[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 7, Chapters 22 - 25]
[Chapter 23. Motions]
[E. Motions to Refer or Recommit]
[Â§ 27. Priorities in Recognition]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 4662-4679]
 
                               CHAPTER 23
 
                                Motions
 
                    E. MOTIONS TO REFER OR RECOMMIT
 
Sec. 27. Priorities in Recognition

Speaker's Power of Recognition

Sec. 27.1 On one occasion the Speaker took the floor in the Committee 
    of the Whole to state that it was his prerogative to recognize any 
    member of the minority for a motion to recommit when no member of 
    the committee offers a motion.

    On Feb. 3, 1944,(8) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering S. 1285, relating to voting by members of the armed forces. 
Mr. Joseph W. Martin, Jr., a Republican from Massachusetts, had 
indicated that he would be glad to have either Mr. Eugene Worley, a 
Democrat of Texas, or Mr. John Z. Anderson, a Republican of California, 
recognized to offer a motion to recommit. Mr. John J. Cochran, of 
Missouri, then yielded the floor to Speaker Sam Rayburn, of Texas:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 90 Cong. Rec. 1221, 1222, 78th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Rayburn: I trust that this colloquy will not take away from 
    the Speaker what has always been his prerogative, to recognize any 
    member of the minority to offer a motion to recommit when no member 
    of the committee offers a motion.

[[Page 4663]]

        Mr. Cochran: In my opinion no Member on the minority side who 
    is a member of the committee can stand up, in view of the fact that 
    they all signed the report, and say he is opposed to the bill. 
    Therefore some person outside of the committee will have to do it.
        Mr. Martin of Massachusetts: Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman 
    yield?
        Mr. Cochran: I yield.
        Mr. Martin of Massachusetts: There will be no minority member 
    of the committee, in my opinion, who can stand up and say he is 
    opposed to the bill, but I would like to address a word or two to 
    my beloved friend, the Speaker. I realize it rests with the Speaker 
    to recognize the Member to make the motion to recommit. The clear 
    intent of the rule, however, in my opinion, is to give that weapon 
    of recommitment to the minority and not to any minority of the 
    minority.
        Mr. Rayburn: I just wanted to make it entirely clear that I 
    always recognize somebody in the minority if they qualify, but I 
    could not allow anybody to commit me to recognize any particular 
    member of the minority. The gentleman from Massachusetts would not 
    ask me to do that, nor would he want that done to him were our 
    positions reversed.

What Constitutes Recognition

Sec. 27.2 The mere fact that the Speaker asks a Member ``for what 
    purpose does the gentleman rise'' does not extend recognition to 
    such Member to offer a motion to recommit.

    On Apr. 13, 1946,(9) the House was considering H.R. 
6064, authorizing an extension of the Selective Training and Service 
Act. The following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 92 Cong. Rec. 3669, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (10) The question is on the engrossment 
    and third reading of the bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time.
        The Speaker: The question is on the passage of the bill.
        Mr. [Dewey] Short (of Missouri): Mr. Speaker.
        Mr. [Edward E.] Cox (of Georgia): Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Missouri 
    rise?
        Mr. Short: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Georgia 
    rise?
        Mr. Cox: Mr. Speaker, it was my purpose to demand a reading of 
    the engrossed copy of the bill.
        Mr. [Malcolm C.] Tarver [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Tarver: Mr. Speaker, may a demand be made for the reading 
    of the copy of the engrossed bill after the proceedings which have 
    just taken place and after the Clerk has read the bill which was 
    considered engrossed?
        The Speaker: The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a 
    third time. The gentleman from Georgia was on his feet at the time.

[[Page 4664]]

        Does the gentleman from Georgia insist upon his demand that the 
    engrossed copy of the bill be read?
        Mr. Cox: Mr. Speaker, my making demand that the engrossed copy 
    of the bill be read does not indicate my opposition to the bill.
        Mr. Short: Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill.
        Mr. Cox: I was compelled to make the demand and I did make it.
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Cox] demands the 
    reading of the engrossed copy of the bill. The Chair will state 
    that with the number of amendments agreed to, it would be 
    impossible to have the engrossed copy of the bill this afternoon.
        Mr. [Vito] Marcantonio [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a point of 
    order.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Marcantonio: Mr. Speaker, if I understood the situation 
    correctly, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Short] was recognized 
    to offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Short] was not 
    recognized. The Chair asked the gentleman for what purpose he rose, 
    and then recognized the gentleman from Georgia.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. See also 101 Cong. Rec. 9379, 84th Cong. 1st Sess., June 28, 1955.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recognition as Dependent on Opposition to Measure

Sec. 27.3 In recognizing a Member to move to recommit, the Speaker 
    determines if the Member qualifies as being opposed to the bill.

