[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 4, Chapters 15 - 17]
[Chapter 16. Introduction]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 2469]
 
                               CHAPTER 16
 
          Introduction and Reference of Bills and Resolutions


[[Page 2469]]



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commentary and editing by John R. Graham, J.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Sec. 1. Introduction
   Sec. 2. Sponsorship
   Sec. 3. Reference

  



                          INDEX TO PRECEDENTS
                                     

Absence of Delegate who introduced bill, effect of, Sec. 1.3
Death of Member who introduced bill, effect of, Sec. 1.8
Introduction
    adjournment, introduction after, Sec. 1.4
    Member opposed to passage, introduction by, Sec. 1.6
    methods of, Sec. 1.1
    Senate, practice in, Sec. Sec. 1.10, 1.11
Joint sponsorship, authorization for, Sec. Sec. 2.2-2.4
Messaging of Senate bills after sine die adjournment, Sec. 1.5
Petitions, introduction of, ``by request,'' Sec. 1.2
Reference
    bills exempted from, Sec. 3.1
    correcting date of, Sec. 3.9
    on opening day, Sec. Sec. 3.6-3.8
    Speaker's responsibilities for, Sec. Sec. 3.2-3.5
Replacement of Member who introduced bill, effect of, Sec. 1.9
Rereferral
    motion, by, Sec. Sec. 3.10-3.13
    reported bills, Sec. 3.16
    unanimous consent, by, Sec. Sec. 3.14, 3.15
Resignation of Member who introduced bill, effect of, Sec. 1.9
Senate cosponsor, deletion of name of, Sec. 2.7
Senate, practice in, Sec. Sec. 1.10, 1.11
Speaker's introduction, Sec. 1.7
Sponsors, erroneous listing of, Sec. 2.5
Sponsor's signature, necessity of, Sec. 2.1
Sponsorship, withdrawal of, Sec. 2.6

[[Page 2471]]



 
                               CHAPTER 16
 
          Introduction and Reference of Bills and Resolutions
 
Sec. 1. Introduction


    Procedures relating to the introduction of petitions, memorials, or 
bills, both public1(1) and private,1(2) are 
outlined in the House Rules. In general, such bills and other documents 
are filed with the Clerk (by placing them in the hopper at the Clerk's 
desk).1(~3~)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Rule XXII clause 4, House Rules and Manual Sec. 854 (1973).
 2. Rule XXII clause l, House Rules and Manual Sec. 849 (1973).
 3. For discussion of precedents affecting introduction and reference 
        of bills prior to 1936, see, for example, 4 Hinds' Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 3364-3366; and 7 Cannon's Precedents Sec. Sec. 1027-
        1033.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rules of the House also regulate the introduction ``by request'' of 
bills, resolutions, and memorials,(4) and prohibit certain 
private bills.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Rule XXII clause 6, House Rules and Manual Sec. 860 (1973). See 
        Sec. 1.2, infra, for further discussion.
 5. Rule XXII clause 2, House Rules and Manual Sec. 852 (1973).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Bills and resolutions may be introduced either by Members in the 
House, or by message from the Senate.(6) But a bill may not 
be introduced by a Member-elect prior to taking the oath.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. See Sec. 1.1, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, bills and resolutions are introduced by Members actually 
present in the House; but on at least one occasion, the House, by 
unanimous consent, permitted the introduction of bills notwithstanding 
the absence of their sponsor.(7) Similarly, while the 
introduction of proposed legislation usually occurs when the House is 
in session, the introduction of a bill after adjournment has been 
authorized by unanimous consent.(8) 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See Sec. 1.3, infra.
 8. See Sec. 1.4, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although most bills are introduced by Members who support their 
passage, the House on occasion has received and considered bills 
introduced by Members opposed to their passage.(~9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. See Sec. 1.6, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Methods of Introduction

Sec. 1.1 Bills may be introduced by Members in the House or are 
    received in the House by message from the Senate.

    On Jan. 14, 1937,(10) Mr. John J. O'Connor, of New York, 
called up a resolution (11) which provided
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 81 Cong. Rec. 236, 237, 243, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
11. H. Res. 60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2472]]

for the referral to a Select Committee on Government Organization of 
``All bills and resolutions introduced in the House proposing 
legislation concerning reorganization, coordination, consolidation, or 
abolition of, or reduction of personnel in, organizations or units in 
the executive branch of the Government.'' Following the presentation of 
the resolution, the following proceedings occurred:

        Mr. [Samuel B.] Pettengill [of Indiana]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: (12) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Pettengill: In reference to the words in lines 7 and 8, 
    ``introduced in the House'', a bill or resolution which came over 
    from the Senate which, had it been introduced in the House, would 
    go to this select committee, would then go to the Committee on 
    Expenditures in the Executive Departments, would it not?
        The Speaker: Replying to the gentleman's inquiry, it is the 
    present opinion of the Chair that any bills that came from the 
    Senate would be introduced in the House by a message from the 
    Senate and would properly be referred to this select committee if 
    they were within the jurisdiction of the committee.

Introduction of Petitions ``by Request''

Sec. 1.2 A citizens' petition is sometimes introduced by a Member ``by 
    request'' and referred to a committee pursuant to Rule XXII clause 
    6, in which case the words ``by request'' are entered on the 
    Journal and printed in the Record following the name of the Member.

    On Apr. 13, 1961,(13) Mr. Perkins Bass, of New 
Hampshire, introduced (by request) the petition (14) of 67 
faculty members of Dartmouth College seeking the elimination of the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities as a standing committee. 
Following its receipt, the petition was referred to the Committee on 
Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 107 Cong. Rec. 5900, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
14. No. 118.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effect of Sponsor's Absence

Sec. 1.3 On one occasion, the House, by unanimous consent, permitted a 
    Delegate to introduce bills notwithstanding his absence from the 
    House that day.

    On Jan. 3, 1953,(15) Mr. Charles A. Halleck, of Indiana, 
asked unanimous consent that the Delegate from Hawaii, Joseph Rider 
Farrington, be permitted to intro
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 99 Cong. Rec. 29, 83d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2473]]

duce bills that day notwithstanding his absence from the House. There 
was no objection to the gentleman's request.

Introduction After Adjournment

Sec. 1.4 The introduction of a measure after the adjournment of the 
    House may be permitted by unanimous consent, but is not a request 
    normally entertained by the Speaker.

