[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 5, Chapters 18 - 20]
[Chapter 19. The Committee of the Whole]
[D. Consideration and Debate]
[Â§ 17. Calling Members to Order]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 3413-3421]
 
                               CHAPTER 19
 
                       The Committee of the Whole
 
                      D. CONSIDERATION AND DEBATE
 
Sec. 17. Calling Members to Order

    The Chairman directs the Committee of the Whole to rise and report 
to the House when objections have been made under Rule XIV clause 
4,(17) which relates to calling a Member to order for 
transgressing the rules of the House, or Rule XIV clause 
5,(18) which relates to calling a Member to order for words 
spoken in debate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. House Rules and Manual Sec. 760 (1979); 2 Hinds' Precedents 
        Sec. 1653. See also Ch. 29 Sec. Sec. 48-52, infra
18. House Rules and Manual Sec. 761 (1979); Sec. 17.3, infra; 2 Hinds' 
        Precedents Sec. Sec. 1257-1259, 1348; and 8 Cannon's Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 2533, 2538, 2539. See also Jefferson's Manual, House 
        Rules and Manual Sec. 369 (1979), for parliamentary law on 
        calling to order.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seating of Member Called to Order

Sec. 17.1 A Member called to order in the Committee of the Whole 
    because of words spoken in debate must take his seat.

    On Mar. 26, 1965,(19) during consideration of H.R. 2362, 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Chairman Richard 
Bolling, of Missouri, stated that a Member called to order because of 
words spoken in debate in the Committee of the Whole must take his 
seat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 111 Cong. Rec. 6107, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Frank] Thompson [Jr.] of New Jersey: Mr. Chairman, I move 
    to strike out the requisite number of words. . . .
        I might suggest further you can beat this dog all you want for 
    political purposes; you can demagog however subtly and try to scare 
    people off at the expense of the Nation's schoolchildren with your 
    demagoguery
        Mr. [Charles E.] Goodell [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I demand 
    that those words be taken down.
        Mr. Thompson of New Jersey: Please take the words down.
        Mr. Goodell: Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has accused one of his 
    colleagues of demagoguery.
        Mr. Thompson of New Jersey: I was referring to a gentleman; who 
    takes exception to that?
        Mr. Goodell: Mr. Chairman, a point of order: The gentleman must 
    take his seat.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from New Jersey will take his seat.

Rising of Committee to Report Objectionable Words

Sec. 17.2 When words are taken down in the Committee of the Whole, the 
    Committee immediately rises and the Chairman reports the words 
    objected to to the House.

[[Page 3414]]

    On Mar. 9, 1936,(20) during consideration of H.R. 11563, 
the District of Columbia rent commission bill, the Committee of the 
Whole rose immediately after a demand was made to take words down, and 
the Chairman reported the objectionable words to the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 80 Cong. Rec. 3465, 74th Cong. 2d Sess. See 79 Cong. Rec. 1808, 
        74th Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 7, 1935, for another illustration of 
        this procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Henry] Ellenbogen [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Chairman, a point 
    of order. I ask that the gentleman's language be taken down. It is 
    a violation of the rules of the House, and in the meantime I demand 
    that the gentleman take his seat.
        The Chairman: (1) The Clerk will report the words 
    objected to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. William B. Umstead (N.C.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Blanton: Here is the answer if the gentleman can 
        understand English.

        The Committee rose and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. O'Connor) 
    having assumed the chair, Mr. Umstead, Chairman of the Committee of 
    the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that the 
    Committee having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 11563), 
    certain words used in debate were objected to and on request were 
    taken down and read at the Clerk's desk and he reported the same to 
    the House herewith.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (2) The Clerk will report 
    the words objected to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John J. O'Connor (N.Y.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Blanton: Here is the answer, if the gentleman can 
        understand English.

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair is ready to rule. The Chair 
    sees nothing objectionable in the words used.
        The Committee will resume its session.

Expungement of Words

Sec. 17.3 Where a demand is made that certain words spoken in debate be 
    taken down in Committee of the Whole, such words must be reported 
    to the House, and a motion to expunge words from the Record is not 
    in order in the Committee.