    On April 27, 1966,(12) the House was considering H.R. 
10065, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1965. After the 
engrossed copy of the bill was read Mr. Joe D. Waggonner, Jr., of 
Louisiana, was recognized, and the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 112 Cong. Rec. 9153, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Waggonner: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (13) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Waggonner: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion to 
    recommit.(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. See also 95 Cong. Rec. 3110-15, 81st Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 24, 
        1949; and 86 Cong. Rec. 11938, 76th Cong. 3d Sess., Sept. 11, 
        1940.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Member's Attitude Toward Measure is Only Relevant Inquiry

Sec. 27.4 The Speaker recognized a Member for a motion to recommit who 
    stated that he was opposed to the form of the bill, although 
    another Member said he was unqualifiedly opposed to the bill.

    On Mar. 12, 1964,(15) the House was considering H.R. 
8986, relat
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 110 Cong. Rec. 5147, 88th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4665]]

ing to salary increases for federal officers and employees. The 
following then occurred:

        Mr. [Robert J.] Corbett [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, I offer 
    a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (16) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Corbett: I am opposed to the bill in its present form.
        The Speaker: The gentleman qualifies.
        Mr. [H.R.] Gross (of Iowa): Mr. Speaker----
        The Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Iowa 
    rise?
        Mr. Gross. Under the rules of the House, Cannon's Procedure in 
    the House of Representatives, a member of the committee who is 
    unqualifiedly opposed to the bill takes precedence over a member 
    who qualifies his opposition.
        The Speaker: The Chair understands that the gentleman from 
    Pennsylvania is opposed to the bill in its present form.
        Mr. Gross: I am opposed to it unqualifiedly.
        The Speaker: Since the gentleman from Pennsylvania is opposed 
    to the bill in its present form, the Chair rules that the gentleman 
    from Pennsylvania qualifies.

        The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17.  See also 104 Cong. Rec. 12974, 85th Cong. 2d Sess., July 2, 1958.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Acceptance of Member's Declaration of Opposition

    Parliamentarian's Note: The following precedents demonstrate the 
current and the older practice with respect to qualifying to offer the 
motion to recommit. Under the current practice (Sec. Sec. 27.5-27.9, 
infra) a Member opposed to the bill ``in its present form'' qualifies. 
The earlier rulings (Sec. Sec. 27.10, and 27.11, infra) illustrate a 
distinction between qualified and total opposition.

Sec. 27.5 Members of the minority have preference of recognition for 
    motions to recommit and, if they qualify as being opposed to the 
    bill, the Chair never questions their veracity.

    On Apr. 8, 1957,(18) the House was considering H.R. 
6500, making appropriations for the government of the District of 
Columbia and for other purposes. Mr. Paul C. Jones, of Missouri (of the 
majority party), and Mr. Earl Wilson, of Indiana (of the minority party 
and a member of the Committee on Appropriations), rose at the same time 
to offer motions to recommit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 103 Cong. Rec. 5294, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Jones of Missouri: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
    recommit.
        Mr. Wilson of Indiana: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
    recommit.
        The Speaker: (19) Is the gentleman from Indiana 
    opposed to the bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4666]]

        Mr. Wilson of Indiana: I am.
        The Speaker: The gentleman qualifies. . . .
        Mr. Jones of Missouri: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Jones of Missouri: When a Member makes a motion to recommit 
    and the Chair asks him if he is against the bill, would the 
    proceedings during the afternoon when he is for the bill--
        The Speaker: The Chair never questions a Member about his 
    motives or whether or not he is telling the truth.
        Mr. Jones of Missouri: I was just asking for information.
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Indiana offered a motion to 
    recommit. The motion always goes to the minority if they desire it, 
    and the gentleman qualifies by saying he was opposed to the bill.

Sec. 27.6 When a Member has stated that he is opposed to a bill, the 
    Speaker will not entertain a point of order against a motion by 
    that Member to recommit with instructions on the grounds that the 
    motion shows the Member not to be opposed and not qualified.

    On July 2, 1958,(20) Mr. John Taber, of New York, rose 
and was recognized by the Speaker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 104 Cong. Rec. 12974, 85th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Taber: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker:(1) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Taber: I am.

    Mr. Homer H. Budge, of Idaho, inquired whether he, who was 
unqualifiedly opposed to the bill, was entitled to prior recognition to 
offer a motion to recommit.

