[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 6, Chapter 21]
[Chapter 21. Order of Business; Special Orders]
[A. General Principles]
[Â§ 2. Prayer, Approval of Journal, and Business on the Speaker's Table]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 3777-3793]
 
                               CHAPTER 21
 
                   Order of Business; Special Orders
 
                         A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
 
Sec. 2. Prayer, Approval of Journal, and Business on the Speaker's 
    Table

    Rule XXIV clause 1 (16) provides for the order of 
business when the House convenes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. House Rules and Manual Sec. 878 (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        l. The daily order of business shall be as follows:
        First. Prayer by the Chaplain.
        Second. Reading and approval of the Journal.
        Third. Correction of reference of public bills.
        Fourth. Disposal of business on the Speaker's table.
        Fifth. Unfinished business.
        Sixth. The morning hour for the consideration of bills called 
    up by committees.
        Seventh. Motions to go into Committee of the Whole House on the 
    State of the Union.
        Eighth. Orders of the day.

    Similarly, Rule XXIV clause 2 (17) provides for the 
disposition of business on the Speaker's table:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. House Rules and Manual Sec. 882 (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        2. Business on the Speaker's table shall be disposed of as 
    follows:
        Messages from the President shall be referred to the 
    appropriate committees without debate. Reports and communications 
    from heads of departments, and other communications addressed to 
    the House, and bills, resolutions, and messages from the Senate may 
    be referred to the appropriate committees in the same manner and 
    with the same right of correction as public bills presented by 
    Members; but House bills with Senate amendments which do not 
    require consideration in a Committee of the Whole may be at once 
    disposed of as the House may determine, as may also Senate bills 
    substantially the same as House bills already favorably reported by 
    a committee of the House, and not required to be considered in 
    Committee of the Whole, be disposed of in the same manner on motion 
    directed to be made by such committee.

    No business is in order before the prayer, which is offered daily 
when the House meets, and a point of order of no quorum is not 
entertained before the prayer.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. See Sec. Sec. 2.1-2.3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The next order of business is the approval of the Journal. Prior

[[Page 3778]]

to the 92d Congress, one Member could, under then Rule I clause 1, 
demand the reading of the Journal in full, and intervening points of 
order of no quorum could be made during such reading, delaying the 
business of the House for many hours on some occasions. Under the 1973 
version of the rule, the Speaker announces his approval of the Journal, 
whereupon it is considered as read (unless the Speaker in his 
discretion orders its reading). Only one motion is in order that the 
Journal be read (a nondebatable motion).(19) Messages from 
the President and Senate have been received and questions of privileges 
of the House have been raised before the approval of the 
Journal,(20) but no other business, including a privileged 
report from the Committee on Rules, may intervene.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. See House Rules and Manual Sec. 621 (1973).
20. See Sec. Sec. 2.5, 2.8, infra. 2 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 1630; 6 
        Cannon's Precedents Sec. 637.
1. See Sec. 2.12, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following the approval of the Journal, motions (or unanimous 
consent requests) to correct the rereference of public bills are in 
order, and such motions may be made at a later point in the proceedings 
only by unanimous consent.(2) In the current practice of the 
House, one-minute speeches, although not provided for by the rule, are 
entertained immediately following the approval of the Journal by 
unanimous consent and before any legislative business (including the 
rereference of bills).(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. See Sec. Sec. 2.14-2.16, infra.
3. For the place in the order of business of one-minute speeches, see 
        Sec. 6, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule XXIV (4) next provides for the disposal of business 
on the Speaker's table. Business on the table consists of executive 
communications, messages from the President, bills, resolutions, and 
messages from the Senate, and House bills with Senate amendments. 
Messages from the President and messages from the Senate are matters of 
privilege and may be received, laid before the House and disposed of at 
any time when business permits; where they are received during a quorum 
call which results in an adjournment of the House, they are held at the 
desk until the next legislative day.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. See House Rules and Manual Sec. Sec. 878, 882 (1979)
5. See Sec. Sec. 2.22, 2.23, infra. Such messages have been received 
        before the approval of the Journal; see Sec. Sec. 2.5, 2.8, 
        infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Normally, executive communications are referred after the ap

