[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 5, Chapters 18 - 20]
[Chapter 18. Discharging Matters From Committees]
[Â§ 2. Discharging Particular Committees]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 3216-3219]
 
                               CHAPTER 18
 
                  Discharging Matters From Committees
 
Sec. 2. Discharging Particular Committees

Committee on Agriculture

Sec. 2.1 The House has agreed to a motion to discharge the Committee on 
    Agriculture from further consideration of a bill.

    On Apr. 26, 1948,(20) Mr. L. Mendel Rivers, of South 
Carolina, called up, pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, the motion to 
discharge the Committee on Agriculture from further consideration of a 
bill (21) repealing the tax on oleomargarine. Debate on the 
motion ensued, at the conclusion of which, the motion was agreed to--
yeas 235, nays 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 94 Cong. Rec. 4835-41, 80th Cong. 2d Sess. See 94 Cong. Rec. 4078, 
        80th Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 2, 1948, where the motion to 
        discharge the Committee on Agriculture received the requisite 
        number of signatures.
21. H.R. 2245.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Committee on Banking and Currency

Sec. 2.2 The House has agreed to a motion to discharge the Committee on 
    Banking and Currency from further consideration of a bill.

    On Dec. 13, 1943,(22) Mr. Wesley E. Disney, of Oklahoma, 
called up, pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, a motion to discharge the 
Committee on Banking and Currency from further consideration of a bill 
(23) transferring certain price administration functions 
with respect to petroleum and petroleum products to the Petroleum 
Administrator for War. Following debate, the motion was agreed to--yeas 
247, nays 71, not voting 111.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. 89 Cong. Rec. 10605, 10607, 10608, 78th Cong. 1st Sess.
23. H.R. 2887.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Committee on the Judiciary

Sec. 2.3 The House has agreed to a motion to discharge the Committee on 
    the Judiciary from further consideration of a joint resolution 
    proposing an amendment to the Constitution.

    On Nov. 8, 1971,(24) Mr. Chalmers P. Wylie, of Ohio, 
called up, pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, a motion to discharge the 
Committee on the Judiciary from further consideration of a House joint 
resolution (25) proposing an amend
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. 117 Cong. Rec. 39885-89, 92d Cong. 1st Sess. For a further example, 
        see 116 Cong. Rec. 27999, 28004, 91st Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 10, 
        1970, where the Committee on the Judiciary was discharged from 
        further consideration of H.J. Res. 264, proposing an amendment 
        to the Constitution relative to equal rights for men and women.
25. H.J. Res. 191.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3217]]

ment to the U.S. Constitution relative to the offering of prayer in 
public buildings. Following some debate, the motion was agreed to-yeas 
242, nays 156, not voting 33.

Committee on Rules

Sec. 2.4 On several occasions, the House has agreed to a motion to 
    discharge the Committee on Rules from further consideration of a 
    resolution making in order consideration of a bill.

    On Sept. 27, 1965,(26) Mr. Abraham J. Multer, of New 
York, called up, pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, a motion to discharge 
the Committee on Rules from further consideration of a resolution 
(27) making in order a ``home rule'' bill (28) 
pending before the Committee on the District of Columbia. Following 
debate, the motion was agreed to--yeas 213, nays 183, not voting 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. 111 Cong. Rec. 25180-85, 89th Cong. 1st. Sess. See also 111 Cong. 
        Rec. 22900, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 3, 1965, where the 
        motion to discharge the Committee on Rules received the 
        requisite number of signatures. For additional examples see 106 
        Cong. Rec. 12691, 12720, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., June 15, 1960, 
        where the Committee on Rules was discharged from further 
        consideration of a resolution, H. Res. 537, providing for the 
        consideration of the bill H.R. 9883, adjusting rates of 
        compensation for officers and employees of the federal 
        government, and 103 Cong. Rec. 12332, 12334, 12335, 85th Cong. 
        1st Sess., July 22, 1957, where the Committee on Rules was 
        discharged from further consideration of a resolution, H. Res. 
        249, providing for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2474, 
        increasing rates of basic compensation of officers and 
        employees in the field service of the Post Office Department.
27. H. Res. 515.
28. H.R. 4644.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.5 The House refused to discharge the Committee on Rules from 
    further consideration of a resolution making in order consideration 
    of a House joint resolution.

