    [Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 109th Congress]
    [109th Congress]
    [House Document 108-241]
    [Rules of the House of Representatives]
    [Pages 331-955]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    [[Page 331]]

    ========================================================================

    ========================================================================

    [[Page 333]]

                      RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

        RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WITH NOTES AND ANNOTATIONS

                                   __________

                                     Rule I

    Approval of the Journal
                                   the speaker

    621. Journal; Speaker's approval.

      1. The Speaker shall take the Chair on every legislative day precisely
    at the hour to which the House last adjourned and immediately call the
    House to order.  Having
    examined and approved the Journal of the last day's proceedings, the
    Speaker shall announce to the House his approval thereof. The Speaker's
    approval of the Journal shall be deemed agreed to unless a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner demands a vote thereon. If such a
    vote is decided in the affirmative, it shall not be subject to a motion
    to reconsider. If such a vote is decided in the negative, then one
    motion that the Journal be read shall be privileged, shall be decided
    without debate, and shall not be subject to a motion to reconsider.

      This clause was adopted in 1789, amended in 1811, 1824 (II, 1310),
    1971 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, pp. 140-44, with the implementation of
    the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, 84 Stat. 1140), and 1979 (H.
    Res. 5, 96th Cong., Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7, 16). Clerical and stylistic
    changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 334]]

    Congress, the House by standing order formalized the practice of varying
    its convening time to accommodate committee meetings on certain days of
    the week and to maximize time for floor action on other days (H. Res. 7,
    Jan. 4, 1977, p. 70; H. Res. 949, Jan. 19, 1978, p. 108; H. Res. 9, Jan.
    15, 1979, p. 17; H. Res. 522, Jan. 22, 1980, p. 188; H. Res. 8, Jan. 5,
    1981, p. 114; H. Res. 313, Jan. 25, 1982, p. 62; H. Res. 8, Jan. 3,
    1983, p. 51; H. Res. 388, Jan. 23, 1984, p. 74; H. Res. 9, Jan. 3, 1985,
    p. 414; H. Res. 355, Jan. 21, 1986, p. 2; H. Res. 7, Jan. 6, 1987, p.
    19; H. Res. 348, Jan. 25, 1988, p. 39; H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 82;
    H. Res. 304, Jan. 23, 1990, p. 3; H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 63; H.
    Res. 330, Jan. 28, 1992, p. 684; H. Res. 7, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 101; H.
    Res. 327, Jan. 25, 1994, p. 88; H. Res. 8, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 547; H. Res.
    327, Jan. 3, 1996, p. 36; H. Res. 9, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 143; H. Res. 337,
    Jan. 27, 1998, p. 75; H. Res. 14, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 246; H. Res. 403,
    Jan. 27, 2000, p. 132; H. Res. 9, Jan. 3, 2001, p. ----; H. Res. 333,
    Jan. 23, 2002, p. ----). In the 108th Congress and first session of the
    109th Congress, the House provided that it would meet at 2 p.m. on
    Mondays, noon on Tuesdays, and 10 a.m. on the balance of the week
    through a date certain in May, after which it would meet at noon on
    Mondays, 10 a.m. on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, and 9 a.m. on
    the balance of the week for the remainder of the session (H. Res. 9,
    Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----; H. Res. 488, Jan. 20, 2004, p. ----; H. Res. 8,
    Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). The House retains the right to vary from this
    schedule by use of the motion to fix the day and time to which the House
    shall adjourn as provided in clause 4 of rule XVI. By special order, the
    House may provide for a session of the House on a Sunday, traditionally
    a ``dies non'' under the precedents of the House (Dec. 17, 1982, p.
    31946; Dec. 18, 1987, p. 36352; Nov. 19, 1989, p. 30029; Aug. 20, 1994,
    p. 23367; Nov. 7, 1997, p. 25160; Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25483). Beginning in
    the second session of the 103d Congress, the House has by unanimous
    consent agreed to convene earlier on Mondays and Tuesdays for morning-
    hour debate and then recess to the hour established for convening under
    a previous order (see Sec. 951, infra).
      The hour of meeting is fixed by standing order, and was traditionally
    set at 12 m. (I, 104-109, 116, 117; IV, 4325); but beginning in the 95th

    [[Page 335]]

    er's announcement of his approval of the Journal (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15,
    1979, pp. 7, 16). If a quorum fails to respond on a motion incident to
    the approval, reading, or amendment of the Journal, and there is an
    objection to the vote, a call of the House under clause 6 of rule XX is
    automatic (Feb. 2, 1977, p. 3342).
      Immediately after the Members are called to order, the prayer is
    offered by the Chaplain (IV, 3056), and the Speaker declines to
    entertain a point of no quorum before prayer is offered (VI, 663; clause
    7 of rule XX). Before the 96th Congress, clause 1 of rule I directed the
    Speaker to announce his approval of the Journal on the appearance of a
    quorum after having called the House to order. Under that form of the
    rule, a point of no quorum could be made after the prayer and before the
    approval of the Journal when the House convened, notwithstanding the
    provisions of former clause 6(e) of rule XV (now clause 7 of rule XX),
    allowing such points of order in the House only when the Speaker had put
    the pending motion or proposition to a vote (Oct. 3, 1977, p. 31987).
    Similarly, prior practice had permitted a point of no quorum before the
    reading of the Journal (IV, 2733; VI, 625) or during its reading (VI,
    624). In the 96th Congress, the House eliminated the necessity for the
    appearance of a quorum before the Speak

      Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Speaker may postpone until a
    later time on the same legislative day a record vote on the Speaker's
    approval of the Journal. Where the House adjourns on consecutive days
    without having approved the Journal of the previous days' proceedings,
    the Speaker puts the question de novo in chronological order as the
    first order of business on the subsequent day (Nov. 3, 1987, p. 30592).

      Before the 92d Congress, the reading of the Journal was mandatory,
    could not be dispensed with except by unanimous consent (VI, 625; Sept.
    19, 1962, p. 19941), or by motion to suspend the rules (IV, 2747-2750).
    It had to be read in full when demanded by any Member (IV, 2739-2741;
    VI, 627, 628; Feb. 22, 1950, p. 2152), but the demand came too late
    after the Journal was approved (VI, 626). Under the rule as in effect
    from the 92d Congress through the 95th Congress, any Member could offer
    a privileged, nondebatable motion that the Journal be read pending the
    Speaker's announcement of his approval and before agreement by the House
    (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11482).

      The Journal of the last day of a session is not read on the first day
    of the next session (IV, 2742). No business is transacted before the
    approval of the Journal (or the postponement of a vote under clause 8 of
    rule XX on agreeing to the Speaker's approval), including consideration
    of a conference report (IV, 2751-2756; VI, 629, 630, 637). However, the
    motion to adjourn (IV, 2757; Speaker Wright, Nov. 2, 1987, p. 30387) and
    the swearing-in of a Member (I, 172) could take precedence.

      Once begun, the reading may not be interrupted, even by business so
    highly privileged as a conference report (V, 6443; rule XXII). However,
    a parliamentary inquiry (VI, 624), an arraignment of impeachment (VI,
    469), or a question of privilege relating to a breach of privilege (such
    as an assault occurring during the reading) may interrupt its reading or
    approval (II, 1630).

    [[Page 336]]

    Preservation of order
    <>   2. The Speaker shall preserve order and decorum and, in case
    of disturbance or disorderly conduct in the galleries or in the lobby,
    may cause the same to be cleared.

      Under the prior rule, the Speaker's examination and approval of the
    Journal was preliminary to the reading and did not preclude subsequent
    amendment by the House itself (IV, 2734-2738). If the Speaker's approval
    of the Journal is rejected, a motion to amend takes precedence of a
    motion to approve (IV, 2760; VI, 633), and a Member offering an
    amendment is recognized under the hour rule (Mar. 19, 1990, p. 4488);
    but the motion is not admissible after the previous question is demanded
    on the motion to approve (IV, 2770; VI, 633; VIII, 2684; Sept. 13, 1965,
    p. 23600).

      This clause was adopted in 1789 and amended in 1794 (II, 1343).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      The Speaker may name a Member who is disorderly, but may not, of his
    own authority, censure or punish him (II, 1344, 1345; VI, 237). In cases
    of extreme disorder in the Committee of the Whole the Speaker has taken
    the chair and restored order without a formal rising of the Committee
    (II, 1348, 1648-1653, 1657); and the Speaker, as an exercise of his
    authority under this clause, has on his own initiative declared the
    House in recess in an emergency (Speaker Martin, 83d Cong., Mar. 1,
    1954, p. 2424). A former Member must observe the rules of decorum while
    on the floor, and the Speaker may request the Sergeant-at-Arms to assist
    him in maintaining such decorum (Sept. 17, 1997, pp. 19026, 19027).

      The authority to have the galleries cleared has been exercised but
    rarely (II, 1352; Speaker Albert, Jan. 18, 1972, p. 9). On one occasion,
    acting on the basis of police reports and other evidence, the Speaker
    ordered the galleries cleared before the House convened (May 10, 1972,
    p. 16576) and then informed the House of his decision. In an early
    instance the Speaker ordered the arrest of a person in the gallery; but
    this exercise of power was questioned (II, 1605). In response to a
    disruptive demonstration in the gallery, the Chair notes for the Record
    the disruptive character of the demonstration and enlists the Sergeant-
    at-Arms to remove the offending parties (Oct. 8, 2002, p. ----; Oct. 10,
    2002, p. ----).

    [[Page 337]]

    the page or to use the page as though part of the exhibit (June 11,
    2003, p. ----; Speaker Hastert, June 12, 2003, p. ----). The Chair will
    distinguish between using an exhibit in the immediate area the Member is
    addressing the House as a visual aid for the edification of Members and
    staging an exhibition; for example, a Member having a large number of
    his colleagues accompany him in the well, each carrying a part of his
    exhibit, was held to impair the decorum of the House (June 12, 2003, p.
    ----). The Speaker may inquire as to a Member's intentions, as to the
    use of exhibits, before conferring recognition to address the House
    (Mar. 21, 1984, p. 6187). In the 101st Congress both the Speaker and the
    Chairman of the Committee of the Whole reinforced the Chair's authority
    to control the use of exhibits in debate, distinguishing between the
    constitutional authority of the House to make its own rules and first
    amendment rights of free speech, and the use of all exhibits was
    prohibited during the consideration of a bill in the Committee of the
    Whole (Oct. 11, 1990, p. 28650). The Speaker may permit the display of
    an exhibit in the Speaker's lobby during debate on a measure (May 20,
    1999, p. 10280). Just as an appeal may be entertained on a decision from
    the Chair that a Member has engaged in personalities in debate (Sept.
    28, 1996, pp. 25780-82; see also clause 4 of rule XVII), so also may an
    appeal be entertained on a ruling of the Chair on the propriety of an
    exhibit (Nov. 16, 1995, p. 33395).
      Although Members are permitted to use exhibits such as charts during
    debate (subject to clause 6 of rule XVII), the Speaker may direct the
    removal of a chart from the well of the House which is not being
    utilized during debate (Apr. 1, 1982, p. 6304; Apr. 19, 1990, p. 7402).
    The Speaker's responsibility to preserve decorum requires that he
    disallow the use of exhibits in debate which would be demeaning to the
    House, or to any Member of the House, or which would be disruptive of
    the decorum thereof (Sept. 13, 1989, p. 20362; Oct. 16, 1990, p. 29647;
    Oct. 1, 1991, p. 24828; Nov. 16, 1995, p. 33395; Jan. 3, 1996, p. 42).
    The Speaker has disallowed the use of a person on the floor as a guest
    of the House as an ``exhibit,'' including a Member's child (see
    Sec. 678, infra). The Chair also has cautioned Members to refrain from
    using audio devices during debate (May 24, 2005, p. ----). Although a
    Member may enlist the assistance of a page to manage the placement of an
    exhibit on an easel, it is not appropriate to refer to

      At the request of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, the
    Speaker announced that (1) all handouts distributed on or adjacent to
    the floor must bear the name of a Member authorizing the distribution;
    (2) the content of such handouts must comport with the standards
    applicable to words used in debate; (3) failure to comply with these
    standards may constitute a breach of decorum and thus give rise to a
    question of privilege; (4) staff are prohibited in the Chamber or rooms
    leading thereto from distributing handouts and from attempting to
    influence Members with regard to legislation; and (5) Members should
    minimize the use of handouts to enhance the quality of debate (Sept. 27,
    1995, p. 26567; Mar. 20, 1996, p. 5644).

    [[Page 338]]

      Questions having been raised concerning proper attire for Members in
    the Chamber (thermostat controls having been raised to comply with a
    Presidential directive conserving energy in the summer months), the
    Speaker announced he considered traditional attire for Members
    appropriate, including coats and ties for male Members and appropriate
    attire for female Members, but that he would recognize for a question of
    privileges of the House to relax such standards. The Speaker also
    requested a Member in violation of those standards to remove himself
    from the Chamber and appear in appropriate attire, and refused to
    recognize such Member until he did so (Speaker O'Neill, July 17, 1979,
    p. 19008). The House later agreed to a resolution (presented as a
    question of the privileges of the House) requiring Members to wear
    proper attire as determined by the Speaker (July 17, 1979, p. 19072).

    Control of Capitol facilities
      Recognition is within the discretion of the Chair, and in order to
    uphold order and decorum in the House as required under clause 2 of rule
    I, the Speaker may deny a Member recognition for a ``one-minute speech''
    (Aug. 27, 1980, p. 23456). Furthermore, it is a breach of decorum for a
    Member to continue to speak beyond the time for which recognized (Mar.
    22, 1996, p. 6086; May 22, 2003, p. ----; Oct. 2, 2003, p. ----), and
    the Speaker may deny further recognition to such Member (Mar. 16, 1988,
    p. 4081), from which there is no appeal (see Sec. 629, infra). Even
    before adoption of the rules, the Speaker may maintain decorum by
    directing a Member engaging in such breach of decorum to be removed from
    the well and by directing the Sergeant-at-Arms to present the mace as
    the traditional symbol of order (Jan. 3, 1991, p. 58). A Member's
    comportment may constitute a breach of decorum even though the content
    of that Member's speech is not, itself, unparliamentary (July 29, 1994,
    p. 18609). Under this standard the Chair may deny further recognition to
    a Member engaged in unparliamentary debate who ignores repeated
    admonitions by the Chair to proceed in order (unless the Member is
    permitted to proceed by order of the House) (Sept. 18, 1996, p. 23535).

    623. Speaker's control of the Hall, corridors, and
    rooms.

      3.  Except as otherwise provided by rule or law, the Speaker shall
    have general control of the Hall of the House, the corridors and
    passages in the part of the Capitol assigned to the use of the House,
    and the disposal of unappropriated rooms in that part of the Capitol.

      This clause was adopted in 1811 and amended in 1824, 1885 (II, 1354),
    and 1911 (VI, 261). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 339]]

    Signature of documents
      Control of the appropriated rooms in the House portion of the Capitol
    is exercised by the House itself (V, 7273-7279), but repairs and
    alterations have been authorized by statute (V, 7280-7281; 59 Stat.
    472). On January 15, 1979, the Speaker announced his directive
    concerning free access by Members in the corridors approaching the
    Chamber (p. 19). The Speaker has declined to recognize for a unanimous-
    consent request to change the decor in the Chamber, stating that he
    would take the suggestion under advisement in exercising his authority
    under this clause (Mar. 2, 1989, p. 3220). The Speaker has announced
    that a joint Republican Conference and Democratic Caucus meeting would
    be held in the Chamber following the adjournment of the House on that
    day (July 27, 1998, p. 17466).

    624. Speaker's signature to acts, warrants, subpoenas,
    etc.

      4.  The Speaker shall sign all acts and joint resolutions passed by
    the two Houses and all writs, warrants, and subpoenas of, or issued by
    order of, the House. The Speaker may sign enrolled bills and joint
    resolutions whether or not the House is in session.

      The Speaker was given authority to sign acts, warrants, subpoenas,
    etc., in 1794 (II, 1313). The last sentence of this clause, granting the
    Speaker standing authority to sign enrolled bills, even if the House is
    not in session, was added in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981,
    pp. 98-113). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, clauses 4 and 5 occupied a single clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 625. Signing of enrolled bills.

      Enrolled  bills are
    signed first by the Speaker (IV, 3429). For precedents relevant to the
    signing of enrolled bills before this clause was amended to permit the
    Speaker to sign at any time, see IV, 3458, and V, 5705. Before the
    adoption of clause 2(d)(2) of rule II (enabling the Clerk to examine
    enrolled bills), the House authorized the Speaker to sign an enrolled
    bill before the Committee on Enrolled Bills could attest to its accuracy
    (IV, 3452). In cases of error the House has permitted the Speaker's
    signature to be vacated (IV, 3453, 3455-3457; VII, 1077-1080). Under the
    modern practice, the Committee of the Whole may rise informally without
    motion to enable the Speaker to assume the Chair and to sign an enrolled
    bill and lay it before the House (Jan. 28, 1980, p. 888; Apr. 30, 1980,
    p. 9505).

    [[Page 340]]

    Questions of order

    Sec. 626. Signing of warrants, subpoenas,
    etc.

      Warrants,  subpoenas, etc., during recesses of Congress are signed only by
    authority specially given (III, 1753, 1763, 1806). The issuing of
    warrants must be specially authorized by the House (I, 287) or pursuant
    to a standing rule (clause 6 of rule XX; Sec. 1026, infra). Instance
    wherein the House authorized the Speaker to warrant for the arrest of
    absentees (VI, 638). The Speaker also signs the articles, replications,
    etc., in impeachments (III, 2370, 2455; e.g., H. Res. 611, Dec. 19,
    1998, p. 28112); and certifies cases of contumacious witnesses for
    action by the courts (III, 1691, 1769; VI, 385; 2 U.S.C. 194). A
    subpoena validly issued by a committee authorized by the House under
    clause 2(m) of rule XI to issue subpoenas need only be signed by the
    chairman of that committee, whereas when the House issues an order or
    warrant, the Speaker must issue the summons under his hand and seal, and
    it must be attested by the Clerk (III, 1668; see H. Rept. 96-1078, p.
    22).

    627. Questions of order.

      5.  The Speaker shall decide all
    questions of order, subject to appeal by a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner. On such an appeal a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner may not speak more than once without permission of the
    House.

      This rule was adopted in 1789 and amended in 1811. Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, clauses 4 and 5 occupied a
    single clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 628. Practice governing the Speaker in deciding
    points of order.

      The  Speaker may require that a question of order be
    presented in writing (V, 6865). When enough of a proposition has been
    read to show that it is out of order, the question of order may be
    raised without waiting for the reading to be completed (V, 6886, 6887;
    VIII, 2912, 3378, 3437), though the Chair may decline to rule until the
    entire proposition has been read (Dec. 14, 1973, pp. 41716-18). For
    example, the Chair declined to entertain a point of order that a motion
    to recommit was not germane before any nongermane portion of the motion
    had been read (May 9, 2003, p. ----); and a motion to recommit with
    instructions was ruled out of order before the entire motion had been
    read as a matter of form where a special order of business precluded
    instructions (May 6, 2004, p. ----). Questions arising during a division
    are decided peremptorily (V, 5926), and when they arise out of any other
    question must be decided before that question (V, 6864). In rare
    instances the Speaker has declined to rule until he has taken time for
    examination of the question (III, 2725; VI, 432; VII, 2106; VIII, 2174,
    2396, 3475).

    [[Page 341]]

    sent has allowed a Member to revise and extend his remarks to follow the
    ruling on a point of order (July 13, 2000, p. 14095). A Member may raise
    multiple points of order simultaneously, and the Chair may hear argument
    and rule on each question individually (Mar. 28, 1996, pp. 6931, 6933);
    or the Chair may choose to rule on only one of the points of order
    raised (July 24, 1998, p. 17278). Where a Member incorrectly demands the
    ``regular order,'' rather than making a point of order to assert that
    remarks are not confined to the question under debate, the Chair may
    treat the demand as a point of order and rule thereon (May 1, 1996, p.
    9889).
      Debate on a point of order, being for the Chair's information, is
    within the Chair's discretion (see, e.g., V, 6919, 6920; VIII, 3446-
    3448; Deschler-Brown, ch. 29, Sec. 67.3; Jan. 24, 1996, p. 1248; Sept.
    12, 1996, p. 22901; Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25420). Debate is confined to the
    question of order and may not extend to the merits of the proposition
    against which it lies or to parliamentarily similar propositions
    permitted to remain in the pending bill by waivers of points of order
    (e.g., July 18, 1995, p. 19335; June 22, 2000, p. 12078; Oct. 16, 2003,
    p. ----). Members must address the Chair and cannot engage in colloquies
    on the point of order (e.g., Sept. 18, 1986, p. 24083; Oct. 16, 2003, p.
    ----), nor can they offer pro forma amendments to debate the point of
    order (July 21, 1998, p. 16369). To ensure that the arguments recorded
    on a question of order are those actually heard by the Chair before
    ruling, the Chair will not entertain a unanimous-consent request to
    permit a Member to revise and extend remarks on a point of order (Sept.
    22, 1976, p. 31873; May 15, 1997, p. 8493, 8494; July 24, 1998, p.
    17278). However, the Committee of the Whole by unanimous con

      The Chair is constrained to give precedent its proper influence (II,
    1317; VI, 248). While the Chair will normally not disregard a decision
    of the Chair previously made on the same facts (IV, 4045), such
    precedents may be examined and reversed where shown to be erroneous (IV,
    4637; VI, 639; VII, 849; VIII, 2794, 3435; Sept. 12, 1986, p. 23178).
    The authoritative source for proper interpretations of the rules are
    statements made directly from the Chair and not comments made by the
    Speaker in other contexts (May 25, 1995, p. 14437; Sept. 19, 1995, p.
    25454). Preserving the authority and binding force of parliamentary law
    is as much the duty of each Member of the House as it is the duty of the
    Chair (VII, 1479). The Speaker's decisions are recorded in the Journal
    (IV, 2840, 2841), but responses to parliamentary inquiries are not so
    recorded (IV, 2842).

      The Chair does not decide on the legislative or legal effect of
    propositions (II, 1274, 1323, 1324; VI, 254; VII, 2112; VIII, 2280,
    2841; Mar. 16, 1983, p. 5669; May 13, 1998, p. 9129), on the consistency
    of proposed action with other acts of the House (II, 1327-1336; VII,
    2112, 2136; VIII, 3237, 3458), whether Members have abused leave to
    print (V, 6998-7000; VIII, 3475), or on the propriety or expediency of a
    proposed course of action (II, 1275, 1325, 1326, 1337; IV, 3091-3093,
    3127).

      Also, the Chair does not rule on: (1) the constitutional power of the
    House (II, 1490; IV, 3507), such as the constitutional authority of the
    House to propose a rule of the House, such matter appropriately being
    decided by way of the question of consideration or disposition of the
    proposal (Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----); (2) the constitutional competency of
    proposed legislation (II, 1255, 1318-1322, VI, 250, 251; VIII, 2225,
    3031, 3427; July 21, 1947, pp. 9522, 9551; May 13, 1948, p. 5817; Oct.
    10, 1998, p. 25424); (3) the constitutional rights of Members (VIII,
    3071).

    [[Page 342]]

    proceedings had been postponed (June 27, 1994, p. 14593; June 12, 2000,
    p. 10377); (3) the admissibility under clause 2 of rule XXI of an
    amendment already pending (July 29, 1998, p. 17963), against which all
    points of order had been waived (July 27, 1995, p. 20800); (4) the
    admissibility of an amendment at a future date, pending a ruling of the
    Chair on its immediate admissibility (June 25, 1997, p. 12488). The
    Chair will not declare judgment on the propriety of words taken down
    before they are read to the House (Sept. 21, 2001, p. ----). The Chair
    does not take cognizance of complaints relating to pairs (VIII, 3087).
    The Chair passes on the validity of conference reports (V, 6409, 6410,
    6414-6416; VIII, 3256, 3264), but not on the sufficiency of the
    accompanying statements as distinguished from the form (V, 6511-6513),
    or on the question of whether a conference report violates instructions
    of the House (V, 6395; VIII, 3246). As to reports of committees, he does
    not decide as to their sufficiency (II, 1339; IV, 4653), or whether the
    committee has followed instructions (II, 1338; IV, 4404, 4689); or on
    matters arising in the Committee of the Whole (V, 6927, 6928, 6932-6937;
    Dec. 12, 1985, p. 36173); but he has decided as to the validity of the
    authorization of a report (IV, 4592, 4593) and has indicated that a
    point of order could be raised at a proper time where the content of a
    filed report varies from that approved by the committee (May 16, 1989,
    p. 9356). An objection to the use of an exhibit under clause 6 of rule
    XVII (formerly rule XXX) is not a point of order on which the Chair must
    rule (July 31, 1996, pp. 20694, 20700). Before the rule was rewritten in
    the 107th Congress, it required that the Chair put the question whether
    the exhibit may be used. It now merely permits the Chair to put such
    question (sec. 2(o), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). A complaint that
    certain remarks that might be uttered in debate would improperly
    disclose executive-session material of a committee is not cognizable as
    a point of order in the House where the Chair is not aware of the
    executive-session status of the information (Nov. 5, 1997, p. 24648). A
    request that the voting display be turned on during debate is not in
    order (Oct. 12, 1998, p. 25770). The assertion that a Member may be
    inconvenienced by the legislative schedule announced by the Leadership
    does not give rise to a point of order that the Member cannot attend
    both to House and constituent duties at the same time (Nov. 10, 1999, p.
    29537).
      The Chair is not required to decide a question not directly presented
    by the proceedings (II, 1314). Furthermore, it is not his duty to decide
    a hypothetical question (VI, 249, 253; Nov. 20, 1989, p. 30225),
    including: (1) the germaneness of an amendment not yet offered (Dec. 12,
    1985, p. 36167; May 5, 1988, p. 9936; May 18, 1988, p. 11404; Mar. 22,
    2000, p. 3283) or previously offered and entertained without a point of
    order (June 6, 1990, p. 13194); (2) the admissibility under existing
    Budget Act allocations of an amendment not yet offered, particularly
    where the Chair's response might depend on the disposition of a prior
    amendment on which

    [[Page 343]]

    8 of rule XVII) that the Record be a substantially verbatim account of
    remarks made during House proceedings, extended to statements and
    rulings of the Chair (Jan. 20, 1995, p. 1866).
      Before the 104th Congress, precedents and applicable guidelines
    allowed the Chair to refine a ruling on a point of order in the Record
    in order to clarify the ruling without changing its substance, including
    one sustained by the House on appeal (Feb. 19, 1992, p. 2461; see H.
    Res. 230, 99th Cong., July 31, 1985, p. 21783; and H. Rept. 99-228 (in
    accordance with existing accepted practices, the Chair may make such
    technical or parliamentary corrections or insertions in transcript as
    may be necessary to conform to rule, custom, or precedent); see also H.
    Res. 330, 101st Cong., Feb. 7, 1990, p. 1515, and report of House
    Administration task force on Record inserted by Speaker Foley, Oct. 27,
    1990, p. 37124). However, the Chair ruled that the requirement of former
    clause 9 of rule XIV (now clause

      In interpreting the language of a special order adopted by the House,
    the Chair will not look behind the unambiguous language of the
    resolution itself (June 18, 1986, p. 14267). Questions concerning
    informal guidelines of the Committee on Rules for advance submission of
    amendments for possible inclusion under a ``modified closed'' rule may
    not be raised under the guise of parliamentary inquiry (May 5, 1988, p.
    9938). Because the Chair refrains from issuing advisory opinions on
    hypothetical or anticipatory questions of order, the Chair will not
    interpret a special order before it is adopted by the House (Oct. 14,
    1986, p. 30862; July 27, 1993, p. 17116; July 27, 1995, p. 20741; Jan.
    5, 1996, p. 366; Mar. 28, 1996, p. 7064; June 28, 2000, p. 12649; Mar.
    8, 2001, p. 3229; May 22, 2002, p. ----; Oct. 17, 2003, p. ----). Thus,
    the Chair has declined to identify provisions in a bill as ostensible
    objects of a waiver in the pending resolution providing a special order
    for that bill (Oct. 19, 1995, pp. 28503, 28504; Oct. 26, 1995, p. 29477;
    Mar. 28, 1996, p. 7064); to determine whether a bill, for which the
    pending resolution provides a special order waiving any requirement for
    a three-fifths vote on passage, actually ``carries'' a Federal income
    tax rate increase under clause 5 of rule XXI (Oct. 26, 1995, p. 29477);
    or to opine whether an amendment might be in order in the Committee of
    the Whole (May 22, 2002, p. ----; Oct. 17, 2003, p. ----). The Chair
    will not compare the text made in order by a pending special order as
    original text for further amendment with the text reported by the
    committee of jurisdiction (Oct. 19, 1995, p. 28503). Similarly, the
    Chair will not issue an advisory opinion on how debate on a pending
    resolution will bear on the Chair's ultimate interpretation of the
    resolution as an order of the House (Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19343).

      Recognition for parliamentary inquiry lies in the discretion of the
    Chair (VI, 541; Apr. 7, 1992, p. 8273). The Speaker may recognize and
    respond to a parliamentary inquiry although the previous question may
    have been demanded (Mar. 27, 1926, p. 6469). While the Chair may in his
    discretion recognize Members for parliamentary inquiries when no other
    Member is occupying the floor for debate, when another Member has the
    floor he must yield for a parliamentary inquiry (Oct. 1, 1986, p. 27465;
    July 13, 1989, p. 14633). A Member under recognition for a parliamentary
    inquiry may not yield to another Member (Nov. 22, 2002, p. ----).

    [[Page 344]]

      On a difficult question of order, the Speaker has declined to rule
    until he has taken time for examination (III, 2725; VI, 432; VII, 2106;
    VIII, 2174, 2396, 3475); and he may take a parliamentary inquiry under
    advisement, especially where not related to the pending proceedings
    (VIII, 2174; Apr. 7, 1992, p. 8273). The Chair responds to parliamentary
    inquiries relating in a practical sense to the pending proceedings but
    does not respond to requests to place them in historical context (June
    25, 1992, p. 16174; Jan. 3, 1996, pp. 36-41; Nov. 5, 1997, p. 24653;
    Sept. 9, 2003, p. ----).

      The Speaker may entertain a parliamentary inquiry during a record vote
    if it relates to the vote (Oct. 9, 1997, p. 22017; Oct. 6, 1999, p.
    24199; Sept. 9, 2003, p. ----; Mar. 30, 2004, p. ----). However, the
    Speaker will not respond to a request to place the length of a record
    vote in historical context (Sept. 9, 2003, p. ----) or explain the
    exercise of his discretion to hold a vote open beyond the minimum time
    prescribed under clause 2 of rule XX (Mar. 30, 2004, p. ----).

      A proper parliamentary inquiry relates to an interpretation of a House
    rule, not of a statute or of the Constitution (Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25424).
    The Chair will not respond to a parliamentary inquiry to: (1) judge the
    propriety of words spoken in debate pending a demand that those words be
    ``taken down'' as unparliamentary (June 8, 1995, p. 15267); (2) judge
    the veracity of remarks in debate (June 5, 1996, p. 13195; June 17,
    2004, p. ----); (3) judge the propriety of words uttered earlier in
    debate (June 15, 2000, p. 11106); (4) reexamine and explain the validity
    of a prior ruling (Oct. 26, 1995, p. 29477); (5) anticipate the
    precedential effect of a ruling (Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25424); (6) judge the
    accuracy of the content of an exhibit (Nov. 10, 1995, p. 32142); (7)
    indicate which side of the aisle has failed under the Speaker's
    guidelines to clear a unanimous-consent request (Feb. 1, 1996, p. 2260;
    Nov. 22, 2002, p. ----); (8) respond to political commentary (June 25,
    1998, p. 13978; Apr. 4, 2001, p. 5417; Oct. 8, 2004, p. ----); (9)
    comment on the effect of time consumed on a pending amendment as a
    tactic to prevent the offering of other amendments under a special order
    adopted by the House (May 10, 2000, p. 7508); (10) anticipate whether
    bill language would trigger certain executive actions; (11) interpret a
    pending proposition (Sept. 20, 1989, p. 20969; May 13, 1998, p. 9129);
    (12) judge the appropriateness of Senate action (Apr. 10, 2003, p. ----
    ). The Chair may clarify a prior response to a parliamentary inquiry
    (July 31, 1996, p. 20700).

      The Speaker rarely submits a question directly to the House for its
    decision (IV, 3173, 3282, 4930; V, 5014, 5323, 6701; VI, 49; Speaker
    Longworth, Apr. 8, 1926, p. 7148; Dec. 19, 1998, p. 28107), and rarely
    raises and submits a question on his own initiative (II, 1277, 1315,
    1316; VIII, 3405). Even as to questions of privilege he usually, in
    later practice, makes a preliminary decision instead of submitting the
    question directly to the House (III, 2648, 2649, 2650, 2654, 2678;
    Speaker Wright, Mar. 11, 1987, p. 5404).

    Sec. 629. Practice, governing appeals.

      The  right of appeal
    insures the House against the arbitrary control of the Speaker and
    cannot be taken away from the House (V, 6002). While a decision of the
    Chair on a point of order is subject to appeal on demand of any Member,
    a Member cannot secure a recorded vote on a point of order absent an
    appeal and the Chair's putting the question thereon (June 20, 1996, p.
    14847).

    [[Page 345]]

    (II, 1425-1428; VI, 292; VIII, 2429, 2646, 2762; July 23, 1993, p.
    16820; Apr. 4, 1995, p. 10298; June 17, 1999, p. 13465); (3) decision on
    dilatoriness of motions (V, 5731); (4) question on which an appeal has
    just been decided (IV, 3036; V, 6877); (5) Chair's count of the number
    rising to demand tellers (VIII, 3105), to demand a recorded vote (June
    24, 1976, p. 20390; June 14, 2000, p. 10841) or the yeas and nays (Sept.
    12, 1978, p. 28950), or to object to a request under the former rule
    that required a committee have permission to sit during floor
    proceedings under the five-minute rule (Sept. 12, 1978, p. 28984); (6)
    Chair's count of a quorum (July 24, 1974, p. 25012); (7) Chair's call of
    a voice vote (Aug. 10, 1994, p. 20766); (8) Chair's refusal to
    recapitulate a vote (VIII, 3128); (9) Chair's refusal under clause 7 of
    rule XX (formerly clause 6(e) of rule XV) to entertain a point of no
    quorum when a pending question has not been put to a vote (Sept. 16,
    1977, p. 29594); (10) determination that a Member's time in debate has
    expired (Mar. 22, 1996, p. 6086); (11) the Speaker's announcement of the
    whole number of the House upon the death, resignation, expulsion,
    disqualification, or removal of a Member (clause 5(d) of rule XX); (12)
    the Speaker's announcement of the content of a catastrophic quorum
    failure report under clause 5(c) of rule XX (Sec. 1024a, infra).
    Although an announcement by the Chair that an objection to a unanimous-
    consent request has been heard is not subject to appeal, the Chair's
    ruling on the timeliness of the objection is subject to appeal (Apr. 14,
    2005, p. ----).
      An appeal may not be entertained from the following: (1) response to a
    parliamentary inquiry (V, 6955; VIII, 3457); (2) decision on recognition

      An appeal also may not be entertained: (1) while another is pending
    (V, 6939-6941); (2) between the motion to adjourn and vote thereon (V,
    5361); (3) during a call of the yeas and nays (V, 6051); or (4) when
    dilatory (V, 5715-5722; VIII, 2822).

