6 A resolution authorized the printing of reports of the 
    Comptroller General to be received following the adjournment sine 
    die as documents of the second session of the 90th Congress.

    On Oct. 14, 1968,(1) the authorization for printing 
Comptroller

[[Page 953]]

General reports during adjournment was provided by resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 114 Cong. Rec. 31313, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. (Carl) ALBERT (of Oklahoma). Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    resolution (H. Res. 1323) and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 1323

        Resolved, That notwithstanding the sine die adjournment of the 
    House, reports of the Comptroller General of the United States made 
    to the Congress pursuant to the Government Corporation Control Act 
    (31 U.S.C. 841 et seq.) shall be printed during such adjournment as 
    House documents of the second session of the Ninetieth Congress.
        The resolution was agreed.
        The motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    At the close of the second session of the 80th 
Congress,(2) a resolution authorized the Comptroller General 
reports to be printed during adjournment sine die, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 94 Cong. Rec. 9348, 80th Cong. 2d Sess., June 19, 1948.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. (Charles A.) HALLECK (of Indiana). Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    resolution (H. Res. 700) and ask for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved, That the reports (if the Comptroller General of 
        the United States made to Congress, pursuant to section 5 of 
        the act of February 24, 1945 (56 Stat. 6), and the Government 
        Corporation Control Act (59 Stat. 597), after the adjournment 
        of the House until December 31, 1948, shall be printed as House 
        documents of the second session of the Eightieth Congress.

        The resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

    Parliamentarian's Note: This permission for printing of Comptroller 
General reports is no longer necessary, as such reports are processed 
as executive communications.

Investigative Reports

Sec. 18.7 Committees authorized to conduct investigations were 
    permitted by unanimous consent to file investigative reports with 
    the Clerk and have them printed, notwithstanding adjournment sine 
    die.

    On the legislative day of Aug. 31, 1960,(1) the 
following took place in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 106 Cong. Rec. 19132, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., Sept. 1, 1960 (calendar 
        day). See also 88 Cong. Rec. 9602, 77th Cong. 24 Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John W.] McCORMACK [of Massachusetts]. Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that reports filed with the Clerk following the 
    sine die adjournment by committees authorized by the House to 
    conduct investigations may be printed by the Clerk as reports of 
    the 86th Congress.

[[Page 954]]

        The SPEAKER.(2) Is there objection to the request of 
    the gentleman from Massachusetts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Sam Rayburn (TX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See also 109 Cong. Rec. 25555, 88th Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 24, 1963; 
        and 107 Cong. Rec. 21529, 87th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 27, 1961 
        (calendar day).
            Parliamentarian's Note: Beginning with the 105th Congress, 
        the standing rules were amended to give all committees 
        authority to file investigative reports with the Clerk 
        following sine die adjournment. See Rule XI clause 1(b)(4), 
        House Rules and Manual Sec. 788 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Aug. 30, 1957,(4) permission was granted for certain 
investigative reports to be filed during an adjournment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 103 Cong. Rec. 16759, 85th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 104 Cong. Rec. 
        19699, 85th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 23, 1958.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
    reports filed with the Clerk following the sine die adjournment by 
    committees authorized by the House to conduct investigations, may 
    be printed by the Clerk as reports of the 85th Congress.
        The SPEAKER. Is there objection?
        There was no objection.
                   DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS
Ch. 40 

[[Page 955]]

                        

[Page 955-966]
 
