[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 4, Chapters 15 - 17]
[Chapter 17. Committees]
[A. Creating and Organizing Committees]
[Â§ 4. Committee Expenses; Use of Contingent Fund]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 2542-2551]
 
                               CHAPTER 17
 
                               Committees
 
                 A. CREATING AND ORGANIZING COMMITTEES
 
Sec. 4. Committee Expenses; Use of Contingent Fund

    Funds for compensation of standing committees' professional and 
clerical staff are carried in the annual legislative appropriations 
acts, which also place money in the contingent fund of the House. Each 
committee, other than the Committee on Appropriations,(14) 
and (more recently) the Committee on the Budget,(15) must 
obtain authorization for the payment of those expenses not covered by 
the legislative appropriation acts from the contingent fund of the 
House. The Committee Reform Amendments of 1974 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong. 
effective Jan. 3, 1975), in clause 1(b), Rule XI provided authorization 
for all committees to conduct investigations within their jurisdictions 
and to incur expenses subject to the adoption of expense resolutions 
reported from the Committee on House Administration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Rule XI clause 5(a), House Rules and Manual Sec. 732(a) (1979).
15. See Rule XI clause 5(a), House Rules and Manual Sec. 732(a) (1979). 
        This exemption emanated from the Congressional Budget Act of 
        1974 (88 Stat. 297) and dates from July 12, 1974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rules provide (16) that such an authorization 
initially shall be procured by one primary expense resolution providing 
funds for the payment of all the committee's expenses for the year from 
the contingent fund. The resolution may not be considered in the House 
unless a printed report on the resolution has been available to Members 
for at least one calendar day prior to consideration. The report, 
itself, must:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Rule XI clause 5(a), House Rules and Manual Sec. 732(a) (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        (1) state the total amount of the funds to be provided to the 
    committee under the primary expense resolution for all anticipated 
    activities and programs of the committee; and
        (2) to the extent practicable, contain such general statements 
    regarding the estimated foreseeable expenditures for the respective 
    anticipated activities and programs of the committee as may be 
    appropriate to provide the House with basic estimates with respect 
    to the expenditure generally of the funds to be provided to the 
    committee under the primary expense resolution.

    In practice, each standing committee goes before the Committee on 
House Administration with its

[[Page 2543]]

funding request. The latter committee possesses jurisdiction under the 
rules over appropriations and expenditures from the contingent 
fund.(17) In addition, the rules (18) accord 
privileged status to the reporting of any matter by the Committee on 
House Administration which pertains to the expenditure of the 
contingent fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Rule X clauses 1(j)(1), 1(j)(6), House Rules and Manual Sec. 679(a) 
        (1979).
18. Rule XI clause 4(a), House Rules and Manual Sec. 726 (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following the adoption of a committee's primary expense resolution 
by the House, authorization for the payment from the contingent fund of 
additional committee expenses not covered by statutory appropriations 
or by the primary expense resolution may be obtained by one or more 
additional expense resolutions. Again, any such expense resolution must 
be accompanied by a printed report made available to Members at least 
one calendar day prior to the consideration of the 
resolution.(19) And, the report accompanying such an 
additional expense resolution must:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Rule XI clause 5(b), House Rules and Manual Sec. 732 (b) (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        (1) state the total amount of additional funds to be provided 
    to the committee under the additional expense resolution and the 
    purpose or purposes for which those additional funds are to be used 
    by the committee; and
        (2) state the reason or reasons for the failure to procure the 
    additional funds for the committee by means of the primary expense 
    resolution.

    It should be noted none of the requirements applicable to primary 
and additional expense resolutions obtain with respect to those 
resolutions providing for contingent fund payment of a committee's 
expenses from and after the beginning of a year and before the adoption 
by the House of the committee's primary expense 
resolution.(20) Similarly ex

