[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 7, Chapters 22 - 25]
[Chapter 25. Appropriation Bills]
[B. Reporting and Consideration of Appropriation Bills]
[Â§ 7. Nonprivileged Appropriations - "Continuing" Appropriations]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 5093-5100]
 
                               CHAPTER 25
 
                          Appropriation Bills
 
       B. REPORTING AND CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS TEXT
 
Sec. 7. Nonprivileged Appropriations--``Continuing'' Appropriations

    The right of the Committee on Appropriations to report at any time 
is confined strictly to general appropriation bills.(19) 
This section discusses the consideration of appropriations not falling 
within the category of general appropriation bills. For example, joint 
resolutions continuing appropriations pending enactment of general 
appropriation bills for the ensuing fiscal year are not ``general'' 
appropriation bills and therefore are not reported or called up as 
privileged.(20) Similarly, supplemental appropriations for a 
single agency or department of government do not comprise a ``general'' 
appropriation bill, though bills making supplemental appropriations for 
diverse agencies are considered general appropriation 
bills.(1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. See the discussion at the beginning of Sec. 6, supra; and the 
        precedents in this section.
20. See Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives Ch. 25 Sec. 2.2 
        (4th ed.). See also 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 2282, et seq. In 
        1981, rule XI clause 4, was amended to allow continuing 
        appropriation bills to be reported as privileged after 
        September 15 (H. Res. 5, 97th Cong.). Precedents arrising under 
        this new rule will appear in later volumes.
 1. See Sec. 7.4, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Continuing Appropriations

Sec. 7.1 Where appropriations for certain operations of the Federal 
    Government have remained unprovided for at the beginning of a 
    fiscal year, through the failure of enactment of the supply bills 
    customarily providing for such operations, a bill to extend 
    appropriations for a limited time period for the same operations as 
    those previously provided for, and under the same conditions, 
    restrictions, and limitations has been considered by unanimous 
    consent.

    On June 30, 1937,(2) the following actions took place in 
the

[[Page 5094]]

House prior to passage of H.R. 7726:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 81 Cong. Rec. 6611, 6612, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clarence] Cannon of Missouri: Mr. Speaker, I call up . . . 
    H.R. 7726 . . . and ask unanimous consent that the bill may be 
    considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole.
        The Clerk read the title of the bill.
        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, reserving the 
    right to object, as I understand it, the Senate has adjourned until 
    tomorrow, so that it is absolutely impossible to have all the 
    appropriation bills passed before the 1st of July. I have never 
    known of this kind of a situation arising before.
        The Speaker: (3) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Missouri?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The Clerk read the bill, as follows:

            Be it enacted, etc., That for defraying during the first 
        half of the month of July 1937 all expenses of the necessary 
        operations of the Federal Government, which, on July 1, 1937, 
        remain unprovided with appropriations through the failure of 
        enactment on or before such date of the supply bills 
        customarily providing for such operations, there are hereby 
        extended for and during such period all appropriations 
        available for obligation for such expenses during the fiscal 
        year ending June 30, 1937, in the same detail and under the 
        same conditions, restrictions, and limitations as such 
        appropriations were provided for on account of such fiscal 
        year. . . .

        Mr. Cannon of Missouri: Mr. Speaker, the fiscal year ends at 
    midnight tonight, and all departments for which supply bills have 
    not been enacted by that time are without authority to operate. 
    They can spend no money; they cannot enter into contracts; they 
    cannot employ assistants, rent quarters, buy supplies, or legally 
    transact business of any character.
        All of the supply bills have been enacted with the exception of 
    two War Department bills and the Interior bill.
        It is our hope that they will be ready, in the next day or two, 
    but in the meantime, in order to provide for the maintenance of the 
    War Department and the Interior Department, it is necessary to pass 
    a continuing resolution.
        This is the usual bill, prepared in the regular form, and has 
    been submitted to, and approved by, the Comptroller and the 
    Director of the Budget.

Continuing Appropriations Not Privileged

Sec. 7.2 A joint resolution providing continuing appropriations for 
    departments and agencies of government, to provide funds until the 
    regular appropriation bills are enacted, is not a ``general 
    appropriation bill,'' and is not reported as privileged.

