[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 6, Chapter 21]
[Chapter 21. Order of Business; Special Orders]
[A. General Principles]
[Â§ 5. District of Columbia Business]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 3860-3871]
 
                               CHAPTER 21
 
                   Order of Business; Special Orders
 
                         A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
 
Sec. 5. District of Columbia Business

    Rule XXIV clause 8(4) sets apart two days per month for 
the consideration of business called up by the Committee on the 
District of Columbia:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. House Rules and Manual Sec. 899 (1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The second and fourth Mondays in each month, after the 
    disposition of motions to discharge committees and after the 
    disposal of such business on the Speaker's table as requires 
    reference only, shall, when claimed by the Committee on the 
    District of Columbia, be set apart for the consideration of such 
    business as may be presented by said committee.

    The consideration of District business on the specified days is of 
qualified privilege, and is of equal privilege with a special order 
created for that day.(5) District business yields to 
privileged reports from the Committee on Rules,(6) motions 
to dispense with Calendar Wednesday business,(7) questions 
of the privileges of the House,(8) conference 
reports,(9) and motions to resolve into the Committee of the 
Whole for the consideration of revenue or appropriation 
bills.(10) Moreover, as indi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. See Sec. 5.1, infra. See also 7 Cannon's Precedents Sec. Sec. 877, 
        878.
 6. See Sec. 5.4, infra.
 7. See Sec. 5.6, infra.
 8. See Sec. 5.3, infra.
 9. See 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 3292.
10. See 6 Cannon's Precedents Sec. Sec. 716718; 7 Cannon's Precedents 
        Sec. Sec. 876, 1123. When the 21-day discharge rule relating to 
        the Committee on Rules was in effect, such motions to discharge 
        had precedence over District business (see Sec. 5.2, infra).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3861]]

cated by Rule XXIV clause 8, motions to discharge committees (in order 
on the second and fourth Mondays, like District business) and reference 
of matters on the Speakers table take precedence over District 
business.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Bills reported by the Committee on the District of Columbia do not 
        have such privilege as to prevent their being called up on 
        Calendar Wednesday during the call of committees. See 7 
        Cannon's Precedents Sec. 937.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    District of Columbia business may be considered in the House as in 
Committee of the Whole by unanimous consent,(12) and private 
bills may be called Up.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. See Sec. Sec. 5.7, 5.8, infra.
13. See Sec. Sec. 5.8, 5.11, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Unfinished business on District Day does not come again before the 
House until the next District Day unless the previous question has been 
ordered; and unfinished District bills must be affirmatively called up 
by the Member in charge.(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. See Sec. Sec. 5.13, 5.14, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    District Day may be transferred to another day not specified in the 
rule, either by unanimous consent or by a special order.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. See Sec. 5.12, infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Precedence of District Business

Sec. 5.1 When a Member seeks recognition to call up District of 
    Columbia business on the fourth Monday (privileged under Rule XXIV 
    clause 8) and another Member seeks recognition to move to suspend 
    the rules and agree to a Senate joint resolution amending the 
    Constitution (privileged pursuant to a unanimous-consent agreement 
    making it in order on the fourth Monday for the Speaker to 
    recognize Members to move suspension and passage of bills), it is 
    within the discretion of the Speaker as to which of the two Members 
    he shall recognize.

    On Aug. 27, 1962,(16) which was the fourth Monday of the 
month and therefore a day eligible for District of Columbia business, 
under Rule XXIV clause 8, Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, 
recognized Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New York, to move to suspend the 
rules and pass a joint resolution (to amend the Constitution to 
prohibit the use of a poll tax as a qualification for voting) pursuant 
to a previous unanimous
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 108 Cong. Rec. 17654-70, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3862]]

consent request making in order on that day motions to suspend the 
rules. The Speaker overruled a point of order against prior recognition 
for the motion to suspend the rules:

        Mr. Celler: Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
    Senate Joint Resolution on 29, proposing an amendment to the 
    Constitution of the United States relating to qualifications of 
    electors.
        Mr. [Thomas G.] Abernethy [of Mississippi]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    point of order.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state his point of order.
        Mr. Abernethy: Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that this 
    is District Day, that there are District bills on the calendar, and 
    as a member of the Committee on the District of Columbia I 
    respectfully demand recognition so that these bills may be 
    considered.
        Mr. [Carl] Albert [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Speaker, may I be heard on 
    the point of order?
        The Speaker: The Chair is prepared to rule, but the gentleman 
    may be heard.
        Mr. Albert: Mr. Speaker, by unanimous consent, suspensions were 
    transferred to this day, and under the rules the Speaker has power 
    of recognition at his own discretion.
        Mr. Abernethy: Mr. Speaker, I respectfully call the attention 
    of the chairman to clause 8, rule XXIV, page 432 of the House 
    Mamal. . . .
        Mr. Speaker, I submit that rule is clear that when the time is 
    claimed and the opportunity is claimed the Chair shall permit those 
    bills to be considered.
        Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I respectfully submit my point of order 
    is well taken, and that I should be permitted to call up bills 
    which are now pending on the calendar from the Committee on the 
    District of Columbia.
        Mr. [Howard W.] Smith of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, I should like 
    to be heard on the point of order.
        The Speaker: The Chair will hear the gentleman.
        Mr. Smith of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, the rules of the House on 
    some things are very clear, and the rules of the House either mean 
    something or they do not mean anything.
        Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Abernethy], 
    has just called to the Chair's attention clause 8 of rule XXIV. 
    Nothing could be clearer; nothing could be more mandatory. I want 
    to repeat it because I hope the Chair will not fall into an error 
    on this proposition:

            The second and fourth Mondays in each month, after the 
        disposition of motions to discharge committees and after the 
        disposal of such business on the Speaker's table as requires 
        reference only--

        And that is all; that is all that you can consider--disposition 
    of motions to discharge committees--
        and after the disposal of such business on the Speaker's table 
        as requires reference only--

        That is all that the Chair is permitted to consider.
        Mr. Speaker, after that is done the day--
        shall when claimed by the Committee on the District of 
        Columbia,

[[Page 3863]]

        be set apart for the consideration of such business as may be 
        presented by said committee.

        Mr. Speaker, I know that the majority leader bases his defense 
    upon the theory that the House having given unanimous consent to 
    hear suspensions on this Monday instead of last Monday when they 
    should have been heard--and I doubt if very many Members were here 
    when that consent order was made and I am quite sure that a great 
    number of them had no notice that it was going to be made, and 
    certainly I did not--now the majority leader undertakes to say that 
    having gotten unanimous consent to consider this motion on this day 
    to suspend the rules, therefore, it gives the Speaker carte blanche 
    authority to do away with the rule which gives first consideration 
    to District of Columbia matters.
        Mr. Speaker, there was no waiver of the rule on the District of 
    Columbia. That consent did not dispose or dispense with the 
    business on the District of Columbia day. The rule is completely 
    mandatory. The rule says that on the second and fourth Mondays, if 
    the District of Columbia claims the time, that the Speaker shall 
    recognize them for such dispositions as they desire to call.
        The Speaker: The Chair is prepared to rule.
        Several days ago on August 14 unanimous consent was obtained to 
    transfer the consideration of business under suspension of the 
    rules on Monday last until today. That does not prohibit the 
    consideration of a privileged motion and a motion to suspend the 
    rules today is a privileged motion. The matter is within the 
    discretion of the Chair as to the matter of recognition.

Sec. 5.2 When the ``21-day rule'' for the discharge of Committee on 
    Rules resolutions was in effect in the 89th Congress, business 
    called up under that rule was of the highest privilege and took 
    precedence over District of Columbia business on District of 
    Columbia Monday.

    On Sept. 13, 1965,(17) which was District of Columbia 
Monday, Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, answered a 
parliamentary inquiry propounded by the Chairman of the Committee on 
the District of Columbia:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 17. 111 Cong. Rec. 23606, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John L.] McMillan [of South Carolina]: A parliamentary 
    inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state his parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        Mr. McMillan: Mr. Speaker, now that the Journal has been read 
    and other business has been dispensed with, is it in order to call 
    up District bills under the rules of the House?
        The Speaker: If the gentleman from New York [Mr. Powell] yields 
    for that purpose.
        Mr. McMillan: Mr. Speaker, has the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
    Powell] been recognized?
        The Speaker: The Chair is going to recognize the gentleman from 
    New

[[Page 3864]]

    York [Mr. Powell] because the gentleman from New York has the 
    privileged matter.
        The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.

    Mr. Powell was recognized to call up, pursuant to then Rule XI 
clause 23 [Rule XI clause 4(b) in the 1979 House Rules and Manual], a 
resolution providing an order of business which had been pending before 
the Committee on Rules for more than 21 calendar days without being 
reported by that committee.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. See also 111 Cong. Rec. 18076, 18087, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., July 
        26, 1965.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 5.3 A question of the privileges of the House may be raised 
    pending the consideration of legislation called up by the Committee 
    on the District of Columbia on the second and fourth Mondays of the 
    month.