                               CHAPTER 40
 
                              Adjournment
 
                        C. Adjournment Sine Die
 
Sec.                   INDEX TO PRECEDENTS

Amendment to concurrent resolution, see, e.g., Concurrent resolution 
    providing for adjournment for more than three days to date certain
Amendment to motion to adjourn, see Motion for adjournment of three 
    days or less
August recess, see Concurrent resolution providing for adjournment of 
    more than three days to date certain; see also Legislative 
    Reorganization Act, provisions of, relating to adjournment or 
    August recess
Budget Act, provisions of, as affecting consideration of concurrent 
    resolution, see, e.g., Concurrent resolution providing for 
    adjournment for more than three days to date certain
Business during adjournment, authorization to transact, under current 
    and former practice
    appointment of commissions, boards, and committees, Sec. Sec. 18.1, 
        18.2
    Comptroller General, printing of reports of, Sec. 18.6
    House Rules and Manual, printing of, Sec. 17.4
    investigative reports, filing and printing of, Sec. 18.7
    mandate to adjourn, authorization was not, Sec. 18.4
    messages from Senate, receipt of, Sec. Sec.  18.4, 18.5
    Record, extension of remarks in, Sec. 18.1
    Senate, receipt of messages from, Sec. Sec. 18.4, 18.5
    signing enrolled bills and resolutions, Sec. Sec. 18.1, 18.3, 18.4
Committee of the Whole, motion to adjourn not in order in, Sec. 4.1
Concurrent resolution providing for adjournment of more than three days 
    to date certain
    agreed to by both Houses, concurrent resolution not operative 
        until, Sec. 11.13
    alternative dates certain permitted by concurrent resolution, 
        Sec. Sec. 10.2, 10.3, 10.6
    alternative departure dates, see, e.g., Sec. Sec. 10.5-10.7, 13.5
    alternative to date certain, concurrent resolution permitted joint 
        leadership recall as, Sec. Sec. 10.2, 10.5, 10.6
    amendment, concurrent resolution as subject to, if previous 
        question has not been ordered, Sec. 11.2
    amendment in House to permit House to reconvene later than Senate, 
        Sec. 10.4
    amendment, Senate, disposed of in House by privileged motion 
        requiring quorum for adoption, Sec. 11.13
    amendment, Senate, provided that upon disposition by Senate of 
        designated bill it would stand in recess until date certain to 
        which House was to adjourn, Sec. 10.9
    amendment, Senate, to House concurrent resolution added Senate 
        adjournment dates and provisions as to recall authority, 
        Sec. 13.7
    amendment to concurrent resolution is not debatable, Sec. 11.11
    amendment to concurrent resolution was proposed in motion to commit 
        with instructions, Sec. 11.2
    amendment to Senate concurrent resolution to provide for 
        adjournment of House to same date, Sec. 11.6
    amendments, privileged, by Senate provided for recess on motion of 
        majority leader made on one of four designated days, Sec. 10.7

[[Page 956]]

    August recess adjournment of House and different period of 
        adjournment of Senate, concurrent resolution provided for, 
        Sec. 10.6
    August recess, simple motion to adjourn from day to day in order in 
        absence of concurrent resolution providing for, Sec. 12.3
    August recess subject to recall authority, concurrent resolution 
        providing for, as not debatable, Sec. 12.2
    August recess subject to recall authority, Senate concurrent 
        resolution providing in odd-numbered year for, required yea and 
        nay vote, Sec. Sec. 12.1, 12.2, 12.5
    Budget Act provisions requiring passage of general appropriations 
        bills prior to adjournment, concurrent resolution was 
        considered pursuant to special order where House had not 
        complied with, Sec. 13.5
    Budget Act provisions requiring passage of general appropriations 
        bills prior to adjournment, effect of, on privilege of 
        concurrent resolution, Sec. Sec. 11.1, 11.7, 13.5
    Budget Act provisions requiring passage of general appropriations 
        bills prior to adjournment, waiver of, by unanimous-consent 
        agreement to consider concurrent resolution, Sec. 11.1
    condition was added by Senate amendment that designated legislative 
        action be completed prior to adjournment, Sec. 10.9
    contingent adjournment for three days, unanimous-consent agreement 
        permitting, in event Senate failed to act on concurrent 
        resolution, Sec. 9.2
    contingent upon Senate completion of designated legislative action, 
        adjournment was made, Sec. 10.9
    debatable, amendment to concurrent resolution is not, Sec. 11.9
    debatable, not, Sec. Sec. 11.3, 11.8, 11.9, 11.11
    determined by House, effect of provision permitting House to 
        adjourn to day certain or to a prior day to be, Sec. 10.3
    differing periods of adjournment for House and Senate, 
        Sec. Sec. 10.1-10.7, 13.1, 13.11, 13.13
    House, Speaker was authorized to recall, Sec. 13.1
    July adjournment, concurrent resolution provided for, Sec. 11.7
    July 31, procedures under which Houses may remain in session 
        beyond, notwithstanding provisions of Legislative 
        Reorganization Act, Sec. Sec. 6.2, 12.1, 12.3, 12.4
    Legislative Reorganization Act, applicable provisions of, see, 
        e.g., ``August recess'' topics above; and see Legislative 
        Reorganization Act, provisions of, relating to adjournment or 
        August recess
    motion pursuant to, required quorum where concurrent resolution 
        permitted adjournment to date certain ``as determined by the 
        House,'' Sec. 10.3
    motion setting different time of convening for House was permitted 
        by concurrent resolution, Sec. 10.3
    nonprivileged, concurrent resolution containing provisions relating 
        to conduct of business upon reconvening was, Sec. 14.13
    one-minute rule, debate under, was allowed to proceed by unanimous 
        consent during consideration of concurrent resolution, 
        Sec. Sec. 11.8, 11.9