    [[Page 346]]

      An appeal may be debated (VII, 1608; VIII, 2347, 2375, 3453-3455; June
    24, 2003, p. ----); unless the motion is made to lay on the table (V,
    5301; Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4086), or the previous question is ordered (V,
    5448, 5449). An appeal from a decision relating to the priority of
    business (V, 6952), or relevancy of debate (V, 5056-5063) is not
    debatable. In practice in the House, a Member in favor of the ruling
    usually moves to lay the appeal on the table, thus shutting off debate
    (e.g., Oct. 8, 1968, p. 30215; Apr. 6, 1995, p. 10614). Debate in the
    House is under the hour rule (V, 4978), but may be closed at any time by
    the adoption of a motion for the previous question (V, 6947); or to lay
    on the table (VIII, 3453). Debate on an appeal in the Committee of the
    Whole is under the five-minute rule (VII, 1608; VIII, 2347, 2556a, 3454,
    3455; June 24, 2003, p. ----), and may be closed by motion to close
    debate or to rise and report (V, 6947, 6950; VIII, 3453). 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. 9954). An appeal may be withdrawn at
    any time before action by the House thereon (as where the Chair has not
    even stated the question on appeal) (May 6, 2004, p. ----).

    Form of a question
      A motion to postpone an appeal has been held in order (VIII, 2613).
    The Speaker may vote to sustain his own decision (IV, 4569; V, 5686,
    6956, 6957).

    630. Putting of the question by the Speaker.

      6.  The Speaker
    shall rise to put a question but may state it sitting. The Speaker shall
    put a question in this form: ``Those in favor (of the question), say
    `Aye.' ''; and after the affirmative voice is expressed, ``Those
    opposed, say `No.' ''. After a vote by voice under this clause, the
    Speaker may use such voting procedures as may be invoked under rule XX.

      This clause was adopted in 1789 (II, 1311). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this clause (formerly clause
    5) consisted of this clause and current clause 1(a), clause 1(b), and
    clause 2(a) of rule XX (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Discretion to vote
      The motion as stated by the Chair in putting the question and not as
    stated by the Member in offering the motion, is the proposition voted on
    (VI, 247). Under this paragraph the Speaker must put the pending
    question to a voice vote before entertaining a demand for a recorded
    vote or the yeas and nays (Speaker Foley, Mar. 9, 1992, p. 4698). It is
    not in order for a Member having the floor in debate to conduct a
    ``straw vote'' or otherwise ask for a show of support for a proposition
    (Nov. 18, 1995, p. 33973).

    631. The Speaker's vote. Tie vote.

      7.  The Speaker is not
    required to vote in ordinary legislative proceedings, except when his
    vote would be decisive or when the House is engaged in voting by ballot.

      This clause was adopted in 1789, and amended in 1850 (V, 5964) and
    1911. Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    clause 7 (formerly clause 6) consisted of this clause and current clause
    1(c) of rule XX (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 347]]

    3075). During an electronic vote, the Speaker directs the Clerk to
    record him and verifies that instruction by submitting a vote card (Oct.
    17, 1990, p. 30229). The Speaker may vote to make a tie and so decide a
    question in the negative, as he may vote to break a tie and so decide a
    question in the affirmative (VIII, 3100; Aug. 14, 1957, p. 14783). The
    Speaker never has two votes on the same question; that is, having voted
    as a Member, he may not vote again should the result be a tie (V, 5964).
    The duty of giving a decisive vote may be exercised after the
    intervention of other business, or after the announcement of the result
    or on another day, if a correction of the roll shows a condition wherein
    his vote would be decisive (V, 5969, 6061-6063; VIII, 3075). In one
    instance the Speaker asserted a right to withdraw his vote where a
    correction indicated that it was unnecessary (V, 5971).
      Although the amendment of 1850 granted the Speaker the same right to
    vote as other Members (V, 5966, 5967), he has historically rarely
    exercised it (V, 5964, footnote). The Speaker's name is not on the roll
    from which the yeas and nays are called (V, 5970), is called only on his
    request (V, 5965), and is then called at the end of the roll by name (V,
    5965; VIII,

    Speaker pro tempore
      Before the vote by tellers was repealed (Sec. Sec. 1012-1013, infra),
    the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole could be counted on a vote by
    tellers without passing through the tellers (V, 5996, 5997; VIII, 3100,
    3101).

    632. Speaker pro tempore.

      8.  (a) The Speaker may appoint a
    Member to perform the duties of the Chair. Except as specified in
    paragraph (b), such an appointment may not extend beyond three
    legislative days.

      (b)(1) In the case of his illness, the Speaker may appoint a Member to
    perform the duties of the Chair for a period not exceeding 10 days,
    subject to the approval of the House. If the Speaker is absent and has
    omitted to make such an appointment, then the House shall elect a
    Speaker pro tempore to act during the absence of the Speaker.

      (2) With the approval of the House, the Speaker may appoint a Member
    to act as Speaker pro tempore only to sign enrolled bills and joint
    resolutions for a specified period of time.

    [[Page 348]]

    pore until the election of a Speaker or a Speaker pro tempore. Pending
    such election the Member acting as Speaker pro tempore may exercise such
    authorities of the Office of Speaker as may be necessary and appropriate
    to that end.
      (3)(A) In the case of a vacancy in the Office of Speaker, the next
    Member on the list described in subdivision (B) shall act as Speaker pro
    tem

      (B) As soon as practicable after his election and whenever he deems
    appropriate thereafter, the Speaker shall deliver to the Clerk a list of
    Members in the order in which each shall act as Speaker pro tempore
    under subdivision (A).

      (C) For purposes of subdivision (A), a vacancy in the Office of
    Speaker may exist by reason of the physical inability of the Speaker to
    discharge the duties of the office.

      This clause was adopted in 1811, and amended in 1876 (II, 1377) and in
    1920 (VI, 263). The clause was again amended in the 99th Congress to
    authorize the Speaker, with approval of the House, to designate a
    Speaker pro tempore to sign enrolled bills (H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1985, p.
    393). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    clause 8 (formerly clause 7) and clause 9 occupied a single clause (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clause 8(b)(3) was added in the 108th
    Congress (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). The Speaker
    delivers to the Clerk the list required under clause 8(b)(3)(B) and
    announces such delivery to the House (e.g., Mar. 13, 2003, p. ----; Jan.
    20, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 349]]

    not exercised by a Speaker pro tempore designated under paragraph (a) of
    this clause (II, 1399, 1400, 1404; VI, 274, 277; Sept. 21, 1961, p.
    20572; June 21, 1984, p. 17708). The House agreed by unanimous consent
    to the Speaker's appointment under this clause of two Members in the
    alternative to act as Speakers pro tempore to sign enrollments through a
    date certain (e.g., Aug. 6, 1998, p. 19128; Nov. 18, 1999, p. 30790).

    Sec. 634. Election, oath, and designation of Speaker pro
    tempore.

      The  right of the House to elect a Speaker pro tempore in the
    absence of the Speaker was exercised before the rule was adopted (II,
    1405), although the House sometimes preferred to adjourn (I, 179). An
    elected Speaker pro tempore in the earlier practice was not sworn (I,
    229; II, 1386); but the Senate and sometimes the President were notified
    of his election (II, 1386-1389, 1405-1412; VI, 275). On August 31, 1961
    (p. 17765), the House adopted House Resolution 445, electing Hon. John
    W. McCormack as Speaker pro tempore in the absence and terminal illness
    of Speaker Rayburn. The resolution provided that the Clerk notify the
    President and the Senate. The chairman of the Democratic Caucus then
    administered the oath. The Speaker has appointed a Speaker pro tempore
    to perform the duties of the Chair for a fourth consecutive day on
    account of illness (Speaker Hastert, Feb. 26, 2001, p. 2192). Elected
    Speakers pro tempore have signed enrolled bills, appointed select
    committees, administered the oath of office to a Member-elect (Mar. 17,
    1998, p. 3836), etc., functions

    Other responsibilities
      A call of the House may take place with a Speaker pro tempore in the
    chair (IV, 2989), and the Speaker pro tempore may issue a warrant for
    the arrest of absent Members under a call of the House (VI, 688). When
    the Speaker is not present at the opening of a session, including
    morning-hour debates, he designates a Speaker pro tempore in writing
    (II, 1378, 1401); but he does not always announce the Member whom he
    calls to the chair temporarily during the day's sitting (II, 1379,
    1400). The presence of the Speaker either at the opening of morning-hour
    debates or at the opening of the regular session on a day satisfies the
    requirement that the Speaker be present to convene the House at least
    every fourth day. A Speaker pro tempore elected under clause 8 of rule I
    may in turn designate another Member to act as Speaker pro tempore on a
    day certain (II, 1384; VI, 275; Feb. 23, 1996, p. 2807). Members of the
    minority have been called to the chair on occasions of ceremony (II,
    1383; VI, 270; Jan. 31, 1951, p. 779; Jan. 6, 1999, p. 41), but in rare
    instances on other occasions (II, 1382, 1390; III, 2596; VI, 264).

    635. Drug testing in the House.

      9.  The Speaker, in
    consultation with the Minority Leader, shall develop through an
    appropriate entity of the House a system for drug testing in the House.
    The system may provide for the testing of a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House, and otherwise shall be
    comparable in scope to the system for drug testing in the executive
    branch pursuant to Executive Order 12564 (Sept. 15, 1986). The expenses
    of the system may be paid from applicable accounts of the House for
    official expenses.

    [[Page 350]]

      This clause was added in the 105th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997,
    p. 121). Clerical and stylistic changes to this clause were effected
    when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This clause was redesignated from clause 13 to
    clause 9 in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p.
    ----).

    Designation of travel

    Sec. 635a. Former Term limit.

      Clause 9  formerly was occupied
    by a prohibition against the Speaker serving for more than four
    consecutive Congresses, which was added in the 104th Congress (sec.
    103(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462) and repealed in the 108th
    Congress (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, the former term-limit rule
    and current clause 8 occupied a single clause (formerly clause 7) (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    636. Travel authority.

      10.  The Speaker may designate a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House to travel on the business of the House within or without the
    United States, whether the House is meeting, has recessed, or has
    adjourned. Expenses for such travel may be paid from applicable accounts
    of the House described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X on vouchers approved
    and signed solely by the Speaker.

    Committee appointment
      This clause was adopted in the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14,
    1975, p. 20). In the 105th Congress this clause was amended to update
    archaic references to the ``contingent fund'' (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997,
    p. 121). In the 106th and 109th Congresses, clerical corrections were
    effected with respect to the ``applicable accounts of the House'' (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47; sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----
    ). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    clause and the provision now found in clause 10 of rule XXIV together
    occupied former clause 8 of this rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    See also Sec. Sec. 769, 770, infra, for discussion of the Speaker's
    authority under section 502(b) of the Mutual Security Act of 1954 (22
    U.S.C. 1754) to authorize use of counterpart funds for Members and
    employees for foreign travel, except where authorized by the chairman of
    the committee for members and employees thereof.

    [[Page 351]]

    may remove Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner from, or
    appoint additional Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner to,
    a select or conference committee. In appointing Members, Delegates, or
    the Resident Commissioner to conference committees, the Speaker shall
    appoint no less than a majority who generally supported the House
    position as determined by the Speaker, shall name those who are
    primarily responsible for the legislation, and shall, to the fullest
    extent feasible, include the principal proponents of the major
    provisions of the bill or resolution passed or adopted by the House.

    637. Select and conference committees.

      11. The  Speaker
    shall appoint all select, joint, and conference committees ordered by
    the House. At any time after an original appointment, the Speaker

      The provision of this clause relating to select committees was adopted
    in 1880, and the provision relating to conference committees was first
    adopted in 1890, although the practice of leaving the appointment of
    conference committees to the Speaker had existed from the earliest years
    of the House's history (IV, 4470; VIII, 2192). The provision authorizing
    the Speaker to add or remove select committee members or conferees after
    his initial appointment was added in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    5, 1993, p. 49). The provision requiring the Speaker to appoint a
    majority of Members who generally supported the House position became
    effective on January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470). The provision requiring the Speaker to appoint Members primarily
    responsible for the legislation was added in the 95th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6(f) of
    rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Before 1880 the House might take from the Speaker the appointment of a
    select committee (IV, 4448, 4470; VIII, 2192) and on several occasions
    did so (IV, 4471-4476). In the earlier practice of the House, the Member
    moving a select committee was appointed its chairman (II, 1275; III,
    2342; IV, 4514-4516). However, in modern practice, except for matters of
    ceremony, the inconvenience and even impropriety of the usage has caused
    it often to be disregarded (IV, 4517-4523, 4671). The Speaker has
    removed Members from a select committee (e.g., Sept. 8, 2004, p. ----).

    [[Page 352]]

    the Speaker to appoint as conferees Members who are primarily
    responsible for the legislation (Speaker O'Neill, Oct. 12, 1977, p.
    33434). A motion to instruct the Speaker as to the number and
    composition of a conference committee on the part of the House is not in
    order (VIII, 2193, 3221), and a motion to instruct conferees does not
    necessarily form the basis for the Speaker's determination under this
    clause as to which Members support the legislation (May 9, 1990, p.
    9830).
      It is within the discretion of the Chair as to whom he appoints as
    conferees (June 24, 1932, p. 13876; July 8, 1947, p. 8469), and his
    discretion is not subject to challenge on a point of order even though
    clause 11 requires

      The Speaker may appoint conferees from committees (1) which have not
    reported a measure, (2) which have jurisdiction over provisions of a
    non-germane Senate amendment to a House amendment to a Senate bill
    originally narrower in scope (Speaker O'Neill, Nov. 28, 1979, p. 33904),
    or (3) which have jurisdiction over provisions of an original Senate
    bill where the House amendment was narrower in scope (Speaker O'Neill,
    July 28, 1980, p. 19875; July 11, 1985, p. 18545). The Speaker may also
    appoint one who, although not a member of the committee of jurisdiction,
    is a principal proponent of the measure (Speaker Gingrich, Feb. 1, 1995,
    p. 3258) or a principal proponent of an adopted floor amendment (June
    21, 1977, p. 20132). The Speaker has appointed as sole conferees on a
    nongermane portion of a Senate bill or amendment only members from the
    committee having jurisdiction over the subject matter thereof (Speaker
    O'Neill, Aug. 27, 1980, p. 23548; July 24, 1986, p. 17644), and also
    members from such committees as additional rather than exclusive
    conferees on other nongermane portions of the Senate bill (July 24,
    1986, p. 17644). Where a comprehensive matter is committed to
    conference, the Speaker may appoint separate groups of conferees from
    several committees for concurrent or exclusive consideration of
    provisions within their respective jurisdictions (Feb. 7, 1990, p. 1522;
    May 9, 1990, p. 9830). Pursuant to this clause the Speaker may by the
    terms of his appointment empower a group of exclusive conferees to
    report in total disagreement (June 10, 1988, p. 14077; Sept. 20, 1989,
    p. 20955). Pursuant to this clause the Speaker may remove a conferee
    (e.g., Mar. 10, 1998, p. 3049). In the 102d Congress the Speaker
    reiterated his announced policy of simplifying conference appointments
    by noting on the occasion of a relatively complex appointment that,
    inasmuch as conference committees are select committees that dissolve
    when their report is acted upon, conference appointments should not be
    construed as jurisdictional precedent (Speaker Foley, June 3, 1992, p.
    13288). The Speaker may fill a vacancy on a conference committee by
    appointment but may not accept a resignation from a conference committee
    (as contrasted with his authority to remove) absent an order of the
    House (Nov. 4, 1987, p. 30808).

    [[Page 353]]

    Recess and Convening Authorities
      For a further discussion of the Speaker's authority to appoint
    conferees, see Sec. 536, supra.

    638. Short recess authority.

      12.  (a) To suspend the
    business of the House for a short time when no question is pending
    before the House, the Speaker may declare a recess subject to the call
    of the Chair.

      This paragraph was added as clause 12 of rule I in the 103d Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). It was redesignated as paragraph (a)
    in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).
    Having postponed proceedings on a pending question, the Speaker may
    declare a recess for a short time under this paragraph (there being no
    question then pending before the House) (Apr. 30, 1998, p. 7381). A
    Member's mere revelation that he seeks to offer a motion to adjourn does
    not suffice to make that motion ``pending,'' and thus the Chair remains
    able to declare a short recess under this paragraph (Oct. 28, 1997, p.
    23524; June 25, 2003, p. ----).

    Sec. 639. Emergency recess and reconvening authority.

      (b)  To
    suspend the business of the House when notified of an imminent threat to
    its safety, the Speaker may declare an emergency recess subject to the
    call of the Chair.

      (c) During any recess or adjournment of not more than three days, if
    the Speaker is notified by the Sergeant-at-Arms of an imminent
    impairment of the place of reconvening at the time previously appointed,
    then he may, in consultation with the Minority Leader--

          (1) postpone the time for reconvening within the limits of clause
    4, section 5, article I of the Constitution and notify Members
    accordingly; or

    [[Page 354]]

    5, article I of the Constitution and notify Members accordingly.
          (2) reconvene the House before the time previously appointed
    solely to declare the House in recess within the limits of clause 4,
    section

      (d) The Speaker may convene the House in a place at the seat of
    government other than the Hall of the House whenever, in his opinion,
    the public interest shall warrant it.

      Paragraphs (b)-(d) were added in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(c), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). For similar authority in the Senate, see
    Senate Resolution 296 (108th Cong., Feb. 3, 2003, p. ----). An emergency
    recess under paragraph (b) was declared by the Speaker pro tempore on
    May 11, 2005 (p. ----) and by the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole
    on June 29, 2005 (p. ----).

                                     Rule II

    Elections
                          other officers and officials

    640. Election, oath, and removal of officers.

      1.  There
    shall be elected at the commencement of each Congress, to continue in
    office until their successors are chosen and qualified, a Clerk, a
    Sergeant-at-Arms, a Chief Administrative Officer, and a Chaplain. Each
    of these officers shall take an oath to support the Constitution of the
    United States, and for the true and faithful exercise of the duties of
    his office to the best of his knowledge and ability, and to keep the
    secrets of the House. Each of these officers shall appoint all of the
    employees of his department provided for by law. The Clerk, Sergeant-at-
    Arms, and Chief Administrative Officer may be removed by the House or by
    the Speaker.

    [[Page 355]]

    was amended several times before 1880, when it assumed the form it
    retained for more than a century (I, 187). During the 102d Congress,
    section 2 of the House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992 amended
    the clause to abolish the Office of the Postmaster (see Sec. 668, infra)
    and to empower the Speaker to remove elected officers (H. Res. 423, Apr.
    9, 1992, p. 9039). The 104th Congress made conforming changes to the
    clause to reflect the abolishment of the Office of the Doorkeeper and
    the establishment of an elected Chief Administrative Officer (sec.
    201(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). Clerical and stylistic changes
    were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). For a discussion of the former Office
    of the Doorkeeper, see Sec. 663a, infra; and for a discussion of the
    evolution of the Chief Administrative Officer (an elected officer) from
    the former Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services (an
    officer appointed jointly by the Speaker and the Majority and Minority
    Leaders under clause 1 of rule VI of the 103d Congress), see Sec. 664,
    infra.
      When the House recodified its rules, it consolidated former rules II
    through VII, former clauses 10 and 11 of rule I, former clause 6 of rule
    XIII, and former clause 5 of rule XVI under rule II (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). A rudimentary form of this clause was adopted in 1789, and

      The House having discarded a theory that the rules might be imposed by
    one House on its successor (V, 6743-6745), it follows that this clause
    is not operative at the organization before the rules are adopted.
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, the House
    was required under former rule II to elect its Speaker and other
    officers by a viva voce vote following nominations (I, 204, 208).
    However, the officers mentioned in the rule, other than Speaker, were,
    even then, usually chosen by resolution, which is not a viva voce
    election (I, 193, 194). A majority vote is required for the election of
    officers of both Houses of Congress (VI, 23). The oath is administered
    by the Speaker to the officers (I, 81; Sec. 198, supra). The requirement
    that the officers be sworn to keep the secrets of the House had become
    obsolete (I, 187), but the 104th Congress adopted a requirement that
    Members, officers, and employees subscribe an oath of secrecy regarding
    classified information (clause 13 of rule XXIII). Clause 4(d)(1)(A) of
    rule X requires the Committee on House Administration to provide policy
    direction for, and oversight of, the Inspector General, and oversight of
    the Clerk, Sergeant-at-Arms, and Chief Administrative Officer (see
    Sec. 752, infra).

    [[Page 356]]

    1980, p. 4350; and Mar. 12, 1992, p. 5519), Clerk (Nov. 15, 1975, p.
    36901; Jan. 6, 1999, p. 257), Chaplain (Mar. 14, 1966, p. 5712; Mar. 23,
    2000, p. 3481), Doorkeeper (Dec. 20, 1974, p. 41855), and Chief
    Administrative Officer (Jan. 9, 1997, p. 279). A resolution electing a
    House officer is presented as a question of privilege (July 31, 1997, p.
    17021). The resignation of an elected officer of the House is subject to
    acceptance by the House (Mar. 23, 2000, p. 3480).

    Clerk
      The House has declined to interfere with the Clerk's power of removing
    his subordinates (I, 249). Employees under the Clerk and other officers
    are to be assigned only to the duties for which they are appointed (V,
    7232). The Sergeant-at-Arms having died, the Clerk was elected by the
    House to serve temporarily also as Sergeant-at-Arms without additional
    compensation (July 8, 1953, p. 8242). The Legislative Reorganization Act
    of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 75a-1) authorizes the Speaker to fill temporary
    vacancies in the offices of Clerk, Sergeant-at-Arms, Chief
    Administrative Officer, and Chaplain. A former version of the Act also
    permitted temporary appointments to the former offices of Doorkeeper and
    Postmaster. The Speaker has exercised his authority to fill temporary
    vacancies in the offices of Sergeant-at-Arms (Jan. 6, 1954, p. 8; June
    30, 1972, p. 23665; Feb. 28,

    641. Clerk; commencement of first session.

      2.  (a) At the
    commencement of the first session of each Congress, the Clerk shall call
    the Members, Delegates, and Resident Commissioner to order and proceed
    to record their presence by States in alphabetical order, either by call
    of the roll or by use of the electronic voting system. Pending the
    election of a Speaker or Speaker pro tempore, the Clerk shall preserve
    order and decorum and decide all questions of order, subject to appeal
    by a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.

      In 1880 several rules, adopted at different periods from 1794 to 1846,
    were consolidated into this clause, which, before the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, was found in rule III (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47). Paragraph (a) was initially framed in 1880, on a basis
    furnished by a rule of 1860 (I, 64), and amended in 1911.

    [[Page 357]]

    Sec. 642. Other duties of the Clerk.

      Various  administrative
    duties, similar to those specified in this clause, are imposed on the
    Clerk by law (I, 253; Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, 60 Stat.
    812); and the law also makes it his duty to furnish stationery, blank
    books, etc., to the committees and officers of the House (V, 7322); to
    exercise discretionary authority as to reprinting of bills and documents
    (V, 7319); to receive the testimony taken in election contests (I, 703,
    705; see also Federal Contested Election Act, P.L. 91-138, 83 Stat.
    284), to serve as an ex officio member of the Federal Election
    Commission established pursuant to Public Law 94-283; 2 U.S.C. 437c; and
    to make certain reports on receipts and expenditures (2 U.S.C. 102, 103,
    113; see Sec. 655, infra). Instance of Clerk serving temporarily also as
    Sergeant-at-Arms (July 8, 1953, p. 8242).

    Sec. 643. Clerk's duties at organization.

      As  rules are not
    usually adopted until after the election of the Speaker, this paragraph
    is not in force at the time of organization of a new House. The
    procedure at organization does, however, follow a practice conforming to
    the terms of the paragraph (I, 81), although the House may depart from
    it. Since the 97th Congress, for example, the House has permitted by
    unanimous consent the alphabetical roll call of Members by States to be
    conducted by electronic device to establish a quorum (Jan. 5, 1981, pp.
    93-96). For a discussion of procedure in the House before the adoption
    of rules, including the procedure by which the Clerk conducts the
    election of the Speaker, see Sec. Sec. 27, 60, supra. The Clerk, in
    presiding before the election of the Speaker, recognizes Members (I,
    74). The Members-elect have, before the election of the Speaker or
    adoption of rules, authorized the Clerk and Sergeant-at-Arms of the last
    House to preserve order (I, 101); but usually such action has not been
    taken, although an occasion might arise to make it necessary (I, 76,
    77).

      While the Speaker ceases to be an officer of the House with the
    expiration of a Congress, the Clerk, by old usage, continues in a new
    Congress (I, 187, 188, 235, 244).-

    Sec. 644. The roll of Memberselect.

      The  roll of Members is
    made up by the Clerk from the credentials, in accordance with a
    provision of law (I, 14-62; VI, 2; 2 U.S.C. 26). A certificate of
    election in due form having been filed, the Clerk placed the name of the
    Member-elect on the roll, although he was subsequently advised that a
    State Supreme Court had issued a writ restraining the Secretary of State
    from issuing such certificate (Jan. 3, 1949, p. 8). The call of the roll
    may not be interrupted, especially by one not on that roll (I, 84), and
    a person not on the roll may not be recognized (I, 86). A motion to
    proceed to the election of the Speaker is of higher privilege than a
    motion to correct the roll (I, 19-24). The House has declined to permit
    enrollment by the Clerk to be final as to prima facie right (I, 376,
    589, 592).

    Sec. 645. Clerk as presiding officer at
    organizations.

      In  early years the authority of the Clerk to decide
    questions of order pending the election of a Speaker was questioned (I,
    65). The Clerks often declined to make decisions (I, 68-72; V, 5325).
    However, in 1855 and 1997 the Clerk decided a question of order; and in
    1997 the Clerk was sustained on appeal (I, 91; Jan. 7, 1997, pp. 115,
    116). During the existence of a rule that applied the rules of a prior
    House to a successor House (1860 through 1890) (I, 64; V, 6743-6747) the
    Clerks made several rulings (I, 76, 77; VI, 623).

    [[Page 358]]

    8(b)(3) of rule I, which requires the Speaker to deliver to the Clerk a
    list of Members in the order in which each shall act as Speaker pro
    tempore in the case of a vacancy.
      In a case of a vacancy in the Office of the Speaker arising after the
    adoption of the rules, this rule would be operative and conclude
    questions as to the Clerk's authority. For example, upon the death of
    the Speaker during a sine die adjournment of the first session of the
    87th Congress, the Clerk called the House to order on the first day of
    the second session (Jan. 10, 1962, p. 5). However, this rule should be
    read in light of clause

      The Clerk having died, and in the absence of the Sergeant-at-Arms, the
    Doorkeeper of the 79th Congress presided at organization of the 80th
    Congress (Jan. 3, 1947, p. 33). The Clerk, having been appointed
    pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 75a-1 by the previous Speaker at the end of the
    105th Congress to fill a vacancy caused by resignation of the Clerk
    elected for that Congress, presided at the organization of the 106th
    Congress (Jan. 6, 1999, p. 41).

    Sec. 646. Clerk furnishes a list of reports.

      (b)  At the
    commencement of every regular session of Congress, the Clerk shall make
    and cause to be delivered to each Member, Delegate, and the Resident
    Commissioner a list of the reports that any officer or Department is
    required to make to Congress, citing the law or resolution in which the
    requirement may be contained and placing under the name of each officer
    the list of reports he is required to make.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2 of rule II (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). The paragraph was initially adopted in 1822 (I, 252). It
    was amended in the 107th Congress to permit the Clerk to publish the
    list in a form other than printed (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001,
    p. 25).

      (c) The Clerk shall--

    Sec. 647. Clerk's duty as to Journal and
    documents.

          (1) note  all questions of order, with the decisions thereon, the
    record of which shall be appended to the Journal of each session;

          (2) enter on the Journal the hour at which the House adjourns;

    [[Page 359]]

    complete index, as soon as possible after the close of a session; and
          (3) complete the distribution of the Journal to Members,
    Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner, together with an accurate and

          (4) send a copy of the Journal to the executive of and to each
    branch of the legislature of every State as may be requested by such
    State officials.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph (except subparagraph (2)) was found in former clause 3 of rule
    III; and subparagraph (2) was found in former clause 5 of rule XVI (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Subparagraph (2) was adopted initially in
    1837 and amended in 1880 (V, 6740). Former provisions directing the
    Clerk to make all contracts, keep contingent and stationery accounts,
    and pay officers and employees were stricken by section 3 of the House
    Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, 102d Cong., Apr.
    9, 1992, p. 9050), to relieve the Clerk of functions to be transferred
    to the Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services pursuant to
    section 7 of that resolution (see Sec. 664, infra). Clerical corrections
    were effected at the beginning of the 104th Congress (sec. 223(f), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 469) and the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). During the 104th Congress the requirement to send a
    printed copy of the Journal to each branch of every State legislature
    was changed to an authorization to send such copies on request (H. Res.
    254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). Subparagraphs (3) and (4) were amended in
    the 107th Congress to permit the Clerk to publish the Journal in a form
    other than printed (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

    Sec. 648. Attests and seals process and certifies
    passage of bills; oversees engrossment and enrollment process.

      (d)(1)  The
    Clerk shall attest and affix the seal of the House to all writs,
    warrants, and subpoenas issued by order of the House and certify the
    passage of all bills and joint resolutions.

    [[Page 360]]

    nature by the Speaker and the President of the Senate, and report to the
    House the fact and date of their presentment.

      (2) The Clerk shall examine all bills, amendments, and joint
    resolutions after passage by the House and, in cooperation with the
    Senate, examine all bills and joint resolutions that have passed both
    Houses to see that they are correctly enrolled and forthwith present
    those bills and joint resolutions that originated in the House to the
    President in person after their sig

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    subparagraph (1) was found in former clause 3 of rule III (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). When the House issues an order or warrant, the
    Speaker must issue the summons under his hand and seal, and it must be
    attested by the Clerk; but when the power is granted to a committee to
    send for persons and papers under clause 2(m) of rule XI, a summons
    signed by the chairman of the committee is sufficient (III, 1668).

      The enrollment process was originally the responsibility of the
    Committee on Enrolled Bills, which was created in 1789 by a joint rule
    of the two Houses (IV, 4350). This joint rule lapsed in 1876 with other
    joint rules, but in 1880 the Rules of the House were amended to again
    recognize the Committee on Enrolled Bills (IV, 4350, 4416; VII, 2099).
    Responsibility for the engrossment and enrollment process was given to
    the Committee on House Administration when that Committee was created
    effective January 2, 1947 as part of the Legislative Reorganization Act
    of 1946 (60 Stat. 812) as an enumerated subject of legislative
    jurisdiction. That responsibility was transferred from the Committee's
    legislative jurisdiction to its special oversight jurisdiction (see
    former clause 4(d)(1)(A) of rule X) by the Committee Reform Amendments
    of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470) and was transferred to the Clerk in the 107th Congress
    (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 28). The Clerk and the Secretary
    of the Senate make comparisons of bills of their respective Houses for
    enrollment, and the two cooperate in the interchange of bills for
    signature.

    Sec. 649. Calendars distributed.

      (e)  The Clerk shall cause
    the calendars of the House to be distributed each legislative day.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraph
    (e) was found in former clause 6 of rule XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). This paragraph was adopted initially in the 62d Congress, April
    5, 1911 (VI, 743), and amended December 8, 1931 (pp. 10, 83). It was
    amended in the 107th Congress to permit the Clerk to publish the
    calendars in a form other than printed (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    2001, p. 25).

      (f) The Clerk shall--

    [[Page 361]]

    sioner, and officers of the House, and not to be withdrawn therefrom,
    two copies of all the books and printed documents deposited there; and

    Sec. 650. Documents.

          (1) retain  in the library at the
    Office of the Clerk for the use of the Members, Delegates, Resident
    Commis

          (2) deliver to any Member, Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner
    an extra copy of each document requested by that Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner that has been printed by order of either House of
    Congress in any Congress in which the Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner served.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    paragraphs (c) and (f) were found in former clause 3 of rule III (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). They were amended in the 92d Congress to
    include Delegates and the Resident Commissioner among those entitled to
    the listed services (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, pp. 140-44; H. Res. 1153,
    Oct. 13, 1972, pp. 36013-15). It was amended in the 107th Congress to
    permit the Clerk to distribute documents by a method other than mail and
    in a form other than bound (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

    Sec. 651. Official to act as Clerk upon designation.

      (g)  The
    Clerk shall provide for his temporary absence or disability by
    designating an official in the Office of the Clerk to sign all papers
    that may require the official signature of the Clerk and to perform all
    other official acts that the Clerk may be required to perform under the
    rules and practices of the House, except such official acts as are
    provided for by statute. Official acts performed by the designated
    official shall be under the name of the Clerk. The designation shall be
    in writing and shall be laid before the House and entered on the
    Journal.

    [[Page 362]]

    ed January 3, 1953 (p. 16). Form of designation of a Clerk pro tempore
    (VI, 26). Technical corrections to the clause were effected in the 108th
    Congress (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph was found in former clause 4 of rule III (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially on January 18, 1912 (VI, 25) and
    was amend

    Sec. 652. Authority to receive messages.

      (h)  The Clerk may
    receive messages from the President and from the Senate at any time when
    the House is not in session.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph was found in former clause 5 of rule III (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 98-113). In the case of Kennedy v. Sampson, 511 F.2d
    430 (D.C. Cir. 1974) (see Sec. 113, supra, accompanying Const., art. I,
    sec. 7, cl. 2) a United States Court of Appeals held that a bill could
    not be pocket-vetoed by the President during an ``intrasession''
    adjournment of Congress to a day certain for more than three days, where
    the House of origin has made appropriate arrangements for the receipt of
    Presidential messages during the adjournment. Under this clause the
    Clerk may receive messages during recesses as well as during
    adjournments (Dec. 22, 1987, p. 37966).

    Sec. 653. Administration of vacant Member's
    office.

      (i)(1)  The Clerk shall supervise the staff and manage the office of a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who has died, resigned, or
    been expelled until a successor is elected. The Clerk shall perform
    similar duties in the event that a vacancy is declared by the House in
    any congressional district because of the incapacity of the person
    representing such district or other reason. Whenever the Clerk is acting
    as a supervisory authority over such staff, he shall have authority to
    terminate employees and, with the approval of the Committee on House
    Administration, may appoint such staff as is required to operate the
    office until a successor is elected.

    [[Page 363]]

    staff appointed under House Resolution 1238, Ninety-first Congress (as
    enacted into permanent law by chapter VIII of the Supplemental
    Appropriations Act, 1971) (2 U.S.C. 31b-5).

      (2) For 60 days following the death of a former Speaker, the Clerk
    shall maintain on the House payroll, and shall supervise in the same
    manner,

    -  (j) In <> addition to any other
    reports required by the Speaker or the Committee on House
    Administration, the Clerk shall report to the Committee on House
    Administration not later than 45 days following the close of each
    semiannual period ending on June 30 or on December 31 on the financial
    and operational status of each function under the jurisdiction of the
    Clerk. Each report shall include financial statements and a description
    or explanation of current operations, the implementation of new policies
    and procedures, and future plans for each function.
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph was found in former clause 6 of rule III (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34). It was amended in the 104th and 106th Congresses
    to reflect changes in the name of the Committee on House Administration
    (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47).

    Sec. 655. Cooperation with others.