    Whereas general appropriation bills are normally called up as 
privileged, consideration of joint resolutions continuing 
appropriations is usually made in order by unanimous consent, since 
such resolutions are not reported as privileged. The following pro

[[Page 5095]]

ceedings (4) are illustrative of the manner in which bills 
providing for continuing appropriations for departments or agencies of 
government are made in order for consideration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. See 113 Cong. Rec. 26370, 90th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 21, 1967. See 
        also 8 Cannon's Precedents Sec. Sec. 2282 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [George H.] Mahon [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that it may be in order on Wednesday, September 27, or any 
    day thereafter, for the House to consider a joint resolution making 
    continuing appropriations.
        The Speaker: (5) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Texas?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Frank T.] Bow [of Ohio]: Mr. Speaker, reserving the right 
    to object, I wish to address a parliamentary inquiry to the Chair.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state his parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        Mr. Bow: Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary inquiry is this: Is a 
    continuing resolution subject to amendment when it is brought onto 
    the floor of the House, if the amendment is germane?
        The Speaker: The Chair will state that any germane amendment 
    will be in order. It would have to be a germane amendment.
        Mr. Bow: I thank the Speaker, and I withdraw my reservation of 
    objection.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Texas?
        Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, further reserving the 
    right to object, I would assume the Speaker could add to that the 
    statement: ``If the gentleman is recognized for the purpose of 
    offering an amendment.''
        Mr. Speaker, as a parliamentary inquiry is that not correct? . 
    . .
        The Speaker: The Chair will state that the question answers 
    itself. The answer would be yes, subject to the right of 
    recognition, it is a question within the discretion of the Speaker. 
    . . .
        Mr. Mahon: Mr. Speaker, this is the third continuing resolution 
    to be considered by the House this year.
        I would also say in this case, as in former cases, that the 
    continuing resolution would be considered in the House under the 5-
    minute rule, and I assume any relevant amendment could be offered. 
    . . .
        Mr. Gross: . . . I assume the continuing resolution is for a 
    month or is it for a longer period?
        Mr. Mahon: It would probably be for 1 month. The committee 
    meets next week to consider the matter. We are pushing to get our 
    bills through, but there are three appropriation bills which we 
    have not been able to report. One of them is military construction; 
    another is foreign assistance; both of these are awaiting 
    authorization; another is the final supplemental which will include 
    the poverty program for which authorization legislation has not 
    been considered. There is other legislation to be worked on before 
    the supplemental appropriation bill can be reported. . . .
        Mr. Gross: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the gentleman 
    says the 5-

[[Page 5096]]

    minute rule will prevail and that any germane amendments will be in 
    order to the continuing resolution, I withdraw my reservation of 
    objection.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Texas [Mr. Mahon]?
        There was no objection.

Appropriation for Specific Purpose

Sec. 7.3 A joint resolution making an appropriation to a department for 
    a specific purpose is not a ``general'' appropriation bill within 
    the meaning of Rule XI clause 22 [now clause 4(a)] and is therefore 
    not privileged for consideration when reported by the Committee on 
    Appropriations. For this reason the Committee on Rules may provide 
    for the immediate consideration of a special bill reported from the 
    Committee on Appropriations.

    On Aug. 4, 1971,(6) the following proceedings took place 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 117 Cong. Rec. 29384, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [B. F.] Sisk [of California]: Mr. Speaker, by direction of 
    the Committee on Rules, I call up [House Resolution 577] and ask 
    for its immediate consideration.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 577

            Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this 
        resolution it shall be in order to move that the House resolve 
        itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
        the Union for the consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. 
        Res. 833) making an appropriation for the Department of Labor 
        for the fiscal year 1972, and for other purposes. . . .

        The Speaker: (7) The gentleman from California (Mr. 
    Sisk) is recognized for 1 hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Sisk: . . . Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 577 provides an 
    open rule with 1 hour of debate on House Joint Resolution 833, 
    which implements the emergency assistance Employment Act of 1971.
        House Joint Resolution 833, being for a single purpose, is not 
    regarded as a general appropriation bill. For this reason it was 
    necessary to grant a rule providing for its consideration.