    On Oct. 16, 1967,(16) Mr. George H. Mahon, of Texas, 
asked for and was granted unanimous consent to have until midnight to 
file a House joint resolution providing for continuing appropriations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 113 Cong. Rec. 28962, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: House Joint Resolution 888, providing for 
continuing appropriations, was actually introduced before the House 
adjourned--so the permission granted above was not utilized.
    While permission may be granted by the House, by unanimous consent, 
to introduce a bill at a time when the House is not in session, the 
practice has been consistently discouraged. Only one other example of 
such permission is to be found in the precedents.(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. See 7 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 1030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Messaging After Sine Die Adjournment

Sec. 1.5 A Senate bill, messaged to the House following sine die 
    adjournment, is referred to committee on opening day of the next 
    session of the same Congress.

    On Jan. 10, 1966,(18) the opening day of a new session 
of the same Congress, a Senate bill (19) which had been 
messaged to the House following sine die adjournment, was referred to 
the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 112 Cong. Rec. 36, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
19. S. 2471, an act to improve and clarify certain laws of the Coast 
        Guard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction by One Opposed to Bill

Sec. 1.6 Occasionally, bills have been introduced by Members opposed to 
    their passage.

    On June 14, 1967,(20) at the commencement of debate on a 
joint resolution (1) in Committee of the Whole, Mr. Harley 
O. Staggers, of West Virginia, addressed the following remarks to the 
Chair: (2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 113 Cong. Rec. 15822, 15823, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
 1. H.J. Res. 559, providing for the settlement of a railroad labor 
        dispute.
 2. Wilbur V. Mills (Ark.).

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

[[Page 2474]]

        Mr. Staggers: Mr. Chairman I am here today in a most unusual 
    position. I was requested by the President to introduce the bill we 
    have before us today, and because of my responsibilities as 
    chairman of the committee, I introduced the bill. If the House was 
    to be given an opportunity to work its will on this legislation, it 
    was necessary that hearings begin promptly and continue as 
    expeditiously as possible, and I think the record will bear me out, 
    that the hearings before our committee have been prompt, they have 
    not been delayed in any respect.
        In fact we interrupted consideration of a very important piece 
    of health legislation in order to take up this bill. We have heard 
    every witness who wanted to be heard on the legislation. I did this 
    because I felt it to be my responsibility to the House as chairman 
    of the committee.
        Following the conclusion of our hearings I promptly scheduled 
    executive sessions for consideration of the bill and we met as 
    promptly as possible both morning and afternoon and the committee 
    reported the bill to the House.
        Yesterday I went before the Rules Committee as chairman of the 
    committee to present the facts to the Rules Committee and attempt 
    to obtain a rule so that the bill would be considered by the House. 
    I have done these things because I felt it is my responsibility to 
    do so as chairman of the committee.

        Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, I was opposed to this bill when I 
    introduced it, and having heard all the witnesses and all the 
    testimony, I am still opposed to it. For that reason I have asked 
    the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Friedel] to handle the bill in 
    Committee of the Whole, so that I would be free to express my 
    opposition to it . . .
        Mr. Chairman, this concludes the presentation I desire to make 
    on the bill. At this time I request the gentleman from Maryland 
    [Mr. Friedel], the ranking majority member on the Interstate and 
    Foreign Commerce Committee, to take charge of managing the bill on 
    the floor.

    Thereupon the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Samuel N. Friedel, was 
recognized.

Introduction by Speaker

Sec. 1.7 Traditionally, the Speaker refrains from sponsoring public 
    bills containing subject matter of general import; but sometimes 
    the Speaker has introduced bills pertaining solely to matters 
    within his congressional district.

    On May 21, 1970,(3) Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massa
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 116 Cong. Rec. 16643, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. See also 117 Cong. Rec. 
        23043, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., June 30, 1971, where the House, by 
        unanimous consent, considered and passed a concurrent 
        resolution (H. Con. Res. 354, recognizing the importance of 
        July 4, 1971, Honor America Day celebrations) from which 
        Speaker Carl Albert (Okla.) had removed his name as a cosponsor 
        pursuant to the policy followed by Speakers in recent years of 
        not introducing or cosponsoring public bills or resolutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2475]]

chusetts, introduced a public bill (4) which pertained 
solely to a matter within the congressional district which he 
represented.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. H.R. 17750, to declare the tidewaters of the Fort Point Channel, in 
        the city of Boston, nonnavigable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effect of Sponsor's Death

Sec. 1.8 The death of a Member after introduction of a bill does not 
    preclude subsequent action thereon.

    On June 29, 1964,(5) the House considered and passed a 
bill (6) notwithstanding the intervening death of Mr. Howard 
H. Baker, of Tennessee, the Member who had introduced it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 110 Cong. Rec. 15274, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
 6. H.R. 7301, to amend the Internal Revenue Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effect of Sponsor's Resignation or Replacement

Sec. 1.9 A bill becomes the property of the House when introduced and 
    is not withdrawn or canceled because of the resignation or 
    replacement of the Member or Delegate who introduced it.

    On May 3, 1960,(7) a private bill,(8) 
previously introduced by Delegate John Burns, of Hawaii, was considered 
and passed by the House notwithstanding the intervening admission of 
the new state of Hawaii and the replacement of the Delegate by an 
elected Representative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 106 Cong. Rec. 9246, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
 8. H.R. 2823, for the relief of Fumie Yoshioka.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senate Practice

Sec. 1.10 At the beginning of a Congress, the Senate does not permit 
    the introduction of bills until after the President has delivered 
    his message on the State of the Union.

    On Jan. 5, 1955,(9)  Senator Lyndon B. Johnson, of 
Texas, made the following announcement to the Senate:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 101 Cong. Rec. 7, 84th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Johnson: . . . As is customary, the Senate will transact no 
    further business in the way of the introduction of bills or other 
    matters until after the President has delivered his message on the 
    State of the Union.
        The President will come to the Capitol tomorrow at 12:30 p.m. 
    to address a joint session of Congress in the Hall of the House of 
    Representatives.
        It is planned to have the Senate meet at 12 o'clock, and then, 
    after a

[[Page 2476]]

    quorum call, to proceed in a body to the Hall of the House of 
    Representatives at about 12:10 or 12:15 p.m.
        I now move that the Senate adjourn until 12 o'clock noon 
    tomorrow.

