[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 9, Chapter 27]
[Chapter 27. Amendments]
[G. House Consideration of Amendments Reported From Committee of the Whole]
[Â§ 37. Order of Consideration]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 7357-7365]
 
                               CHAPTER 27
 
                               Amendments
 
  G. HOUSE CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE OF THE 
                                 WHOLE
 
Sec. 37. Order of Consideration

Generally

Sec. 37.1 When demand is made for separate votes in the House on 
    several amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole, such 
    amendments are ordinarily read and voted on in the

[[Page 7358]]

    House in the order in which they appear in the bill as reported 
    from the Committee of the Whole--not necessarily in the order in 
    which agreed to in Committee or in which demanded in the House.

    The modern practice of considering amendments in the order in which 
they appear in the bill is illustrated by the proceedings on Aug. 9, 
1966, where a resolution making in order the consideration of a bill 
provided for separate votes in the House on amendments to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, the vote recurred in the order 
in which the amendments appeared in the bill even though the demands 
were not made in that order.(3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 112 Cong. Rec. 18736-39, 89th Cong. 2d Sess. Under consideration 
        was H.R. 14765.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, on July 24, 1968,(4) the following 
proceedings took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4.  114 Cong. Rec. 23093-95, 90th Cong. 2d Sess. Under consideration 
        was H.R. 17735. For further illustration, see 119 Cong. Rec. 
        24959, 24965, 24966, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., July 19, 1973.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (5) The Chair will state that separate 
    votes have been demanded on the so-called MacGregor amendment on 
    page 8, the so-called Sikes amendment on page 28, the so-called 
    Poff amendment on page 28, and the so-called Latta amendment on 
    page 12. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Gerald R. Ford [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, would the Chair 
    announce the order in which the amendments will be voted upon?
        The Speaker: The Chair will state in response to the 
    parliamentary inquiry of the gentleman from Michigan that the 
    amendments will be voted on in the order in which they appear in 
    the bill.

    But the Speaker (6) on one occasion indicated that, 
where separate votes are demanded in the House on amendments adopted in 
the Committee of the Whole, such amendments would be voted on in the 
order in which a separate vote is demanded and not the order in which 
adopted.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
 7. 95 Cong. Rec. 2542, 2543, 81st Cong. 1st Sess. Under consideration 
        was H.R. 1731, to extend certain provisions of the Housing and 
        Rent Act of 1947, as amended. And see 111 Cong. Rec. 16280, 
        16283, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., July 9, 1965, where the usual 
        procedure was not strictly followed and amendments were voted 
        on in the order in which separate votes were demanded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On another occasion, amendments adopted in the Committee of the 
Whole on which a separate vote was demanded in the House were reported 
in the order in which they were adopted in the

[[Page 7359]]

Committee of the Whole. Of course, as a bill is read for amendment by 
sections, the order of adoption of the amendments would normally 
correspond to the order of sections in the bill. In this instance, the 
bill (8) under consideration was to extend the effective 
period of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, and the 
Stabilization Act of 1942, and the Committee of the Whole had by 
unanimous consent agreed that the separate sections extending each of 
the two Acts be considered together, that amendments be in order under 
the general rules of the House to any part of the resolution, and that 
the amendments to both Acts would be open to amendment at the same 
time: (9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. H.J. Res. 101.
 9. See 91 Cong. Rec. 6533, 79th Cong. 1st Sess., June 21, 1945.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Chairman: (10) The Clerk will read.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Resolved, etc., That section 1 (b) of the Emergency Price 
        Control Act of 1942, as amended, is amended by striking out 
        ``June 30, 1945'' and substituting ``December 31, 1946.''

        Mr. [Paul] Brown of Georgia: Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
    consent that sections 1 and 2 may be considered together and that 
    amendments may be in order under the general rules of the House to 
    any part of the resolution.
        Mr. [Jesse P.] Wolcott [of Michigan]: . . . If the unanimous 
    consent of the gentleman from Georgia is adopted will amendments to 
    the amendments to both the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as 
    amended, and the Stabilization Act of 1942, as amended, be in order 
    after the reading of section 2?
        The Chairman: Yes.
        Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
    Georgia?
        There was no objection.

