[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 7, Chapters 22 - 25]
[Chapter 25. Appropriation Bills]
[B. Reporting and Consideration of Appropriation Bills]
[Â§ 12. Points of Order; Timeliness]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 5144-5157]
 
                               CHAPTER 25
 
                          Appropriation Bills
 
       B. REPORTING AND CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATION BILLS TEXT
 
Sec. 12. Points of Order; Timeliness

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Committee of the Whole has no authority 
to delete by points of order portions of a bill referred to it by the 
House absent reservation of that authority in the House at the time the 
bill is first referred to the Calendar of the Committee of the Whole 
House on the state of the Union (the Union Calendar). Absent reserved 
authority to delete provisions in violation of clauses 2 and 6 of Rule 
XXI, the Committee of the Whole can merely recommend amendments to be 
acted upon by the House to change general appropriation bills committed 
thereto.
                          -------------------

Reservation of Points of Order

Sec. 12.1 Points of order are ordinarily reserved against general 
    appropriation bills prior to referral of the bills to the Committee 
    of the Whole, i.e., when placed upon the Union Calendar, and may be 
    reserved thereafter only by unanimous consent.

    On Feb. 26, 1940,(18) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 86 Cong. Rec. 1991, 76th Cong. 3d Sess.

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

[[Page 5145]]

        Mr. [Clifton A.] Woodrum of Virginia: Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on 
    the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R 8341) 
    making appropriations to supply deficiencies in certain 
    appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1940, to provide 
    supplemental appropriations for such fiscal year, and for other 
    purposes; and pending that motion, I ask unanimous consent that 
    general debate shall continue for 2\1/2\ hours, to be confined to 
    the bill and the time to be equally divided between myself and the 
    gentleman from New York [Mr. Taber].
        The Speaker: (19) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Woodrum)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, reserving the 
    right to object, has this bill been reported?
        Mr. Woodrum of Virginia: Yes; it has been reported.
        Mr. Taber: Mr. Speaker, I desire to reserve all points of order 
    against the bill.
        The Speaker: Without objection, the gentleman from New York 
    reserves all points of order against the bill.
        There was no objection.

    Parliamentarian's Note: Unanimous consent was requested since the 
bill had been referred to the Committee of the Whole by the Speaker 
when reported. That is the proper time to reserve points of order in 
the House against a general appropriation bill. Once the bill is 
referred to the Union Calendar, it is then too late absent unanimous 
consent.

Sec. 12.2 The committee chairman obtained unanimous consent that the 
    committee have until midnight to file a report on an appropriation 
    bill, and a Member thereafter obtained unanimous consent to reserve 
    all points of order on the bill.

    On Nov. 26, 1945,(20) the following unanimous-consent 
request was made:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 91 Cong. Rec. 10984, 10993, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clarence] Cannon [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriations may have 
    until midnight tonight to file a report on the first deficiency 
    appropriation bill.
        The Speaker: (1) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Missouri?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection. . . .
        Mr. [Earl C.] Michener [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Michener: I have been on the floor all morning, but I have 
    been advised that earlier in the day unanimous consent was given to 
    the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations to have until 
    midnight to file a report on the deficiency appropriation bill. I 
    did not hear that request.

[[Page 5146]]

        The Speaker: The request was made and the consent was granted.
        Mr. Michener: The gentleman from New York [Mr. Taber], the 
    ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations, was in the 
    committee room, as I am advised, at the time. Had he been present 
    and known about it, he would have asked permission to reserve all 
    points of order on the bill.
        I now ask unanimous consent to reserve all points of order on 
    the bill.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Michigan?
        There was no objection.

Precedence Over Pro Forma Amendment

Sec. 12.3 A point of order against a paragraph in a general 
    appropriation bill takes precedence over any amendment (including a 
    pro forma amendment) to that paragraph.

