[Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 107th Congress]
[107th Congress]
[House Document 106-320]
[Rules of the House of Representatives]
[Pages 728-755]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


 
                               Rule XVIII


Resolving into the Committee of the Whole
       the committee of the whole house on the state of the union




Sec. 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.



[[Page 729]]

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but that authority was repealed in the 104th Congress (sec. 212(b), H. 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




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). Decisions of the Chairman on questions of order may be appealed. 
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?'' The 
Committee of the Whole may not postpone a vote on an appeal of a ruling 
of the Chair (even by unanimous consent); and an appeal of a ruling of 
the Chair may be withdrawn in the Committee of the Whole as a matter of 
right (June 8, 2000, p. ----). A majority vote sustains the ruling (Aug. 
1, 1989, p. 17159). In rare cases wherein the Chairman has been defied 
or insulted, he has directed the Committee to rise, left the chair and, 
on the chair being taken by the Speaker, has reported the facts to the 
House (II, 1350, 1651, 1653). While the Committee of the Whole does not 
control the Congressional Record, the Chairman may direct the exclusion 
of disorderly words spoken by a Member after he has been called to order 
(V, 6987), but may not determine the privileges of a Member under 
general ``leave to print'' (V, 6988). The Chairman decides questions of 
order arising in the Committee independently of the Speaker (V, 6927, 
6928), but has declined to consider a question that had arisen in the 
House just before the Committee began to sit (IV, 4725, 4726) or a 
question that may arise in the House in the future (June 21, 1995, p. 
16682). The Chairman does not take cognizance of a ``point of order'' 
against the legislative schedule, its announcement being the prerogative 
of the Leadership (Nov. 10, 1999, p. ----). He recognizes for debate (V, 
5003); but like the Speaker is forbidden to recognize for requests to 
suspend the rule of admission to the floor (V, 7285). He may direct the 
Committee to rise when the hour previously fixed for adjournment of the 
House arrives, or when the hour previously fixed by the House for 
consideration of other business arrives, in which case he reports in the 
regular way (IV, 4785; VIII, 2376; Aug. 22, 1974, p. 30077); but if the 
Committee happens to be in session at the hour fixed for the meeting of 
the House on a new legislative day, it rests with the Committee and not 
with the Chairman to determine whether or not the Committee shall rise 
(V, 6736, 6737). Although arguments on a point of order may not be 
revised, extended, or inserted, the Committee of the Whole by unanimous 
consent has allowed a Member to insert remarks about a point of order to 
follow the ruling thereon (July 13, 2000, p. ----).



[[Page 730]]

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.


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



  (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.


Measures requiring initial consideration in the Committee of the Whole
  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 
Committee 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. 
----).


[[Page 731]]

resolution, or Senate amendment that fails to comply with this clause is 
subject to a point of order against its consideration.



Sec. 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,


  The first form of this rule was adopted in 1794 and was 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. ----).



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). 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 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 considered in the House (VIII, 2415, 2416). 
Authorizations of expenditures from the contingent fund, under the later 
ruling (IV, 4862-4867) do not fall within the specifications of the rule 
(IV, 4868). A bill providing for an expenditure which is to be borne 
otherwise than by the Government (IV, 4831; VIII, 2400), or relating to 
money in the Treasury in trust (IV, 4835, 4836, 4853; VIII, 2413), is 
not governed by the rule. However, 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).



[[Page 732]]

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).


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 the House have been considered in Committee 
of the Whole pursuant to special orders (H. Res. 988, Committee Reform 
Amendments of 1974, considered in Committee of the Whole pursuant to H. 
Res. 1395, Sept. 30, 1974, p. 32953; H.R. 17654, Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1970, considered in Committee of the Whole 
pursuant to H. Res. 1093, July 13, 1970, p. 23901). While conference 
reports were formerly considered




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, 4844, 4845; VIII, 2413). While a bill removing 
the rate of postage has been held to be within the rule as affecting 
revenues (IV, 4861), a bill relating to taxes on bank circulation have 
not been so considered (IV, 4854, 4855).



