[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 5, Chapters 18 - 20]
[Chapter 18. Discharging Matters From Committees]
[Â§ 3. Calling Up Motion; Debate]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 3219-3228]
 
                               CHAPTER 18
 
                  Discharging Matters From Committees
 
Sec. 3. Calling Up Motion; Debate

    Pursuant to the provisions of the rule,(7) a motion to 
discharge which has been on the calendar at least seven days 
(8) may be called up by a signatory thereof (9) 
for consideration on the second and fourth Mondays of each month 
(10) except during the last six days of any session of 
Congress.(11) Of course, the House may by unanimous consent 
make the consideration of such motions in order on another 
day.(12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Rule XXVII clause 4, House Rules and Manual Sec. 908 (1979).
 8. See Sec. 3.1, infra.
 9. See Sec. 3.6, infra.
10. See Sec. 3.2, infra.
11. See Sec. 3.3, infra.
12. See Sec. 3.5, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A motion not called up on the first eligible Monday is in order

[[Page 3220]]

for consideration on any subsequent eligible Monday.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. See Sec. 3.2, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Debate on the motion is limited to 20 minutes--10 minutes under the 
control of the Member recognized to call up the motion and 10 minutes 
under the control of a Member recognized in opposition.(14) 
The proponents of a motion to discharge a committee have the right to 
close debate thereon.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. See Sec. Sec. 3.9, 3.10, infra.
15. See Sec. 3.13, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Expiration of Seven Legislative Days

Sec. 3.1 Motions to discharge committees may be called up only after 
    seven legislative days have expired since the time the motion was 
    placed on the calendar.

    On Friday, Dec. 10, 1937,(16) Mr. Sam Rayburn, of Texas, 
propounded the following parliamentary inquiry:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 82 Cong. Rec. 1300, 75th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Rayburn: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: (17) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Rayburn: Several Members during the last day or two have 
    been asking me with reference to the discharge petition which was 
    signed up last week whether if we adjourn over tomorrow a 
    sufficient number of legislative days will have intervened to make 
    the wage-hour bill in order on Monday. I ask the Speaker if that is 
    the fact?
        The Speaker: In reply to the inquiry of the gentleman from 
    Texas, and in order to avoid confusion about a proper decision of 
    this question if it should arise, the Chair quotes the following 
    excerpt from the discharge rule:

            When a majority of the total membership of the House shall 
        have signed the motion it shall be entered on the Journal, 
        printed with the signatures thereto in the Congressional 
        Record, and referred to the Calendar of Motions to Discharge 
        Committees.
            On the second and fourth Mondays of each month, except 
        during the last 6 days of any session of Congress, immediately 
        after the approval of the Journal, any Member who has signed a 
        motion to discharge which has been on the calendar at least 7 
        days prior thereto, and seeks recognition, shall be recognized 
        for the purpose of calling up the motion; and the House shall 
        proceed to its consideration in the manner herein provided 
        without intervening motion except one motion to adjourn.

        The petition to discharge the Committee on Rules from 
    consideration of the rule involving the wage and hour bill was 
    signed on December 2 [the preceding Thursday] by 218 Members of the 
    House and immediately was referred to the Calendar of Motions to 
    Discharge Committees under the rule the Chair has just read.
        In answer to the inquiry of the gentleman from Texas the Chair 
    holds that without any session of the House of Representatives 
    tomorrow the 7 legislative days necessary in order to

[[Page 3221]]

    make this matter in order on Monday next will have expired, and 
    there is no question in the mind of the Chair that the rule will 
    have been complied with if we do not meet tomorrow. If that 
    question should be raised on Monday next, the Chair would so hold.

Second and Fourth Mondays

Sec. 3.2 Motions to discharge committees may be called up on the second 
    or fourth Monday of any month after they have been on the calendar 
    for seven legislative days, and if they are not called up on the 
    first eligible Monday they may be called up on any subsequent 
    second or fourth Monday of a month.

