[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 3, Chapters 10 - 14]
[Chapter 11. Questions of Privilege]
[E. Basis of Questions of Personal Privilege]
[Â§ 28. Published Charges of Impropriety]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 1676-1677]
 
                               CHAPTER 11
 
                         Questions of Privilege
 
              E. BASIS OF QUESTIONS OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE
 
Sec. 28. Published Charges of Impropriety

``Vote Selling''

Sec. 28.1 A newspaper article accusing a Member of selling his vote 
    gave rise to a question of personal privilege.

    On July 24, 1957,(15), Mr. H. Carl Andersen, of 
Minnesota, on a question of personal privilege, called the attention of 
the House to a newspaper article which included allegations of his 
involvement in a conflict-of-interest case. After receipt of the 
objectionable articles, the Speaker (16) stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 103 Cong. Rec. 12583, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
16. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chair has read the headline, to which the gentleman refers, 
    and it does, in effect, accuse a Member of Congress of selling his 
    vote, and this is carried forward in the second paragraph.
        The Chair thinks the gentleman has stated a question of 
    personal privilege and therefore, recognizes the gentleman from 
    Minnesota [Mr. H. Carl Andersen].

Implying Reprehensibility

Sec. 28.2 A newspaper article referring to a Member as 
    ``reprehensible'' or ``punk'' gave rise to a question of personal 
    privilege.

    On Jan. 25, 1944,(17) Mr. John E. Rankin, of 
Mississippi, rose to a question of personal privilege and was 
recognized to reply to a newspaper article in which he was referred to 
as ``reprehensible'' Rankin and ``punk'' Rankin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 90 Cong. Rec. 751, 78th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Questionable Business Associations

Sec. 28.3 Newspaper articles accusing a Member of promoting and 
    participating in an organization being investigated by a Senate 
    investigating committee gave rise to a question of personal 
    privilege.

    On July 8, 1946,(18) Mr. Andrew J. May, of Kentucky, 
presented as

[[Page 1677]]

involving a question of personal privilege certain newspaper articles 
which were submitted to the Speaker's desk. Thereupon, the Speaker 
(19) stated as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 92 Cong. Rec. 8391, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
19. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Chair has looked over these papers and 
    headlines, as well as the body of the articles. One headline states 
    ``Documents show May had financial stake in Garsson's empire.''
        The article further states:

            Documentary evidence that Representative May, Democrat, of 
        Kentucky, chairman of the House Military Committee, had a 
        financial interest in the Illinois munitions empire he is said 
        to have promoted at the War Department and his vehement denial 
        featured explosive development yesterday before the Senate War 
        Investigation Committee.

        The Chair thinks that these entitle the gentleman to the 
    question of personal privilege in his Representative capacity, 
    therefore, it recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. May].

Ethnic Slur

Sec. 28.4 On one occasion, a Member took the floor for a one-minute 
    speech to respond to a newspaper article which included a reference 
    to him as ``one of the few Italian American undesirables in 
    Congress.''

    This precedent was occasioned by certain House proceedings on Nov. 
22, 1967.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 113 Cong. Rec. 33693, 90th Cong. 1st Sess. See Sec. 22.4, supra, 
        for a detailed discussion of this precedent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------