    [Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 105th Congress]
    [105th Congress]
    [House Document 104-272]
    [Rules of the House of Representatives]
    [Pages 702-725]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

                                   Rule XXIII.

                        of committees of the whole house.

    Sec. 861a. Selection of Chairman of Committee of the
    Whole; and his power to preserve order.

      1. (a) In  all cases, in forming a
    Committee of the Whole House, the Speaker shall leave his chair after
    appointing a Member as Chairman to preside, who shall, in case of
    disturbance or disorderly conduct in the galleries or lobby, have power
    to cause the same to be cleared.

    [[Page 703]]

    in two instances during the 103d Congress (Oct. 6,
    1994, p. ----; Oct. 7, 1994, p. ----).
      This provision, adopted in 1880, was made from two older rules dating
    from 1789 and modified in 1794 to provide for the appointment of the
    Chairman instead of the inconvenient method of election by the committee
    (IV, 4704). It was amended in the 103d Congress to permit Delegates and
    the Resident Commissioner to preside in the Committee of the Whole (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. ----), but that authority was repealed in the
    104th Congress (sec. 212(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. ----).
    Delegates presided

    Sec. 861b. Functions of the Chairman of the Committee of
    the Whole.

      The  Sergeant-at-Arms attends the sittings of the Committee of
    the Whole and, under direction of the Chairman, maintains order (I,
    257). His decisions on questions of order may be appealed; and in
    stating the appeal, the question is put as in the House: ``Shall the
    decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Committee?'' and a
    majority vote sustains the ruling (Aug. 1, 1989, p. 17159). In rare
    cases wherein the Chairman has been defied or insulted he has directed
    the committee to rise, left the chair and, on the chair being taken by
    the Speaker, has reported the facts to the House (II, 1350, 1651, 1653).
    While the Committee of the Whole does not control the Congressional
    Record, the Chairman may direct the exclusion of disorderly words spoken
    by a Member after he has been called to order (V, 6987), but may not
    determine the privileges of a Member under general ``leave to print''
    (V, 6988). The Chairman decides questions of order arising in the
    committee independently of the Speaker (V, 6927, 6928), but has declined
    to consider a question that had arisen in the House just before the
    committee began to sit (IV, 4725, 4726) or a question that may arise in
    the House in the future (June 21, 1995, p. ----). He recognizes for
    debate (V, 5003); but like the Speaker is forbidden to recognize for
    requests to suspend the rule of admission to the floor (V, 7285). He may
    direct the committee to rise when the hour previously fixed for
    adjournment of the House arrives, or when the hour previously fixed by
    the House for consideration of other business arrives, in which case he
    reports in the regular way (IV, 4785; VIII, 2376; Aug. 22, 1974, p.
    30077); but if the committee happens to be in session at the hour fixed
    for the meeting of the House on a new legislative day, it rests with the
    committee and not with the Chairman to determine whether or not the
    committee shall rise (V, 6736, 6737).

    [[Page 704]]

    vening motion, unless the resolution in question provides otherwise.

    Sec. 862. Speaker's declaration into Committee
    of the Whole pursuant to special order.

      (b) After the  House has adopted a special
    order of business resolution reported by the Committee on Rules
    providing for the consideration of a measure in the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union, the Speaker may at any time
    within his discretion, when no question is pending before the House,
    declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the
    state of the Union for the consideration of that measure without inter-

      Paragraph (b) was added in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983,
    p. 34).

    [[Page 705]]

    less than five minutes
    the period of time within which a recorded vote on the pending question
    may be taken if such a vote is ordered. If, at any time during the
    conduct of a quorum call in a Committee of the Whole, the Chairman
    determines that a quorum is present, he may, in his discretion and
    subject to his prior announcement, declare that a quorum is constituted.
    Proceedings under the call shall then be considered as vacated, and the
    Committee shall not rise but shall continue its sitting and resume its
    business.

    Sec. 863. Failure of a quorum in Committee of the
    Whole.

      2. (a) A  quorum of a Committee of the Whole shall consist of one hundred
    Members. The first time that a Committee of the Whole finds itself
    without a quorum during any day, the Chairman shall invoke the procedure
    for the call of the roll under clause 5 of rule XV, unless, in his
    discretion, he orders a call of the Committee to be taken by the
    procedure set forth in clause 1 or clause 2(b) of rule XV: Provided,
    That the Chairman may in his discretion refuse to entertain a point of
    order that a quorum is not present during general debate only. If on
    such call, a quorum shall appear, the Committee shall continue its
    business; but if a quorum does not appear, the Committee shall rise and
    the Chairman shall report the names of the absentees to the House. After
    the roll has been once called to establish a quorum during such day, the
    Chairman may not entertain a point of order that a quorum is not present
    unless the Committee is operating under the five-minute rule and the
    Chairman has put the pending motion or proposition to a vote; and if the
    Chairman sustains a point of order that a quorum is not present after
    putting the question on such a motion or proposition, he may announce
    that following a regular quorum call conducted pursuant to the previous
    provisions of this clause, he will reduce to not

      It was the early practice for the Committee of the Whole to rise on
    finding itself without a quorum (IV, 2977), and it was not until 1847
    that a rule was adopted. The rule was amended in 1880, again in 1890
    (which included the concept that a quorum in the Committee should be one
    hundred rather than a quorum of the House (IV, 2966)), and in 1971 (Jan.
    22, 1971, p. 144). On October 13, 1972 (H. Res. 1123, p. 36012) the rule
    was amended to reflect the installation of the electronic voting system
    in the House Chamber, and on January 4, 1977 (H. Res. 5, 95th Cong., pp.
    53-70) clause 2 was substantially changed to allow quorum calls only
    under the five-minute rule where the Chairman has put the question on a
    pending proposition, after a quorum of the Committee of the Whole has
    been once established on that day. The Chairman of the Committee of the
    Whole must entertain a point of order of no quorum during the five-
    minute rule if a quorum has not yet been established in the Committee on
    the bill then pending (and the fact that a quorum of the Committee has
    previously been established on another bill on that day is irrelevant
    during consideration (Sept. 19, 1984, p. 26082)). Where a recorded vote
    on a prior amendment or motion during the five-minute rule on that bill
    on that day has established a quorum, a subsequent point of no quorum
    during debate is precluded (June 3, 1992, p. ----), although a
    subsequent call of the Committee may be ordered by unanimous consent
    (May 10, 1984, p. 11869; Dec. 17, 1985, p. 37469; June 25, 1986, p.
    15551).