[[Page 3779]]

proval of the Journal; if the House adjourns before such approval, the 
communications are held at the desk until the next legislative. 
day.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. See Sec. 2.17, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule XXIV clause 2 provides for the immediate disposal, after the 
correction of reference of public bills, of certain House bills with 
Senate amendments and certain Senate bills.(7) Most Senate 
bills and House bills with Senate amendments do not, however, comply 
with the requirements of the rule, since requiring consideration in 
Committee of the Whole. They mav be disposed of at any time before the 
stage of disagreement (when business permits) by unanimous consent, by 
a motion to ask for or agree to a conference if authorized by the 
committee (and if entertained by the Speaker in his discretion), by 
suspension of the rules, or by a resolution from the Committee on 
Rules.(8) And after the stage of disagreement has been 
reached, a bill with amendments between the Houses is privileged for 
consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. See Sec. Sec. 2.18 (Senate bills substantially the same as reported 
        House bills on the House Calendar) and 2.21 (House bill with 
        Senate amendments not requiring consideration in Committee of 
        the Whole), infra.
8. See Sec. Sec. 2.19 (note) and 2.20, infra. For a complete 
        discussion, see Ch. 32, infra (discussing amendments between 
        the Houses), and Ch. 33, infra (House-Senate Conferences).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offering of Prayer

Sec. 2.1 The Chaplain offers prayer daily, whether the House has 
    adjourned until the next day or has recessed.

    On June 17, 1948, the House recessed at 8:12 p.m. until 10 a.m. on 
June 18. When the House was called to order at the conclusion of the 
recess, prayer was offered by the Reverend James Shera 
Montgomery.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 94 Cong. Rec. 8824, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.2 The prayer offered at the beginning of the business of the 
    House is not considered as business and the Speaker does not 
    recognize a point of order that a quorum is not present before the 
    prayer.

    On Aug. 4, 1950,(10) Mr. Robert F. Rich, of 
Pennsylvania, sought to make a point of order that a quorum was not 
present, before the prayer had been offered. Speaker Sam Rayburn, of 
Texas, responded ``We will have the prayer first, because that is not 
considered business.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 96 Cong. Rec. 11829, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: Rule XV clause 6, as added during the

[[Page 3780]]

93d Congress, prohibits the making or entertaining of a point of order 
that a quorum is not present before or during the offering of prayer.

Sec. 2.3 On one occasion, prayer was not offered by the Chaplain until 
    a Speaker had been elected and the oath administered to him (the 
    late Speaker having died between the first and second session).

    On Jan. 10, 1962,(11) the convening day of the second 
session of the 87th Congress, the Clerk called the House to order, 
Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, having died before the convening. The 
House proceeded to elect a new Speaker (John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts) who was sworn in by the Dean of the House, Carl Vinson, 
of Georgia, before prayer was offered by the Chaplain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 108 Cong. Rec. 5, 6, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Approval of Journal in Order Of Business

Sec. 2.4 Under the order of business prescribed by Rule XXIV, 
    legislative business on the Speaker's table is not disposed of 
    until the Journal has been approved, and executive communications 
    on the Speaker's table are not referred when the House adjourns 
    before the reading or approval of the Journal.

    On Dec. 7, 1963,(12) Mr. William K. Van Pelt, of 
Wisconsin, made a point of order that a quorum was not present, 
immediately after the offering of prayer and before the approval of the 
Journal. Mr. John E. Moss, Jr., of California, moved that the House 
adjourn, and the motion was agreed to. Executive communications on the 
Speaker's table were not referred, in accordance with Rule XXIV clause 
2, but were held at the Speaker's table and referred on Dec. 9, the 
next meeting day of the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 109 Cong. Rec. 23751, 23752, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: This precedent, and the following ones 
relating to the reading and approval of the Journal as to the order of 
business, predate the 1971 change in Rule I clause 1, implementing the 
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140). The rule was 
amended to change the former requirement that the Journal be read in 
full, such reading to be dispensed with only by unanimous consent. The 
rule now provides for the Speaker to announce his approval of the 
Journal, whereon it shall be considered read, unless the Speaker

[[Page 3781]]

in his discretion orders its reading. One motion is in order that the 
Journal be read.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. For the 1971 amendment to Rule I, see H. Res. 5, 117 Cong. Rec. 
        140-44, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 22, 1971 (implementing 
        Sec. 127 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, Pub. L. 
        No. 91-510, 84 Stat. 1140).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.5 Messages from the Senate have been received before the 
    approval of the Journal.