    On June 4, 1970,(2) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the foreign assistance appropriation bill 
(H.R. 17867) the following proceedings took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 116 Cong. Rec. 18406, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Sec. 117. None of the funds appropriated or made available in 
    this Act for carrying out the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as 
    amended, shall be available for assistance to the United Arab 
    Republic, unless the President determines that such availability is 
    essential to the national interest of the United States.
        Mr. [George H.] Mahon [of Texas]: Mr. Chairman, I move to 
    strike the last word.
        Mr. [Clement J.] Zablocki [of Wisconsin]: Mr. Chairman, I was 
    on my feet to make a point of order as to section 117 that was just 
    read.
        The Chairman: (3) The gentleman from Wisconsin has a 
    point of order on section 117?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Hale Boggs (La.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Zablocki: That is correct, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: The Chair will hear the gentleman from Wisconsin 
    on his point of order.
        Mr. Zablocki: Mr. Chairman, I will gladly defer to the 
    gentleman from Texas (Mr. Mahon) if I do not lose my opportunity to 
    make my point of order in so doing.
        The Chairman: The Chair will state that the point of order 
    takes precedence.

Priority in Recognition

Sec. 12.4 Members of the committee reporting a bill have priority of 
    recognition in making points of order against proposed amendments 
    to bills.

    On Mar. 30, 1949,(4) the Committee on the Whole was 
considering H.R. 3838, an Interior Department appropriation bill. The

[[Page 5147]]

Clerk read as follows, and proceedings ensued as indicated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4.  95 Cong. Rec. 3520, 81st Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Francis H.] Case of South Dakota: On 
    page 47, line 7, strike out the period, insert a colon and the 
    following: ``Provided further, That no part of these funds shall be 
    used to build, operate, or administer transmission lines to carry 
    power developed at Fort Randall Dam across the boundaries of the 
    State of South Dakota in which the power is produced, unless the 
    power so produced shall exceed the requests for power in that 
    State.''
        Mr. [Henry M.] Jackson [of Washington]: Mr. Chairman, a point 
    of order.
        Mr. [Carl T.] Curtis [of Nebraska]: Mr. Chairman, a point of 
    order.
        The Chairman: (5) The Chair recognizes the gentleman 
    from Washington, a member of the committee, to state a point of 
    order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Point of Order Against Two Paragraphs

Sec. 12.5 Because a general appropriation bill is read for amendment by 
    paragraphs, a point of order against two consecutive paragraphs 
    comprising a section in the bill can be made only by unanimous 
    consent.

    On June 4, 1970,(6) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering H.R. 17867, a foreign assistance appropriation bill. A 
Member stated as follows, and proceedings ensued as indicated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 116 Cong. Rec. 18405, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Donald M.] Fraser [of Minnesota]: Mr. Chairman, I move to 
    strike the requisite number of words.
        Mr. Chairman, when the Clerk reads the next section, I propose 
    to raise a point of order against both clauses (a) and (b), and I 
    rise at this time to inquire if I can make the point of order 
    against both clauses and have it considered at the same time.
        The Chairman: (7) The Chair will state to the 
    gentleman from Minnesota that that can be done only by unanimous 
    consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. J. Caleb Boggs (Del.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
    Minnesota?
        Mr. [Otto E.] Passman [of Louisiana]: Mr. Chairman, I object.

Assertion That Bill Is Not ``General'' Appropriation Bill.

Sec. 12.6 In response to a point of order based on Rule XXI clause 2, 
    it was asserted that the bill under consideration was not a 
    ``general'' appropriation bill and therefore not subject to the 
    rule; but the Chair ruled that such assertion should have been made 
    when the bill was first taken up as a privileged general 
    appropriation bill and was not timely made after

[[Page 5148]]

    the stage of amendment was reached.

    On June 21, 1939,(8) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering an appropriations bill.(9) A point of order was 
raised against the following amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 84 Cong. Rec. 7673, 76th Cong. 1st Sess.
 9. H.R. 6791, supplemental military establishment appropriation of 
        1940.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Ross A.] Collins [of Mississippi]: 
    Page 10, line 11, after the word ``thereof'', insert ``Provided 
    further, That of the amounts herein appropriated and authorized to 
    be obligated for the procurement of 2,290 airplanes, obligations 
    shall not be incurred for the procurement of more than 1,007 
    airplanes unless and until the President shall determine that the 
    interests of national defense require the procurement of any 
    portion or all of the number in excess of 1,007.''

