[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 7, Chapters 22 - 25]
[Chapter 23. Motions]
[A. Introductory]
[Â§ 2. Offering, Modifying, and Withdrawing Motions; Form]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 4530-4536]
 
                               CHAPTER 23
 
                                Motions
 
                             A. INTRODUCTORY
 
Sec. 2. Offering, Modifying, and Withdrawing Motions; Form

Oral or Written Motions

Sec. 2.1 Every motion must be reduced to writing on demand of any 
    Member.

    On July 23, 1942,(14) the House was considering H.R. 
7416, absen
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 88 Cong. Rec. 6561, 77th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4531]]

tee voting in time of war by members of the armed forces. The following 
took place:

        Mr. [John E.] Rankin of Mississippi: Mr. Chairman, I move to 
    strike out the enacting clause and ask unanimous consent that I may 
    proceed for 5 additional minutes.
        Mr. [John J.] Cochran [of Missouri]: Mr. Chairman, I make the 
    point of order that the gentleman is not complying with the rule 
    and presenting his motion in writing.
        The Chairman: (15) The rule requires that such a 
    motion must be in writing.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
16. See also 76 Cong. Rec. 4195, 4196, 72d Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 15, 
        1933.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Modifying Motion to Conform to Rules

Sec. 2.2 The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole pointed out that a 
    motion before the Committee was not in proper form and then, when 
    the proponent of the motion had modified it to conform to the 
    rules, put the question thereon.

    On Dec. 12, 1969,(17) the House was considering H.R. 
12321, economic opportunity amendments of 1969. A motion to close 
debate was then made:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 115 Cong. Rec. 38844, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [William H.] Ayres [of Ohio]: Mr. Chairman, I move that all 
    debate on the substitute amendment and all amendments thereto close 
    at 6 o'clock with the last 5 minutes reserved to the committee.
        The Chairman: (18) The matter of the last 5 minutes 
    being reserved to the committee may not be included in the motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. John J. Rooney (N.Y.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Ayres: Mr. Chairman, I withdraw that portion of the motion.
        The Chairman: The question is on the motion of the gentleman 
    from Ohio (Mr. Ayres).
        The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. 
    Ottinger) there were--ayes 124, noes 35.
        So the motion was agreed to.

 Statement of Motion

Sec. 2.3 The motion as stated by the Chair in putting the question and 
    not as stated by the Member in offering the motion, is the 
    proposition voted upon.

    On Mar. 26, 1965,(19) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering H.R. 2362, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965 when a misunderstanding arose as to the wording of a motion 
offered by Mr. Adam C. Powell, of New York. Richard Bolling, of 
Missouri, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, attempted to state 
the motion as he understood it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 111 Cong. Rec. 6101, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: The Chair will state the motion as the Chair 
    understood it.

[[Page 4532]]

    The Chair will say frankly the Chair had a little difficulty 
    hearing it, but my understanding of the motion was that the 
    chairman of the committee moved that all debate and all amendments 
    to section 203 be closed in 5 minutes. . . .
        Mr. [Craig] Hosmer (of California): In the event that the 
    motion is carried, if put, would the motion carried be that which 
    was actually made by the gentleman from New York, or according to 
    the record as reported, or would it be the motion as stated by the 
    Chair?
        The Chairman: The motion will be as stated by the Chair, as was 
    the case yesterday and is the case today.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. See also 111 Cong. Rec. 6016, 6020, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 25, 
        1965.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Restating and Rereading Motions

Sec. 2.4 Where there is a misunderstanding about the wording of a 
    pending motion, the Chair may restate the motion; but it is not the 
    practice to ask that the motion be reread by the reporter.