    [[Page 706]]

    under this clause (July 22, 1994, p. ----). In the 97th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, p. 98) the rule was amended to allow
    the Chairman the discretion whether or not to entertain a point of order
    of no quorum during general debate only.
      The clause was amended again in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15,
    1979, pp. 7-16) to permit the Committee to continue its business
    following the appearance of a quorum so that the Speaker need not take
    the chair to receive the Committee's report of absentees as in previous
    practice, and to enable the Chairman to reduce to five minutes the
    period for a recorded vote immediately following a regular quorum call.
    A vote by division is not such intervening business as would preclude a
    five-minute vote

      The last two sentences of the clause, permitting the Chair to vacate
    proceedings under the call in his discretion when a quorum appears, were
    added in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 998, Apr. 9, 1974, pp. 10195-99). The
    Speaker interpreted the last two sentences of this clause to permit the
    Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to announce in advance, at the
    time that the absence of a quorum is ascertained, that he will vacate
    proceedings when a quorum appears, and to convert to a regular quorum
    call if a quorum does not appear at any time during the call (May 13,
    1974, pp. 14148-49).

      The Chair need not convert to a regular quorum call precisely at the
    expiration of 15 minutes if 100 Members have not responded on a
    ``notice'' quorum call but may continue to exercise his discretion to
    vacate proceedings at any time during the entire period permitted for
    the conduct of the call by clause 5 of rule XV (July 17, 1974, p.
    23673).

      Under the modern practice, when a Committee of the Whole finds itself
    without a quorum, the Chairman normally directs that Members record
    their presence by electronic device. The Chair may however, in his
    discretion, order that Members respond by the alternative procedures in
    clause 1 of rule XV (alphabetical call of the roll) or clause 2(b) of
    rule XV (clerk tellers) (for the use of clerk tellers for a ``notice''
    quorum call in Committee of the Whole, see July 13, 1983, p. 18858).

    [[Page 707]]

    and on his observation of several Members present but not voting
    on the division vote in finding the presence of a quorum of the
    Committee of the Whole (June 29, 1988, p. 16504). No quorum being
    present when a vote is taken in Committee of the Whole, and the
    committee having risen before a quorum appeared, such vote is invalid,
    and the question is put de novo when the committee resumes its business
    (VI, 676, 677). While an ``automatic'' roll call (under clause 4 of rule
    XV) is not in order in Committee of the Whole, a point of order of no
    quorum may intervene between the announcement of a division vote result
    and prior to transaction of further business, and a demand for a
    recorded vote following the quorum call is not thereby precluded (Oct.
    9, 1975, p. 32598). Where a recorded vote is refused but the Chair has
    not announced the result of a voice vote on an amendment, and the demand
    for a division or teller vote remains possible, the question remains
    pending and the Chair is obligated to entertain a point of order of no
    quorum under clause 2(a) of rule XXIII (June 6, 1979, p. 13648).
      Before the installation of the electronic system, a quorum in the
    Committee was established by a call of the roll. At one time the roll
    was called but once (IV, 2967); but in the later practice it was called
    twice as on other roll calls (VI, 668). Where the Committee has risen to
    report the absence of a quorum, it resumes its session by direction of
    the Speaker on the appearance of a quorum (IV, 2968; VI, 674). The
    quorum which must appear to permit the committee to continue its
    business is a quorum of the committee and not of the House (IV, 2970,
    2971) but if such quorum fails to appear, a quorum of the House is
    required (VI, 674). It was formerly held that after the committee has
    risen and reported its roll call, a motion to adjourn is in order before
    direction as to resumption of the session (IV, 2969), but under the
    later practice the committee immediately resumed its session without
    intervening motion or unanimous-consent requests (VI, 672, 673; VIII,
    2377, 2379, 2436). The failure of a quorum of the House to answer on
    this roll call does not interfere with the authority of the Speaker to
    direct the committee to resume its session (IV, 2969). The Chairman's
    count of a quorum is not subject to verification by tellers (VIII, 2369,
    2436), may not be challenged by an appeal (July 24, 1974, p. 25012), and
    he may count those present and not voting in determining whether a
    quorum is present (VI, 641). On a division vote totaling less than 100,
    the Chair has relied on his immediately prior count on a point of no quorum

    Sec. 864. Rising and reports of Committee of the
    Whole.

      The presence  of a quorum is not necessary for adoption of a motion that the
    Committee of the Whole rise (IV, 2975, 2976, 4914; clause 6(b) of rule
    XV; Mar. 5, 1980, pp. 4801-02; Oct. 3, 1985, p. 26096; May 21, 1992, p.
    ----); but when the committee rises without a quorum, it may not report
    the bills it has acted on (IV, 2972, 2973), and such bills as have been
    laid aside to be reported remain in the committee until the next
    occasion, when the committee rises without question as to a quorum (IV,
    4913). A simple motion that the Committee of the Whole rise is
    privileged (VIII, 2369) and takes precedence over a motion to amend (May
    21, 1992, p. ----); however the motion cannot interrupt a Member who has
    the floor (VIII, 2370-2371) and may be ruled out when dilatory (VIII,
    2800). For a further discussion of the motion to rise, see Sec. 334,
    supra.

    [[Page 708]]

      Under clause 6 of rule XV, as added in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 998,
    Apr. 9, 1974, p. 10199), a point of order of no quorum may not be
    entertained, on a day on which a quorum has been established, during the
    period after the Committee of the Whole has risen after completing its
    consideration of a bill or resolution and before the Chairman of the
    Committee has reported the bill or resolution back to the House. The
    fact that the vote whereby the committee rises does not show a quorum
    (IV, 4914) or that a point of no quorum has been made without an
    ascertainment thereof (IV, 2974), does not prevent a report of the bills
    already acted on. The Chairman having announced the absence of a quorum
    in Committee of the Whole, a motion to rise is in order and if a quorum
    develops on the vote by which the motion is rejected the roll is not
    called and the committee proceeds with its business (VIII, 2369). The
    passage of a bill by the House is not invalidated by the fact that the
    Committee of the Whole reported it on an erroneous supposition that a
    record vote had disclosed a quorum (IV, 2972).

      (b) In the Committee of the Whole, the Chair shall order a recorded
    vote on request supported by at least twenty-five Members.

    -  (c) In the <> Committee of the Whole, the Chairman may, in his discretion,
    reduce to not less than five minutes the period of time within which a
    rollcall vote by electronic device may be taken without any intervening
    business or debate on any or all pending amendments after the vote has
    been taken on the first pending amendment.

      This clause was adopted in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15,
    1979, pp. 7-16).

      This paragraph was added in the 102d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    1991, p. 39). A vote by division is not such intervening business as
    would preclude a five-minute vote under this clause (July 22, 1994, p.
    ----).

    Sec. 864b. Former provision for de novo vote where Delegates
    decisive.