    On Sept. 13, 1965,(14) there was pending before the 
House a motion to approve the Journal. Speaker John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, received a message from the Senate, announcing the 
passage by the Senate of a House bill. The Speaker overruled a point of 
order against the procedure:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 111 Cong. Rec. 23604, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, a point of order.
        The Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Iowa 
    arise?
        Mr. Gross: The transacting of business of the House prior to 
    adoption of the reading of the Journal.
        The Speaker: The Chair will state it is always proper, as well 
    as courteous, to receive a message from the President of the United 
    States, or from the other body, as quickly as possible.

    On Sept. 11, 1968,(15) there was pending before the 
House a motion to dispense with further proceedings under a call of the 
House, where the call was ordered before the reading and approval of 
the Journal. Before the motion was dispensed with, Speaker John W. 
McCormack, of Massachusetts, received a message from the Senate, 
announcing that the Senate had agreed to a conference 
report.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 114 Cong. Rec. 26453, 26454, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
16. See also 108 Cong. Rec. 19940, 87th Cong. 2d Sess., Sept. 19, 1962; 
        and 108 Cong. Rec. 17651--54, 87th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 27, 
        1962.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.6 The oath may be administered to a Member-elect before the 
    approval of the Journal.

    On Apr. 26, 1948,(17) Mr. Ellsworth B. Buck, of New 
York, made the point of order that a quorum was not present prior to 
the reading and approval of the Journal. At the request of Speaker 
Joseph W. Martin, Jr., of Massachusetts, Mr. Buck withheld his point of 
order in order that the certificate of election of a Member-elect could 
be laid before the House and that he be sworn in. Following the 
completion of the administration of the oath, Mr. Buck renewed his 
point of order and a call of the House ensued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 94 Cong. Rec. 4834, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: The administration of the oath is pre

[[Page 3782]]

sented as a question of the privileges of the House, which if properly 
raised takes precedence over the approval of the Journal; for a 
complete discussion of the oath, see Chapter 2, supra. Questions of 
constitutional privilege, of which there are few, such as propositions 
to impeach, also take precedence over the approval of the 
Journal.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. See the discussion at 31, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.7 Calendar Wednesday business may be dispensed with by unanimous 
    consent but not by motion before the approval of the Journal.

    On Sept. 19, 1962,(19) Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, the 
Majority Leader, asked unanimous consent, before the reading and 
approval of the Journal, that Calendar Wednesday business on that day 
be dispensed with. Mr. Carl D. Perkins, of Kentucky, objected to the 
request. Mr. Albert then moved that Calendar Wednesday business be 
dispensed with, and Speaker John W. McCormack, of Masachusetts, ruled 
that the motion was not in order before the reading and approval of the 
Journal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 108 Cong. Rec. 19940, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.8 A message from the President was received before the approval 
    of the Journal.

    On Aug. 27, 1962,(20) three quorum calls and two record 
votes on the motion to dispense with further proceedings under the call 
interrupted the reading of the Journal, on a day when a Member intended 
to move to suspend the rules and pass a joint resolution amending the 
Constitution to abolish poll taxes as a qualification for federal 
electors. Before the reading of the Journal had been completed, Speaker 
John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, received a message in writing from 
the President.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 108 Cong. Rec. 17651-54, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.9 Unanimous-consent requests for insertions in the Record are 
    not received by the Speaker prior to the completion of the reading 
    and approval of the Journal.

    On Sept. 19, 1962,(1) before the reading and approval of 
the Journal, Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, asked unanimous consent to 
insert in the Congressional Record with his own remarks a letter from 
the Secretary of State to the Speaker. Speaker John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, stated that the request would ``have to
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 108 Cong. Rec. 19940, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3783]]

wait until after the Journal has been read and acted upon.''

Sec. 2.10 Prior to the conclusion of the reading and approval of the 
    Journal, the Speaker declared a recess subject to the call of the 
    Chair (pursuant to authority previously granted).

    On Apr. 9, 1964,(2) before the reading and approval of 
the Journal, Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, declared a 
recess, in order that Members could proceed to the Rotunda of the 
Capitol to witness the conclusion of lying-in-state ceremonies for the 
late General of the Army, Douglas MacArthur. The Speaker had previously 
been authorized by the House to declare a recess at any time on the day 
in question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 110 Cong. Rec. 7354, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.11 Numerous parliamentary inquiries concerning the anticipated 
    order of business were entertained by the Chair during the reading 
    of the Journal.