Supplemental Appropriations

Sec. 7.4 A joint resolution making a supplemental appropriation for a 
    single department of the government is not a ``general 
    appropriation bill,'' and not reported as privileged, and is 
    therefore brought up for consideration in a different manner.

    On Jan. 30, 1962,(8) a joint resolution was made in 
order by unanimous consent, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 108 Cong. Rec. 1149, 87th Cong. 2d Sess.

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

[[Page 5097]]

        Mr. [Carl] Albert [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that a joint resolution providing appropriations for the 
    Veterans' Administration may be in order for consideration 
    tomorrow.
        The Speaker: (9) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Oklahoma?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.

    On the next day,(10) proceedings were as indicated 
below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 108 Cong. Rec. 1352, 1385, 87th Cong. 2d Sess, Jan. 31, 1962.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Albert] Thomas [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, in accordance with 
    the unanimous-consent agreement of yesterday, I call up the joint 
    resolution (H.J. Res. 612) making supplemental appropriations for 
    the Veterans' Administration for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
    1962, and for other purposes, and ask unanimous consent that it be 
    considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole.
        The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Texas?

    The reference of the joint resolution to the Union Calendar was 
carried in the Record as follows:

        Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were 
    delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper 
    calendar, as follows:
        Mr. Thomas: Committee on Appropriations. House Joint Resolution 
    612. Joint resolution making supplemental appropriations for the 
    Veterans' Administration for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1962, 
    and for other purposes; without amendment (Rept. No. 1294). 
    Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the 
    Union.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Note: Proposals for supplemental appropriations, normally requested 
        by a communication from the President (31 USC Sec. 14) are 
        sometimes requested by message. The usual practice is for the 
        President to transmit letters requesting such appropriations to 
        the Speaker, who refers them to the Committee on Appropriations 
        and orders them printed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Requests for Supplemental Appropriations

Sec. 7.5 The House has given unanimous consent to make in order 
    ``tomorrow, or on a subsequent day this week,'' consideration of a 
    joint resolution providing supplemental appropriations for the 
    Department of Defense, pursuant to a message from the President.

    On May 4, 1965,(12) the following proceedings occurred 
in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 111 Cong. Rec. 9390, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [George H.] Mahon [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
    consent that it may be in order tomorrow, or on a subsequent day 
    this week, to consider a House joint resolution making

[[Page 5098]]

    a supplemental appropriation for the Department of Defense.
        The Speaker: (13) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Texas?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Melvin R.] Laird [of Wisconsin]: Mr. Speaker, reserving 
    the right to object, it is my understanding that the message from 
    the President of the United States which has been just submitted 
    will satisfy the Budget and Accounting Act as far as a budget 
    estimate is concerned.
        Mr. Mahon: Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, that is 
    certainly my opinion, and I am sure the gentleman is correct. This 
    is a request for $700 million by the President. It follows one of 
    the procedures used by the Executive in submitting budget estimates 
    and I consider this, and I am sure the gentleman does, a budget 
    request from the President.
        Mr. Laird: I would like to state to the gentleman from Texas 
    [Mr. Mahon] that it was my understanding yesterday that before we 
    considered this we would have a budget estimate. I wholeheartedly 
    support the principle of following the regular procedure in seeing 
    that these funds are appropriated, and if this satisfies the Budget 
    and Accounting Act, I certainly would have no objection to its 
    being considered either tomorrow or the next day.
        Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Bill Reducing Appropriations

Sec. 7.6 A bill reported from the Committee on Appropriations reducing 
    certain appropriations and contract authorizations available for 
    fiscal 1946 was held not to be a general appropriation bill and a 
    germane amendment rescinding appropriations was permitted.

    On Oct. 19, 1945,(14) a bill (15) as 
described above was under consideration. The bill contained a paragraph 
appropriating money for grants to states for unemployment compensation 
benefits and related expenses. During consideration of the bill, an 
amendment was offered, and a point of order made against the amendment. 
During the ensuing debate on a point of order, a question arose as to 
the nature of the bill. The proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 91 Cong. Rec. 9851, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
15.  H.R. 4407.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows: . . .