    On Feb. 18, 1941,(3) Chairman Warren G. Magnuson, of 
Washington, stated that the House, not the Committee of the Whole, 
determines whether to expunge from the Record words spoken and objected 
to in the Committee of the Whole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  3. 87 Cong. Rec. 1126, 77th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        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

[[Page 3415]]

    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 help it

        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.
        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. Magnuson, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole 
    House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, 
    having had under consideration the bill H.R. 2665, certain words in 
    debate were objected to, which, on request, where taken down and 
    read at the Clerk's desk, and that he reported the same herewith to 
    the House.
        The Speaker: (4) The Clerk will report the words 
    objected to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

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

        The Speaker: The Chair is of the opinion that the expression 
    contained in the words reported to the House is merely a 
    colloquialism which does not reflect in an unparliamentary manner 
    upon any Member.
        The Chair cannot see anything in these words which violates the 
    rules of the House.
        The Committee will resume its session.

Scope of Ruling by Speaker

Sec. 17.4 The Speaker passes only on words reported from the Committee 
    of the Whole; a demand that additional words uttered in the 
    Committee (but not reported to the House) be reported is not in 
    order in the House.

    On July 27, 1965,(5) during consideration of H.R. 77, 
repealing section 14(b) of the Labor-Management Relations Act, Speaker 
John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, stated that he could rule only on 
words reported from the Committee of the Whole as recited by the 
Clerk.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 111 Cong. Rec. 18441, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
 6. See 5 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 5202, for additional support for this 
        principle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles E.] Goodell [of New York]: I would be very 
    interested on this particular issue, if we are going to have a 
    repeat of the exhibition on the housing vote with the gentleman 
    withholding votes and seeing how they are necessary on the issue 
    that comes be

[[Page 3416]]

    fore us. I hope that this will not be repeated. In my instance, and 
    in the instance of all the gentlemen from New York, I believe we 
    will be standing on the merits of whether we should have a Federal 
    law that destroys the right of the States to make up their minds.
        Mr. [Neal] Smith of Iowa: Mr. Chairman, I demand that the 
    gentleman's words be taken down. He is impugning the motives of 
    Members of this body.
        The Chairman:(7) The Clerk will report the words 
    objected to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Leo W. O'Brien (N.Y.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Goodell: I would be very interested on this particular 
        issue if we are going to have a repeat of the exhibition on the 
        housing vote with the gentlemen withholding votes and seeing 
        how they are necessary on the issue that comes before us. I 
        hope that this will not be repeated.

        The Chairman: The Committee will rise.
        Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. O'Brien, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole 
    House on the State of the Union, reported that that Committee, 
    having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 77) to repeal section 
    14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and section 
    705(b) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 
    and to amend the first proviso of section 8(a)(3) of the National 
    Labor Relations Act, as amended, certain words used in debate were 
    objected to and on request were taken down and read at the Clerk's 
    desk, and he herewith reported the same to the House.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the words objected to.

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Goodell: I would be very interested on this particular 
        issue if we are going to have a repeat of the exhibition on the 
        housing vote with the gentlemen withholding votes and seeing 
        how they are necessary on the issue that comes before us. I 
        hope that this will not be repeated.

        Mr. Smith of Iowa: Mr. Speaker, there was another sentence 
    following that. He did not read the last sentence.
        The Speaker: The occupant of the Chair can pass only on the 
    words that have been reported.
        The Chair will state that in debate the question of impugning 
    the motives or attacking the vote of a Member is one thing; but 
    looking at it from a broad angle the remarks made by the gentleman 
    from New York [Mr. Goodell] seem to come within the purview of the 
    rules.
        The Chair does not consider this to be a reflection, if the 
    gentleman was making any reflection, upon any Member of the House 
    or upon any State of the Union, particularly the State of Iowa.
        The Chair overrules the point of order.
        Mr. Smith of Iowa: Mr. Speaker, I demand the sentence following 
    that be taken down. That was the sentence objected to. He said we 
    did not vote on the merits.
        The Speaker: The Chair will state that the Chair can only pass 
    upon the words presented to the Chair and which were taken down in 
    the Committee of the Whole.
        Mr. Smith of Iowa: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.