    On Sept. 11, 1968,(3) two quorum calls interrupted the 
reading of the Journal. Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, 
entertained and responded to several parliamentary inquiries on the 
order of business (in relation to a conference report on the Defense 
Department appropriation bill, H.R. 18707) before concluding the 
reading and approval of the Journal. The Speaker noted that recognition 
for parliamentary inquiries was always within the discretion of the 
Chair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 114 Cong. Rec. 26453-56, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.12 A privileged report from the Committee on Rules may not be 
    called up before the approval of the Journal, contrary to early 
    practice.

    On Oct. 8, 1968,(4) when various quorum calls had 
interrupted the reading of the Journal (the scheduled business was a 
bill suspending for the 1968 Presidential campaign equal-time 
requirements of the Communications Act of 1934), Speaker pro tempore 
Wilbur D. Mill, of Arkansas, responded to a parliamentary inquiry 
concerning the order of business before the reading and approval of the 
Journal:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 114 Cong. Rec. 30095, 30096, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman from Texas will state 
    his parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. [James C.] Wright [Jr., of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, under rule 
    11 of the rules of the House it is held that it

[[Page 3784]]

    shall always be in order to call up for consideration a report on 
    legislative business from the Committee on Rules.
        I discover that on one occasion the Chair did recognize a 
    member of the Committee on Rules to call up a resolution providing 
    a special order for the consideration of the bill. On that occasion 
    one of the Members made a point of order against the consideration 
    of that resolution to the effect that no business was in order 
    until after the reading and the approval of the Journal of the 
    proceedings of the previous session. After debate, the Speaker 
    overruled the point of order on the ground that under clause 51 of 
    rule 11 it shall always be in order to call up for consideration a 
    report from the Committee on Rules, and that like a motion to 
    adjourn, which is ``always in order,'' such report may be called up 
    before as well as after the reading of the Journal.
        The other Member, Mr. Tracey, appealed from the decision of the 
    Chair. This appeal was laid upon the table by a vote of yeas 195, 
    nays 73.
        Mr. Speaker, my inquiry is this: Under that rule and under that 
    precedent would it not be in order, particularly in view of the 
    very obvious dilatory tactics being employed on the part of certain 
    Members of this body on the other side of the aisle to prevent the 
    transaction of business, for the Chair to recognize a member of the 
    Committee on Rules as the spokesman of the Committee on Rules to 
    call up a rule in order that the business of the House may be 
    transacted and the will of the majority of the Members of the House 
    may be worked?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Did the gentleman from Texas [Mr. 
    Wright] put his inquiry in the form of a parliamentary inquiry?
        Mr. Wright: Yes, Mr. Speaker. At the end of the statement was a 
    question mark. The question is, Would it be in order under the 
    circumstances and in view of this precedent for the Chair forthwith 
    to recognize the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Madden] who acts at 
    the direction of the Committee on Rules to call up a special order 
    for consideration of the bill and permit the House to work its 
    will?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair understands the gentleman's 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. [Sidney R.] Yates [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, with 
    reference to that particular point, may I call the attention of the 
    Chair to rule XI, section 22, which states that--

            It shall always be in order to call up for consideration a 
        report from the Committee on Rules (except it shall not be 
        called up for consideration on the same day it is presented to 
        the House, unless so determined by a vote of not less than two-
        thirds of the Members voting.

        As I understand the gentleman from Texas and his inquiry of the 
    Chair, it is whether it is not in order for a Member to call up a 
    report from the Committee on Rules----
        Mr. [Craig] Hosmer [of California]: The citation and precedent 
    used by the gentleman from Oklahoma and also the rule cited by the 
    gentleman from Illinois appear to have reference to proceedings 
    either before or after an act such as the reading of the Journal 
    and not within the pending business which is the reading of the 
    Journal.
        I wish to point out to the Chair the distinction between the 
    situation posed

[[Page 3785]]

    by the parlinmentary inquiry of the gentleman from Texas and his 
    precedents, and the situation actually before the House at this 
    moment when there is pending an unread Journal.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair is ready to respond to the 
    parliamentary inquiry of the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Wright]. The 
    Chair will state that the Chair is aware of the precedent to which 
    the gentleman points and poses in propounding his parliamentary 
    inquiry, and appreciates the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates] 
    calling attention of the Chair to the rule, and the statement of 
    the gentleman from California [Mr. Hosmer].
        However, in Cannon's Precedents, volume 6 of the 1936 edition, 
    section 630, the ruling pointed to by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. 
    Wright] has been superceded by a subsequent ruling of the Chair:

            On January 23, 1913, immediately after prayer by the 
        Chaplain and before the Journal had been read, Mr. James R. 
        Mann, of Illinois, made the point of order that a quorum was 
        not present. A call of the House was ordered, and a quorum 
        having appeared, Mr. Augustus P. Gardner, of Massachusetts, 
        proposed to present a conference report.