        The Speaker: The gentleman from New York has qualified by his 
    statement that he was opposed to the bill. What other thought the 
    gentleman from New York may have had in his mind the Chair is 
    unable to determine.
        The Clerk will report the motion.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Taber moves to recommit the bill to the Committee on 
        Appropriations with instructions to report the same back 
        forthwith together with the following amendment: Page 2, line 
        10, strike out ``$700,000,000'' and insert in lieu thereof 
        ``$775,000,000.''

    At this point Mr. Clare E. Hoffman, of Michigan, rose to a point of 
order.

        Mr. Hoffman: Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the 
    motion to recommit on the ground that the motion itself shows that 
    the gentleman is not qualified.
        The Speaker: The Chair cannot entertain such a point of order 
    after the statement made by the gentleman from New York.

Effect of Qualified or Limited Opposition

Sec. 27.7 Where a Member seeking recognition to offer a motion

[[Page 4667]]

    to recommit a bill states he is opposed to ``some features'' of the 
    bill, the Chair may conclude that he is opposed to the bill and 
    therefore recognize him to make the motion.

    On Apr. 15, 1948,(2) the House was considering H.R. 
6226, supplemental national defense appropriations for 1948. After the 
engrossed copy of the bill was read Mr. John H. Kerr, of North 
Carolina, was recognized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 94 Cong. Rec. 4547, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Kerr: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (3) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Kerr: I am opposed to some features of it.
        Mr. [Vito] Marcantonio [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a point of 
    order. The gentleman says that he is opposed to some features of 
    the bill. My understanding of the rules is that the gentleman must 
    be opposed to the bill.
        The Speaker: The gentleman has stated that he is opposed to 
    some features of the bill, and the Chair must interpret that to 
    mean that he is opposed to the bill.
        The gentleman from North Carolina qualifies. The Clerk will 
    report the motion to recommit.

Sec. 27.8 The Speaker indicated in response to a parliamentary inquiry 
    that a minority member of a committee reporting a bill who is 
    opposed to the bill ``in its present form'' qualifies to offer a 
    motion to recommit since he is opposed to the bill then before the 
    House.

    On Apr. 16, 1970,(4) the House was considering H.R. 
16311, the Family Assistance Act of 1970. Mr. Harold R. Collier, of 
Illinois, was then recognized to offer a motion to recommit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 116 Cong. Rec. 12063, 12092, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Collier: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (5) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Collier: In its present form I am, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The gentleman qualifies.
        Mr. [Phillip M.] Landrum [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state the parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        Mr. Landrum: Mr. Speaker, is it not true under the rules of the 
    House that the motion to recommit should go to one who is 
    unqualifiedly opposed to the bill?
        The Speaker: The Chair will state that a Member who states that 
    he is opposed to the bill in its present form qualifies.
        Mr. Landrum: Mr. Speaker, is that not a modification of the 
    rule that a

[[Page 4668]]

    Member in order to qualify must be opposed to the bill?
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Collier) 
    qualifies because he has stated he is in opposition to the bill in 
    its present form, which is the bill now before the House.
        Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state the parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        Mr. Gross: Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois has 
    repeatedly stated, as recently as a few minutes ago, that he firmly 
    supports the bill.
        Mr. Collier: Mr. Speaker, I said I firmly support the principle 
    and the concept of the bill. That is what I said, but I am opposed 
    to the bill in its present form.
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Illinois has stated that he is 
    opposed to the bill in its present form. Therefore, the gentleman, 
    with that statement, and upon his responsibility, 
    qualifies.(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. See also 115 Cong. Rec. 28487, 28488, 91st Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 3, 
        1969; and 110 Cong. Rec. 5147, 88th Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 12, 
        1964.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 27.9 In qualifying a Member to offer a motion to recommit, the 
    Chair makes no distinction between a Member who states that he is 
    opposed to the bill in its present form and another who is opposed 
    to the bill in its entirety.

    On Oct. 3, 1969,(7) the House was considering H.R. 
14000, authorizing military procurement for fiscal 1970. The Speaker, 
John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, recognized Mr. Alvin E. O'Konski, 
of Wisconsin, and the following then occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 115 Cong. Rec. 28487, 28488, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. O'Konski: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
        Mr. O'Konski: In its present form, emphatically yes.
        Mr. [Otis G.] Pike [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a point of 
    order.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state his point of order.
        Mr. Pike: Mr. Speaker, Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
    Representatives volume 8, section 2731, says:

            Recognition to move recommitment is governed by the 
        attitude of the Member toward the bill, and a Member opposed to 
        the bill as a whole is entitled to prior recognition over a 
        Member opposed to a portion of the bill.