    A point of order having been raised, the following exchange took 
place:

        Mr. [Francis H.] Case of [South Dakota]: Mr. Chairman, there 
    are two points on which this is in order. In the first place, it 
    proposes retrenchment; and, if so, comes under the Holman Rule. In 
    the second place, the bill before us is not a general appropriation 
    bill. The rule under which the point of order is made is rule XXI, 
    section 2, and that rule specifically says:

            No appropriation shall be reported in any general 
        appropriation bill. . . . For any expenditure not previously 
        authorized by law. . . . Nor shall any provision in any such 
        bill or amendment thereto changing existing law be in order--

        And so forth. The limitations apply only to recognized general 
    appropriation bills. In Cannon's Procedure, which I have in my 
    hand, on page 20, this point is specifically treated, and on page 
    20 the statement is flatly made:

            The rule applies to general appropriation bills only.

        The Chairman: (10) The Chair is ready to rule. The 
    argument just made, if containing merit, should have been made 
    earlier, when the bill was taken up. It has been reported as a 
    general appropriation bill and so considered, and was reported 
    under the rules as a general appropriation bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Schuyler Otis Bland (Va.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Point of Order That Paragraph Has Been Passed

Sec. 12.7 A point of order that a paragraph has been passed and is 
    therefore not subject to amendment will not lie where a Member was 
    on his feet seeking recognition to offer an amendment, while the 
    Clerk continued to read.

    On Apr. 3, 1957,(11) The Committee of the Whole was 
considering H.R. 6287, the Departments of Labor and Health, Education,

[[Page 5149]]

and Welfare appropriation bill. The following proceedings took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 103 Cong. Rec. 5034-36, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: (12) For what purpose does the 
    gentleman from North Carolina rise?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Aime J. Forand (R.I.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Harold D.] Cooley [of North Carolina]: Mr. Chairman, I 
    offer an amendment which is at the Clerk's desk.
        The Chairman: The Clerk will report the amendment.
        Mr. [Hamer H.] Budge [of Idaho]: Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: For what purpose does the gentleman from Idaho 
    rise?
        Mr. Budge: Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from North Carolina has just been 
    recognized to offer an amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Cooley: On page 32, after line 21, 
        insert the following paragraph: ``Grants to States for training 
        public-welfare personnel: For grants to States for increasing 
        the number of adequately trained public-welfare personnel 
        available for work in the publicassistance programs as 
        authorized by section 705 of the Social Security Act, as 
        amended, $2,500,000.''

        Mr. [Albert P.] Morano [of Connecticut]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order. I believe that section was passed, but I will 
    reserve the point of order.
        Mr. Cooley: It was not passed. My amendment was at the Clerk's 
    desk, but the Clerk was reading so rapidly that he passed that 
    section inadvertently. . . .
        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of 
    order against the amendment on the ground that it is not in order 
    at this point in the bill, the Clerk having read down to line 2 on 
    page 33; and, furthermore, that it is not authorized by law.
        Mr. Cooley: May I be heard on the point of order, Mr. Chairman?
        The Chairman: The Chair will hear the gentleman.
        Mr. Cooley: Do I understand the gentleman to base his point of 
    order upon the ground that this amount was not authorized by law?
        Mr. Taber: Upon the ground that the amendment is not in order 
    at the point where the Clerk had finished reading.
        The Chairman: The Chair is ready to rule on that point. The 
    gentleman from North Carolina was on his feet while the Clerk was 
    reading. The Clerk continued to read before the gentleman had a 
    chance to offer his amendment.
        The gentleman was entitled to recognition.
        The Chair overrules the point of order.

After Reading of Paragraph

Sec. 12.8 The time for making points or order against items in an 
    appropriation bill is after the House has resolved itself into the 
    Committee of the Whole and after the paragraph containing such 
    items has been read for amendment.