    The motion was agreed to.

Sec. 1.11 On one occasion, bills were introduced for a Senator who was 
    hospitalized.

    On May 23, 1957,(10) the following exchange occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 103 Cong. Rec. 7491, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Lyndon B.] Johnson of Texas: Mr. President, on behalf of 
    the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Hennings], I introduce three bills: 
    (11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. S. 2148, S. 2149, and S. 2150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Yesterday, I visited the Senator from Missouri, who is in 
    Bethesda Naval Hospital. . . . I announce for the benefit of his 
    friends, that he is resting comfortably; and all of us hope he will 
    return to the Senate in a few days.
        I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
    statements prepared by the Senator from Missouri, relating to each 
    of the bills just introduced.
        The Vice President: (12) The bills will be received 
    and appropriately referred; and, without objection, the statements 
    will be printed in the Record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Richard M. Nixon (Calif.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
                               CHAPTER 16
 
          Introduction and Reference of Bills and Resolutions
 
Sec. 2. Sponsorship

    House Rule XXII clause 4,(13) permits the joint 
sponsorship of public bills by at least two but not more than 25 
Members.(14) The rule has been interpreted to permit the 
sponsor of a bill having the maximum permissible number of cosponsors 
to introduce other bills with identical text with additional 
cosponsors.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. House Rules and Manual Sec. 854 (1973).
14. See Sec. 2.2, infra.
15. See Sec. 2.3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The House by precedent has determined the order of appearance of 
the names of the chief sponsors and the cosponsors which are listed on 
jointly sponsored bills; (16) moreover, pursuant to a 
directive from the Speaker, no such bill will be accepted for 
introduction without the signature of its prime sponsor.(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. See Sec. 2.4, infra.
17. See Sec. 2.1, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following the introduction of a jointly sponsored bill, a 
cosponsor's name may not be deleted therefrom; but, by unanimous 
consent, the House may expunge the cosponsor's name from the 
Record.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. See Sec. 2.5, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prime Sponsor's Signature

Sec. 2.1 By directive of the Speaker, all bills and resolutions must be 
    signed by the prime sponsor thereof in order to be accepted for 
    introduction.

[[Page 2477]]

    On Feb. 3, 1972,(1) the Speaker,(2) in 
response to a parliamentary inquiry by Mr. Robert H. Steele, of 
Connecticut, made a statement concerning the introduction of bills as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 118 Cong. Rec. 2521, 92d Cong. 2d Sess. See also 119 Cong. Rec. 30, 
        93d Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 3, 1973, where the Speaker announced 
        that bills placed in the hopper must bear the original 
        signature of the chief sponsor or first-named Member.
 2. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: . . . It has come to the attention of the Chair 
    that several bills have been introduced recently in the names of 
    Members who have no knowledge of or responsibility for their 
    introduction.
        Rule XXII of the rules of this House makes it clear that 
    Members, and Members alone, have the right to introduce bills--that 
    is, to cause them to be placed in the hopper here at the Clerk's 
    desk. When a bill is found in the hopper, it has been assumed to be 
    authentic.
        The Chair has observed, and knows it has become common 
    practice, that Members' offices often send bills to the floor by 
    messenger or page and ask that they be dropped in the hopper by a 
    page or a doorman. The pages and doormen, of course, have no way of 
    knowing the authenticity of bills which they receive by messenger 
    or otherwise.
        It would seem to the Chair that it would be a much safer 
    practice if Members, in addition to having their names typed or 
    printed on the bills, would also affix their signatures thereon. 
    Members would also be protecting their own interests if they would 
    personally place their bills in the hopper.
        The Chair feels that the right to introduce legislation is one 
    of the most important and fundamental rights of the Members of this 
    House. It should not be a slipshod or casual practice. In the 
    interest of safeguarding the integrity of this process, and to 
    protect Members against future instances where bills are introduced 
    without their authorization, the Chair is issuing instructions that 
    the pages, their overseers, and other employees in the Chamber 
    shall have no authority to place any bill, memorial, petition, or 
    other material in the hopper unless it bears the original signature 
    of a Member thereon. In the case of a bill or resolution which is 
    jointly sponsored, the signature must be that of the Member first 
    named thereon. The bill clerk is instructed to return to the Member 
    any bill which appears in the hopper without an original signature 
    of the Member.
        Finally, the Chair suggests that the Clerk of the House notify 
    all Members of this statement so that they will be aware of this 
    new policy and procedure for the introduction of legislation.

    Parliamentarian's Note: On Jan. 27, 1972, six bills separately 
sponsored by six different Members dealing with the subject of fire 
research and safety were placed in the hopper and referred without the 
knowledge of those Members. Neither the chief sponsor nor the other 
Members were able to explain the source of the introduc

[[Page 2478]]

tion of those bills. To prevent a recurrence of this problem, the 
Speaker announced his directive as to the signing of proposed bills and 
resolutions.

Joint Sponsorship

Sec. 2.2 The rules of the House were amended to permit joint 
    sponsorship of public bills by up to 25 Members.

    On Apr. 25, 1967,(3) Mr. William M. Colmer, of 
Mississippi, by direction of the Committee on Rules, called up and 
asked for the immediate consideration of a resolution as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 113 Cong. Rec. 10708-12, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 H. Res. 42

        Resolved, That paragraph 4 of rule XXII of the Rules of the 
    House of Representatives is amended by adding at the end thereof 
    the following sentence: ``Two or more but not more than ten Members 
    may introduce jointly any bill, memorial, or resolution to which 
    this paragraph applies.''

    Debate on the resolution ensued, during the course of which Mr. 
Colmer proposed and the House agreed to an amendment striking the word 
``ten'' in line four and inserting in lieu thereof the words ``twenty-
five.'' At the conclusion of debate, the resolution as amended was 
agreed to.

Sec. 2.3 The rule providing for joint sponsorship of House bills [Rule 
    XXII clause 4] permits the names of the sponsor and up to 24 
    cosponsors to appear on any public bill; but the rule is 
    interpreted to permit the sponsor to introduce other bills, with 
    identical text, with additional cosponsors.