      (k)  The Clerk shall fully
    cooperate with the appropriate offices and persons in the performance of
    reviews and audits of financial records and administrative operations.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    paragraphs (j) and (k) were found in former clauses 7 and 8 of rule III
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). They were adopted initially in the
    104th Congress (sec. 201(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). A
    conforming change was effected at the beginning of the 106th Congress in
    the name of the Committee on House Administration (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 364]]

    public. However, members of the public have no statutory or
    constitutional right to examine the actual financial records that are
    used in preparing such reports (Trimble v. Johnston, 173 F. Supp. 651,
    D.C. Cir. 1959).

    Sergeant-at-Arms--
      The Clerk is also required to make certain reports on receipts and
    expenditures under law (2 U.S.C. 102, 103, 113), which are available to
    the

    656. SergeantatArms enforces authority of House.

      3. (a)
    The Sergeant-at-Arms shall attend the House during its sittings and
    maintain order under the direction of the Speaker or other presiding
    officer. The Sergeant-at-Arms shall execute the commands of the House,
    and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the
    Speaker.

    [[Page 365]]

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph was found in former clause 1 of rule IV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in 1789, with additions and
    amendments in 1838, 1877, 1890 (I, 257), 1911 (VI, 29), and 1971.
    Amendments adopted in the 92d Congress clarified the responsibility of
    the Sergeant-at-Arms to keep the accounts for the pay and mileage of the
    Delegates from the District of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands
    and the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico as well as for Members
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144; H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13, 1972, pp.
    36013-15). In the 94th Congress, the provisions of House Resolution 732,
    directing the Sergeant-at-Arms to enter into agreements with State
    officials, with the approval of the Committee on House Administration,
    to withhold State income taxes from the pay of each Member subject to
    such State income tax and requesting such withholding, were enacted into
    permanent law (90 Stat. 1448; 2 U.S.C. 60e-1b). Former provisions of
    this clause directing the Sergeant-at-Arms to keep the accounts for the
    pay and mileage of Members and Delegates and the Resident Commissioner
    from Puerto Rico were stricken by section 4 of the House Administrative
    Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, 102d Cong., Apr. 9, 1992, p.
    9039), to relieve the Sergeant-at-Arms of functions to be transferred to
    the Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services pursuant to
    section 7 of that resolution (see Sec. 664, supra). During the 102d
    Congress, the House adopted a resolution presented by the Majority
    Leader as a question of the privileges of the House to terminate all
    bank and check-cashing operations in the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms
    and direct the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to review GAO
    audits of such operations (Oct. 3, 1991, p. 25435). When former rule IV
    was rewritten in the 104th Congress, clause 1 was restated without
    change (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463).

      The Sergeant-at-Arms is authorized to make payments from the
    contingent fund of the House (now referred to as ``applicable accounts
    of the House described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X''), under rules
    prescribed by the Committee on House Administration, to defray the
    expenses of the funeral of a deceased Member of the House and the
    expenses of any delegation of Members of Congress duly appointed to
    attend (76 Stat. 686; 2 U.S.C. 124).

      The Speaker ordered that documents received in a communication from an
    independent counsel advising the House of substantial and credible
    information that may constitute grounds for impeachment of the President
    be kept under armed guard of the Sergeant-at-Arms until the House
    determined which documents to make available to the public (Sept. 9,
    1998, p. 19769).

      At the organization of the House in a new Congress the election of
    Speaker occurs before the adoption of rules. Therefore this rule is not
    in force at that time, and in case of necessity a special rule may be
    adopted conferring the authority, as was done in 1849 and 1859 (I, 101,
    102).

    -- <>   (b) The symbol of the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms shall
    be the mace, which shall be borne by him while enforcing order on the
    floor.

      Duties are imposed on the Sergeant-at-Arms by law (I, 258): Control of
    Capitol police; and the making up of the roll of Members-elect and
    presiding over the organization of a new Congress in case of vacancy in
    the Office of the Clerk, or the absence or disability of that officer (2
    U.S.C. 26). The death of the Sergeant-at-Arms being announced, the House
    passed appropriate resolutions and adjourned as a mark of respect (VI,
    32; July 8, 1953, p. 8263). The Clerk having died, and in the absence of
    the Sergeant-at-Arms, the Doorkeeper of the 79th Congress presided at
    the organization of the 80th Congress (Jan. 3, 1947, p. 33). In the 83d
    Congress the Sergeant-at-Arms having died, the Clerk was elected to
    serve temporarily both as Clerk and Sergeant-at-Arms (July 8, 1953, p.
    8242), and upon resignation by the Clerk from his additional position of
    Sergeant-at-Arms, the Speaker, pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 75a-1, appointed a
    temporary Sergeant-at-Arms (Jan. 6, 1954, p. 8). The Sergeant-at-Arms
    having resigned in the 96th Congress, the Speaker appointed a temporary
    Sergeant-at-Arms pursuant to the statute (Feb. 28, 1980, pp. 4349-50);
    and the same occurred in the 102d Congress (Mar. 12, 1992, p. 5519).
    Instance where the Senate by resolution removed its Sergeant-at-Arms
    (VI, 37).

    [[Page 366]]

    to enforce order without the mace gave rise to a question of privilege
    (II, 1347). Extreme disorder arising on the floor, the Speaker directed
    the Sergeant-at-Arms to enforce order with the mace (VI, 258; VIII,
    2530).

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph was found in former clause 2 of rule IV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in 1789 (II, 1346). When former
    rule IV was rewritten entirely in the 104th Congress, the paragraph was
    restated without change (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463).
    An attempt

    Sec. 658. Doorkeeping.

      (c)  The Sergeant-at-Arms shall
    enforce strictly the rules relating to the privileges of the Hall of the
    House and be responsible to the House for the official conduct of his
    employees.

      (d) The Sergeant-at-Arms may not allow a person to enter the room over
    the Hall of the House during its sittings; and from 15 minutes before
    the hour of the meeting of the House each day until 10 minutes after
    adjournment, he shall see that the floor is cleared of all persons
    except those privileged to remain.

    -  (e) <> In addition to any other
    reports required by the Speaker or the Committee on House
    Administration, the Sergeant-at-Arms shall report to the Committee on
    House Administration not later than 45 days following the close of each
    semiannual period ending on June 30 or on December 31 on the financial
    and operational status of each function under the jurisdiction of the
    Sergeant-at-Arms. Each report shall include financial statements and a
    description or explanation of current operations, the implementation of
    new policies and procedures, and future plans for each function.

    [[Page 367]]

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    paragraphs (c) and (d) were found in former clauses 3 and 4 of rule IV
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). They were adopted initially in the
    104th Congress to transfer functions incident to the abolishment of the
    Office of the Doorkeeper (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463).
    For the history of the Office of the Doorkeeper, see Sec. 663a, infra.

    Sec. 660. Cooperation with others.

      (f) The  Sergeant-at-Arms
    shall fully cooperate with the appropriate offices and persons in the
    performance of reviews and audits of financial records and
    administrative operations.

    Chief Administrative Officer
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    paragraphs (e) and (f) were found in former clauses 5 and 6 of rule IV
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). They were adopted initially in the
    104th Congress (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). A
    conforming change was effected at the beginning of the 106th Congress in
    the name of the Committee on House Administration (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    661. Duties.

      4.  (a) The Chief Administrative Officer shall
    have operational and financial responsibility for functions as assigned
    by the Committee on House Administration and shall be subject to the
    oversight of the Committee on House Administration.-

    Sec. 662. Semiannual reports.

      (b)  In addition to any other
    reports required by the Committee on House Administration, the Chief
    Administrative Officer shall report to the Committee on House
    Administration not later than 45 days following the close of each
    semiannual period ending on June 30 or December 31 on the financial and
    operational status of each function under the jurisdiction of the Chief
    Administrative Officer. Each report shall include financial statements
    and a description or explanation of current operations, the
    implementation of new policies and procedures, and future plans for each
    function.

    [[Page 368]]

    ance of reviews and audits of financial records and administrative
    operations.

    Sec. 663. Cooperation with others.

      (c)  The Chief
    Administrative Officer shall fully cooperate with the appropriate
    offices and persons in the perform

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, clause 4
    was found in former rule V (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). It was
    adopted initially in this form in the 104th Congress (sec. 201(c), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). It was amended in the 105th Congress to
    eliminate the supervisory role of the Speaker over the Chief
    Administrative Officer (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). A conforming
    change was effected at the beginning of the 106th Congress in the name
    of the Committee on House Administration (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). It was amended in the 107th Congress to reflect the removal of the
    requirement that the Committee on House Administration provide policy
    direction to the Chief Administrative Officer (sec. 2(g), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). The earlier form of the rule enumerated the duties
    of the Doorkeeper, which were transferred to the Sergeant-at-Arms
    incident to the abolishment of the Office of the Doorkeeper.

    Sec. 663a. Former Office of Doorkeeper.

      Before  the 104th
    Congress (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463), rule V
    enumerated the duties of the Doorkeeper, who enforced the rules relating
    to the privileges of the Hall of the House. The earlier form of the rule
    was adopted in 1838 and amended in 1869, 1880 (I, 260), and 1890 (V,
    7295). By law the Doorkeeper was assigned certain administrative duties
    (I, 262), including certain housekeeping functions. Through his
    employees and appointees, the Doorkeeper also discharged various duties
    not enumerated in the law or in the rules, such as announcing at the
    door of the Hall of the House all messengers from the President and the
    Senate (V, 6591). The Clerk having died, and the Sergeant-at-Arms having
    been absent, the Doorkeeper of the 79th Congress presided at the
    organization of the 80th Congress (Jan. 3, 1947, p. 33). In the 78th
    Congress, the House adopted a resolution on the death of the Doorkeeper
    and appointed a committee to attend his funeral (Jan. 28, 1943, pp. 421-
    22).-

    [[Page 369]]

    previous responsibility for a function or entity would remain fixed
    until such function or entity were transferred. Pursuant to clause 1 of
    rule VI of the 103d Congress (then still designated as rule LII of the
    102d Congress), the Speaker, the Majority Leader, and the Minority
    Leader jointly appointed the first Director of Non-legislative and
    Financial Services of the House on October 23, 1992 (Oct. 29, 1992, p.
    34802).

    Chaplain

    Sec. 664. Former Director of Nonlegislative and
    Financial Services.

      The Chief  Administrative Officer supplanted the Director of
    Non-legislative and Financial Services formerly provided for under
    clause 1 of rule VI in the 103d Congress, which corresponded to an
    erstwhile rule LII of the 102d Congress. Certain functions and entities
    formerly within the purview of elected officers were transferred to the
    Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services pursuant to section 7
    of the House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, Apr.
    9, 1992, p. 9040). Section 7(b) of that resolution vested the Committee
    on House Administration with authority to prescribe regulations
    providing for the orderly transfer of such functions and entities and
    any other transfers necessary for the improvement of non-legislative and
    financial services in the House, so long as not transferring a function
    or entity within the jurisdiction of the committee under rule X. Section
    13 of the resolution provided that

    665. Duties of the Chaplain.

      5. The  Chaplain shall offer a
    prayer at the commencement of each day's sitting of the House.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    clause was found in former rule VII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). It
    was adopted initially in 1880 (I, 272), but the sessions of the House
    were opened with prayer from the first, and the Chaplain was an officer
    of the House before the adoption of the rule (I, 273-282). The Chaplain
    takes the oath prescribed for the officers of the House (VI, 31; Feb. 1,
    1950, p. 1311). Prayer by the Chaplain is not business requiring the
    presence of a quorum and the Speaker declines to entertain a point of no
    quorum before prayer is offered (VI, 663; clause 7(a)(1) of rule XX).
    There is no precedent for prayer to be offered by the Chaplain during a
    continuous session of the House, absent an adjournment or recess
    (compare Apr. 22 and 23, 1985, pp. 8753 and 8959). Form of resignation
    of the Chaplain (Feb. 28, 1921, p. 4075; Jan. 30, 1950, p. 1097; Mar.
    23, 2000, p. 3480). Form of resolution electing a Chaplain emeritus (VI,
    31; Jan. 30, 1950, p. 1095; Nov. 10, 1999, p. 29493).

    Office of Inspector General
      During the 97th Congress, the Supreme Court held that employment of a
    chaplain for the legislative body of Nebraska did not violate the
    Establishment Clause of the first amendment to the Constitution (Marsh
    v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983)). The Court of Appeals cited the Marsh
    decision as controlling authority in a similar challenge to the House
    Chaplain (Murray v. Buchanan, 729 F.2d 689 (D.C. Cir. 1983)). The House
    adopted a privileged resolution articulating its position in the Murray
    case (H. Res. 413, Mar. 30, 1982, p. 5890).

    667. Inspector General.

      6. (a)  There is established an
    Office of Inspector General.

    [[Page 370]]

      (b) The Inspector General shall be appointed for a Congress by the
    Speaker, the Majority Leader, and the Minority Leader, acting jointly.

      (c) Subject to the policy direction and oversight of the Committee on
    House Administration, the Inspector General shall only--

          (1) conduct periodic audits of the financial and administrative
    functions of the House and of joint entities;

          (2) inform the officers or other officials who are the subject of
    an audit of the results of that audit and suggesting appropriate
    curative actions;

          (3) simultaneously notify the Speaker, the Majority Leader, the
    Minority Leader, and the chairman and ranking minority member of the
    Committee on House Administration in the case of any financial
    irregularity discovered in the course of carrying out responsibilities
    under this clause;

          (4) simultaneously submit to the Speaker, the Majority Leader, the
    Minority Leader, and the chairman and ranking minority member of the
    Committee on House Administration a report of each audit conducted under
    this clause; and

    [[Page 371]]

          (5) report to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    information involving possible violations by a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House of any rule of
    the House or of any law applicable to the performance of official duties
    or the discharge of official responsibilities that may require referral
    to the appropriate Federal or State authorities under clause 3(a)(3) of
    rule XI.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    clause was found in former rule VI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). It
    was adopted initially in this form at the beginning of the 104th
    Congress (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). Later in the
    104th Congress and in the 106th Congress it was amended to effect a
    technical correction (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077; H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Its predecessor form was composed in the 103d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49) by combining two rules adopted
    in the House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, 102d
    Cong., Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9040). For the history of former rule VI before
    1992, see Sec. 668, infra.

      In the form of the rule adopted in the 103d Congress, paragraph (a)
    (formerly clause 1) corresponded to an erstwhile rule LII of the 102d
    Congress (relating to the Director of Non-legislative and Financial
    Services, who in the 104th Congress was supplanted by the Chief
    Administrative Officer; see clause 4 of rule II, Sec. Sec. 661-663,
    supra), and paragraph (b) (formerly clause 2) corresponded to an
    erstwhile rule LIII of the 102d Congress (relating to the Inspector
    General). The 104th Congress rewrote clause 2 of rule VI (as it was
    composed in the 103d Congress) to occupy all of rule VI and to: broaden
    the auditing responsibilities beyond the offices of the elected officers
    (paragraph (c)(1), formerly clause 2(c)(1)); add requirements for
    simultaneous reporting (paragraphs (c)(3) and (4), formerly clauses
    2(c)(3) and (4)); delete a provision relating to classification of
    employees (formerly clause 2(d)); and add the responsibility to report
    certain information to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    (paragraph (c)(5)) (sec. 201, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). The
    104th Congress also mandated that the Inspector General, in consultation
    with the Speaker and the Committee on House Administration, procure an
    independent and comprehensive audit of House financial records and
    administrative operations and report the results thereof in accord with
    this rule (sec. 107, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463).

    Office of the Historian

    Sec. 668. Former Office of the Postmaster.

      Until  the 102d
    Congress, former rule VI provided for an Office of the Postmaster, who
    superintended the post offices of the House and the delivery of its
    mail. The earlier form of the rule was adopted in 1838 and amended in
    1880 (I, 270), 1911 (VI, 34), 1971 (H. Res. 5, 92d Cong., p. 144), and
    1972 (H. Res. 1153, 92d Cong., pp. 36013-15). The Office of the
    Postmaster was abolished during the 102d Congress by sections 2 and 5 of
    the House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, Apr. 9,
    1992, p. 9040).

    [[Page 372]]

    and set the annual rate of pay for employees of the Office of the
    Historian.

    669. Historian.

      7.  There is established an Office of the
    Historian of the House of Representatives. The Speaker shall appoint

    Office of General Counsel
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 10 of rule I (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in the 101st Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). The second sentence was added in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). An earlier form of this
    clause provided for the seven-year establishment of an Office for the
    Bicentennial to coordinate the commemoration of the two-hundredth
    anniversary of the House of Representatives (H. Res. 621, 97th Cong.,
    Dec. 17, 1982, p. 31951). The management, supervision, and
    administration of the office was under the direction of the Speaker and
    was staffed by a professional historian appointed by the Speaker on a
    nonpartisan basis. In 1984 the Office of the Bicentennial was removed
    from the standing rules and established by law for the remainder of its
    existence in P.L. 98-367 (2 U.S.C. 29c). Apart from the Office of the
    Historian, the History of the House Awareness and Preservation Act
    requires the Librarian of Congress to prepare a new and complete written
    history of the House in consultation with the Committee on House
    Administration (2 U.S.C. 183). The Act also requires the Librarian to
    accept for deposit, preserve, maintain, and make accessible an oral
    history of the House as told by its Members and former Members (2 U.S.C.
    183a).

    670. General Counsel.

      8.  There is established an Office of
    General Counsel for the purpose of providing legal assistance and
    representation to the House. Legal assistance and representation shall
    be provided without regard to political affiliation. The Office of
    General Counsel shall function pursuant to the direction of the Speaker,
    who shall consult with a Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, which shall
    include the majority and minority leaderships. The Speaker shall appoint
    and set the annual rate of pay for employees of the Office of General
    Counsel.

    [[Page 373]]

    p. 49). The previous year, in section 12 of the House Administrative
    Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9040), the
    House had directed the Committee on House Administration to provide for
    an Office of General Counsel in a manner ensuring appropriate
    coordination with and participation by both the majority and minority
    leaderships in matters of representation and litigation.
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 11 of rule I (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted intially in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 1993,

      The General Counsel is authorized by law to appear in any proceeding
    before a State or Federal court (except the United States Supreme Court)
    without compliance with admission requirements of such court (2 U.S.C.
    130f(a)). Furthermore, the law requires the Attorney General to notify
    the General Counsel of a determination not to appeal a court decision
    affecting the constitutionality of an Act (2 U.S.C. 130f(b)).

                                    Rule III

    Voting
        the members, delegates, and resident commissioner of puerto rico

    671. Personal interest.

      1.  Every Member shall be present
    within the Hall of the House during its sittings, unless excused or
    necessarily prevented, and shall vote on each question put, unless he
    has a direct personal or pecuniary interest in the event of such
    question.

      When the House recodified its rules, it consolidated former rule VIII,
    rule XII, and clause 6(h) of rule X under rule III, except that viable
    provisions of former clause 2 of rule VIII were transferred to current
    clause 3 of rule XX. This clause was adopted initially in 1789, with
    amendment in 1890 (V, 5941). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this clause was found in former clause 1 of rule
    VIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 374]]

    3011, footnote; VI, 30, 198), its general application is not practical
    under modern conditions. Form of resolution for the arrest of Members
    absent without leave (VI, 686).
      Leaves of absence are presented pending the motion to adjourn (IV,
    3151), and are usually granted by unanimous consent, but sometimes are
    opposed or even refused (II, 1142-1145). Application for leave of
    absence is properly presented by filing with the Clerk the printed form
    to be secured at the desk rather than by oral request from the floor
    (VI, 199). Whether or not they are privileged is a matter of doubt (II,
    1146, 1147). Excuses for absence, as distinguished from leaves of
    absence, may be granted by less than a quorum (IV, 3000-3002). The
    statutes provide that deductions may be made from the salaries of
    Members who are absent without sufficient excuse (II, 1149, 1150); and
    while this law has been enforced (IV,

    Sec. 672. Member's control of his own vote.

      It  has been
    found impracticable to enforce the provision requiring every Member to
    vote (V, 5942-5948), and such question, even if entertained, may not
    interrupt a pending record vote (V, 5947). The weight of authority also
    favors the idea that there is no authority in the House to deprive a
    Member of the right to vote (V, 5937, 5952, 5959, 5966, 5967; VIII,
    3072). In one or two early instances the Speaker decided that because of
    personal interest, a Member should not vote (V, 5955, 5958); but on all
    other occasions and in the later practice the Speaker has held that the
    Member himself and not the Chair should determine this question (V,
    5950, 5951; VIII, 3071; Speaker Albert, Dec. 2, 1975, p. 38135; Speaker
    O'Neill, Mar. 1, 1979, p. 3748; July 30, 1996, p. 19952), and the
    Speaker has denied his own power to deprive a Member of the
    constitutional right to vote (V, 5956; Speaker Albert, Dec. 2, 1975, p.
    38135; Speaker O'Neill, Mar. 1, 1979, p. 3748). Members may not vote in
    the House by proxy (VII, 1014). Instance where a Member submitted his
    resignation from a committee on grounds of disqualifying personal
    interest (VIII, 3074).

      The House has frequently excused Members from voting in cases of
    personal interest (III, 2294; V, 5962; Aug. 2, 1949, pp. 10591, 10592;
    Oct. 20, 1951, p. 13746; July 21, 1954, p. 11262; July 28, 1955, p.
    11930; July 12, 1956, p. 12566).

    Sec. 673. Nature of disqualifying personal interest.

      It  is a
    principle of ``immemorial observance'' that a Member should withdraw
    when a question concerning himself arises (V, 5949); but it has been
    held that the disqualifying interest must be such as affects the Member
    directly (V, 5954, 5955, 5963), and not as one of a class (V, 5952;
    VIII, 3071, 3072; Speaker Bankhead, May 31, 1939, p. 6359; Speaker
    Albert, Dec. 2, 1975, p. 38135). In a case where question affected the
    titles of several Members to their seats, each refrained from voting in
    his own case, but did vote on the identical cases of his associates (V,
    5957, 5958). While a Member should not vote on the direct questions
    affecting himself, he has sometimes voted on incidental questions (V,
    5960, 5961).

    Sec. 674. Voting.

      2.  (a) A Member may not authorize any
    other person to cast his vote or record his presence in the House or the
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

    [[Page 375]]

    the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

      (b) No other person may cast a Member's vote or record a Member's
    presence in the House or

    Delegates and the Resident Commissioner
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    clause was found in former clause 3 of rule VIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct recommended
    this addition to the rules in its May 15, 1980, report on voting
    anomalies which had occurred in the House (H. Rept. 96-991), and the
    House adopted the rule in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981,
    pp. 98-113). Even before the addition of this clause, however, ``ghost
    voting'' was considered unethical (VII, 1014; Dec. 18, 1987, p. 36274).

    675. Committee service.

      3.  (a) Each Delegate and the
    Resident Commissioner shall be elected to serve on standing committees
    in the same manner as Members of the House and shall possess in such
    committees the same powers and privileges as the other members of the
    committee.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former rule XII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Paragraph (a) resumed basically this form in the 104th Congress (sec.
    212, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). The first form of paragraph (a)
    was adopted in 1871, and it was perfected by amendments in 1876, 1880,
    1887, and 1892 (II, 1297). Reference to the Resident Commissioner was
    first found in 1904 (II, 1306). Paragraph (a) was again amended on
    January 2, 1947 (Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946), August 2, 1949
    (p. 10618), February 2, 1951 (p. 883), January 22, 1971 (H. Res. 5, 92d
    Cong., p. 144), January 3, 1973 (H. Res. 6, 93d Cong., p. 26), and
    January 3, 1991 (H. Res. 5, 102d Cong., p. 39). Paragraph (a) was
    completely revised in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49)
    to provide that each of the Delegates and the Resident Commissioner be
    elected to committees of the House on the same bases, vote in any
    committees on which they serve, and vote on questions arising in the
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. The latter power
    was affected by former clause 2(d) of rule XXIII (providing for
    immediate reconsideration in the House of questions resolved in the
    Committee of the Whole by a margin within which the votes of Delegates
    and the Resident Commissioner were decisive; see Sec. 984, infra).

    [[Page 376]]

    ``revote'' where votes cast by Delegates had been decisive rendered
    their votes merely symbolic and not an investment of true legislative
    power (Michel v. Anderson, 14 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 1994)). The changes
    effected in the 103d Congress were revoked in the 104th Congress (sec.
    212, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462).
      The constitutionality of granting to Delegates the right to vote in
    the Committee of the Whole under the former rule, as circumscribed by
    former clause 2(d) of rule XXIII, was upheld based on the premise that
    immediate

      The Office of Delegate was established by ordinance of the Continental
    Congress and confirmed by a law of Congress (I, 400, 421). The nature of
    the office has been the subject of much discussion (I, 400, 403, 473);
    and except as provided by law (I, 431, 526) the qualifications of the
    Delegate also have been a matter of discussion (I, 421, 423, 469, 470,
    473). A territory or district must be organized by law before the House
    will admit a Delegate (I, 405, 407, 411, 412). The Office of Delegate
    from the District of Columbia was established by Public Law 91-405 (84
    Stat. 845). The Offices of Delegate from the Territories of Guam and the
    Virgin Islands were established by Public Law 92-271 (86 Stat. 118). The
    Office of Delegate from American Samoa was established by Public Law 95-
    556 (92 Stat. 2078) and was first filled by the general Federal election
    of 1980. The Office of Resident Commissioner was established (with a
    four-year term) by the Act of March 2, 1917 (39 Stat. 963; 48 U.S.C.
    891). The Act of May 17, 1932, changed the name of Porto Rico to Puerto
    Rico (48 U.S.C. 731a).

      Under an earlier practice, Delegates did not vote in committee (VI,
    243); but this had not always been so (II, 1301). The Resident
    Commissioner, who under the rules of the 91st and earlier Congresses,
    was designated as an additional member of the Committees on Agriculture,
    Armed Services, and Interior and Insular Affairs, is now elected to
    committees in the same fashion as are other Members and may exercise in
    those committees on which he serves the same powers as other members,
    including the right to vote.

    [[Page 377]]

    of a Delegate in parliamentary matters are not limited to legislation
    affecting his own territory (VI, 240).
      The law provides that on the floor of the House a Delegate may debate
    (II, 1290), and he may in debate call a Member to order (II, 1295). He
    may make any motion which a Member may make except the motion to
    reconsider (II, 1291, 1292). A Delegate may make a point of order (VI,
    240). A Delegate has even moved an impeachment (II, 1303). However, a
    resolution offered from the floor to permit the Delegate of the District
    of Columbia to vote on the articles of impeachment against the President
    was held not to constitute a question of the privileges of the House
    under rule IX (Dec. 18, 1998, p. 27825). He may be appointed a teller
    (II, 1302); but the law forbids him to vote (II, 1290). He has been
    recognized to object to the consideration of a bill (VI, 241), to a
    unanimous-consent request to concur in a Senate amendment (June 29,
    1984, p. 20267), and has made reports for committees (July 1, 1958, p.
    12870). A discharge petition may not be signed by a Delegate or the
    Resident Commissioner, even by unanimous consent (Oct. 1, 2003, p. ----)
    because the phrase in clause 2 of rule XV ``a majority of the total
    membership of the House'' is construed to mean 218 Members (Speaker
    Byrns, Apr. 15, 1936, p. 5509), not including Delegates or the Resident
    Commissioner. The rights and prerogatives

      At the organization of the House, the Delegates and Resident
    Commissioner are sworn (I, 400, 401); but the Clerk does not put them on
    the roll (I, 61, 62; Jan. 6, 1999, p. 41). In the 103d Congress on
    recorded votes in the Committee of the Whole, their names were listed
    alphabetically with the names of Members (Feb. 3, 1993, p. 2035).

      A Delegate resigns in a communication addressed to the Speaker (II,
    1304). He may be arrested and censured for disorderly conduct (II,
    1305), but there has been disagreement as to whether he should be
    expelled by a majority or two-thirds vote (I, 469).

      The privileges of the floor with the right to debate were extended to
    Resident Commissioners in the 60th Congress (VI, 244). Before the
    independence of the Philippines it was represented in the House by a
    Resident Commissioner (Deschler, ch. 7, Sec. 3.3).

    Sec. 676. Appointment to select and conference
    committees.

        (b) The Delegates and the Resident Commissioner may be
    appointed to any select committee and to any conference committee.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraph
    (b) was found in former clause 6(h) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). Paragraph (b), effective January 3, 1975, initially authorized
    the appointment of Delegates and the Resident Commissioner to certain
    conferences (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Paragraph
    (b) was amended in the 96th Congress to authorize their appointment to
    select committees (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16), and again in the
    103d Congress to authorize their appointment to any conference (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49).

      Before the adoption and refinement of this paragraph, a Delegate or
    the Resident Commissioner could not be appointed to a conference
    committee (Sept. 18, 1973, p. 30144; July 20, 1973, p. 25201); and they
    could be appointed to a select committee only with the permission of the
    House (Sept. 21, 1976, p. 31673).

                                     Rule IV

    Use and admittance
                              the hall of the house

    [[Page 378]]

    ference meetings of its Members, except when the House agrees to take
    part in any ceremonies to be observed therein. The Speaker may not
    entertain a motion for the suspension of this clause.

    677. Use of the Hall of the House.

      1. The Hall  of the House
    shall be used only for the legislative business of the House and for
    caucus and con

      When the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it
    consolidated former rules XXXI, XXXII, and XXXIII under rule IV, and
    clause 1 was found in former rule XXXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Rules relating to the use of the Hall were adopted as early as 1804. The
    present form of this clause dates from 1880 (V, 7270). It was renumbered
    January 3, 1953 (p. 24).

    Sec. 678. Persons and officials admitted to the floor
    during sessions of the House.

      2.  (a) Only the following persons shall be
    admitted to the Hall of the House or rooms leading thereto:

          (1) Members of Congress, Members-elect, and contestants in
    election cases during the pendency of their cases on the floor.

          (2) The Delegates and the Resident Commissioner.

          (3) The President and Vice President of the United States and
    their private secretaries.

          (4) Justices of the Supreme Court.

          (5) Elected officers and minority employees nominated as elected
    officers of the House.

          (6) The Parliamentarian.

          (7) Staff of committees when business from their committee is
    under consideration, and staff of the respective party leaderships when
    so assigned with the approval of the Speaker.

    [[Page 379]]

    dent Commissioner has an amendment under consideration (subject to
    clause 5).
          (8) Not more than one person from the staff of a Member, Delegate,
    or Resident Commissioner when that Member, Delegate, or Resi

          (9) The Architect of the Capitol.

          (10) The Librarian of Congress and the assistant in charge of the
    Law Library.

          (11) The Secretary and Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate.

          (12) Heads of departments.

          (13) Foreign ministers.

          (14) Governors of States.

          (15) Former Members, Delegates, and Resident Commissioners; former
    Parliamentarians of the House; and former elected officers and minority
    employees nominated as elected officers of the House (subject to clause
    4).

          (16) One attorney to accompany a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner who is the respondent in an investigation undertaken by the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct when a recommendation of that
    committee is under consideration in the House.

          (17) Such persons as have, by name, received the thanks of
    Congress.

      (b) The Speaker may not entertain a unanimous consent request or a
    motion to suspend this clause.

    [[Page 380]]

    of Public Law 92-271, which created the positions of Delegate from Guam
    and Delegate from the Virgin Islands. Officers and elected employees,
    both present and former, were given floor privileges by the adoption of
    this same resolution (H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13, 1972, p. 36013) but had in
    fact, by custom, been permitted on the floor before this change in the
    clause. This clause was substantially amended in the 94th Congress (H.
    Res. 1435, Oct. 1, 1976, pp. 35175-80) and was amended by the Ethics
    Reform Act of 1989 to permit floor privileges for one attorney for a
    Member-respondent during consideration of a disciplinary resolution
    (P.L. 101-194, Nov. 30, 1989). Clause 2(a)(7) was amended in the 108th
    Congress to extend floor privileges to party leadership staff when so
    assigned with the approval of the Speaker (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    2003, p. ----). This amendment codified current practice, including the
    Speaker's ultimate control over such assignments.
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 1 of rule XXXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was subjected to many changes from 1802 until 1880 (V,
    7823; VIII, 3634) and was renumbered in the 83d Congress (Jan. 3, 1953,
    p. 24). The rule was amended in the 92d Congress to include the Delegate
    from the District of Columbia among those having the privilege of the
    floor (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144), and later in that same
    Congress was again revised to permit all Delegates to enjoy the
    privilege (H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13, 1972, pp. 36021-23). The latter
    revision was necessary because of the enactment

      The portion of this clause which permits clerks of committees access
    to the floor during the consideration of business from their committees
    has been interpreted by the Speaker to allow four professional staff
    members and one clerk on the floor at one time (Speaker Albert, June 8,
    1972, p. 20318; Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 26, 1977, p. 2333). The
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, section 503(3) (84 Stat. 1140,
    1202; 2 U.S.C. 281b(3)) also allows two staff members of the Legislative
    Counsel access to the floor to assist the committee.

      The portion of the clause forbidding the Speaker to entertain requests
    for suspension of the rule applies also to the Chairman of the Committee
    of the Whole (V, 7285). ``Heads of departments'' means members of the
    President's Cabinet, and not subordinate executive officers, and
    ``foreign ministers'' means ministers from foreign governments only.
    ``Governors of States'' does not include governors of territories (V,
    7283; VIII, 3634).

    [[Page 381]]

    ----; June 17, 2004, p. ----), other children (May 18, 1995, p. 13490),
    or Senators exercising floor privileges (May 18, 1995, p. 13491).

      An alleged violation of the rule relating to admission to the floor
    presents a question of privilege (III, 2624, 2625; VI, 579), but not a
    higher question of privilege than an election case (III, 2626). In one
    case where a former Member was abusing the privilege, he was excluded by
    direction of the Speaker (V, 7288), but in another case the Speaker
    declared it a matter for the House and not the Chair to consider (V,
    7286). In one case an alleged abuse was inquired into by a select
    committee (V, 7287). See Sec. 680, infra, for the rule constraining
    conduct of former Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner,
    officers, and staff while on the floor. The Speaker announced his
    intention to strictly enforce the rule to prevent a proliferation of
    committee and other staff on the floor (Aug. 22, 1974, p. 30027; Jan.
    19, 1981, p. 402; Jan. 25, 1983, p. 224). The Speaker announced that
    committee staff would be required to display staff badges on the floor
    in exchange for identification cards before admission to the floor
    (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 21, 1986, p. 5; Jan. 5, 1993, p. 105). It is not
    in order to refer to persons temporarily on the floor of the House as
    guests of the House, such as Members' children (Apr. 28, 1994, p. 8783;
    Dec. 19, 1995, p. 37575; Jan. 22, 1996, p. 682; Apr. 30, 1998, p. 7320;
    Oct. 7, 1999, p.

    Sec. 679. Admission to the floor when the House is not
    sitting.

      3. (a)  Except as provided in paragraph (b), all persons not entitled
    to the privilege of the floor during the session shall be excluded at
    all times from the Hall of the House and the cloakrooms.

      (b) Until 15 minutes of the hour of the meeting of the House, persons
    employed in its service, accredited members of the press entitled to
    admission to the press gallery, and other persons on request of a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner by card or in writing, may be
    admitted to the Hall of the House.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2 of rule XXXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in 1902 (V, 7346).

    Sec. 680. Former Members and officers.