[[Page 5150]]

    On July 5, 1945,(13) the following proceedings took 
place in the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 91 Cong. Rec. 7226, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clarence] Cannon [of Missouri]: Mr. Speaker, I move that 
    the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on 
    the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 
    3649), making appropriations for war agencies for the fiscal year 
    ending June 30, 1946, and for other purposes; and pending that 
    motion, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
    general debate in the Committee of the Whole.
        Mr. [Vito] Marcantonio [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        The Speaker: (14) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Marcantonio: Mr. Speaker, if, as in this case, the bill 
    contains many items that are subject to a point of order, is it not 
    in order to make a point of order against sending this bill to the 
    Committee of the Whole?
        The Speaker: Under the rules of the House, it is not.
        Mr. Marcantonio: Then the procedure to make the point of order 
    is to make it as the bill is being read for amendment?

        The Speaker: As the paragraphs in the bill are reached.

Sec. 12.9 The proper time to raise a point of order against language in 
    a paragraph of a general appropriation bill is after the paragraph 
    has been read but before debate starts thereon. (Note: The Chair, 
    however, will not permit the reading of an amendment to preclude a 
    point of order made by a Member who has shown due diligence and who 
    sought recognition at the proper time.)

    On May 24, 1960,(15) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill, the following 
proceedings occurred:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 106 Cong. Rec. 10979, 10980, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

                             Construction, General

            For the prosecution of river and harbor, flood control, 
        shore protection, and related projects authorized by law. . . .

        Mr. [Fred] Wampler [of Indiana]: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Wampler: On page 4, line 16, 
        strike the amount ``$662,622,300'' and insert in lieu thereof 
        the amount ``$662,807,300''.

        Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Chairman: (16) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Hale Boggs (La.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Gross: I have a point of order against the language to be 
    found on this page. Will the discussion of this

[[Page 5151]]

    amendment abrogate my right to make a point of order?
        The Chairman: The gentleman is correct, it would. If the 
    gentleman has a point of order, it would have to be urged at this 
    point.
        Mr. Gross: The gentleman is trying to obtain recognition from 
    the Chair to make a point of order.
        The Chairman: The Chair recognizes the gentleman to make the 
    point of order.

Sec. 12.10 A point of order against language in a paragraph of an 
    appropriation bill comes too late after the paragraph has been read 
    and amendments thereto have been considered.

    On May 25, 1959,(17) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 7176) the 
following proceedings took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 105 Cong. Rec. 9013, 86th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Charles A.] Vanik [of Ohio]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point 
    of order.
        The Chairman: (18) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Vanik: I make a point of order to the language on page 9, 
    lines 5 and 6 ``from the Baltic countries.''
        The Chairman: The Chair must advise the gentleman that the 
    point of order comes too late. That section has been read and 
    amendments to the section have been considered. The point of order 
    is overruled.
        The Clerk will read.

Sec. 12.11 A point of order against language in a paragraph of an 
    appropriation bill comes too late after the paragraph has been read 
    and an amendment thereto has been agreed to.

    On June 13, 1961,(19) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering H.R. 7577, a bill making appropriations for the executive 
office and the Department of Commerce. The Clerk read as follows, and 
proceedings ensued as indicated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 107 Cong. Rec. 10177, 10178, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
    Small Business Administration, including hire of passenger motor 
    vehicles, $6,750,000. . . .
        Mr. [Wright] Patman [of Texas]: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Patman: On page 28, lines 11 and 
        12, after ``exceed'', strike out ``$17,524,000'' and insert 
        ``$18,447,000''.

        Mr. [George W.] Andrews [of Alabama]: Mr. Chairman, the 
    committee accepts the amendment.
        The Chairman: (20) The question is on the amendment 
    offered by the gentleman from Texas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The amendment was agreed to.

[[Page 5152]]

        The Clerk read as follows: . . .

            For necessary expenses of the Subversive Activities Control 
        Board, including services as authorized by section 15 of the 
        Act of August 2, 1946 (5 U.S.C. 55a) . . . $305,000.

        Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Gross: Is a point of order to the language on page 29 in 
    order?
        The Chairman: If it is to language preceding line 5 on page 29 
    it is not in order.
        Mr. Gross: It does precede line 5 on page 29. The Clerk did not 
    read the language on page 29, lines 1 to 5.
        The Chairman: The Clerk has read and an amendment has been 
    adopted to the paragraph starting on page 28, line 8 and ending on 
    page 29, line 5.
        Mr. Gross. Then a point of order to the language on page 29, 
    line 5, is not in order?
        The Chairman: The Chair will advise the gentleman it comes too 
    late at this time.