    On June 6, 1968,(4) Mrs. Leonor K. Sullivan, of 
Missouri, introduced five identical bills (5) cosponsored by 
107 other Members. The bills were referred to the Committee on 
Agriculture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 114 Cong. Rec. 16307-09, 16319, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
 5. H.R. 17721, H.R. 17722, H.R. 17723, H.R. 17724, and H.R. 17725, to 
        amend the Food Stamp Act of 1964, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.4 Bills which are jointly sponsored first carry the name of the 
    chief sponsor, then the names of those Members who are cosponsors.

    As an example, on Apr. 26, 1967,(6) Mr. Spark M. 
Matsunaga, of Hawaii (for himself and Mrs. Patsy T. Mink, of Hawaii) 
introduced the first jointly sponsored bill (7) pursuant to 
the amendment
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 113 Cong. Rec. 10892, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
 7. H.R. 9316.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2479]]

of Rule XXII clause 4 agreed to on the preceding day. The bill first 
carried the name of Mr. Matsunaga, its chief sponsor, then the name of 
Mrs. Mink, a cosponsor.

Erroneous Listing of Sponsors

Sec. 2.5 Where a public bill or resolution is introduced in the House 
    with several Members listed as cosponsors, the names cannot 
    thereafter be deleted from the bill or resolution; but a statement 
    indicating that an error was made in listing one of the names has 
    been made on the floor in conjunction with a unanimousconsent 
    request that the Record be corrected accordingly.

    On Oct. 9, 1969,(8) the following proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 115 Cong. Rec. 29347, 91st Cong. 1st Sess. See also 114 Cong. Rec. 
        1873, 1922, 90th Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 1, 1968, where Mr. Walter 
        B. Jones (N.C.) announced to the House that a hill (H.R. 15030) 
        had been introduced containing the names of two Members who had 
        not authorized the use of their names as cosponsors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Jeffery] Cohelan [of California]: Mr. Speaker, I rise to 
    correct an error in the sponsorship of House Joint Resolution 927 
    which provided for the funding of Health, Education, and Welfare 
    under a continuing resolution at the House-passed levels. The name 
    of the Honorable Michael J. Kirwan, of Ohio, appears as a cosponsor 
    of this resolution. I have been informed that Mr. Kirwan's name was 
    incorrectly added to the list of cosponsors and I ask unanimous 
    consent that the Record stand corrected.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (9) The gentleman's 
    statement will appear in the Record. There is no way of correcting 
    the resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: Since a bill as introduced in the House 
becomes the property of the House, the sponsor thereof cannot, after 
its introduction, add to or delete from the list of cosponsors 
appearing on the bill as introduced.

Withdrawal of Cosponsor's Support

Sec. 2.6 While a Member may not withdraw his name from a bill which he 
    has cosponsored once the bill has been introduced and referred, he 
    may announce to the House his withdrawal of support for the bill.

    On Mar. 29, 1971,(10) Mr. Harold R. Collier, of 
Illinois, pursuant to a grant of permission to address the House for 
one minute and to revise and extend his remarks, announced the 
withdrawal
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 117 Cong. Rec. 8268, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2480]]

of his cosponsorship and support of a bill (11) which had 
previously been introduced and referred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. H.R. 6360, to establish a National Legal Services Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senate Practice

Sec. 2.7 A Senator's name may be deleted from the list of cosponsors of 
    a bill.

    On Feb. 17, 1959,(12) Senator Hubert H. Humphrey, of 
Minnesota, asked unanimous consent that the name of the Senator from 
New York' Senator Jacob K. Javits, be deleted as a cosponsor of a bill 
(13) which had been introduced. There being no objection, it 
was so ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 105 Cong. Rec. 2470, 86th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 103 Cong. Rec. 
        2666, 85th Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 27, 1957, where the Senate, by 
        unanimous consent, permitted the names of four Senators to be 
        stricken as cosponsors of an amendment to a bill (H.R. 4090).
13. S. 812, to establish a Youth Conservation Corps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
                               CHAPTER 16
 
          Introduction and Reference of Bills and Resolutions
 
Sec. 3. Reference

    Bills, petitions, and other matters are referred to committees of 
the House in accordance with the House rule (14) 
establishing the jurisdiction of committees over particular 
subjects.(15) Petitions, memorials and bills of a private 
nature are delivered to the Clerk, endorsed with the sponsors names and 
the reference or disposition to be made thereof.(16) The 
referral of public bills, memorials and resolutions is the 
responsibility of the Speaker.(17) Bills and messages from 
the Senate are referred to committees in the same manner as public 
bills presented by the Members.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Rule XI, House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 675-724 (1973).
            For a discussion of rule changes in the 94th Congress 
        affecting referral of bills to standing committees, see 
        supplements to this edition as they appear.
15. For a discussion of jurisdiction of committees, generally, see Ch. 
        17, infra.
16. Rule XXII clause 1, House Rules and Manual Sec. 849 (1973).
17. Rule XXII clause 4, House Rules and Manual Sec. 854 (1973). See 
        Sec. Sec. 3.2-3.5, infra, for further discussion.
18. Rule XXIV clause 2, House Rules and Manual Sec. 882 (1973).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Referral of bills and resolutions generally occurs on the same day 
as their introduction. Due to the large number of bills introduced on a 
session's opening day, however, the referral of all such bills may not 
be completed until the following day.(19) Bills so 
introduced which are referred only as of the following day are neverthe
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. See Sec. Sec. 3.6, 3.7, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2481]]

less printed in the Record of the following day with the date of their 
original introduction.

    Occasionally, of course, errors in reference of bills to committees 
may occur. In the case of private bills, errors may be corrected 
without action by the House at the suggestion of the committee having 
possession of the bill.(20) Similarly, a House rule 
(1) provides for procedures to be followed in case of an 
error in reference of a public bill. The House pursuant to the rule has 
rereferred erroneously referenced public bills both by unanimous 
consent (2) and by agreement to rereferral motions of the 
committees claiming or relinquishing jurisdiction over the matters in 
question.(3) Rereferral either on motion or by unanimous 
consent is determined without debate.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Rule XXII clause 3, House Rules and Manual Sec. 853 (1973).
 1. Rule XXII clause 4, House Rules and Manual Sec. 854 (1973).
 2. See Sec. Sec. 3.14, 3.15, infra.
 3. See Sec. Sec. 3.10-3.13, infra.
 4. See Sec. 3.13, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It should be noted that once a bill has been reported for floor 
action from a committee, points of order against its reference and 
motions for its rereferral may not be entertained.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See Sec. 3.16, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On rare occasions a bill is called up for consideration by 
unanimous consent without being referred to a committee.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. See Sec. 3.1, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consideration Without Reference

Sec. 3.1 On rare occasions a private bill is introduced from the floor 
    and called up for consideration by unanimous consent without being 
    referred to a committee.