Order of business
  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).



Sec. 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.



[[Page 733]]

olutions making general appropriations have precedence under this 
clause.

  (b) Motions to resolve into the Committee of the Whole for 
consideration of bills and joint res

  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.


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


[[Page 734]]

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.


Sec. 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



  (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 cloakroom and at least one copy to the minority 
cloakroom.


[[Page 735]]

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).
  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 but 
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. 
However, 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 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 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 the responsibility for 
providing copies of amendments on the Clerk, 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.



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). Though the motion is not debatable, the 
previous question is sometimes ordered on it to prevent amendment (V, 
5203). Where 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 debate it is in order 
in the House (V, 5204-5206). The motion may not apply to a series of 
bills (V, 5209) and must be offered to 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; June 
17, 1999, p. ----). General debate must close before amendments, or 
motions for disposition of the bill, may be offered (IV, 4744, 4778; V, 
5221). General debate 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).


  A simple motion to rise is in order during general debate if offered 
by a Member managing time or a Member to whom a manager yields for that 
purpose (June 10, 1999, p. ----). However, a Member may not, 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; May 17, 2000, p. ----).-


[[Page 736]]

(V, 5221). Revenue, general appropriation, lighthouse, and river and 
harbor bills are generally read by paragraphs. Other bills are read by 
sections (IV, 4738, 4740). The matter is in the discretion of the Chair 
(VIII, 2341, 2344, 2346), although 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 new section at the end of the 
bill does not preclude subsequent amendments to previous sections of the 
bill (Apr. 17, 1986, p. 7861). However, 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 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. 7107).


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



[[Page 737]]

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).
  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

  The Chair endeavors to alternate recognition to offer amendments 
between majority and minority Members (giving priority to committee 
members) (July 20, 2000, p. ----).-



[[Page 738]]

Quorum and voting


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). Unless a special rule precludes 
any amendment except pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate, a 
pro forma amendment may 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, 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. 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.

  (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 of the Union is operating 
under the five-minute rule and the Chairman has put the pending 
proposition to a vote.

  (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.


[[Page 739]]

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.
  (c) When ordering a quorum call in the Committee of the Whole House on 
the state of the


  (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.

  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. The 
clause was amended in the 93d Congress to permit the Chair to vacate 
proceedings under the call in his discretion when a quorum appears (H. 
Res. 998, Apr. 9, 1974, pp. 10195-99). In the 95th Congress the clause 
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 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). The clause 
was amended again in the 96th Congress 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 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16). In the 97th 
Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, p. 98) the clause was amended to 
allow the Chairman the discretion whether or not to entertain a point of 
order of no quorum during general debate only. Before the House 
recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in 
former clause 2(a) of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).


[[Page 740]]

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). A vote by division is not such 
intervening business as would preclude a five-minute vote under clause 
6(b)(3) (July 22, 1994, p. 17609).
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole must entertain a point of 
order of no quorum during the five-minute rule if a quorum has not yet 
been established in the Committee on the bill then pending (and the fact 
that a quorum of the Committee has previously been established on

  The Speaker interpreted clause 6(c) 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).

  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). Under the modern practice 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 741]]

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 the 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).
  Where the Committee has risen to report the absence of a quorum, it 
resumes its session by direction of the Speaker on the appearance of a 
quorum (IV, 2968; VI, 674). The quorum which must appear to permit the 
Committee to continue its business is a quorum of the Committee and not 
of the House (IV, 2970, 2971). However, if such quorum fails to appear, 
a quorum of the House is required for the Committee to resume its 
sitting (VI, 674). It was formerly held that after the Committee has 
risen and reported its roll call, a motion to adjourn was 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 
may include those present and not voting (VI, 641). On a division vote 
totaling less than 100, the



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).


  A simple motion that the Committee of the Whole rise is privileged 
(VIII, 2369), takes precedence over a motion to amend (May 21, 1992, p. 
12394), and is not debatable (May 17, 2000, p. ----). However, the 
motion cannot interrupt a Member who has the floor (VIII, 2370, 2371) 
and may be ruled out when dilatory (VIII, 2800). For a further 
discussion of the motion to rise, see Sec. 334, supra.


