[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 5, Chapters 18 - 20]
[Chapter 19. The Committee of the Whole]
[F. Rising of the Committee of the Whole]
[Â§ 25. Proceedings Subsequent to Action on Motion]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 3475-3481]
 
                               CHAPTER 19
 
                       The Committee of the Whole
 
                F. RISING OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
 
Sec. 25.--Proceedings Subsequent to Action on Motion

Reporting to House

Sec. 25.1 Where the Committee of the Whole votes merely that

[[Page 3476]]

    the Committee rise, the Chairman reports to the House that the 
    Committee has considered a certain bill and has come to no 
    conclusion thereon; he does not under this procedure report the 
    bill with amendments back to the House.

    On Aug. 24, 1949,(6) during consideration of H.R. 6070, 
to amend the National Housing Act, and after agreement to a particular 
amendment, Chairman Mike Mansfield, of Montana, ruled on the procedure 
to be followed in reporting to the House where the Committee of the 
Whole votes to rise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 95 Cong. Rec. 12186, 81st Cong.1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Brent] Spence [of Kentucky]: Mr. Chairman, I move that the 
    Committee do now rise.
        Mr. [Jesse P.] Wolcott [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Wolcott: If the Committee rises at the present time will it 
    report the bill back to the House with amendments, or will it 
    report that it has come to no conclusion thereon? What is the 
    situation?
        The Chairman: This is simply a motion that the Committee rise. 
    There are several amendments yet to be offered. . . .
        The Committee again divided, and the tellers reported that 
    there were--ayes 86, noes 83.
        So the motion was agreed to.
        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore, 
    Mr. Priest, having assumed the chair, Mr. Mansfield, 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. 6070) to amend the National Housing Act, as amended, and 
    for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

Point of No Quorum

Sec. 25.2 A point of order that no quorum is present is not in order 
    after the Committee of the Whole has voted to rise.

    On Mar. 9, 1936,(7) during consideration of H.R. 11563, 
and after the Committee of the Whole had voted to rise, Chairman 
William B. Umstead, of North Carolina, ruled that a point of order that 
a quorum was not present was not in order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 80 Cong. Rec. 3459, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
            Note: A quorum is not required on an affirmative vote to 
        rise. The subject of quorums and points of no quorum is treated 
        more fully in Ch. 20. infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Thomas L.] Blanton [of Texas] (interrupting the reading of 
    the bill): Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
        The question was taken.
        Mr. Blanton: Mr. Chairman, I ask for a division.

[[Page 3477]]

        The Committee divided; and there were--ayes 40, noes 33,
        Mr. [Henry] Ellenbogen [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Chairman, I make 
    the point of order there is not a quorum present.
        The Chairman: The Chair will count.
        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, a point of order.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Taber: Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order that a point 
    of no quorum is not in order after the Committee has determined to 
    rise.
        The Chairman: The point of order is sustained. The vote had 
    already been announced.

Division on Amendment After Rejection of Motion

Sec. 25.3 Where a preferential motion that the Committee of the Whole 
    rise is made and rejected subsequent to a demand for a division 
    vote on an amendment, the division is taken after the rejection of 
    the motion that the Committee rise.

    On June 13, 1947,(8) during consideration of H.R. 3342, 
relating to the cultural relations program of the State Department, 
Chairman Thomas A. Jenkins, of Ohio, presiding, a preferential motion 
that the Committee of the Whole rise was made subsequent to a demand 
for a division vote on an amendment. The division vote was taken after 
rejection of the motion to rise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 93 Cong. Rec. 6998, 80th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: . . . The question is on the amendment offered by 
    the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Keefe].
        The question was taken; and Mr. Angell demanded a division.
        Mr. [Daniel A.] Reed of New York: Mr. Chairman I offer a 
    preferential motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Reed of New York moves that the Committee do now rise.

        The Chairman: The question is on the motion offered by the 
    gentleman from New York.
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Rayburn) there were--ayes 93, noes, 95.
        Mr. Reed of New York: Mr. Chairman, I demand tellers.
        Tellers were ordered, and the Chairman appointed as tellers Mr. 
    Mundt and Mr. Reed of New York.
        The Committee again divided; and the tellers reported that 
    there were--ayes 101, noes 110.
        So the motion was rejected.
        The Chairman: The Chair will state that before the motion was 
    made that the Committee do now rise the question was being taken on 
    the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Keefe]. 
    There was a voice vote and then a division was requested.
        Mr. [John W.] McCormack [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Chairman, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.

[[Page 3478]]

        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. McCormack: The Chair had stated that a standing vote had 
    been requested, but I think the Chair failed to state that the 
    Chair announced the ``ayes'' had it on the voice vote.
        The Chairman: No. No announcement was made on the division. The 
    preferential motion intervened.
        The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
    Wisconsin [Mr. Keefe].
        The question was taken; and on a division there were--ayes 145, 
    noes 1.