    Subsequently,(11) during proceedings in the House, 
amendments on which separate votes were demanded were reported, as 
directed by the Speaker, Sam Rayburn, of Texas:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 91 Cong. Rec. 6623-27, 79th Cong. 1st Sess., June 23, 1945.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the next amendment on which 
    a separate vote is demanded. The amendments will be reported in the 
    order in which they were adopted in the Committee of the Whole.

Sec. 37.2 Where separate votes are demanded in the House on amendments 
    adopted in the Committee of the Whole, such amendments are reported 
    and voted on in the order in which they appear in the bill and not 
    as offered in the Committee of the Whole.

    On Apr. 17, 1946,(12) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 92 Cong. Rec. 3936-38, 79th Cong. 2d Sess. Under consideration was 
        H.R. 6042, the Emergency Price Control Act.

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

[[Page 7360]]

        The Speaker: (13) the Clerk will report the first 
    amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded. . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Eugene] Worley [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I was under the 
    impression that the Flannagan amendment had been adopted prior to 
    the Wadsworth amendment.
        The Speaker: The amendments are being considered in the order 
    in which they appear in the bill, not as they were offered.

Sec. 37.3 Votes in the House on amendments reported from the Committee 
    of the Whole, on which separate votes have been demanded, are taken 
    in the order in which the amendments appear in the bill, and not in 
    the order in which separate votes were demanded.

    On May 31, 1984,(14) during consideration of H.R. 5167 
(15) in the House, the proposition described above occurred 
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 130 Cong. Rec. 14677, 14678, 98th Cong. 2d Sess.
15. Defense Department authorization bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: (16) The Clerk will report 
    the first amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. James C. Wright, Jr. (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment: Page 131, after line 2, insert the following new 
        title (and redesignate the succeeding titles and sections 
        accordingly):

                         TITLE IX--NUCLEAR WINTER STUDY

                 government-sponsored studies of nuclear winter

            Sec. 901. (a) If any Government agency undertakes a study 
        of the phenomenon referred to as ``nuclear winter'' pursuant to 
        proper authorization, the Secretary of Defense may participate 
        in such study to the extent (and only to the extent) that the 
        participation of the Secretary in the study is directly 
        relevant to defense related aspects of the nuclear-winter 
        phenomenon. . . .

        The Speaker Pro Tempore: . . . The question is on the 
    amendment.
        The amendment was rejected.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Clerk will report the next 
    amendment on which a separate vote has been demanded.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment: At the end of the bill, insert the following new 
        section:
            Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, amounts 
        authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 1985 for the MX 
        missile program shall be as provided under section 103(a). . . 
        .

        Mr. [Samuel S.] Stratton [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, there was 
    a demand for a separate vote on the Leach amendment.
        The Speaker Pro Tempore: The Chair would advise the gentleman 
    that the amendments are voted on in the order in which they appear 
    in the bill. The Leach amendment will be called after this one.

[[Page 7361]]

Sec. 37.4 Where separate votes are demanded in the House on several 
    amendments reported from Committee of the Whole, the Speaker puts 
    the question on the amendments in the order in which they appear in 
    the bill.

    On June 24, 1976,(17) the Committee of the Whole 
reported a bill back to the House with several amendments and the 
Speaker put the question on the amendments as indicated above. The 
proceedings were as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 122 Cong. Rec. 20424, 94th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed 
    the chair, Mr. [James C.] Wright [Jr., of Texas], 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. 
    14232) making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, and 
    Health, Education, and Welfare, and related agencies, for the 
    fiscal year ending September 30, 1977, and for other purposes, had 
    directed him to report the bill back to the House with sundry 
    amendments, with the recommendation that the amendments be agreed 
    to and that the bill, as amended, do pass.
        The Speaker: (18) Without objection, the previous 
    question is ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The Speaker: Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment?
        Mrs. [Bella S.[ Abzug [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the so-called Hyde amendment.
        The Speaker: Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
    amendment?
        Mr. [Robert H.] Michel [of Illinois]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the so-called Mitchell of Maryland amendment 
    relating to summer employment.
        The Speaker: Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
    amendment? If not, the Chair will put them en gross.
        The amendments were agreed to.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the first amendment, the so-
    called Mitchell of Maryland amendment, on which a separate vote has 
    been demanded.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment: On page 2, line 19 under Title I--Department of 
        Labor, Employment, and Training Administration, Employment and 
        Training Assistance, strike out ``$3,245,250,000'' and insert 
        in lieu thereof ``$3,311,831,000''.