        Of course, a conference report is a highly privileged matter.

            The Speaker ruled that no business was in order until the 
        Journal had been read and approved.

        Thus it would not be in order for the Speaker to recognize a 
    member of the Committee on Rules to present a rule before the 
    completion of the reading of the Journal of yesterday.

Sec. 2.13 A question of personal privilege (as opposed to a question of 
    the privileges of the House) cannot be raised before the approval 
    of the Journal.

    On Oct. 8, 1968,(5) before the reading and approval of 
the Journal, on a day when the House had ordered the doors to the 
Chamber locked (various calls of the House and privileged motions 
having interrupted the reading of the Journal) Speaker John W. 
McCormack, of Massachusetts, declined to recognize a Member on a 
question of personal privilege:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 114 Cong. Rec. 30214--16, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Robert] Taft [Jr., of Ohio]: Mr. Speaker----
        The Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Ohio 
    rise?
        Mr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, I have a privileged motion.
        Mr. [Sidney R.] Yates [of Illinois]: A point of order, Mr. 
    Speaker. That is not in order until the reading of the Journal has 
    been completed.
        The Speaker: Will the gentleman from Ohio state his privileged 
    motion?
        Mr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, my motion is on a point of personal 
    privilege.
        The Speaker: Will the gentleman from Ohio state whether it is a 
    point of personal privilege or a privileged motion?
        Mr. Taft: It is a privileged motion, and a motion of personal 
    privilege.
        Under rule IX questions of personal privilege are privileged 
    motions, ahead of the reading of the Journal.

[[Page 3786]]

        The Speaker: The Chair will advise the gentleman that a 
    question of personal privilege should be made later after the 
    Journal has been disposed of.
        If the gentleman has a matter of privilege of the House, that 
    is an entirely different situation.

    When Mr. Taft again sought recognition and sought to raise a 
question of the privileges of the House, the Speaker heard the question 
and ruled that no question of the privileges of the House was stated. 
An appeal from the Speaker's ruling was laid on the table.

Motions to Rerefer Public Bills After Approval of Journal

Sec. 2.14 A motion or unanimous-consent request to correct the 
    reference of a public bill may be made on any day immediately after 
    the reading and approval of the Journal.

    On Apr. 2, 1935,(6) following the approval of the 
Journal, Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New York, asked unanimous consent, by 
direction of the Committee on the Judiciary, that H.R. 6547, originally 
referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, be re-referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary. When the request was objected to, Mr. 
Celler offered a motion for the same purpose. Speaker Joseph W. Byrns, 
of Tennessee, answered parliamentary inquiries on the place of the 
motion in the order of business:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 79 Cong. Rec. 4878, 4879, 74th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Schuyler Otis] Bland [of New York]: May I ask, according 
    to the rules, if a motion to correct a reference must not be made 
    immediately after the reading of the Journal and before any other 
    business has been transacted?
        The Speaker: There has been no business transacted, the Chair 
    may say to the gentleman from Virginia, except unanimous-consent 
    requests.
        Mr. Bland: I thought that was business. I have no interest in 
    the pending matter at all.
        The Speaker: The House has not proceeded with the business on 
    the Speaker's table as yet. What has been done up to this time has 
    been by unanimous consent.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See also 83 Cong. Rec. (11)42, 1143, 75th Cong. 3d Sess., Jan. 26, 
        1938, where Speaker William B. Bankhead (Ala.) overruled a 
        point of order against the consideration of a bill on the 
        grounds that it had been improperly referred, after the 
        committee of reference had reported the bill. The Chair alluded 
        to Rule XXII, clause 3 [subsequently Rule XXII, clause 4, House 
        Rules and Manual Sec. 854 (1979)] providing for the motion to 
        correct reference and its place in the order of business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: In current practice, rereference of bills 
is usually done by unanimous consent and with the concurrence of both 
committees involved.

[[Page 3787]]

Sec. 2.15 The rule providing that rereference of bills on motion of a 
    committee claiming jurisdiction may be made immediately after the 
    reading of the Journal (Rule XXII, clause 4) was construed to mean 
    before any business was transacted, but the motion may be made 
    after one-minute speeches are made.