    On Dec. 18, 1937,(18) the following parliamentary 
inquiry was raised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 82 Cong. Rec. 1847, 75th Cong. 2d Sess. For an additional example 
        see 90 Cong. Rec. 9, 78th Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 10, 1944.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Samuel B.] Pettengill [of Indiana]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: (19) The gentleman will state his 
    parliamentary inquiry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Pettengill: Directing the Chair's attention to the Ludlow 
    petition which now may be called up on the second Monday of next 
    month, if it fails to be called up on that day, would it retain its 
    privileged status on a subsequent second or fourth Monday?
        The Speaker: The status of the matter is that it is on the 
    calendar of motions to discharge committees. If not called up on 
    the first date on which it would be entitled to be called up, it 
    remains on the calendar subject to further call on the second or 
    fourth Mondays of a month.

Call of Motion on Last Six Days of Session

Sec. 3.3 A motion to discharge a committee cannot be called up during 
    the last six days of a session.

    On July 29, 1954,(20) the following parliamentary 
inquiry was raised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 100 Cong. Rec. 12562, 83d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Harold C.] Hagen of Minnesota: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: (1) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Hagen of Minnesota: Mr. Speaker, the inquiry is with 
    reference to paragraph 908 of the rules of the House relative to a 
    motion to discharge a committee. My question is, Is it possible 
    during the last 6 days of the session after a motion to recess or 
    adjourn sine die has been adopted by both Houses, to call up the 
    bill H.R. 9245, the postal-pay bill, under the rules of the House?
        The Speaker: In response to the parliamentary inquiry of the 
    gentleman, the Chair invites attention to

[[Page 3222]]

    the second paragraph of clause 4 of rule XXVII, which contains the 
    following statement:

            On the second and fourth Mondays of each month, except 
        during the last 6 days of any session of Congress, immediately 
        after the approval of the Journal, any Member who has signed a 
        motion to discharge which has been on the calendar at least 7 
        days prior thereto, and seeks recognition, shall be recognized 
        for the purpose of calling it up.

        It seems perfectly clear to the Chair that the meaning of the 
    rule is that when a motion has been on the calendar 7 legislative 
    days a Member who signed the motion can call it up on the second or 
    the fourth Monday, except when the second or fourth Monday comes 
    during the last 6 days of a session. The exception then means that 
    during the last 6 days of a session the motion cannot be called up 
    at all.

Precedence of Motion Over Unfinished Business

Sec. 3.4 A motion to discharge which has been on the Discharge Calendar 
    for seven legislative days may be of higher privilege for 
    consideration on the second and fourth Mondays of the month than 
    unfinished business from a preceding day.

    On May 8, 1936,(2) during proceedings incident to the 
consideration of the unanimous-consent request of Mr. William B. 
Bankhead, of Alabama, that the House adjourn until the following 
Monday, Mr. Gerald J. Boileau, of Wisconsin, reserving the right to 
object, addressed an inquiry to the Chair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 80 Cong. Rec. 7010, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Boileau: . . . [W]ill the Speaker make the situation clear 
    with reference to the legislative program for Monday?
        As I understand it, it will be in order before we complete this 
    bill (3) to take up the question of the discharge of the 
    Rules Committee from further consideration of the Frazier-Lemke 
    bill. I would like to ask the Speaker if my understanding is 
    correct, if consideration of the discharge petition would come up 
    before the vote on this bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. H.R. 12624, deficiency appropriation bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (4) The Chair thinks it would unless 
    there is a previous understanding. The matter of which shall take 
    precedence can be fixed by consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calling Up By Unanimous Consent

Sec. 3.5 By unanimous consent, a motion to discharge, which under Rule 
    XXVII clause 4 would be eligible to be called up on a Monday, was 
    made in order on a Wednesday.