    On Apr. 16, 1969,(7) Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, asked 
unanimous consent for the immediate consideration of a bill 
(8) to provide mail service for the widow of a former 
President. No objection being heard to the request of the gentleman 
from Oklahoma, the bill was read to the House, was ordered to be 
engrossed and read a third time, was read a third time and passed. A 
motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 115 Cong. Rec. 9258, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
 8. H.R. 10158.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: The proposal was transmitted to the 
Congress as Executive Communication No. 686 and was received in the 
Speaker's Rooms at 11:30 a.m., April 16. The Parliamen

[[Page 2482]]

tarian called it to the attention of the Speaker who then directed the 
Majority Leader to clear it for immediate consideration by unanimous 
consent.

Speaker's Responsibilities

Sec. 3.2 The referral of a public bill to the proper committee, under 
    the rules of the House, is the responsibility of the Speaker, who, 
    on occasion, has taken the floor to explain his reference of a 
    bill.

    On Mar. 2, 1966,(9) during debate in Committee of the 
Whole concerning a bill (10) providing for the participation 
of the United States in the 1967 Alaska Centennial, the Chair 
(11) recognized Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, 
who delivered the following remarks:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 112 Cong. Rec. 4579, 4580, 89th Cong. 2d Sess. See Rule XXII clause 
        4, House Rules and Manual Sec. 854 (1973).
10. H.R. 9963.
11. Charles A. Vanik (Ohio).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McCormack: . . . Mr. Chairman, in view of the remarks made 
    by the gentleman from New Hampshire [Mr. Cleveland] about the 
    reference of this bill, and overhearing them and confining myself 
    to that aspect of his remarks, I simply want to advise the Members 
    of the House that in my judgment as the Speaker, this bill was 
    properly referred to the Committee on Public Works.
        In the original bill, the bill calls for the participation in 
    the 1967 exposition, jointly with the State of Alaska through 
    economic development projects such as industrial, agricultural, 
    educational, research, or commercial facilities, and so forth.
        Mr. Chairman, I thoroughly respect the views of my friend, the 
    gentleman from New Hampshire [Mr. Cleveland], but I cannot be on 
    the floor and listen to one challenge the reference of a bill that 
    I made. I realize that I might make mistakes occasionally, but I 
    will always make the reference of a bill that the rules call for. 
    In my clear judgment this bill was properly referred to the 
    Committee on Public Works.

Sec. 3.3 The referral of a Senate bill on the Speaker's table to the 
    proper committee is within the discretion of the Speaker.

    On June 6, 1949,(12) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 95 Cong. Rec. 7255, 81st Cong. 1st Sess. For further illustrations, 
        see 80 Cong. Rec. 4547, 74th Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 27, 1936; and 
        72 Cong. Rec. 7236, 7237, 71st Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 17, 1930. 
        And see Rule XXIV clause 2, House Rules and Manual Sec. 882 
        (1973).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Wright] Patman [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Speaker: (13) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

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

[[Page 2483]]

        Mr. Patman: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the status of the bill S. 
    1008, which, I understand, was messaged over from the Senate on 
    Friday last?
        The Speaker: The Chair understands it is on the Speaker's 
    table.
        Mr. Patman: Will it be referred to the Committee on the 
    Judiciary?
        The Speaker: The Chair does not know about that.
        Mr. Patman: What action will be necessary in order to get it 
    referred to the committee?
        The Speaker: It is the duty and the privilege of the Chair to 
    refer bills to whatever committee he desires, after consultation 
    with the Parliamentarian, of course. The Chair will not recognize 
    any motion in that regard at this time.

Sec. 3.4 On one occasion a Senate bill which had been held at the 
    Speaker's table pending disposition of a similar House measure was 
    referred by the Speaker to the same House committee to which the 
    House bill had been recommitted.

    On June 22, 1962,(14) the Speaker (15) 
referred to the Committee on Agriculture a Senate bill,(16) 
following the recommittal on the previous day of a similar House bill 
(17) to the same committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 108 Cong. Rec. 11433, 11434, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
15. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
16. S. 3225.
17. H.R. 11222, food and agricultural bill of 1962.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 3.5 The Chair does not indicate in advance the committee to which 
    he will refer public bills subsequently introduced.

    On Jan. 24, 1944,(18) during House debate relating to a 
motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from further consideration 
of a resolution,(19) a parliamentary inquiry was propounded 
by Mr. Pete Jarman, of Alabama, questioning whether the discharge of 
the committee and the adoption of the resolution would result in the 
reference of certain proposed legislation to the Committee on World War 
Veterans' Legislation. Responding to the inquiry, the Speaker 
(20) remarked as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 90 Cong. Rec. 629, 631-33, 78th Cong. 2d Sess. For a further 
        example of the Speaker's refusal to speculate on the 
        referencing of future bills, see 112 Cong. Rec. 1716, 89th 
        Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 1, 1966.
19. H. Res. 29, amending Rule XI clause 40.
20. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Chair . . . is compelled to say to the 
    gentleman from Alabama that as bills are submitted reference would 
    have to be made under the rules of the House.

        The Chair does not want to decide at this time that he would be 
    compelled to refer all legislation of that kind and character to 
    this committee. A great many times bills are introduced having 
    three or four subjects in them and

[[Page 2484]]

    there may be a choice of which committee should have jurisdiction.

Reference on Opening Day

Sec. 3.6 Bills placed in the hopper on the opening day of a new 
    Congress are not referred until after the adoption of the rules. 
    The titles of bills that are not referred on the opening day are 
    sometimes printed in the next day's Record with a date 
    corresponding to the date on which the rules were adopted.