        When the 103d Congress enabled voting by the Delegates and
    the Resident Commissioner in the Committee of the Whole, it also added a
    paragraph (d) to clause 2 of rule XXIII to provide for immediate
    reconsideration in the House of questions resolved in the Committee of
    the Whole House on the state of the Union by a margin within which the
    votes of Delegates and the Resident Commissioner have been decisive (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. ----). When the 104th Congress repealed the
    authority for the Delegates and the Resident Commissioner to vote in the
    Committee of the Whole, it also repealed clause 2(d) (sec. 212(c), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. ----).

    [[Page 709]]

      Under the former paragraph (d), whether the votes cast by the
    delegates were decisive was determined by a ``but for'' test, the
    question being whether the result would have been different if their
    votes were not counted (May 19, 1993, p. ----). An amendment adopted by
    immediate proceedings de novo in the House under the former paragraph
    (d) did not disturb the sequence of a ``king-of-the-hill'' procedure
    established by a special rule waiving all points of order against
    subsequent amendments (Mar. 17, 1994, p. ----).

    Sec. 865. Subjects requiring consideration in
    Committee of the Whole.

      3. All motions  or propositions involving a tax or charge upon
    the people, all proceedings touching appropriations of money, or bills
    making appropriations of money, or property, or requiring such
    appropriation to be made, or authorizing payments out of appropriations
    already made, or releasing any liability to the United States for money
    or property, or referring any claim to the Court of Claims, shall be
    first considered in a Committee of the Whole, and a point of order under
    this rule shall be good at any time before the consideration of a bill
    has commenced.

      The first form of this rule was adopted in 1794, and it has been
    perfected by amendments in 1874 and 1896 (IV, 4792).

    [[Page 710]]

    bills (IV, 4793, 4794; VIII, 2331), and also to
    any portion of a bill requiring an appropriation, even though it be
    merely incidental to the bill's main purpose (IV, 4825). Under the later
    practice general (as well as private and special) bills providing for
    the adjudication and payment of claims are held to be within the
    requirements of the rule (IV, 4856-4859).

    Sec. 866. Construction of the rule, requiring
    consideration in Committee of the Whole.

      To require  consideration in Committee of
    the Whole, a bill must show on its face that it falls within the
    requirements of the rule (IV, 4811-4817; VIII, 2391), but where the
    expenditure is a mere matter of speculation (IV, 4818-4821; VIII, 2388),
    or where the bill might involve a charge, but does not necessarily do so
    (IV, 4809, 4810), the rule does not apply. In passing upon the question
    as to whether a proposition involves a charge upon the Treasury, the
    Speaker is confined to the provisions of the text and may not take into
    consideration personal knowledge not directly deducible therefrom (VIII,
    2386, 2391). Resolutions reported by the Committee on House
    Administration (now House Oversight) appropriating from the contingent
    fund (now referred to as ``applicable accounts of the House described in
    clause 1(h)(1) of rule X'') of the House are considered in the House
    (VIII, 2415, 2416). Authorizations of expenditures from the contingent
    fund, under the later ruling (IV, 4862-4867) do not fall within the
    specifications of the rule (IV, 4868). A bill providing for an
    expenditure which is to be borne otherwise than by the Government (IV,
    4831; VIII, 2400), or relating to money in the Treasury in trust (IV,
    4835, 4836, 4853; VIII, 2413), is not governed by the rule. But where a
    bill sets in motion a train of circumstances destined ultimately to
    involve certain expenditures, it must be considered in Committee of the
    Whole (IV, 4827; VIII, 2399), as must also bills ultimately authorizing
    officials in certain contingencies to part with property belonging to
    the United States (VIII, 2399). The requirements of the rule apply to
    amendments as well as to

    Sec. 867. Subjects not requiring consideration in
    Committee of the Whole.

      The  House may consider in Committee of the Whole
    subjects not specified in the rule (IV, 4822); for example, major
    amendments to the rules of the House have been considered in Committee
    of the Whole pursuant to special orders (H. Res. 988, Committee Reform
    Amendments of 1974, considered in Committee of the Whole pursuant to H.
    Res. 1395, Sept. 30, 1974, p. 32953; H.R. 17654, Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970, considered in Committee of the Whole
    pursuant to H. Res. 1093, July 13, 1970, p. 23901). While conference
    reports were formerly considered in Committee of the Whole, they may not
    be sent there on the suggestion of the point of order that they contain
    matter ordinarily requiring consideration therein (V, 6559-6561). When a
    bill is made a special order (IV, 3216-3224), or when unanimous consent
    is given for its consideration (IV, 4823; VIII, 2393), the effect is to
    discharge the Committee of the Whole and bring the bill before the House
    itself for its consideration (IV, 3216; VII, 788), and in such event the
    bill is considered ``in the House as in the Committee of the Whole''
    (VIII, 2393). When a bill once considered in Committee of the Whole is
    recommitted, it is not, when again reported, necessarily subject to the
    point of order that it must be considered in Committee of the Whole (IV,
    4828, 4829; V, 5545, 5546, 5591).

    Sec. 868. General practice as to consideration in
    Committee of the Whole.

      Provisions  placing liability jointly on the United States
    and the District of Columbia (IV, 4833), granting an easement on public
    lands or in streets belonging to the United States (IV, 4840-4842),
    dedicating public land to be forever used as a public park (IV, 4837,
    4838), providing site for statue (VIII, 2405), confirming grants of
    public lands (IV, 4843) and creating new offices (IV, 4824, 4846), have
    been held to require consideration in Committee of the Whole. Indian
    lands have not been considered ``property'' of the Government within the
    meaning of the rule (IV, 4844, 4845; VIII, 2413). And while a bill
    removing the rate of postage has been held to be within the rule as
    ``involving a tax or charge'' (IV, 4861), taxes on bank circulation have
    not been so considered (IV, 4854, 4855).

    [[Page 711]]

      The mere making of a unanimous-consent request to dispense with the
    reading of an amendment and to revise and extend remarks thereon is not
    such intervening business as would render a point of order untimely,
    where the Member making the point of order is on his feet seeking
    recognition (July 16, 1991, p. 18391; see Procedure, ch. 31, sec. 5.7).

    Sec. 869. Order of business in Committee of the
    Whole.

      4. In  Committees of the Whole House business on their calendars may
    be taken up in regular order, or in such order as the committee may
    determine, unless the bill to be considered was determined by the House
    at the time of going into committee, but bills for raising revenue,
    general appropriation bills, and bills for the improvement of rivers and
    harbors shall have precedence.

      This rule applies to the two committees of the whole which have been
    established by the practice of the House (IV, 4705), the Committee of
    the Whole House on the state of the Union, which considers public bills,
    and the Committee of the Whole House, which considers private business
    (IV, 3115). The early practice left the order of taking up bills to be
    determined entirely by the committee, but in 1844 the House began by
    rule to regulate the order, and in 1880 adopted the present rule (IV,
    4729). The latter portion of the rule is rarely used, since the ordinary
    practice is to consider general appropriation bills under clause 9 of
    rule XVI, which gives privilege to motions to go into committee to
    consider a designated bill of this class (IV, 3072).