      4.  (a) Former
    Members, Delegates, and Resident Commissioners; former Parliamentarians
    of the House; and former elected officers and minority employees
    nominated as elected officers of the House shall be entitled to the
    privilege of admission to the Hall of the House and rooms leading
    thereto only if--

          (1) they do not have any direct personal or pecuniary interest in
    any legislative measure pending before the House or reported by a
    committee; and

    [[Page 382]]

    islative measure pending before the House, reported by a committee, or
    under consideration in any of its committees or subcommittees.
          (2) they are not in the employ of, or do not represent, any party
    or organization for the purpose of influencing, directly or indirectly,
    the passage, defeat, or amendment of any leg

      (b) The Speaker shall promulgate such regulations as may be necessary
    to implement this rule and to ensure its enforcement.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 3 of rule XXXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). This clause was added initially in the 94th Congress (H.
    Res. 1435, Oct. 1, 1976, pp. 35175-80) to consolidate in one clause and
    to clarify the restrictions on admittance to the floor of former
    Members, officers, and employees and to give the Speaker the power to
    promulgate regulations to enforce the rule. As early as 1945 the Chair
    held that former Members do not have the privilege of the floor when
    they are personally interested in legislation (Speaker Rayburn, Oct. 2,
    1945, p. 9251). Pursuant to the authority under this clause, the Speaker
    issued regulations addressing former Members (Jan. 6, 1977, p. 321; June
    7, 1978, p. 16625; Speaker Foley, June 9, 1994, p. 12387; Speaker
    Gingrich, May 24, 1995, p. 14300; Speaker Gingrich, Aug. 1, 1996, p.
    21031). A former Member is not entitled to the privileges of the floor
    under this clause if he (1) has a direct personal or pecuniary interest
    in legislation under consideration in the House or reported by any
    committee, or (2) represents any party or organization for the purpose
    of influencing the disposition of legislation pending before the House,
    reported by any committee or under consideration in any committee or
    subcommittee (June 7, 1978, p. 16625). The essence of the rule is the
    former Member's status as one with a personal or pecuniary interest and
    not whether the former Member may have a present intent to lobby
    (Speaker Foley, June 9, 1994, p. 12387). Intent to lobby will be assumed
    where the former Member is employed or retained as a lobbyist to
    influence legislative measures as described in (2) above (Aug. 1, 1996,
    p. 21031). The Speaker has emphasized that the rule applies not only to
    the floor but also to ``rooms leading thereto,'' and has construed the
    latter phrase to include the Speaker's Lobby and the cloakrooms (Speaker
    Gingrich, May 24, 1995, p. 14300; Aug. 1, 1996, p. 21031).

    [[Page 383]]

      A former Member must observe the rules of proper decorum while on the
    floor, and the Chair may direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to assist the Chair
    in maintaining such decorum (Sept. 17, 1997, pp. 19026, 19027). A former
    Member may not manifest approval or disapproval of the proceedings
    (VIII, 3635). In the 105th Congress the House adopted a resolution
    offered as a question of the privileges of the House alleging indecorous
    behavior of a former Member and instructing the Sergeant-at-Arms to ban
    the former Member from the floor, and rooms leading thereto, until the
    resolution of a contested election to which he was party (H. Res. 233,
    Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19340).

    Sec. 681. Members' staff.

      5. A person  from the staff of a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may be admitted to the Hall
    of the House or rooms leading thereto under clause 2 only upon prior
    notice to the Speaker. Such persons, and persons from the staff of
    committees admitted under clause 2, may not engage in efforts in the
    Hall of the House or rooms leading thereto to influence Members with
    regard to the legislation being amended. Such persons shall remain at
    the desk and are admitted only to advise the Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, or committee responsible for their admission. A person who
    violates this clause may be excluded during the session from the Hall of
    the House and rooms leading thereto by the Speaker.

    [[Page 384]]

    Gallery
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 4 of rule XXXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). This clause was added initially in the 95th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) to extend the privilege of the floor to
    one person from the staff of a Member who has an amendment under
    consideration but not of a measure's sponsor or during special-order
    speeches. The Speaker promulgated regulations for the implementation of
    this clause on January 26, 1977 (p. 2333). In the 97th Congress the
    Speaker announced that personal staff of Members did not have the
    privilege of the floor and that committee staff, permitted on the floor
    when business from their committees is under consideration, were
    required to remain unobtrusively by the committee tables (Aug. 18, 1982,
    p. 21934). Staff permitted on the floor under this clause are not
    permitted to pass out literature or otherwise attempt to influence
    Members in their votes (Aug. 1, 1990, p. 21519; Sept. 27, 1995, p.
    26567) and may not applaud during debate (June 14, 1995, p. 15896).

    682. The various galleries and admission
    thereto.

      6. (a)  The Speaker shall set aside a portion of the west gallery for
    the use of the President, the members of the Cabinet, justices of the
    Supreme Court, foreign ministers and suites, and the members of their
    respective families. The Speaker shall set aside another portion of the
    same gallery for the accommodation of persons to be admitted on the
    cards of Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner.

      (b) The Speaker shall set aside the southerly half of the east gallery
    for the use of the families of Members of Congress. The Speaker shall
    control one bench. On the request of a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, or Senator, the Speaker shall issue a card of admission to
    his family, which may include their visitors. No other person shall be
    admitted to this section.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former rule XXXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). It was adopted initially in 1880 (V, 7302) and renumbered January
    3, 1953 (p. 24).

    Prohibition on campaign contributions
      On special occasions the House sometimes makes a special rule for
    admission to the galleries (V, 7303), as on the occasion of the
    electoral count (III, 1961), of an address by the President, and of
    public funerals.

    [[Page 385]]

    paign contribution in the Hall of the House or rooms leading thereto.

    683. Prohibition on distribution of campaign
    contributions.

      7. A  Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House, or any other person entitled to admission to the
    Hall of the House or rooms leading thereto by this rule, may not
    knowingly distribute a political cam

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 5 of rule XXXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in the 105th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).

                                     Rule V

                             broadcasting the house

    Sec. 684. Broadcasting of House proceedings.

      1.  The Speaker
    shall administer a system subject to his direction and control for
    closed-circuit viewing of floor proceedings of the House in the offices
    of all Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and committees and
    in such other places in the Capitol and the House Office Buildings as he
    considers appropriate. Such system may include other telecommunications
    functions as the Speaker considers appropriate. Any such
    telecommunications shall be subject to rules and regulations issued by
    the Speaker.

      2. (a) The Speaker shall administer a system subject to his direction
    and control for complete and unedited audio and visual broadcasting and
    recording of the proceedings of the House. The Speaker shall provide for
    the distribution of such broadcasts and recordings to news media, for
    the storage of audio and video recordings of the proceedings, and for
    the closed-captioning of the proceedings for hearing-impaired persons.

    [[Page 386]]

    Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries, and all radio and
    television correspondents who are so accredited, shall be provided
    access to the live coverage of the House.
      (b) All television and radio broadcasting stations, networks,
    services, and systems (including cable systems) that are accredited to
    the House

      (c) Coverage made available under this clause, including any recording
    thereof--

          (1) may not be used for any political purpose;

          (2) may not be used in any commercial advertisement; and

          (3) may not be broadcast with commercial sponsorship except as
    part of a bona fide news program or public affairs documentary program.

      3. The Speaker may delegate any of his responsibilities under this
    rule to such legislative entity as he considers appropriate.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 9 of rule I (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 15, 1979, p. 7). The requirement that the televised broadcasts of
    the proceedings of the House be closed captioned for hearing-impaired
    individuals was added in the 101st Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p.
    72). The authority of the Speaker to make rules governing
    telecommunications functions within the House was added in the 102d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39).

    [[Page 387]]

    casting of House proceedings and to report to the House thereon; and (3)
    directed the Speaker after receipt of the committee's report to
    establish a system subject to his direction and control for audio and
    visual broadcast and recording of House proceedings and to provide for
    distribution and access to the news media (H. Res. 866, Oct. 27, 1977,
    pp. 35425-37). The Speaker, after receipt of that report (H. Rept. 95-
    881, Feb. 15, 1978), directed implementation of full audio coverage,
    with distribution to the media, on June 8, 1978 (p. 16746). Public Law
    95-391 (Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1979) contained the
    following proviso in section 306 relating to the broadcasting of House
    proceedings: ``No funds in this bill may be used to implement a system
    for televising and broadcasting the proceedings of the House pursuant to
    House Resolution 866, Ninety-Fifth Congress, under which the TV cameras
    in the Chamber purchased by the House are controlled and operated by
    persons not in the employ of the House.''
      In the 95th Congress the House considered as a question of the
    privileges of the House and adopted a resolution directing the Committee
    on Rules to investigate the impact on the safety, dignity, and integrity
    of House proceedings, of a test authorized by the Speaker under his
    general control over the Hall of the House for the audiovisual broadcast
    of House proceedings within the Capitol and House Office Buildings (H.
    Res. 404, Mar. 15, 1977, p. 7608). The resolution directed the Committee
    on Rules to report to the House at the earliest practicable date its
    findings and recommendations, including whether such coverage should be
    made available to the public. The committee reported and the House
    adopted another resolution that: (1) authorized the Speaker to establish
    a closed-circuit system for in-House broadcasting of House proceedings;
    (2) directed the Committee on Rules to study methods for providing
    complete audio and visual broad

      Pursuant to his authority under this rule, the Speaker directed the
    Clerk in the 98th Congress to immediately implement periodic wide-angle
    television coverage of all ``special-order'' speeches at the end of
    legislative business (with captions at the bottom of the screen
    indicating that legislative business has been completed) (May 10, 1984,
    p. 11894) but not during ``interim'' special orders (Dec. 19, 1985, p.
    38106). However, in the 103d and 104th Congresses, the Speaker
    prohibited wide-angle coverage but continued the caption at the bottom
    of the screen not only during special-order speeches but also during
    morning-hour debates (Speaker Foley, Feb. 11, 1994, p. 2244; Speaker
    Gingrich, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551). In the 99th Congress, the House adopted
    a resolution, raised as a question of the privileges of the House,
    authorizing and directing the Speaker to provide for the audio and
    visual broadcast coverage of the Chamber while Members are voting (H.
    Res. 150, Apr. 30, 1985, p. 9821). Although paragraph (a) requires
    complete and unedited broadcast coverage of House proceedings, the House
    held (by tabling an appeal of a ruling of the Chair) that it does not
    require in-House microphone amplification of disorderly conduct by a
    Member following expiration of his recognition for debate (Mar. 16,
    1988, p. 4081).

                                     Rule VI

    Official reporters
                   official reporters and news media galleries

    [[Page 388]]

    ing stenographers of committees, and shall supervise the execution of
    their duties.

    685. Reporters of debates and committee
    stenographers.

      1.  Subject to the direction and control of the Speaker,
    the Clerk shall appoint, and may remove for cause, the official
    reporters of the House, includ

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 1 of rule XXXIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). From 1874 until March 1, 1978, the appointment and removal
    of the official reporters, and the manner of the execution of their
    duties, was vested in the Speaker (V, 6958); effective March 1, 1978 (H.
    Res. 959, Jan. 23, 1978, p. 431) those responsibilities were vested in
    the Clerk, subject to the direction and control of the Speaker.

      The reporters of debates have borne an important part in the evolution
    by which the House has built up the system of a daily verbatim report of
    its proceedings, made by its own corps of reporters (V, 6959). Since
    these reporters have become officers of the House a correction of the
    Congressional Record has been held a question of privilege (V, 7014-
    7016).

    Sec. 686. Rules relating to Congressional
    Record.

      The  arrangement, style, etc., of the Congressional Record is
    prescribed by the Joint Committee on Printing pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 901,
    904 (see also VIII, 3500). The rules of the Joint Committee on Printing
    governing publication of the Congressional Record are as follows:

      1. Arrangement of the daily Congressional Record.--The Public Printer
    shall arrange the contents of the daily Congressional Record as follows:
    The Senate proceedings shall alternate with the House proceedings in
    order of placement in consecutive issues insofar as such an arrangement
    is feasible, and Extensions of Remarks and Daily Digest shall follow:
    Provided, That the makeup of the Congressional Record shall proceed
    without regard to alternation whenever the Public Printer deems it
    necessary in order to meet production and delivery schedules.

      2. Type and style.--The Public Printer shall print the report of the
    proceedings and debates of the Senate and House of Representatives, as
    furnished by the official reporters of the Congressional Record, in 8-
    point type; and all matter included in the remarks or speeches of
    Members of Congress, other than their own words, and all reports,
    documents, and other matter authorized to be inserted in the
    Congressional Record shall be printed in 7-point type; and all roll
    calls shall be printed in 6-point type. No italic or black type nor
    words in capitals or small capitals shall be used for emphasis or
    prominence; nor will unusual indentions be permitted. These restrictions
    do not apply to the printing of or quotations from historical, official,
    or legal documents or papers of which a literal reproduction is
    necessary.

      3. Only as an aid in distinguishing the manner of delivery in order to
    contribute to the historical accuracy of the Record, statements or
    insertions in the Record where no part of them was spoken will be
    preceded and followed by a ``bullet'' symbol, i.e.,  (now
    applicable only in Senate).

    [[Page 389]]

    later than 9 o'clock p.m. in order to insure publication in the
    Congressional Record issued on the following morning; and if all of the
    manuscript is not furnished at the time specified, the Public Printer is
    authorized to withhold it from the Congressional Record for 1 day. In no
    case will a speech be printed in the Congressional Record of the day of
    its delivery if the manuscript is furnished later than 12 o'clock
    midnight.
      4. Return of manuscript.--When manuscript is submitted to Members for
    revision it should be returned to the Government Printing Office not

      5. Tabular matter.--The manuscript of speeches containing tabular
    statements to be published in the Congressional Record shall be in the
    hands of the Public Printer not later than 7 o'clock p.m. to insure
    publication the following morning. When possible, manuscript copy for
    tabular matter should be sent to the Government Printing Office 2 or
    more days in advance of the date of publication in the Congressional
    Record. Proof will be furnished promptly to the Member of Congress to be
    submitted by him instead of manuscript copy when he offers it for
    publication in the Congressional Record.

      6. Proof furnished.--Proofs or ``leave to print'' and advance speeches
    will not be furnished the day the manuscript is received but will be
    submitted the following day, whenever possible to do so without causing
    delay in the publication of the regular proceedings of Congress. Advance
    speeches shall be set in the Congressional Record style of type, and not
    more than six sets of proofs may be furnished to Members without charge.

      7. Notation of withheld remarks.--If manuscript or proofs have not
    been returned in time for publication in the proceedings, the Public
    Printer will insert the words ``Mr. ---- addressed the Senate (House or
    Committee). His remarks will appear hereafter in Extensions of Remarks''
    and proceed with the printing of the Congressional Record.

      8. Thirty-day limit.--The Public Printer shall not publish in the
    Congressional Record any speech or extension of remarks which has been
    withheld for a period exceeding 30 calendar days from the date when its
    printing was authorized: Provided, That at the expiration of each
    session of Congress the time limit herein fixed shall be 10 days, unless
    otherwise ordered by the committee.

      9. Corrections.--The permanent Congressional Record is made up for
    printing and binding 30 days after each daily publication is issued;
    therefore all corrections must be sent to the Public Printer within that
    time: Provided, That upon the final adjournment of each session of
    Congress the time limit shall be 10 days, unless otherwise ordered by
    the committee: Provided further, That no Member of Congress shall be
    entitled to make more than one revision. Any revision shall consist only
    of corrections of the original copy and shall not include deletions of
    correct material, substitutions for correct material, or additions of
    new subject matter.

    [[Page 390]]

    provides that conference reports be printed in the daily edition of the
    Congressional Record, they shall not be printed therein a second time.
      10. The Public Printer shall not publish in the Congressional Record
    the full report or print of any committee or subcommittee when the
    report or print has been previously printed. This rule shall not be
    construed to apply to conference reports. However, inasmuch as rule XXII
    (Sec. 1082, infra)

      11. Makeup of the Extensions of Remarks.--Extensions of Remarks in the
    Congressional Record shall be made up by successively taking first an
    extension from the copy submitted by the official reporters of one House
    and then an extension from the copy of the other House, so that Senate
    and House extensions appear alternately as far as possible. The sequence
    for each House shall follow as closely as possible the order or
    arrangement in which the copy comes from the official reporters of the
    respective Houses.

      The official reporters of each House shall designate and distinctly
    mark the lead item among their extensions. When both Houses are in
    session and submit extensions, the lead item shall be changed from one
    House to the other in alternate issues, with the indicated lead item of
    the other House appearing in second place. When only one House is in
    session, the lead item shall be an extension submitted by a Member of
    the House in session. This rule shall not apply to Congressional Records
    printed after the sine die adjournment of the Congress.

      12. Official reporters.--The official reporters of each House shall
    indicate on the manuscript and prepare headings for all matter to be
    printed in Extensions of Remarks and shall make suitable reference
    thereto at the proper place in the proceedings.

      13. Two-page rule--Cost estimate from Public Printer.--(1) No
    extraneous matter in excess of two printed Record pages, whether printed
    in its entirety in one daily issue or in two or more parts in one or
    more issues, shall be printed in the Congressional Record unless the
    Member announces, coincident with the request for leave to print or
    extend, the estimate in writing from the Public Printer of the probable
    cost of publishing the same. (2) No extraneous matter shall be printed
    in the House proceedings or the Senate proceedings, with the following
    exceptions: (a) Excerpts from letters, telegrams, or articles presented
    in connection with a speech delivered in the course of debate; (b)
    communications from State legislatures; (c) addresses or articles by the
    President and the Members of his Cabinet, the Vice President, or a
    Member of Congress. (3) The official reporters of the House or Senate or
    the Public Printer shall return to the Member of the respective House
    any matter submitted for the Congressional Record which is in
    contravention of these provisions.

          house supplement to ``laws and rules for publication of the

                congressional record''--effective august 12, 1986

    [[Page 391]]

    gress may be printed in the Congressional Record. One-minute speeches
    delivered during the morning business of Congress shall not exceed 300
    words. Statements exceeding this will be printed following the business
    of the day.
      1. Extensions of Remarks in the daily Congressional Record.--When the
    House has granted leave to print (1) a newspaper or magazine article, or
    (2) any other matter not germane to the proceedings, it shall be
    published under Extensions of Remarks. This rule shall not apply to
    quotations which form part of a speech of a Member, or to an authorized
    extension of his own remarks: Provided, That no address, speech, or
    article delivered or released subsequently to the sine die adjournment
    of a session of Con

      2. Any extraneous matter included in any statement by a Member, either
    under the 1-minute rule or permission granted to extend at this point,
    will be printed in the ``Extensions of Remarks'' section, and that such
    material will be duly noted in the Member's statement as appearing
    therein.

      3. Under the general leave request by the floor manager of specific
    legislation only matter pertaining to such legislation will be included
    as per the request. This, of course, will include tables and charts
    pertinent to the same, but not newspaper clippings and editorials.

      4. In the makeup of the portion of the Record entitled ``Extensions of
    Remarks,'' the Public Printer shall withhold any Extensions of Remarks
    which exceed economical press fill or exceed production limitations.
    Extensions withheld for such reasons will be printed in succeeding
    issues, at the direction of the Public Printer, so that more uniform
    daily issues may be the end result and, in this way, when both Houses
    have a short session the makeup would be in a sense made easier so as to
    comply with daily proceedings, which might run extremely heavy at times.

      5. The request for a Member to extend his or her remarks in the body
    of the Record must be granted to the individual whose remarks are to be
    inserted.

      6. All statements for ``Extensions of Remarks,'' as well as copy for
    the body of the Congressional Record must be submitted on the Floor of
    the House to the Official Reporters of Debates and must carry the actual
    signature of the Member. Extensions of Remarks will be accepted up to 15
    minutes after adjournment of the House. To insure printing in that day's
    proceedings, debate transcripts still out for revision must be returned
    to the Office of Official Reporters of Debates, Room HT-60, the Capitol,
    (1) by 5 p.m., or 2 hours following adjournment, whichever occurs later;
    or (2) within 30 minutes following adjournment when the House adjourns
    at 11 p.m., or later.

    [[Page 392]]

    remarks in a distinctive type style to follow the remarks actually
    uttered. In no event would the actually uttered remarks be removable.

      7. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XVII of the Rules of the House, the
    Congressional Record shall be a substantially verbatim account of
    remarks made during the proceedings of the House, subject only to
    technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections authorized by the
    Member making the remarks involved. Unparliamentary remarks may be
    deleted only by permission or order of the House. Consistent with rule 9
    of the Joint Committee on Printing Rules, any revision shall consist
    only of technical, grammatical, or typographical corrections of the
    original copy and shall not include deletions of correct material,
    substitutions for correct material, or additions of new subject matter.
    By obtaining unanimous consent to revise and extend, a Member will be
    able to relax the otherwise strict prohibition contained in clause 8 of
    rule XVII only in two respects: (1) to revise by technical, grammatical,
    and typographical corrections; and (2) to extend

    Sec. 687. Substantially verbatim account.

      The requirement  of
    rule 7 of the supplemental rules that the Congressional Record be a
    substantially verbatim account of remarks actually rendered was included
    in clause 8(a) of rule XVII (formerly clause 9 of rule XIV) in the 104th
    Congress, with the prescription that that rule constitute a standard of
    conduct under former clause 3(a)(2) of rule XI (formerly clause
    4(e)(1)(B) of rule X) (sec. 213, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Under
    that clause remarks actually delivered may not be deleted and remarks
    inserted must appear in distinctive type (Jan. 4, 1995, p. 541). The
    Speaker has instructed the Official Reporters of Debates to adhere
    strictly to the requirement of rule 7 of the supplemental rules (Mar. 2,
    1988, p. 2963; Feb. 3, 1993, p. 1980).

      Words spoken by a Member not under recognition are not included in the
    Congressional Record (V, 6975-6978; VIII, 3466, 3471). For example the
    Record does not include remarks uttered: (1) after a Member has been
    called to order (July 29, 1994, p. 18609); (2) when a Member fails to
    heed the gavel at the expiration of time for debate (May 22, 2003, p. --
    --; Oct. 2, 2003, p. ----); (3) when a Member interrupts another during
    debate without being yielded or otherwise recognized (as on a point of
    order) (Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 7, 1985, p. 2229). Remarks held irrelevant
    by the Chair may be removed from the Record by unanimous consent only
    (Mar. 20, 2002, p. ----).

      In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Chair advised that when
    the Pledge of Allegiance is delivered as the third element of the daily
    order of business, the Record reflects the pledge in its statutory form
    (Apr. 27, 2004, p. ----). The Chair announced the Record-printing policy
    regarding remarks in debate uttered in languages other than English, to
    deny transcription in the foreign language (unless a transcript is
    provided in a language that the Government Printing Office can print)
    and to require Members to submit translations for distinctive printing
    in the Record in English as a revision of remarks (Mar. 4, 1998, p.
    2535; Feb. 25, 2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 393]]

    of remarks made during House proceedings extended to statements and
    rulings of the Chair (Jan. 20, 1995, p. 1866).
      Through the 103d Congress, under applicable precedents and guidelines,
    the Chair could refine a ruling on a point of order in the Record in
    order to clarify the ruling without changing its substance, including
    one sustained by the House on appeal (Feb. 19, 1992, p. 2461; see H.
    Res. 230, 99th Cong., July 31, 1985, p. 21783, and H. Rept. 99-228). In
    accordance with existing accepted practices, the Speaker customarily
    made such technical or parliamentary corrections or insertions in the
    transcript of a ruling or statement by the Chair as may have been
    necessary to conform to rule, custom, or precedent (see also H. Res.
    330, 101st Cong., Feb. 7, 1990, p. 1515, and report of House
    Administration task force on Record inserted by Speaker Foley, Oct. 27,
    1990, p. 37124). However, in the 104th Congress the Speaker ruled that
    the requirement of clause 8 of rule XVII (formerly clause 9 of rule XIV)
    that the Record be a substantially verbatim account

      The Congressional Record is for the proceedings of the House and
    Senate only, and matters not connected therewith are rigidly excluded
    (V, 6962).It is not, however, the official record, that function being
    fulfilled by the Journal (IV, 2727). Because the Record is maintained as
    a substantially verbatim account of the proceedings of the House (44
    U.S.C. 901), the Speaker will not entertain a unanimous-consent request
    to give a special-order speech ``off the Record'' (June 24, 1992, p.
    16131). As a general principle the Speaker has no control over the
    Record (V, 6984, 7017).

      The traditional practice to allow a Member, with the approval of the
    House and under conditions set forth by the Joint Committee on Printing,
    to revise his remarks before publication in the Congressional Record (V,
    6971, 7024; VIII, 3500) should be interpreted in light of clause 8 of
    rule XVII and rule 7 of the supplemental rules of the Joint Committee on
    Printing, which require the Record to be a substantially verbatim
    account of remarks made during House proceedings (see Sec. 686, supra,
    and Sec. Sec. 967, 968, infra). In any event, a Member should not change
    the notes of his own speech in such a way as to affect the remarks of an
    opponent in controversy without bringing the correction to the attention
    of that Member (V, 6972; VIII, 3461), and alterations which place a
    different aspect on the remarks of a colleague require authorization by
    the House (VIII, 3463, 3497). Where a Member so revised his remarks as
    to affect the import of words uttered by another Member, the House
    corrected the Record (V, 6973). A Member is not entitled to inspect the
    reporter's notes of remarks which do not contain reflections on himself,
    delivered by another Member and withheld for revision (V, 6964).

    [[Page 394]]

    Sec. 688. Relations of the Committee of the Whole
    to the Congressional Record.

      As a general  rule the Committee of the Whole has no
    control over the Congressional Record (V, 6986); but the Chairman in the
    preservation of order, may direct the exclusion of disorderly words
    spoken by a Member after he has been called to order (V, 6987). In a
    case wherein the Committee conceived that a letter read in Committee
    involved a breach of privilege, it reported the matter to the House for
    action, and the House struck the letter from the Record (V, 6986). The
    Chairman of the Committee of the Whole does not determine the privileges
    of a Member under a general leave to print in the Record, that being for
    the House alone (V, 6988). Neither may the Committee of the Whole grant
    a general leave to print, although for convenience it does permit
    individual Members to extend their remarks (V, 7009, 7010; VIII, 3488-
    3490; Aug. 31, 1965, p. 22385), nor may the Committee of the Whole
    permit the inclusion of extraneous material (Jan. 23, 1936, p. 950; Feb.
    1, 1937, p. 656; Sept. 19, 1967, p. 26032).

    Sec. 689. Correction of the Congressional
    Record.

      While the  House controls the Congressional Record, the Speaker with the
    assent of the House laid down the principle that words spoken by a
    Member in order might not be changed by the House, as this would be
    determining what a Member should utter on the floor (V, 6974; VI, 583;
    VIII, 3469, 3498). Neither should one House strike out matter placed in
    the Record by permission of the other House (V, 6966). But the House may
    correct the speech of one of its Members so that it may record
    faithfully what he actually said (V, 6972). Similarly, a motion to
    correct the Record has been entertained to allow a Member to print in
    subsequent edition of the daily Record the correct text of an amendment
    which he had offered on a previous day and which had been substantially
    misprinted in the daily Record for the day on which it was offered
    (Deschler, ch. 5, Sec. 18.6). In addition, privileged motions have been
    permitted to correct the Record as follows: (1) striking unparliamentary
    words inserted in the Record (Deschler, ch. 5, Sec. 17); (2) correcting
    the Record where the remarks of one Member have been attributed to
    another (Deschler, ch. 5, Sec. Sec. 18.1, 18.2); (3) correcting the
    Record where a Member has improperly altered his remarks during an
    exchange of colloquy with another Member (Deschler, ch. 5, Sec.  18.9).
    Mere typographical errors in the Record or ordinary revisions of a
    Member's remarks do not give rise to privileged motions for the
    correction of the Record (Apr. 25, 1985, p. 9419), since such changes
    for the permanent edition of the Record may be made without the
    permission of the House (Deschler, ch. 5, Sec. 19) (subject to clause 8
    of rule XVII). The House does not change the Record merely to show what
    a Member should have said during debate (Deschler, ch. 5, Sec. 18).

      Furthermore, the Speaker declines to entertain unanimous-consent
    requests to correct the Record on a vote taken by electronic device,
    based upon the presumed accuracy of the electronic system and the
    ability and responsibility of each Member to verify his vote (Feb. 6,
    1973, p. 3558; Apr. 18, 1973, p. 13081; Dec. 3, 1974, p. 37897). It also
    has been held that a Member may not, in a controversy over a proposed
    correction of the Record as to a matter of business, demand as a matter
    of right the reading of the reporter's notes (V, 6967; VIII, 3460).

    [[Page 395]]

      The accuracy and propriety of reports in the Congressional Record
    constitute questions of the privileges of the House (see, Sec. 704,
    infra). Subject to the requirements of rule IX, a motion or resolution
    for the correction of the Congressional Record that involves a question
    of privilege may be made properly after the reading and approval of the
    Journal (V, 7013; VIII, 3496), is not in order pending the approval of
    the Journal (V, 6989), and may not be raised until the Record has
    appeared (V, 7020). A correction of the Record which involves a motion
    and a vote is recorded in the Journal (IV, 2877). Propositions to make
    corrections are sometimes considered by the Committee on House
    Administration.

    Sec. 690. Unparliamentary remarks and the Congressional
    Record.

      Where  a Member had uttered disorderly words on the floor without
    objection, the House yet decided that it was not precluded from action
    when the words, after being withheld for revision, appeared in the
    Record, and struck them out (V, 6979, 6981; VI, 582; VIII, 2538, 3463,
    3472). The House also has ordered stricken from the Record printed
    speeches condemned as unparliamentary for reflections on Members,
    committees of the House, the House itself (V, 7017), and the Senate (V,
    5129). In the 101st Congress a resolution presented as a question of
    privilege was adopted which directed the Committee on House
    Administration to report with respect to certain unauthorized deletions
    from the Record. A task force of that committee recommended that
    deletion of unparliamentary remarks be permitted only by consent of the
    House and not by the Member uttering the words under authority to revise
    and extend (Oct. 27, 1990, p. 37124). That recommendation has been
    incorporated into the Rules of the House (clause 8(b) of rule XVII). In
    debating a resolution to strike from the Record disorderly language a
    Member may not read the language (V, 7004); but it was held that as part
    of a personal explanation relating to matter excluded as out of order a
    Member might read the matter, subject to a point of order if the reading
    should develop anything in violation of the rules of debate (V, 5079). A
    resolution to omit from the Congressional Record certain remarks merely
    declared by the Member offering the resolution to be out of order is not
    privileged (V, 7021). A motion to strike unparliamentary words from the
    Record is privileged (see Sec. 961, infra), although a question of
    privilege may not subsequently arise therefrom (V, 7023; VI, 596).

    [[Page 396]]

    (V, 7005). Neither the House nor the Committee of the Whole may permit
    the insertion of an entire colloquy between two or more Members not
    actually delivered (Aug. 10, 1982, pp. 20266, 20267; Oct. 3, 1985, p.
    26028; Dec. 15, 1995, p. 37133).

    Sec. 692. ``Leave to print'' in the Congressional
    Record.

      The practice  of inserting in the Congressional Record speeches not actually
    delivered on the floor has developed by consent of the House as the
    membership has increased and it has become difficult at times for every
    Member to express at length on the floor his reasons for his attitude on
    public questions (V, 6990-6996, 6998-7000). The House, in granting such
    leave to print, does not permit it to be exercised without unreasonable
    freedom (V, 7002, 7003). For example: (1) a Member with permission to
    insert one matter may not insert another (V, 7001; VIII, 3462, 3479,
    3480); (2) a Member may not insert statements and letters of others
    unless the leave granted specifies such matter as extraneous (VIII,
    3475, 3481), whether the extension be under general leave for all
    Members or individually; (3) a Member may not insert that which would
    not have been in order if uttered on the floor, and the House may
    exclude such insertion in whole or in part (V, 7004-7008; VIII, 3495;
    Oct. 2, 1992, p. 30709; Sept. 27, 1996, p. 25633); (4) a Member may not
    insert in the Record the individual votes of Members on a question of
    which the yeas and nays have not been entered on the Journal (V, 6982).
    The principle that a Member shall not be called to order for words
    spoken in debate if business has intervened does not apply to a case
    where leave to print has been violated

      The House, and not the Speaker, determines what liberty shall be
    allowed to a Member who has leave to extend his remarks (V, 6997-7000;
    VIII, 3475), whether or not a copyrighted article shall be printed
    therein (V, 6985), as to an alleged abuse of the leave to print (V,
    7012; VIII, 3474), or as to a proposed amendment (V, 6983). General
    leave to print may be granted only by the House, although in the
    Committee of the Whole a Member, by unanimous consent, may be given
    leave to extend his remarks (V, 7009, 7010; VIII, 3488-3490). In the
    Committee of the Whole leave for an extension of remarks should not be
    granted except in connection with remarks actually delivered and
    relevant to the bill; and the extension under such circumstances should
    be brief (Speaker Longworth, Mar. 18, 1926, p. 5854).

      Where a Member abused a leave to print on the last day of the session,
    the House at the next session condemned the abuse and declared the
    matter not a legitimate part of the official debates (V, 7017). An abuse
    of the leave to print gives rise to a question of privilege (V, 7005-
    7008, 7011; VIII, 3163, 3491, 3495), and a resolution or motion to
    expunge from the Record in such a case is offered as a question of
    privilege (V, 7012; VIII, 3475, 3491). An inquiry by the House as to an
    alleged abuse of the leave to print does not necessarily entitle the
    Member implicated to the floor on a question of privilege (V, 7012).
    Clause 8 of rule XVII (formerly clause 9 of rule XIV) requires
    substantive remarks inserted under leave to revise and extend to be
    printed in distinctive type and precludes deletion under such permission
    of words actually uttered (Jan. 4, 1995, p. 541).

      A motion that a Member be permitted to extend his remarks in the
    Record is not privileged (Feb. 8, 1950, p. 1661), and under the rules of
    the Joint Committee on Printing, one Member cannot obtain permission for
    other individual Members to extend their remarks (rule 5 of House
    Supplement, Sec. 686, supra).

    [[Page 397]]

    charts and tables admitted under general leave that exceed two Record
    pages.
      Where extraneous material proposed to be inserted in the body or in
    the Extension of Remarks portion of the Record exceeds two Record pages,
    the rules of the Joint Committee on Printing require that the Member
    state an estimate of printing cost when permission is requested to make
    the insertion (Feb. 12, 1962, p. 2207; May 24, 1972, p. 18653). It is
    the Member's responsibility and not that of the Chair to ascertain the
    cost of printing extraneous material and obtaining consent of the House
    when necessary (Feb. 11, 1994, p. 2245). As indicated in supplemental
    rule 3 of the Laws and Rules for Publication of the Congressional
    Record, the general leave request of the floor manager permits matter
    pertaining to specific legislation, including tables and charts but not
    newspaper clippings and editorials. The Clerk normally does not require
    a cost estimate for

      The Joint Committee on Printing amended the rules for publication of
    the Record, effective March 1, 1978, to require the identification in
    the Record by ``bullet'' symbols of statements or insertions no part of
    which were actually delivered in debate (Feb. 20, 1978, p. 3676). Where
    the House permitted all Members leave to revise and extend their remarks
    on a certain subject, those Members who actually spoke during the debate
    could revise their remarks to appear as if actually delivered, but
    Members' statements no part of which were spoken were preceded and
    followed by a ``bullet'' symbol (Nov. 15, 1983, p. 32729). Then in the
    99th Congress, the House adopted a resolution requesting the Joint
    Committee on Printing to adopt temporary rules to require distinctive
    type styles rather than bulleting of remarks not actually spoken in
    debate (H. Res. 230, July 31, 1985, p. 21783), and also adopted a
    resolution requesting that those rules be made permanent (H. Res. 514,
    Aug. 12, 1986, p. 20980). Under regulations of the Joint Committee on
    Printing, remarks delivered or inserted under leave to revise and extend
    in connection with a ``one-minute speech'' made before legislative
    business are printed after legislative business if exceeding 300 words
    (Speaker O'Neill, Apr. 5, 1978, p. 8846). See Sec. 686, supra.