[[Page 2544]]

cluded from such requirements is: (1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. In recent Congresses, ``continuing'' resolutions have been 
        considered by unanimous consent at the beginning of each 
        Congress (where the Committee on House Administration had not 
        been organized and could not report privileged resolutions) to 
        provide for temporary payments from the contingent fund, 
        usually for a period of up to three months and at rates in 
        existence at the end of the prior Congress, for expenses of 
        standing and select committees established in House rules (see 
        e.g., H. Res. 84, 121 Cong. Rec. 1160, 1161, 94th Cong. 1st 
        Sess., Jan. 23, 1975; H. Res. 11, 123 Cong. Rec. 74, 95th Cong. 
        1st Sess., Jan. 4, 1977; H. Res. 49, 125 Cong. Rec.--, 96th 
        Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 18, 1979). See also Sec. Sec. 13.1-13.9, 
        infra, for discussion of resolutions permitting continued 
        committee employment in new Congresses. This concept of 
        ``continuing resolutions'' is to be distinguished from 
        ``continuing appropriations joint resolutions'' for operation 
        of departments of government pending enactment of annual 
        general appropriations bills, discussed in Ch. 25 
        (Appropriations), infra, in this work.
 1. Rule XI clause 5(c)(2), House Rules and Manual Sec. 732 (c) (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        any resolution providing in any Congress, for all of the 
    standing committees of the House, additional office equipment, 
    airmail and special delivery postage stamps, supplies, staff 
    personnel, or any other specific item for the operation of the 
    standing committees, and containing an authorization for the 
    payment from the contingent fund of the House of the expenses of 
    any of the foregoing items provided by that resolution, subject to 
    and until enactment of the provisions of the resolution as 
    permanent law.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Information with respect to the compensation of committee 
        employees, as well as particulars about their appointment and 
        employment may be found at Sec. 13, 
        infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allocation of Funds for Committee Personnel; for Minority Party Funding

Sec. 4.1 The 92d Congress by resolution adopted rules striking out the 
    statutory requirement (which was contained as a rulemaking exercise 
    in an Act passed the previous year) that not less than one-third of 
    funds for standing committee investigative personnel be made 
    available to the minority party, and inserting the requirement that 
    the minority be given fair consideration in the allocation of such 
    funds.

    On Jan. 21, 1971,(3) Mr. William M. Colmer, of 
Mississippi, offered a privileged resolution (H. Res. 5) and asked for 
its immediate consideration. The resolution provided:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 117 Cong. Rec. 14, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        That the Rules of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-
    first Congress, together with all applicable provisions of the 
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, as amended, and the 
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, be, and they are hereby 
    adopted as the Rules of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-
    second Congress, with the following amendments as part thereof. . . 
    .

    Among the amendments which were then listed was the following:

        In Rule XI, strike out clause 32(c) (4) and insert 
    in lieu thereof the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. On July 16, 1970 [116 Cong. Rec. 24590, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.], by a 
        teller vote of 105 ayes to 63 nays, the Committee of the Whole 
        agreed to an amendment to the Legislative Reorganization Act of 
        1970 (H.R. 17654), offered by Mr. Frank Thompson, Jr., of New 
        Jersey, which amended section (c) of the newly proposed clause 
        32, Rule XI, such that the latter provision [clause 32(c), Rule 
        XI] would read thusly: ``The minority party on any such 
        standing committee is entitled to if they so request not less 
        than one-third of the funds provided for the appointment of 
        committee staff personnel pursuant to each such primary or 
        additional expense resolution.'' This provision, frequently 
        referred to as the ``Thompson-Schwengel amendment'' owing to 
        its joint authorship by Mr. Thompson and Mr. Fred Schwengel, of 
        Iowa, remained intact when the Legislative Reorganization Act 
        of 1970 became law [Pub. L. No. 91-510], and thus was in effect 
        as of Jan. 1, 1971.

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

[[Page 2545]]

        ``(c) The minority party on any such standing committee is 
    entitled to and shall receive fair consideration in the appointment 
    of committee staff personnel pursuant to each such primary or 
    additional expense resolution.''