      The power of the committee to determine the order of considering bills
    on its calendar is construed to authorize a motion to establish an order
    (IV, 4730) or a motion to take up a specified bill out of its order (IV,
    4731, 4732; VIII, 2333). Except in cases wherein the rules make specific
    provisions therefor a motion is not in order in the House to fix the
    order in which business on the calendars of the Committee of the Whole
    shall be taken up (IV, 4733). The Committee of the Whole having voted to
    consider a particular bill, and consideration having begun, a motion to
    reconsider or change that vote is not in order (IV, 4765). When there is
    unfinished business in Committee of the Whole, it is usually first in
    order (IV, 4735; VIII, 2334).

    [[Page 712]]

    debate shall be allowed in favor of and against any amendment that
    may be offered to an amendment; and neither an amendment nor an
    amendment to an amendment shall be withdrawn by the mover thereof unless
    by the unanimous consent of the committee. Upon the offering of any
    amendment by a Member, when the House is meeting in the Committee of the
    Whole, the Clerk shall promptly transmit to the majority committee table
    five copies of the amendment and five copies to the minority committee
    table. Further, the Clerk shall deliver at least one copy of the
    amendment to the majority cloak room and at least one copy to the
    minority cloak room.

    Sec. 870. General debate and amendment under the
    fiveminute rule in Committee of the Whole.

      5. (a) When  general debate is closed by
    order of the House, any Member shall be allowed five minutes to explain
    any amendment he may offer, after which the Member who shall first
    obtain the floor shall be allowed to speak five minutes in opposition to
    it, and there shall be no further debate thereon, but the same privilege of

    [[Page 713]]

    in this clause is not grounds for a point of order against the
    amendment (June 21, 1974, p. 20609; Mar. 25, 1976, p. 7997).
      A rule of 1789 provided that bills should be read and debated in
    Committee of the Whole and in the House by clauses. Although that rule
    has disappeared, the practice continues in Committee of the Whole,
    although not in the House. Originally there was unlimited debate in
    Committee of the Whole both as to the bill generally and also as to any
    amendment; but in 1841 the rule that no Member should speak more than an
    hour was applied both to the Committee of the Whole and the House. At
    the same time another rule was adopted to prevent indefinite
    prolongation of debate in Committee of the Whole by permitting the House
    by majority vote to order the discharge of the Committee of the Whole
    from the consideration of a bill after acting, without debate, on
    pending amendments and any other amendments that might be offered. The
    effect of this was to empower the House to close general debate at any
    time after it had actually begun in the committee; and thereby to
    require amendments to be voted on without debate. In 1847 a rule
    provided that any Member proposing an amendment should have five minutes
    in which to explain it, and in 1850 an amendment to the rule also
    permitted five minutes in opposition and guarded against abuse by
    forbidding the withdrawal of an amendment when once offered (V, 5221).
    In the 104th Congress the Speaker announced his intention to strictly
    enforce time limitations on debate (Jan. 4, 1995, p. ----). The last two
    sentences of this clause, placing upon the Clerk the responsibility for
    providing copies of amendments, was part of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (sec. 124; 84 Stat. 1140) and was added to
    the rule in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). The
    fact that copies of an amendment have not been made available as
    required

    Sec. 871. Motion to close general debate in
    Committee of the Whole.

      The motion  to close general debate in Committee of the
    Whole, successor in the practice to the motion to discharge provided by
    the rule of 1841, is made in the House pending the motion that the House
    resolve itself into committee, and not after the House has voted to go
    into committee (V, 5208); and though not debatable, the previous
    question is sometimes ordered on it to prevent amendment (V, 5203); and
    in case the previous question is ordered, the 40 minutes debate under
    clause 2 of rule XXVII is not allowed (VIII, 2555, 2690). General debate
    must have already begun in Committee of the Whole before the motion to
    limit it is in order in the House (V, 5204-5206). The motion may not
    apply to a series of bills (V, 5209) and the motion in the House to
    limit debate on a bill in the Committee of the Whole must apply to the
    whole and not to a part of a bill (V, 5207). A proposition for a
    division of time may not be made as a part of it (V, 5210, 5211). The
    motion may not be made in Committee of the Whole (V, 5217; VIII, 2548);
    but, in absence of an order by the House, the Committee of the Whole may
    by unanimous consent determine as to general debate (V, 5232; VIII,
    2553). Where the House has fixed the time the committee may not, even by
    unanimous consent, extend it (V, 5212-5216; VIII, 2321, 2550; Mar. 27,
    1984, p. 6599). The general debate must close before amendments may be
    offered (IV, 4744; V, 5221); and it is closed by the fact that no Member
    desires to participate further (IV, 4745). Where no member of a
    committee designated to control time is present at the appropriate time
    during general debate in Committee of the Whole, the Chair may presume
    the time to have been yielded back (June 11, 1984, p. 15744). Motions
    for disposition of the bill are not in order before general debate is
    closed (IV, 4778); nor may a Member, in time yielded to him for general
    debate, move that the Committee rise (May 25, 1967, p. 14121) or yield
    to another for such motion (Feb. 22, 1950, p. 2178).-

    [[Page 714]]

    must also be read in its entirety
    and is then open to amendment at any point, and a unanimous-consent
    request in Committee of the Whole that it be read by sections for
    amendment is not in order (Mar. 25, 1975, p. 8490). The Committee of the
    Whole may not, even by unanimous consent, prohibit the offering of an
    amendment otherwise in order under the five-minute rule (July 31, 1984,
    p. 21701; Mar. 7, 1995, p. ----). When a paragraph or section has been
    passed it is not in order to return thereto (IV, 4742, 4743) except by
    unanimous consent (IV, 4746, 4747; Deschler's Precedents, vol. 8, ch.
    26, sec. 2.26) or when, the reading of the bill being concluded and a
    motion to rise being decided in the negative, the committee on motion
    votes to return (IV, 4748). Where a bill is considered as read and open
    to amendment at any point, adoption of an amendment adding a new section
    at the end of the bill does not preclude subsquent amendments to
    previous sections of the bill (Apr. 17, 1986, p. 7861). But the chairman
    may direct a return to a section whereon, by error, no action was had on
    a pending amendment (IV, 4750). Points of order against a paragraph
    should be made before the next paragraph is read (V, 6931; VIII, 2351).
    The paragraph or section having been read, and an amendment offered, the
    right to explain or oppose that amendment has precedence of a motion to
    amend it (IV, 4751). In this debate recognitions are governed by the
    conditions of the pending question rather than by the general relations
    of majority and minority (V, 5223). The Member recognized may not yield
    time (V, 5035-5037; May 8, 1987, p. 11832; Dec. 10, 1987, p. 34686) and
    must confine himself to the subject (V, 5240-5256; VIII, 2591). Where
    debate on an amendment is limited or allocated by special order to a
    proponent and an opponent, the five-minute rule is abrogated and the
    Members controlling the debate may yield and reserve time; whereas
    debate time on amendments under the five-minute rule cannot be reserved
    (Aug. 1, 1990, p. 21425). A Member recognized under the five-minute rule
    may not yield to another Member to offer an amendment (Dec. 12, 14,
    1973, pp. 41171, 41716; Sept. 8, 1976, p. 29243; Mar. 7, 1995, p. ----).

