    [Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 106th Congress]
    [106th Congress]
    [House Document 105-358]
    [Rules of the House of Representatives]
    [Pages 717-742]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    Rule XVIII.--THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON THE STATE OF THE UNION

    Resolving into the Committee of the Whole

    970. Selection of Chairman of Committee of the Whole; and
    his power to preserve order.

      1.  Whenever the House resolves into the
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, the Speaker
    shall leave the chair after appointing a Chairman to preside. In case of
    disturbance or disorderly conduct in the galleries or lobby, the
    Chairman may cause the same to be cleared.

      This provision (former clause 1(a) of rule XXIII), 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. 49),
    but that authority was repealed in the 104th Congress (sec. 212(b), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Delegates presided in two instances
    during the 103d Congress (Oct. 6, 1994, p. 28533; Oct. 7, 1994, p.
    29167). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    this provision was found in former clause 1(a) of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

    [[Page 718]]

    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. 16682). 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).

    Sec. 971. 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

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 2
    Rule XVIII, clause 2

    Sec. 972. Speaker's declaration into Committee of the
    Whole pursuant to special order.

      2. (a)  Except as provided in paragraph (b)
    and in clause 7 of rule XV, the House resolves into the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union by motion. When such a motion is
    entertained, the Speaker shall put the question without debate: ``Shall
    the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the
    state of the Union for consideration of this matter?'', naming it.

      (b) After the House has adopted a resolution reported by the Committee
    on Rules providing a special order of business 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, when no question is pending before the
    House, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole for
    the consideration of that measure without intervening motion, unless the
    special order of business provides otherwise.

    [[Page 719]]

    mittee of the Whole (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----). Paragraph (b)
    was added in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraph (b) was
    found in former clause 1(b) of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    ----).

      Paragraph (a) was adopted when the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress to codify the form of the motion to resolve into the Com

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 3
    Rule XVIII, clause 3
    Measures requiring initial consideration in the Committee of the Whole

    973. Subjects requiring consideration in Committee of the
    Whole.

      3.  All bills, resolutions, or Senate amendments (as provided in
    clause 3 of rule XXII) involving a tax or charge on the people, raising
    revenue, directly or indirectly making appropriations of money or
    property or requiring such appropriations to be made, authorizing
    payments out of appropriations already made, releasing any liability to
    the United States for money or property, or referring a claim to the
    Court of Claims, shall be first considered in the Committee of the Whole
    House on the state of the Union. A bill, resolution, or Senate amendment
    that fails to comply with this clause is subject to a point of order
    against its consideration.

      The first form of this rule was adopted in 1794, and it has been
    perfected by amendments in 1874 and 1896 (IV, 4792). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 3 of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

    [[Page 720]]

    ered 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 well as 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 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. 974. 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(i)(1) of rule X'') of the House are consid

    Sec. 975. 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 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 either in the House pursuant to a special order or
    ``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).

    [[Page 721]]

    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).

    Sec. 976. 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,

      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
    under this clause, 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).

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 4
    Rule XVIII, clause 4
    Order of business

    977. Order of business in Committee of the
    Whole.

      4. (a)  Subject to subparagraph (b) business on the calendar of the
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union may be taken up
    in regular order, or in such order as the Committee may determine,
    unless the measure to be considered was determined by the House at the
    time of resolving into the Committee of the Whole.

      (b) Motions to resolve into the Committee of the Whole for
    consideration of bills and joint resolutions making general
    appropriations have precedence under this clause.

      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).
    When the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was transferred from former clause 4 of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----). At that time references in this provision to
    revenue bills and rivers and harbors bills were deleted to conform it to
    changes made to the Rules of House by the Committee Reform Amendments of
    1974 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), which revoked the
    privilege to report such bills at any time.

    [[Page 722]]

    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).

      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

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 5
    Rule XVIII, clause 5
    Reading for amendment-

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

      5. (a)  Before general debate commences on a
    measure in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union,
    it shall be read in full. When general debate is concluded or closed by
    order of the House, the measure under consideration shall be read for
    amendment. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who offers an
    amendment shall be allowed five minutes to explain it, after which the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who shall first obtain the
    floor shall be allowed five minutes to speak in opposition to it. There
    shall be no further debate thereon, but the same privilege of debate
    shall be allowed in favor of and against any amendment that may be
    offered to an amendment. An amendment, or an amendment to an amendment,
    may be withdrawn by its proponent only by the unanimous consent of the
    Committee of the Whole.

    [[Page 723]]

    cloakroom and at least one copy to the minority cloakroom.