    On Jan. 22, 1971,(5) as discussion of House Resolution 5 
continued, much of the debate focused on the minority staffing 
amendment. The Democratic Caucus had bound (6) its members 
to vote to remove that provision of clause 32(c) [Rule XI which 
entitled the minority party of an affected committee to control at 
least one-third of the funds set aside for the appointment of committee 
staff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 117 Cong. Rec. 132, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
 6. A brief discussion of the extent to which caucus members were 
        ``bound'' was provided by Mr. Frank Thompson, of New Jersey 
        [Id. at p. 138]. For further details as to the role of party 
        caucuses, in general, see Ch. 3, supra, particularly Sec. 10, 
        discussing the extent to which party decisions could be made 
        binding on members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Those in favor of modifying the ``one-third funding'' provision 
cited that rule's inflexible and ``arbitrary'' standard which, it was 
argued, would impose divisiveness and controversy into committees which 
already had agreeable and workable arrangements.(7) It was 
also felt that the rigid standard would be a step in the direction of a 
``spoils'' system and away from the development of professional staff 
careers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See remarks of Mr. John A. Blatnik (Minn.) at 117 Cong. Rec. 138, 
        92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Those opposing change in the funding provision argued that the 
``one-third funding'' provision ensured development of a minority staff 
capable of constructively evaluating legislation offered by the 
majority; offering intelligent alternatives in a strengthened adversary 
system; fully clarifying or defending minority views; and protecting 
against abuses in the executive branch.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. See, generally, 117 Cong. Rec. 135140, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.

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

[[Page 2546]]

    After debate, the resolution was amended (9) in a manner 
not affecting the minority staffing provision. As amended, House 
Resolution 5 was agreed to,(10) on a roll call vote thereby 
eliminating the ``one-third control'' proviso and substituting the 
requirement of ``fair consideration'' in the allocation of such funds 
to the minority.
    Parliamentarian's Note: Subsequently, in the 93d Congress, the 
House tentatively restored, effective Jan. 3, 1975, the requirement for 
one-third minority staff funding (the Committee Reform Amendments of H. 
Res. 988, 93d Cong.). This requirement,, however, was never 
effectuated, being in turn superseded on Jan. 14, 1975, by clause 5(d) 
Rule XI, in which the 94th Congress provided instead a new mechanism 
for staff entitlement and selection. Thus, for example, one 
subcommittee staff member is provided for each chairman and ranking 
minority subcommittee member, to be counted against permanent staff 
positions unless made available pursuant to an expense resolution 
reported from the Committee on House Administration. (See future 
editions for more detailed treatment of this rule.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Id. at p. 143.
10. Id. at pp. 143, 144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Resolution Paying Expenses from Contingent Fund; Privilege of 
    Resolution

Sec. 4.2 A resolution reported by the Committee on House 
    Administration, providing for the payment of a standing committee's 
    expenses from the contingent fund of the House, is reported and 
    called up as privileged.

    On Aug. 10, 1967,(11) Charles M. Price, of Illinois, 
Chairman of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, introduced 
a resolution (H. Res. 871) authorizing funds for the operation of the 
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct pursuant to House Resolution 
418.(12) The measure was referred to the Committee on House 
Administration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 113 Cong. Rec. 22340, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
12. See Sec. 2.1, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several weeks later, on Sept. 21, 1967,(13) Mr. Samuel 
N. Friedel, of Maryland, was recognized by the Speaker (14) 
and proceeded to make the following statement:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 113 Cong. Rec. 26375, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
14. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on House 
    Administration, I submit a privileged report (Repts. No.

[[Page 2547]]

    651) on the resolution (H. Res. 871) authorizing funds for the 
    operation of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct 
    pursuant to House Resolution 418, and ask for immediate 
    consideration of the resolution.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 871

            Resolved, That, effective April 13, 1967, in carrying out 
        its duties during the Ninetieth Congress, the Committee on 
        Standards of Official Conduct is authorized to incur such 
        expenses (not in excess of $10,000) as it deems advisable. Such 
        expenses shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House 
        on vouchers authorized and approved by such committee, and 
        signed by the chairman thereof.
            Sec. 2. Funds authorized by this resolution shall be 
        expended pursuant to regulations established by the Committee 
        on House Administration under existing law.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The rules provide that certain committees 
shall ``have leave to report at any time'' on certain 
matters.(15) Under this proviso, the Committee on House 
Administration may report at any time ``on all matters of expenditure 
of the contingent fund of the House,'' among other things.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Rule XI clause 22, House Rules and Manual Sec. 726 (1973).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Motion to Recommit Relative to Funding

Sec. 4.3 That which may not be done directly by amendment may not be 
    done indirectly by motion to recommit with instructions; thus, 
    where the amount of authorized funds provided in an investigatory 
    resolution is diminished by floor amendment, a motion to recommit 
    with instructions to restore the difference by again changing the 
    same sum is out of order.