    Sec. 872. Reading and amendment under the
    fiveminute rule.

      The reading  of the bill for amendment is not specifically
    required by the present form of the rule; but is done under a practice
    which was originally instituted by the rule of 1789 and has continued,
    although the rule was eliminated, undoubtedly by inadvertence, in the
    codification of 1880 (V, 5221). Revenue, general appropriation,
    lighthouse, and river and harbor bills are generally read by paragraphs;
    other bills by sections (IV, 4738, 4740); and while the matter is very
    largely in the discretion of the Chair (VIII, 2341, 2344, 2346), the
    Committee of the Whole has overruled his decision (VIII, 2347). A bill
    (or the remainder of a bill) may be considered as having been read and
    open to amendment by unanimous consent but not by motion (June 18, 1976,
    p. 19296). A Senate amendment, however, is read in entirety, and not by
    either paragraphs or sections (V, 6194) and an amendment in the nature
    of a substitute offered from the floor

      Where the Chair recognizes the proponent of an amendment to propound a
    unanimous-consent request to modify the text of the amendment before
    commencing debate thereon, the Chair does not charge time consumed under
    a reservation of objection against the proponent's time for debate on
    the amendment (Feb. 3, 1993, p. ----; May 27, 1993, p. ----).-

    [[Page 715]]

    may not during that time offer a substantive amendment but must be
    separately recognized for that purpose by the Chair (Nov. 19, 1987, p.
    32880). A Member may speak in opposition to a pending amendment and
    subsequently offer a pro forma amendment and debate that (June 30, 1955,
    p. 9614); a Member may offer a second degree amendment and then offer a
    pro forma amendment to debate the underlying first degree amendment
    (June 28, 1995, p. ----); and a Member who has debated a substantive
    amendment may thereafter rise in opposition to a pro forma amendment
    thereto (July 20, 1951, p. 8566). A Member who has offered a substantive
    amendment and then debated it for five minutes may not extend his time
    by offering a pro forma amendment, as it is not in order for the offeror
    of an amendment to amend his own amendment except by unanimous consent
    (Oct. 14, 1987, p. 27898). A pro forma amendment may be offered after a
    substitute has been adopted and before the vote on the amendment, as
    amended, by unanimous consent only, since the amendment has been amended
    in its entirety and no further amendments, including pro forma
    amendments, are in order (Oct. 18, 1983, p. 28185; June 28, 1995, p. --
    --). A Member recognized on a pro forma amendment may not allocate or
    reserve time, though he may in yielding indicate to the Chair when he
    intends to reclaim his time (May 19, 1987, p. 12811; July 13, 1994, p.
    ----). The Chair endeavors to alternate recognition to offer pro forma
    amendments between majority and minority Members (giving priority to
    committee members) rather than between sides of the question (Mar. 21,
    1994, p. ----).

    Sec. 873a. Pro forma amendments under the fiveminute
    rule.

      The pro  forma amendment to ``strike out the last word'' has long been
    used for purposes of debate or explanation where an actual amendment is
    not contemplated (V, 5778; VIII, 2591); but a pro forma amendment must
    be voted on unless withdrawn (VIII, 2874). A Member who has occupied
    five minutes on a pro forma amendment may not lengthen this time by
    making another pro forma amendment (V, 5222; VIII, 2560), nor may he
    then extend this time by offering a substantive amendment while other
    Members are seeking recognition (July 28, 1965, p. 18631). A Member
    recognized to offer a pro forma amendment under the five-minute rule

    Sec. 873b. Motion to dispense with reading.

      (b) It  shall be
    in order to move in the Committee of the Whole to dispense with the
    reading of an amendment if the amendment has been printed in the bill as
    reported from a committee, or if any Member shall have caused the
    amendment to be printed in the Congressional Record, and to be submitted
    to the clerk, or to any responsible staff member designated by the
    Chairman, of the reporting committee or committees, at least one day
    prior to floor consideration, and said motion shall be decided without
    debate.

    [[Page 716]]

      Paragraph (b) was added in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981,
    pp. 98-113) to permit a motion to dispense with the reading of certain
    amendments in the Committee of the Whole.

    Sec. 873c. Unfunded mandates.

      (c)(1) In the  Committee of the
    Whole, an amendment proposing only to strike an unfunded mandate from
    the portion of the bill then open to amendment, if otherwise in order,
    may be precluded from consideration only by specific terms of a special
    order of the House.

      (2) In this paragraph, ``unfunded mandate'' means a Federal
    intergovernmental mandate the direct costs of which exceed the threshold
    otherwise specified for a reported bill or joint resolution in section
    424(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

      Paragraph (c) was added by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    (sec. 107(a), P.L. 104-4; 109 Stat. 63). It was amended later in the
    104th Congress to effect a technical correction (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30,
    1995, p. ----), and in the 105th Congress to clarify that it applies to
    intergovernmental mandates (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. ----).

    [[Page 717]]

    amendment to be printed in the Record shall be given
    five minutes in which to explain such amendment, after which the first
    person to obtain the floor shall be given five minutes in opposition to
    it, and there shall be no further debate thereon; but such time for
    debate shall not be allowed when the offering of such amendment is
    dilatory. Material placed in the Record pursuant to this provision shall
    indicate the full text of the proposed amendment, the name of the
    proponent Member, the number of the bill to which it will be offered and
    the point in the bill or amendment thereto where the amendment is
    intended to be offered, and shall appear in a portion of the Record
    designated for that purpose. All amendments to a specified measure
    submitted for printing in that portion of the Record shall be given
    numerical designations in the order printed.

    Sec. 874a. Closing the fiveminute debate in
    Committee of the Whole.