    On June 8, 1960,(5) Mr. John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 106 Cong. Rec. 12120, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3223]]

asked unanimous consent that motions in order under the discharge rule 
on the following Monday be postponed until the following Wednesday at 
which time they would be the first order of business. There was no 
objection to the gentleman's request.

Who May Call Up Motion

Sec. 3.6 A Member who calls up a motion to discharge must qualify as 
    having signed the discharge petition.

    On Aug. 10, 1970,(6) subsequent to the calling up, 
pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, by Mrs. Martha W. Griffiths, of 
Michigan, of a motion to discharge the Committee on the Judiciary from 
the further consideration of a House joint resolution,(7) 
the Speaker (8) sought to determine whether Mrs. Griffiths 
was in fact eligible to call up the motion:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 116 Cong. Rec. 27999, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. For additional examples 
        see 117 Cong. Rec. 39885, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 8, 1971; 
        and 111 Cong. Rec. 25180, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 27 1965.
 7. H.J. Res. 264, proposing an amendment to the Constitution relative 
        to equal rights for men and women.
 8. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: Did the gentlewoman sign the motion?
        Mrs. Griffiths: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I signed the motion.
        The Speaker: The gentlewoman qualifies.

Quorum Call Preceding Recognition to Call Up Motion

Sec. 3.7 On one occasion, a quorum call occurred before the reading of 
    the Journal, on a day when the calling up of a motion to discharge 
    a committee was to have been the first order of business after the 
    reading of the Journal.

    On Apr. 26, 1948,(9) the day on which the calling up of 
a motion to discharge the Committee on Agriculture from further 
consideration of a bill (10) was to have been the first 
order of business after the reading of the Journal, a quorum call 
occurred prior to the reading of the Journal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 94 Cong. Rec. 4834, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
10. H.R. 2245, repealing the tax on oleomargarine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unanimous-consent Requests Preceding Recognition to Call Up Motion

Sec. 3.8 A motion to discharge a committee under the provisions of Rule 
    XXVII clause 4 is in order ``immediately after the approval of the 
    Journal''; but pending rec

[[Page 3224]]

    ognition of a Member to make such a motion, the Speaker has 
    permitted a Member to proceed for one minute on an unrelated 
    matter.

    On Aug. 10, 1970,(11) after the approval of the Journal, 
the Speaker (12) made the following announcement to the 
House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 116 Cong. Rec. 27994-99, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. See also 88 Cong. Rec. 
        8066, 8067, 77th Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 12, 1942, where the 
        phrase ``immediately after the approval of the Journal'' was 
        interpreted by Speaker Sam Rayburn (Tex.) as not precluding the 
        recognition of Members for unanimous-consent requests 
        subsequent to the reading of the Journal on a day when the call 
        up of a motion to discharge a committee was pending.
12. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Chair would like to announce that the Chair is 
    not going to recognize Members for the usual 1-minute speeches at 
    this time, due to the situation with respect to the rules that 
    exist in relation to the consideration of a constitutional 
    amendment, with one exception: and that is that the Chair will 
    recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Corbett) to announce 
    the death of our late and beloved colleague and friend, the 
    gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Watkins).

    Proceedings incident to the announcement of the death of a Member 
from Pennsylvania ensued, at the conclusion of which Mrs. Martha W. 
Griffiths, of Michigan, was recognized to call up pursuant to Rule 
XXVII a motion to discharge the Committee on the Judiciary from further 
consideration of a House joint resolution (13) proposing an 
equal rights amendment to the Constitution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. H.J. Res. 264.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Debate on Motion

Sec. 3.9 Debate on a motion to discharge a committee is limited to 20 
    minutes--10 minutes under the control of the Member recognized to 
    call up the motion and 10 minutes under the control of a Member 
    recognized in opposition.

