    [Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 104th Congress]
    [104th Congress]
    [House Document 103-342]
    [Jeffersons Manual of ParliamentaryPractice]
    [Pages 242-245]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

                      SEC. XXXVIII.--EQUIVALENT QUESTIONS.

    Sec. 484. Former practice as to rejection and second
    reading of bills.

      If, on a  question for rejection, a bill be retained, it
    passes, of course, to its next reading. Hakew., 141; Scob., 42. And a
    question for a second reading, determined negatively, is a rejection
    without further question. 4 Grey, 149. And see Elsynge's Memor., 42, in
    what case questions are to be taken for rejection.

      The House of Representatives has abandoned the question ``Shall the
    bill be rejected?'' (IV, 3391), and the question is now taken in
    accordance with clause 1 of rule XXI. A vote is not taken on the second
    reading, the first test coming in the modern practice of the House on
    the engrossment and third reading.

    [[Page 243]]
    other, and leaves no other alternative, the decision of the one
    concludes necessarily the other. 4 Grey, 157. Thus the negative of
    striking out amounts to the affirmative of agreeing; and therefore to
    put a question on agreeing after that on striking out, would be to put
    the same question in effect twice over. Not so in questions of
    amendments between the two Houses. A motion to recede being negatived,
    does not amount to a positive vote to insist, because there is another
    alternative, to wit, to adhere.

    Sec. 485. Equivalent questions in
    general.

      Where questions  are perfectly equivalent, so that the negative of the one
    amounts to the affirmative of the

      The principles set forth in this paragraph are recognized by the
    practice of the House of Representatives; but Jefferson's use of the
    motion to strike out as an illustration is no longer justified, since
    the practice of the House under clause 7 of rule XVI does not permit the
    negative of the motion to strike out to be equivalent to the affirmative
    of agreeing.

    Sec. 486. Equivalent questions on amendments between
    the Houses.

      A bill  originating in one House is passed by the other with an
    amendment. A motion in the originating House to agree to the amendment
    is negatived. Does there result from this a vote of disagreement, or
    must the question on disagreement be expressly voted? The question
    respecting amendments from another House are--1st, to agree; 2d,
    disagree; 3d, recede; 4th, insist; 5th, adhere.

    [[Page 244]]
    5488). The motion to refer also takes precedence of the motions to
    agree or disagree (V, 6172-6174), but the demanding or ordering of the
    previous question does not prevent a motion to refer (V, 5575). The
    motion to refer takes precedence of the motions to agree or disagree
    and, under clause 1, of rule XVII is in order pending a demand for or
    after the ordering of the previous question, before the stage of
    disagreement has been reached (V, 6172-6174, 5575) but not after the
    stage of disagreement when the most preferential motion tending to bring
    the two Houses together is already pending (Speaker Albert, Sept. 16,
    1976, pp. 30887-88).

      In the House of Representatives and the Senate the order of precedence
    of motions is as given in the parliamentary law, and the motions take
    precedence in that order without regard to the order in which they are
    moved (V, 6270, 6324). But a motion to amend an amendment of the other
    House has precedence of the motion to agree or disagree either before
    the stage of disagreement has been reached or after the House has
    receded from its disagreement (V, 6164, 6169-6171; VIII, 3203) even
    after the previous question has been ordered on both motions before the
    question is divided (Feb. 12, 1923, p. 3512). See also the discussion in
    Sec. 525, infra. But it has been held that when the previous question
    has been demanded or ordered on a motion to concur, a motion to amend is
    not in order (V,

    Sec. 487. The motions to agree and disagree as related
    to motions to amend.

      1st. To  agree; 2d. To disagree.--Either of these
    concludes the other necessarily, for the positive of either is exactly
    the equivalent to the negative of the other, and no other alternative
    remains. On either motion amendments to the amendment may be proposed;
    e.g., if it be moved to disagree, those who are for the amendment have a
    right to propose amendments, and to make it as perfect as they can,
    before the question of disagreeing is put.

    Sec. 488. No equivalent questions on
    motions to recede, insist, and adhere.

      3d. To recede.--You  may then either insist or
    adhere.                          4th. To insist.--You may then either
    recede or adhere.

      5th. To adhere.--You may then either recede or insist.

      Consequently the negative of these is not equivalent to a positive
    vote the other way. It does not raise so necessary an implication as may
    authorize the Secretary by inference to enter another vote; for two
    alternatives still remain, either of which may be adopted by the House.

    [[Page 245]]
    the more recent practice is that when the House disagrees to a motion
    to recede and concur in a Senate amendment some further action must be
    taken to dispose of the amendment (Speaker Bankhead, July 9, 1937, p.
    7007; Speaker McCormack, Sept. 19, 1962, p. 19945) and the question may
    recur on a pending motion to insist or such a motion is then entertained
    from the floor.

      Under the earlier practice in the House it was held that voting down
    the motion to recede and concur was tantamount to insistence but not the
    equivalent of adherence (Speaker Clark, July 2, 1918, p. 8648). But