      6. The committee  may, by the vote of a majority of the Members
    present, at any time after the five minutes' debate has begun upon
    proposed amendments to any section or paragraph of a bill, close all
    debate upon such section or paragraph or, at its election, upon the
    pending amendments only (which motion shall be decided without debate);
    but this shall not preclude further amendment, to be decided without
    debate. However, if debate is closed on any section or paragraph under
    this clause before there has been debate on any amendment which any
    Member shall have caused to be printed in the Congressional Record at
    least one day prior to floor consideration of such amendment, the Member
    who caused such

      This clause was adopted in 1860, with amendments in 1880 and 1885 (V,
    5221, 5224). The second sentence of the clause, permitting ten minutes
    for debate on an amendment that has been printed in the Record even
    after the Committee of the Whole closes debate, was inserted in the 92d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144) following the enactment of
    an identical provision in section 119 of the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140). In the 105th Congress that sentence was
    amended to accommodate the printing of amendments to measures not yet
    reported (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. ----). The third sentence,
    relating to the procedure for submitting and the printing of amendments,
    was added in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 1387, Nov. 25, 1974, p. 37270).
    The last sentence, relating to the numbering of printed amendments, was
    added in the 104th Congress (sec. 217, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. ----).

    [[Page 718]]

    thereafter (July 18, 1968, p. 22110), debate on an
    amendment printed in the Record may nevertheless proceed for 10 minutes
    under this clause (Aug. 2, 1973, p. 27715). Printing an amendment in the
    Record under this clause permits debate notwithstanding a limitation of
    debate only if the amendment has been properly offered, and does not
    permit the offering of an amendment not otherwise in order under the
    rules (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11491); and the guaranteed five minutes may be
    claimed only if the offeror of the amendment is the Member who caused it
    to be printed under the rule (June 1, 1976, p. 16044; June 29, 1989, p.
    13928; June 19, 1991, p. ----). The guaranteed time applies to an
    amendment offered as a substitute for another amendment, rather than as
    a primary amendment, if offered in the precise form printed (June 26,
    1979, p. 16682), but where such a substitute amendment has not been
    printed in the Record it may not be debated unless time is yielded
    within the original 10 minutes (Dec. 10, 1987, p. 34710). Where a
    special order requires amendments to be printed in the Record to qualify
    during the consideration of a bill under the five-minute rule, but makes
    no designation concerning offerors, any printed amendment may be offered
    by any Member (Mar. 22, 1990, p. 5017); but only the Member causing the
    amendment to be printed is entitled to the time for debate guaranteed by
    this clause.
      The Speaker announced that amendments to be printed in the Record
    pursuant to this clause must be deposited in a separate box at the
    Rostrum or with the Official Reporters of Debates within 15 minutes
    following adjournment, and must bear the Member's original signature
    (Nov. 25, 1974, p. 37270). Although ordinarily the expiration of time
    for debate on a bill and all amendments thereto precludes debate on
    amendments offered

      The motion to close five-minute debate is not in order until such
    debate has begun (V, 5225; VIII, 2567), which means after one five-
    minute speech (V, 5226; VIII, 2573). The motion to strike the enacting
    clause under clause 7 of this rule is preferential to the motion to
    close debate (June 28, 1995, p. ----; July 13, 1995, p. ----). Although
    any Member may move, or request unanimous consent, to limit debate under
    the five-minute rule, the manager of the bill has priority in
    recognition for such purpose (June 19, 1984, p. 17055). The House, as
    well as the Committee of the Whole, may close five-minute debate after
    it has begun (V, 5229, 5231), but rarely exercises this right. The
    motion to close debate, while not debatable (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11534;
    June 5, 1975, p. 17187), may be amended (V, 5227; VIII, 2578). A time
    limitation imposed by the Committee of the Whole under this clause may
    be rescinded or modified only by unanimous consent (Sept. 17, 1975, p.
    28904). While the Committee of the Whole may limit debate on amendments,
    it may not restrict the offering of amendments in contravention of a
    special order adopted by the House (June 25, 1985, p. 17201). The motion
    may be ruled out when dilatory (V, 5734).

    [[Page 719]]

    amendment to) the motion to strike
    remains separately debatable outside the limitation (July 20, 1995, p.
    ----). Where five-minute debate has been limited to a certain number of
    minutes without reference to a time certain, the time consumed by
    reading of amendments, quorum calls, points of order and votes does not
    reduce the amount of time remaining for debate (Oct. 3, 1969, pp. 28459-
    60; Nov. 9, 1971, pp. 40060-61); but where debate has been limited to a
    time certain, such activities as reading and voting obviously consume
    time otherwise allocable to Members wishing to speak (May 6, 1970, p.
    14452; Oct. 7, 1976, pp. 26305-06). Unlike time placed under a Member's
    ``control,'' five-minute debate (or time derived therefrom under a
    limitation) may not be reserved or yielded in blocks except by unanimous
    consent (Mar. 2, 1976, p. 4992; May 11, 1976, p. 13416; June 14, 1977,
    p. 18833). A motion to limit debate on a pending amendment may neither
    allocate the time proposed to remain nor vary the order of recognition
    to close debate, though the Committee of the Whole may do either
    separately by unanimous consent (July 12, 1988, p. 17767). The Committee
    of the Whole may: (1) by motion, limit debate on a pending committee
    amendment in the nature of a substitute (considered as read) and on all
    amendments thereto to a time certain; and then (2) by unanimous-consent
    request or motion, separately limit debate on each perfecting amendment
    as it is offered (Mar. 16, 1983, p. 5794).
      The closing of debate on the last section of a bill does not preclude
    debate on a substitute for the whole text (V, 5228). Where there is a
    time limitation on debate on a pending amendment in the nature of a
    substitute and all amendments thereto, but not on the underlying
    original text, debate on perfecting amendments to the original text
    proceeds under the five-minute rule absent another time limitation (Apr.
    13, 1983, p. 8402). Where the time for debate on a pending amendment in
    the form of a motion to strike ``and all amendments thereto'' has been
    limited, a subsequently offered perfecting amendment considered as
    preferential to (rather than as an

      Under a limitation on debate the Chair may, in his discretion, either:
    (1) permit continued debate under the five-minute rule; (2) divide the
    remaining time among those desiring to speak; or (3) divide the
    remaining time between a proponent and an opponent to be yielded by them
    to other Members (May 25, 1982, p. 11672). The Chair also may, in his
    discretion, give priority in recognition under a limitation to those
    Members seeking to offer amendments, over other Members standing at the
    time the limitation was agreed to (May 26, 1977, pp. 16950-52). Where
    the Committee of the Whole has limited time for debate on a bill and all
    amendments thereto to a time certain several hours away, the Chair may,
    in his discretion, continue to proceed under the five-minute rule until
    he desires to allocate remaining time on possible amendments, and may
    then divide that time among proponents of anticipated amendments and
    committee members opposing those amendments (July 16, 1981, p. 16044).
    The Chair has discretion to reallocate time to conform to the limit set
    by unanimous consent of the Committee of the Whole (Mar. 16, 1995, p. ----).

    [[Page 720]]

      Except as indicated in Sec. 762, supra, the manager of the bill, and
    not the proponent of the pending amendment, has the right to close
    controlled debate on an amendment (July 16, 1981, p. 16043), even where
    he is also the proponent of a pending amendment to the amendment (Mar.
    16, 1983, p. 5792).