        Mr. Speaker, I submit that there were two gentlemen on their 
    feet on the other side, one of whom has voted against the bill as a 
    whole, both seeking recognition for the privilege of offering the 
    motion to recommit. I would submit that under that rule of the 
    House the gentleman who stated that he was opposed to it only in 
    its present form should yield to the gentleman who has voted 
    against the entire bill.
        The Speaker: The Chair will state that the gentleman from 
    Wisconsin (Mr. O'Konski) has stated he is opposed to the bill in 
    its present form before the House is the bill H.R. 14000, as 
    amended, and therefore the gentleman qualifies.

[[Page 4669]]

        The point of order is overruled.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. See also 116 Cong. Rec. 12063, 12092, 91st Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 16, 
        1970.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: Mr. O'Konski and Mr. Chalmers P. Wylie 
(Ohio) who were both minority members of the Committee on Armed 
Services, each sought recognition to offer a motion to recommit. 
Speaker McCormack in overruling 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 2731 
apparently relied on the fact that Mr. O'Konski was the senior minority 
member of the Committee on Armed Services, the committee that had 
reported the measure at issue.

Sec. 27.10 Under the earlier practice, a Member opposed to a conference 
    report ``in its present form'' was qualified to move to recommit 
    such a report, but if another Member opposed to the report without 
    reservation desired recognition to offer the motion, he was 
    accorded priority.

    On Oct. 18, 1949,(9) the House was considering the 
conference report on H.R. 5856, the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 
1949. When Mr. A. S. Mike Monroney, of Oklahoma, was recognized, the 
following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 95 Cong. Rec. 14943, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Monroney: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (10) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    conference report?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Monroney: I am, Mr. Speaker, in its present form.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Monroney moves to recommit the conference report to the 
        conference committee with instructions to the managers on the 
        part of the House to further insist upon the House provisions 
        for the exemption of employees of newspapers of circulation of 
        5,000 or under.

        Mr. [Walter E.] Brehm [of Ohio]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Brehm: If I understood the gentleman from Oklahoma 
    correctly, he said he was opposed to the bill in its present form. 
    If I understand the rules correctly, that is incorrect. He is 
    either opposed to it or he is for it. I wonder if the gentleman 
    will state his position?
        The Speaker: If the gentleman is opposed to the bill in its 
    present form he would be opposed to it. However, if some other 
    Member had asked to qualify to submit a motion to recommit, and 
    said he was absolutely opposed to the bill, unequivocally, as a 
    gentleman said the other day, then of course the Speaker would 
    recognize him.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. The rule referred to by Speaker Rayburn has not been invoked in 
        recent years. Speaker McCormack's rulings (see Sec. Sec. 27.8, 
        27.9, supra) reflect the current practice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4670]]

Sec. 27.11 Under the earlier practice, a Member opposed to a bill 
    without reservation had priority to offer a motion to recommit the 
    bill over one opposed merely to the bill ``in its present form''; 
    and where a Member opposed to a bill in its present form offered 
    the motion, the Speaker asked ``is there any member opposed without 
    reservation who desires to make such a motion.''

    On May 24, 1949,(12) the House was considering H.R. 
4591, relating to pay, allowances, and physical disability retirement 
for members of the armed forces. Mr. Francis H. Case, of South Dakota, 
was recognized and the following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 95 Cong. Rec. 6772, 6773, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Case of South Dakota: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
    recommit.
        The Speaker: (13) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Case of South Dakota: I am, Mr. Speaker, in its present 
    form.
        The Speaker: Does any Member desire to offer a motion to 
    recommit without reservation? [After a pause.] The Chair hears 
    none. The gentleman from South Dakota is the only Member that 
    qualifies under the circumstances.

Vote on Recommitted Measure

Sec. 27.12 A Member making a motion to recommit must qualify as being 
    opposed to the measure under consideration, and is expected to 
    indicate his opposition by voting against passage of the measure if 
    the motion to recommit is rejected; however, where the proponent of 
    a motion to recommit with instructions is successful in having this 
    motion adopted, and the instructions accompanying the motion are 
    agreed to by the House, he remains under no obligation to vote 
    against the bill on final passage.

    On Dec. 2, 1969,(14) the House was considering House 
Resolution 613, affirming its support for President Richard M. Nixon's 
conduct of war in Viet Nam. Mr. James G. Fulton, of Pennsylvania, moved 
to recommit the resolution with instructions to the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs. After his motion was adopted by the House, Mr. Fulton 
voted in favor of the resolution as amended by that motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 115 Cong. Rec. 36536, 36537, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4671]]

Recognition of Member Favoring Measure

Sec. 27.13 A Member may be recognized to offer a motion to recommit 
    even though he is not opposed to the bill if no Member opposed 
    seeks recognition.