    On Jan. 21, 1971,(1) the Speaker (2) made the 
following announcement to the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 117 Cong. Rec. 16, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
 2. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Chair would like to make a statement 
    concerning the introduction and reference of bills.
        Heretofore on the opening day of a new Congress, several 
    thousand bills have been introduced under adopted rules permitting 
    their introduction by Members and reference by the Speaker. On 
    those occasions, the Speaker announced his intention to examine and 
    refer as many bills as possible, and he asked the indulgence of 
    Members if he was unable to refer all introduced bills.
        Since the rules of the 92d Congress have not yet been adopted, 
    the right of Members to introduce bills, and the authority of the 
    Speaker to refer them, is technically delayed. The Chair will state 
    that bills dropped in the hopper will be held until the adoption of 
    the rules, at which time they will be referred as expeditiously as 
    possible to the appropriate committee. At that time, the bills 
    which are not referred and do not appear in the Record as of that 
    day will be included in the next day's Record and printed with a 
    date as of the time the rules were adopted.

Sec. 3.7 As a result of the large number of bills introduced on opening 
    day, the Speaker has on that occasion announced his intention to 
    examine and refer as many bills as possible and to ask the 
    indulgence of the Members if he was unable to refer all introduced 
    bills.

    On Jan. 3, 1969,(3) the Speaker (4) made the 
following announcement to the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 115 Cong. Rec. 37, 91st Cong. 1st Sess. For further illustrations, 
        see 113 Cong. Rec. 34, 90th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 10, 1967; 111 
        Cong. Rec. 26, 27, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 4, 1965; and 109 
        Cong. Rec. 23, 24, 88th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 9, 1963.
 4. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Chair would like to make a statement 
    concerning the introduction and reference of bills today.
        As Members are aware, they have the privilege today of 
    introducing bills. Heretofore on the opening day of a new Congress, 
    several thousand bills have been introduced. It will be readily ap

[[Page 2485]]

    parent to all Members that it may be a physical impossibility for 
    the Speaker to examine each bill for reference today. The Chair 
    will do his best to refer as many bills as possible, but he will 
    ask the indulgence of Members if he is unable to refer all the 
    bills that may be introduced. Those bills which are not referred 
    and do not appear in the Record as of today will be included in the 
    next day's Record and printed with a date as of today.

Sec. 3.8 A Senate bill, messaged to the House following sine die 
    adjournment, is referred to committee on opening day of the next 
    session of the same Congress.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See the proceedings discussed in Sec. 1.5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Correcting Date of Reference

Sec. 3.9 On one occasion two bills delivered to the Parliamentarian for 
    reference after adjournment, when it was too late to process them 
    for inclusion in the Record of that day, were held for reference on 
    the following day; subsequently, upon assurances by the sponsor 
    that the bills had been placed in the hopper before adjournment on 
    the preceding day, they were printed as having been introduced on 
    the preceding day and notations of the date, as corrected, of 
    introduction were made in both the Record and the Journal.

    On Jan. 26, 1970,(6) the announcement of the Jan. 22 
introduction and referral of two bills, introduced Jan. 22 but omitted 
from the Record of that date, was made as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. Cong. Rec. (daily ed.), 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Public Bills and Resolutions

        Under clause 4 of rule XXII, public bills and resolutions were 
    introduced and severally referred as follows:

                   [Omitted from the Record of Jan. 22, 1970]
            By Mr. Bennett (for himself, Mr. Brock, Mr. Broomfield, Mr. 
                Chappell, Mr. Cleveland, Mr. Daddario, Mr. Dulski, Mr. 
                Edmondson, Mr. Foley, Mr. Helstoski, Mr. Hull, Mr. Kee, 
                Mr. Kuykendall, Mr. McCloskey, Mr. Mikva, Mrs. Mink, 
                Mr. Olsen, Mr. Pryor of Arkansas, Mr. Purcell, Mr. 
                Rarick, Mr. Reifel, Mr. Ruppe, Mr. Saylor, Mr. Scherle, 
                and Mr. Skubitz):

            H.R. 15521. A bill to amend the act of June 27, 1960 (74 
        Stat. 220), relating to the preservation of historical and 
        archaeological data; to the Committee on Interior and Insular 
        Affairs.
            By Mr. Bennett (for himself, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Tiernan, Mr. 
                Tunney, Mr. Udall, Mr. Waldie, and Mr. Vanik):

        H.R. 15522. A bill to amend the act of June 27, 1960 (74 Stat. 
    220), relat

[[Page 2486]]

    ing to the preservation of historical and archaeological data; to 
    the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

    The Record was corrected accordingly.

Rereferral by Motion

Sec. 3.10 On occasion, the House has rejected a motion for the 
    rereferral of a bill, offered in accordance with Rule XXII clause 4 
    by a Member at the direction of the committee claiming 
    jurisdiction.

    On May 4, 1939,(7) Mr. William T. Schulte, of Indiana, 
by direction of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 
submitted a motion that a bill (8) be rereferred from the 
Committee on the Judiciary to the Committee on Immigration and 
Naturalization. The motion was subsequently rejected on a division--
ayes 17, noes 128.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 84 Cong. Rec. 5119, 5120, 76th Cong. 1st Sess.
 8. H.R. 5138, relating to unlawful attempts to overthrow the 
        government of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 3.11 The rule providing for rereference of bills on motion of a 
    committee claiming jurisdiction is construed to require that the 
    motion be made before any business has been transacted; but the 
    motion may be made after one-minute speeches.

    On Apr. 21, 1942,(9) subsequent to the submission by Mr. 
Samuel Dickstein, of New York (at the direction of the Committee on 
Immigration and Naturalization) of a motion to rerefer a bill 
(10) from the Committee on the Judiciary to the Committee on 
Immigration and Naturalization, a point of order was raised by Mr. John 
E. Rankin, of Mississippi, asserting that the motion had been made too 
late. In overruling the point of order, the Speaker (11) 
said:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 88 Cong. Rec. 3571, 77th Cong. 2d Sess. For an additional example, 
        see 79 Cong. Rec. 4878, 4879, 74th Cong. 1st Sess., Apr. 2, 
        1935, where a motion to rerefer a bill was made and considered 
        subsequent to the House's entertainment of unanimous-consent 
        requests.
10. H.R. 6915.
11. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        On the point that the motion comes too late in that business 
    has been transacted in the House today, the Chair may say that 
    since the reading of the Journal the only business that has been 
    transacted has been 1-minute speeches. The Chair is constrained to 
    overrule the point of order of the gentleman from Mississippi on 
    the ground that he thinks it involves too technical a construction 
    of the rule.