    News media galleries
      Based upon several unauthorized insertions of extensions of remarks in
    the Record, the Speaker announced that henceforth all extensions of
    remarks must be signed by the Member submitting them (Aug. 15, 1974, p.
    28385). The House by unanimous consent may grant permission for all
    Members to extend their remarks and to include extraneous material
    within the established limits in that section of the Congressional
    Record entitled ``Extensions of Remarks'' for a session of Congress
    (e.g., Jan. 6, 1999, p. 247; Jan. 3, 2001, p. 38; Jan. 23, 2002, p. ----
    ; Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----; Jan. 20, 2004, p. ----).

    [[Page 398]]

    shall supervise such galleries, including the designation of its
    employees, subject to the direction and control of the Speaker. The
    Speaker may assign one seat on the floor to Associated Press reporters
    and one to United Press International reporters, and may regulate their
    occupation. The Speaker may admit to the floor, under such regulations
    as he may prescribe, one additional representative of each press
    association.

    693. Unofficial reporters in the press gallery and on the
    floor.

      2.  A portion of the gallery over the Speaker's chair as may be
    necessary to accommodate representatives of the press wishing to report
    debates and proceedings shall be set aside for their use. Reputable
    reporters and correspondents shall be admitted thereto under such
    regulations as the Speaker may prescribe from time to time. The Standing
    Committee of Correspondents for the Press Gallery, and the Executive
    Committee of Correspondents for the Periodical Press Gallery,

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2 of rule XXXIV. When it was
    transferred to this clause, it also was amended to reflect the existing
    practice of including the Periodical Press Gallery under the ambit of
    the rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This provision was first
    adopted in 1857 and has been amended from time to time (V, 7304; VIII,
    3642; Jan. 3, 1953, p. 24; Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). See also Consumers
    Union v. Periodical Correspondents' Association, 1515 F.2d 1341 (D.C.
    Cir. 1975), cert. den. 423 U.S. 1051 (1976) (action in enforcing
    correspondents' association regulations is within legislative immunity
    granted by the Speech or Debate Clause).

    [[Page 399]]

    of the National Broadcasting Company, one of the Columbia Broadcasting
    System, and one of the American Broadcasting Company.

    Sec. 694. Unofficial reporters in the radio gallery and on
    the floor.

      3.  A portion of the gallery as may be necessary to accommodate
    reporters of news to be disseminated by radio, television, and similar
    means of transmission, wishing to report debates and proceedings, shall
    be set aside for their use. Reputable reporters and correspondents shall
    be admitted thereto under such regulations as the Speaker may prescribe.
    The Executive Committee of the Radio and Television Correspondents'
    Galleries shall supervise such gallery, including the designation of its
    employees, subject to the direction and control of the Speaker. The
    Speaker may admit to the floor, under such regulations as he may
    prescribe, one representative

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 3 of rule XXXIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially on April 20, 1939 (p. 4561), and
    was amended on May 30, 1940 (p. 7208) and on January 22, 1971 (p. 144).

                                    Rule VII

    Archiving
                              records of the house

    695. Duties of Clerk and committees as to custody of
    papers before committees.

      1. (a)  At the end of each Congress, the chairman of
    each committee shall transfer to the Clerk any noncurrent records of
    such committee, including the subcommittees thereof.

      (b) At the end of each Congress, each officer of the House elected
    under rule II shall transfer to the Clerk any noncurrent records made or
    acquired in the course of the duties of such officer.

      2. The Clerk shall deliver the records transferred under clause 1,
    together with any other noncurrent records of the House, to the
    Archivist of the United States for preservation at the National Archives
    and Records Administration. Records so delivered are the permanent
    property of the House and remain subject to this rule and any order of
    the House.
    Public availability

    [[Page 400]]

    able for public use, subject to clause 4(b) and any order of the House.
      3. (a) The Clerk shall authorize the Archivist to make records
    delivered under clause 2 avail

      (b)(1) A record shall immediately be made available if it was
    previously made available for public use by the House or a committee or
    a subcommittee.

      (2) An investigative record that contains personal data relating to a
    specific living person (the disclosure of which would be an unwarranted
    invasion of personal privacy), an administrative record relating to
    personnel, or a record relating to a hearing that was closed under
    clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI shall be made available if it has been in
    existence for 50 years.

      (3) A record for which a time, schedule, or condition for availability
    is specified by order of the House shall be made available in accordance
    with that order. Except as otherwise provided by order of the House, a
    record of a committee for which a time, schedule, or condition for
    availability is specified by order of the committee (entered during the
    Congress in which the record is made or acquired by the committee) shall
    be made available in accordance with the order of the committee.

      (4) A record (other than a record referred to in subparagraph (1),
    (2), or (3)) shall be made available if it has been in existence for 30
    years.

    [[Page 401]]

    Clerk shall notify in writing the chairman and ranking minority member
    of the Committee on House Administration of any such determination.
      4. (a) A record may not be made available for public use under clause
    3 if the Clerk determines that such availability would be detrimental to
    the public interest or inconsistent with the rights and privileges of
    the House. The

      (b) A determination of the Clerk under paragraph (a) is subject to
    later orders of the House and, in the case of a record of a committee,
    later orders of the committee.

      5. (a) This rule does not supersede rule VIII or clause 11 of rule X
    and does not authorize the public disclosure of any record if such
    disclosure is prohibited by law or executive order of the President.

      (b) The Committee on House Administration may prescribe guidelines and
    regulations governing the applicability and implementation of this rule.

      (c) A committee may withdraw from the National Archives and Records
    Administration any record of the committee delivered to the Archivist
    under this rule. Such a withdrawal shall be on a temporary basis and for
    official use of the committee.
    Definition of record

      6. In this rule the term ``record'' means any official, permanent
    record of the House (other than a record of an individual Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner), including--

    [[Page 402]]

    activity of such committee or a subcommittee thereof); and
          (a) with respect to a committee, an official, permanent record of
    the committee (including any record of a legislative, oversight, or
    other

          (b) with respect to an officer of the House elected under rule II,
    an official, permanent record made or acquired in the course of the
    duties of such officer.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, clauses 1
    through 6 were found in former rule XXXVI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). That rule was adopted initially in 1880 (V, 7260). Clause 2 (which
    derived from section 140(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of
    1946 (60 Stat. 812)) was added in the 83d Congress when the rule was
    also renumbered (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1953, p. 24). It was amended on
    January 22, 1971 (p. 144). It was again amended in the 99th Congress to
    change the reference from the General Services Administration to the
    National Archives and Records Administration (H. Res. 114, Oct. 14,
    1986, p. 30821). The rule was rewritten entirely in the 101st Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 73) to incorporate the provisions of H.
    Res. 419 as reported from the Committee on Rules in the 100th Congress
    (H. Rept. 100-1054). Clerical corrections were effected to reflect
    changes in the name of the Committee on House Administration in the
    104th and 106th Congresses (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    467; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clerical corrections were effected
    in the 107th Congress to correct cross references (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24).

    Withdrawal of papers
      The Clerk has historically been authorized to permit the Administrator
    of General Services (now Archivist) to make available for use certain
    records of the House transferred to the National Archives (H. Res. 288,
    June 16, 1953, p. 6641). Under this rule, an order of the House is
    required for the release of noncurrent records of the House (Mar. 22,
    1991, p. 7549).

    [[Page 403]]

    porarily to an officer or bureau of the executive departments any papers
    on file in his office relating to any matter pending before such officer
    or bureau, taking proper receipt therefor.

    696. Custody of papers in the files of the House.

      7.  A
    memorial or other paper presented to the House may not be withdrawn from
    its files without its leave. If withdrawn certified copies thereof shall
    be left in the Office of the Clerk. When an act passes for the
    settlement of a claim, the Clerk may transmit to the officer charged
    with the settlement thereof the papers on file in his office relating to
    such claim. The Clerk may lend tem

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former rule XXXVII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). It was adopted initially in 1873 and amended in 1880 (V, 7256). It
    was renumbered January 3, 1953 (p. 24).

      The House usually allows the withdrawal of papers only in cases where
    there has been no adverse report. As the rules for the order of business
    give no place to the motion to withdraw, it is made by unanimous consent
    (V, 7259). The House formerly adopted a privileged resolution at the
    beginning of each Congress authorizing the Clerk to furnish certified
    copies of certain types of House papers subpoenaed by courts upon
    determination of relevancy by the court, but not permitting production
    of executive session papers or transfer of original papers (Jan. 3,
    1973, p. 30).

      See rule VIII, infra for current procedure for response to subpoenas
    for papers of the House.

                                    Rule VIII

                              response to subpoenas

    [[Page 404]]

    Sec. 697. Response to subpoenas.

      1.  When a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House is properly
    served with a judicial or administrative subpoena or judicial order
    directing appearance as a witness relating to the official functions of
    the House or for the production or disclosure of any document relating
    to the official functions of the House, such Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee shall comply, consistently with the
    privileges and rights of the House, with the judicial or administrative
    subpoena or judicial order as hereinafter provided, unless otherwise
    determined under this rule.

      2. Upon receipt of a properly served judicial or administrative
    subpoena or judicial order described in clause 1, a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House shall promptly
    notify the Speaker of its receipt in writing. Such notification shall
    promptly be laid before the House by the Speaker. During a period of
    recess or adjournment of longer than three days, notification to the
    House is not required until the reconvening of the House, when the
    notification shall promptly be laid before the House by the Speaker.

      3. Once notification has been laid before the House, the Member,
    Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House shall
    determine whether the issuance of the judicial or administrative
    subpoena or judicial order described in clause 1 is a proper exercise of
    jurisdiction by the court, is material and relevant, and is consistent
    with the privileges and rights of the House. Such Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee shall notify the Speaker
    before seeking judicial determination of these matters.

    [[Page 405]]

      4. Upon determination whether a judicial or administrative subpoena or
    judicial order described in clause 1 is a proper exercise of
    jurisdiction by the court, is material and relevant, and is consistent
    with the privileges and rights of the House, the Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House shall
    immediately notify the Speaker of the determination in writing.

      5. The Speaker shall inform the House of a determination whether a
    judicial or administrative subpoena or judicial order described in
    clause 1 is a proper exercise of jurisdiction by the court, is material
    and relevant, and is consistent with the privileges and rights of the
    House. In so informing the House, the Speaker shall generally describe
    the records or information sought. During a period of recess or
    adjournment of longer than three days, such notification is not required
    until the reconvening of the House, when the notification shall promptly
    be laid before the House by the Speaker.

      6. (a) Except as specified in paragraph (b) or otherwise ordered by
    the House, upon notification to the House that a judicial or
    administrative subpoena or judicial order described in clause 1 is a
    proper exercise of jurisdiction by the court, is material and relevant,
    and is consistent with the privileges and rights of the House, the
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House shall comply with the judicial or administrative subpoena or
    judicial order by supplying certified copies.

    [[Page 406]]

    that transpired under this clause shall promptly be laid before the
    House by the Speaker.
      (b) Under no circumstances may minutes or transcripts of executive
    sessions, or evidence of witnesses in respect thereto, be disclosed or
    copied. During a period of recess or adjournment of longer than three
    days, the Speaker may authorize compliance or take such other action as
    he considers appropriate under the circumstances. Upon the reconvening
    of the House, all matters

      7. A copy of this rule shall be transmitted by the Clerk to the court
    when a judicial or administrative subpoena or judicial order described
    in clause 1 is issued and served on a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House.

      8. Nothing in this rule shall be construed to deprive, condition, or
    waive the constitutional or legal privileges or rights applicable or
    available at any time to a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House, or of the House itself, or the right
    of such Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee,
    or of the House itself, to assert such privileges or rights before a
    court in the United States.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former rule L (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    It was added initially in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, p.
    98). Until the 95th Congress, whenever a Member, officer, or employee
    received a subpoena, the House would authorize the person to respond by
    adopting a resolution. This case-by-case approach was changed in the
    95th and 96th Congresses (H. Res. 10, Jan. 4, 1977, p. 73; H. Res. 10,
    Jan. 15, 1979, p. 19) when general authority was granted to respond to
    subpoenas and a procedure was established for automatic compliance
    without the necessity of a House vote. This standing authority was
    clarified and revised later in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 722, Sept. 17,
    1980, pp. 25777-90) and forms the basis for the present rule. In the
    107th Congress the rule was amended to broaden its application to
    administrative subpoenas (sec. 2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

    [[Page 407]]

    gress, a Member or employee receiving such a subpoena informs the
    Speaker, as had been the practice under precedent (Deschler, ch. 11,
    Sec. 14.8) before the rule was amended (July 30, 1998, p. 18298; May 3,
    1999, p. 8040).
      In the 102d Congress the House considered as questions of the
    privileges of the House resolutions: responding to a subpoena for
    records of the ``bank'' in the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms (Apr. 29,
    1992, p. 9753); responding to a contemporaneous request for such records
    from a Special Counsel (Apr. 29, 1992, p. 9763); and authorizing an
    officer of the House to release certain documents in response to another
    such request from the Special Counsel (May 28, 1992, p. 12790). Under
    rule VIII as amended in the 107th Con

      Under clause 2, the Speaker promptly lays before the House a
    communication notifying him of the receipt of a subpoena, but the rule
    does not require that the text of a subpoena be printed in the Record
    (July 31, 1992, p. 20602).

                                     Rule IX

                             questions of privilege

    Sec. 698. Definition of questions of privilege.

      1.  Questions
    of privilege shall be, first, those affecting the rights of the House
    collectively, its safety, dignity, and the integrity of its proceedings;
    and second, those affecting the rights, reputation, and conduct of
    Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner, individually, in their
    representative capacity only.

    [[Page 408]]

    which the proponent announces to the House his intention to offer the
    resolution and the form of the resolution. Oral announcement of the form
    of the resolution may be dispensed with by unanimous consent.

    Sec. 699. Precedence of questions of
    privilege.

      2. (a)(1) A resolution  reported as a question of the privileges of the House, or
    offered from the floor by the Majority Leader or the Minority Leader as
    a question of the privileges of the House, or offered as privileged
    under clause 1, section 7, article I of the Constitution, shall have
    precedence of all other questions except motions to adjourn. A
    resolution offered from the floor by a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner other than the Majority Leader or the Minority Leader as a
    question of the privileges of the House shall have precedence of all
    other questions except motions to adjourn only at a time or place,
    designated by the Speaker, in the legislative schedule within two
    legislative days after the day on

      (2) The time allotted for debate on a resolution offered from the
    floor as a question of the privileges of the House shall be equally
    divided between (A) the proponent of the resolution, and (B) the
    Majority Leader, the Minority Leader, or a designee, as determined by
    the Speaker.

      (b) A question of personal privilege shall have precedence of all
    other questions except motions to adjourn.

      This rule was adopted in 1880 (III, 2521). It merely defined what had
    been long established in the practice of the House but what the House
    had hitherto been unwilling to define (II, 1603). It was amended in the
    103d Congress to authorize the Speaker to designate a time within a
    period of two legislative days for the consideration of a resolution to
    be offered from the floor by a Member other than the Majority Leader or
    the Minority Leader as a question of the privileges of the House after
    that Member has announced to the House his intention to do so and the
    content of the resolution, and to divide the time for debate on a
    resolution offered from the floor as a question of privilege (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). Clause 2 was amended in the 106th Congress to
    permit the announcement of the form of the resolution to be dispensed
    with by unanimous consent, and clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 409]]

    Sec. 700. Questions of privileges of the House.

      The  body of
    precedent relating to questions of the privileges of the House includes
    rulings that span the adoption of standing rule IX in 1880. The rule was
    adopted ``to prevent the large consumption of time which resulted from
    Members getting the floor for all kinds of speeches under the pretext of
    raising a question of privilege'' (III, 2521). In a landmark decision on
    constitutional assertions of privilege, Speaker Gillett placed
    significant reliance on the history of rule IX by observing that it
    ``was obviously adopted for the purpose of hindering the extension of
    constitutional or other privilege'' (VI, 48). Under House practice, a
    resolution offered as a question of privilege is read in full by the
    Clerk (Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25420).

    Sec. 701. Questions relating to organization.

      The  privileges
    of the House include questions relating to its organization (I, 22-24,
    189, 212, 290), and the title of its Members to their seats (III, 2579-
    2587), which may be raised as questions of the privileges of the House
    even though the subject has been previously referred to committee (I,
    742; III, 2584; VIII, 2307). Such resolutions include those: (1) to
    declare prima facie right to a seat, or to declare a vacancy, where the
    House has referred the questions of prima facie and final rights to an
    elections committee for investigation (H. Res. 1, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 381;
    H. Res. 52, Feb. 7, 1985, p. 2220; H. Res. 97, Mar. 4, 1985, p. 4277; H.
    Res. 121, Apr. 2, 1985, p. 7118; H. Res. 148, Apr. 30, 1985, p. 9801);
    (2) to raise various questions incidental to the right to a seat (I,
    322, 328, 673, 742; II, 1207; III, 2588; VII, 2316), such as a
    resolution to declare a vacancy in the House because a Member-elect is
    unable to take the oath of office and to serve as a Member or to
    expressly resign the office due to an incapacitating illness (H. Res.
    80, Feb. 24, 1981, p. 2916); (3) to declare neither of two claimants
    seated pending a committee report and decision of final right to the
    seat by the House (Jan. 3, 1961, pp. 23-25; Jan. 3, 1985, p. 381),
    including incidental provisions providing compensation for both
    claimants and office staffing by the Clerk (Jan. 3, 1985, p. 381) and to
    direct temporary seating of a certified Member-elect pending
    determination of final right notwithstanding prior House action
    declining to seat either claimant (Feb. 7, 1985, p. 2220; Mar. 4, 1985,
    p. 4277); and (4) to propose directly to dispose of a contest over the
    title to a seat in the House (Nov. 8, 1997, p. 25294; Nov. 9, 1997, p.
    25721; Jan. 28, 1998, p. 175) or to dispose of such contest upon the
    expiration of a specified day (Oct. 23, 1997, p. 23231; Oct. 29, 1997,
    p. 23695; Oct. 30, 1997, p. 23959; Nov. 5, 1997, p. 24645).

      A resolution electing a House officer is presented as a question of
    the privileges of the House (July 31, 1997, p. 17021). A resolution
    declaring vacant the Office of the Speaker is presented as a matter of
    high constitutional privilege (VI, 35). For further discussion with
    respect to the organization of the House and the title of its Members to
    seats, see Sec. Sec. 18-30, 46-51, 56, and 58-60, supra.

    [[Page 410]]

    resolving that such bill be recommitted to conference (July 27, 2000, p.
    16565). The constitutional prerogatives of the House also include its
    function with respect to: (1) impeachment and matters incidental thereto
    (see Sec. 604, supra); (2) bills ``pocket vetoed'' during an
    intersession adjournment (Nov. 21, 1989, p. 31156); (3) its power to
    punish for contempt, whether of its own Members (II, 1641-1665), of
    witnesses who are summoned to give information (II, 1608, 1612; III,
    1666-1724), or of other persons (II, 1597-1640); and (4) questions
    relating to legal challenges involving the prerogatives of the House
    (Jan. 29, 1981, p. 1304; Mar. 30, 1982, p. 5890), including a resolution
    responding to a court challenge to the prerogative of the House to
    establish a Chaplain (Mar. 30, 1982, p. 5890). A resolution laying on
    the table a message from the President containing certain averments
    inveighing disrespect toward Members of Congress was considered as a
    question of the privileges of the House asserting a breach of privilege
    in a formal communication to the House (VI, 330).

    Sec. 702. Questions relating to constitutional
    prerogatives.

      The  privileges of the House, as distinguished from that of
    the individual Member, include questions relating to its constitutional
    prerogatives in respect to revenue legislation and appropriations (see,
    e.g., II, 1480-1501; VI, 315; Nov. 8, 1979, p. 31517; Oct. 1, 1985, p.
    25418; June 16, 1988, p. 14780; June 21, 1988, p. 15425; Aug. 12, 1994,
    p. 21655). For a more thorough record of revenue bills returned to the
    Senate, see Sec. 102, supra. Such a question of privilege may be raised
    at any time when the House is in possession of the papers (June 20,
    1968, Deschler, ch. 13, Sec. 14.2; Aug. 19, 1982, p. 22127), but not
    otherwise (Apr. 6, 1995, p. 10701). Such a question of privilege
    includes a resolution asserting that a conference report accompanying a
    House bill originated revenue provisions in derogation of the sole
    constitutional prerogative of the House and

      For a discussion of the relationship of the House and its Members to
    the courts, see Sec. Sec. 290-291b, supra. For examples of Senate
    messages requesting the return of Senate measures that intruded on the
    constitutional prerogative of the House to originate revenue measures,
    see Sec. 565, supra. For a discussion of the prerogatives of the House
    with respect to treaties affecting revenue, see Sec. 597, supra.

    [[Page 411]]

    consideration of the joint resolution had been made in order (Speaker
    O'Neill, Aug. 15, 1978, p. 26203).

      The ordinary rights and functions of the House under the Constitution
    are exercised in accordance with the rules without precedence as matters
    of privilege (III, 2567). Neither the enumeration of legislative powers
    in article I of the Constitution nor the prohibition in the seventh
    clause of section 9 of that article against any withdrawal from the
    Treasury except by enactment of an appropriation renders a measure
    purporting to exercise or limit the exercise of those powers a question
    of the privileges of the House, because rule IX is concerned not with
    the privileges of the Congress, as a legislative branch, but only with
    the privileges of the House, as a House (Feb. 7, 1995, p. 3905; Dec. 22,
    1995, p. 38501; Jan. 3, 1996, p. 40; Jan. 24, 1996, p. 1248; Feb. 1,
    1996, p. 2245; Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25420; Nov. 4, 1999, pp.28528-33; June
    6, 2002, p. ----; Oct. 2, 2002, pp. ----, ----, ----, ----; Oct. 3,
    2002, pp. ----, ----). For example, the following legislative
    propositions have been held not to involve a question of constitutional
    privileges of the House: (1) a resolution requiring a committee inquiry
    into the extent to which the right to vote was denied under the
    provisions of the 14th amendment (VI, 48); and (2) a resolution alleging
    an unconstitutional abrogation of a treaty by the President, and calling
    on the President to seek the approval of Congress before such abrogation
    (June 6, 2002, p. ----). On the other hand, an extraordinary question
    relating to the House vote required by the Constitution to pass a joint
    resolution extending the ratification period of a proposed
    constitutional amendment was raised as a question of privilege where the
    House had not otherwise made a separate determination on that procedural
    question and where

    [[Page 412]]

    of disciplinary resolutions meting out punishment for violations of
    standards of official conduct, which constitute questions of the
    privileges of the House, see Sec. Sec. 62-66, supra.

    Sec. 703. Questions relating to official
    conduct.

      The  privileges of the House include certain questions relating to
    the conduct of Members, officers, and employees (see, e.g., I, 284, 285;
    III, 2628, 2645-2647). Under that standard, the following resolutions
    have been held to constitute questions of the privileges of the House:
    (1) a resolution directing the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct to investigate illegal solicitation of political contributions
    in the House Office Buildings by unnamed sitting Members (July 10, 1985,
    p. 18397); (2) a resolution establishing an ad hoc committee to
    investigate allegations of ``ghost'' employment in the House (Apr. 9,
    1992, p. 9029); (3) a resolution directing a committee to further
    investigate the conduct of a Member on which it has reported to the
    House (Aug. 5, 1987, p. 22458); (4) a resolution directing the Committee
    on Standards of Official Conduct to report to the House the status of an
    investigation pending before the committee (Nov. 17, 1995, p. 33846;
    Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35075); (5) a resolution appointing an outside counsel
    (Sept. 19, 1996, p. 23851; Sept. 24, 1996, p. 24525); (6) a resolution
    to commit other matters to an outside counsel already appointed by the
    committee (June 27, 1996, p. 15917); (7) a resolution directing the
    committee to release the report of an outside counsel (Sept. 19, 1996,
    p. 23852; Sept. 24, 1996, p. 24526); (8) a resolution making allegations
    concerning the propriety of responses by officers of the House to court
    subpoenas for papers of the House without notice to the House, and
    directions to a committee to investigate such allegations (Feb. 13,
    1980, p. 2768); (9) a resolution making allegations of improper
    representation by counsel of the legal position of Members in a brief
    filed in the Court and directions for withdrawal of the brief (Mar. 22,
    1990, p. 4996); (10) a resolution making allegations of unauthorized
    actions by a committee employee to intervene in judicial proceedings
    (Feb. 5, 1992, p. 1601); (11) a resolution directing the Clerk to notify
    interested parties that the House regretted the use of official
    resources to present to the Supreme Court of Florida a legal brief
    arguing the unconstitutionality of congressional term limits, and that
    the House had no position on that question (Nov. 4, 1991, p. 29968);
    (12) a resolution alleging a chronology of litigation relating to the
    immunity of a Member from civil liability for bona fide official acts
    and expressing the views of the House thereon (May 12, 1988, p. 10574);
    (13) a resolution directing the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct to establish an investigative subcommittee and appoint outside
    counsel to investigate certain allegations against a Member (Oct. 8,
    2004, p. ----); (14) a resolution alleging, among other things, the
    improper and unilateral firing of nonpartisan staff of the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct and directing the Speaker to appoint a
    bipartisan task force to address the efficacy of that committee so as to
    restore public confidence in the ethics process (Mar. 15, 2005, p. ----;
    Apr. 14, 2005, p. ----) and directing the committee to appoint
    nonpartisan professional staff (June 9, 2005, p. ----). For a discussion

    [[Page 413]]

    mittee on House Administration to redress the inaccurate naming of a
    Member in minority views accompanying a report on that matter (July 23,
    1992, p. 19121); (10) directing the public release of official papers of
    the House relating to an investigation by the Committee on House
    Administration's task force to investigate the operation and management
    of the Office of the Postmaster (July 22, 1993, p. 16634); (11)
    directing the public release of transcripts and other relevant documents
    relating to an investigation by the Committee on House Administration's
    task force to investigate the operation and management of the Office of
    the Postmaster unless two designees of the bipartisan leadership agree
    to the contrary (June 9, 1994, p. 12437); and (12) directing the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to defer any investigation
    relating to the operation of the former Post Office until assured that
    its inquiry would not interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation,
    as well as a resolution directing the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct to proceed with the investigation (Mar. 2, 1994, p. 3672).
      In the 102d and 103d Congresses, a large number of resolutions
    relating to the operation of the ``bank'' in the Office of the Sergeant-
    at-Arms and the management of the Office of the Postmaster were
    presented as questions of the privileges of the House. The former
    category included resolutions: (1) terminating all bank and check-
    cashing operations in the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms and directing
    the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to review GAO audits of
    such operations (Oct. 3, 1991, p. 25435); (2) instructing the Committee
    on Standards of Official Conduct to disclose the names and pertinent
    account information of Members and former Members found to have abused
    the privileges of the ``bank'' in the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms
    (Mar. 12, 1992, p. 5519); (3) instructing the Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct to disclose further account information respecting
    Members and former Members having checks held by that entity (Mar. 12,
    1992, p. 5534); (4) mandating full and accurate disclosure of pertinent
    information concerning the operation of that entity (Mar. 12, 1992, p.
    5551); (5) responding to a subpoena for records of that entity (Apr. 29,
    1992, p. 9453); (6) responding to a contemporaneous request for such
    records from a Special Counsel (Apr. 29, 1992, p. 9763); and (7)
    authorizing an officer of the House to release certain documents in
    response to another such request from the Special Counsel (May 28, 1992,
    p. 12790). The latter category included resolutions: (1) directing the
    Committee on House Administration to conduct a thorough investigation of
    the operation and management of the Office of the Postmaster in light of
    recent press allegations of wrongdoing (Feb. 5, 1992, p. 1589); (2)
    creating a select committee to investigate the same matter (Feb. 5,
    1992, p. 1599); (3) requiring an explanation of a reported interference
    with authorized access to a committee investigation of that matter (Apr.
    9, 1992, p. 9024); (4) redressing a perception of obstruction of justice
    by recusing the General Counsel to the Clerk from matters relating to
    the investigation of that matter (Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9076); (5) directing
    the Speaker to explain the lapse of time before the House received
    notice that several Members and an officer of the House had received
    subpoenas to testify before a Federal grand jury investigating that
    matter (May 14, 1992, p. 11309); (6) directing the Committee on House
    Administration to transmit to the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct and to the Department of Justice all records obtained by its
    task force to investigate that matter (July 22, 1992, p. 18786); (7)
    directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to investigate
    violations of confidentiality by staff engaged in the investigation of
    that matter (July 22, 1992, p. 18795); (8) directing the Committee on
    House Administration to release transcripts of the proceedings of its
    task force to investigate that matter, where the investigation was
    ordered as a question of privilege and its results had been ordered
    reported to the House (July 22, 1992, p. 18796; July 23, 1992, p.
    19125); (9) directing the Com

      In the 105th Congress a 12-member bipartisan task force appointed by
    the Majority and Minority Leaders conducted a comprehensive review of
    the House ethics process. During the deliberations of the task force,
    the House imposed a moratorium on raising certain questions of privilege
    under this rule with respect to official conduct and on the filing or
    processing of ethics complaints. The moratorium was imposed in the
    expectation that the recommendations of the task force would include
    rules changes relating to establishment and enforcement of standards of
    official conduct for Members, officers, and employees of the House (Feb.
    12, 1997, p. 2058). The moratorium was extended through September 10,
    1997 (July 30, 1997, p. 16958). The task force recommendations
    ultimately were reported from the Committee on Rules and were adopted
    with certain amendments (H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19340).

    Sec. 704. Questions relating to integrity of
    proceedings.

      The  privileges of the House include questions relating to the
    integrity of its proceedings, including the processes by which bills are
    considered (III, 2597-2601, 2614; IV, 3383, 3388, 3478), such as the
    constitutional question of the vote required to pass a joint resolution
    extending the State ratification period of a proposed constitutional
    amendment (Speaker O'Neill, Aug. 15, 1978, p. 26203). Privileges of the
    House also include: (1) resignation of a Member from a select or
    standing committee (Speaker Albert, June 16, 1975, p. 19054; Speaker
    O'Neill, Mar. 8, 1977, pp. 6579-82); (2) newspaper charges affecting the
    honor and dignity of the House (VII, 911); and (3) the conduct of
    representatives of the press (II, 1630, 1631; III, 2627; VI, 553).

    [[Page 414]]

    of a contested election to which he was party (H. Res. 233, Sept. 18,
    1997, p. 19340).
      Admission to the floor of the House constitutes a question of
    privilege (III, 2624-2626), including a resolution alleging indecorous
    behavior of a former Member and instructing the Sergeant-at-Arms to ban
    the former Member from the floor, and rooms leading thereto, until the
    resolution

      The accuracy and propriety of reports in the Congressional Record also
    constitute a question of privileges of the House (V, 7005-7023; VIII,
    3163, 3461, 3463, 3464, 3491, 3499; Apr. 20, 1936, p. 5704; May 11,
    1936, p. 7019; May 7, 1979, p. 10099), including a resolution: (1)
    asserting that a Member's remarks spoken in debate were omitted from the
    printed Record, directing that the Record be corrected and requiring the
    Clerk to report on the circumstances and possible corrective action
    (July 29, 1983, p. 21685); (2) directing the Committee on Rules to
    investigate and report to the House within a time certain on alleged
    alterations of the Congressional Record (Jan. 24, 1984, p. 250); and (3)
    addressing whether the Record should constitute a verbatim transcript
    (May 8, 1985, p. 11072; Feb. 7, 1990, p. 1515). Although a motion to
    correct the Congressional Record based on improper alterations or
    insertions may constitute a question of privilege, mere typographical
    errors or ordinary revisions of a Member's remarks do not form the basis
    for privileged motions to correct the Record (Apr. 25, 1985, p. 9419;
    see Sec. 690, supra). A resolution directing the placement of an
    asterisk in the Congressional Record to note alleged inaccuracies in the
    State of the Union address (but not alleging improper transcription of
    that address) was held not to constitute a question of privilege (Oct.
    20, 2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 415]]

      The protection of House records constitutes a question of the
    privileges of the House, especially when records are demanded by the
    courts (III, 2604, 2659, 2660-2664; VI, 587; Sept. 18, 1992, p. 25750;
    see also Sec. 291, supra). Privileges of the House involving records
    also include resolutions: (1) furnishing certain requested information
    to an Independent Counsel investigating covert arms transactions with
    Iran (June 4, 1992, p. 13664); (2) responding to a request of a law
    enforcement official regarding the timing of the public release of
    official papers of the House (July 22, 1993, p. 16624); (3) directing a
    committee to investigate press publication of a report that the House
    had ordered not to be released (Speaker Albert, Feb. 19, 1976, p. 3914);
    (4) directing the public release of transcripts and other relevant
    documents relating to an investigation by the Committee on House
    Administration's task force to investigate the operation and management
    of the Office of the Postmaster unless two designees of the bipartisan
    leadership agreed to the contrary (June 9, 1994, p. 12437); and (5)
    alleging that a Member willfully abused his power as chairman of a
    committee by unilaterally releasing records of the committee in
    contravention of its rules (adopted ``protocol''), and expressing
    disapproval of such conduct (May 14, 1998, p. 9279). However, a
    resolution directing a standing committee to release executive-session
    material referred to it as such by special rule of the House was held to
    propose a change in the rules and, therefore, not to constitute a
    question of the privileges of the House under rule IX (Sept. 23, 1998,
    p. 21562).

      A question regarding the accuracy of House documents constitutes a
    question of privileges of the House (V, 7329), including resolutions:
    (1) asserting that a printed transcript of joint subcommittee hearings
    contained unauthorized alterations of the statements of subcommittee
    members in the prior Congress and that unauthorized alterations may have
    occurred in other committee hearing transcripts, and proposing the
    creation of a select committee to investigate and report back by a date
    certain (June 29, 1983, p. 18279); (2) alleging the unauthorized
    creation and falsification of documents distributed to the general
    public at a committee hearing and resolving that the Speaker take
    appropriate measures to ensure the integrity of the legislative process
    and report his actions and recommendations to the House (Oct. 25, 1995,
    p. 29373); (3) alleging that a committee report contained descriptions
    of recorded votes (as required by clause 3(b) of rule XIII) that
    deliberately mischaracterized certain amendments and directing the
    chairman of the committee to file a supplemental report to change those
    descriptions (May 3, 2005, p. ----). The privileges of the House also
    include: (1) the integrity of its Journal (II, 1363; III, 2620) and
    messages (III, 2613); (2) unreasonable delay in transmitting an enrolled
    bill to the President (Oct. 8, 1991, p. 25761); and (3) a concurrent
    resolution directing the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the
    Senate to produce official duplicates of certain legislative papers
    (Oct. 5, 1992, p. 32064). For a discussion of the privileged status of a
    request of one House for the return of a measure messaged to the other,
    see Sec. 565, supra.