    On Dec. 14, 1970,(19) which was District of Columbia 
Monday, Speaker John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, recognized Mr. 
Richard H. Ichord, of Missouri, to raise a question of the privileges 
of the House (relating to a restraining order issued by a federal court 
against the printing and publishing of a report by the Committee on 
Internal Security) before recognizing Chairman John L. McMillan, of 
South Carolina, of the Committee on the District of Columbia, to call 
up District of Columbia business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 116 Cong. Rec. 41355, 41374, 91st Cong.2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 5.4 On a District Day, the Speaker recognized a member of the 
    Committee on Rules to call up a privileged resolution relating to 
    the order of business, and later recognized the chairman of another 
    committee to call up the business made in order thereby, prior to 
    recognizing the Chairman of the Committee on the District of 
    Columbia to call up District business under Rule XXIV clause 8.

    On Sept. 24, 1962,(20) which was District of Columbia 
Day under Rule XXIV clause 8, Speaker John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, first recognized Mr. William M. Colmer, of Mississippi, 
to call up by direction of the Committee on Rules House Resolution 804, 
making in order and providing for the consideration of Senate Joint 
Resolution 224, authorizing the President to call up armed forces 
reservists. The House having agreed to the resolution, the Speaker rec
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 108 Cong. Rec. 20489-94, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3865]]

ognized Carl Vinson, of Georgia, Chairman of the Committee on Armed 
Services and manager of the joint resolution, to move that the House 
resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for the consideration of 
the joint resolution, which was, after debate, agreed to by the House.

    The Speaker then stated that it was District of Columbia Day and 
recognized Chairman John L. McMillan, of South Carolina, of the 
Committee on the District of Columbia, for District 
business.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Id. at p. 20521.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 5.5 A privileged motion to dispense with Calendar Wednesday 
    business preceded District of Columbia business under Rule XXIV 
    clause 8.

    On June 11, 1973,(2) which was District of Columbia 
Monday, Mr. John J. McFall, of California, was first recognized by 
Speaker Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, to offer the privileged motion (under 
Rule XXIV clause 7) to dispense with Calendar Wednesday business, 
before Chairman John L. McMillan, of South Carolina, of the Committee 
on the District of Columbia was recognized to call up District 
business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 119 Cong. Rec. 19028-30, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consideration Generally

Sec. 5.6 Before the adoption of the requirement of a three-day layover 
    for committee reports, the Speaker held that a bill reported by the 
    Committee on the District of Columbia was privileged for 
    consideration on the second and fourth Mondays irrespective of 
    whether the report had been printed.

    On July 8, 1968,(3) which was District of Columbia 
Monday, Mr. John V. Dowdy, of Texas, called up for consideration a 
District of Columbia bill which had been reported out the same day by 
the committee and on which the committee report was not yet printed. 
Under a reservation of the right to object, Mr. H. R. Gross, of Iowa, 
inquired whether it was in order to consider the bill. Speaker John W. 
McCormack, of Massachusetts, responded that in view of the fact that 
the committee had filed its report, it was in order to consider the 
bill. After the reading of the bill in the House as in the Committee of 
the Whole, Mr. Dowdy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 114 Cong. Rec. 20057, 20058, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 3866]]

withdrew the bill from consideration.

    Parliamentarian's Note: The decision of the Chair predated the 1971 
amendment to the rules of the House in order to implement the 
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970. Rule XI clause 27(d)(4) [Rule 
XI clause 2(l)(6) in the House Rules and Manual (1979)] now requires a 
three-day layover of committee reports before their consideration by 
the House, in order that printed reports be available to Members.

Sec. 5.7 District of Columbia bills, called up on District Day, if on 
    the Union Calendar, may be considered by unanimous consent in the 
    House as in Committee of the Whole or in the Committee of the 
    Whole.

    On Aug. 11, 1964,(4) which was District of Columbia Day, 
Mr. John V. Dowdy, of Texas, asked unanimous consent that a District of 
Columbia bill, pending on the Union Calendar, be considered in the 
House as in the Committee of the Whole; the request was objected to. He 
then moved that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the 
Whole for consideration of the bill and, pending that motion, asked 
unanimous consent that general debate on the bill be limited to one 
hour. The request was objected to, Speaker John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, put the question on the motion, and the motion was 
rejected by the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 110 Cong. Rec. 18949, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: General debate in Committee of the Whole on 
District of Columbia bills is under the hour rule unless limited by the 
House or Committee of the Whole; on one occasion where such debate had 
not been limited in the House, the Chairman of the Committee of the 
Whole recognized five Members successively for one hour of debate 
each.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 87 Cong. Rec. 3917-39, 77th Cong. 1st Sess., May 12, 1941.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 5.8 District of Columbia bills called up on District Day, if on 
    the Private Calendar, may be considered by unanimous consent in the 
    House as in Committee of the Whole.