[[Page 3417]]

        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Smith of Iowa: Are we not entitled to have the words taken 
    down that were objected to in the Committee of the Whole so that 
    Members can exercise their rights?
        The Speaker: The Chair was confronted with the words actually 
    reported by the Clerk.
        Mr. Smith of Iowa: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Smith of Iowa: Then when we go back into the Committee of 
    the Whole, am I entitled to demand that the words be taken down 
    that I objected to and report them back?
        The Speaker: The Chair will not pass upon what can be done in 
    the Committee of the Whole. Of course, if the gentleman desires to 
    renew his request, that would be a matter for the Chairman of the 
    Committee of the Whole to consider on the question of whether or 
    not the words were taken down as demanded by the gentleman from 
    Iowa.
        The Committee will resume its sitting.
        Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of 
    the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further 
    consideration of the bill H.R. 77 with Mr. O'Brien in the chair.
        The Chairman: The Committee will be in order.
        Mr. Smith of Iowa: Mr. Chairman, I demand that the words the 
    gentleman most recently gave me be taken down.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from Iowa demands that certain 
    additional words which he claims were uttered shall be taken down.
        The Clerk will report the words objected to.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Goodell: In my instance and in the instance of all the 
        gentlemen from New York, I believe we will be standing on the 
        merits of whether we should have a Federal law that destroys 
        the right of the States to make up their minds.

        Mr. Smith of Iowa: That is not all of it, Mr. Chairman. That is 
    not all of the words.
        The Chairman: I might say to the gentleman that is all that the 
    Clerk was able to furnish the Chairman and I assume that the point 
    he has raised--
        Mr. Smith of Iowa: In that case, I withdraw the objection.
        The Chairman: Objection is withdrawn.
        The Committee will proceed in order.

Automatic Resolution Into Committee After Ruling

Sec. 17.5 After the Speaker has ruled on words taken down in Committee, 
    the House automatically again resolves into the Committee of the 
    Whole.

    On Mar. 26, 1965,(8) during consideration of H.R. 2362, 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and after Speaker 
John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, ruled on words taken
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 111 Cong. Rec. 6107, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3418]]

down in the Committee of the Whole, the House automatically resolved 
into the Committee under the Chairmanship of Richard Bolling, of 
Missouri.

        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the words objected to.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            I might suggest further you can beat this dog all you want 
        for political purposes; you can demagog however subtly and try 
        to scare people off at the expense of the Nation's 
        schoolchildren with your demagoguery--

        The Speaker: The Chair feels that Members in debate have 
    reasonable flexibility in expressing their thoughts.
        The Chair sees nothing about the words that contravene the 
    rules of the House. The point of order is not sustained.
        The Committee will resume its sitting.
        Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of 
    the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further 
    consideration of the bill (H.R. 2362) with Mr. Bolling in the 
    chair. . . .
        The Chairman: . . . The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New 
    York [Mr. Powell).

Withdrawal of Demand

Sec. 17.6 A demand that words spoken in debate be taken down may be 
    withdrawn without unanimous consent in the Committee of the Whole.

    On July 3, 1946,(9) Chairman Wright Patman, of Texas, 
stated that withdrawal of a demand to take words down did not require 
unanimous consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 92 Cong. Rec. 8295, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clarence J.] Brown of Ohio: Mr. Chairman, I move to strike 
    out the last three words.
        Mr. Chairman, I have just finished listening to two political 
    tirades by two political tyros, and I say to those gentlemen that 
    they cannot
        Mr. [Matthew M.] Neely [of West Virginia]: Mr. Chairman, I 
    demand that those words be taken down.
        Mr. Brown of Ohio: If the gentleman knows what the word 
    ``tyro'' means he can have it taken down.
        Mr. Neely: The gentleman knows that that statement is not true 
    and that the statement is not justified. I demand that the words be 
    taken down and stricken from the Record.
        The Chairman: The Clerk will report the words objected to.
        Mr. Neely: Mr. Chairman, for fear that this procedure will 
    delay the final vote on the bill, I withdraw my request.
        Mr. [Earl] Wilson [of Indiana]: I object, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: It does not require unanimous consent to withdraw 
    the request.

Withdrawal of Objectionable Words After Speaker's Ruling

Sec. 17.7 Words spoken in debate in the Committee of the

[[Page 3419]]

    Whole and ruled out of order by the Speaker when reported to the 
    House may by unanimous consent be withdrawn; such consent when 
    granted permits a Member who had the floor to continue without 
    motion to proceed in order provided that his time had not expired.