[[Page 957]]

    parliamentary inquiry may be entertained pending adoption of 
        concurrent resolution, Sec. 11.3
    place of reassembly, alternate, authority given to leadership in 
        certain circumstances to designate, see Place of meeting, 
        different, adjournment to reassembly at
    privileged, concurrent resolution offered as, may be withdrawn 
        prior to action thereon, Sec. 11.10
    privileged, House concurrent resolution with Senate amendments is 
        laid before House by Speaker as, Sec. Sec. 11.4, 11.5
    privileged, not, concurrent resolution containing nonprivileged 
        provisions relating to the conduct of business upon reconvening 
        as, Sec. 14.13
    privilege of, see, e.g., Sec. Sec. 10.1 et seq., 13.1
    privilege of, as affected by Budget Act provisions requiring 
        passage of general appropriations bills prior to adjournment, 
        Sec. Sec. 11.1, 11.7, 13.5
    provides for a different time, Senate concurrent resolution was 
        amended to, Sec. 10.10
    quorum required for adoption of motion to concur in Senate 
        amendment, Sec. 11.13
    quorum requirements, Sec. 11.13
    recall authority, designees authorized to exercise, in specified 
        circumstances, Sec. 13.5
    recall authority, exercised by Senate Majority Leader, Sec. 13.12
    recall authority, modification of role of minority in exercise of, 
        Sec. 12.5
    recall authority, role of minority in exercise of, under former 
        practice, Sec. Sec. 12.5, 13.3, 13.4, 13.7
    recall by joint leadership permitted as alternative to reconvening 
        on specified date, see, e.g., Sec. Sec. 10.2, 10.5, 10.6, 11.1, 
        13.2, 14.13
    recall of House by Speaker, concurrent resolution provided for, 
        Sec. 13.1
    recommit with instructions, concurrent resolution as subject to 
        motion to, Sec. 11.2
    reconvening of Senate, at earlier date, Sec. 13.8
    Senate agreeing to House concurrent resolution, enabling recall 
        authority, Sec. 13.9
    Senate amendments, House concurrent resolution with, laid before 
        House by Speaker as privileged, Sec. Sec. 11.4, 11.5
    Senate amendment, withdrawal of, where no action has been taken, 
        Sec. 11.14
    Senate fixing time to which it would adjourn, Sec. 13.10
    separate days certain, Senate and House permitted to adjourn from 
        and to, Sec. Sec. 10.2, 10.5, 10.6
    sine die adjournment, pending, concurrent resolution permitting 
        Senate to adjourn for periods in excess of three days as it may 
        determine, Sec. 10.1
    unanimous consent, concurrent resolution called up by, where 
        nonprivileged, Sec. 14.13
    unanimous consent, consideration by, of concurrent resolution 
        providing that Houses not adjourn until adoption of subsequent 
        concurrent resolution notwithstanding requirements under 
        Legislative Reorganization Act, Sec. 12.4
    withdrawal of concurrent resolution prior to action thereon, 
        Sec. 11.10

[[Page 958]]