  A point of order of no quorum may not be entertained, on a day on 
which a quorum has been established, during the period after the 
Committee of the Whole has risen after completing its consideration of a 
bill or resolution and before the Chairman of the Committee has reported 
the bill or resolution back to the House. The 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).


  (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.


[[Page 742]]

this provision was found in former clause 2(b) of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, 
Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----).

-  (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,


  (g) The Chairman may postpone a request for a recorded vote on any 
amendment. The Chairman may resume proceedings on a postponed request at 
any time. The Chairman may reduce to five minutes the minimum time for 
electronic voting on any postponed question that follows another 
electronic vote without interviewing business, provided that the minimum 
time for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions shall 
be 15 minutes.

  Paragraph (f) was added in the 102d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, 
p. 39). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, 
paragraph (f) 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 paragraph (July 
22, 1994, p. 17609).


[[Page 743]]

ceedings on a request for a recorded vote had been postponed could be 
modified by unanimous consent on the initiative of its proponent (Mar. 
30, 2000, p. ----); (3) a request for a recorded vote on an amendment on 
which proceedings had been postponed could be withdrawn by unanimous 
consent before proceedings resumed on the request as unfinished 
business, in which case the amendment stood disposed of by the voice 
vote thereon (May 16, 2000, p. ----); (4) it did not permit the Chair to 
postpone a vote on an appeal of a ruling of the Chair (even by unanimous 
consent) (June 8, 2000, p. ----); (5) the Committee of the Whole by 
unanimous consent could vacate postponed proceedings, thereby permitting 
the Chair to put the question de novo (June 20, 2000, p. ----); and (6) 
the Committee of the Whole could resume proceedings on unfinished 
business consisting of a ``stack'' of amendments even while another 
amendment was pending (July 10, 2000, p. ----). The offering of a pro 
forma amendment to discuss the legislative program, or an extended one-
minute speech by a Member to express gratitude to the Members on a 
personal matter, is considered intervening business such as to preclude 
a five-minute vote under this authority except by unanimous consent 
(June 22, 2000, p. ----; June 27, 2000, p. ----).
  Paragraph (g) was added in the 107th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 
2001, p. ----). Before the adoption of paragraph (g), the Chairman of 
the Committee of the Whole could not entertain a unanimous-consent 
request to reduce below 15 minutes the minimum time for recorded votes 
(June 18, 1987, p. 16764) or to postpone and cluster votes on amendments 
(July 13, 1995, p. 18871; Sept. 27, 1995, p. 26611; July 14, 1998, p. --
--). Special rules of the House prior to adoption of paragraph (g) 
routinely provided the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole authority 
to postpone and cluster requests for recorded votes. Where a special 
rule provided such authority: (1) use of that authority, and the order 
of clustering, was entirely within the discretion of the Chair (Aug. 5, 
1998, p. ----; Mar. 29, 2000, p. ----); (2) an amendment pending as 
unfinished business where pro



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).



Dispensing with the reading of an amendment
  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).


[[Page 744]]

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.



Sec. 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



Closing debate-
  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 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. ----).



Sec. 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.



[[Page 745]]

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.
  (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


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

  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 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. ----). A clerical correction was effected to 
paragraph (c) in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, 
p. ----).


[[Page 746]]

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. 15473). The guaranteed time applies to an amendment 
offered as a substitute for another amendment, rather than as a primary 
amendment, if offered in the precise form printed (June 26, 1979, p. 
16682), but where such a substitute amendment has not been printed in 
the Record it may not be debated unless time is yielded within the 
original 10 minutes (Dec. 10, 1987, p. 34710). Where a special order 
requires amendments to be printed in the Record to qualify during the 
consideration of a bill under the five-minute rule, but makes no 
designation concerning offerors, any printed amendment may be offered by 
any Member (Mar. 22, 1990, p. 5017); but only the Member causing the 
amendment to be printed is entitled to the time for debate guaranteed by 
this clause.
  The Speaker announced that amendments to be printed in the Record 
pursuant to this clause must be deposited in a separate box at the 
Rostrum