Bill Considered as Read

Sec. 12.12 Where the remainder of a general appropriation bill has been 
    considered as read and open to amendment at any point by unanimous 
    consent, points of order against any provision in that portion of 
    the bill must be made prior to debate or amendment to the remainder 
    of the bill.

    On June 26, 1972,(1) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 15586) the 
following proceedings took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 118 Cong. Rec. 22428, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: (2) The Clerk will read.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Wayne N. Aspinall (Colo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk proceeded to read the bill.
        Mr. [Joseph L.] Evins of Tennessee: Mr. Chairman, I ask 
    unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill be considered as 
    read in full and open to amendment at any point.
        The Chairman: Is there objection to the request of the 
    gentleman from Tennessee?
        Mr. [Robert H.] Michel [of Illinois]: Mr. Chairman, reserving 
    the right to object, would that foreclose the making of a point of 
    order against a point that has not been reached in the bill?
        A point of order can still be made?
        The Chairman: Yes.
        Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Chairman, a further 
    parliamentary inquiry.
        Mr. Chairman, is it not necessary that the point of order be 
    made now?
        Having dispensed with the reading of the bill, the point of 
    order has to be made now?
        The Chairman: If the unanimous-consent request of the gentleman 
    from Tennessee is approved, the gentleman from Iowa is correct, the 
    point of order should be made at that time.

Points of Order Against Amendments

Sec. 12.13 Points of order against proposed amendments must

[[Page 5153]]

    be made immediately after the amendment is read; after a Member has 
    been granted 15 minutes to address the Committee of the Whole on 
    his amendment, it is too late to make a point of order against it.

    On Apr. 17, 1943,(3) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering H.R. 2481, an Agriculture Department appropriation bill. 
The Clerk read as follows, and proceedings ensued as indicated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 89 Cong. Rec. 3510, 78th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Clarence] Cannon of Missouri: On page 
    65, line 6, after the colon, insert: ``Provided further, That no 
    part of said appropriation or any other appropriation carried in 
    this bill shall be used for incentive payments or subsidies or for 
    any expense for or incident to the payment of incentive payments or 
    any other form of subsidy payments.''
        Mr. Cannon of Missouri: Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent 
    to speak for 15 minutes.
        The Chairman: (4) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Missouri?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. William M. Whittington (Miss.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The Chairman: The gentleman is recognized for 15 minutes.
        Mr. [Usher L.] Burdick (of North Dakota): Mr. Chairman, I 
    reserve a point of order on the amendment.
        The Chairman: The point of order comes too late.
        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York): The regular order, Mr Chairman.
        The Chairman: The point of order comes too late. The gentleman 
    has been recognized and has been granted permission to proceed for 
    15 minutes. The gentleman from Missouri is recognized.

Appropriations in Legislative Bills

Sec. 12.14 While Rule XXI clause 4 (now clause 5) provides that points 
    of order against appropriations in legislative bills may be raised 
    at any time, the practice of the House is that such points of order 
    should be raised when the bill is read for amendment.

    On Mar. 18, 1946,(5) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering H.R. 5407, a bill granting certain powers to the Federal 
Works Administration. The following proceedings took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 92 Cong. Rec. 2365, 79th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
    Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the 
    bill H.R. 5407, with Mr. [Fadjo] Cravens [of Arkansas] in the 
    chair.
        Mr. [Francis H.] Case of South Dakota: Mr. Chairman, I desire 
    to make

[[Page 5154]]

    a point of order against portions of the bill in paragraphs (a), 
    (b), and what was originally (c), proposed now to be made (b) by a 
    committee amendment, on the ground that they constitute 
    appropriations. Under the rule forbidding the reporting of 
    appropriations by a committee without jurisdiction, I make a point 
    of order against the consideration of the language on page 2, 
    beginning in line 4, reading:

            And the unobligated balances of appropriations heretofore 
        made for the construction of projects outside the District of 
        Columbia.