    On Jan. 10, 1938,(29) Mr. Louis Ludlow, of Indiana, 
called up, pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, a motion to discharge the 
Committee on Rules from further consideration of a resolution 
(1) making in order consideration of a House joint 
resolution (2) proposing an amendment to the U.S. 
Constitution requiring a referendum on war. After debate on the motion 
to discharge, the motion was rejected--yeas 188, nays 209.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. 83 Cong. Rec. 276-282, 75th Cong. 3d Sess.
 1. H. Res. 165.
 2. 2. H.J. Res. 199.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.6 The Committee on Rules, under Rule XXVII clause 4,

[[Page 3218]]

    may not be discharged from the further consideration of a 
    resolution providing for the appointment of a committee to 
    investigate.

    On Apr. 23, 1934,(3) Speaker Henry T. Rainey, of 
Illinois, responded to a parliamentary inquiry relating to the 
applicability of the discharge rule to certain types of resolutions, 
described below, under consideration in the Committee on Rules. Finding 
that the language of the discharge rule,(4) which was 
specific in nature, did not expressly permit motions to discharge the 
Committee on Rules from consideration of the kind of resolution in 
question, the Speaker indicated such a motion would not be in order. 
The proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 78 Cong. Rec. 7161-63, 73d Cong. 2d Sess.
 4. See Rule XXVII clause 4, House Rules and Manual Sec. 908 (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Oscar] De Priest [of Illinois]: . . . On the 24th day of 
    January I filed a resolution in the House. At the expiration of 30 
    legislative days I prepared a petition to discharge the committee, 
    and laid it on the desk. I subsequently received the necessary 145 
    signatures on the 23d day of March. After that the Committee on 
    Rules reported the bill out favorably, and I am glad they did. 
    Under the ruling of the Chair today, if my interpretation is 
    correct, it is impossible to call up this resolution on the 
    Discharge Calendar? . . .
        Mr. [John J.] O'Connor [of New York]: . . . The gentlemen from 
    Illinois [Mr. De Priest] introduced a resolution which was referred 
    to the Rules Committee. It could not have been first referred to 
    any other committee, because that resolution provided for the 
    setting up of a special committee to investigate a certain alleged 
    situation in connection with the conduct of the House restaurant. 
    While his resolution was pending in the Rules Committee, the 
    gentleman filed a petition to discharge that committee, and 
    obtained the necessary 145 signatures. Thereafter the Rules 
    Committee favorably reported the resolution to the House. . . .
        Under the rules the Rules Committee can only be discharged from 
    consideration of either a ``special order of business or a special 
    rule for the consideration of any public bill or resolution 
    reported by a committee.'' The gentleman's resolution was a mere 
    ``House resolution'', which he could not have brought up on a 
    ``discharge day''. . . .
        The Speaker: The Chair is ready to answer the parliamentary 
    inquiry submitted by the gentleman from Illinois.
        The resolution introduced by the gentleman from Illinois reads:

            That a committee of five Members of the House be appointed 
        by the Speaker to investigate by what authority the Committee 
        on Accounts controls and manages the conduct of the House 
        restaurant and by what authority said committee or any members 
        thereof issued and enforced rules or instructions whereby any 
        citizen of the United States is discriminated against on 
        account of race, color, or creed in said House restaurant--

[[Page 3219]]

        And so forth. The discharge rule we are considering this 
    morning provides very specifically, as follows:

            Under this rule it shall also be in order for a Member to 
        file a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from further 
        consideration of any resolution providing either a special 
        order of business, or a special rule for the consideration of 
        any public bill or resolution favorably reported by a standing 
        committee, or a special rule for the consideration of a public 
        bill or resolution which has remained in a standing committee 
        30 or more days without action.

        The gentleman's resolution which the Chair has just read does 
    not provide for a special order of business or a special rule for 
    the consideration of any public bill or resolution favorably 
    reported by a standing committee or a special rule for the 
    consideration of a public bill or resolution, which has remained in 
    a standing committee 30 or more days without action, and, 
    therefore, a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules will not 
    lie, in the judgment of the Chair, under the discharge rule.

Committee on Ways and Means

Sec. 2.7 The House has agreed to a motion to discharge the Committee on 
    Ways and Means from further consideration of a bill.

    On Jan. 13, 1936,(5) Mr. Wright Patman, of Texas, moved, 
pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, to discharge the Committee on Ways and 
Means from the further consideration of a bill (6) providing 
for the immediate payment to veterans of the face value of their 
adjusted service certificates and for controlled expansions of the 
currency. Following some debate, the motion was agreed to--yeas 228, 
nays 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 80 Cong. Rec. 336, 337, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
 6. H.R. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------