    On Jan. 24, 1946,(15) the House was considering H.R. 
5201, appropriations for independent offices for fiscal 1947, when Mr. 
John Taber, of New York, was recognized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 92 Cong. Rec. 370, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Taber: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore:(16) Is the gentleman 
    opposed to the bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Taber: I am not, Mr. Speaker.
        Mr. [Joe] Hendricks [of Florida]: Mr. Speaker, a point of 
    order.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Hendricks: Did the gentleman from New York say he was 
    against the bill?
        Mr. Taber: I did not. That relates only to the privilege of 
    offering it. A Member who is opposed to the bill would be entitled 
    to prior recognition.
        Mr. Hendricks: Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that 
    unless the gentleman is opposed to the bill he cannot offer a 
    motion to recommit.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: Is there any Member of the minority 
    party who is opposed to the bill who desires to offer a motion to 
    recommit? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none.
        The Clerk will report the motion to recommit offered by the 
    gentleman from New York.

Proponent of Amendment to Motion to Recommit

Sec. 27.14 In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Speaker 
    indicated that if the previous question were voted down on a motion 
    to recommit, the person offering an amendment to the motion would 
    not necessarily have to qualify as being opposed to the bill.

    On June 26, 1968,(17) the House was considering H.R. 
18037, Labor and HEW appropriations for fiscal 1969. After Mr. Robert 
H. Michel, of Illinois, was recognized to offer a motion to recommit, 
Mr. Charles A. Halleck, of Indiana, was recognized to propound a 
parliamentary inquiry:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 114 Cong. Rec. 18940, 18941, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Halleck: Is it not true that under the rules a motion to 
    recommit, under the long-established precedents of the House of 
    Representatives, shall go to the ranking member on the minority 
    side of the committee involved?
        The Speaker:(18) The Chair has recognized and 
    complied with that custom
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4672]]

    and practice in recognizing the gentleman from Illinois on the 
    motion to recommit.

        Mr. Michel: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Michel: Is it not also true that for one to qualify to 
    amend a motion to recommit, one would also have to be opposed to 
    the bill?
        The Speaker: At that stage, should it develop, not necessarily.

Members of the Minority

Sec. 27.15 In recognizing a Member for a motion to recommit, the 
    Speaker gives preference to a minority member if opposed to the 
    measure.

    On Mar. 29, 1954,(19) the House was considering House 
Resolution 468, authorizing expenditures to be paid out of the 
contingent fund of the House. The following occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 100 Cong. Rec. 3962-67, 83d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Augustine B.] Kelley of Pennsylvania: Mr. Speaker, I offer 
    a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (20) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    resolution?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Kelley of Pennsylvania: I am, Mr. Speaker.

        Mr. [Clare E.] Hoffman of Michigan: Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    motion to recommit with instructions.
        The Speaker: The Chair is obliged to say that, by reason of a 
    time-honored custom, the motion to recommit belongs to the minority 
    party if they claim the privilege, and in this instance they have 
    claimed it. Therefore, the Chair is constrained to recognize the 
    gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelley), for that 
    purpose.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. See also 101 Cong. Rec. 3950, 84th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 29, 1955; 
        92 Cong. Rec. 10104, 79th Cong. 2d Sess., July 25, 1946; 89 
        Cong. Rec. 9899, 78th Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 23, 1943; 88 Cong. 
        Rec. 478, 77th Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 19, 1942; and 86 Cong. Rec. 
        8214, 76th Cong. 3d Sess., June 13, 1940.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 27.16 On one occasion, the Speaker intended to recognize the 
    Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary to offer a motion to 
    recommit, but the Minority Leader claimed that the motion to 
    recommit was the prerogative of the minority and the Speaker 
    recognized a minority member of the Committee on Interstate and 
    Foreign Commerce, the committee which had reported the matter to 
    the House, to offer the motion.

    On July 13, 1971,(2) the House was considering a 
resolution (H. Res. 534) certifying the contumacious conduct of Frank 
Stanton, the president of CBS, as a witness
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 117 Cong. Rec. 24723, 24752, 24753, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4673]]

before the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Mr. Hastings 
Keith, of Massachusetts, a member of that committee, was recognized to 
offer a motion to recommit the resolution to the Committee on 
Interstate and Foreign Commerce.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Parliamentarian's Note: The Congressional Record indicates only 
        that Mr. Keith, a Republican, was recognized to offer a motion 
        to recommit. However, prior to consideration of the resolution, 
        the Speaker had announced to the press his support of a motion 
        to recommit the resolution to the Committee on the Judiciary 
        for further study of the constitutional questions involved. 
        During consideration of the resolution, however, the Minority 
        Leader, Gerald R. Ford (Mich.), suggested that recognition to 
        offer the motion to recommit was the prerogative of the 
        minority, whereas the Speaker had indicated that he would 
        recognize Emanuel Celler (N.Y.), Chairman of the Committee on 
        the Judiciary, to offer the motion. The Speaker therefore 
        agreed to recognize a minority member of the Committee on 
        Interstate and Foreign Commerce to offer the motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minority Member Opposed to Measure in Its ``Present Form''

Sec. 27.17 Under the prior practice, the Speaker extended recognition 
    to a minority member ``opposed to the bill in its present form'' 
    over a majority member with the same qualification where no one 
    stated he was opposed to the bill without qualification.

