[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but that authority was repealed in the 104th Congress (sec. 212(b), H. 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).