    On Mar. 16, 1939,(10) during consideration of H.R. 4852, 
the Department of the Interior appropriations bill, 1940, Speaker 
William B. Bankhead, of Alabama, stated that words spoken in the 
Committee of the Whole and objected to as violative of rules of the 
House could be withdrawn by unanimous consent. After the Committee 
resumed its sitting, Chairman Frank H. Buck, of California, ruled on 
whether the Member who had been granted unanimous consent to withdraw 
certain words could proceed with further debate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 84 Cong. Rec. 2871, 76th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Lee E.] Geyer of California: Mr. Chairman, I move to 
    strike out the last two words. . . .
        I have heard the gentleman from Wisconsin, the man who made 
    Milwaukee famous, stand upon this floor a good many times. He is an 
    estimable gentleman. I like him very much when he is not in the 
    Well of this House. I have seen him come out with a hand that only 
    he possesses, a hand like a ham, and grasp this delicate instrument 
    until it groaned from mad torture. I have seen him come on the 
    floor and stamp up and down like a wild man.
        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I demand that the 
    gentleman's words be taken down.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from New York demands that the 
    words of the gentleman be taken down. The gentleman from California 
    will take his seat.
        The gentleman from New York will indicate to the Clerk the 
    words objected to.
        Mr. Taber: ``Stamping like a wild man'' and ``a hand like a 
    ham.''
        Mr. [John C.] Schafer [of Wisconsin]: Mr. Chairman, as far as I 
    am concerned, I am not objecting to the words. I will handle him at 
    a later date.
        Mr. Taber: I believe the integrity of the rules of the House 
    should be preserved.
        The Chairman: The Clerk will report the words taken down at the 
    request of the gentleman from New York.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            I have seen him come on the floor and stamp up and down 
        like a wild man.

        Mr. Taber: Mr. Chairman, there were some other words about ``a 
    hand like a ham.''
        The Chairman: The Clerk will report the additional words.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            I have seen him come out with a hand that only he 
        possesses, a hand

[[Page 3420]]

        like a ham, and grasp this delicate instrument until it groaned 
        from mad torture.

        The Chairman: The Committee will rise.
        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. Buck, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House 
    on the state of the Union, reported that the Committee having had 
    under consideration the bill (H.R. 4852) the Interior Department 
    appropriation bill, 1940, certain words used in debate were 
    objected to and, on request, were taken down and read at the 
    Clerk's desk, and that he herewith reported the same to the House.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the words objected to in the 
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            I have seen him come out with a hand that only he 
        possesses, a hand like a ham, and grasp this delicate 
        instrument until it groaned from mad torture. I have seen him 
        come on the floor and stamp up and down like a wild man.

        The Speaker: The rule governing situations of this character 
    provides as follows:

                             Of Decorum and Debate

            When any Member desires to speak or deliver any matter to 
        the House he shall rise and respectfully address himself to 
        ``Mr. Speaker,'' and, on being recognized, may address the 
        House from any place on the floor or from the Clerk's desk, and 
        shall confine himself to the question under debate, avoiding 
        personality.

        The words objected to and which have been taken down and read 
    from the Clerk's desk very patently violate the rule, because the 
    words alleged do involve matters of personal reference and 
    personality.
        Mr. Schafer of Wisconsin: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Schafer of Wisconsin: Mr. Speaker, I do not believe the 
    gentleman who had the floor had any intention of violating the 
    rules. He was just carried away by the debate. I rise to ask if the 
    words cannot be withdrawn by unanimous consent.
        The Speaker: The words can be withdrawn by unanimous consent.
        Mr. Geyer of California: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the 
    gentleman from Wisconsin for his very generous attitude, and I ask 
    unanimous consent to withdraw the words in question.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from California?
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker: The Committee will resume its sitting.
        Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
    Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration 
    of the bill H.R. 4852, with Mr. Buck in the chair.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from California is recognized for 
    3\1/2\ minutes.
        Mr. [James W.] Mott [of Oregon]: Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Chairman: Does the gentleman from California yield for a 
    parliamentary inquiry?
        Mr. Geyer of California: I do not yield, Mr. Chairman.

[[Page 3421]]

        Mr. Mott: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Mott: As I understand, Mr. Chairman, the proceeding just 
    had takes the gentleman off the floor, and he may proceed only by 
    unanimous consent.
        The Chairman: The Chair may state that, by unanimous consent, 
    the House permitted the gentleman to withdraw his words. That 
    leaves the gentleman in the position he was before the words were 
    uttered.
        The gentleman from California will proceed.
        Mr. Mott: Mr. Chairman, a further parliamentary inquiry.
        The Chairman: Does the gentleman yield for a parliamentary 
    inquiry?
        Mr. Geyer of California: I do not care to yield for another 
    one, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Mott: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Mott: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that the time 
    of the gentleman has expired.
        The Chairman: The time of the gentleman has not expired. The 
    point of order is overruled.