      (b) When a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner offers an
    amendment in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union,
    the Clerk shall promptly transmit five copies of the amendment to the
    majority committee table and five copies to the minority committee
    table. The Clerk also shall deliver at least one copy of the amendment
    to the majority

      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. 457). Paragraph
    (b), 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). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(a) of
    rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----). The recodification also
    conformed paragraph (a) to the recodified clause 8 of rule XVI to
    reflect the modern practice of first and second readings (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----). The fact that copies of an amendment have not
    been made available as required in this clause is not grounds for a
    point of order against the amendment (June 21, 1974, p. 20609; Mar. 25,
    1976, p. 7997).

    [[Page 724]]

    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).-

    Sec. 979. 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 1(a) of rule XIX (former 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

    [[Page 725]]

    new section at the end of the bill does not preclude subsequent
    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) unless he remains on his feet (June 10,
    1998, p. ----); and he 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. 980. 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 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). To a bill read by
    paragraph, a motion to strike an entire title, encompassing multiple
    paragraphs, is not in order (Aug. 5, 1998, p. ----). 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. 11931). 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

      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. 1978; May 27, 1993, p. 11931).-

    [[Page 726]]

    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.
    17633). 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.
    16438). 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. 5730).

    Sec. 981. 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 to debate a pending substantive
    amendment may not lengthen this time by making another pro forma
    amendment (V, 5222; VIII, 2560), may not offer another pro forma
    amendment after intervening debate on a pending amendment, even on a
    subsequent day (July 14, 1998, p. ----), and may not extend debate 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 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. 17633); and a
    Member who has debated a substantive amendment may thereafter rise in
    opposition to a pro forma amendment thereto (July 20,

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 6
    Rule XVIII, clause 6
    Quorum and voting

    982. Failure of a quorum in Committee of the
    Whole.

      6. (a)  A quorum of a Committee of the Whole House on the state of the
    Union is 100 Members. The first time that a Committee of the Whole finds
    itself without a quorum during a day, the Chairman shall invoke the
    procedure for a quorum call set forth in clause 2 of rule XX, unless he
    elects to invoke an alternate procedure set forth in clause 3 or clause
    4(a) of rule XX. If a quorum appears, the Committee of the Whole shall
    continue its business. If a quorum does not appear, the Committee of the
    Whole shall rise, and the Chairman shall report the names of absentees
    to the House.

      (b)(1) The Chairman may refuse to entertain a point of order that a
    quorum is not present during general debate.

    [[Page 727]]

    of the Union is operating under the five-minute rule and the Chairman
    has put the pending proposition to a vote.
      (2) After a quorum has once been established on a day, the Chairman
    may entertain a point of order that a quorum is not present only when
    the Committee of the Whole House on the state

      (3) Upon sustaining a point of order that a quorum is not present, the
    Chairman may announce that, following a regular quorum call under
    paragraph (a), the minimum time for electronic voting on the pending
    question shall be five minutes.

      (c) When ordering a quorum call in the Committee of the Whole House on
    the state of the Union, the Chairman may announce an intention to
    declare that a quorum is constituted at any time during the quorum call
    when he determines that a quorum has appeared. If the Chairman
    interrupts the quorum call by declaring that a quorum is constituted,
    proceedings under the quorum call shall be considered as vacated, and
    the Committee of the Whole shall continue its sitting and resume its
    business.

      (d) A quorum is not required in the Committee of the Whole House on
    the state of the Union for adoption of a motion that the Committee rise.

    [[Page 728]]

    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. 13336), 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).
      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 (former clause 2(a) of rule XXIII) 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) it 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 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 under this clause (July 22, 1994, p. 17609). 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 provision 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 that provision 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, p. 14148).

      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 2 of rule XX (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 3 of rule XX (alphabetical call of the roll) or clause 4(a) of
    rule XX (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 729]]

    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 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 6(a) of rule XX) 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 vote remains possible, the question remains pending and the
    Chair is obligated to entertain a point of order of no quorum under this
    provision (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

    Sec. 983. 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(d) of rule
    XVIII; Mar. 5, 1980, p. 4801; Oct. 3, 1985, p. 26096; May 21, 1992, p.
    12394); 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. 12394); 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 730]]

    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).

      Under clause 6 of rule XVIII (former 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

      (e) In the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, the
    Chairman shall order a recorded vote on a request supported by at least
    25 Members.

    -  (f) <> In the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the
    Union, the Chairman may reduce to five minutes the minimum time for
    electronic voting without any intervening business or debate on any or
    all pending amendments after a record vote has been taken on the first
    pending amendment.