    On Apr. 24, 1972,(6) the House agreed to a unanimous-
consent request for the consideration of a District of Columbia bill 
pending on the Private Calendar:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 118 Cong. Rec. 14000, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Williamson Sylvester] Stuckey [Jr., of Georgia]: Mr. 
    Speaker, by direction of the Committee on the District of Columbia, 
    I call up the

[[Page 3867]]

    bill (H.R. 2895) to provide for the conveyance of certain real 
    property in the District of Columbia to the National Firefighting 
    Museum and Center for Fire Prevention, Incorporated, and ask 
    unanimous consent that the bill be considered in the House as in 
    the Committee of the Whole.
        The Speaker: (7) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Georgia?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Private Calendar bills, when called up by 
unanimous consent, are considered under the five-minute rule in the 
Committee of the Whole House, and the form of the request in this 
instance was unnecessary.
    The Journal properly indicated in this instance that the Committee 
of the Whole House was discharged from consideration of the private 
bill when the bill was considered by unanimous consent in the House as 
in the Committee of the Whole.

Sec. 5.9 A bill called up by the Committee on the District of Columbia 
    was refused consideration twice on the same day (by negative votes 
    on the motion to resolve into Committee of Whole to consider the 
    bill).

    On June 14, 1937,(8) Speaker William B. Bankhead, of 
Alabama, announced that it was District of Columbia Monday. Mr. Vincent 
L. Palmisano, of Maryland, twice offered and the House twice rejected, 
motions that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole 
for the consideration of H.R. 7472, to provide additional revenue for 
the District of Columbia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 81 Cong. Rec. 5667, 5668, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 5.10 The House struck out the enacting clause of a bill called up 
    on District of Columbia Day being considered in the House as in the 
    Committee of the Whole.

    On Apr. 28, 1941,(9) H.R. 4342, to authorize black-outs 
in the District of Columbia, was being considered in the House as in 
the Committee of the Whole. Mr. Dewey Short, of Missouri, moved that 
the enacting clause be stricken from the bill, which was agreed to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 87 Cong. Rec. 3352, 77th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: The motion to strike out the enacting 
clause of a bill is classified among those motions applicable only in 
the Committee of the Whole [Rule XXIII clause 7], although the motion 
was in earlier times utilized in the House as well [see House Rules and 
Manual Sec. 876 (1979)]. The motion is in order in the

[[Page 3868]]

House only during the amendment stage [i.e., in the House as in the 
Committee of the Whole] and takes precedence only over the motion to 
amend [see also Rule XVI clause 4 for other privileged motions in the 
House].

Private Bills

Sec. 5.11 It is in order on District of Columbia Monday for the 
    Committee on the District of Columbia to call up bills on the 
    Private Calendar which have been reported by that committee.

    On May 26, 1930,(10) which was District of Columbia 
Monday, Mr. Clarence J. McLeod, of Michigan, of the Committee on the 
District of Columbia asked unanimous consent to take up a bill; Speaker 
pro tempore Carl R. Chindblom, of Illinois, ruled, in response to a 
reservation of the right to object, that unanimous consent was not 
required and that the matter was privileged:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 72 Cong. Rec. 9607, 71st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [William H.] Stafford [of Wisconsin]: Reserving the right 
    to object, I note that the bill bears Calendar No. 672 on the 
    Private Calendar. On Saturday last we got as far as Calendar No. 
    500. I do not question but that this bill will be reached in the 
    regular order on call of that calendar.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair will state that while the 
    gentleman from Michigan asked unanimous consent to take up the 
    bill, the Chair did not put the request in that manner. The 
    gentleman is privileged on District day to call up a bill on the 
    Private Calendar.
        Mr. Stafford: I hope that the gentleman will not press it for 
    the reason that it has not been the practice for a committee on the 
    day it has to bring up legislation to bring up private bills. I 
    would like to have the matter go over.
        Mr. McLeod: I called up the bill by agreement with several 
    Members of the House.

    The Speaker pro tempore cited 4 Hinds' Precedents Sec. 3310 for the 
proposition that unanimous consent was not required and that the bill 
could be brought up by motion.

Transferring District of Columbia Day

Sec. 5.12 By unanimous consent (or by a special order) the House may 
    make in order on certain days, which are not District of Columbia 
    days under Rule XXIV clause 8, the consideration of District of 
    Columbia bills, such consideration to be either under the general 
    rules of the House or under the normal procedures for District of 
    Columbia business.