    On Mar. 26, 1965,(21) during debate in the Committee of 
the Whole on H.R. 2362, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965, several Members sought to have the Chair clarify a motion offered 
by Mr. Adam C. Powell, of New York.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. 111 Cong. Rec. 6101, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Porter] Hardy [Jr., of Virginia]: Mr. Chairman, will the 
    Chair state the motion as originally made?
        Mr. Gerald R. Ford [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary 
    inquiry. At the time that the gentleman from New York made the 
    motion his voice was inaudible. I strongly feel that the motion 
    that he made should be reread and read loud.
        The Chairman: (1) The Chair will attempt to state 
    how he understood it. It may be in error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Gerald R. Ford: Mr. Chairman, I ask that the reporter read 
    what the Chairman said so we can all hear it. It would be very 
    helpful.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from Michigan, the distinguished 
    minority leader, is putting the Chair in the same position he had 
    him in a little while ago. This goes straight, head on, into all of 
    the practices and procedures of the House to have the reporter 
    report a motion.
        Mr. Gerald R. Ford: Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my request.
        The Chairman: The Chair will state the motion as the Chair 
    understood it. The Chair will say frankly the Chair had a little 
    difficulty hearing it, but [the Chair's] understanding of the 
    motion was that the chairman of the committee moved that all debate 
    and all amendments to section 203 be closed in 5 minutes.

Sec. 2.5 A pending motion may be reread, by unanimous consent, even 
    though all time for debate thereon may have expired.

    On Sept. 12, 1967,(2) the House was debating the Senate 
amend
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 113 Cong. Rec. 25201, 25211, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4533]]

ments in disagreement to H.R. 10738, Defense Department appropriations 
for fiscal year 1968. The following then occurred:

        Mr. [George H.] Mahon [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Mahon moves that the House insist upon its disagreement 
        to Senate amendment numbered 18.

                  Preferential Motion Offered By Mr. Sikes

        Mr. [Robert L. F.] Sikes [of Florida]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    preferential motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Sikes moves that the House recede from its disagreement 
        to the amendment of the Senate numbered 18 and concur therein.

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (3) The gentleman from 
    Texas [Mr. Mahon] is recognized for 1 hour. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (4) All time has expired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Gerald R. Ford [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that the preferential motion of the gentleman from Florida 
    be reread before the vote is taken.
        The Speaker: Without objection, it is so ordered.
        There was no objection.

Withdrawal of Motions in the House

Sec. 2.6 In the House a motion may be withdrawn as a matter of right 
    and unanimous consent is not required.

    On June 22, 1943,(5) the House was debating Senate 
amendments in disagreement to H.R. 2481, the agriculture appropriation 
bill of 1944. The following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 89 Cong. Rec. 6284, 78th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Malcolm C.] Tarver [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw 
    the motion which was formerly made with reference to amendments 12 
    and 14 and submit other amendments stating the correct amounts of 
    the totals, which are on the Clerk's desk.
        Mr. [Earl C.] Michener [of Michigan]: I object to that, Mr. 
    Speaker. The gentleman asked to withdraw a motion, and he can do 
    that only by unanimous consent.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (6) The Chair will state 
    that in the House a motion may be withdrawn as a matter of right.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. Fritz G. Lanham (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 2.7 A motion may be withdrawn in the House before action is taken 
    thereon.

    On Dec. 11, 1969,(7) the House was debating the 
appointment of conferees on H.R. 13270, the Tax Reform Act of 1969. 
Wilbur D. Mills, of Arkansas, Chairman of the House Committee on Ways 
and Means, sought unanimous consent to disagree to the Senate
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 115 Cong. Rec. 38543-45, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4534]]

amendments and agree to a conference requested by the Senate. Mr. 
Charles A. Vanik, of Ohio, sought to offer a preferential motion:

        Mr. Vanik: Mr. Speaker, I offer a preferential motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Vanik moves that the managers on the part of the House 
        at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on 
        the bill H.R. 13270 be instructed to insist on the House 
        provisions relating to the oil and gas depletion allowance and 
        to provide tax relief by way of increased dependency 
        exemptions.

        Mr. Vanik: Mr. Speaker, I would like to be heard on my motion.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (8) The gentleman from Ohio 
    is recognized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Vanik: Mr. Speaker, I offer this motion to instruct the 
    conferees in order to assure that the managers on the part of the 
    House will stand by the House provisions on oil and gas depletion--
    which the Ways and Means Committee reduced to 20 percent--along 
    with elimination of the foreign depletion allowance.