  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 747]]

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. 19788). 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). 
However, where debate has been limited to a time certain, such 
activities as reading and voting consume time otherwise available for 
debate (May 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


[[Page 748]]

  Under a limitation on debate the Chair may, in his discretion, choose 
among the following: (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; May 10, 2000, 
p. ----). 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 time for debate has been 
limited 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; Feb. 28, 1995, pp. 6306-08; May 10, 2000, p. 
----). 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).


Striking the enacting clause
  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).




Sec. 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 constitute 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.



[[Page 749]]

(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).
  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, 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



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), 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).


  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 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.


[[Page 750]]

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).
  A second motion to strike out the enacting clause is not entertained 
on the same legislative day 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

  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 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). 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).


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


[[Page 751]]

under section 305(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
concurrent resolution shall be considered as read for amendment.


Sec. 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


  (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--

      (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.



[[Page 752]]


  (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.


Unfunded mandates
  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 the House were made 
applicable to the third concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal 
year 1980 as well as the first concurrent resolution on the budget for 
fiscal year 1981 (H. Res. 642, Apr. 23, 1980, 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. ----).



Sec. 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.



[[Page 753]]

Applicability of Rules of the House
  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. 35077), 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. ----).




Sec. 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 754]]

special order (July 28, 1988, p. 19491; Speaker Wright, Aug. 11, 1988, 
p. 22105; June 10, 1998, p. ----; July 29, 1999, p. ----); (13) to 
permit another to offer an amendment vested in a specified Member (May 
1, 1990, p. 9030); or (14) 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.

  A unanimous-consent  request may not be entertained in the Committee of the Whole 
by the Chair if its 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 amendment to a committee amendment 
(Aug. 2, 1977, p. 26161); (2) to permit a substitute to be read by 
section 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. ----; Oct. 21, 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. 
26611; 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 postpone a vote on an appeal of a ruling of the Chair (June 8, 
2000, p. ----); (10) 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); (11) 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. ----); (12) 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


  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, if the request is propounded by 
the proponent of the amendment (Sept. 1, 1976, p. 28877; Nov. 19, 1993, 
p. 30472; July 24, 1996, p. 18906; Mar. 29, 2000, p. ----), including as 
unfinished business where proceedings on a request for a recorded vote 
have been postponed (Mar. 30, 2000, p. ----); (2) to permit a page 
reference to be included in a designated amendment made in order as 
printed where the printed amendment did not include that reference (Apr. 
1, 1976, p. 9091); (3) to permit a supporter of an amendment to claim 
debate time allocated by special order to an opponent, where no opponent 
seeks recognition (May 23, 1990, p. 11988); (4) to shorten the time set 
by special order for debate on a particular amendment (Aug. 1, 1990, p. 
21510; Mar. 29, 1995, p. 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, p. 11646; Mar. 22, 1995, p. 8769; June 27, 1995, p. 
17329; Nov. 2, 1995, p. 31376); (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); (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); (9) to reach 
ahead in the reading of a general appropriation bill to consider one 
amendment without prejudice to others earlier in the bill under a 
special order of the House contemplating that each remaining amendment 
be offered only at the ``appropriate point in the reading of the bill'' 
(Mar. 29, 2000, p. ----); and (10) to permit the reading of an amendment 
that already was considered as read under the special order of the House 
(June 13, 2000, p. ----).


[[Page 755]]

description of the authority under clause 6(g) of this rule for the 
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone and cluster requests 
for recorded votes on amendments (which, prior to the adoption of that 
clause, was routinely provided by special orders of the House), and the 
Chair's interpretation thereof, see Sec. 984, infra.

  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). The Chair advised the Committee that an amendment made in 
order was described by subject matter rather than by prescribed text and 
that the pending amendment fit such description (July 20, 2000, p. ----
). For a