Sec. 3.12 The House has granted unanimous consent that it

[[Page 2487]]

    may be in order for a Member to move the rereference of a bill at 
    any time during the day notwithstanding the rule requiring that 
    such motions be made immediately after the reading of the Journal.

    On June 18, 1952,(12) the following proceedings 
occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 98 Cong. Rec. 7532, 7542-44, 82d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] Vinson [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that it may be in order for me to make a motion today to 
    rerefer a bill.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. H.R. 8130, to promote economy and efficiency through certain 
        reorganizations and the integration of supply and service 
        activities within and among the military departments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (14) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Georgia?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [William C.] Lantaff [of Florida]: Mr. Speaker, reserving 
    the right to object, what is the bill?
        Mr. Vinson: Mr. Speaker, I am simply trying to preserve my 
    right so that the chairman of the committee may be here.
        Mr. [Charles A.] Halleck [of Indiana]: Mr. Speaker, reserving 
    the right to object, if this unanimous-consent request is granted 
    the gentleman proposes to make such motion later today?
        Mr. Vinson: Yes; I am asking unanimous consent that later on 
    during the day I may have the right to propound a unanimous-consent 
    request or to move to rerefer a bill. I am doing this to preserve 
    my rights and to give the chairman of the Expenditures Committee an 
    opportunity to be here. He is just leaving his office.
        Mr. [Clare E.] Hoffman of Michigan: Mr. Speaker, reserving the 
    right to object, do I understand the gentleman to say that he is 
    asking unanimous consent that he may make the same request later 
    on?
        Mr. Vinson: That is right exactly, because under the rules of 
    the House this is the time it has to be made and I propound a 
    unanimous-consent request now to be permitted during today to offer 
    a motion to rerefer a bill.
        Mr. Hoffman of Michigan: Why does not the gentleman ask it now?
        Mr. Vinson: I am withholding the motion pending the arrival of 
    the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Dawson].
        Mr. Hoffman of Michigan: Mr. Speaker, if that is the only 
    purpose, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Georgia?
        There was no objection.

    Later in the day, Mr. Vinson asked for and was granted unanimous 
consent to rerefer the bill from the Committee on Expenditures in the 
Executive Departments to the Committee on Armed Services.

Sec. 3.13 A motion made pursuant to Rule XXII clause 4 to rerefer a 
    bill to a committee claiming jurisdiction is not debatable.

[[Page 2488]]

    On Apr. 2, 1935,(15) during consideration of a motion 
submitted by Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New York, to rerefer a bill 
(16) to the Committee on the Judiciary, a parliamentary 
inquiry was raised by Mr. Sam D. McReynolds, of Tennessee, asking if 
the Chair had recognized the gentleman from New York for that purpose. 
Responding in the affirmative, the Speaker (17) stated as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 79 Cong. Rec. 4878, 4879, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. For further example, 
        see 87 Cong. Rec. 127, 128, 77th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 13, 
        1941, where an objection based on the nondebatability of 
        motions to rerefer bills was made when the Speaker sought to 
        state, in reply to a parliamentary inquiry, his reasons for 
        referring the bill to a certain committee.
16. H.R. 6547, authorizing the appointment of a Commissioner for the 
        United States Court for China.
17. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The gentleman has the floor and has made a motion that is in 
    order at this time. The gentleman from New York moves that the bill 
    H.R. 6547 be rereferred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The 
    Chair may state to the gentleman from Tennessee that the motion is 
    not debatable.

Rereferral by Unanimous Consent

Sec. 3.14 Rereferral of a bill has been permitted by unanimous consent.

    On July 15, 1970,(1) the following proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 24451, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. For a further 
        illustration see 113 Cong. Rec. 29560, 29561, 29564-67, 90th 
        Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 20, 1967, where 68 bills and resolutions 
        dealing with veterans' cemeteries were, by unanimous consent, 
        rereferred from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs 
        to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Jack T.] Brinkley [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged 
    from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 18365) to amend title 
    10 of the United States Code to permit actions against the United 
    States for damage to the good name and reputation of members of the 
    Armed Forces charged with committing certain crimes against 
    civilians in combat zones if such members are cleared of such 
    charges, and for other purposes, of which I am the author, and that 
    the bill be rereferred to the Committee on Armed Services.
        In this regard, Mr. Speaker, I have gotten the permission of 
    the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary and of the Committee 
    on Armed Services.
        The Speaker: (2) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Georgia?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There being no objection, the bill was rereferred.
    Parliamentarian's Note: Normally the chairman of one of the 
committees involved makes the unanimous-consent request, and not the 
sponsor of the bill.

[[Page 2489]]

Sec. 3.15 Where the chairman of a committee wishes to ask unanimous 
    consent for the rereference of a bill, it is customary to consult 
    with the chairman of the committee to which the bill is to be 
    referred; on one occasion, the Speaker declined to recognize a 
    chairman of a committee for a unanimous-consent request to rerefer 
    a bill until the chairman of the other committee was consulted.

    On Mar. 25, 1948,(3) subsequent to the unanimous-consent 
request of Mrs. Edith Nourse Rogers, of Massachusetts, that a bill 
(4) be referred from the Committee on Veterans' Affairs to 
the Committee on the Judiciary, the following exchange took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 94 Cong. Rec. 3573, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
 4. H.R. 5515, for the relief of Mr. and Mrs. Albert Chandler.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (5) Has the gentlewoman conferred with 
    the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mrs. Rogers of Massachusetts: I have not, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: It is customary to consult with the chairman of 
    the committee to whom the bill is to be referred. No harm will come 
    if this matter is delayed until Monday.
        Mrs. Rogers of Massachusetts: I withdraw the request, Mr. 
    Speaker.

Rereferral of Reported Bills

Sec. 3.16 Once a bill has been reported by the committee to which it 
    was referred, points of order against reference of the bill and 
    motions for its rereferral are not entertained.