    On Apr. 5, 1967,(16) the House entertained consideration 
of a privileged resolution (H. Res. 221) reported from the Committee on 
House Administration providing investigatory funds from the contingent 
fund for the Committee on Un-American Activities. The proposed 
authorization having then been reduced by floor amendment 
(17) from $400,000 to $350,000, Speaker John W. McCormack, 
of Massachusetts, recognized Mr. John M. Ashbrook, of Ohio, who offered 
the following motion to recommit:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 113 Cong. Rec. 8419-43, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
17. Id. at p. 8441.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Ashbrook moves to recommit the resolution (H. Res. 221) to 
    the Committee on House Administration with instructions to report 
    the resolution forthwith with the following amendment: On page 1, 
    line 5, strike out ``$350,000'' and insert in lieu thereof 
    ``$400,000.''

    Immediately thereafter, the ensuing exchange took place:

[[Page 2548]]

        Mr. [Wayne L.] Hays [of Ohio]: Mr. Speaker----
        The Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman rise?
        Mr. Hays: Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the 
    motion to recommit on the grounds that the House has just adopted 
    the committee amendment to cut the amount from $400,000 to 
    $350,000. The gentleman now offers a motion to recommit to restore 
    it from the $350,000 to $400,000 and it is clearly out of order.
        The Speaker: Does the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ashbrook] desire 
    to be heard?
        Mr. Ashbrook: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
        Mr. Speaker, it appears to me that we voted to order the 
    previous question on the amendments and the motion to recommit, in 
    my opinion, would be a proper motion to recommit. I hope that the 
    Chair will so hold.
        The Speaker: The Chair will call attention to that fact that 
    the previous question was ordered and the amendments were adopted 
    by the House.
        It is not in order to do indirectly by a motion to recommit 
    with instructions that which may not be done directly by way of 
    amendment.
        An amendment to strike out an amendment already adopted is not 
    in order. The subject matter of the motion to recommit has already 
    been passed upon by the House.
        The Chair sustains the point of order.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Id. at pp. 8441, 8442.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 4.4 The House having under consideration an investigatory, funding 
    resolution for the Committee on Un-American Activities, a motion to 
    recommit that resolution to the Committee on House Administration 
    with instructions that open hearings be held to justify such 
    funding, was rejected on a roll call vote.

    On Apr. 5, 1967,(19) following lengthy consideration of 
an investigatory funding resolution (H. Res. 221) for the Committee on 
Un-American Activities, Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, 
recognized Mr. Don Edwards, of California, who offered the following 
motion to recommit:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 113 Cong. Rec. 8442, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Edwards of California moves to recommit the resolution (H. 
    Res. 221) to the Committee on House Administration with 
    instructions that open hearings be held on justification for such 
    additional funds of the House Committee on Un-American Activities 
    as provided in House Resolution 221.

    Immediately thereafter, the Chair put the question on the motion, 
and on a roll call vote of yeas 92, nays 304, it was rejected.

Sec. 4.5 A resolution providing for payment of a standing committee's 
    expenses out of the contingent fund of the House is subject to a 
    motion to recommit (with instructions).

[[Page 2549]]

    On Mar. 1, 1961,(20) after the previous question was 
ordered on a resolution (H. Res. 167) providing $331,000 for the 
operations of the Committee on Un-American Activities, the Speaker 
(21) initiated the following exchange:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 107 Cong. Rec. 2989, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
21. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The question is on the resolution.
        Mr. [James] Roosevelt [of California]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Roosevelt: Is it not proper to offer a motion to recommit 
    at this point?
        The Speaker: If the gentleman can qualify.
        Mr. Roosevelt: I think I can qualify, Mr. Speaker.
        I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: Is the gentleman opposed to the resolution?
        Mr. Roosevelt: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Roosevelt moves to recommit the resolution to the 
        Committee on House Administration with instructions to report 
        forthwith with the following amendment: On page 2, after the 
        period, line 1, add the following: ``Provided, That the 
        committee shall not use any of its funds to undertake any 
        investigation of any subject which is being investigated by any 
        other committee of the House.''

        The Speaker: The question is on the motion to recommit.

    The motion to recommit was rejected and the resolution was agreed 
to.