    Sec. 875. The motion to strike out the enacting words of
    a bill.

      7. A  motion to strike out the enacting words of a bill shall have
    precedence of a motion to amend, and, if carried, shall be considered
    equivalent to its rejection. Whenever a bill is reported from a
    Committee of the Whole with an adverse recommendation and such
    recommendation is disagreed to by the House, the bill shall stand
    recommitted to the said committee without further action by the House,
    but before the question of concurrence is submitted it is in order to
    entertain a motion to refer the bill to any committee, with or without
    instructions, and when the same is again reported to the House it shall
    be referred to the Committee of the Whole without debate.

      The practice of rejecting a bill by striking out the enacting words
    dates from a time as early as 1812, but the first rule on the subject
    was not adopted until 1822. By amendments in 1860, 1870, and 1880 the
    rule has been brought into its present form (V, 5326). The rule before
    1880 applied in the House as well as in Committee of the Whole. In the
    revision of 1880 for the first time it was classified among the rules
    relating to the Committee of the Whole, but there is nothing to indicate
    that this change was intended to limit the scope of the motion. It was
    probably a recognition merely of the fact that the motion was used most
    frequently in Committee of the Whole (V, 5326, 5332). The motion must be
    in writing and in the proper form (July 24, 1986, p. 17641; Aug. 15,
    1986, p. 22071; Sept. 12, 1986, p. 23178).

    [[Page 721]]

    to strike out the enacting words is in
    order (VII, 787); contra (IV, 3215), but after the stage of amendment
    has been passed the motion to strike out the enacting words is not in
    order (IV, 4782; VIII, 2368). Where a bill is being considered under a
    special order which permits only committee amendments and no amendments
    thereto, a motion that the committee rise and report with the
    recommendation that the enacting clause be stricken is not in order
    where no committee amendments are in fact offered (Apr. 16, 1970, p.
    12092).

    Sec. 876a. Practice as to use of the motion to
    strike out the enacting clause.

      The motion  may not be made until the first
    section of the bill has been read (V, 5327; VIII, 2619). Having
    precedence of a motion to amend, it may be offered while an amendment is
    pending (V, 5328-5331; VIII, 2622, 2624, 2627). The motion takes
    precedence over the motion to amend and therefore over the motion to
    rise and report at the end of the reading of a general appropriation
    bill for amendment under clause 2(d) of rule XXI (July 24, 1986, p.
    17641). The motion also takes precedence over a motion to limit debate
    on pending amendments (June 28, 1995, p. ----; July 13, 1995, p. ----).
    Where a special order provides that a bill shall be open to amendment in
    Committee of the Whole, a motion

      The motion is debatable as to the merits of the bill, but may not go
    beyond its provisions (V, 5336). The debate on the motion is, in
    Committee of the Whole, governed by the five-minute rule (V, 5333-5335;
    VIII, 2618, 2628-2631); only two five-minute speeches are in order (V,
    5335; VIII, 2629), and time may not be reserved (May 22, 1991, p.
    11830); thus where a Member recognized for five minutes in opposition to
    the motion yields back his time another Member may not claim the unused
    portion thereof (Mar. 3, 1988, p. 3241). Members of the committee
    managing the bill have priority in recognition for debate in opposition
    to the motion (May 5, 1988, p. 9955; June 26, 1991, p. 16436). The Chair
    will not announce in advance the Member to be recognized in opposition
    to the motion (July 17, 1996, p. ----). The motion is not debatable
    after the expiration of time for debate on the pending bill and all
    amendments thereto (July 9, 1965, p. 16280; July 19, 1973, p. 24961;
    June 19, 1975, p. 19785), but it is debatable where the limitation is
    only on an amendment in the nature of a substitute being read as an
    original bill for the purpose of amendment under a special order (June
    20, 1975, p. 19966). For more concerning debate on the motion, see
    Deschler's Precedents, vol. 5, ch. 19, sec. 12.

      A second motion on the same legislative day to strike out the enacting
    clause is not entertained in the absence of any material modification of
    the bill (VIII, 2636), but the motion may be repeated on a subsequent
    legislative day without change in the bill (May 6, 1950, p. 6571). The
    rejection of a proposed amendment to the bill does not qualify as a
    modification of the bill (June 21, 1962, p. 11369), nor does the
    adoption of an amendment to a proposed amendment to the bill. However,
    adoption of an amendment to an amendment in the nature of a substitute
    read as an original bill pursuant to a special order does qualify as a
    modification of the bill (June 20, 1975, p. 19970). A motion that is
    withdrawn by unanimous consent rather than voted on by the Committee
    does not preclude the offering of another motion on the same day without
    a material modification of the bill (May 9, 1996, p. ----).

    [[Page 722]]

    to lay on the table is not in order (V, 5337). The
    previous question may be moved on the motion to concur without applying
    to further action on the bill (V, 5342). When the House disagrees to the
    action of the committee in striking out the enacting words and does not
    refer it under the provisions of the rule, it goes back to the Committee
    of the Whole, where it becomes unfinished business (V, 5326, 5345, 5346;
    VIII, 2633). Notwithstanding that consideration of the pending bill was
    governed by a ``modified closed rule'' permitting only specified
    amendments, pending the concurrence of the House with a recommendation
    of the Committee of the Whole that the enacting clause be stricken, the
    House could by instructions in a motion to refer under this clause
    direct the Committee of the Whole to consider additional germane
    amendments (Apr. 14, 1994, p. ----). When the enacting words of a bill
    are stricken out the bill is rejected (V, 5326); and when the enacting
    clause of a Senate measure is stricken, the bill is rejected (V, 5326),
    and the Senate is so informed (IV, 3423; VIII, 2638; June 20, 1946, p.
    7211; Oct. 4, 1972, p. 33787).
      A point of order against the motion should be made before debate
    thereon has begun (V, 6902; VIII, 3442; May 6, 1950, p. 6571), and when
    challenged the Member offering the motion must qualify as being opposed
    to the bill (Mar. 13, 1942, p. 2439; May 6, 1950, p. 6571; June 14,
    1979, p. 14995; Jan. 26, 1995, p. ----). When a bill is reported from
    the Committee of the Whole with the recommendation that the enacting
    words be stricken out, the motion to strike out is debatable (V, 5337-
    5340), but a motion

      When, on Calendar Wednesday, the House disagrees to the recommendation
    of the Committee of the Whole that the enacting words be stricken out,
    the House automatically resolves itself into Committee of the Whole for
    its further consideration (VII, 943). When the bill is thus again taken
    up in Committee of the Whole it is taken up as unfinished business and
    is open to amendment, and the motion to strike out the enacting words
    may be again offered (VIII, 2633).