      This provision was adopted in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15,
    1979, pp. 7-16). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 2(b) of rule XXIII
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

      This paragraph was added in the 102d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    1991, p. 39). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 2(c) of rule XXIII
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----). A vote by division is not such
    intervening business as would preclude a five-minute vote under this
    clause (July 22, 1994, p. 17609).

    [[Page 731]]

    adopted by the House have routinely provided the Chairman of the
    Committee of the Whole authority to postpone and cluster requests for
    recorded votes. Where a special rule provides such authority, use of
    that authority, and the order of clustering, is entirely within the
    discretion of the Chair (Aug. 5, 1998, p. ----).
      Other than the authority granted under this clause, the Chairman of
    the Committee of the Whole may not entertain a unanimous-consent request
    to reduce below 15 minutes the minimum time for recorded votes in the
    Committee of the Whole (June 18, 1987, p. 16764) or to postpone and
    cluster votes on amendments (July 13, 1995, p. ----; Sept. 27, 1995, p.
    ----; July 14, 1998, p. ----). In recent years, however, special rules

    Sec. 985. 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 former 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. 49). 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 former clause 2(d) (sec.
    212(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468).

      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. 10409). 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. 5388).

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 7
    Rule XVIII, clause 7
    Dispensing with the reading of an amendment

    986. Motion to dispense with reading.

      7.  It shall be in
    order in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to
    move that the Committee of the Whole dispense with the reading of an
    amendment that has been printed in the bill or resolution as reported by
    a committee, or an amendment that a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner has caused to be printed in the Congressional Record. Such
    a motion shall be decided without debate.

    [[Page 732]]

    its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former
    clause 5(b) of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

      This provision 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. Before the House
    recodified

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 8
    Rule XVIII, clause 8
    Closing debate-

    987. Closing the fiveminute debate in Committee of the
    Whole.

      8. (a)  Subject to paragraph (b) at any time after the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union has begun five-minute debate on
    amendments to any portion of a bill or resolution, it shall be in order
    to move that the Committee of the Whole close all debate on that portion
    of the bill or resolution or on the pending amendments only. Such a
    motion shall be decided without debate. The adoption of such a motion
    does not preclude further amendment, to be decided without debate.

      (b) If the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union
    closes debate on any portion of a bill or resolution before there has
    been debate on an amendment that a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner has caused to be printed in the Congressional Record at
    least one day before its consideration, the Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner who caused the amendment to be printed in the
    Record shall be allowed five minutes to explain it, after which the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who shall first obtain the
    floor shall be allowed five minutes to speak in opposition to it. There
    shall be no further debate thereon.

    [[Page 733]]

    Commissioner proposing it, the number of the bill or resolution to which
    it will be offered, and the point in the bill or resolution or amendment
    thereto where the amendment is intended to be offered. The amendment
    shall appear in a portion of the Record designated for that purpose.
    Amendments to a specified measure submitted for printing in that portion
    of the Record shall be numbered in the order printed.

      (c) Material submitted for printing in the Congressional Record under
    this rule shall indicate the full text of the proposed amendment, the
    name of the Member, Delegate, or Resident

      This clause (former clause 6 of rule XXIII) was adopted in 1860, with
    amendments in 1880 and 1885 (V, 5221, 5224). Paragraph (b), permitting
    10 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
    provision 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. 468). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6 of rule XXIII (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

    [[Page 734]]

    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 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

      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 9 (former clause 7) of this rule is preferential to
    the motion to close debate (June 28, 1995, p. 17647; July 13, 1995, p.
    18872). 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, July 14, 1998, p. ----), 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 Committee of the
    Whole by unanimous consent may limit and allocate control of time for
    debate on amendments not yet offered (May 6, 1998, p. ----). The motion
    may be ruled out when dilatory (V, 5734).

    [[Page 735]]

    6, 1970, p. 14452; Oct. 7, 1976, p. 26305). 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 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, p. 28459;
    Nov. 9, 1971, p. 40060); 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

      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.
    8115).

      As codified in clause 3(c) of rule XVII (and except as indicated in
    Sec. 959, 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).

                                                        Rule XVIII, clause 9
    Rule XVIII, clause 9
    Striking the enacting clause

    [[Page 736]]

    stitute a rejection of the bill or resolution. Whenever a bill or
    resolution is reported from the Committee of the Whole with such adverse
    recommendation and the recommendation is rejected by the House, the bill
    or resolution shall stand recommitted to the Committee of the Whole
    without further action by the House. Before the question of concurrence
    is submitted, it shall be in order to move that the House refer the bill
    or resolution to a committee, with or without instructions. If a bill or
    resolution is so referred, then when it is again reported to the House
    it shall be referred to the Committee of the Whole without debate.