Contingent Fund Moneys for Subcommittee's Expenses

Sec. 4.6 The House refused to agree to a resolution authorizing the use 
    of contingent fund moneys to cover the expenses incurred by a 
    subcommittee on poverty created by the Committee on Education and 
    Labor.

    On Aug. 14, 1964,(22) by direction of the Committee on 
House Administration, Mr. Samuel N. Friedel, of Maryland, called up 
House Resolution 663. The Clerk then read the resolution, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. 110 Cong. Rec. 19711, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Resolved, That the expenses of an investigation authorized by 
    H. Res. 103, Eighty-eighth Congress, with respect to the proposals 
    for an attack on poverty recommended by the President in a special 
    message to Congress incurred by the ad hoc subcommittee of the 
    Committee on Education and Labor which was specially created to 
    make such investigation, not to exceed $20,000, including 
    expenditures for the employment of necessary professional and 
    stenographic assistance, and all expenses necessary for travel and 
    subsistence incurred by members and employees who will be engaged 
    in the ac

[[Page 2550]]

    tivities of the subcommittee, shall be paid out of the contingent 
    fund of the House. All accounts authorized to be paid out of the 
    contingent fund by this resolution shall be paid on vouchers 
    authorized and signed by the chairman of the committee, and 
    approved by the Committee on House Administration.
        With the following committee amendment:
        Page 1, line 7, strike out ``$20,000'' and insert ``$10,000''.

    Discussion ensued, and in an effort to clarify what had transpired, 
Mr. James Roosevelt, of California, stated: (1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Id. at p. 19712.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Roosevelt: May I say again that I must emphasize what the 
    distinguished chairman of the Committee on House Administration 
    said, that the full committee did not envision any such activity as 
    was called for under the poverty program, and that the chairman of 
    the Committee on Education and Labor found it necessary to form an 
    ad hoc committee to undertake that work, and that we then went to 
    the Committee on House Administration and asked for a reasonable 
    sum, $10,000, in order that this very special work might be carried 
    out.

    Shortly thereafter, Mr. Peter H. B. Frelinghuysen, Jr., of New 
Jersey, was recognized and responded to Mr. Roosevelt's statement, 
saying:

        . . . The only problem was that the Committee on House 
    Administration took no action with respect to that request for 
    additional funds. Yet the Committee on Education and Labor in 
    effect went ahead and spent the money anyway. It strikes me that 
    this is unconscionable procedure. I am not saying the bill should 
    not be paid, because that would just be making a bad matter worse, 
    but I am pointing out the irregularity under which our committee 
    operates. I am not pointing the finger of blame at any one 
    individual. I am just saying if we were in charge of that 
    committee, we would not be spending money unless it were available 
    and we had some positive assurance that our request for funds was 
    going to be honored. So far as I know, there was no such informal 
    understanding that something would be forthcoming and therefore, 
    the Committee on Education and Labor could go ahead and spend the 
    money and simply submit its bill.

    Following additional discussion of the matter, Speaker pro tempore 
Wilbur D. Mills, of Arkansas, put the question on the 
resolution.(2) The yeas and nays were then demanded and 
ordered, the question was taken again; and there were--yeas 115, nays 
156, answered ``present'' 1. Accordingly, the resolution was rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Id. at p. 19714.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Contingent Fund Where Fiscal Year Expenses of Committees 
    Underestimated

Sec. 4.7 The House has authorized by resolution the transfer of certain 
    sums from the contingent fund to meet com

[[Page 2551]]

    mittee payrolls where committee expenses had been underestimated 
    for the fiscal year, resulting in a shortage of appropriated funds.

    On June 29, 1966,(3) Speaker pro tempore Carl Albert, of 
Oklahoma, recognized Mr. Omar T. Burleson, of Texas, who called up the 
following resolution (H. Res. 900, reported from the Committee on House 
Administration on that day) and asked for its immediate consideration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 112 Cong. Rec. 14623, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Resolved, That the Clerk of the House be and is hereby directed 
    to pay such sum as may be necessary, from the contingent fund of 
    the House of Representatives, to meet the June 1966 payroll of 
    committee employees.

    No objection was heard to Mr. Burleson's request, and shortly 
thereafter the question was put,(4) and the resolution was 
agreed to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Id, at p. 14624.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------