      A resolution alleging that the Chair had improperly ordered the
    interruption of audio broadcast coverage of certain House proceedings
    constitutes a question of privileges of the House (Mar. 17, 1988, p.
    4180), as does a resolution providing for an experiment in the
    telecasting and broadcasting of House proceedings (Speaker O'Neill, Mar.
    15, 1977, p. 7607). Similarly, a resolution authorizing and directing
    the Speaker to provide for the audio and visual broadcast coverage of
    the Chamber while Members are voting has been held to present a question
    of the privileges of the House, because rule V (formerly clause 9 of
    rule I), which requires complete and unedited audio and visual coverage
    of House proceedings and coverage of record votes, had not been
    implemented (Apr. 30, 1985, p. 9821).

      A resolution alleging intentional abuse of House practices and customs
    in holding a vote open for approximately three hours for the sole
    purpose of circumventing the initial will of the House and directing the
    Speaker to take such steps as necessary to prevent further abuse
    constitutes a question of the privileges of the House (Dec. 8, 2003, p.
    ----).

    [[Page 416]]

    a committee violated House rules by voting to take allegedly defamatory
    testimony in open session (June 30, 1958, p. 12690), were all held not
    to give rise to a question of the privileges of the House. However, the
    following resolutions were held to give rise to questions of the
    privileges of the House: (1) alleging that the chairman of a committee
    directed his staff to request the Capitol Police to remove minority
    party members from a committee room where they were meeting during the
    reading of an amendment, alleging that the chairman deliberately and
    improperly refused to recognize a legitimate and timely objection by a
    member of the committee to dispense with the reading of that amendment,
    resolving that the House disapproves of the manner in which the chairman
    conducted the markup, and finding that the bill considered at that
    markup was not validly ordered reported (July 18, 2003, p. ----) and
    resolving that the House disapproves of the manner in which the chairman
    summoned the Capitol Police as well as the manner in which he conducted
    the markup, finding that the bill considered at that markup was not
    validly ordered reported, and calling for a police report to be placed
    in the Record (July 23, 2003 p. ----); (2) alleging, among other things,
    the improper and unilateral firing of nonpartisan staff of the Committee
    on Standards of Official Conduct and directing the Speaker to appoint a
    bipartisan task force to address the efficacy of that committee so as to
    restore public confidence in the ethics process (Mar. 15, 2005, p. ----;
    Apr. 14, 2005, p. ----) and directing the committee to appoint
    nonpartisan professional staff (June 9, 2005, p. ----); (3) alleging
    that the chairman of a committee intentionally violated House rules and
    abused his power as chairman during a minority day of hearings under
    clause 2(j) of rule XI and directing the chairman to schedule a further
    day of hearings (June 16, 2005, p. ----).

      Alleged improprieties in committee procedures, including charges of
    committee inaction (III, 2610), secret committee conferences (VI, 578),
    refusal to make staff study available to certain Members and to the
    public (Feb. 14, 1939, p. 1370), refusal to give hearings or allow
    petitions to be read (III, 2607), refusal to permit committee member to
    take photostatic copies of committee files (Aug. 14, 1957, p. 14739),
    and a determination whether

    Sec. 705. Questions relating to comfort and
    convenience.

      The  privileges of the House include questions relating to the
    comfort and convenience of Members and employees (III, 2629-2636), such
    as resolutions concerning the proper attire for Members in the Chamber
    when the temperature is uncomfortably warm (July 17, 1979, p. 19008); as
    well as questions relating to safety, such as resolutions requiring an
    investigation into the safety of Members in view of alleged structural
    deficiencies in the West Front of the Capitol (July 25, 1980, pp. 19762-
    64); and directing the appointment of a select committee to inquire into
    alleged fire safety deficiencies in the environs of the House (May 10,
    1988, p. 10286).

    [[Page 417]]

    clause 2 of rule XVII (formerly clause 2 of rule XIV) (July 25, 1980,
    pp. 19762-64), for example, by requiring that he give priority in
    recognition to any Member seeking to call up a matter highly privileged
    pursuant to a statutory provision, over a member from the Committee on
    Rules seeking to call up a privileged report from that committee
    (Speaker Wright, Mar. 11, 1987, p. 5403), or by requiring that he state
    the question on overriding a veto before recognizing for a motion to
    refer (thereby overruling prior decisions of the Chair to change the
    order of precedence of motions) (Speaker Wright, Aug. 3, 1988, p.
    20281). Similarly, a resolution alleging that, in light of an
    internationally objectionable French program of nuclear test
    detonations, for the House to receive the President of France in a joint
    meeting would be injurious to its dignity and to the integrity of its
    proceedings, and resolving that the Speaker withdraw the pending
    invitation and refrain from similar invitations, was held not to present
    a question of the privileges of the House because it proposed a
    collateral change in an order of the House previously adopted (that the
    House recess for the purpose of receiving the President of France) and a
    new rule for future cases (Jan. 31, 1996, p. 1887). A resolution
    collaterally challenging the validity or fairness of an adopted rule of
    the House by delaying its implementation was held not to give rise to a
    question of the privileges of the House (Feb. 3, 1993, p. 1974
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)). A resolution directing that the party
    ratios of all standing committees, subcommittees, and staffs thereof be
    changed within a time certain to reflect overall party ratios in the
    House was held to constitute a change in the Rules of the House and not
    to constitute a proper question of the privileges of the House (the
    standing rules already providing mechanisms for selecting committee
    members and staff) (Jan. 23, 1984, p. 78). On the other hand, although
    the Rules of the House establish a procedure for fixing the ratio of
    majority to minority members on full committees and also provide that
    subcommittees are subject to the direction and control of the full
    committee (clause 1 of rule XI), a question of the privileges of the
    House is raised where it is alleged that subcommittee ratios should
    reflect full committee ratios established by the House and failure to do
    so denies representational rights at the subcommittee level (Oct. 4,
    1984, p. 30042). A resolution alleging that a recitation of the Pledge
    of Allegiance at the start of each legislative day would enhance the
    dignity and integrity of the proceedings of the House and directing that
    the Speaker implement such a recitation as the practice of the House was
    held to propose a change in the rules and therefore not to give rise to
    a question of the privileges of the House (Sept. 9, 1988, p. 23298). A
    resolution directing that the reprogramming process established in law
    for legislative branch appropriations be subjected to third-party review
    for conformity with external standards of accounting but alleging no
    deviation from duly constituted procedure was held not to give rise to a
    question of the privileges of the House (May 20, 1992, p. 12005
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)). A resolution to permit the Delegate
    of the District of Columbia to vote on articles of

    [[Page 418]]

    impeachment of the President in contravention of statutory law and the
    Rules of the House was held to be tantamount to change in the rules and
    therefore not to constitute a question of the privileges of the House
    (Dec. 18, 1998, p. 27825). A resolution directing a standing committee
    to release executive-session material referred to it as such by special
    rule of the House was held to propose a change in the rules and,
    therefore, not to constitute a question of the privileges of the House
    (Sept. 23, 1998, p. 21562). A resolution expressing Congressional
    sentiment that the President should take specified action to achieve a
    desired public policy, even though involving executive action under a
    treaty (under which the Senate had exercised its prerogative to ratify),
    does not present a question of the privileges of the House, but rather
    is a legislative matter to be considered under ordinary rules relating
    to priority of business (June 6, 2002, p. ----).

    Sec. 706. May not effect change in rules.

      A motion  to amend
    the Rules of the House does not present a question of privilege (Speaker
    Cannon, sustained by the House, thereby overruling the decision of March
    19, 1910 (VIII, 3376), which held such motion privileged (VIII, 3377)),
    and a question of the privileges of the House may not be invoked to
    effect a change in the rules or standing orders of the House or their
    interpretation (Speaker O'Neill, Dec. 6, 1977, pp. 38470-73; Sept. 9,
    1988, p. 23298; July 30, 1992, p. 20339; Jan. 31, 1996, p. 1887),
    including directions to the Speaker infringing upon his discretionary
    power of recognition under

      A question of the privileges of the House may not be invoked to
    prescribe a special order of business for the House, because otherwise
    any Member would be able to attach privilege to a legislative measure
    merely by alleging impact on the dignity of the House based upon House
    action or inaction (June 27, 1974, p. 21596; Feb. 7, 1995, p. 3905; Dec.
    22, 1995, p. 38501; Jan. 3, 1996, p. 40; Jan. 24, 1996, p. 1248; Feb. 1,
    1996, p. 2245; Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25420; Nov. 4, 1999, pp.28528-33; June
    6, 2002, p. ----; Oct. 2, 2002, pp. ----, ----, ----, ----; Oct. 3,
    2002, pp. ----, ----). For example, the following resolutions have been
    held not to give rise to a question of the privileges of the House: (1)
    a resolution directing a committee to meet and conduct certain business
    (June 27, 1974, p. 21596; July 31, 1975, p. 26250); (2) a resolution
    alleging that the inability of the House to enact certain legislation
    constituted an impairment of the dignity of the House, the integrity of
    its proceedings, and its place in public esteem, and resolving that the
    House be considered to have passed such legislation (Jan. 3, 1996, p.
    40; Jan. 24, 1996, p. 1248); and (3) a resolution precluding an
    adjournment of the House until a specified legislative measure is
    considered (Feb. 1, 1996, p. 2247). See also Sec. 702, supra, for a
    discussion of legislative propositions purporting to present questions
    of the privileges of the House.

    [[Page 419]]

    stitution mandatory in nature, have been held to have a privilege which
    superseded the rules establishing the order of business, as bills
    providing for census or apportionment (I, 305-308), bills returned with
    the objections of the President (IV, 3530-3536), propositions of
    impeachment (see Sec. 604, supra), and questions incidental thereto
    (III, 2401, 2418; V, 7261; July 22, 1986, p. 17306; Dec. 2, 1987, p.
    33720; Jan. 3, 1989, p. 84; Feb. 7, 1989, p. 1726), matters relating to
    the count of the electoral vote (III, 2573-2578), resolutions relating
    to adjournment and recess of Congress (V, 6698, 6701-6706; Nov. 13,
    1997, p. 26538), and a resolution declaring the Office of the Speaker
    vacant (VI, 35); but under later decisions certain of these matters
    which have no other basis in the Constitution or in the rules for
    privileged status, such as bills relating to census and apportionment,
    have been held not to present questions of privilege, and the effect of
    such decisions is to require all questions of privilege to come within
    the specific provisions of this rule (VI, 48; VII, 889; Apr. 8, 1926, p.
    7147) (see Sec. 702, supra).

    Sec. 707. As distinct from privileged questions.

      The  clause
    of the rule giving questions of privilege precedence over all other
    questions except a motion to adjourn is a recognition of a well-
    established principle in the House, for it is an axiom of the
    parliamentary law that such a question ``supersedes the consideration of
    the original question, and must be first disposed of'' (III, 2522, 2523;
    VI, 595). As the business of the House began to increase it was found
    necessary to give certain important matters a precedence by rule, and
    such matters are called ``privileged questions.'' But as they relate
    merely to the order of business under the rules, they are to be
    distinguished from ``questions of privilege'' which relate to the safety
    or efficiency of the House itself as an organ for action (III, 2718). It
    is evident, therefore, that a question of privilege takes precedence
    over a matter merely privileged under the rules (III, 2526-2530; V,
    6454; VIII, 3465). Certain matters of business, arising under provisions
    of the Con

      A resolution that presents a proper question of the privileges of the
    House (alteration of subcommittee hearing transcripts) may propose the
    creation of a select investigatory committee with subpoena authority to
    report back to the House by a date certain (June 29, 1983, p. 18104),
    but may not appropriate funds for the investigating committee from the
    contingent fund (now referred to as ``applicable accounts of the House
    described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X'') (VI, 395).

    [[Page 420]]

    ber's proposed amendments as ``dilatory and frivolous'' may give rise to
    a question of personal privilege (Aug. 1, 1985, p. 22542) as may the
    fraudulent use of a Member's official stationery as a ``Dear Colleague''
    letter (Sept. 17, 1986, p. 23605). While a Member may be recognized on a
    question of personal privilege to complain about an abuse of House rules
    as applied to debate in which he was properly participating, he may not
    raise a question of personal privilege merely to complain that
    microphones had been turned off during disorderly conduct following
    expiration of his recognition for debate (Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4085).

    Sec. 708. Questions of personal privilege.

      The  privilege of
    the Member rests primarily on the Constitution, which gives to him a
    conditional immunity from arrest (Sec. 90, supra) and an unconditional
    freedom of debate in the House (III, 2670, Sec. 92, supra). A menace to
    the personal safety of Members from an insecure ceiling in the Hall was
    held to involve a question of the highest privilege (III, 2685); and an
    assault on a Member within the Capitol when the House was not in
    session, from a cause not connected with the Member's representative
    capacity, was also held to involve a question of privilege (II, 1624).
    But there has been doubt as to the right of the House to interfere for
    the protection of Members, who outside the Hall, get into difficulties
    not connected with their official duties (II, 1277; III, 2678;
    footnote). Charges against the conduct of a Member are held to involve
    privilege when they relate to his representative capacity (III, 1828-
    1830, 2716; VI, 604, 612; VIII, 2479); but when they relate to conduct
    at a time before he became a Member they have not been entertained as of
    privilege (II, 1287; III, 2691, 2723, 2725). While questions of personal
    privilege normally involve matters touching on a Member's reputation, a
    Member may be recognized for a question of personal privilege based on a
    violation of his rights as a Member, such as unauthorized printed
    alterations in his statements made during a subcommittee hearing in a
    prior Congress (since the second phrase of this clause speaks to the
    ``rights, reputation, and conduct of Members, individually'') (June 28,
    1983, p. 17674). A printed characterization by an officer of the House
    of a Mem

      Speaker Wright rose to a question of personal privilege to respond to
    a ``statement of alleged violations'' pending in the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct; and, pending the committee's disposition
    of his motion to dismiss, announced his intention to resign as Speaker
    and as a Member (May 31, 1989, p. 10440). Speaker Gingrich rose to a
    question of personal privilege to discuss his own official conduct
    previously resolved by the House, which question was based upon press
    accounts (Apr. 17, 1997, p. 5834). Speaker Hastert rose to a question of
    personal privilege to discuss the process for selecting a Chaplain,
    which question was based on press accounts (Mar. 23, 2000, p. 3478).

      A Member rose to a question of personal privilege to discuss: (1) his
    own official conduct relative to his account with the ``bank'' operated
    by the Sergeant-at-Arms, which question was based on press accounts
    (Mar. 19, 1992, p. 6074); (2) reflections on his character in pointed
    descriptions of recorded votes taken in committee on a Member's
    amendments, included in a committee report under clause 3(b) of rule
    XIII, which question was based on the report and on certain media
    coverage thereof (May 5, 2005, p. ----; May 10, 2005, p. ----).

      A Member rose to a question of personal privilege based on press
    accounts concerning allegations by other Members that he, as a committee
    chairman, had been ``buying votes'' (Mar. 26, 1998, p. 4851). A
    committee chairman rose to a question of personal privilege based on
    press accounts containing statements impugning his character and motive
    by alleging intentional violation of rules as chairman of a committee
    conducting an investigation (May 12, 1998, p. 8838). A committee
    chairman rose to a question of personal privilege to discuss his own
    official conduct, which question was based on a letter of reproval
    reported by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (Oct. 5,
    2000, p. 21048). A committee chairman rose to a question of personal
    privilege based on press accounts impugning his character to discuss his
    decision to direct his staff to request the Capitol Police to remove
    minority party members from a committee room where they were meeting
    during the reading of an amendment at a committee markup (July 23, 2003,
    p. ----).

    [[Page 421]]

    2717). Charges made in newspapers against Members in their
    representative capacities involve privilege (III, 1832, 2694, 2696-2699,
    2703, 2704; VI, 576, 621; VIII, 2479), even though the names of
    individual Members are not given (III, 1831, 2705, 2709; VI, 616, 617).
    But vague charges in newspaper articles (III, 2711; VI, 570), criticisms
    (III, 2712-2714; VIII, 2465), or even misrepresentations of the Member's
    speeches or acts or responses in an interview (III, 2707, 2708; Aug. 3,
    1990, p. 22135), have not been entertained. A question of personal
    privilege may not ordinarily be based merely on words spoken in debate
    (July 23, 1987, p. 20861; Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4085; Nov. 16, 1989, p.
    29569; Sept. 25, 1996, p. 24807; Sept. 21, 2001, p. ----; Mar. 31, 2004,
    p. ----) or conveyed by an exhibit in debate (June 28, 2000, p. 12723).
    However, a Member may raise a question of personal privilege based upon
    press accounts of another Member's remarks, in debate or off the floor,
    which impugn his character or motives (May 15, 1984, pp. 12207, 12211;
    May 31, 1984, p. 14620), or based upon newspaper accounts of televised
    press coverage of a committee hearing at which he was criticized
    derogatorily (Mar. 3, 1988, p. 3196).

      A distinction has been drawn between charges made by one Member
    against another in a newspaper or in a press release (July 28, 1970, p.
    26002) or in a ``Dear Colleague'' letter (Aug. 4, 1989, p. 19139; May
    14, 1996, p. 11081), and the same when made on the floor (III, 1827,
    2691,

    Sec. 709. Precedence of questions of privileges of the
    House.

      The  body of precedent relating to the precedence of questions of
    privilege spans both the adoption of standing rule IX in 1880 and its
    amendment to require notice in certain cases in 1993.

    [[Page 422]]

    determines which of two matters of equal privilege is considered first
    (July 24, 1990, p. 18916). While under rule IX a question of the
    privileges of the House takes precedence over all other questions except
    the motion to adjourn, the Speaker may, pursuant to his power of
    recognition under clause 2 of rule XVII (formerly clause 2 of rule XIV),
    entertain unanimous-consent requests for ``one-minute speeches'' pending
    recognition for a question of privilege, since such unanimous-consent
    requests, if granted, temporarily waive the standing Rules of the House
    relating to the order of business (Speaker O'Neill, July 10, 1985, p.
    18394; Feb. 6, 1989, pp. 1676-82).
      A question of privilege may interrupt: (1) the reading of the Journal
    (II, 1630; VI, 637); (2) the consideration of a bill (or series of
    measures) that had been made in order by a special rule (III, 2524,
    2525); (3) in an exceptional decision, where the rule thereon ordered
    the previous question to final passage without intervening motion, after
    consideration of the measure in the Committee of the Whole but before
    passage in the House (VI, 560); (4) under antiquated drafting
    conventions for special orders of business that ordered the previous
    question after debate, the consideration of certain matters on which the
    previous question has been ordered (III, 2532; VI, 561; VIII, 2688). A
    question of privilege takes precedence over (1) business in order on
    Calendar Wednesday (VI, 394; VII, 908-910), a ``suspension day'' (III,
    2553; VI, 553), or over certain motions given precedence under a special
    rule (VI, 565); (2) reports from the Rules Committee before
    consideration has begun (VIII, 3491; Mar. 11, 1987, p. 5403); (3) call
    of the Consent Calendar on Monday (VI, 553), before that Calendar was
    repealed in the 104th Congress (H. Res. 168, June 20, 1995, p. 16574);
    (4) motions to resolve into the Committee of the Whole (VI, 554; VIII,
    3461); (5) unfinished business, privileged under clauses 1 and 3 of rule
    XIV (formerly rule XXIV) (Speaker Albert, June 4, 1975, p. 16860).
    Because a resolution raising a question of the privileges of the House
    takes precedence over a motion to suspend the rules, it may be offered
    and voted on between motions to suspend the rules on which the Speaker
    has postponed record votes until after debate on all suspensions (May
    17, 1983, p. 12486). In general, one question of privilege may not take
    precedence over another (III, 2534, 2552, 2581), and the Chair's power
    of recognition

      A Member's announcement of intent to offer a resolution as a question
    of privilege may take precedence over a special order reported from the
    Committee on Rules; but, where a special order is pending, such
    announcements are counted against debate on the resolution absent
    unanimous consent to the contrary (Oct. 28, 1997, pp. 23525, 23527).

      While a question of privilege is pending, a message of the President
    is received (V, 6640-6642), but is read only by unanimous consent (V,
    6639). A motion to reconsider may also be entered but may not be
    considered (V, 5673-5676). It has been held that only one question of
    privilege may be pending at a time (III, 2533), but having presented one
    question of privilege, a Member, before discussing it, may submit a
    second question of privilege related to the first and discuss both on
    one recognition (VI, 562). While a resolution raising a question of the
    privileges of the House has precedence over all other questions, it is
    nevertheless subject to disposition by the ordinary motions permitted
    under clause 4 of rule XVI, and by the motion to commit under clause 2
    of rule XIX (formerly clause 1 of rule XVII) (Speaker Albert, Feb. 19,
    1976, p. 3914; Apr. 28, 1983, p. 10423; Mar. 22, 1990, p. 4996).

    [[Page 423]]

    sonal privilege may not be raised while a question of the privileges of
    the House is pending (Apr. 30, 1985, p. 9808; May 1, 1985, p. 10003).

    Sec. 711. Precedence of questions of personal
    privilege.

      When  a Member proposes merely to address the House on a question
    of personal privilege, and does not bring up a resolution affecting the
    dignity or integrity of the House for action, the practice as to
    precedence is somewhat different. Thus, a Member rising to a question of
    personal privilege may not interrupt a call of the yeas and nays (V,
    6051, 6052, 6058, 6059; VI, 554, 564), or take from the floor another
    Member who has been recognized for debate (V, 5002; VIII, 2459, 2528;
    Sept. 29, 1983, p. 26508; July 23, 1987, p. 20861), but he may interrupt
    the ordinary legislative business (III, 2531). A Member may address the
    House on a question of personal privilege even after the previous
    question has been ordered on a pending bill (VI, 561; VIII, 2688). Under
    modern practice, a question of personal privilege may not be raised in
    the Committee of the Whole (Sept. 4, 1969, p. 24372; Dec. 13, 1973, p.
    41270), the proper remedy being that a demand that words uttered in the
    Committee of the Whole be taken down pursuant to clause 4 of rule XVII
    (formerly clause 5 of rule XIV); yet a breach of privilege occurring in
    the Committee of the Whole relates to the dignity of the House and is so
    treated (II, 1657). A question of per

    <>   Whenever
    it is asserted on the floor that the privileges of the House are
    invaded, the Speaker entertains the question (II, 1501), and may then
    refuse recognition if the resolution is not admissible as a question of
    privilege under the rule. A proper question of privilege may be renewed
    (Nov. 17, 1995, p. 33846). Although the early custom was for the Speaker
    to submit to the House the question whether a resolution involved the
    privileges of the House (III, 2718), the modern practice is for the
    Speaker to rule directly on the question (VI, 604; Speaker Wright, Mar.
    11, 1987, p. 5404; Feb. 3, 1995, p. 3571; Feb. 7, 1995, p. 3905),
    subject to appeal where appropriate (Speaker Albert, June 27, 1974, p.
    21596).

    Sec. 712. Questions of privilege in relation to
    quorum.

        During a call of the House in the absence of a quorum, only
    such questions of privilege as relate immediately to those proceedings
    may be presented (III, 2545). See also Sec. 1024, infra.

      Under the form of the rule adopted in the 103d Congress, the Speaker
    may in his discretion recognize a Member other than the Majority or
    Minority Leader to proceed immediately on a resolution offered as a
    question of the privileges of the House without first designating a
    subsequent time or place in the legislative schedule within two
    legislative days (Speaker Foley, Feb. 3, 1993, p. 1974); and he is not
    required to announce the time designated to consider a resolution at the
    time the resolution is noticed but may announce his designation at a
    later time (Feb. 11, 1994, p. 2209). The Speaker does not rule on the
    privileged status of a resolution at the time that resolution is
    noticed, but only when the resolution is called up within two
    legislative days (Feb. 11, 1994, p. 2209; Sept. 13, 1994, p. 24389; Feb.
    3, 1995, p. 3571).

    [[Page 424]]

    question may be moved (II, 1256; V, 5459, 5460; VIII, 2672); since the
    103d Congress, however, the rule has provided for divided control of the
    hour in the case of a resolution offered from the floor. Consideration
    of a resolution as a question of the privileges of the House has
    included an hour of debate on a motion to refer under clause 4 of rule
    XVI; a separate hour of debate on the resolution, itself, under clause 2
    of rule XVII (formerly clause 2 of rule XIV); and a motion to commit
    (not debatable after the ordering of the previous question) under clause
    2 of rule XIX (formerly clause 1 of rule XVII) (Mar. 12, 1992, p. 5557).
    Debate on a letter of resignation is controlled by the Member moving the
    acceptance of the resignation (Mar. 8, 1977, pp. 6579-82) if the
    resigning Member does not seek recognition (June 16, 1975, p. 19054).
    Debate on a question of personal privilege must be confined to the
    statements or issues which gave rise to the question of privilege (V,
    5075-77; VI, 576, 608; VIII, 2448, 2481; May 31, 1984, p. 14623).

      Common fame has been held sufficient basis for raising a question
    (III, 2538, 2701); a telegraphic dispatch may also furnish a basis (III,
    2539). A report relating to the contemptuous conduct of a witness before
    a committee gives rise to a question of the privileges of the House and
    may, under this rule, be considered on the same day reported
    notwithstanding the requirement of clause 4(a) of rule XIII (formerly
    clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI) that reports from committees be available to
    Members for at least three calendar days before their consideration
    (Speaker Albert, July 13, 1971, pp. 24720-23). But a Member may not, as
    matter of right, require the reading of a book or paper on suggesting
    that it contains matter infringing on the privileges of the House (V,
    5258). In presenting a question of personal privilege the Member is not
    required in the first instance to offer a motion or resolution, but he
    must take this preliminary step in raising a question of general
    privileges (III, 2546, 2547; VI, 565-569; VII, 3464). A proposition of
    privilege may lose its precedence by association with a matter not of
    privilege (III, 2551; V, 5890; VI, 395). Debate on a question of
    privilege is under the hour rule (V, 4990; VIII, 2448), but the previous

                                     Rule X

    Committees and their legislative jurisdictions
                           organization of committees

    714. Number and jurisdiction of standing
    committees.

      1.  There shall be in the House the following standing
    committees, each of which shall have the jurisdiction and related
    functions assigned by this clause and clauses 2, 3, and 4. All bills,
    resolutions, and other matters relating to subjects within the
    jurisdiction of the standing committees listed in this clause shall be
    referred to those committees, in accordance with clause 2 of rule XII,
    as follows:

    [[Page 425]]

    988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The Committee on Internal
    Security was abolished in the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975,
    p. 20) thereby setting the total number of standing committees at 22.
      Under the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), the
    44 committees of the 79th Congress were consolidated into 19, effective
    January 2, 1947. The total number of standing committees grew over time
    with the creation of the Committee on Science and Astronautics (now
    Science), established on July 21, 1958 (p. 14513); the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct, established on April 13, 1967 (p. 9425);
    the Committee on the Budget, established on July 12, 1974, by the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 297); and the Committee on
    Small Business, established as a standing committee effective January 3,
    1975 (H. Res.

      The 104th Congress reduced the total number to 19 by abolishing the
    Committees on the District of Columbia, Merchant Marine and Fisheries,
    and Post Office and Civil Service (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995,
    p. 464). Matters formerly in the jurisdiction of the Committees on the
    District of Columbia and Post Office and Civil Service were transferred
    to the Committee on Government Reform (formerly Government Reform and
    Oversight); and matters formerly in the jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Merchant Marine and Fisheries were transferred to the Committees on
    Resources (formerly Natural Resources), Transportation and
    Infrastructure (formerly Public Works and Transportation), Armed
    Services (formerly National Security during the 104th and 105th
    Congresses), and Science (formerly Science, Space, and Technology) (sec.
    202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).

      A Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence was established in the
    95th Congress (H. Res. 658, July 14, 1977, pp. 22932-49). Before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, the Select Committee
    was found in former rule XLVIII (current clause 11 of rule X) (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A permanent Select Committee on Aging was added
    to clause 6 of this rule effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470) until stricken in the 103d Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49).

      Although earlier forms of the rule specified the number of Members
    comprising each of the standing committees, those specifications were
    eliminated in the 93d Congress, leaving to the House the authority to
    establish the sizes of committees by the numbers elected to each
    standing committee pursuant to clause 5 of rule X. The rules still
    specify part of the composition of the Committee on the Budget (clause
    5(a)(2) of rule X) as well as the overall size and preferred composition
    of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (clause 11(a) of rule
    X; Jan. 6, 2001, p. 115).

    [[Page 426]]

    most bills is accomplished by unanimous consent (see Procedure, ch. 17,
    Sec. Sec. 17-38).
      The Speaker refers public bills in accordance with clause 1 of rule X,
    but when the House itself refers a bill it may send it to any committee
    without regard to the rules of jurisdiction (IV, 4375; V, 5527; VII,
    2131) and jurisdiction is thereby conferred (IV, 4362-4364; VII, 2105).
    Motions for change of reference of public bills and resolutions must be
    authorized by the committee claiming jurisdiction (clause 7 of rule XII;
    VII, 2121; Feb. 13, 1918, p. 2070; Jan. 10, 1941, p. 100), must be made
    immediately following the reading of the Journal (VII, 1809, 2119,
    2120), must apply to a single bill and not to a class of bills (VII,
    2125), must apply to a bill erroneously referred (VII, 2125), may be
    amended (VII, 2127), may not be divided (VII, 2125), and may not be
    debated (VII, 2126, 2128), but are not in order on Calendar Wednesday
    (VII, 2117), and are not privileged if the original reference was not
    erroneous (VII, 2125). The rereferral of

      Before the 94th Congress, a bill could not be divided among two or
    more committees, even though it might contain matters properly within
    the jurisdiction of several committees (IV, 4372). The Committee Reform
    Amendments of 1974 added former clause 5 of rule X (current clause 2 of
    rule XII), permitting the Speaker to refer any matter to more than one
    committee (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). That
    provision was amended in the 104th Congress to require the Speaker to
    designate a primary committee among those to which a matter is initially
    referred (sec. 205, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467). However, the
    provision was amended again in the 108th Congress to permit the Speaker
    to refrain from designating a primary committee in extraordinary
    circumstances (sec. 2(i), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----; see
    Sec. 816, infra).

      A committee having jurisdiction of a subject by means of a petition
    (IV, 3365) properly referred (IV, 4361) can report on the subject
    thereof. It has generally been held that a committee may not report a
    bill whereof the subject matter has not been referred to it by the House
    (IV, 4355-4360, 4372; VII, 1029, 2101, 2102). Where a House bill is
    returned from the Senate with a substitute amendment relating to a new
    and different subject, the reference could nevertheless be to the
    committee having jurisdiction of the original bill (IV, 4373, 4374);
    normally, however such amended measures are held at the Speaker's table
    until disposed of by the House. The erroneous reference of a public bill
    under this rule, if it remains uncorrected, gives jurisdiction (IV,
    4365-4371; VII, 2108), but such is not the case with a private bill or
    petition (IV, 3364, 4382-4389) unless the reference be made by action of
    the House itself (IV, 4390, 4391; VII 2131). A point of order as to the
    reference of a private bill is good when the bill comes up for
    consideration, either in the House or in the Committee of the Whole (IV,
    4382-4389; VII, 2116, 2132; VIII, 2262) or at any time before passage
    (VII, 2116). The reference of a bill to a committee involving the same
    subject matter as a bill previously reported confers jurisdiction anew
    upon the committee to consider and report the bill subsequently
    introduced (VIII, 2311).

    [[Page 427]]

      Clause 4 of rule XII prohibits the reception or consideration of
    certain private bills relating to claims, pensions, construction of
    bridges, and the correction of military or naval records. In the 104th
    Congress the House adopted a rule to prohibit introduction or
    consideration of any bill or resolution expressing a commemoration by
    designation of a specified period of time (current clause 5 of rule XII,
    former clause 2 of rule XXII) (sec. 216, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    468).

      (a) Committee on Agriculture.

    Sec. 715. Agriculture.

          (1)  Adulteration of seeds, insect
    pests, and protection of birds and animals in forest reserves.

          (2) Agriculture generally.

          (3) Agricultural and industrial chemistry.

          (4) Agricultural colleges and experiment stations.

          (5) Agricultural economics and research.

          (6) Agricultural education extension services.

          (7) Agricultural production and marketing and stabilization of
    prices of agricultural products, and commodities (not including
    distribution outside of the United States).

          (8) Animal industry and diseases of animals.

          (9) Commodity exchanges.

          (10) Crop insurance and soil conservation.

          (11) Dairy industry.

          (12) Entomology and plant quarantine.

          (13) Extension of farm credit and farm security.

          (14) Inspection of livestock, poultry, meat products, and seafood
    and seafood products.

          (15) Forestry in general and forest reserves other than those
    created from the public domain.

          (16) Human nutrition and home economics.

          (17) Plant industry, soils, and agricultural engineering.

          (18) Rural electrification.

    [[Page 428]]

          (19) Rural development.

          (20) Water conservation related to activities of the Department of
    Agriculture.

      This committee was established in 1820 (IV, 4149). In 1880 the subject
    of forestry was added to its jurisdiction, and the committee was
    conferred authority to receive estimates of and to report appropriations
    (IV, 4149). However, on July 1, 1920, authority to report appropriations
    for the Department of Agriculture was transferred to the Committee on
    Appropriations (VII, 1860).

      The basic form of the present jurisdictional statement was made
    effective January 2, 1947, as a part of the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812). Subparagraph (7) was altered by the 93d
    Congress, effective January 3, 1975, to include jurisdiction over
    agricultural commodities (including the Commodity Credit Corporation)
    while transferring jurisdiction over foreign distribution and
    nondomestic production of commodities to the Committee on International
    Relations (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470).
    Nevertheless, the committee has retained a limited jurisdiction over
    measures to release CCC stocks for such foreign distribution (Sept. 14,
    1989, p. 20428). Previously unstated jurisdictions over commodities
    exchanges and rural development were codified effective January 3, 1975.

      The 104th Congress consolidated the committee's jurisdiction over
    inspection of livestock and meat products to include inspection of
    poultry, seafood, and seafood products, and added subparagraph (20)
    relating to water conservation (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    464). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).

      The Committee has had jurisdiction of bills for establishing and
    regulating the Department of Agriculture (IV, 4150), for inspection of
    livestock and meat products, regulation of animal industry, diseases of
    animals (IV, 4154; VII, 1862), adulteration of seeds, insect pests,
    protection of birds and animals in forest reserves (IV, 4157; VII,
    1870), the improvement of the breed of horses, even with the cavalry
    service in view (IV, 4158; VII, 1865).

    [[Page 429]]

    search center (May 14, 1996, p. 11070). The Committee shares with the
    committee on the Judiciary jurisdiction over a bill comprehensively
    amending the Immigration and Nationality Act and including food stamp
    eligibility requirements for aliens (Sept. 19, 1995, p. 25533).
      The Committee, having charge of the general subject of forestry, has
    reported bills relating to timber, and forest reserves other than those
    created from the public domain (IV, 4160). The Committee on Resources,
    and not this committee, has jurisdiction over a bill to convey land that
    is part of a National Forest created from the public domain (Mar. 23,
    2004, p. ----). It also has exercised jurisdiction of bills: relating to
    agricultural colleges and experiment stations (IV, 4152), incorporation
    of agricultural societies (IV, 4159), and establishment of a highway
    commission (IV, 4153); to discourage fictitious and gambling
    transactions in farm products (IV, 4161; VII, 1861); to regulate the
    transportation, sale, and handling of dogs and cats intended for use in
    research and the licensing of animal research facilities (July 29, 1965,
    p. 18691); and to designate an agricultural re

      The House referred the President's message dealing with the
    refinancing of farm-mortgage indebtedness to the committee, thus
    conferring jurisdiction (Apr. 4, 1933, p. 1209).