        The Speaker: The question is on the amendment.

Separate Votes on Amendments to Amendment in Nature of Substitute

Sec. 37.5 When a special rule provides for a separate vote on an 
    amendment to an amendment in the nature of a substitute reported 
    from the Committee of the Whole, the vote first recurs on the 
    amendment on which the separate vote is demanded.

[[Page 7362]]

    On July 25, 1968,(19) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 114 Cong. Rec. 23372, 90th Cong. 2d Sess. Under consideration was 
        H.R. 15067.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Gerald R. Ford [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the so called Scherle amendment. . . .
        The Speaker: (20) . . . Is any further separate vote 
    demanded? If not, the Clerk will report the so-called Scherle 
    amendment, on which a separate vote has been demanded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows: . . .
        The Speaker: The question is on the amendment.

--Committee Amendment in Nature of Substitute

Sec. 37.6 Where a committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
    reported from the Committee of the Whole with various amendments 
    thereto, and, under a rule permitting such procedure, separate 
    votes are demanded in the House on several of those amendments, the 
    Speaker puts the question first on those amendments on which a 
    separate vote is demanded, then on the amendment, as amended.

    On Oct. 6, 1966, (21) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. 112 Cong. Rec. 25585-87, 89th Cong. 2d Sess. Under consideration 
        was H.R. 13161, a bill to strengthen and improve programs of 
        assistance for elementary and secondary schools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (22) Under the rule, the previous 
    question is ordered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment?
        Mr. [James G.] O'Hara of Michigan: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the Fountain amendment which appears on page 63 of 
    the bill, after line 9.
        The Speaker: Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
    amendment?
        Mr. [Paul A.] Fino [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the O'Hara amendment, the antibusing amendment. . 
    . .
        The Speaker: The Chair is not aware of that designation.
        What amendment does the gentleman from New York have in mind? 
    The gentleman's characterization does not give sufficient 
    information to the Chair. The Chair is endeavoring to protect the 
    rights of the gentleman from New York.
        Mr. Fino: Mr. Speaker, the amendment which appears on page 57. 
    . . .
        The Speaker: The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. O'Hara] offered 
    several amendments that were adopted in the Committee of the Whole. 
    The Chair is trying to ascertain the particular one that the 
    gentleman from New York has in mind. . . .
        The Speaker: It is the Chair's recollection that the gentleman 
    from Michigan [Mr. O'Hara] offered one amendment covering four 
    sections of the bill. Later he offered another, intended to cover 
    the fifth section.

[[Page 7363]]

        Will the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. O'Hara] let the Chair 
    have his opinion, and can the gentleman ascertain that the first 
    amendment was intended to cover five sections, or five provisions, 
    but covered only four, and that the gentleman then offered his 
    second amendment to carry out the intent that he had in mind?
        Is the Chair's understanding correct?
        Mr. O'Hara of Michigan: Mr. Speaker, the Speaker has correctly 
    stated the matter. The first amendment applied to four of the five 
    titles of the elementary and secondary education bill passed by 
    this Congress in 1965.
        The second amendment on that subject, the last amendment I 
    offered, covered the first title of that bill that we enacted in 
    1965.
        The Speaker: Is that the amendment the gentleman from New York 
    has in mind?
        Mr. Fino: Mr. Speaker, that is correct.
        The Speaker: Does the gentleman from New York demand a separate 
    vote on both of the amendments?
        Mr. Fino: Mr. Speaker, I do, to eliminate any confusion.
        The Speaker: Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
    amendment?
        Mr. O'Hara of Michigan: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
    that the two amendments on which the gentleman from New York has 
    asked for a separate vote be voted en bloc.
        The Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
    from Michigan?
        There was no objection.
        The Speaker: Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
    amendment?
        If not, the Clerk will report the first amendment on which a 
    separate vote has been demanded.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Page 63, after line 9, insert the following:

        ``part g. compliance with section 602 of title vi of the civil 
                               rights act of 1964

            ``Sec. 171. The Commissioner of Education shall not defer 
        action or order action deferred on any application by local 
        educational agencies for funds authorized to be appropriated by 
        this Act or by any Act amended by this Act on the basis of 
        alleged noncompliance with the provisions of title VI of the 
        Civil Rights Act of 1964 unless and until, as provided by 
        section 602 of title VI, there has been an express finding on 
        the record, after opportunity for a hearing, that such local 
        educational agency has failed to comply with the provisions of 
        title VI.''