                             social security board

            There is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not 
        otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
        1946, for grants to States for administration of unemployment 
        compensation and employment service facilities operated in 
        conjunction therewith, as authorized in title III of the Social 
        Security Act, approved August 14, 1935, as amended, 
        $30,000,000, which shall be in addition to the amounts 
        appropriated for such purposes in title II

[[Page 5099]]

        of the Labor-Federal Security Appropriation Act, 1946.

        Mr. [John W.] McCormack [of Massachusetts]: Mr. Chairman, I 
    offer an amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. McCormack: On page 8, line 10, 
        after the period, strike out lines 11 through 20 and insert the 
        following:
            ``On July 1, 1946, any unobligated balance of the 
        appropriation made in the first paragraph under the heading 
        `Employment Office Facilities and Services' in title VII of the 
        Labor-Federal Appropriation Act, 1946, shall be carried to the 
        surplus fund and covered into the Treasury, and after June 30, 
        1946, appropriations shall be made only for grants to States 
        for administration of unemployment compensation and employment 
        service facilities as authorized in title III of the Social 
        Security Act, approved August 11, 1935, as amended, and in the 
        act of June 6, 1933, as amended, known as the Wagner-Peyser 
        Act.''. . .

        Mr. [Everett M.]. Dirksen [of Illinois]: Mr. Chairman, I make 
    the point of order that the amendment is not germane, that it is 
    legislative in character.
        The Chairman: (16) In the opinion of the Chair, the 
    amendment is obviously germane. It relates to the same subject as 
    specified in the bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Fritz G. Lanham (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Francis H.] Case of [South Dakota]: Mr. Chairman, I make 
    an additional point of order. If I understood the amendment 
    correctly, it makes an appropriation. Has this bill not been 
    regarded as a legislative bill?
        The Chairman: The paragraph under consideration makes an 
    appropriation of $30,000,000.
        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, this, to my mind, 
    is the situation: The amendment is a rescission. The paragraph 
    which is made in order under the rule is an appropriation; 
    therefore the amendment is not in order.
        The Chairman: In the opinion of the Chair, the amendment 
    offered is germane to the paragraph which deals with appropriations 
    for this purpose. The amendment offered also deals with 
    appropriations for the same purpose. In the opinion of the Chair 
    the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts is 
    clearly germane and the Chair overrules the point of order. . . .
        Mr. Case of South Dakota: Has the Chair ruled at any time 
    whether this is an appropriation bill or a legislative bill?
        The Chairman: The Chair does not have to rule upon that 
    question. This is a question with reference to rescission of funds 
    and incidentally involves appropriations, as does this particular 
    paragraph. The Chair, in a bill of this character, which is not a 
    general appropriation bill, is simply called upon to pass upon the 
    question of germaneness. . . .
        Mr. Case of South Dakota: I do not question the germaneness, 
    but I heard the bill referred to as a legislative bill, and if it 
    is interpreted as a legislative bill, the amendment making an 
    appropriation, of course, would not be in order.
        The Chairman: This certainly is not a general appropriation 
    bill but a bill with reference to rescission of appropriations. The 
    only question which could occur from a parliamentary

[[Page 5100]]

     standpoint would be the question of germaneness. . . . The Chair 
    overruled the point of order. . . .
        Mr. [John E.] Rankin [of Mississippi]: As a matter of fact, the 
    rule waiving points of order would apply to any point of order that 
    an amendment was legislation on an appropriation bill.
        The Chairman: The Chair is not at all passing upon that 
    question. . . .
        Mr. Case of South Dakota: Mr. Chairman, since that question has 
    been raised, may we have a ruling on the question whether or not 
    the rule waives points of order as against amendments or merely 
    waives points of order against the contents of the bill?
        The Chairman: The Chair is called upon to rule only upon the 
    point of order made and cannot rule upon other points of order not 
    pertinent to the pending amendment. The Chair has overruled the 
    point of order.(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Parliamentarian's Note: A special rule (see 91 Cong. Rec. 9813, 
        79th Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 18, 1945) had provided that the 
        above bill be considered for amendment by appropriation titles. 
        Appropriation bills are, of course, generally read for 
        amendment by paragraphs. See Sec. Sec. 11.8-11.10, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------