      The Committee has jurisdiction over a bill relating solely to
    executive level positions in the Department of Agriculture (Mar. 2,
    1976, p. 4958) and has jurisdiction over bills to develop land and water
    conservation programs on private and non-Federal lands (June 7, 1976, p.
    16768).

      (b) Committee on Appropriations.

    Sec. 716. Appropriations.

          (1)    Appropriation of the
    revenue for the support of the Government.

          (2) Rescissions of appropriations contained in appropriation Acts.

          (3) Transfers of unexpended balances.

          (4) Bills and joint resolutions reported by other committees that
    provide new entitlement authority as defined in section 3(9) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and referred to the committee under
    clause 4(a)(2).

      This committee was established in 1865, when all the general
    appropriation bills were confided to its care. In 1885 a portion of the
    bills were distributed to other committees. On July 1, 1920, the
    committee again was given jurisdiction over all appropriations by an
    amendment to the rules adopted June 1, 1920 (VII, 1741).

      In the 95th Congress this paragraph was amended to correct a
    typographical error (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, p. 53). Subparagraph (4)
    was amended in the 105th and 106th Congresses to conform to changes made
    by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1997 (sec. 10116, P.L. 105-33; H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). When the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, it transferred an undesignated portion of this paragraph
    to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 430]]

    committee in clause 3 of rule X, effective January 3, 1975 (formerly
    clause 2(b)(3) of rule X) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470). The Committee is also authorized and directed to hold hearings
    on the budget as a whole in open session within 30 days of its
    submission (clause 4(a)(1)(A) of rule X), and to study on a continuing
    basis provisions of law providing spending authority or permanent budget
    authority and to report to the House recommendations for terminating or
    modifying such provisions (clause 4(a)(3) of rule X). The requirement of
    section 139 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812)
    that the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate develop a
    standard appropriation classification schedule was superseded by section
    202(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1167),
    which now imposes that responsibility upon the Secretary of the Treasury
    and the Office of Management and Budget. The further requirement of
    section 139 of the 1946 Act that the Appropriations Committees study
    existing permanent appropriations and recommend which, if any, should be
    discontinued was made the responsibility of all standing committees of
    the House by clauses 4(e) of rule X, through enactment of section 253 of
    the 1970 Act (84 Stat. 1175).
      The authority to conduct studies and examinations of the organization
    and operation of executive departments and agencies was first given to
    this committee on February 11, 1943 (p. 884); continued by resolution of
    January 9, 1945 (p. 135); and incorporated into permanent law in section
    202(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812).
    This authority was first made part of the standing rules on January 3,
    1953 (pp. 17, 24), and is now listed as a special oversight
    responsibility of the

      Although this committee has authority to report appropriations, the
    power to report legislation relating thereto belongs to other committees
    (IV, 4033; clause 2 of rule XXI), and a general appropriation bill
    reported from this committee may not contain items of appropriation not
    authorized by law or provisions amending existing law (except
    retrenchments and rescissions of appropriations) (clause 2 of rule XXI),
    and may not contain reappropriations of unexpended balances except
    within agencies (clause 2 of rule XXI). General appropriation bills may
    not be considered in the House until hearings thereon have been
    available for three days (clause 4 of rule XIII).

    Sec. 717. Responsibilities under Budget Act.

      Effective  July
    12, 1974, special Presidential messages on rescissions and deferrals of
    budget authority submitted pursuant to sections 1012 and 1013 of the
    Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 683, 684), as well as
    rescission bills and impoundment resolutions defined in section 1011 (2
    U.S.C. 682) and required in section 1017 (2 U.S.C. 688) to be referred
    to the appropriate committee, are referred to the Committee on
    Appropriations if the proposed rescissions or deferrals involve funds
    already appropriated or obligated. Also effective July 12, 1974, the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (sec. 404(a)) added to the committee's
    jurisdiction, and later perfected by the Committee Reform Amendments of
    1974 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), subparagraphs
    (2), (3), and (4).

      (c) Committee on Armed Services.

    [[Page 431]]

    Sec. 718. Armed Services.

          (1)  Ammunition depots; forts;
    arsenals; and Army, Navy, and Air Force reservations and establishments.

          (2) Common defense generally.

          (3) Conservation, development, and use of naval petroleum and oil
    shale reserves.

          (4) The Department of Defense generally, including the Departments
    of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, generally.

          (5) Interoceanic canals generally, including measures relating to
    the maintenance, operation, and administration of interoceanic canals.

          (6) Merchant Marine Academy and State Maritime Academies.

          (7) Military applications of nuclear energy.

          (8) Tactical intelligence and intelligence-related activities of
    the Department of Defense.

          (9) National security aspects of merchant marine, including
    financial assistance for the construction and operation of vessels,
    maintenance of the U.S. shipbuilding and ship repair industrial base,
    cabotage, cargo preference, and merchant marine officers and seamen as
    these matters relate to the national security.

          (10) Pay, promotion, retirement, and other benefits and privileges
    of members of the armed forces.

          (11) Scientific research and development in support of the armed
    services.

          (12) Selective service.

          (13) Size and composition of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air
    Force.

          (14) Soldiers' and sailors' homes.

    [[Page 432]]

          (15) Strategic and critical materials necessary for the common
    defense.

      This committee was established January 2, 1947, as a part of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), combining the
    Committee on Military Affairs with the Committee on Naval Affairs, both
    of which had been created in 1822 (IV, 4179, 4189) and had had
    jurisdiction over appropriations from 1885 to 1920 (IV, 4179, 4189; VII,
    1741). The Committee was redesignated the Committee on National Security
    in the 104th Congress (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464) and
    was redesignated again the Committee on Armed Services in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clerical and stylistic
    changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, including the deletion of a redundant undesignated recitation
    of a special oversight function (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Much of the present legislative jurisdiction in this paragraph was
    adopted on January 3, 1953 (p. 17), to reflect jurisdiction over the
    Department of Defense, which was created in the National Security Act of
    1947 (61 Stat. 495). In the 95th Congress, when the Joint Committee on
    Atomic Energy was abolished, this committee gained jurisdiction over
    military applications of nuclear energy (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, p.
    53). The special oversight function of the committee in clause 3(h)
    (formerly clause 3(a)) were assigned by the Committee Reform Amendments
    of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470). The 104th Congress added subparagraph (8) for
    clarification and subparagraphs (5), (6), and (9) to reflect the
    transfer of those matters from the former Committee on Merchant Marine
    and Fisheries (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464), and later
    amended subparagraph (8) to effect a technical correction (H. Res. 254,
    Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077).

      The Committee has jurisdiction over bills: relating to military
    housing construction (Feb. 21, 1962, p. 2684; Apr. 18, 1967, p. 9981);
    amending title 10 of the United States Code to permit suits against the
    United States for damage to reputation of members of Armed Forces
    acquitted of charges of crimes against civilians in combat zones (July
    15, 1970, p. 24451); for construction of facilities at Walter Reed
    Medical Center (Oct. 3, 1966, p. 24859); to require military commissary,
    post exchange, and medical care privileges for veterans with sufficient
    service-connected disabilities (Feb. 3, 1976, p. 1972); of a private
    character to waive the statutory time limit on the award of the
    Congressional Medal of Honor on individuals (Feb. 22, 1982, p. 1812);
    including authorization of appropriations to the Department of Energy
    for resource applications for naval petroleum and oil shale reserves
    (May 1, 1978, p. 11946); and effecting the transfer of military property
    to a State to be designated by the State as a wilderness area (Nov. 15,
    1995, p. 32627).

    [[Page 433]]

      The Committee exercised jurisdiction with the Committee on Interior
    and Insular Affairs (now Resources) over a resolution expressing the
    sense of Congress regarding continued operation of the Hanford Nuclear
    Reactor to produce power for the Bonneville Power Administration (July
    17, 1986, p. 16888).

      (d) Committee on the Budget.

    Sec. 719.
    Budget.

          (1) Concurrent resolutions on the  budget (as defined in section 3(4) of the Congressional Budget
    Act of 1974), other matters required to be referred to the committee
    under titles III and IV of that Act, and other measures setting forth
    appropriate levels of budget totals for the United States Government.

          (2) Budget process generally.

          (3) Establishment, extension, and enforcement of special controls
    over the Federal budget, including the budgetary treatment of off-budget
    Federal agencies and measures providing exemption from reduction under
    any order issued under part C of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
    Deficit Control Act of 1985.

      This committee was established in the 93d Congress, effective July 12,
    1974, by section 101 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat.
    299). The separate subpoena authority conferred upon the committee by
    section 101(b) of that Act has been superseded by the general grant of
    subpoena authority to all committees in clause 2(m) of rule XI (H. Res.
    988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The Committee is also charged
    with the special oversight functions as described in clause 3(b) and
    clause 4(b) of rule X.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph consisted of the committee's legislative jurisdiction (current
    paragraph (d)), its oversight jurisdiction (current clause 4 of rule X),
    and its composition (current clause 5(a)(2) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47)).

    [[Page 434]]

    paragraph to expand the limited legislative jurisdiction of the
    committee by: (1) adding other measures setting forth appropriate levels
    of budget totals to subparagraph (2); (2) granting the committee
    jurisdiction over the congressional budget process generally in a new
    subparagraph (3); and (3) granting the committee jurisdiction over
    special controls over the Federal budget in a new subparagraph (4),
    including receiving from the former Committee on Government Operations
    (now Government Reform) jurisdiction over budgetary treatment of off-
    budget Federal agencies and measures providing exemption from
    sequestration orders issued under the Balanced Budget and Emergency
    Deficit Control Act (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).
    Three rereferrals from the Committee on Government Reform to the
    Committee on the Budget marked this migration of off-budget treatment
    jurisdiction: (1) the Committee on the Budget has primary jurisdiction
    over a bill excluding from the budget the Civil Service Retirement and
    Disability Fund (although the Committee on Government Reform retains
    programmatic jurisdiction over that Fund); (2) the Committee on the
    Budget has primary jurisdiction over a bill excluding from the budget
    the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, the Inland
    Waterways Trust Fund, and the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (although
    the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure retains programmatic
    jurisdiction); and (3) the Committee on the Budget has secondary
    jurisdiction over a bill amending title 49 of the United States Code and
    providing off-budget treatment for the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport
    and Airway Trust Fund, the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, and the Harbor
    Maintenance Trust Fund (Dec. 6, 1995, p. 35572). The chairman of the
    Committee on the Budget inserted in the Congressional Record a
    Memorandum of Understanding between this committee and the Committee on
    Rules to clarify each Committee's jurisdiction over the congressional
    budget process (Jan. 4, 1995, p. 617). In the 105th Congress the
    jurisdictional statement in subparagraph (2), previously confined to the
    congressional budget process, was broadened to encompass also the
    executive budget process formerly included in the jurisdiction of the
    Committee on Government Reform and Oversight (now Government Reform) (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This committee, and not the Committee on
    Ways and Means, has jurisdiction over a bill establishing a rule of
    sequestration under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
    Act (Dec. 15, 2000, p. 27085). This committee has primary jurisdiction,
    and the Committee on Ways and Means has additional jurisdiction, over a
    bill taking Social Security trust funds off budget (Dec. 15, 2000, p.
    27085). This committee has primary jurisdiction, and the Committee on
    Rules has additional jurisdiction, over a bill amending the Budget Act
    to establish new legislative points of order and directing that the
    President include a specified matter with his budget (Feb. 13, 2001, p.
    1817).

    [[Page 435]]

      In the 99th Congress this paragraph was again amended by section
    232(h) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985,
    to confer jurisdiction over Senate joint or concurrent resolutions
    constituting congressional responses to a Presidential sequestration
    order issued pursuant to a report of the Comptroller General under
    section 252(b) of that Act (P.L. 99-177). It was again amended by the
    Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 to conform subparagraph (2) to changes in
    the congressional budget laws (tit. XIII, P.L. 101-508). The 104th
    Congress amended the

      (e) Committee on Education and the Workforce.

          (1) Child labor.

    Sec. 720. Education and the Workforce.

            (2) Gallaudet
    University and Howard University and Hospital.

          (3) Convict labor and the entry of goods made by convicts into
    interstate commerce.

          (4) Food programs for children in schools.

          (5) Labor standards and statistics.

          (6) Education or labor generally.

          (7) Mediation and arbitration of labor disputes.

          (8) Regulation or prevention of importation of foreign laborers
    under contract.

          (9) Workers' compensation.

          (10) Vocational rehabilitation.

          (11) Wages and hours of labor.

          (12) Welfare of miners.

          (13) Work incentive programs.

      This committee was established as the Committee on Education and Labor
    on January 2, 1947, as part of the Legislative Reorganization Act of
    1946 (60 Stat. 812), combining the Committee on Education (created in
    1867) (IV, 4242) and the Committee on Labor (created in 1883) (IV,
    4244). When it was redesignated as the Committee on Economic and
    Educational Opportunities in the 104th Congress, the jurisdictional
    statement remained unchanged except by the combination of labor
    standards and labor statistics in a single subparagraph (5) (sec.
    202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). In the 105th Congress the
    committee was redesignated again the Committee on Education and the
    Workforce (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).

    [[Page 436]]

    to the Committee on Foreign Affairs (now International Relations); and
    its special oversight function was inserted in clause 3(c) of rule X
    (current clause 3(d) of rule X) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974,
    p. 34470). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, including the deletion of
    obsolete references to the Columbia Institution for the Deaf, Dumb, and
    Blind, Freedmen's Hospital, and the United States Employees'
    Compensation Commission and the deletion of a redundant undesignated
    recitation of general and special oversight functions (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47).
      By the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975,
    the committee gained jurisdiction over food programs for children in
    schools, an expansion of earlier jurisdiction over school-lunch programs
    (subpara. (4)), work incentive programs (subpara. (13)), and Indian
    education, a matter formerly within the specific jurisdiction of the
    Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs (now Resources); jurisdiction
    of the committee over international education matters was specifically
    transferred

      The Committee has jurisdiction over bills dealing with juvenile
    delinquency (Jan. 22, 1959, p. 1027), runaway youth (July 12, 1973, p.
    23633; Sept. 10, 1973, p. 28970), human services programs administered
    by HEW (June 21, 1972, p. 21733), education of Indians (Apr. 15, 1975,
    p. 10247; June 10, 1991, p. 14049), including the Native American
    Programs Act (Oct. 30, 1997, p. 23967), and compensation for work
    injuries to Federal employees (Apr. 16, 1975, p. 10339); over bills
    amending the Community Services Block Grant Act to continue antipoverty
    programs originally authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964
    (Nov. 4, 1993, p. 27359); and over an executive communication proposing
    draft legislation to amend the Labor Management Relations Act and the
    Employee Retirement Income Security Act (Mar. 24, 1983, p. 7402). The
    Committee shares with the Committee on the Judiciary original
    jurisdiction over a bill comprehensively amending the Immigration and
    Nationality Act and including provisions addressing the enforcement of
    labor laws (Sept. 19, 1995, p. 25533). The Committee has additional
    jurisdiction (Commerce, now Energy and Commerce, has primary
    jurisdiction) over a developmental disabilities assistance and family
    support bill (Feb. 10, 2000, p. 1023). The jurisdiction of this
    committee over education and vocational rehabilitation does not include
    those subjects as they relate to veterans, which fall under the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

      (f) Committee on Energy and Commerce.

          (1) Biomedical research and development.

    Sec. 721. Energy and Commerce.

            (2) Consumer affairs and
    consumer protection.

          (3) Health and health facilities (except health care supported by
    payroll deductions).

          (4) Interstate energy compacts.

          (5) Interstate and foreign commerce generally.

    [[Page 437]]

    resources, including all fossil fuels, solar energy, and other
    unconventional or renewable energy resources.
          (6) Exploration, production, storage, supply, marketing, pricing,
    and regulation of energy

          (7) Conservation of energy resources.

          (8) Energy information generally.

          (9) The generation and marketing of power (except by federally
    chartered or Federal regional power marketing authorities); reliability
    and interstate transmission of, and ratemaking for, all power; and
    siting of generation facilities (except the installation of
    interconnections between Government waterpower projects).

          (10) General management of the Department of Energy and management
    and all functions of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

          (11) National energy policy generally.

          (12) Public health and quarantine.

          (13) Regulation of the domestic nuclear energy industry, including
    regulation of research and development reactors and nuclear regulatory
    research.

          (14) Regulation of interstate and foreign communications.

    The committee shall have the same jurisdiction with respect to
    regulation of nuclear facilities and of use of nuclear energy as it has
    with respect to regulation of nonnuclear facilities and of use of
    nonnuclear energy.

          (15) Travel and tourism.

    [[Page 438]]

    was changed from Interstate and Foreign Commerce to Commerce and Health.
    Effective January 14, 1975, it was redesignated as Interstate and
    Foreign Commerce (H. Res. 5, 94th Cong., p. 20). In the 96th Congress it
    was redesignated again as Energy and Commerce and given much of its
    present jurisdiction, effective January 3, 1981 (H. Res. 549, Mar. 25,
    1980, pp. 6405-10; note publication of intercommittee memoranda of
    understanding). In the 104th Congress it was redesignated again as the
    Committee on Commerce (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). In
    the 107th Congress it was redesignated again as the Committee on Energy
    and Commerce and its jurisdiction over securities and exchanges was
    transferred to the Committee on Financial Services (sec. 2(d), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).
      The Committee dates from 1795 (IV, 4096). Effective January 3, 1975
    (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), the name of the
    committee

    [[Page 439]]

    generally (subpara. (11)), measures relating to exploration, production,
    storage, supply, marketing, pricing, and regulation of energy resources
    (subpara. (6)), measures relating to conservation of energy resources
    (subpara. (7)), measures relating to energy information generally
    (subpara. (8)), measures relating to the generation, marketing,
    interstate transmission of, and ratemaking for power as well as the
    siting of generation facilities, with certain exceptions (subpara. (9)),
    interstate energy compacts (subpara. (4)), and measures relating to
    general management of the Department of Energy and all functions of the
    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (subpara. (10)) (H. Res. 549, Mar.
    25, 1980, pp. 6405-10). In the 104th Congress the committee's
    jurisdiction over inland waterways and railroads (including railroad
    labor, retirement, and unemployment) was transferred to the Committee on
    Transportation and Infrastructure, and jurisdiction over measures
    relating to the commercial application of energy technology was
    transferred to the Committee on Science, while the Committee on Energy
    and Commerce obtained exclusive jurisdiction over regulation of the
    domestic nuclear energy industry (subpara. (13)) from the former
    Committee on Natural Resources (now Resources) (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). In the 107th Congress the committee's jurisdiction over
    securities and exchanges was transferred to the Committee on Financial
    Services (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). The Speaker
    inserted in the Congressional Record a Memorandum of Understanding
    between this committee and the Committee on Financial Services to
    clarify the nature of this transfer (Jan. 30, 2001, p. 995), the final
    two paragraphs of which no longer provide jurisdictional guidance (Jan.
    4, 2005, p. ----).
      In the 74th Congress the jurisdictional statement of the committee was
    amended to include jurisdiction over bills relating to radio; to deprive
    the committee jurisdiction over bills relating to water transportation,
    Coast Guard, lifesaving service, lighthouses, lightships, ocean
    derelicts, Coast and Geodetic Survey, and the Panama Canal; and to vest
    jurisdiction over those subjects in the former Committee on Merchant
    Marine and Fisheries (VII, 1814, 1847), but with the demise of the
    latter Committee in the 104th Congress, the latter subjects now reside
    in the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure, except that the Committee on National Security (now
    Armed Services) has jurisdiction over the Panama Canal (sec. 202(a), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). In the 85th Congress matters relating to
    the Bureau of Standards, standardization of weights and measures, and
    the metric system (conferred on the committee by the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 812), were transferred to the
    Committee on Science and Astronautics (now Science) (July 21, 1958, p.
    14513). In the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3,
    1975, the committee obtained specific jurisdiction over consumer affairs
    and consumer protection (subpara. (2)), travel and tourism (subpara.
    (16)), health and health facilities, except health care supported by
    payroll deductions (subpara. (3)) (a matter formerly within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means), and biomedical
    research and development (subpara. (1)), and was released of
    jurisdiction over civil aeronautics to the Committee on Public Works and
    Transportation (now Transportation and Infrastructure), jurisdiction
    over civil aviation research and development, energy and environmental
    research and development, and the National Weather Service to the
    Committee on Science and Technology (now Science), and jurisdiction over
    trading with the enemy to the Committee on Foreign Affairs (now
    International Relations) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470). In the 95th Congress, when the legislative jurisdiction of the
    Joint Committee on Atomic Energy in the House was transferred to various
    standing committees, this committee was given the same jurisdiction over
    nuclear energy as it had over nonnuclear energy and facilities (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). In the 96th Congress the committee obtained
    specific jurisdiction over national energy policy

      The Committee has the special oversight responsibility under clause
    3(c) of rule X as well as the general oversight responsibility required
    by clause 2 of rule X. This special oversight responsibility was
    expanded in the 96th Congress to include all energy, effective January
    3, 1981 (H. Res. 549, Mar. 25, 1980, pp. 6405-10). In the 104th Congress
    it was again expanded to include nonmilitary nuclear energy and research
    and development including the disposal of nuclear waste (sec. 202(a), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464), though a conforming change in clause 3(c)
    was inadvertently omitted.

      The Committee formerly reported the river and harbor appropriation
    bill, but in 1883 the Committee on Rivers and Harbors was created for
    that role (IV, 4096), and since the 66th Congress such appropriations
    have been reported by the Committee on Appropriations.

    [[Page 440]]

    national congress of hygiene, etc. (IV, 4111), bills declaring as to
    whether or not streams are navigable and for preventing or regulating
    hindrances to navigation (IV, 4101; VII, 1810), such as bridges (IV,
    4099; VII, 1812) and dams, except such bridges and dams as are a part of
    river improvements (IV, 4100; VII, 1810). This committee formerly had
    jurisdiction of bills proposing construction of bridges across navigable
    streams which are now banned under clause 4 of rule XII (see Sec. 822,
    infra; see also General Bridge Act, 33 U.S.C. 525, 533).
      The Committee has general jurisdiction of bills affecting domestic and
    foreign commerce, except such as may affect the revenue (IV, 4097). It
    also has jurisdiction of bills authorizing the construction of marine
    hospitals and the acquisition of sites therefor (IV, 4110; VII, 1816),
    the general subjects of quarantine and the establishment of quarantine
    stations (IV, 4109), health, spread of leprosy and other contagious
    diseases, inter

      Before the 104th Congress the committee considered bills regulating
    railroads in their interstate commerce relations (IV, 414) and exercised
    jurisdiction with the Committees on Education and Labor (now Education
    and the Workforce) and Public Works and Transportation (now
    Transportation and Infrastructure) over bills providing labor
    protections to workers in the transportation industry, including
    railroad employees (Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3577). The Committee considers
    bills relating to commercial travelers as agents of interstate commerce
    and the branding of articles going into such commerce (IV, 4115), the
    prevention of the carriage of indecent and harmful pictures or
    literature (IV, 4116), the adulteration and misbranding of foods and
    drugs (IV, 4112), and protection of game through prohibition of
    interstate transportation (IV, 4117). The Committee has jurisdiction
    over bills imposing safety standards on motor vehicles purchased by the
    U.S. Government (Feb. 16, 1959, p. 2420), bills creating civil remedies
    for false advertising or other violations of commercial ethics (June 4,
    1962, p. 9601), and bills to assist financing of the Arctic Winter Games
    in Alaska (June 7, 1972, p. 19935). The Committee had jurisdiction over
    a bill to reauthorize the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill
    of Rights Act (ultimately repealed), which was focused on health matters
    rather than job training (June 1, 1981, p. 11028; Nov. 3, 1993, p.
    27274). This committee and, in addition, the Committee on Education and
    the Workforce have jurisdiction over the Developmental Disabilities
    Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 1999 (which replaced the above-
    mentioned Act) as it contained a family support program within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on the Education and the Workforce (Feb.
    10, 2000, p. 1023). In the 94th Congress, the committee gained
    jurisdiction over bills amending the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning
    Prevention Act and bills dealing with nursing home construction as
    public health matters (June 10, 1975, p. 18009).

      (g) Committee on Financial Services.

          (1) Banks and banking, including deposit insurance and Federal
    monetary policy.

    [[Page 441]]

    Sec. 722. Financial Services.

            (2) Economic
    stabilization, defense production, renegotiation, and control of the
    price of commodities, rents, and services.

          (3) Financial aid to commerce and industry (other than
    transportation).

          (4) Insurance generally.

          (5) International finance.

          (6) International financial and monetary organizations.

          (7) Money and credit, including currency and the issuance of notes
    and redemption thereof; gold and silver, including the coinage thereof;
    valuation and revaluation of the dollar.

          (8) Public and private housing.

          (9) Securities and exchanges.

          (10) Urban development.

      This committee was established in 1865 as the Committee on Banking and
    Currency (IV, 4082). In the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974,
    effective January 3, 1975, its name was changed to Banking, Currency and
    Housing (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the 95th
    Congress its name was changed to Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). In the 104th Congress its name was
    changed to Banking and Financial Services (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 464). In the 107th Congress its name was changed to
    Financial Services in conjunction with its receipt of jurisdiction over
    securities and exchanges (formerly within the jurisdiction of the
    Committee on Energy and Commerce) (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001,
    p. 25).

    [[Page 442]]

    of the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975,
    that jurisdiction was transferred to the standing Committee on Small
    Business, the permanent Select Committee on Small Business was
    abolished, and this committee was specifically given jurisdiction over
    Federal monetary policy, money and credit, urban development, economic
    stabilization, defense production, and renegotiation (the latter matter
    formerly within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means),
    international finance, and international financial and monetary
    organizations (formerly within the jurisdiction of the Committee on
    International Relations), while jurisdiction over the Commodity Credit
    Corporation was transferred to the Committee on Agriculture,
    jurisdiction over export controls and international economic policy to
    the Committee on International Relations, jurisdiction over construction
    of nursing home facilities to what is now the Committee on Energy and
    Commerce, and jurisdiction over urban mass transportation to what is now
    the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the 104th Congress subparagraphs (2)
    and (3) were added (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In the
    107th Congress jurisdiction over securities and exchanges was
    transferred from the Committee on Energy and Commerce to the Committee
    on Financial Services (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). As a
    result of the new jurisdiction of the Committee on Financial Services
    over securities and exchanges, its former jurisdiction over matters
    relating to bank capital markets activities and depository institutions
    securities activities were deleted as redundant (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). In the 107th Congress the Committee on Financial
    Services also received jurisdiction over insurance generally (sec. 2(d),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). The Speaker inserted in the
    Congressional Record a Memorandum of Understanding between this
    committee and the Committee on Energy and Commerce to clarify these
    jurisdictional changes (Jan. 30, 2001, p. 995), the final two paragraphs
    of which no longer provide jurisdictional guidance (Jan. 4, 2005, p. --
    --). A technical change to subparagraph (6) was effected in the 108th
    Congress (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).
      The Committee was given much of its present jurisdiction in the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), by which it
    absorbed the jurisdiction of the former Committee on Coinage, Weights,
    and Measures (created in 1864) (IV, 4090), except jurisdiction over
    matters relating to the standardization of weights and measures and the
    metric system was given to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
    Commerce and was later transferred to the Committee on Science and
    Astronautics (now Science) in the 85th Congress (H. Res. 580, July 21,
    1958, p. 14513). In the 92d Congress jurisdiction over the impact on the
    economy of tax-exempt foundations and charitable trusts was transferred
    from the Subcommittee on Foundations of the Select Committee on Small
    Business, along with all that subcommittee's files, to this committee
    (H. Res. 320, Apr. 27, 1971, p. 12081). Before the end of the 93d
    Congress, the committee had legislative jurisdiction over the problems
    of small business under its general jurisdiction over financial aid to
    commerce and industry; but with the adoption

    [[Page 443]]

    viding for U.S. participation in the International Development
    Association (Mar. 9, 1960, p. 5046), bills to authorize GSA to acquire
    land in D.C. for transfer to the International Monetary Fund (May 1,
    1962, p. 7428), bills relating to flood insurance (Dec. 4, 1975, p.
    38701), and over an executive communication proposing regulations for
    college housing programs (notwithstanding that the requirement for such
    regulations was contained in higher education legislation reported from
    the Committee on Education and Labor) (June 15, 1982, p. 13638).

      The Committee has reported on subjects relating to the strengthening
    of public credit, issues of notes, and State taxation and redemption
    thereof (IV, 4084), propositions to maintain the parity of the money of
    the United States (IV, 4089; VII, 1792), the issue of silver
    certificates as currency (IV, 4087, 4088), national banks and current
    deposits of public money (IV, 4083; VII, 1790), the incorporation of an
    international bank (IV, 4086), subjects relating to the Freedman's Bank
    (IV, 4085), and Federal Reserve System, farm loan act, home loan bills,
    stabilization of the dollar, War Finance Corporation, Federal Reserve
    bank buildings (VII, 1793, 1795). The Committee has jurisdiction of
    bills providing consolidation of grant-in-aid programs for urban
    development (Mar. 18, 1970, p. 7887), bills pro

      (h) Committee on Government Reform.

    Sec. 723. Government Reform.

          (1)  Federal civil service,
    including intergovernmental personnel; and the status of officers and
    employees of the United States, including their compensation,
    classification, and retirement.

          (2) Municipal affairs of the District of Columbia in general
    (other than appropriations).

          (3) Federal paperwork reduction.

          (4) Government management and accounting measures generally.

          (5) Holidays and celebrations.

          (6) Overall economy, efficiency, and management of government
    operations and activities, including Federal procurement.

          (7) National archives.

          (8) Population and demography generally, including the Census.

          (9) Postal service generally, including transportation of the
    mails.

          (10) Public information and records.

          (11) Relationship of the Federal Government to the States and
    municipalities generally.

          (12) Reorganizations in the executive branch of the Government.

    [[Page 444]]

    3, 1952, p. 9217). In the 104th Congress it was changed to Government
    Reform and Oversight (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464), and
    in the 106th Congress it was changed to Government Reform (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The former Committee on Expenditures in the
    Executive Departments was established December 5, 1927 (VII, 2041), and
    took the place of 11 separate committees on expenditures in the several
    executive departments. The first of these committees was established in
    1816, and others were added as new departments were created (IV, 4315).
    They reported bills relating to the efficiency and integrity of the
    public service (IV, 4320), and creation and abolition of offices (IV,
    4318).
      In the 82d Congress the name of this committee was changed from
    Expenditures in the Executive Departments to Government Operations (July

    [[Page 445]]

    tions from executive orders sequestering budget authority, which had
    been added by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (tit. XIII, P.L. 101-
    508). In the 105th Congress any residual jurisdiction over budget
    process was transferred to the Committee on the Budget (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    7, 1997, p. 121). The 104th Congress assigned the committee its
    responsibilities to coordinate committee oversight plans under clause
    2(d) (sec. 203(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467). In the 104th
    Congress the committee was also given the responsibility to consider and
    report recommendations concerning alternatives to commemorative
    legislation, although no such report was made to the House (sec. 216(b),
    H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    including the deletion of a redundant undesignated recitation of general
    and special oversight functions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      In addition to the jurisdiction vested in the Committee by the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), the Committee
    Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975, assigned the
    committee jurisdiction over measures relating to the overall economy and
    efficiency of Government operations and activities, including Federal
    procurement, intergovernmental relationships, and general revenue
    sharing (the latter from the Committee on Ways and Means was stricken
    from the jurisdictional statement of this committee in the 104th
    Congress (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464)), and the
    National Archives (from the former Committee on Post Office and Civil
    Service) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the 104th
    Congress (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464), the committee
    assumed the jurisdictions of the former Committee on the District of
    Columbia (subparas. (2)) and the former Committee on Post Office and
    Civil Service except that relating to the Franking Commission (subparas.
    (1), (5), (8), and (9)); and subparagraphs (3) and (10) were added to
    clarify existing jurisdiction. At the same time the committee's
    jurisdiction over measures relating to off-budget treatment of agencies
    or programs, which had been added by the Balanced Budget and Emergency
    Deficit Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177), was transferred to the
    Committee on the Budget. Three rereferrals from the Committee on
    Government Reform and Oversight (now Government Reform) to the Committee
    on the Budget marked this migration of off-budget treatment
    jurisdiction: (1) the Committee on the Budget has primary jurisdiction
    over a bill excluding from the budget the Civil Service Retirement and
    Disability Fund (although the Committee on Government Reform and
    Oversight (now Government Reform) retains programmatic jurisdiction over
    that Fund); (2) the Committee on the Budget has primary jurisdiction
    over a bill excluding from the budget the Highway Trust Fund, the
    Airport and Airway Trust Fund, the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, and the
    Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (although the Committee on Transportation
    and Infrastructure retains programmatic jurisdiction); and (3) the
    Committee on the Budget has secondary jurisdiction over a bill amending
    title 49 of the United States Code and providing off-budget treatment
    for the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, the
    Inland Waterways Trust Fund, and the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (Dec.
    6, 1995, p. 35572). The Committee was also released from jurisdiction
    over measures relating to exemp

      The Committee has exercised jurisdiction of bills: waiving
    Reorganization Plans to establish the Rural Electrification
    Administration as an independent agency and transferring certain
    functions thereto (Mar. 19, 1959, p. 4692); establishing a Commission on
    Population Growth (Sept. 23, 1969, p. 26568); establishing a Cabinet
    Committee on Opportunities for Spanish-Speaking Americans (Nov. 24,
    1969, p. 35509); providing payment of travel costs for Federal
    employment applicants (Feb. 15, 1967, p. 3466); and a bill to rename an
    existing post office building (Aug. 4, 1995, p. 22085; Oct. 1, 1998, p.
    22933), even if the post office building also houses a courthouse (Sept.
    14, 2000, p. 18054). The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
    and not this committee, has jurisdiction over a measure redesignating a
    general-purpose Federal building as a post office (Apr. 24, 1997, p.
    22085). The Committee has exercised jurisdiction over countercyclical
    programs of revenue-sharing grants to State and local governments, such
    as that contained in Title II of the Public Works Employment Act of 1976
    (Feb. 1, 1977, p. 3057). The Committee shares jurisdiction over a bill
    to facilitate the reorganization of an agency by instituting a
    separation pay program to encourage eligible employees to voluntarily
    resign or retire (Aug. 2, 1993, p. 18161). The Committee has
    jurisdiction over a bill explicitly waiving the Federal Property and
    Administrative Services Act and directing the Administrator of General
    Services to convey excess real property (Oct. 2, 1998, p. 23186). This
    committee, and not the Committee on the Judiciary, has jurisdiction over
    a bill authorizing a pay adjustment for administrative law judges (July
    31, 1991, p. 20677; June 10, 1999, p. 12435).

    [[Page 446]]

    ing intergovernmental relationships domestically and with international
    organizations to which the United States belongs (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Under section 2954 of title 5, United
    States Code, an executive agency, if so requested by this committee or
    any seven members thereof, shall submit any information requested of it
    relating to any matter within the jurisdiction of the committee.

      The specific subpoena authority conferred upon the committee in the
    standing rules on February 10, 1947 (p. 942) was superseded by the
    general conferral of subpoena authority on all committees in clause 2(m)
    of rule XI. By the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective
    January 3, 1975, the committee was given the general function under
    clause 4(c)(1) of examining and reporting upon reports of the
    Comptroller General, evaluating laws reorganizing the legislative and
    executive branches, and study

      (i) Committee on Homeland Security.

