    [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 649-653]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

                                    Rule XX.

                          of amendments of the senate.

    [[Page 650]]

    that point: Provided, however, That a motion to disagree with the amendments
    of the Senate to a House bill or resolution and request or agree to a
    conference with the Senate, or a motion to insist on the House
    amendments to a Senate bill or resolution and request or agree to a
    conference with the Senate, shall always be in order if the Speaker, in
    his discretion, recognizes for that purpose and if the motion is made by
    direction of the committee having jurisdiction of the subject matter of
    the bill or resolution.

    Sec. 827. Consideration of Senate amendments in Committee
    of the Whole; motion for conference.

      1.  Any amendment of the Senate to
    any House bill shall be subject to the point of order that it shall
    first be considered in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of
    the Union, if, originating in the House, it would be subject to

      The first part of this rule was adopted in 1880 to prevent Senate
    amendments of the class described from escaping consideration in
    Committee of the Whole (IV, 4796). The first sentence of the proviso,
    added by the 89th Congress (H. Res. 8, Jan. 4, 1965, p. 21), provides a
    method whereby bills can be sent to conference by majority vote. As
    contained in section 126(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of
    1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and adopted as part of the rules of the House in
    the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144), this clause
    included language relating to separate votes on nongermane Senate
    amendments that was, in the 93d Congress, modified and transferred to
    clause 5 of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 998, Apr. 9, 1974, pp. 10195-99).-

    [[Page 651]]

    has been held that each amendment is subject
    to general debate and amendment under the five-minute rule (V, 6193,
    6196). The requirement of this clause that certain Senate amendments be
    considered in Committee of the Whole applies only before the stage of
    disagreement has been reached on the Senate amendment, and it is too
    late to raise a point of order that Senate amendments should have been
    considered in Committee of the Whole after the House has disagreed
    thereto and the amendments reported from conference in disagreement
    (Oct. 20, 1966, p. 28240; Dec. 4, 1975, p. 38714). The Committee on
    Rules may recommend a special order of business providing that a Senate
    amendment pending at the Speaker's table and otherwise requiring
    consideration in Committee of the Whole under this clause be ``hereby''
    adopted, which special order, if adopted, would obviate the requirement
    of this clause (Deschler's Precedents, vol. 6, ch. 21, sec. 16.11; Feb.
    4, 1993, p. ----).-

    Sec. 828a1. Consideration of Senate amendments in
    Committee of the Whole.

      While  a Senate amendment that is merely a
    modification of a House proposition, like the increase or decrease of
    the amount of an appropriation, and does not involve new and distinct
    expenditure, may not be required to be considered in Committee of the
    Whole (IV, 4797-4806; VIII, 2382-2385), where the question was raised
    against a Senate amendment which on its face apparently placed a charge
    upon the Treasury the Speaker held it devolved upon those opposing the
    point of order to cite proof to the contrary (VIII, 2387). When in the
    House an amendment is offered to provide an appropriation for another
    purpose than that of the Senate amendment, the House goes into Committee
    of the Whole to consider it (IV, 4795). When an amendment is referred,
    the entire bill goes to the Committee of the Whole (IV, 4808), but the
    committee considers only the Senate amendment (V, 6192). It usually
    considers all the amendments, although they may not all be within the
    rule requiring such consideration (V, 6195). In Committee of the Whole a
    Senate amendment, even though it be very long, is considered as an
    entirety and not by paragraphs or sections (V, 6194). When reported from
    the Committee of the Whole, Senate amendments are voted on en bloc and
    only those amendments are voted on severally on which a separate vote is
    demanded (VIII, 3191). It

    Sec. 828a2. Motion for conference.

      The motion to  send a bill
    to conference under this clause is in order notwithstanding the fact
    that the stage of disagreement has not been reached (Aug. 1, 1972, p.
    26153). On a bill that has been jointly referred and reported in the
    House, the motion must be authorized by all committees reporting thereon
    (Sept. 26, 1978, p. 31623), but a committee discharged from a sequential
    referral need not authorize a motion made by direction of the committee
    that reported the bill (Oct. 4, 1994, p. ----). Where such a motion has
    been rejected by the House, it may be repeated if the committee having
    jurisdiction over the subject matter again authorizes its chairman to
    make the motion (Oct. 3, 1972, pp. 33502-03; see also Procedure, ch. 32,
    sec. 5). The motion to send to conference is in order only if the
    Speaker in his discretion recognized for that purpose, and the Speaker
    will not recognize for the motion where he has referred a non-germane
    Senate amendment in question to a House committee with jurisdiction and
    they have not yet had the opportunity to consider the amendment (June
    28, 1984, p. 19770).

    [[Page 652]]

    request for a conference to the Senate (Speaker Albert, Sept. 16, 1976,
    p. 30868).

    Sec. 828b. Stage of disagreement between Houses.