    yea and nay vote not required in even-numbered year for concurrent 
        resolution providing for August recess, Sec. 13.5
    yea and nay vote required for concurrent resolution providing in 
        odd-numbered year for August recess, Sec. Sec. 12.2, 12.5, 12.6
Concurrent resolution providing for adjournment sine die
    alternate departure dates for Houses, Sec. 15.1
    amendment in form of concurrent resolution is not germane to simple 
        motion to adjourn, Sec. 3.1
    Budget Act, noncompliance with terms of, as affecting privilege of 
        resolution, Sec. 13.5
    Budget Act provisions, repeal of, that prohibited consideration of 
        sine die adjournment resolutions until Congress completed 
        action on second concurrent resolution on budget and 
        reconciliation legislation, Sec. 16 (introduction)
    conditional motion to adjourn pending House adoption of concurrent 
        resolution, Sec. 15.5
    consent of House for subsequent adjournment of Senate and for 
        Senate adjournments in excess of three days, House concurred in 
        Senate amendment to give, Sec. 14.8
    Constitutional expiration of session, effect of, see Sine die 
        adjournment
    date certain in next session, adjournment to, provision in 
        concurrent resolution for, Sec. 14.13
    date of adjournment, House amendment changing, Sec. 14.10
    date of adjournment, Senate amendment changing, Sec. Sec. 14.5, 
        14.6
    date of adjournment set in earlier resolution was changed after 
        President called Congress back into session, Sec. 14.7
    debatable, not, Sec. Sec. 14.9, 14.10
    debatable, resolution appointing committee to notify President of 
        impending adjournment is, Sec. 14.10
    debate on resolution has been permitted where no point of order was 
        raised, Sec. 14.10
    declaration of position of Congress regarding exercise of pocket 
        veto was included in resolution, Sec. Sec. 15.4, 15.8
    departure dates, different, for Houses, Sec. 15.1
    designee of Majority Leader, motion to adjourn was made by, 
        Sec. 17.3
    designees named to exercise recall authority in certain instances, 
        Sec. 15.12
    place of reassembly, alternate, authority given to leadership in 
        certain circumstances to designate, see Place of meeting, 
        different, adjournment to or reassembly at
    privileged, called up as, Sec. 14.1 et seq.
    privileged concurrent resolution containing declaration of Congress 
        regarding assertion of pocket veto power, Sec. Sec. 15.4, 15.8
    privileged, resolution was not, where terms of Budget Act not met, 
        Sec. 13.5
    privileged Senate concurrent resolution providing for sine die 
        adjournment of both Houses on October 1 was laid before House, 
        Sec. 15.9
    privilege, inclusion of nonprivileged matter concerning conduct of 
        business, as destroying Sec. Sec. 14.13, 14.14
    quorum required for adoption, Sec. 14.2
    recall authority, concurrent resolution provided, for joint 
        leadership, Sec. 15.1

[[Page 959]]

    recall authority, continuation of session rather than new session 
        after exercise of, Sec. 15.2
    recall authority, designees named to exercise, in certain 
        instances, Sec. 15.12
    recall authority, form of concurrent resolution providing for, 
        Sec. 15.3
    recall authority, notice issued by Speaker in exercise of, 
        Sec. 15.2
    recall authority, reassembly of one House under, provision for, 
        Sec. 15.3
    recall authority, Senate amendment conferring, on leadership, 
        Sec. Sec. 15.10, 15.11
    recall authority was conferred in concurrent resolution adjourning 
        second session, Sec. Sec. 15.6, 15.7, 15.10
    recognition of Member under reservation of objection to unanimous 
        consent request that resolution be agreed to, Sec. 14.9
    rejection, identical resolution may be offered after, where there 
        has been intervening business, Sec. 14.4
    rejection of, and subsequent adoption of another concurrent 
        resolution, Sec. 15.10
    rejection of resolution, Sec. 14.3
    Senate, conditional motion to adjourn, pending House adoption of 
        concurrent resolution, Sec. 15.5
    separate alternate departure dates to separate dates certain, 
        resolution providing for, considered by unanimous consent where 
        terms of Budget Act not met, Sec. 16.1
    televised Presidential debates, debate about failure to complete 
        action on bill permitting, Sec. 14.10
    yeas and nays, demand for, allowed on motion to adjourn on day set 
        by concurrent resolution for sine die adjournment, Sec. 6.2
Constitutional requirement that regular session of Congress begin at 
    noon on January 3, Speaker declared House adjourned sine die 
    without motion due to, Sec. Sec. 14.11, 14.12
Contingent adjournment pending Senate action, see, e.g., Concurrent 
    resolution providing for adjournment for more than three days to 
    date certain
Day and time to which House shall adjourn, motion fixing
    concurrent resolution, motion as permitted by, setting day and hour 
        different from that in standing order on time of convening, 
        Sec. 10.3
    constitutional term of Congress, motion to adjourn to date beyond, 
        not in order, Sec. 3.27
    legislative day, new, resulting from adjournment and reconvening at 
        time certain on same calendar day was for purpose of avoiding 
        two-thirds vote requirement for special rule, Sec. 9.3
    precedence of, over pending question on which vote has been 
        objected to for lack of quorum, Sec. 5.2
    privilege, equal in, to simple motion to adjourn, Sec. 5.3
    quorum required for adoption, Sec. 9.5
    same calendar day, motion may provide for adjournment to time 
        certain later on, Sec. Sec. 5.2, 9.3
    same legislative day as that on which adjournment takes effect, 
        motion must be offered on, Sec. 9.4
    Sunday, unanimous consent to allow session on, as permitting 
        subsequent motion to adjourn from Saturday to Sunday (see also 
        Sunday, session permitted on), Sec. 9.10
    term of Congress, constitutional, motion not in order which sought 
        to adjourn to date beyond, Sec. 3.27