    On July 7, 1949,(4) the House was considering S. 1008, 
to define the application of the Federal Trade Commission and the 
Clayton Act to certain pricing practices. Mr. H. R. Gross, of Iowa, 
offered a motion to recommit, and the Speaker, Sam Rayburn, of Texas, 
posed the following question:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 95 Cong. Rec. 9074, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
        Mr. Gross: I am, in its present form.
        The Speaker: Is there anyone opposed to the bill without 
    qualification?
        Mr. [Joseph L.] Evins [of Tennessee]: Mr. Speaker, I have a 
    motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: Is the gentleman from Tennessee opposed to the 
    bill?
        Mr. Evins: I am, in its present form.
        The Speaker: The gentleman does not qualify any more than the 
    gentleman from Iowa.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Parliamentarian's Note: Mr. Evins was a Democrat and hence a member 
        of the majority party in the 81st Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minority Members of Reporting Committee

Sec. 27.18 In recognizing Members to move to recommit,

[[Page 4674]]

    the Speaker gives preference to minority members of the committee 
    reporting the bill.

    On June 19, 1959,(6) the following occurred on the floor 
of the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 105 Cong. Rec. 11372, 86th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Wright] Patman [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to 
    recommit.
        Mr. [Noah M.] Mason [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    motion to recommit, which is at the Clerk's desk.
        The Speaker: (7) The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
    Mason], a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and in the 
    minority, has the right to make the motion to recommit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is the gentleman from Illinois opposed to the bill?
        Mr. Mason: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.

Sec. 27.19 On one occasion a minority member of a committee reporting a 
    bill offered a straight motion to recommit (having qualified as 
    being opposed to the bill), and then voted against that motion.

    On Sept. 16, 1971,(8) the House was considering H.R. 
1746, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1971. Mr. John M. 
Ashbrook, of Ohio, was then recognized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 117 Cong. Rec. 32112, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Ashbrook: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (9) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Ashbrook: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. Ashbrook moves that the bill H.R. 1746 be recommitted 
        to the Committee on Education and Labor. . . .

        The yeas and nays were ordered.
        The question was taken; and there were--yeas 130, nays 270, not 
    voting 33.

    Mr. Ashbrook was listed among those voting nay.

Recognizing Minority Members of Reporting Committee

Sec. 27.20 In recognizing Members to move to recommit, the Speaker 
    gives preference first to the ranking minority member of the 
    committee reporting the bill; then to the remaining minority 
    members of that committee in the order of their rank.

    On June 18, 1957,(10) the House was considering H.R. 
6127, a civil rights bill. Mr. Joseph W. Martin,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 103 Cong. Rec. 9516, 9517, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4675]]

Jr., of Massachusetts, inquired as to the relative priorities in 
recognition to offer the motion to recommit. The Speaker, Sam Rayburn, 
of Texas, responded to the inquiry by citing a ruling by former Speaker 
Champ Clark:

        The Speaker: The Chair in answer to that will ask the Clerk to 
    read the holding of Mr. Speaker Champ Clark, which is found in 
    volume 8 of Cannon's Precedents of the House of Representatives, 
    section 2767.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            The Chair laid down this rule, from which he never intends 
        to depart unless overruled by the House, that on a motion to 
        recommit he will give preference to the gentleman at the head 
        of the minority list, provided he qualifies, and then go down 
        the list of the minority of the committee until it is gotten 
        through with. And then if no one of them offer a motion to 
        recommit the Chair will recognize the gentleman from Kansas 
        (Mr. Murdock), as the leader of the third party in the House. 
        Of course he would have to qualify. The Chair will state it 
        again. The present occupant of the chair laid down a rule here 
        about a year ago that in making this preferential motion for 
        recommitment the Speaker would recognize the top man on the 
        minority of the committee if he qualified--that is, if he says 
        he is opposed to the bill--and so on down to the end of the 
        minority list of the committee. . . .