        And on line 10, strike out ``G'' and insert ``H'', and on line 
    11, strike out ``171'' and insert ``181''.
        Mr. [John] Brademas [of Indiana]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary 
    inquiry.
        The Speaker: The gentleman will state it.
        Mr. Brademas: Mr. Speaker, is this the so-called Fountain 
    amendment?
        The Speaker: That is correct.
        Mr. Brademas: I thank the Speaker.
        The Speaker: The question is on the amendment. . . .

        The Clerk will report the so-called O'Hara amendments on which 
    a separate vote has been demanded.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendments offered by Mr. O'Hara of Michigan: On page 63, 
        between lines 12 and 13 insert:

                           ``part h--racial imbalance

            ``Sec. 181. Section 604 of the Elementary and Secondary 
        Education

[[Page 7364]]

        Act of 1965 (containing a prohibition against Federal control 
        of education) is amended by inserting the following at the end 
        thereof and before the period: `, or to require the assignment 
        or transportation of students or teachers in order to overcome 
        racial imbalance'.''

        On page 69, after line 3, insert the following:

            ``Sec. 215. Section 301(a) of the Act of September 30, 1950 
        (Public Law 874; Eighty-first Congress) is amended by inserting 
        the following at the end thereof before the period: `, or 
        require the assignment or transportation of students or 
        teachers in order to overcome racial imbalance'.''

        The Speaker: The question is on the amendments. . . .
        Mr. Fino: Mr. Speaker, I ask for tellers.
        Tellers were ordered, and the Speaker appointed Mr. O'Hara of 
    Michigan and Mr. Fino as tellers.
        The House divided, and the tellers reported that there were--
    ayes 263, noes 5.
        So the amendments were agreed to.
        The Speaker: The question is on the amendment as amended.
        The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.

Substitute for Amendment in Nature of Substitute

Sec. 37.7 Where a committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
    amended in Committee of the Whole by the adoption of a substitute 
    and is reported to the House under a procedure permitting a 
    separate vote on any amendment to the committee amendment, any 
    Member may demand a separate vote on the substitute and, if it is 
    adopted, the vote recurs on the committee amendment as amended by 
    the substitute.

    On Nov. 24, 1970,(1) the following proceedings took 
place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 38715, 38723, 38724, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. Under 
        consideration was H.R. 16785.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Speaker: (2) . . . Is a separate vote demanded 
    on any amendment to the committee amendment?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Carl D.] Perkins [of Kentucky]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a 
    separate vote on the Steiger of Wisconsin amendment, commonly known 
    as the Steiger-Sikes substitute, as amended.
        The Speaker: The Clerk will report the amendment. . . .
        The question is on the amendment. . . .
        So the amendment was agreed to. . . .
        The Speaker: The question is on the committee amendment, as 
    amended, adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
        The amendment was agreed to.

Sec. 37.8 The rule that an amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
    always perfected before a vote is taken on a substitute amendment 
    is followed in the House when op

[[Page 7365]]

    erating under a special rule permitting separate votes on 
    amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.

    In the 86th Congress,(3) during consideration of a bill 
(4) to authorize federal financial assistance to school 
construction, the Committee of the Whole had adopted, in the following 
order: (1) an amendment to section 4 of a committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute,(5) (2) then an amendment to section 
6,(6) (3) an amendment, in effect a substitute, striking out 
all after section 1 of the committee amendment [thus deleting all after 
the title],(7) and finally (4) had agreed to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended;(8) 
these amendments were then voted on in the House, under a special rule 
permitting separate votes on any amendments adopted in the Committee of 
the Whole to either the bill or the committee amendment, in the order 
in which they had been adopted.(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. See the proceedings at 106 Cong. Rec. 11282, 11292, 11296-98, 
        11301-03, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., May 26, 1960.
 4. H.R. 10128.
 5. 106 Cong. Rec. 11282, 11292, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
 6. Id. at pp. 11296, 11297.
 7. Id. at pp. 11298, 11301.
 8. Id. at p. 11302.
 9. Id. at pp. 11302, 11303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------