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

      9.  A motion that the Committee of the Whole House on the state of
    the Union rise and report a bill or resolution to the House with the
    recommendation that the enacting or resolving clause be stricken shall
    have precedence of a motion to amend, and, if carried in the House,
    shall con

      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). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 7 of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----). 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 737]]

    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. 989. 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. 17647; July 13, 1995, p.
    18874). Where a special order provides that a bill shall be open to
    amendment in Committee of the Whole, a motion to strike out the enacting
    words is in order (VII, 787); contra (IV, 3215),

      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. 17543). 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. 10758).

    [[Page 738]]

    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. 7452). 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. 2521). 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 to lay on the table is not in order (V, 5337). The
    previous question may

      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).

                                                       Rule XVIII, clause 10
    Rule XVIII, clause 10
    Concurrent resolution on the budget

    990. Reading concurrent resolution on budget for
    amendment.

      10. (a)  At the conclusion of general debate in the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union on a concurrent resolution on the
    budget under section 305(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
    concurrent resolution shall be considered as read for amendment.

      (b) It shall not be in order in the House or in the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union to consider an amendment to a
    concurrent resolution on the budget, or an amendment thereto, unless the
    concurrent resolution, as amended by such amendment or amendments--

    [[Page 739]]

          (1) would be mathematically consistent except as limited by
    paragraph (c); and

          (2) would contain all the matter set forth in paragraphs (1)
    through (5) of section 301(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

      (c)(1) Except as specified in subparagraph (2), it shall not be in
    order in the House or in the Committee of the Whole House on the state
    of the Union to consider an amendment to a concurrent resolution on the
    budget, or an amendment thereto, that proposes to change the amount of
    the appropriate level of the public debt set forth in the concurrent
    resolution, as reported.

      (2) Amendments to achieve mathematical consistency under section
    305(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, if offered by
    direction of the Committee on the Budget, may propose to adjust the
    amount of the appropriate level of the public debt set forth in the
    concurrent resolution, as reported, to reflect changes made in other
    figures contained in the concurrent resolution.

      Paragraph (a) (first sentence of former clause 8 of rule XXIII) was
    added to the rules on January 4, 1977 (H. Res. 5, 95th Cong., pp. 53-
    70). Paragraph (b) (second sentence of former clause 8 of rule XXIII)
    was adopted in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16).
    In the 96th Congress paragraph (b) was amended further and paragraph (c)
    (third sentence of former clause 8 of rule XXIII) was 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 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, p. 8789). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 8 of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

    [[Page 740]]

    Unfunded mandates
                                                       Rule XVIII, clause 11
    Rule XVIII, clause 11

    991. Unfunded mandates.

      11. (a)  In the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union, 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.

      (b) In this clause the term ``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.

      This provision (former clause 5(c) of rule XXIII) 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. ----). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(c) of
    rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

                                                       Rule XVIII, clause 12
    Rule XVIII, clause 12
    Applicability of Rules of the House

    992. Application of Rules of House to the Committee of
    the Whole.

      12.  The Rules of the House are the rules of the Committee of
    the Whole House on the state of the Union so far as applicable.

      This clause was adopted in 1789 (IV, 4737). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 9 of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

    [[Page 741]]

    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; Aug. 3, 1999, p. ----); (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 scheme for
    control (Oct. 9, 1986, p. 29984) or duration (Aug. 1, 1989, p. 17143;
    Mar. 12, 1991, p. 5799; Mar. 17, 1993, p. 5385; June 17, 1999, p. ----
    (Chair corrected himself)) 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. 18872; Sept. 27, 1995, p.
    ----; July 14, 1998, 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. 13625; July 13, 1995, p. 18872; Aug. 2, 1999, 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. 18907); (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. 30472; June 10, 1998, 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; June 10, 1998, p. ----; July
    29, 1999, p. ----); (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. 17318).

    Sec. 993. 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 unanimous-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

    [[Page 742]]

    p. 11646; Mar. 22, 1995, p. 8769; June 27, 1995, p. 17329; 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.
    20768); (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. 23118); and (8) to permit the offering of pro
    forma amendments for the purpose of debate under a ``modified-closed''
    special order limiting both amendments and debate thereon (July 17,
    1996, p. 17563; July 24, 1996, p. 18896).
      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. 30472; July 24, 1996, p. 18906); (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. 9742); (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. 17553).