    On Nov. 8, 1971,(14) during proceedings incident to the 
House's consideration under Rule XXVII of a motion called up by Mr. 
Chalmers P. Wylie, of Ohio, to discharge the Committee on the Judiciary 
from further consideration of a House joint resolution,(15) 
the Speaker,(16) in his statement rel
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 117 Cong. Rec. 39886, 92d Cong. 1st Sess. For a further example see 
        111 Cong. Rec. 25181, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 27, 1965.
15. H.J. Res. 191, proposing an amendment to the Constitution relative 
        to nondenominational prayer in public buildings.
16. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3225]]

ative to the allocation of time for debate on the motion, said:

        Under the rule, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Wylie) will be 
    recognized for 10 minutes, and the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
    Celler, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary) will be recognized 
    for 10 minutes.

Sec. 3.10 In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Speaker indicated 
    that: (1) there would be 20 minutes of debate on a motion to 
    discharge a committee from consideration of a joint resolution; and 
    (2) the chairman of that committee would be recognized for 10 
    minutes if opposed to the motion.

    On Aug. 10, 1970,(17) during proceedings incident to the 
House's consideration of a motion called up, pursuant to Rule XXVII 
clause 4, by Mrs. Martha W. Griffiths, of Michigan, to discharge the 
Committee on the Judiciary from further consideration of a House joint 
resolution,(18) Emanuel Celler, of New York (chairman of the 
committee) propounded a parliamentary inquiry:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 116 Cong. Rec. 27999, 28004, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
18. H.J. Res. 264, proposing an amendment to the Constitution relative 
        to equal rights for men and women.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Celler: Mr. Speaker, I understand the rule provides for 20 
    minutes of debate, 10 minutes on either side. Is it correct that 
    the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, being opposed to the 
    discharge petition, will be allocated 10 minutes?
        The Speaker: (19) The gentleman's statement is 
    correct that the rule provides for 20 minutes of debate, 10 minutes 
    on each side. If the gentleman from New York (Mr. Celler) is 
    opposed to the motion, the Chair will recognize him for 10 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is the gentleman opposed to the motion?
        Mr. Celler: I am opposed to the motion, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: Under the rule, the gentlewoman from Michigan 
    (Mrs. Griffiths) will be recognized for 10 minutes, and the 
    gentleman from New York (Mr. Celler) will be recognized for 10 
    minutes.

Sec. 3.11 A Member recognized to control half of the 20 minutes' debate 
    on a motion to discharge may yield any part of it.

    On June 15, 1960,(20) the Speaker (1) 
announced that, pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, Mr. T. Ashton 
Thompson, of Louisiana, as proponent, and Mr. Edward H. Rees, of 
Kansas, as opponent, would each be recognized for 10 minutes of debate 
incident to the House's consideration of a pending
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 106 Cong. Rec. 12691, 12693, 12720-25, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
 1. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3226]]

motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from further consideration 
of a resolution (2) making in order consideration of a 
bill.(3) Debate by both Members ensued, during the course of 
which Mr. Rees yielded five minutes of his allotted time to Mr. H. R. 
Gross, of Iowa. The following exchange then occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. H. Res. 537.
 3. H.R. 9883, adjusting rates of compensation for officers and 
        employees of the federal government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles A.] Halleck [of Indiana]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Halleck: I understood the gentleman from Kansas yielded 5 
    minutes to the gentleman from Iowa. Would that be within his 
    rights?
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Iowa is recognized for 5 
    minutes.

Sec. 3.12 The Member recognized in opposition to a motion to discharge 
    a committee controls the time for debate thereon, and although he 
    may yield part of his time to another Member, that Member may not 
    yield part of that time to still another Member.

    On June 11, 1945,(4) the House was debating a motion 
called up pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4 to discharge the Committee on 
Rules from a resolution making in order the consideration of a 
bill.(5) The Member who had been recognized in opposition to 
the motion, Mr. Edward E. Cox, of Georgia, yielded a portion of his 
allotted time to Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mississippi. Thereupon, Mr. 
Rankin inquired of the Chair as to whether he would be permitted to 
yield this time as he saw fit. Responding in the negative, the Speaker 
(6) stated, ``The gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Cox] controls 
the time.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 91 Cong. Rec. 5892-96. 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
 5. H.R. 7, making unlawful the requirement for the payment of a poll 
        tax as a prerequisite to voting in a primary or other election 
        for national officers.
 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 3.13 The proponents of a motion to discharge a committee have the 
    right to close debate thereon.