      When  the
    stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill with amendments of the
    other House, motions to dispose of said amendments are privileged in the
    House (IV, 3149, 3150; VI, 756; VIII, 3185, 3194). The stage of
    disagreement between the two Houses is reached after the House in
    possession of the papers has either disagreed to the amendment(s) of the
    other House or has insisted on its own amendment to a measure of the
    other House (Sept. 16, 1976, p. 30868), and not merely where the other
    House has returned a bill with an amendment (Dec. 7, 1977, pp. 38728-
    29). Thus where the House concurred in a Senate amendment to a House
    bill with an amendment, insisted on the amendment and requested a
    conference, and the Senate then concurred in the House amendment with a
    further amendment, the matter was privileged in the House for further
    disposition since the House had communicated its insistence and

    Sec. 829. Conferees may not agree to certain Senate
    amendments.

      2.  No amendment of the Senate to a general appropriation bill
    which would be in violation of the provisions of clause 2 of rule XXI,
    if said amendment had originated in the House, nor any amendment of the
    Senate providing for an appropriation upon any bill other than a general
    appropriation bill, shall be agreed to by the managers on the part of
    the House unless specific authority to agree to such amendment shall be
    first given by the House by a separate vote on every such amendment.

      This clause of the rule was adopted on June 1, 1920 (pp. 8109, 8120).

      While the rule provides for a motion authorizing the managers on the
    part of the House to agree to amendments of the Senate in violation of
    clause 2 of rule XXI, such as a motion to recommit a conference report
    on a general appropriation bill with instructions to agree to a
    legislative Senate amendment (Speaker Albert, Dec. 19, 1973, p. 42565),
    it does not permit a motion to recommit a conference report on a general
    appropriation bill to include instructions to add legislation to that
    contained in a Senate amendment (Nov. 13, 1973, p. 36847). It is
    customary after a conference on a general appropriation bill with
    numbered Senate amendments for the managers to report certain Senate
    amendments in technical disagreement, and after the partial conference
    report (consisting of agreement on those Senate amendments not in
    violation of clause 2 of rule XXI) is disposed of, the remaining
    amendments are taken up in order and disposed of directly in the House
    by separate motion. When Senate amendments in disagreement are
    considered in this fashion, they are not subject to a point of order
    under this clause (Dec. 4, 1975, p. 38714); and a motion to (recede and)
    concur in the Senate amendment with a further amendment is also in
    order, even if the proposed amendment is also legislation on an
    appropriation bill. The only test is whether the proposed amendment is
    germane to the Senate amendment reported in disagreement (IV, 3909;
    VIII, 3188, 3189; Speaker McCormack, Dec. 15, 1970, pp. 41504-05; Aug.
    1, 1979, pp. 22007-11; Speaker O'Neill, Dec. 12, 1979, pp. 35520-21;
    June 30, 1987, p. 18308).

    [[Page 653]]

    the conference report should the managers on the part of the
    House violate the provisions of clause 2 of rule XX (VII, 1574). But
    where a special rule in the House waives points of order against
    portions of an appropriation bill that are unauthorized by law, and the
    bill passes the House with those provisions included therein and goes to
    conference, the conferees may report back their agreement to those
    provisions even though they remain unauthorized, since the waiver in the
    House of points of order under clause 2 of rule XXI carries over to the
    consideration of the same provisions when the conference report is
    before the House (Dec. 20, 1969, pp. 40445-48, consideration of
    conference report; Dec. 9, 1969, p. 37948, adoption of special rule
    waiving points of order against the bill in the House). The rule is a
    restriction upon the managers on the part of the House only, and does
    not provide for a point of order against a Senate amendment when it
    comes up for action by the House (VII, 1572). Managers may be authorized
    to agree to an appropriation by a resolution reported from the Committee
    on Rules (VII, 1577). House managers may include in their report a
    modification of a Senate amendment that eliminates the appropriation in
    that amendment (June 8, 1972, pp. 20280-81); and the prohibition in this
    clause applies only to language in Senate amendments. Thus the conferees
    may without violating this clause agree to language in a Senate bill
    which was sent to conference (Speaker Albert, Jan. 25, 1972, pp. 1076,
    1077; June 30, 1976, pp. 21632-34) or agree to language in a House bill
    which was permitted to remain and which constitutes an appropriation on
    a legislative bill (Speaker Albert, May 1, 1975, p. 12752).
      In the event an appropriation bill with Senate amendments in violation
    of clause 2 of rule XXI is sent to conference by unanimous consent, such
    procedure does not thereby prevent a point of order being sustained
    against

      A provision in a Senate amendment included in a conference report on
    an authorization bill considered after the relevant appropriation has
    been enacted into law, directing that funds appropriated pursuant to the
    authorization be obligated and expended on a project not specifically
    funded in the appropriation, is itself an appropriation and may not be
    agreed to by House conferees (Nov. 29, 1979, pp. 34113-15); and House
    conferees were held to have violated this clause when they had agreed to
    a provision in a Senate amendment not only authorizing appropriations to
    pay judgments against the U.S. for the award of attorney fees and other
    court costs, but also requiring that where such payments were not paid
    out of appropriated funds, payment be made in the same manner as
    judgments under 28 U.S.C. 2414 and 2517 (payable directly out of the
    Treasury pursuant to a direct appropriation previously provided by law
    in 31 U.S.C. 1304) (Oct. 1, 1980, pp. 28637-40).