    On Apr. 21, 1942,(8) following the approval of the 
Journal and some one-minute speeches, Mr. Samuel Dickstein, of New 
York, moved the rereference of a bill, by direction of the Committee on 
Immigration and Naturalization. Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mississippi, 
made the point of order that no such motion was in order, and Speaker 
Sam Rayburn, of Texas, quoted the rule providing for the motion (Rule 
XXII, clause 4) and overruled the point of order. He then ruled as 
follows on ensuing points of order:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 88 Cong. Rec. 3571, 77th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Rankin of Mississippi: Mr. Speaker, I make the point of 
    order that the gentleman's motion has come too late. The bill has 
    already been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and 
    printed, and the motion is not in order.
        The Speaker: On the point that the motion comes to late in that 
    business has been transacted in the House today, the Chair may say 
    that since the reading of the Journal the only business that has 
    been transacted has been 1-minute speeches. The Chair is 
    constrained to overrule the point of order of the gentleman from 
    Mississippi on the ground that he thinks it involves too technical 
    a construction of the rule.

    On motion of Mr. Rankin, the motion of rereference was laid on the 
table.

Sec. 2.16 The House granted consent that it be in order for a Member to 
    move the rereference of a bill at any time during the day 
    notwithstanding the rule (Rule XXII, clause 4) requiring that such 
    motions be made immediately after the reading of the Journal.

    On June 18, 1952,(9) Mr. Carl Vinson, of Georgia, asked 
unanimous consent, after the reading of the Journal, that it be in 
order for him to make a motion at any time on that day to rerefer a 
bill. He stated that the purpose of the request was to defer offering 
the motion until another concerned Member should reach the floor, 
despite the requirement of Rule XXII, clause 4, that motions to re-
refer be made immediately after the reading of the Journal. The request 
was agreed to and Mr.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 98 Cong. Rec. 7532, 82d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3788]]

Vinson offered the motion to re-refer later in the day's proceedings.

Business on the Speaker's Table

Sec. 2.17 Under the order of business prescribed by Rule XXIV, 
    legislative business on the Speaker's table is not disposed of 
    until the Journal has been approved, and executive communications 
    on the Speaker's table are not referred when the House adjourns 
    before the reading or approval of the Journal.

    On Dec. 7, 1963,(10) Mr. William K. Van Pelt, of 
Wisconsin, made a point of order that a quorum was not present, 
immediately after the offering of prayer and before the approval of the 
Journal. Mr. John E. Moss, Jr., of California, moved that the House 
adjourn, and the motion was agreed to. Executive communications on the 
Speaker's table were not referred, accordance with Rule XXIV, clause 2, 
but were held at the Speaker's table and referred on Dec. 9, the next 
meeting day of the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 109 Cong. Rec. 23751, 23752, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.18 Senate bills substantially the same as House bills already 
    favorably reported by a committee of the House and on the House 
    Calendar may be called up for consideration, by direction of the 
    committee reporting the bill, on any day immediately following the 
    correction of reference of public bills.

    On Mar. 26, 1934,(11) after the approval of the Journal 
and the correction of reference of public bills, pursuant to the order 
of business specified in Rule XXIV, the following proceedings took 
place on a Senate bill on the Speaker's table (Speaker Henry T. Rainey, 
of Illinois, presiding):

        Mr. [Vincent L.] Palmisano [of Maryland]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent for the present consideration of the bill (S. 
    2950) to authorize steam railroads to electrify their lines within 
    the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 78 Cong. Rec. 5425-27, 73d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Maryland?
        Mr. [Bertrand H.] Snell [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I reserve 
    the right to object.
        Mr. [John J.] O'Connor [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. O'Connor: Is it necessary to ask unanimous consent to call 
    up a District of Columbia bill today?