        The Speaker: . . . In looking over this list, the Chair has 
    gone down the list and will make the decision when someone arises 
    to make a motion to recommit. The Chair does not know entirely who 
    is going to seek recognition.
        Mr. [Richard H.] Poff [of Virginia]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a 
    motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
        Mr. Poff: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        Mr. [Russell W.] Keeney [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, I also 
    offer a motion to recommit, and I, too, am opposed to the bill.
        The Speaker: In this instance the Chair finds that no one has 
    arisen who is a member of the minority of the Committee on the 
    Judiciary until it comes down to the name of the gentleman from 
    Virginia [Mr. Poff]. He ranks the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
    Keeney] and is therefore senior. Under the rules and precedents of 
    the House, the Chair therefore must recognize the gentleman from 
    Virginia [Mr. Poff].(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. See also 116 Cong. Rec. 17327, 91st Cong. 2d Sess., May 28, 1970; 
        and 114 Cong. Rec. 18914, 90th Cong. 2d Sess., June 26, 1968.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 27.21 Members of the committee reporting a measure are entitled to 
    prior recognition for the purpose of offering a motion to recommit 
    if they qualify as being opposed to the measure.

    Parliamentarian's Note: On June 29, 1937,(12) the House 
was considering H.R. 7562, the farm tenancy bill. The Speaker, William 
B. Bankhead, of Alabama, recognized Mr. Gerald J. Boileau,

[[Page 4676]]

of Wisconsin, to offer a motion to recommit, although Mr. Joseph W. 
Martin, Jr., of Massachusetts, was also on his feet attempting to offer 
a motion to recommit. Since Mr. Boileau was a member of the Committee 
on Agriculture and Mr. Martin was not, the Speaker accorded prior 
recognition to Mr. Boileau. Upon discovering that Mr. Boileau was not 
opposed to the measure, the Speaker recognized Mr. Martin to offer his 
motion to recommit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 81 Cong. Rec. 6580, 6581, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 27.22 Recognition to offer a motion to recommit was extended to a 
    minority member of the committee which reported the bill under 
    consideration, who qualified as being opposed to the bill ``in its 
    present form,'' although a majority member of the committee, 
    totally opposed to the bill, was on his feet seeking recognition.

    Parliamentarian's Note: On June 30, 1969,(13) the House 
was considering H.R. 12290, continuing an income tax surcharge and 
certain excise taxes through fiscal 1970.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 115 Cong. Rec. 17874, 91st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Speaker (14) recognized Mr. Charles E. Chamberlain, 
of Michigan, who opposed the bill ``in its present form,'' to offer a 
motion to recommit, although a member of the majority party who was 
totally opposed to the bill was on his feet seeking recognition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Chamberlain: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
        Mr. Chamberlain: I am, Mr. Speaker, in its present form.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.

Sec. 27.23 A member of the committee reporting a measure, if opposed to 
    the bill in its final form, is entitled to move to recommit over 
    one not a member of the committee.

    On Oct. 9, 1951,(15) the House was considering S. 1959, 
to amend the National Labor Relations Act. After Mr. Clare E. Hoffman, 
of Michigan, offered a motion to recommit Mr. Cleveland M. Bailey, of 
West Virginia, a member of the majority, rose with a parliamentary 
inquiry:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 97 Cong. Rec. 12863, 82d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Bailey: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: (16) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Bailey: Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Committee on 
    Education and

[[Page 4677]]

    Labor, do I not have the privilege of recognition?
        Mr. [Charles A.] Halleck [of Indiana]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Halleck: May I inquire if it is not the practice and the 
    rules of the House of Representatives that the right to offer a 
    motion to recommit goes first to someone on the minority side?
        The Speaker: In response to the gentleman from Indiana, that is 
    correct, if he is a member of the committee, reporting the bill. 
    The Chair quotes from page 301 of Cannon's procedure in the House 
    of Representatives as follows:

            A member of the committee reporting the measure and opposed 
        to it is entitled to recognition to move to recommit over one 
        not a member of the committee.

        Mr. [Walter E.] Brehm [of Ohio]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion 
    to recommit.
        The Speaker: The Chair will hold that the gentleman is not too 
    late in offering the motion. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
        Mr. Brehm: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion, and that motion 
    must be in writing.(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Parliamentarian's Note: Both Mr. Brehm and Mr. Hoffman were members 
        of the minority party, however, Mr. Brehm was a member of the 
        Committee on Education and Labor and Mr. Hoffman was not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 27.24 On one occasion a minority member of the Committee on Ways 
    and Means, which had considered title three of a bill reported by 
    the Committee on Public Works, was recognized to offer a straight 
    motion to recommit to the Committee on Public Works, although a 
    minority member of the Committee on Public Works also opposed to 
    the bill, sought to offer a motion to recommit with instructions.

