[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 7, Chapters 22 - 25]
[Chapter 23. Motions]
[D. Motions for the Previous Question]
[Â§ 21. Debate]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 4615-4620]
 
                               CHAPTER 23
 
                                Motions
 
                  D. MOTIONS FOR THE PREVIOUS QUESTION
 
Sec. 21. Debate

Debate on Motion for Previous Question

Sec. 21.1 A motion for the previous question is not debatable.

    On Sept. 13, 1965,(10) after the Clerk finished reading 
the Journal the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 111 Cong. Rec. 23601, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (11) The question is on ordering the 
    previous question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4616]]

        Mr. [Durward G.] Hall [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Hall: Is not debate in order on this motion inasmuch as 
    under section 805 of Jefferson's Manual there has been no debate on 
    ordering the previous question?
        The Speaker: The Chair will state that the motion on the 
    previous question is not debatable. The question is on ordering the 
    previous question on the motion to approve the Journal. . . .
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 257, nays 126, 
    answered ``present'' 1, not voting 48.(12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. See also 95 Cong. Rec. 10, 81st Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 3, 
        1949.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Debate After Ordering Previous Question

Sec. 21.2 Where the previous question is ordered on a debatable 
    proposition which has not in fact been debated, a Member may demand 
    the right to 40 minutes of debate, and this time is divided between 
    the person demanding the time and a Member who represents the 
    opposing view of the matter [see Rule XXVII clause 3].

    On Sept. 13, 1965,(13) the previous question was ordered 
on the approval of the Journal as read before any debate had occurred 
on that question. Mr. Durward G. Hall, of Missouri, then rose to his 
feet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 111 Cong. Rec. 23602, 23604-06, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Hall: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: (14) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Hall: May we not have debate at this time, under the rules 
    of the House, under section 805, as quoted?
        The Speaker: If a Member claims the right.
        Mr. Hall: I make such a claim, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The gentleman is recognized for 20 minutes. . . .
        The gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Albert] is recognized for 20 
    minutes.(15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. See Rule XXVII clause 3, House Rules and Manual Sec. 907 
        (1981).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 21.3 Since the motion for the previous question is not debatable, 
    a Member is not entitled to claim the right to debate it under Rule 
    XXVII clause 3.

    On Sept. 13, 1965,(16) after the conclusion of the 
reading of the Journal, the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 111 Cong. Rec. 23601, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (17) The question is on ordering the 
    previous question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Durward G.] Hall [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.

[[Page 4617]]

        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Hall: Is not debate in order on this motion inasmuch as 
    under section 805 of Jefferson's Manual there has been no debate on 
    ordering the previous question?
        The Speaker: The Chair will state that the motion on the 
    previous question is not debatable. The question is on ordering the 
    previous question on the motion to approve the Journal. . . .
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 257, nays 126, 
    answered ``present'' 1, not voting 48.

Sec. 21.4 Parliamentarian's Note: The right to recognition for 20 
    minutes of debate under Rule XXVII clause 3 does not apply simply 
    because the previous question is moved on a proposition on which 
    there has been no debate; the right to 40 minutes of debate accrues 
    only if the previous question is in fact ordered.

    On May 14, 1963,(18) the House was considering H.R. 
5517, providing supplemental appropriations for fiscal 1963. Mr. Albert 
Thomas, of Texas, moved that the House concur in the amendment of the 
Senate numbered 76 with an amendment, and before any debate had taken 
place on that motion he moved the previous question thereon. Mr. Thomas 
B. Curtis, of Missouri, then rose to his feet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 109 Cong. Rec. 8508-11, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Curtis: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry:
        The Speaker: (19) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Curtis: As I understand, any person seeking an opportunity 
    for 20 minutes can have it because the previous question has been 
    moved before there has been any debate on it.
        The Speaker: Well, the Chair is not passing on that.
        Mr. Curtis: Mr. Speaker, I ask for recognition for 20 minutes.
        The Speaker: The previous question has not been ordered yet.

Sec. 21.5 Where the House refused to order the previous question on a 
    motion to concur in a Senate amendment with an amendment, but did 
    order the previous question on the offering of a substitute 
    therefor before debate was had thereon, the action gave rise to 40 
    minutes' debate on the proposition.

    On June 8, 1943,(20) the House was considering the 
conference report on H.R. 2714, urgent defense appropriations for 1943. 
After the House voted without debate to recede from its disagreement to 
a
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 89 Cong. Rec. 5506, 5507, 5509, 5510, 78th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4618]]

Senate amendment, Mr. Clarence Cannon, of Missouri, moved that the 
House concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment. Without 
intervening debate, he moved the previous question on his motion. After 
the motion for the previous question was rejected, the following 
occurred:

        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    substitute for the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Taber moves to substitute for the Cannon amendment an 
        amendment as follows: Add to the language of the Senate 
        amendment No. 5 the following: ``or the Department of State or 
        the Office of Strategic Services''.

        Mr. Taber: On that motion I move the previous question, Mr. 
    Speaker.
        The previous question was ordered.

    The Speaker, Sam Rayburn, of Texas, having previously stated that 
time for debate is fixed when the previous question has been ordered, 
not when the motion therefor has been made,(1) indicated 
that there would be 20 minutes of debate on each side, and recognized 
Mr. Cannon for 20 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Id. at p. 5507.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Previous Question Ordered Prior to Adoption of Rules

Sec. 21.6 Prior to the adoption of the rules, when the motion for the 
    previous question is moved without debate, the 40 minutes' debate 
    prescribed by the House rules during the previous Congress does not 
    apply.