        Also on page 2, beginning in line 23, the last sentence of that 
    paragraph which reads:

            Funds for this purpose are hereby made available from the 
        unobligated balances of appropriations heretofore made for the 
        construction of buildings outside the District of Columbia.

        Under the rule, a point of order would lie against 
    consideration of those portions of the bill, and I make such a 
    point of order at this time.
        Mr. [Fritz G.] Lanham [of Texas]: Mr. Chairman, the 
    appropriations referred to by the gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. 
    Case) have already been made, and this money has been appropriated.
        The Chairman: The Chair believes that the proper time to raise 
    such points of order is not at the present time, but when the bill 
    is read under the 5-minute rule for amendment.
        Mr. Case of South Dakota: Of course, I know that is frequently 
    done, but I think the rule authorizes the point of order to be made 
    at any time during consideration of the bill. . . .
        The Chairman: The Chair is informed that under the previous 
    practice of the House, such points of order should be raised when 
    the bill is read for amendment.
        Mr. Case of South Dakota: I have no objection to presenting 
    them later, but I do not want to lose my right to present them by 
    failure to raise them at this time.
        The Chairman: The gentleman will not lose any of his rights.

Sec. 12.15 Points of order against appropriations in legislative bills 
    may be raised at any time, even though debate has taken place on 
    the merits of the proposition.

    On June 17, 1937,(6) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering H.R. 7472, a District of Columbia tax bill. The Clerk read 
as follows, and proceedings ensued as indicated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 81 Cong. Rec. 5915-18, 75h Cong. 1st Sess. See also 99 Cong. Rec. 
        10398, 83d Cong. 1st Sess., July 29, 1953 (proceedings relating 
        to H.R. 6016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Commissioners of the District of Columbia are hereby 
    authorized and empowered, in their discretion, to fix, prescribe, 
    and collect fees for the parking of automobiles. . . .
        The Commissioners of the District of Columbia are further 
    authorized and empowered, in their discretion, to purchase, rent, 
    and install such mechanical parking meters or devices as the 
    Commissioners may deem necessary or

[[Page 5155]]

    advisable to insure the collection of such fees. . . .
        Mr. [Thomas] O'Malley [of Wisconsin]: I make the point of order 
    that this section appropriates money out of fees to be collected, 
    and therefore it is appropriation on a legislative bill. Line 24 
    provides that the purchase price of these machines shall be paid 
    from the fees collected and the remainder of the fee shall be paid 
    into the Treasury.
        Mr. [Jack] Nichols [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Chairman, I make the 
    point of order that the point of order comes too late. The section 
    has been debated and amendments have been offered, and an amendment 
    to strike out the section has been offered.
        Mr. O'Malley: I was attempting to get recognition from the very 
    beginning.
        The Chairman: (7) The Chair is ready to rule. The 
    last sentence of section 4, rule 21, provides as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. James M. Mead (N.Y.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            A question of order on an appropriation in any such bill, 
        joint resolution, or amendment thereto may be raised at any 
        time.

        It is the opinion of the Chair that the point of order is 
    properly raised at this time and that this is purely an 
    appropriation, and, therefore, that language, as indicated in the 
    gentleman's point of order, is ruled out of order.
        The Chair sustains the point of order.

Sec. 12.16 A point of order under Rule XXI clause 4 (now clause 5) 
    against an appropriation in a bill reported by a legislative 
    committee) ``may be raised at any time''; and in response to an 
    inquiry the Chair advised a Member that if the offending. Language 
    was not stricken by amendment it could still be reached by a point 
    of order.

    On May 18, 1966,(8) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of an amendment to H.R. 14544, the Participation 
Sales Act of 1966, proceedings occurred as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 112 Cong. Rec. 10894, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Committee amendment: On page 3, line 3 strike out 
    ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law,'' and insert: 
    ``Subject to the limitations provided in paragraph (4) of this 
    subsection.''
        The committee amendment was agreed to Mr. [Charles R.] Jonas 
    [of North Carolina]: Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
        The Chairman: (9) The gentleman will state the 
    parliamentary inquiry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Eugene J. Keogh (N.Y.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Jonas: Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order against the 
    language to be amended by the committee amendment. I would not 
    insist on the point of order if I knew the committee amendment 
    would be adopted.
        Should the committee amendment be rejected, I inquire of the 
    Chair if I then might be able to lodge my point of order against 
    the language stricken by the amendment.
        The Chairman: The Chair will state to the gentleman from North 
    Carolina

[[Page 5156]]

    that the Chair will undertake to protect the gentleman's right to 
    raise points of order under clause 4 of rule XXI at any time during 
    the consideration of this section of the bill whether the committee 
    amendments are adopted or rejected.

