[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 5, Chapters 18 - 20]
[Chapter 19. The Committee of the Whole]
[A. In General]
[Â§ 3. Remarks in the Congressional Record]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 3269-3270]
 
                               CHAPTER 19
 
                       The Committee of the Whole
 
                             A. IN GENERAL
 
Sec. 3. Remarks in the Congressional Record

Extension and Revision of Remarks

Sec. 3.1 The House and not the Committee of the Whole controls the 
    Congressional Record; for this reason the Committee can neither 
    hold the Record open for later insertions nor permit inclusion of 
    extraneous material. Thus, a request that all Members be permitted 
    five days to revise and extend their remarks on a particular 
    subject is not in order in the Committee of the Whole.

    On Sept. 19, 1967,(12) during consideration of H.R. 
6418, Partnership for Health Amendments, 1967, Chairman Jack B. Brooks, 
of Texas, stated that the Committee of the Whole cannot hold the 
Congressional Record open for later insertions because that authority 
is exercised by the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 113 Cong. Rec. 26032, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Andrew] Jacobs [Jr., of Indiana]: Mr. Chairman . . . I ask 
    unani

[[Page 3270]]

    mous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to 
    revise and extend. . . .
        Mr. [Burt L.] Talcott [of California]: Mr. Chairman, I object.
        The Chairman: That request is properly made in the House and 
    not in Committee of the Whole. Objection is not 
    necessary.(l3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Although general leave to print may be granted only by the House, a 
        Member, by unanimous consent, may be given leave to extend his 
        remarks in the Committee of the Whole. 5 Hinds' Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 7009, 7010 and 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 3488. See 
        also Ch. 5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Expungement of Objectionable Words

Sec. 3.2 A motion to expunge words from the Congressional Record is not 
    in order in the Committee of the Whole.

    On Feb. 18, 1941,(14) Chairman Warren G. Magnuson, of 
Washington, stated that the House, not the Committee of the Whole, 
determines whether to expunge words which have been objected to by a 
Member in the Committee.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 87 Cong. Rec. 1126, 77th Cong. 1st Sess.
15. Compare 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 6987 for a holding that while the 
        Committee of the Whole does not control the Record, the 
        Chairman, in the preservation of order, may direct the 
        exclusion of disorderly words spoken by a Member after he has 
        been called to order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clare E.] Hoffman [of Michigan]: All we ask in this case 
    is what we do not expect to get, that you stick by the rules of the 
    game you established last year. That is not too much to expect if 
    we adhere to the agreement of last year. This would give us in 
    Michigan the Representative to which we are entitled. But we know 
    what you are going to do. You know what is going to happen. You are 
    going to skin us, are you not? And we have no way to prevent it.
        Mr. [Robert F.] Rich [of Pennsylvania]: I demand that the 
    gentleman's words be taken down.
        The Chairman: . . . The Clerk will read the words objected to.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            You know what is going to happen. You are going to skin us, 
        are you not; and we have not any way to

        Mr. Rich: Mr. Chairman, I ask that those words be expunged from 
    the Record. They are not going to skin anybody around here.
        The Chairman: That is a matter for the House to decide. The 
    Committee will rise.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The words could have been withdrawn by 
unanimous consent, but not by motion.