[[Page 960]]

Debate on motion to adjourn, see Motion for adjournment of three days 
    or less, infra
Dilatory, point of order that motion is
    intervening business, held not dilatory after, Sec. 8.3
    late, point of order came, after Speaker entertained motion, 
        Sec. 8.2
    rejection, prior, not determinative, Sec. 8.2
Emergency, effect of state of, on application of Legislative 
    Reorganization Act, see Legislative Reorganization Act, provisions 
    of, relating to adjournment or August recess
Legislative Reorganization Act, provisions of, relating to adjournment 
    or August recess
    constitutional considerations, discussion of, relating to 
        requirement of Act as to adjournment by July 31, Sec. 12.4
    emergency, Chair cited state of, in overruling point of order under 
        Act, Sec. 6.2
    emergency, effect of state of, on application of Act, Sec. 6.2
    emergency, state of, obviated necessity of concurrent resolution 
        continuing session beyond July, Sec. 16.3
    July 31, procedures under which Houses may remain in session 
        beyond, notwithstanding provisions of Act, Sec. Sec. 6.2, 12.1, 
        12.3, 12.4
    point of order that House was not legally in session under, was 
        overruled, Sec. 16.3
    privileged, concurrent resolution providing for August recess or 
        recall by joint leadership in odd-numbered year is called up 
        as, Sec. Sec. 12.1-12.3, 12.5
    unanimous consent, consideration by, of concurrent resolution 
        providing that Houses would remain in session beyond day 
        specified in Act, Sec. 16.2
    war, state of, obviated necessity of concurrent resolution 
        continuing session beyond July, Sec. 16.3
    yea and nay vote on concurrent resolution, application of 
        requirements as to, Sec. Sec. 6.2, 12.1-12.6
Motion for adjournment of three days or less
    amendment fixing time of adjournment, simple motion to adjourn not 
        subject to, Sec. 5.3
    amendment in nature of substitute in form of concurrent resolution 
        is not germane to motion, Sec. 3.1
    automatic roll call, not in order to demand on an affirmative vote 
        on motion to adjourn, Sec. 7.1
    Calendar Wednesday rule, dilatory motions to delay business under, 
        Sec. 8.4
    certain, day, motion to adjourn to, see Day and time to which House 
        shall adjourn, motion fixing,
    day certain, motion to adjourn to, see Day and time to which House 
        shall adjourn, motion fixing
    day to day, motion to adjourn from, agreed to, Sec. 7.1
    day to day, simple motion to adjourn from, in order in absence of 
        concurrent resolution providing for August recess, Sec. 12.3
    debatable, motion to adjourn to time certain is not, Sec. 5.2
    debatable, simple motion is not, Sec. 5.1
    debate, motion may not interrupt Member holding floor in, 
        Sec. Sec. 3.10, 3.15-3.18

[[Page 961]]

    deceased Member, motion was made in memory of, without adoption of 
        resolution marking adjournment, Sec. 3.33
    dilatory, motion held not to be, after intervening business, 
        Sec. 8.3
    dilatory motions to delay business under Calendar Wednesday rule, 
        Sec. 8.4
    dilatory, point of order that motion was, came too late after 
        Speaker entertained motion, Sec. 8.2
    dilatory, prior rejection did not render motion, Sec. 8.2
    floor, Member making motion as losing, upon withdrawal of motion, 
        Sec. 3.32
    floor, motion may not interrupt Member holding, Sec. Sec. 3.10, 
        3.15-3.18, 8.4
    intervening business permitting repetition of motion, unanimous-
        consent request to delete Member's name as cosponsor of bill 
        constitutes, Sec. 8.1
    lay on the table, motion to adjourn to time certain not subject to 
        motion to, Sec. 5.2
    objection to request to adjourn to day certain after point of order 
        against motion, effect of, Sec. 3.2
    parliamentary inquiry, question on motion precedes, Sec. 3.1
    parliamentary inquiry, time yielded for, motion may not be made 
        during, Sec. 3.18
    privilege and precedence of motion to adjourn, see Privilege and 
        precedence of motion to adjourn
    quorum, effect of rejection of motion by less than a, where 
        objection is made to lack of a quorum, Sec. 7.2
    quorum not required for agreement to, Sec. 7.2
    quorum required for adoption of motion to adjourn to day and time 
        certain, Sec. Sec. 9.5, 10.3
    recognition for simple motion offered by Member having floor, Chair 
        may not refuse, Sec. 3.3
    recognition refused in absence of intervening business after 
        rejection of prior motion, Sec. 8.4
    reconvening, motion to set time of, equal in privilege to simple 
        motion to adjourn, Sec. 5.3
    regular order, demand for, effect on motion of, Sec. 3.2
    rejection of motion by less than a quorum, effect of, where 
        objection is made to lack of quorum, Sec. 7.2
    renewal following disposition of motions to compel attendance of 
        absentees, Sec. 3.8
    renewal of motion where prior motion was withdrawn, Sec. 3.32
    repetition of motion not permitted in absence of intervening 
        business, Sec. 8.4
    repetition of motion permitted after intervening business, 
        Sec. Sec. 8.1, 8.3
    sine die, amendment in form of concurrent resolution to adjourn, 
        not germane to simple motion, Sec. 3.1
    special rule ordering previous question on bill to final passage 
        without intervening motion, effect of, on motion to adjourn, 
        Sec. Sec. 3.4, 6.5
    table, motion to, motion not debatable and not subject to, 
        Sec. Sec. 5.1, 5.2
    time certain, motion to adjourn to, is not debatable and not 
        subject to motion to lay on table, Sec. 5.2
    time to adjourn, motion to fix, not in order, Sec. 5.3
    voting on motion, see Voting on motion to adjourn
    withdrawal of motion, Sec. Sec. 3.31, 3.32
    writing, demand that motion be in, Sec. 3.6