    On Jan. 7, 1959,(2) Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas, was 
swearing in the Members of the Congress. Mr. John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, offered House Resolution 1, providing for the swearing 
in of Mr. T. Dale Alford, of Arkansas, whose election to the 86th 
Congress had been subject to a challenge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 105 Cong. Rec. 14, 86th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McCormack: Mr. Speaker, this resolution is in accord with 
    existing precedents and, Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question 
    on this resolution.
        The previous question was ordered.
        Mr. [Thomas P.] O'Neill [Jr., of Massachusetts]: Mr. Speaker, 
    may I make an inquiry on a point of parliamentary procedure.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. O'Neill: Mr. Speaker, when the previous order has been 
    moved and there is no debate, under the rules of the House are we 
    not entitled to 40 minutes debate?
        The Speaker: Under the precedents, the 40-minute rule does not 
    apply before the adoption of the rules.
        The question is on the resolution.
        The resolution was agreed to.

[[Page 4619]]

Previous Question Moved on Motion to Close Debate

Sec. 21.7 When the previous question is moved on a motion to close 
    debate (a motion in itself not debatable), the rule providing for 
    40 minutes of debate on propositions on which the previous question 
    has been ordered without prior debate does not apply and no debate 
    is in order.

    On Apr. 1, 1938,(3) the House was considering S. 3331, a 
reorganization bill, when Mr. John J. Cochran, of Missouri, rose to his 
feet:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 83 Cong. Rec. 4616, 75th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Cochran: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself 
    into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for 
    the further consideration of the bill S. 3331; pending that, I move 
    that general debate in the Committee of the Whole House on the 
    state of the Union on the bill (S. 3331) do now close, and on that 
    motion I move the previous question.
        Mr. [John J.] O'Connor of New York: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    recognition.
        Mr. Cochran: Mr. Speaker, on that motion I have moved the 
    previous question.
        Mr. O'Connor of New York: Mr. Speaker, I asked recognition 
    before the previous question was moved.
        The Speaker: (4) The gentleman from Missouri moves 
    that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House 
    on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill 
    S. 3331; pending that, the gentleman moves that general debate in 
    the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union on the 
    bill S. 3331 do now close, and on that motion he moves the previous 
    question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. O'Connor of New York: Mr. Speaker, before the gentleman 
    moved the previous question I asked recognition.
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Missouri moved the previous 
    question.
        Mr. O'Connor of New York: I asked recognition, Mr. Speaker, 
    before the gentleman moved the previous question.
        The Speaker: The motion for the previous question takes 
    precedence over any other motion.
        Mr. O'Connor of New York: Mr. Speaker, I ask recognition under 
    the 40-minute rule. It is well recognized in the House that there 
    are 40 minutes of debate on a motion even under the previous 
    question.
        The Speaker: The Chair will read from a precedent directly 
    involved on this proposition, Cannon's Precedents, section 2555, 
    volume 8:

            When the previous question is ordered on the motion to 
        close debate, the rule providing for 40-minute debate on 
        propositions on which the previous question has been ordered 
        without prior debate does not apply, and no debate is in order.

        Mr. O'Connor of New York: Mr. Speaker, the previous question 
    has not been ordered. May I suggest to the distinguished Speaker 
    that he read the rule of the House as to the 40 minutes

[[Page 4620]]

    of debate before the previous question is ordered?
        The Speaker: Under the general rules of the House the previous 
    question is always a privileged motion. The gentleman from Missouri 
    has exercised his right to move the previous question.
        The question is on ordering the previous question on the motion 
    of the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Cochran] to close debate. . . .
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 149, nays 191, not 
    voting 89.

Previous Question Ordered on Motion to Send Bill to Conference

Sec. 21.8 Objection has been raised to a unanimous-consent request to 
    permit one hour of debate on a motion to send a bill to conference, 
    on which the previous question had been ordered after a brief 
    debate.

    On July 9, 1970,(5) the House was considering H.R. 
15628, to amend the Foreign Military Sales Act of 1970. Thomas E. 
Morgan, of Pennsylvania, the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs, offered a motion to take the bill from the Speaker's table 
with Senate amendments thereto, to disagree to the Senate amendments 
and to agree to conference asked by the Senate. The following then 
occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 116 Cong. Rec. 23518, 23524, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (6) The gentleman from Pennsylvania 
    [Mr. Morgan] is recognized for 1 hour on his motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Morgan: Mr. Speaker, I have no desire to use any time and 
    there has been no request for any time, and in an effort to move 
    the legislation along I will move the previous question. . . .
        Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the motion.
        The Speaker: The question is on ordering the previous question. 
    . . .
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 247, nays 143, not 
    voting 41. . . .
        The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
        The doors were opened.
        Mr. Morgan: Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the fact that the 
    previous question has been ordered on my motion to go to 
    conference, I ask unanimous consent that there now be 1 hour of 
    debate, one-half to be controlled by myself and one-half by the 
    gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Riegle) who has announced that he will 
    propose a motion to instruct the conferees.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Pennsylvania?
        Mr. [Durward G.] Hall [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, I object.