Resolving Back Into Committee After Reporting a Quorum

Sec. 25.4 Under the former practice, where the Committee of the Whole 
    rose and the Chairman reported to the House that, pursuant to House 
    rule,(9) he had caused the roll to be called in the 
    Committee to establish the presence of a quorum, the House 
    automatically resolved back into the Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Rule XXIII clause 2, House Rules and Manual Sec. 863 (1973).
            Note: Clause 2 of Rule XXIII was amended in the 96th 
        Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979) to permit the Committee to 
        continue its business following the appearance of a quorum so 
        that the Speaker need not take the chair to receive the 
        Committee's report of absentees. Prior to the adoption of this 
        change in the rules, the Committee of the Whole followed the 
        procedure indicated above. Under the new rule, the Committee 
        would still rise if a quorum of the Committee failed to appear. 
        Rule XXIII clause 2(a), House Rules and Manual Sec. 863 (1979). 
        The subject of quorums is discussed more fully in Ch. 20, 
        infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Apr. 21, 1969,(10) the House automatically resolved 
into the Committee of the Whole where the Committee rose and the 
Chairman reported to the House that, pursuant to Rule XXIII clause 2, 
he caused the roll to be called in Committee, thereby establishing the 
presence of a quorum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 115 Cong. Rec. 9705, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Frank E.] Evans of Colorado: Mr. Chairman, I make the 
    point of order that a quorum is not present.
        The Chairman: (11) The Chair will count.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Charles M. Price (Ill.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Forty Members are present, not a quorum. The Clerk will call 
    the roll.
        The Clerk called the roll, and the following Members failed to 
    answer to their names: . . .
        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. Price of Illinois, 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. 514, and 
    finding itself without a quorum, he had directed the roll to be 
    called, when 325

[[Page 3479]]

    Members responded to their names, a quorum, and he submitted 
    herewith the names of the absentees to be spread upon the Journal.
        The Committee resumed its sitting.

On Calendar Wednesday

Sec. 25.5 On Calendar Wednesday, if the Committee of the Whole during 
    consideration of a bill votes to rise, and the House then rejects a 
    motion to adjourn, Calendar Wednesday business is still before the 
    House; and if the chairman of the committee having the call calls 
    up the same bill, the House automatically resolves itself into the 
    Committee of the Whole and continues consideration of that bill.

    On Feb. 22, 1950, Calendar Wednesday,(12) during 
consideration of H. R. 4453, the Federal Fair Employment Practice Act, 
Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, presiding, the Committee of the Whole 
voted to rise; thereafter, the House rejected a motion to adjourn. The 
Speaker indicated that the chairman of the committee having the call 
could call up the same bill, and, if so, that the House would 
automatically resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole to 
continue consideration thereof.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 96 Cong. Rec. 2238-40, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Paul W.] Shafer [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I offer a 
    preferential motion. I move that the Committee do now rise.
        The Chairman: (1~3~) The question is on the motion 
    offered by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Shafer].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Francis F. Walter (Pa.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Adam C.] Powell [Jr., of New York]: Mr. Chairman, a 
    parliamentary inquiry. Has any business been transacted in 
    connection with the bill?
        The Chairman: That is immaterial. The motion is in order at 
    this time.
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Shafer) there were--ayes 142, noes 164.
        Mr. Shafer: Mr. Chairman, I demand tellers.
        Tellers were ordered, and the Chair appointed as tellers Mr. 
    Shafer and Mr. Powell.
        The Committee again divided, and tellers reported that there 
    were--ayes 172, noes 165.
        So the motion was agreed to.
        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. Walter, 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. 4453) to prohibit discrimination 
    in employment because of race, color, religion, or national origin, 
    had come to no resolution thereon.
        Mr. [Howard W.] Smith of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, I move that the 
    House do now adjourn.
        Mr. Marcantonio and Mr. Biemiller demanded the yeas and nays.

[[Page 3480]]

        Mr. [Oren] Harris [of Arkansas]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Harris: As I understand, the roll call now is on the motion 
    to adjourn.
        The Speaker: That is correct.
        Mr. Harris: If the motion to adjourn is not agreed to, then 
    what will be the parliamentary situation?
        The Speaker: It will be Calendar Wednesday business.
        Mr. Harris: A further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Harris: Do we automatically then go back into Committee?
        The Speaker: If the gentleman from Michigan calls the bill up 
    again, yes.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 165, nays 239, 
    answered ``present'' 1, not voting 26, as follows: . . .
        Mr. [John] Lesinski [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, by direction of 
    the Committee on Education and Labor I call up the bill H.R. 4453.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the title of the bill.

        The Clerk read the title of the bill.
        Mr. Smith of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, I raise the question of 
    consideration of the bill.
        The Speaker: The question is, Will the House consider the bill?
        Mr. Smith of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas 
    and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 271, nays 133, not 
    voting 27, as follows: . . .
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        The Speaker: The House automatically resolves itself into the 
    Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the 
    consideration of the bill.
        Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
    Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the 
    bill (H.R. 4453) to prohibit discrimination in employment because 
    of race, color, religion, or national origin, with Mr. Walter in 
    the chair.
        The Clerk read the title of the bill.

    Parliamentarian's Note: On this Calendar Wednesday, because of 
numerous roll calls and motions, the House stayed in session until 3:19 
a.m. Thursday morning, when the reading of the engrossed copy was 
demanded. The House then adjourned and met at noon Thursday to read the 
engrossed copy and pass the bill.

Vacating Vote to Rise

Sec. 25.6 A Committee of the Whole may by unanimous consent vacate the 
    proceedings by which it has voted to rise.

    On Feb. 5, 1936,(14) during consideration of H.R. 10919, 
the Departments of the Treasury and Post Office appropriations bill, 
Chairman Arthur H. Greenwood,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 80 Cong. Rec. 1534, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3481]]

of Indiana, stated that the Committee of the Whole could by unanimous 
consent vacate the proceedings by which it had voted to rise.

        Mr. [Louis] Ludlow [of Indiana]: Mr. Chairman, I move that the 
    Committee do now rise.
        The motion was agreed to.
        Mr. Ludlow: Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Ludlow: May I ask what is the status of the Committee now?
        The Chairman: We are waiting for the Speaker to arrive to 
    report that the Committee has determined to rise.
        Mr. Ludlow: Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
    proceedings by which the Committee determined to rise be vacated.
        The Chairman: Is there objection to the request of the 
    gentleman from Indiana?
        There was no objection.
        Mr. Ludlow: Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman 
    from Iowa [Mr. Wearin].