[[Page 962]]

    yea and nay vote, motion pending result of, Sec. 6.5
    yeas and nays, demand for, allowed on motion on day set by 
        concurrent resolution for sine die adjournment, Sec. 6.2
    yielded to for purpose of making motion, Member may not offer 
        motion unless, where another Member holds floor, 
        Sec. Sec. 3.10, 3.15-3.18
Place of meeting, different, adjournment to or reassembly at
    caucus room, House, adjournment to, Sec. 2.3
    concurrent resolution allowing for two Houses to assemble outside 
        seat of government, Sec. 2.1
    designation by leadership of place of reassembly after adjournment, 
        concurrent resolution as providing for, in certain 
        circumstances, Sec. 13.6
    House, adjournment of, to caucus room, Sec. 2.3
    recall provisions of concurrent resolution permitted joint recall 
        to another place, Sec. 13.6
    Seat of government, location within, Sec. 2.3
    September 11, 2001, provisions in concurrent resolutions of 
        adjournment have allowed designation by leadership of 
        alternative places of reassembly in certain circumstances 
        after, Sec. 2.2
    sine die adjournment, concurrent resolution as providing in certain 
        circumstances for designation by leadership of place of 
        reassembly after, Sec. 2.2
    three days, adjournment for more than, concurrent resolution as 
        providing in certain circumstances for designation by 
        leadership of place of reassembly after, Sec. 2.2
Pocket veto, see Veto, pocket
Privilege and precedence of motion to adjourn
    call of the House, motion to adjourn is in order following, 
        Sec. 3.20
    call of the House, motion to adjourn not entertained after ordering 
        of, Sec. Sec. 3.22, 3.23
    call of the House, precedence of motion to adjourn over, 
        Sec. Sec. 3.21, 3.24
    contested election, precedence of motion over filing of privileged 
        report on, Sec. 3.9
    day and time certain, motion to adjourn to, equal in privilege to 
        simple motion to adjourn, Sec. 5.2
    day and time certain, motion to adjourn to, takes precedence over 
        pending questions on which vote has been objected to for lack 
        of quorum, Sec. 5.2
    debate, motion may not interrupt Member holding floor in, 
        Sec. Sec. 3.10, 3.15-3.18
    election, contested, precedence of motion over filing of privileged 
        report on, Sec. 3.9
    floor, motion may not interrupt Member holding, Sec. Sec. 3.10, 
        3.15-3.18
    highest privilege, Sec. Sec. 3.7, 3.13
    instruct conferees, motion to adjourn offered before vote on motion 
        to, following rejection of motion to lay motion to instruct on 
        table, Sec. 3.11
    instruct conferees, motion to, motion to adjourn preferential even 
        after reading of, Sec. 3.5
    intervening business, repetition of motion in absence of, not 
        permitted, Sec. 3.19
    Journal, precedence of motion over Chair's putting question on 
        approval of, Sec. 3.8
    memory of deceased Member, motion to adjourn in, Sec. 3.33