Sec. 12.17 A point of order having been raised in the Committee of the 
    Whole against a bill reported by a legislative com- mittee, on the 
    ground that it proposed an appropriation contrary to Rule XXI 
    clause 4 (now clause 5), the Committee rose pending decision by the 
    Chair on the point of order.

        On June 4, 1957,(10) the Committee of the Whole was 
    considering H.R. 6974, a bill to extend the Agricultural 
    Development and Assistance Act of 1954. The following proceedings 
    took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 103 Cong. Rec. 8318, 8319, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John J.] Rooney [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I rise to a 
    point of order against the entire bill, H.R. 6974, on the ground 
    that it is a bill from a committee not having authority to report 
    an appropriation. . . .
        Mr. [Harold D.] Cooley [of North Carolina]: . . . I am a little 
    bit apprehensive that the point of order may be sustained if the 
    Chair is called upon to rule on it. But, I think it would be very 
    unfortunate for us to delay final action on the bill, and in the 
    circumstances we have no other alternative other than to move that 
    the Committee do now rise, and so, Mr. Chairman, I make that 
    motion.
        The Chairman: (11) The Chair is prepared to rule on 
    the point of order, but the motion offered by the gentleman from 
    North Carolina that the Committee do now rise is in order, and the 
    Chair will put the question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Brooks Hays (Ark.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from 
    North Carolina.
        The motion was agreed to.
        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. Hays of Arkansas, Chairman of the Committee of the 
    Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that 
    Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 6974) to 
    extend the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 
    1954, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

    Parliamentarian's Note: In this case the language of the bill was 
in fact in violation of Rule XXI clause 4 (now clause 5), and the 
Member in charge of the bill moved that the Committee rise so 
application could be made to the Committee on Rules for a resolution 
waiving points of order against the bill. See House Resolution 274. 
However, a point of order under this rule applies only to offensive 
language in the bill, and not against consideration of the entire bill 
(see 7 Cannon's Precedents Sec. 2142; 121 Cong. Rec. 12049, 94th Cong. 
1st Sess.,

[[Page 5157]]

Apr. 28, 1975). If the entire language of the bill were ruled out in 
Committee of the Whole, the enacting clause would still exist and an 
amendment would still be in order if germane to the title of the bill 
and not containing an appropriation.

Point of Order Against Senate Bill

Sec. 12.18 Where language in violation of Rule XXI clause 4 (now clause 
    5) is stricken from a Senate bill in Committee of the Whole by a 
    point of order, the Chairman reports that fact to the House.

    On July 31, 1957,(12) the Committee of the Whole was 
considering S. 1865, a bill providing for development and modernization 
of the national system of navigation and traffic control facilities. At 
one point, proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 103 Cong. Rec. 13181, 13182, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: (13) The time of the gentleman from 
    Michigan has expired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. George H. Mahon (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        All time has expired.
        The Committee will rise.
        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. Mahon, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House 
    on the State of the Union, stated that that Committee having had 
    under consideration the bill (S. 1856) to provide for the 
    development and modernization of the national system of navigation 
    and traffic-control facilities to serve present and future needs of 
    civil and military aviation, and for other purposes, pursuant to 
    House Resolution 361, he reported the same back to the House.
        The Chairman also reported that the language in the bill on 
    page 7, line 12, reading as follows: ``and unexpended balances of 
    appropriations, allocations, and other funds available or'' was 
    stricken out on a point of order.(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Parliamentarian's Note: The resulting change in the Senate bill was 
        treated as an amendment of the Senate bill and so engrossed and 
        messaged to the Senate, though not voted upon as a separate 
        amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------