    On Apr. 26, 1948,(7) prior to the commencement of debate 
on a motion called up pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4 to discharge the 
Committee on Agriculture from further consideration of a 
bill,(8) Mr. L. Mendel Rivers, of South Carolina, who had 
been recog
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 94 Cong. Rec. 4835, 4841, 4842, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
 8. H.R. 2245, repealing the tax on oleomargarine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3227]]

nized as the proponent of the motion, propounded a parliamentary 
inquiry:

        Mr. Rivers: The proponents of the motion have 10 minutes and 
    the opponents have 10 minutes, and the proponents have the right to 
    close the debate?

    Answering in the affirmative, the Speaker (9) said:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The gentleman has stated the situation accurately. He has the 
    right to close debate.

Intervening Motions

Sec. 3.14 When a motion to discharge a committee is called up, a motion 
    to postpone consideration to a day certain is not in order.

    On Dec. 18, 1937,(10) Mr. Samuel B. Pettengill, of 
Indiana, inquired of the Chair as to whether a motion to postpone 
consideration to a day certain would be in order subsequent to the 
calling up, pursuant to Rule XXVII clause 4, of a motion to discharge a 
committee. Responding to the parliamentary inquiry, the Speaker 
(11) stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 82 Cong. Rec. 1847, 75th Cong. 2d Sess.
11. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Under the rules, it would not. The Chair directs the attention 
    of the gentleman from Indiana to the discharge rule which clearly 
    sets out that no intervening motion may take place except one 
    motion to adjourn.

Sec. 3.15 The motion to lay on the table a motion to discharge a 
    committee is not in order.

    On June 11, 1945,(12) Mr. Vito Marcantonio, of New York, 
moved to discharge the Committee on Rules from a resolution 
(13) making in order consideration of a bill.(14) 
Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mississippi, moved that the motion be laid on 
the table. Ruling on the motion to table, the Speaker (15) 
stated, ``That motion is not in order under the rules.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 91 Cong. Rec. 5892, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
13. H. Res. 139.
14. H.R. 7, making unlawful the requirement for the payment of a poll 
        tax as a prerequisite to voting in a primary or other election 
        for national officers.
15. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: Rule XXVII clause 4, House Rules and Manual 
Sec. 908 (1981), provides, in part, that:

        On the second and fourth Mondays of each month except during 
    the last six days of any session of Congress, immediately after the 
    approval of the Journal, any Member who has signed a motion to 
    discharge which has been on the calendar at least seven days prior 
    thereto, and seeks recognition, shall be recognized for the purpose 
    of calling up

[[Page 3228]]

    the motion, and the House shall proceed to its consideration in the 
    manner herein provided without intervening motion except one motion 
    to adjourn. [Emphasis added.]

Extensions of Remarks

Sec. 3.16 The Speaker may decline to recognize Members to extend their 
    remarks where a discharge motion has been called up and is pending 
    before the House.

    On June 11, 1945,(16) during the consideration, under 
Rule XXVII clause 4, of a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules 
from a resolution (17) making in order consideration of a 
bill,(18) Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mississippi, asked 
unanimous consent to extend his remarks at that point in the Record. 
Responding to the gentleman's request, the Speaker (19) 
stated, ``The Chair cannot recognize Members to extend their remarks 
until this matter has been disposed of.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 91 Cong. Rec. 5892-96, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
17. H. Res. 139.
18. H.R. 7, making unlawful the requirement for the payment of a poll 
        tax as a prerequisite to voting in a primary or other election 
        for national officers.
19. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------