[[Page 963]]

    minority Member, motion offered by, under current and former 
        practice, Sec. 3.30
    parliamentary inquiry, time yielded for, motion may not be made 
        during, Sec. 3.18
    passage, final, motion not available when previous question by 
        terms of special rule has been ordered to, Sec. 3.4
    privilege, question of, not entertained pending vote on motion to 
        adjourn, Sec. 3.26
    question of privilege not entertained pending vote on motion to 
        adjourn, Sec. 3.26
    quorum, as related to point of order concerning absence of, 
        Sec. Sec. 3.20, 3.21, 3.24, 3.25
    recognition of Majority Leader to announce legislative program by 
        unanimous consent before motion to adjourn, Sec. 3.10
    recognition of Member having floor, Chair may not refuse, for 
        motion, Sec. 3.3
    regular order, demand for, motion to adjourn to day certain not in 
        order against, Sec. 3.2
    repetition of motion in absence of intervening business not 
        permitted, Sec. 3.19
    report, privileged, precedence of motion over, Sec. 3.9
    Rule XVI clause 4, precedence under, Sec. 3.9
    Rules, consideration of rule reported from Committee on, motion 
        made during, Sec. 3.6
    Senate action or inaction on collateral matter as not affecting 
        privilege of motion, Sec. 3.13
    sine die adjournment, amendment in form of concurrent resolution 
        providing for, not germane to motion, Sec. 3.1
    special rule, motion not available when question has been ordered 
        to final passage without intervening motion under, Sec. 3.4
    suspend the rules, one motion to adjourn admissible during 
        consideration of motion to, Sec. 3.14
    suspend the rules, precedence over motion to, Sec. 3.7
    time of reconvening, motion to set, of equal privilege at Speaker's 
        discretion to simple motion to adjourn, Sec. 5.3
    unanimous consent to recognize Majority Leader to announce 
        legislative program before recognizing Member for motion, 
        Sec. 3.10
    vote on final passage, precedence of motion over, where House 
        reconsidered the first vote on final passage, Sec. 3.12
    vote on motion to instruct conferees, motion to adjourn offered 
        before, following rejection of motion to lay motion to instruct 
        on table, Sec. 3.11
    withdrawal of motion permitted, Sec. 3.31
    withdrawal of motion, renewal of motion by another Member after, 
        Sec. 3.32
    writing, demand that motion be in, recognition for further debate 
        after, Sec. 3.6
    yielded to for purpose of making motion, Member may not offer 
        motion unless, where another Member holds floor, 
        Sec. Sec. 3.10, 3.1, 3.17, 3.18
President, appointment of committee to notify, of completion of 
    business and intention to adjourn sine die
    House committee, Speaker's appointment of, authorized by privileged 
        resolution, Sec. 17.1

[[Page 964]]

    privileged, resolution as, after adoption of sine die resolution, 
        Sec. 17.1
    report by House committee that it had informed President, Sec. 17.2
Quorum, lack of, as affecting motion to adjourn
    agreement to motion, quorum not required for, Sec. 7.2
    attendance of absent Members, motions to compel, following 
        rejection of motion by less than a quorum, Sec. 3.8
    automatic roll call, motion to adjourn following failure of quorum 
        to vote on, was held in order where majority of those present 
        voted to second motion and no special rule precluded motion, 
        Sec. 6.5
    call of the House, motion to adjourn not entertained after ordering 
        of, Sec. Sec. 3.22, 3.23
    certain, motion to adjourn to day and time, requires quorum for 
        adoption, Sec. Sec. 9.5, 10.3
    day and time certain, adoption of motion to adjourn to, requires 
        quorum, Sec. Sec. 9.5, 10.3
    debate, point of order of no quorum not permitted during, Sec. 3.4
    hour of convening different from that designated in standing order, 
        motion setting, as requiring quorum, Sec. 10.3
    motion for adjournment of three days or less, quorum not required 
        for agreement to
        not required for agreement to motion, quorum as, Sec. 7.2
        required, not, for agreement to, Sec. 7.2
    table motion to compel attendance of absent Members, motion to, not 
        in order, Sec. 3.8
    time of convening different from that designated in standing order, 
        motion setting, as requiring quorum, Sec. 10.3
    unanimous-consent requests not entertained until quorum established 
        after motion rejected and vote objected to, Sec. 7.2
Quorum required for adoption of concurrent resolution providing for 
    sine die adjournment, see Concurrent resolution providing for 
    adjournment sine die
Recall authority of leadership after adjournment sine die
    concurrent resolution, conferral of recall authority in, Sec. 15.1
    concurrent resolution providing for, form of, Sec. 15.3
    continuation of session rather than new session after exercise of, 
        Sec. 15.2
    designees named to exercise, in certain instances, Sec. 15.12
    form of concurrent resolution providing for, Sec. 15.3
    notice issued by Speaker in exercise of, Sec. 15.2
    reassembly of one House under, provision for, Sec. 15.3
    second session, conferred in concurrent resolution adjourning, 
        Sec. Sec. 15.6, 15.7
Recommit with instructions, concurrent resolution as subject to, see, 
    e.g., Concurrent resolution providing for adjournment for more than 
    three days to date certain
Serial adjournment
    rule from Committee on Rules, privileged, authorizing Speaker to 
        declare recesses for specified periods subject to call of the 
        Chair, Sec. 9.1
    Speaker authorized under special rule to declare recesses for 
        specified periods subject to call of Chair, Sec. 9.1