[[Page 3869]]

    On Dec. 3, 1970,(11) the House agreed to a unanimous-
consent request relating to the order of business:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 116 Cong. Rec. 39843, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl] Albert [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that it shall be in order, on Wednesday or any following 
    day next week, to call up for consideration under the general rules 
    of the House the bill (H.R. 19885) to provide additional revenue 
    for the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.

        The Speaker: (12) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Oklahoma?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

    The following unanimous-consent request was agreed to on May 25, 
1960:

        Mr. [John W.] McCormack [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that on Wednesday of next week it may he in order 
    for the Speaker to recognize the chairman of the Committee on the 
    District of Columbia or any member thereof to consider as under 
    District of Columbia Day, one bill, H.R. 12063, to authorize the 
    Commissioners of the District of Columbia to plan, construct, 
    operate, and maintain a sanitary sewer to connect the Dulles 
    International Airport to the District of Columbia system.
        This has been cleared with the ranking member of the Committee 
    on the District of Columbia and the minority leader.(13)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 106 Cong. Rec. 11116, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On one occasion, District of Columbia business was by unanimous 
consent transferred from Monday to the following day due to the death 
of a Member (John Bennett, of Michigan).(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 110 Cong. Rec. 18854, 88th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 10, 1964.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfinished Business

Sec. 5.13 Business unfinished on District of Columbia Day does not come 
    up until the next day on which that business is in order.

    On June 26, 1939,(15) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering District of Columbia business brought up on District of 
Columbia Day. Chairman Fritz G. Lanham, of Texas, answered a 
parliamentary inquiry as to the effect on the pending bill should the 
Committee rise without completing the bill on that day:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 84 Cong. Rec. 7927, 7928, 76th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Walter G.] Andrews [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I move 
    that the Committee do now rise.
        Mr. [Kent E.] Keller [of Illinois]: Mr. Chairman, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Keller: Mr. Chairman, what would be the effect on this bill 
    if we should vote to rise?

[[Page 3870]]

        The Chairman: It would be the unfinished business of the 
    Committee on the District of Columbia on the next day that 
    committee is called.
        Mr. Keller: What day would that be?
        The Chairman: The second and fourth Monday of each month are 
    District days.
        Mr. Keller: If we want present consideration of this bill we 
    will have to vote against the motion?
        The Chairman: I think the membership is sufficiently informed 
    with reference to the motion. The question is on the motion to 
    rise.

Sec. 5.14 Unfinished business on a District of Columbia Monday does not 
    come up automatically when that class of business is again in order 
    but may be called up by a Member in charge of the legislation.

    On May 9, 1932,(16) Speaker John N. Garner, of Texas, 
answered a parliamentary inquiry on the order of business on District 
of Columbia Monday:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 75 Cong. Rec. 9836, 72d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mrs. [Mary T.] Norton [of New Jersey]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent to call up concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 
    27), and yield five minutes to the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. (Byron 
    B.) Harlan to offer an amendment thereto.
        Mr. [William H.] Stafford [of Wisconsin]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Stafford: Mr. Speaker, on the last day given over to 
    District business, House Joint Resolution 154, providing for a 
    merger of the street-railway systems in the District of Columbia, 
    was the unfinished business. As this joint resolution was the 
    unfinished business when the District Committee last had the call, 
    is it not the unfinished business when the House resumes 
    consideration of District business?
        The Speaker: The Chair thinks not, because a motion to consider 
    it is necessary. Wherever a motion is required, the unfinished 
    business has no precedence over any other business.

Form of Special Rule

Sec. 5.15 Form of special rule providing for the consideration of a 
    District of Columbia bill in the Committee of the Whole House on 
    the state of the Union, waiving points of order, closing general 
    debate on the bill, waiving the second reading, opening all 
    sections of the bill for amendment, and limiting debate under the 
    five-minute rule to an hour and a half.

    The following resolution was considered on Apr. 17, 1936: 
(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 80 Cong. Rec. 5634, 74th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            House Resolution 489

        Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution 
    the House

[[Page 3871]]

    shall resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the 
    state of the Union for the consideration of H.R. 11563, a bill 
    declaring an emergency in the housing condition in the District of 
    Columbia; creating a Rent Commission for the District of Columbia; 
    prescribing powers and duties of the commission, and for other 
    purposes; and all points of order against said bill are hereby 
    waived. General debate on said bill shall be considered as closed, 
    and the bill shall be considered as having been read the second 
    time. Amendments may be offered to any section of the bill, but 
    debate under the 5-minute rule shall be closed within one hour and 
    a half. At the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for 
    amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the House 
    with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous 
    question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and the 
    amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion, 
    except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.