    On Nov. 25, 1970,(18) the House was considering H.R. 
19504, relating to federal aid for highway construction. The Speaker, 
John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, recognized Mr. Joel T. Broyhill, 
of Virginia, to offer a motion to recommit:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 116 Cong. Rec. 38997, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Broyhill of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
    recommit.
        The Speaker: Is the gentleman from Virginia opposed to the 
    bill?
        Mr. Broyhill of Virginia: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        Mr. [Fred] Schwengel [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state the parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        Mr. Schwengel: Mr. Speaker, I speak as a member of the 
    Committee on Public Works. This is a public works bill. I have a 
    recommittal motion at the desk which was filed earlier this 
    afternoon.

[[Page 4678]]

        The Speaker: The Chair will state that title III of the bill is 
    a provision that has come from the Committee on Ways and Means. The 
    gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Broyhill] is a member of the Committee 
    on Ways and Means.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Mr. Broyhill had been a Member of Congress 
since the onset of the 83d Congress. Mr. Schwengel had begun his 
service with the 84th Congress, and after being defeated for a term in 
the 89th Congress, returned with the 90th Congress.

Recognizing Majority Member Opposed to Measure

Sec. 27.25 Where no Member from the minority side seeks recognition to 
    offer a motion to recommit, the Chair recognizes a Member from the 
    majority side who qualifies as being opposed to measure.

    On Apr. 5, 1967,(19) the House was considering House 
Resolution 221, appropriating funds for the administration of the 
House. After the Speaker, John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, ruled 
out on a point of order a motion to recommit offered by Mr. John 
Ashbrook, of Ohio, Mr. Sidney R. Yates, of Illinois, was recognized on 
a parliamentary inquiry:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 113 Cong. Rec. 8441, 8442, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Yates: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Chair 
    ruled out the motion to recommit made by a member of the minority, 
    is it in order for the gentleman from California [Mr. Edwards], who 
    is on his feet seeking recognition to offer a motion to recommit?
        The Speaker: If no Member on the minority side seeks 
    recognition to offer a motion to recommit, then a Member on the 
    majority side may be recognized to offer a motion to recommit.
        Mr. [Don] Edwards of California: Mr. Speaker----
        The Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from 
    California rise?
        Mr. Edwards of California: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
    recommit.
        The Speaker: Is the gentleman opposed to the resolution?
        Mr. Edwards of California: I am, Mr. Speaker.
        The Speaker: The gentleman qualifies.
        The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. See also 111 Cong. Rec. 25663, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 30, 
        1965; 110 Cong. Rec. 20120, 88th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 18, 1964; 
        94 Cong. Rec. 8014, 80th Cong. 2d Sess., June 12, 1948; 93 
        Cong. Rec. 7845, 80th Cong. 1st Sess., June 27, 1947; and 92 
        Cong. Rec. 9776, 79th Cong. 2d Sess., July 23, 1946.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Floor Manager of Measure

Sec. 27.26 The chairman of the committee reporting a bill who had 
    managed the bill during its consideration on the floor of the House 
    offered

[[Page 4679]]

    a motion to recommit with instructions to report it back with an 
    amendment which he had offered, and which had been rejected, in the 
    Committee of the Whole.

    On Apr. 22, 1968,(1) the House was considering H.R. 
16409, the District of Columbia Teachers' Salary Act. After the bill 
was read for the third time, John L. McMillan, of South Carolina, the 
Chairman of the Committee on the District of Columbia rose to his feet:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 114 Cong. Rec. 10126, 10130, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McMillan: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
        The Speaker: (2) Is the gentleman opposed to the 
    bill?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. McMillan: In its present form I am opposed to the bill.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Mr. McMillan moves to recommit the bill H.R. 16409 to the 
        Committee on the District of Columbia with instructions to 
        report the bill back forthwith with the following amendment: On 
        page 2, strike out the salary schedule beginning after line 2 
        and ending before line 1 on page 4 and insert in lieu thereof 
        the following: . . .

        Mr. McMillan (during the reading): Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent to dispense with further reading of the motion to recommit 
    and that it be printed in the Record.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from South Carolina?
        Mr. [Joel T.] Broyhill of Virginia: Reserving the right to 
    object, is the amendment the gentleman has offered as a motion to 
    recommit the same amendment which the gentleman offered during the 
    debate on the bill which would reduce the salary structure by $200?
        Mr. McMillan: Two hundred dollars across the board.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from South Carolina?
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker: Without objection, the previous question is 
    ordered on the motion to recommit.