[[Page 965]]

    Tuesdays and Fridays, resolution providing that House meet only on, 
        for stipulated period, Sec. 9.6
Sine die adjournment (see also concurrent resolution providing for 
    adjournment sine die)
    business, authorization to transact, following adjournment, see 
        Business during adjournment, authorization to transact, under 
        current and former practice
    declaration by Speaker that House is adjourned sine die is made 
        upon constitutional expiration of session, Sec. Sec. 14.11, 
        14.12
    expiration of session under constitutional provision, declaration 
        by Speaker upon, Sec. Sec. 14.11, 14.12
    Legislative Reorganization Act, provisions of, see Legislative 
        Reorganization Act, provisions of, relating to adjournment or 
        August recess
Special rule, ordering previous question on bill to final passage 
    without intervening motion, effect of, on motion to adjourn, see 
    Motion for adjournment of three days or less
Sunday, session permitted on
    ``dies non,'' Sunday is normally considered, Sec. Sec. 9.8-9.10
    midnight Saturday, House has continued in session beyond, Sec. 9.10
    unanimous consent, by, Sec. Sec. 9.7-9.10
Televised Presidential debates, debate in House about failure to 
    complete action on bill permitting, Sec. 14.10
Unanimous consent
    Budget Act provisions requiring passage of general appropriations 
        bills prior to adjournment, waiver of, by unanimous-consent 
        agreement to consider concurrent resolution, Sec. 11.1
    Chair may declare House adjourned by, Sec. Sec. 3.28-3.29
    concurrent resolution, quorum requirements affecting proceedings 
        relating to, see, e.g., Concurrent resolution providing for 
        adjournment for more than three days to date certain
    concurrent resolution, where nonprivileged was called up by, 
        Sec. 14.13
    conditional adjournment by, effective unless Senate adopted 
        concurrent resolution and a specified conference report, 
        Sec. 10.8
    debate during consideration of concurrent resolution was allowed to 
        proceed under one-minute rule by, Sec. Sec. 11.8, 11.9
    pro forma days, adjournment on, Sec. 3.28
    Senate action on House concurrent resolution, contingent 
        adjournment to subsequent day by unanimous consent where House 
        is awaiting, Sec. 10.8
Veto, pocket
    declaration of position of Congress regarding exercise of, was 
        included in concurrent resolution, Sec. Sec. 15.4, 15.8
    intrasession assertion of, discussion of precedents relating to, 
        Sec. 14.16
    laid before House, veto message was, accompanied by announcement as 
        to prior correspondence with President, Sec. 14.15
    letters to President from Speaker and minority leader expressing 
        views on limits of pocket veto authority were inserted in 
        Record, Sec. 14.16
Voting on motion to adjourn
    division vote in order, Sec. 6.3
    quorum, rejection of motion by less than a, see Quorum, lack of, as 
        affecting motion to adjourn
    record vote, motion as subject to, Sec. Sec. 6.1, 8.1

[[Page 966]]

    regular order, Chair put question on motion after demand for, 
        Sec. 6.4
    teller vote on motion demanded after insufficient, number seconded 
        demand for yeas and nays, Sec. 6.4
    yeas and nays, demand for, allowed on motion on day set by 
        concurrent resolution for sine die adjournment, Sec. 6.2
    yeas and nays, demand for, not seconded by sufficient number, 
        Sec. 6.4
    yeas and nays, recount of those rising to second demand for, 
        declined where insufficient number had risen, Sec. 6.4
    yeas and nays, teller vote was demanded on motion to adjourn after 
        insufficient number stood to second demand for, Sec. 6.2
Withdrawal of motion, see, e.g., Motion for adjournment of three days 
    or less
Yea and nay vote, motion pending result of, see Motion for adjournment 
    of three days or less