    At this point, Mr. Mills assured Mr. Vanik that the conferees would 
uphold the position of the House, and argued that Mr. Vanik's motion 
would limit the discretion of the conferees to agree to some desirable 
Senate amendments.

        Mr. Vanik: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my distinguished 
    chairman. The conferees and managers on the part of the House have 
    our best wishes, and I ask that they speak for the average 
    taxpayers of America who need to get some relief out of this tax 
    program which will be before the conference.
        Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my motion.

Sec. 2.8 A motion to suspend the rules and pass a bill was, by 
    unanimous consent, withdrawn after a second was ordered, there had 
    been debate on the motion, and the Speaker had put the question on 
    its adoption.

    On May 6, 1963,(9) the House was debating H.R. 101, 
relating to the definition of peanuts under the Agricultural Act. The 
following then took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 109 Cong. Rec. 7813, 7815, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Donald R.] Matthews [of Florida]: Mr. Speaker, I move to 
    suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 101) to extend for 2 
    years the definition of ``peanuts'' which is now in effect under 
    the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. . . .
        The Speaker: (10) Is a second demanded?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Paul] Findley [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    second.
        The Speaker: Without objection, a second will be considered as 
    ordered.
        There was no objection. . . .
        The Speaker: The question is on the motion of the gentleman 
    from Florida that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill.

[[Page 4535]]

        Mr. [Carl] Albert [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that the motion to suspend the rules and call up the bill 
    under consideration be withdrawn.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Oklahoma?
        There was no objection.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Unanimous consent is not required, until a 
second is ordered, to withdraw a motion to suspend the rules.

Sec. 2.9 Unanimous consent to withdraw a motion in the House is 
    required where the yeas and nays have been ordered on the motion.

    On July 9, 1970,(11) the House was debating H.R. 15628, 
the Foreign Military Sales Act of 1970. Mr. Donald W. Riegle, Jr., of 
Michigan, moved that the House instruct its conferees to agree to a 
Senate amendment. The following took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 116 Cong. Rec. 23524, 23525, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Wayne L.] Hays [of Ohio]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
    table.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Hays moves to lay on the table the motion offered by 
        Mr. Riegle.

        The Speaker: (12) The question is on the motion 
    offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hays) to lay on the table 
    the motion offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Riegle).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Sidney R.] Yates [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, on that I 
    demand the yeas and nays.
        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        Mr. Hays: Mr. Speaker, I have been prevailed upon to attempt to 
    withdraw my motion on the understanding that there will be some 
    equal division of time, and if it is not too late I would ask 
    unanimous consent to withdraw my motion to lay on the table the 
    motion offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Riegle).
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Ohio?
        Mr. [William J.] Scherle [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, I object.
        Mr. [Durward G.] Hall [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, I object.
        The Speaker: Objection is heard.

Withdrawal of Motions in Committee of the Whole

Sec. 2.10 A motion may be withdrawn in the Committee of the Whole only 
    by unanimous consent.

    On Mar. 26, 1965,(13) the Committee of the Whole was 
debating H.R. 2362, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. 
Mr. Adam C. Powell, of New York, attempted to clarify a previous motion 
he had offered to limit the time for debate and also limit the offering 
of amendments to the bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 111 Cong. Rec. 6101, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Powell: I withdraw the previous motion. I move all debate 
    and all

[[Page 4536]]

    amendments on this title and this section close in 10 minutes.
        Mr. [Porter] Hardy [Jr., of Virginia]: Mr. Chairman, I ask that 
    the original motion be read.
        Mr. [John M.] Ashbrook [of Ohio]: Mr. Chairman, a point of 
    order. I want to know whether or not it takes unanimous consent to 
    withdraw the motion.
        The Chairman: (14) The gentleman from New York asks 
    unanimous consent to withdraw the motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Powell: That is right. I withdraw it. I ask unanimous 
    consent to withdraw it.
        Mr. Ashbrook: Mr. Chairman, I object.