[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Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. ----), but that authority was repealed in the 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. ----).