    [[Page 723]]

    the matter set forth in paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 301(a) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974. It shall not be in order in the House
    or in a Committee of the Whole to consider an amendment to a concurrent
    resolution on the budget, or any amendment to an amendment thereto,
    which changes the amount of the appropriate level of the public debt set
    forth in the concurrent resolution as reported; except that the
    amendments to achieve mathematical consistency which are permitted under
    section 305(a)(6) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 may include an
    amendment, offered by or at the direction of the Committee on the
    Budget, to adjust the amount of such level to reflect any changes made
    in the other figures contained in the resolution.

    Sec. 876b. Reading concurrent resolution on budget
    for amendment.

      8. At the  conclusion of general debate in a Committee of the
    Whole on any concurrent resolution on the budget pursuant to section
    305(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the concurrent
    resolution shall be considered as having been read for amendment. It
    shall not be in order in the House or in a Committee of the Whole to
    consider an amendment to a concurrent resolution on the budget, or any
    amendment to an amendment thereto, unless the concurrent resolution as
    amended by such amendment or amendments (a) would be mathematically
    consistent (except to the extent that the amendment involved is limited
    by the third sentence of this clause); and (b) would contain all

      The first sentence of this clause was added to the rules on January 4,
    1977 (H. Res. 5, 95th Cong., pp. 53-70). The second sentence was adopted
    in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16). In the 96th
    Congress the second sentence was amended further and the third sentence
    added by Public Law 96-78 (93 Stat. 589) and was originally intended to
    apply to concurrent resolutions on the budget for fiscal years beginning
    on or after October 1, 1980 (fiscal 1980). However, in the 96th Congress
    the provisions of that public law amending the rules of the House were
    made applicable to the third concurrent resolution on the budget for
    fiscal year 1980 as well as the first concurrent resolution on the
    budget for fiscal year 1981 (H. Res. 642, Apr. 23, 1980, pp. 8789-90).

    Sec. 877. Application of rules of the House to the
    Committee of the Whole.

      9. The  rules of proceeding in the House shall be
    observed in Committees of the Whole House so far as they may be
    applicable.

      This clause was adopted in 1789 (IV, 4737).

    [[Page 724]]

    imous-consent requests may not be entertained in the
    Committee of the Whole: (1) to permit a perfecting amendment to be
    offered to the underlying bill where a special rule permitted its
    consideration only as a perfecting amendment to a committee amendment
    (Aug. 2, 1977, p. 26161); (2) to permit a substitute to be read by
    sections for amendment where the special rule did not so provide (Dec.
    12, 1973, p. 41153); (3) to extend the time limitation for consideration
    of amendments beyond that set by a special order requiring the Chair to
    put the question on the pending amendments at the expiration of certain
    hours of consideration (Apr. 10, 1986, p. 7079; Oct. 30, 1991, p.
    29213); (4) to restrict ``en blocking'' authority granted in a special
    order (Sept. 11, 1986, p. 22871; June 21, 1989, p. 12744); (5) to change
    the control (Oct. 9, 1986, p. 29984) or duration (Aug. 1, 1989, p.
    17143; Mar. 12, 1991, p. 5799; Mar. 17, 1993, p. ----) of general debate
    specified by the House; (6) to reduce below 15 minutes the minimum time
    for recorded votes in the Committee of the Whole (June 18, 1987, p.
    16764); (7) to postpone and cluster votes on amendments (July 13, 1995,
    p. ----; Sept. 27, 1995, p. ----); (8) to preempt the Chair's discretion
    (granted by a special order) to postpone and cluster votes or to
    schedule further consideration of a pending measure to a subsequent day
    (June 4, 1992, p. ----; July 13, 1995, p. ----); (9) to permit an
    amendment offered by another Member to an amendment rendered unamendable
    by a special order or to permit a subsequent amendment changing such
    unamendable amendment already adopted (Nov. 18, 1987, p. 32643; July 26,
    1989, p. 16411; July 24, 1996, p. ----); (10) to permit consideration of
    an amendment out of the order specified in a special rule (May 25, 1988,
    p. 12275; Oct. 3, 1990, p. 27354; Oct. 31, 1991, p. 29359; Nov. 19,
    1993, p. ----); (11) to permit consideration of an additional amendment
    or to authorize a supplemental report from the Committee on Rules in
    lieu of the original report referred to in the special order (July 28,
    1988, p. 19491; (Speaker Wright, Aug. 11, 1988, p. 22105); (12) to
    permit another to offer an amendment vested in a specified Member (May
    1, 1990, p. 9030); or (13) to permit a division of the question on an
    amendment rendered indivisible by a special order (July 16, 1996, p. ----).

    Sec. 877a. Modification of special
    orders.

      Unanimous consent  requests may not be entertained in the Committee of the Whole
    by the Chair if their effect is to materially modify procedures required
    by a special rule or order adopted by the House. For example, the
    following unan-

    [[Page 725]]

    p. 11646; Mar. 22, 1995, p. ----; June 27, 1995, p.
    ----; Nov. 2, 1995, p. ----); (6) to permit en bloc consideration of
    several amendments under a ``modified closed'' special order providing
    for the sequential consideration of designated separate amendments (Aug.
    10, 1994, p. ----); (7) to permit one of two committees controlling time
    for general debate pursuant to a special order to yield control of its
    time to the other (Aug. 18, 1994, p. ----); and (8) to permit the
    offering of pro forma amendments for the purposes of debate under a
    ``modified-closed'' special order limiting both amendments and debate
    thereon (July 17, 1996, p. ----; July 24, 1996, p. ----).
      Unanimous consent requests have been entertained in Committee of the
    Whole: (1) to permit the modification of a designated amendment made in
    order by a special rule, once offered (Sept. 1, 1976, p. 28877; Nov. 19,
    1993, p. ----; July 24, 1996, p. ----); (2) to permit a page reference
    to be included in a designated amendment made in order as printed where
    the printed amendment did not include that reference (Apr. 1, 1976, p.
    9091); (3) to permit a supporter of an amendment to claim debate time
    allocated by special order to an opponent, where no opponent seeks
    recognition (May 23, 1990, p. 11988); (4) to shorten the time set by
    special order for debate on a particular amendment (Aug. 1, 1990, p.
    21510; Mar. 29, 1995, p. ----); (5) to lengthen the time set by special
    order for debate on a particular amendment under terms of control
    congruent with those set by the order of the House (May 11, 1988, p.
    10495; May 21, 1991,

      By unanimous consent the House may delegate to the Committee of the
    Whole authority to entertain unanimous-consent requests to change
    procedures contained in an adopted special order (Aug. 11, 1986, p.
    20633). The Member offering an amendment in the Committee of the Whole
    pursuant to a special order of the House has the burden of proving that
    it meets the description of the amendment made in order (July 17, 1996,
    p. ----).