[[Page 3789]]

        The Speaker: The Chair is advised it is not. . . .
        Mr. [Carl E.] Mapes [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, I think it is a 
    very easy matter to have this bill passed upon by the Interstate 
    Commerce Commission. I dislike to object, but----
        Mr. [Joseph W.] Byrns [of Tennessee]: Mr. Speaker, I make the 
    point of order that it is too late to object. This is District day, 
    and it is in order to call the bill up for consideration.
        Mr. [Thomas L.] Blaton [of Texas]: This bill is called up as a 
    matter of right.
        The Speaker: The point of order is sustained.
        Mr. Mapes: Mr. Speaker, I listened very carefully as the bill 
    was called up and watched the proceedings with that point in mind. 
    After the colloquy with the gentleman from New York, the Republican 
    leader, nothing was said except that the Clerk would report the 
    bill. . . .
        Mr. O'Connor: I asked the Chair whether unanimous consent was 
    necessary to call up this bill and the Chair ruled that it was not 
    necessary.
        The Speaker: That was the ruling of the Chair.
        Mr. Mapes: Mr. Speaker, I have no desire to be technical in 
    this. If the gentleman from Maryland wishes to move that the House 
    consider this legislation, of course, I cannot object to that, but 
    I do object to taking it up by unanimous consent.
        The Speaker: This bill is on the House Calendar.
        Mr. Mapes: But no effort has been made to call it up except by 
    unanimous consent, and unanimous consent has not yet been given.
        The Speaker: This is District of Columbia day, and the Acting 
    Chairman of the District Committee, by direction of that committee, 
    may call this bill up as a matter of right. The Chair will say that 
    a similar House bill was favorably reported by the District 
    Committee and placed on the House Calendar before the Senate bill 
    came over. Under Rule XXIV, clause 2, the Committee on the District 
    of Columbia could dispose of this bill under the provisions of 
    clause 1 of the same rule or the committee could dispose of it 
    under clause 8 of that rule.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Rule XXIV, clause 2 [House Rules and Manual 
Sec. 882 (1979)] provides for the immediate disposition (after the 
correction of reference of public bills pursuant to clause 1) of Senate 
bills substantially the same as House bills already reported and not 
required to be considered in Committee of the Whole, and Rule XXIV, 
clause 8 [House Rules and Manual Sec. 899 (1979)] provides for the 
consideration of District of Columbia business on the second and fourth 
Mondays after the disposition of business on the Speaker's table.

Sec. 2.19 House bills with Senate amendments which do not require 
    consideration in the Committee of the Whole may be at once disposed 
    of as the House may, determine and are privileged matters on the 
    Speaker's table.

[[Page 3790]]

    On Feb. 1, 1937,(12) Mr. John J. O'Connor, of New York, 
called up House Joint Resolution 81, to create a joint congressional 
committee, with a Senate amendment, for immediate consideration as a 
privileged resolution, and moved the previous question thereon. Speaker 
William B. Bankhead, of Alabama, responded to a parliamentary inquiry 
on the privileged nature of the request:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 81 Cong. Rec. 644, 645, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Bertrand H.] Snell [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Snell: I understood the gentleman called this up as a 
    privileged matter. On what ground is this a privileged matter?
        The Speaker: In reply to the inquiry of the gentleman from New 
    York [Mr. Snell], under paragraph 2 of rule XXIV of the House 
    Manual it is stated:

            Business on the Speaker's table shall be disposed of as 
        follows:
            Messages from the President shall be referred to the 
        appropriate committees without debate. Reports and 
        communications from heads of departments, and other 
        communications addressed to the House, and bills, resolutions, 
        and messages from the Senate may be referred to the appropriate 
        committees in the same manner and with the same right of 
        correction as public bills presented by Members.

        Here is the pertinent part in answer to the gentleman's 
    inquiry:

            But House bills with Senate amendments which do not require 
        consideration in a Committee of the Whole may be at once 
        disposed of as the House may determine, as may also Senate 
        bills substantially the same as House bills.

        Mr. Snell: I appreciate that, and I have no objection to the 
    consideration of this matter, but I wondered if it was a matter 
    that could be taken up without being referred back to the committee 
    for consideration.
        The Speaker: Under the rule which the Chair has just read, the 
    Chair is clearly of the opinion that it may be brought up in this 
    manner.

    Parliamentarian's Note: As most bills with Senate amendments 
require consideration in the Committee of the Whole (before the stage 
of disagreement), they are brought up for disposition either by 
unanimous consent, or by a privileged motion to go to conference under 
Rule XX, clause 1, House Rules and Manual Sec. 827 (1979). Such 
requests and motions may be made at any time during the proceedings of 
the House when other business is not under consideration, and need not 
be made after the approval of the Journal under Rule XXIV [House Rules 
and Manual Sec. 878 (1979)] .