    On May 2, 1939,(6) subsequent to the introduction of a 
resolution (7) reported from the Committee on Rules 
providing for the consideration of a bill,(8) Mr. Samuel 
Dickstein, of New York, made the following point of order:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 84 Cong. Rec. 5052-55, 76th Cong. 1st Sess. For further 
        illustrations, see 89 Cong. Rec. 6209, 78th Cong. 1st Sess., 
        June 21, 1943; 84 Cong. Rec. 9532, 76th Cong. 1st Sess., July 
        19, 1939; and 83 Cong. Rec. 1142, 1143, 75th Cong. 3d Sess., 
        Jan. 26, 1938.
 7. H. Res. 175.
 8. H.R. 5643, investing the circuit courts of appeals of the United 
        States with original and exclusive jurisdiction in certain 
        cases involving alien affairs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order to the substance of the 
    resolution and the adoption of the resolution for consideration of 
    this bill upon the ground that this bill did not have a hearing 
    before the committee authorized by the rules of the House, and that 
    the Rules Committee had no right to hear it, because there was no 
    proper report from a committee authorized to conduct the hearings 
    on this legislation or to sanction the approval of this bill.

[[Page 2490]]

        This bill is 100 percent immigration, but was referred to the 
    Committee on the Judiciary; and I submit, Mr. Speaker, I should 
    like to have some time to go into the precedents and the rules of 
    the House which will establish definitely that this bill is 
    improperly before the House for consideration under a rule or under 
    any other provision of the laws of this Congress or any other 
    Congress, and that this is an immigration bill and the Immigration 
    Committee has had no consideration of this measure by hearings or 
    otherwise. . . .

    Considerable debate on the point of order ensued, at the conclusion 
of which, the Speaker,(9) overruling the point of order, 
made the following statement:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The gentleman from Mississippi, on behalf of the Committee on 
    Rules of the House, has offered a resolution, which has been 
    reported, providing for the consideration of H.R. 5643.
        The gentleman from New York, chairman of the Committee on 
    Immigration and Naturalization, has raised a point of order, which 
    may be stated in two different forms, possibly, that the resolution 
    now offered is out of order. Primarily, as the Chair understands, 
    the point of order is raised against consideration of the bill 
    because of the fact that the Committee on the Judiciary, to which 
    it was referred, had no jurisdiction or authority under the rules 
    of the House to consider the bill; therefore it had no legal right 
    to report the bill to the House for its consideration under the 
    rules of the House.
        The Chair has given considerable consideration to the problem, 
    because it is a matter of some importance. It is a matter of grave 
    importance, of course, to all committees, their chairmen and 
    members, affecting as it does the matter of jurisdiction of the 
    committees over important legislation. . . .
        This is not a new matter that is now raised by the gentleman 
    from New York. It may be proper here to state that the present 
    occupant of the chair nor any other Speaker who has been his 
    predecessor has had any personal interest in reference to any bill. 
    The Speaker does not participate in the deliberations by the 
    committees. His function is entirely to undertake to preserve the 
    rules and precedents of the House as its presiding officer.
        This bill now being attacked in the ordinary course was 
    referred to the Parliamentarian, and, with the consent of the 
    Speaker, referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, for the 
    reasons rather admirably stated by the gentleman from Alabama. It 
    was felt at that time that the Committee on the Judiciary was the 
    proper committee to which the bill should be referred. . . .
        The defect in the position taken by the gentleman from New York 
    . . . is that under the uniform practices and precedents of the 
    House, as far as the Speaker has been able to find them, the 
    gentleman has slept upon his rights in raising this question . . . 
    although he may not have been actually advised of this bill until 
    recently called to his attention; however, constructively at least, 
    he has been guilty of parliamentary laches.
        In making this ruling, the Chair desires to refer to a decision 
    heretofore

[[Page 2491]]

    made by the present Speaker of the House on an identical question 
    involving the jurisdiction of a committee. This is found on page 
    1526 of the Congressional Record of January 26, 1938.
        On January 26, 1938, Mr. May, by direction of the Committee on 
    Military Affairs, called up the bill (H.R. 8176) providing for 
    continuing retirement pay, under certain conditions, of officers 
    and former officers of the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps of the 
    United States, other than officers of the Regular Army, Navy, or 
    Marine Corps, who incurred physical disability while in the service 
    of the United States during the World War, and for other purposes.
        The gentlemen from Texas [Mr. Patman] made the point of order 
    that the bill was improperly referred to the Committee on Military 
    Affairs, the proper committee being the Committee on World War 
    Veterans' Legislation. He made the point of order that the bill was 
    not in order for consideration at that time. As the Chair 
    understands that is the principle invoked by the gentleman from New 
    York.
        The gentlemen from Kentucky [Mr. May] made the point of order 
    that the question of order raised by Mr. Patman came too late, 
    inasmuch as the bill had been reported to the House.
        The Speaker, in sustaining a point of order made by Mr. May, 
    said:

            The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Patman] raises the point of 
        order against consideration of the bill, that it was not 
        referred under the rules of the House to the Committee on World 
        War Veterans' Legislation, to which, according to his 
        contention, it should have originally been referred.
            Pending that question the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. 
        May], the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, raises 
        the point of order that the point of order made by the 
        gentleman from Texas comes too late. . . .
            . . . [T]here have been a number of decisions and 
        precedents upon this particular question. The Chair refers 
        especially to a decision made by Mr. Speaker Longworth, as 
        reported in volume 7 of Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
        Representatives, section 2113.

        Then quoting Speaker Longworth's decision:

            After a public bill has been reported--

        As is the case here, the bill having been referred to the 
    Committee on the Judiciary, whether properly or erroneously 
    referred, the quotation goes on to say:
        it is not in order to raise a question of committee 
        jurisdiction--

        And so forth. The gentleman from Michigan has cited for 
    consideration of the Chair a syllabus found on page 401, section 
    854, of the House Rules Manual which the Chair will quote:

            According to the later practice, the erroneous reference of 
        a public bill, if it remains uncorrected in effect, gives 
        jurisdiction to the committee receiving it, and it is too late 
        to move a change of reference after such committee has reported 
        the bill.

        The Chair desires particularly to direct the attention of the 
    House to a decision made by Mr. Speaker Crisp which may be found in 
    Hinds' Precedents, volume IV, section 4365. In that instance 
    Speaker Crisp delivered an elaborate opinion on a question which 
    the Chair thinks is on all fours with the one now before him.

[[Page 2492]]

        . . . [T]he Chair is clearly of the opinion that despite the 
    fact there might be considerable merit in the contention made by 
    the gentleman from New York so far as the spirit and purposes in 
    the establishment of committees are concerned, nevertheless, under 
    these precedents, which seem to be absolutely uniform, the Chair is 
    constrained to overrule the point of order made by the gentleman 
    from New York.