Sec. 2.20 The Speaker declined to recognize a Member for a unanimous-
    consent request to take a bill from the Speaker's table and concur 
    in the

[[Page 3791]]

    Senate amendments where such a request was made without the 
    authorization of the chairman of the committee involved and where 
    Members had been informed there would be no further legislative 
    business for the day.

    On July 31, 1969,(13) Mr. Hale Boggs, of Louisiana, 
sought recognition to ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's 
table a bill (H.R. 9951) providing for the collection of federal 
unemployment tax, with Senate amendments thereto, and concur in the 
Senate amendments. Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, 
declined to recognize for that purpose:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 115 Cong. Rec. 21691, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Chair will state that at this time the Chair 
    does not recognize the gentleman from Louisiana for that purpose.

    The chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means is at present 
appearing before the Committee on Rules seeking a rule and Members have 
been told that there would be no further business tonight.
    The Chair does not want to enter into an argument with any Member, 
particularly the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana whom I admire 
very much. But the Chair has stated that the Chair does not recognize 
the gentleman for that purpose.

        Mr. Boggs: Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Louisiana equally 
    admires the gentleman in the chair. I thoroughly understand the 
    position of the distinguished Speaker.

Sec. 2.21 A motion to concur in the Senate amendments to a House 
    concurrent resolution providing for the signing of enrolled bills 
    during a period of adjournment is privileged under Rule XXIV, 
    clause 2.

    On Oct. 13, 1970,(14) Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, 
brought up as a privileged matter a House concurrent resolution, on the 
Speaker's table, with Senate amendments, authorizing the signing of 
enrolled bills during a period of adjournment. The House agreed to the 
Senate amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 116 Cong. Rec. 36600, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Congressional Record incorrectly showed 
that the Majority Leader called up the Senate amendments by unanimous 
consent; they were in fact handled as privileged, pursuant to Rule 
XXIV, clause 2.

Sec. 2.22 The reception of a Presidential message is a matter

[[Page 3792]]

    of high privilege in the House, and in response to a parliamentary 
    inquiry the Speaker pro tempore indicated that where such a message 
    is received it is laid before the House as soon as business permits 
    and the precedents do not justify its being held at the desk until 
    another legislative day.

    On June 24, 1968,(15) after the House had completed its 
legislative business for the day, Speaker pro tempore Carl Albert, of 
Oklahoma, received a message from the President, responded to a 
parliamentary inquiry as to its disposition, and a quorum call ensued:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 114 Cong. Rec. 18330, 18331, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair lays before the House a 
    message from the President of the United States.
        Mr. [Durward G.] Hall [of Missouri)]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Hall: Mr. Speaker, in the opinion of the Chair is it 
    necessary that a Presidential message when delivered in writing be 
    presented to the Members of the House immediately or could it be 
    held until the next legislative day?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair will advise the 
    distinguished gentleman that when the House is in session, a 
    message from the President is laid before the House.
        Mr. Hall: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry, is this 
    done by tradition, at the will of the Chair, or is it supported by 
    a rule of the House?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: It is supported by the custom of the 
    House and the provisions of the constitution.
        Mr. Hall: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry. Could 
    the Chair advise the Members of the House as to the subject of this 
    particular message, arriving at 4:45 in the evening?
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: It relates to the matter of firearms 
    legislation.
        Mr. Hall: Mr. Speaker, in my opinion the Members of the House 
    should hear anything that is this important and I make a point of 
    order that a quorum is not present.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Evidently, a quorum is not present.

Sec. 2.23 Where messages from the Senate and the President are received 
    during a call of the House, and the House adjourns when a quorum 
    fails to appear on the call, the messages are held at the Speaker's 
    table until it next convenes.

    On Oct. 12, 1968,(16) a message from the Senate and a 
message from the President, which had
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 114 Cong. Rec. 31116, 31117, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3793]]

been held at the Speaker's table from the previous day, their having 
been received in the absence of a quorum, were laid before the House 
(Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, presiding).

Sec. 2.24 A message from the Senate may be received by the House after 
    the previous question has been ordered, pending the auestion on the 
    passage of a bill.

    On Oct. 3, 1969, the Committee of the Whole rose and reported back 
to the House, with sundry amendments, a bill which had been under 
consideration before the Committee. Speaker John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, stated that under the rule, the previous question was 
considered as ordered. Further consideration of the bill was 
interrupted for the receipt of a message from the Senate (announcing 
that the Senate had passed a Senate bill).(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 115 Cong. Rec. 28487, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