    Sec. 723a. Homeland
    Security.

          (1) Overall homeland  security policy.

          (2) Organization and administration of the Department of Homeland
    Security.

          (3) Functions of the Department of Homeland Security relating to
    the following:

              (A) Border and port security (except immigration policy and
    non-border enforcement).

              (B) Customs (except customs revenue).

              (C) Integration, analysis, and dissemination of homeland
    security information.

              (D) Domestic preparedness for and collective response to
    terrorism.

              (E) Research and development.

              (F) Transportation security.

      This committee was established in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(a), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). For debate (and material submitted
    during debate) that may edify the reader on the jurisdictional issues
    surrounding the new committee, see January 4, 2005, p. ----. The Speaker
    announced that his referral of measures in the 108th Congress to the
    Select Committee on Homeland Security would not constitute precedent for
    referral to this committee (Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 447]]

    ----). In the 108th Congress the House reestablished a Select Committee
    on Homeland Security (sec. 4, H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Its
    mission was to develop recommendations on such matters that relate to
    the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) as may be referred to
    it by the Speaker; to conduct oversight of laws, programs, and
    Government activities relating to homeland security; to conduct a study
    of the operation and implementation of the Rules of the House, including
    rule X, with respect to homeland security; and to report its
    recommendations to the House by bill or otherwise on matters referred to
    it by the Speaker and to report its recommendations on changes to House
    rules to the Committee on Rules by September 30, 2004.

    Sec. 723b. Former Select Committees on Homeland
    Security.

      In the  107th Congress the House established a Select Committee on
    Homeland Security (H. Res. 449, June 19, 2002, p. ----). Its mission was
    to develop recommendations on such matters that relate to the
    establishment of a department of homeland security as may be referred to
    it by the Speaker and on recommendations submitted to it by standing
    committees to which the Speaker referred a bill establishing the
    department and to report its recommendation to the House on such bill.
    It was terminated after final disposition of the specified bill (Nov.
    25, 2002, p.

      (j) Committee on House Administration.

    Sec. 724. House Administration.

          (1)  Appropriations from
    accounts for committee salaries and expenses (except for the Committee
    on Appropriations); House Information Resources; and allowance and
    expenses of Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and
    administrative offices of the House.

          (2) Auditing and settling of all accounts described in
    subparagraph (1).

          (3) Employment of persons by the House, including staff for
    Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and committees; and
    reporters of debates, subject to rule VI.

          (4) Except as provided in paragraph (r)(11), the Library of
    Congress, including management thereof; the House Library; statuary and
    pictures; acceptance or purchase of works of art for the Capitol; the
    Botanic Garden; and purchase of books and manuscripts.

          (5) The Smithsonian Institution and the incorporation of similar
    institutions (except as provided in paragraph (r)(11)).

    [[Page 448]]

          (6) Expenditure of accounts described in subparagraph (1).

          (7) Franking Commission.

          (8) Printing and correction of the Congressional Record.

          (9) Accounts of the House generally.

          (10) Assignment of office space for Members, Delegates, the
    Resident Commissioner, and committees.

          (11) Disposition of useless executive papers.

          (12) Election of the President, Vice President, Members, Senators,
    Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner; corrupt practices; contested
    elections; credentials and qualifications; and Federal elections
    generally.

          (13) Services to the House, including the House Restaurant,
    parking facilities, and administration of the House Office Buildings and
    of the House wing of the Capitol.

          (14) Travel of Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner.

          (15) Raising, reporting, and use of campaign contributions for
    candidates for office of Representative, of Delegate, and of Resident
    Commissioner.

          (16) Compensation, retirement, and other benefits of the Members,
    Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and employees of
    Congress.

    [[Page 449]]

    gress (created in 1893) (IV, 4299), and Memorials (created January 3,
    1929, VII, 2080).
      This committee was created as the Committee on House Administration on
    January 2, 1947, as a part of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946
    (60 Stat. 812), combining the Committees on Accounts (created in 1803)
    (IV, 4328), Enrolled Bills (created in 1789) (IV, 4350), Disposition of
    Executive Papers (created in 1889) (IV, 4419), Printing (created in
    1846), Elections (created in 1794 and divided into three committees in
    1895) (IV, 4019), Election of President, Vice President, and
    Representatives in Con

      The Committee was redesignated as the Committee on House Oversight in
    the 104th Congress, obtaining from the former Committee on Post Office
    and Civil Service jurisdiction over the Franking Commission (also known
    as the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards) in
    subparagraph (7), while transferring to the Committee on Resources
    jurisdiction over erection of monuments to the memory of individuals
    (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). References in
    subparagraphs (1) and (2) to the ``contingent fund'' were eliminated
    without changing the committee's jurisdiction over the accounts that the
    fund comprised. In the 105th Congress subparagraph (1) was amended to
    effect a technical correction (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). In the
    106th Congress the committee was redesignated House Administration, and
    the House recodified its rules to effect clerical and stylistic changes,
    including the deletion of a redundant undesignated recitation of general
    and special oversight functions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In the
    107th Congress the committee's responsibilities with respect to enrolled
    bills (which were set forth in former clause 4(d)(1)(A) of rule X) were
    transferred to the Clerk (see clause 2(d)(2) of rule II) (sec. 2(b), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

    Sec. 725. House facilities.

      The  Committee has jurisdiction
    over measures relating to the House Restaurant (2 U.S.C. 2041), which
    was first under the jurisdiction of the former Committee on Accounts,
    then under the supervision of the Architect of the Capitol (H. Res. 590,
    76th Cong., Sept. 5, 1940, p. 11552, as made permanent law by P.L. 76-
    812), and then under the supervision of the Select Committee on the
    House Restaurant (H. Res. 472, 91st Cong., July 10, 1969, p. 19080; H.
    Res. 111, 93d Cong., Feb. 7, 1973, p. 3680), which was not reestablished
    after the 93d Congress.

      By the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975,
    the committee obtained jurisdiction over parking facilities of the
    House, a matter formerly assigned to a select committee (subpara. (13))
    (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the 94th Congress
    the committee was given jurisdiction over campaign contributions to
    candidates for the House, a matter formerly within the jurisdiction of
    the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (subpara. (15)), and over
    compensation, retirement, and other benefits of Members, officers, and
    employees of Congress (subpara. (16)) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20).

    [[Page 450]]

      The Committee has jurisdiction over resolutions authorizing committees
    to employ additional professional and clerical personnel (Feb. 7, 1966,
    p. 2373). The Committee has supervisory authority over the House barber
    shops, beauty shops, House Information Resources, and the Office of
    Placement and Management (the latter formerly within the jurisdiction of
    the former Joint Committee on Congressional Operations and of the former
    Select Committee on Congressional Operations).

    Sec. 727. Library.

      Under  the Reorganization Act the
    committee has jurisdiction of some of the subjects formerly within the
    jurisdiction of the Joint Committee on the Library, such as matters
    relating to the Library of Congress and the House Library, statuary and
    pictures, acceptance or purchase of works of art for the Capitol, the
    Botanic Gardens, management of the Library of Congress, purchase of
    books and manuscripts, matters relating to the Smithsonian Institution,
    and the incorporation of similar institutions. Excepted are measures
    relating to the construction or reconstruction, maintenance, and care of
    the buildings and grounds of the Botanic Gardens, the Library of
    Congress, and the Smithsonian Institution, which fall under the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation (now Transportation and
    Infrastructure). The House Members of the Joint Committee on the
    Library, provided for by law (2 U.S.C. 132b), are elected by resolution
    each Congress.

    Sec. 728. Congressional Record.

      The  Committee has
    jurisdiction of matters relating to printing and correction of the
    Congressional Record, formerly within the jurisdiction of the Committee
    on Printing. The House Members of the Joint Committee on Printing,
    provided for by law (44 U.S.C. 1), are elected by resolution each
    Congress.

      The Committee has jurisdiction of measures relating to the election of
    the President, Vice President, or Members of Congress; corrupt
    practices; contested elections; credentials and qualifications; Federal
    elections generally, and the electoral count, which formerly was within
    the jurisdiction of the Committee on Election of the President, Vice
    President, and Representatives in Congress (IV, 4303).

      The Committee's former responsibility to report on Members' travel was
    supplanted by the function of providing policy direction to and
    oversight of the Clerk, Sergeant-at-Arms, Chief Administrative Officer,
    and Inspector General (sec. 10, H. Res. 423, Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9040; sec.
    201(e), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463; see rule II and Sec. 752,
    infra). In the 107th Congress the committee retained the responsibility
    to provide policy direction to and oversight of the Inspector General
    but retained only oversight of the remaining officers (sec. 2(g), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

      (k) Committee on International Relations.

    Sec. 729. International Relations.

          (1)  Relations of the
    United States with foreign nations generally.

          (2) Acquisition of land and buildings for embassies and legations
    in foreign countries.

    [[Page 451]]

          (3) Establishment of boundary lines between the United States and
    foreign nations.

          (4) Export controls, including nonproliferation of nuclear
    technology and nuclear hardware.

          (5) Foreign loans.

          (6) International commodity agreements (other than those involving
    sugar), including all agreements for cooperation in the export of
    nuclear technology and nuclear hardware.

          (7) International conferences and congresses.

          (8) International education.

          (9) Intervention abroad and declarations of war.

          (10) Diplomatic service.

          (11) Measures to foster commercial intercourse with foreign
    nations and to safeguard American business interests abroad.

          (12) International economic policy.

          (13) Neutrality.

          (14) Protection of American citizens abroad and expatriation.

          (15) The American National Red Cross.

          (16) Trading with the enemy.

          (17) United Nations organizations.

      This committee was established in 1822 (IV, 4162), and from 1885 to
    1920 had authority to report appropriations. In the 94th Congress the
    name of the committee was changed from Foreign Affairs to International
    Relations (H. Res. 163, Mar. 19, 1975, p. 7343). In the 96th Congress it
    was changed back to Foreign Affairs (H. Res. 89, Feb. 5, 1979, p. 1848).
    In the 104th Congress the name was again changed to International
    Relations (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).

    [[Page 452]]

    of the Committee on Banking and Currency (now Financial Services);
    international commodity agreements other than sugar (subpara. (6)),
    formerly within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture;
    trading with the enemy (subpara. (16)), formerly within the jurisdiction
    of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce (now Energy and
    Commerce); and international education (subpara. (8)); while
    transferring jurisdiction over international financial and monetary
    organizations to the Committee on Banking and Currency (now Financial
    Services), and jurisdiction over international fishing agreements to the
    Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries (now Resources) (H. Res. 988,
    93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). When the legislative jurisdiction in
    the House of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy was abolished in the
    95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), the committee was
    given jurisdiction over nonproliferation of nuclear technology and
    hardware (subpara. (4)), and over international agreements on nuclear
    exports (subpara. (6)). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected
    when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, including the
    deletion of a redundant undesignated recitation of general and special
    oversight functions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      In addition to the jurisdiction vested in the committee by the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), the Committee
    Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975, gave the committee
    jurisdiction over measures relating to: international economic policy
    (subpara. (12)) and export controls (subpara. (4)), matters formerly
    within the jurisdiction

      It has a broad jurisdiction over foreign relations, including bills to
    establish boundary lines between the United States and foreign nations,
    to determine naval strengths, and to regulate bridges and dams on
    international waters (IV, 4166; see also the ``General Bridge Act,'' 33
    U.S.C. 525, 533), for the protection of American citizens abroad and
    expatriation (IV, 4169; VII, 1883), for extradition with foreign
    nations, for international arbitration, relating to violations of
    neutrality (IV, 4178a), international conferences and congresses (IV,
    4177; VII, 1884), the incorporation of the American National Red Cross
    and protection of its insignia (IV, 4173), intervention abroad and
    declarations of war (IV, 4164; VII 1880), affairs of the consular
    service, including acquisition of land and buildings for legations in
    foreign capitals (IV, 4163; VII, 1879), creation of courts of the United
    States in foreign countries (IV, 4167), treaty regulations as to
    protection of fur seals (IV, 4170), matters relating to the Philippines
    (see 60 Stat. 315), and measures establishing a District of Columbia
    corporation to support private American organizations engaged in
    communications with foreign nations (June 21, 1971, p. 21062).

    [[Page 453]]

    dents (May 10, 1988, p. 10305). The Committee has jurisdiction over a
    communication from the President notifying the House, consistent with
    the War Powers Resolution, of the deployment abroad of U.S. armed forces
    to participate in an embargo against another nation (Nov. 4, 1993, p.
    27393).
      The Committee also has considered measures for fostering commercial
    intercourse with foreign nations and for safeguarding American business
    interests abroad (IV, 4175), and even the subjects of commercial
    treaties and reciprocal arrangements (IV, 4174), although in later
    practice the Committee on Ways and Means has considered such matters
    (IV, 4021). The Committee has exercised a general but not exclusive
    jurisdiction over legislation relating to claims having international
    relations (IV, 4168; VII, 1882). Pursuant to its jurisdiction over
    international education, the committee (and not former Committee on
    Education and Labor) has exercised jurisdiction over bills establishing
    scholarship programs for foreign stu

      The special oversight function of the committee set forth in clause
    3(d) of rule X (current clause 3(g) of rule X) was made effective
    January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470).

      (l) Committee on the Judiciary.

    Sec. 730. Judiciary.

          (1)  The judiciary and judicial
    proceedings, civil and criminal.

          (2) Administrative practice and procedure.

          (3) Apportionment of Representatives.

          (4) Bankruptcy, mutiny, espionage, and counterfeiting.

          (5) Civil liberties.

          (6) Constitutional amendments.

          (7) Criminal law enforcement.

          (8) Federal courts and judges, and local courts in the Territories
    and possessions.

          (9) Immigration policy and non-border enforcement.

          (10) Interstate compacts generally.

          (11) Claims against the United States.

          (12) Meetings of Congress; attendance of Members, Delegates, and
    the Resident Commissioner; and their acceptance of incompatible offices.

          (13) National penitentiaries.

          (14) Patents, the Patent and Trademark Office, copyrights, and
    trademarks.

          (15) Presidential succession.

    [[Page 454]]

          (16) Protection of trade and commerce against unlawful restraints
    and monopolies.

          (17) Revision and codification of the Statutes of the United
    States.

          (18) State and territorial boundary lines.

    Sec. 731. Internal Security.

          (19)  Subversive activities
    affecting the in-
    ternal security of the United States.

      This committee dates from 1813 (IV, 4054). The essential jurisdiction
    defined in the rule was made effective January 2, 1947, as a part of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), and combined the
    Committees on Revision of Laws (created 1868, IV, 4293), Patents
    (created in 1837) (IV, 4254), Immigration and Naturalization (created in
    1893) (IV, 4309), Claims (created in 1794) (IV, 4262), and War Claims
    (created in 1883) (IV, 4269). By the Committee Reform Amendments of
    1974, effective January 3, 1975, the committee's jurisdiction over
    holidays and celebrations was transferred to the former Committee on
    Post Office and Civil Service (now under Government Reform) (H. Res.
    988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the 94th Congress the
    Committee on Internal Security was abolished and jurisdiction over
    communist and other subversive activities affecting the internal
    security of the United States was transferred to this committee
    (subpara. (18), now (19)) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20), though an
    accompanying provision for the transfer of records and staff of the
    Internal Security Committee to the Judiciary Committee was deleted as
    obsolete in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), and
    the specific reference to communism was deleted as unnecessary in the
    104th Congress (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). The 104th
    Congress also inserted ``the judiciary'' in subparagraph (1); added
    subparagraph (2) for clarification; combined former subparagraphs (6)
    and (9) in a new subparagraph (7) (now (8)); and combined former
    subparagraphs (13) and (14) in a new subparagraph (13) (now (14)) (sec.
    202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). Clerical and stylistic changes
    were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    including an update of a reference to the Patent and Trademark Office
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In the 109th Congress the House
    established the Committee on Homeland Security with jurisdiction over
    certain functions of the Department of Homeland Security that resulted
    in a conforming change to subparagraph (9) (sec. 2(a)(1), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). In the 109th Congress the House also added
    subparagraph (7) (sec. 2(a)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). For
    debate (and material submitted during debate) that may edify the reader
    on the jurisdictional issues surrounding the new Committee on Homeland
    Security, see January 4, 2005, p. ----.

    [[Page 455]]

    of Impeachment of the President (Aug. 20, 1974, pp. 29219-81; Dec. 17,
    1998, p. 27819). Where the House has voted impeachment, members of the
    committee have been appointed as managers on the part of the House in
    presenting the charges to the Senate for trial (H. Res. 501, 99th Cong.,
    July 22, 1986, p. 17306; H. Res. 511, 100th Cong., Aug. 3, 1988, p.
    20223; H. Res. 12, 101st Cong., Jan. 3, 1989, p. 84; Dec. 19, 1998, p.
    28112; Jan. 6, 1999, p. 15).
      Under subparagraph (15) the committee has jurisdiction over
    Presidential nominations to fill vacancies in the Office of Vice
    President, submitted pursuant to the 25th amendment to the Constitution
    (Oct. 13, 1973, p. 34032; Aug. 20, 1974, p. 29366). The Committee has
    reported Articles

      The Committee on the Judiciary considers charges against judges of the
    Federal courts (IV, 4062), legislative propositions relating to the
    service of the Department of Justice (IV, 4067), bills relating to local
    courts in the District of Columbia, Alaska, and the territories (IV,
    4068), the establishment of a court of patent appeals (IV, 4075),
    relations of labor to courts and corporations (IV, 4072), crimes,
    penalties, extradition (IV, 4069; VII, 1747), construction and
    management of national penitentiaries (IV, 4070), matters relating to
    trusts and corporations (IV, 4057, 4059, 4060; VII, 1764), claims of
    States against the United States (IV, 4080), general legislation
    relating to international and other claims (IV, 4078, 4079, 4081),
    including measures extending the terms of members of the Foreign Claims
    Settlement Commission (Nov. 14, 1991, p. 32130), bills relating to the
    Office of President (IV, 4077), to the flag (IV, 4055), bankruptcy (IV,
    4065), removal of political disabilities (IV, 4058), prohibition of
    traffic in intoxicating liquors (IV, 4061; VII, 1773), mutiny and
    willful destruction of vessels (IV, 4145), counterfeiting (IV, 4071;
    VII, 1753), settlement of State and territorial boundary lines (IV,
    4060; VII, 1768), meeting of Congress and attendance of Members and
    their acceptance of incompatible offices (IV, 4077, VI, 65).

      The Committee also has jurisdiction over joint resolutions proposing
    amendments to the Constitution (IV, 4056; VII, 1779). It also reports on
    important questions of law relating to subjects naturally within the
    jurisdiction of other committees (IV, 4063). Although the committee has
    historically exercised jurisdiction over lobbying activities, the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct was assigned such
    jurisdiction during a brief period (H. Res. 1031, 91st Cong., July 8,
    1970, p. 23141; H. Res. 5, 94th Cong., Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20).

    [[Page 456]]

    Substances Act (Nov. 14, 1983, p. 32457). The Committee has exclusive
    jurisdiction over the Legal Services Corporation (Nov. 19, 1975, p.
    37288) and over the extension of workmen's benefits to non-Federal
    policemen and firemen (Dec. 12, 1975, p. 40204). The Committee has
    exercised jurisdiction, with the Committee on Education and Labor (now
    Education and the Workforce), over bills to amend the Walsh-Healey Act
    regarding hours of work under government contracts (May 15, 1985, p.
    11946). This committee, and not the Committee on Public Works and
    Transportation (now Transportation and Infrastructure), exercised
    jurisdiction over a bill extending the authority for the Marshal of the
    Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Police to protect the Chief Justice,
    Associate Justices, officers, and employees of the Supreme Court beyond
    its building and grounds (Nov. 22, 1993, p. 32074). The Committee on
    Government Reform, and not this committee, has jurisdiction over pay
    adjustments for administrative law judges (July 31, 1991, p. 20677; June
    10, 1999, p. 12435). The Committee on Resources, and not this committee,
    has jurisdiction over a bill to designate an immigration museum within a
    facility of the National Park Service (July 8, 2004, p. ----).
      The Committee also has jurisdiction over bills regulating the
    authority of States to impose taxes on interstate commerce (June 18,
    1959, p. 11317), imposing conflict of interest standards and civil and
    criminal penalties relating thereto on government employees (Feb. 25,
    1960, p. 3484), establishing an Academy of Criminal Justice (Apr. 5,
    1965, p. 6822), to eliminate racketeering in the interstate sale of
    cigarettes (Feb. 9, 1972, p. 3429), providing workmen's compensation for
    non-Federal firemen killed during civil disorder (May 6, 1968, p.
    11798), authorizing the Attorney General to consent to a modification of
    a certain trust on behalf of the Library of Congress (Aug. 17, 1959, p.
    16051), amending an omnibus pension act to increase the amount of
    pension granted a certain class of persons (Feb. 15, 1960, p. 2523), and
    imposing criminal sanctions under the Controlled

      The Committee has the general oversight responsibility set forth in
    clause 2(b).

      (m) Committee on Resources.

    Sec. 732. Resources.

          (1)  Fisheries and wildlife,
    including research, restoration, refuges, and conservation.

          (2) Forest reserves and national parks created from the public
    domain.

          (3) Forfeiture of land grants and alien ownership, including alien
    ownership of mineral lands.

          (4) Geological Survey.

          (5) International fishing agreements.

          (6) Interstate compacts relating to apportionment of waters for
    irrigation purposes.

    [[Page 457]]

          (7) Irrigation and reclamation, including water supply for
    reclamation projects and easements of public lands for irrigation
    projects; and acquisition of private lands when necessary to complete
    irrigation projects.

          (8) Native Americans generally, including the care and allotment
    of Native American lands and general and special measures relating to
    claims that are paid out of Native American funds.

          (9) Insular possessions of the United States generally (except
    those affecting the revenue and appropriations).

          (10) Military parks and battlefields, national cemeteries
    administered by the Secretary of the Interior, parks within the District
    of Columbia, and the erection of monuments to the memory of individuals.

          (11) Mineral land laws and claims and entries thereunder.

          (12) Mineral resources of public lands.

          (13) Mining interests generally.

          (14) Mining schools and experimental stations.

          (15) Marine affairs, including coastal zone management (except for
    measures relating to oil and other pollution of navigable waters).

          (16) Oceanography.

          (17) Petroleum conservation on public lands and conservation of
    the radium supply in the United States.

          (18) Preservation of prehistoric ruins and objects of interest on
    the public domain.

          (19) Public lands generally, including entry, easements, and
    grazing thereon.

    [[Page 458]]

          (20) Relations of the United States with Native Americans and
    Native American tribes.

          (21) Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline (except ratemaking).

      The Committee on Public Lands was created in 1805 (IV, 4194). Its name
    has since been changed to Interior and Insular Affairs (Feb. 2, 1951, p.
    883); to Natural Resources (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49); and to
    Resources (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).

      The core of the jurisdiction reflected in this paragraph was assigned
    to the committee effective January 2, 1947, as a part of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), which consolidated in this
    committee the jurisdictions of the former Committees on Mines and Mining
    (created in 1865) (IV, 4223), Insular Affairs (created in 1899) (IV,
    4213), Irrigation and Reclamation (created in 1893) (IV, 4307), Indian
    Affairs (created in 1821) (IV, 4204), and territories (created in 1825)
    (IV, 4208), though vesting the subject of welfare of men working in
    mines, formerly under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Mines and
    Mining, in the Committee on Education and Labor (now Education and the
    Workforce). Until the Reorganization Act, military parks, battlefields,
    and national cemeteries were under jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Military Affairs. Jurisdiction over cemeteries of the United States in
    which veterans may be buried, except those administered by the Secretary
    of the Interior, was transferred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    in the 90th Congress (H. Res. 241, Oct. 20, 1967).

      In the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975,
    the committee gained jurisdiction over parks within the District of
    Columbia, formerly within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Public
    Works and Transportation (now Transportation and Infrastructure)
    (subpara. (10)), and lost specific jurisdiction over Indian education
    and over Hawaii and Alaska, generally (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470). By that same resolution, the committee was given
    special oversight functions in clause 3.

    [[Page 459]]

    clause were adjusted to reflect the transfer of nonmilitary nuclear
    energy and research and development including disposal of nuclear waste
    from this committee to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, though
    conforming changes in former paragraphs (e) and (h) of clause 3 were
    inadvertently omitted. Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47).
      The 104th Congress expanded the jurisdiction of the committee by:
    adding subparagraphs (1), (5), (15), and (16) to reflect the transfer of
    those matters from the former Committee on Merchant Marine and
    Fisheries; inserting the subject of monuments in memory of individuals
    in subparagraph (10) to reflect the transfer of that matter from the
    Committee on House Administration; adding subparagraph (21), an
    exceptional treatment of pipeline jurisdiction otherwise vested in the
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure; and deleting the subject
    of regulation of the domestic nuclear energy industry to reflect the
    transfer of that jurisdiction, which this committee had acquired when
    the 95th Congress abolished the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) and which it shared with the Committee
    on Energy and Commerce, to the Committee on Energy and Commerce (sec.
    202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). At the same time, the
    statements of special oversight functions formerly found in this
    paragraph and in former paragraph (e) of this

    [[Page 460]]

    matter) (Oct. 30, 1997, p. 23967). This committee, and not the Committee
    on Agriculture, has jurisdiction over a bill to convey land that is part
    of a National Forest created from the public domain (Mar. 23, 2004, p.
    ----). This committee, and not the Committee on the Judiciary, has
    jurisdiction over a bill to designate an immigration museum within a
    facility of the National Park Service (July 8, 2004, p. ----).
      The Committee reports on subjects relating to the mineral resources of
    the public lands (IV, 4202), forfeiture of land grants and alien
    ownership (IV, 4201), validation of certain conveyances of erstwhile
    public lands by a railway company (July 11, 1995, p. 18397), public
    lands of Alaska (IV, 4196), forest reserves (IV, 4197), and national
    parks created out of the public domain (IV, 4199; VII, 1925), including
    measures relating to criminal trespass provisions applying only within
    national forests created from the public domain (July 18, 1977, p.
    23434); to admission of States (IV, 4208); to preservation of
    prehistoric ruins and objects of interest on the public domain (IV,
    4199); and sometimes to projects of general legislation relating to
    various classes of land claims (IV, 4203). The Committee also has
    jurisdiction over the following bills: to dispose of proceeds from oil
    shale on public lands (other than naval oil shale reserves) (Aug. 3,
    1967, p. 21179); to exclude certain lands in the Outer Continental Shelf
    from mineral leasing provisions of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
    (May 16, 1963, p. 8777); to reinstate a U.S. oil and gas lease (Aug. 5,
    1959, p. 15190); to address U.S. claims to lands along the Colorado
    River forming State boundaries (June 28, 1967, p. 17738); to designate
    national forest lands created from the public domain as wilderness (May
    6, 1969, p. 11459); to include additional units in the Missouri River
    Basin project (Sept. 8, 1959, p. 18587); to establish a commission on
    development of Pennsylvania Avenue in D.C. as a national historic site
    (Oct. 21, 1965, p. 27803); to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
    conduct a feasibility investigation of potential water resource
    development (May 1, 1975, p. 12764); to establish a commission to
    consider the creation of a (Hudson) River compact (July 21, 1975, p.
    23653); to name a building constructed as part of a Federal recreation
    area (June 8, 1988, p. 13803); to address the siting on Federal parkland
    of an established national memorial (Sept. 24, 1991, p. 23731); (with
    the Committee on Agriculture) to exchange a Federal tree nursery for
    certain State mining patents touching a public domain (western) forest
    (Sept. 17, 1991, p. 23193); and to transfer interest in a National
    Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fisheries research laboratory
    (Oct. 1, 2002, p. ----). The Committee on National Security (now Armed
    Services), and not this committee, has jurisdiction over the transfer of
    military property to a State to be designated by the State as a
    wilderness area (Nov. 15, 1995, p. 32627). The Committee on Agriculture,
    and not this committee, has jurisdiction over the designation of an
    agricultural research center (May 14, 1996, p. 11070). The Committee on
    Education and the Workforce, and not this committee, has jurisdiction
    over a bill amending the Native American Programs Act of 1974 (an Indian
    education

      The authority of the committee to report as privileged bills for the
    forfeiture of land grants to railroad and other corporations, bills
    preventing speculation in the public lands, bills for the preservation
    of the public lands for the benefit of actual and bona fide settlers,
    and bills for the admission of new States was eliminated in the
    Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res.
    988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470).

      (n) Committee on Rules.

    Sec. 733. Rules.

          (1)  Rules and joint rules (other than
    those relating to the Code of Official Conduct) and the order of
    business of the House.

          (2) Recesses and final adjournments of Congress.

      This committee, which had existed as a select committee from 1789,
    became a standing committee in 1880 (IV, 4321; VII, 2047). The
    jurisdiction defined in this paragraph became effective January 2, 1947,
    as a part of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, including the deletion of a redundant
    undesignated pararaph permitting the committee to sit during sessions of
    the House (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). That undesignated paragraph,
    originally designated as subparagraph (3) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p.
    49), was derived from section 134(c) of the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1946, even though the committee had authority to sit during
    sessions of the House since 1893 (IV, 4546). Effective January 3, 1975,
    however, the authority for all committees to sit and act whether the
    House is in session or has adjourned rendered this provision obsolete
    (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470).

    [[Page 461]]

    eliminate prescriptions of committee sizes (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct.
    8, 1974, p. 34470), and in the 94th through the 98th Congresses 16
    Members were named to the Committee on Nominations from the respective
    party caucuses (see, e.g., H. Res. 76, Jan. 20, 1975, p. 803; H. Res.
    101, Jan. 28, 1975, p. 1611), and in the 99th through 101st Congresses,
    13 Members were named to the Committee on Nominations from the
    respective party caucuses (see, e.g., H. Res. 34, 35, Jan. 30, 1985, pp.
    1271, 1273).
      The Speaker was first made a member of the committee in 1858 (IV,
    4321), and ceased to be a member on March 19, 1910 (VII, 2047). However,
    the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 deleted from the former rule
    the prohibition against the Speaker serving on the committee. The size
    of the committee was increased from 12 to 15 members for the 87th
    Congress (Jan. 31, 1961, p. 1589), and the increase in the committee's
    size was incorporated as a part of the rules in the 88th Congress (Jan.
    9, 1963, p. 14). Effective January 3, 1975, however, the rules were
    amended to

      The subject of recesses and adjournments was formerly under the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. In section 402(b) of
    the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344, July 12, 1974), the
    committee was given specific authority to report emergency waivers of
    the required reporting date for bills and resolutions authorizing new
    budget authority. That authority was incorporated into this rule,
    effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470), but was repealed as obsolete in the 102d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). Jurisdiction over rules relating to official
    conduct and financial disclosure was transferred to the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct on April 3, 1968 (H. Res. 1099, 90th
    Cong.), but in the 95th Congress, jurisdiction over rules relating to
    financial disclosure by Members, officers, and employees of the House
    was returned to this committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70).

      The jurisdiction of this committee is primarily over propositions to
    make or change the rules (V, 6770, 6776; VII, 2047), for the creation of
    committees (IV, 4322; VII, 2048), and directing them to make
    investigations (IV, 4322-4324; VII, 2048). Effective January 3, 1975,
    however, the authority for all committees to conduct investigations and
    studies was made a part of the standing rules (clause 1(b) of rule XI),
    as was the authority to issue subpoenas (clause 2(m) of rule XI) (H.
    Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The Committee also reports
    resolutions relating to the hour of daily meeting and the days on which
    the House shall sit (IV, 4325), and orders relating to the use of the
    galleries during the electoral count (IV, 4327). The chairman of the
    Committee on the Budget inserted in the Congressional Record a
    Memorandum of Understanding between this committee and the Committee on
    the Budget to clarify each Committee's jurisdiction over the
    congressional budget process (Jan. 4, 1995, p. 617). The Committee on
    the Budget has primary jurisdiction, and this committee has additional
    jurisdiction, over a bill amending the Budget Act to establish new
    legislative points of order and directing that the President include a
    specified matter with his budget (Feb. 13, 2001, p. 1817).

    [[Page 462]]

    Sec. 734. Special orders of business.

      Since  1883 the
    Committee on Rules has reported special orders providing times and
    methods for consideration of individual bills or classes of bills,
    thereby enabling the House by majority vote to forward particular
    legislation, instead of being forced to use for the purpose the motion
    to suspend the rules, which requires a two-thirds vote (IV, 3152; V,
    6870; for forms of, IV, 3238-3263).

      Special orders may still be made by suspension of the rules (IV, 3154)
    or by unanimous consent (IV, 3165, 3166; VII, 758); but it is not in
    order, by motion in the House, to provide that a subject be made a
    special order by a motion to postpone to a day certain (IV, 3164).
    Before the adoption of rules, and consequently before there is a rule as
    to the order of business, the Speaker may recognize a Member to offer by
    direction of the caucus of the majority party for immediate
    consideration a special order providing for the consideration in the
    House of a subsequent resolution to adopt rules for the new Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 447). A special order reported by the Committee
    on Rules must be agreed to by a majority vote of the House (IV, 3169).

      It is not in order to move to postpone a special order providing for
    the consideration of a class of bills (V, 4958), but a bill which comes
    before the House by the terms of a special order merely assigning the
    day for its consideration may be postponed by a majority vote (IV, 3177-
    3182). A motion to rescind a special order is not privileged under the
    rules regulating the order of business (IV, 3173, 3174; V, 5323).

      A motion to amend the Rules of the House does not present a question
    of privilege (VIII, 3377, overruling VIII, 3376; see also rule IX and
    Sec. 706, supra), and it is not in order by raising a question of the
    privileges of the House under rule IX to move to direct the Committee on
    Rules to consider a request to report a special order of business
    (Speaker Albert, June 27, 1974, p. 21599), or to direct the Committee on
    Rules to meet, to elect a temporary chairman (in the temporary absence
    of the chairman) and consider special orders of business (Speaker
    Albert, July 31, 1975, p. 26250).

      For further discussion of the Committee on Rules, see Sec. Sec. 857-
    859, infra.

      (o) Committee on Science.

    Sec. 735. Science.

          (1)  All energy research, development,
    and demonstration, and projects therefor, and all federally owned or
    operated nonmilitary energy laboratories.

          (2) Astronautical research and development, including resources,
    personnel, equipment, and facilities.

          (3) Civil aviation research and development.

          (4) Environmental research and development.

    [[Page 463]]

          (5) Marine research.

          (6) Commercial application of energy technology.

          (7) National Institute of Standards and Technology,
    standardization of weights and measures, and the metric system.

          (8) National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

          (9) National Space Council.

          (10) National Science Foundation.

          (11) National Weather Service.

          (12) Outer space, including exploration and control thereof.

          (13) Science scholarships.

          (14) Scientific research, development, and demonstration, and
    projects therefor.

    [[Page 464]]

    tional statement of the committee was updated to reflect the renaming of
    executive branch entities (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). The 104th
    Congress again renamed the committee as the Committee on Science and
    expanded its jurisdiction by adding subparagraph (5), from the former
    Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, and subparagraph (6), from
    the Committee on Energy and Commerce (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 464). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, including the deletion
    of a redundant undesignated recitation of general and special oversight
    functions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      The standing Committee on Science and Astronautics was established in
    the 85th Congress and given jurisdiction formerly vested in a Select
    Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration established a few months
    earlier (Mar. 5, 1958, p. 3443), as well as the former jurisdiction of
    the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce (now Energy and
    Commerce) over the Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of
    Standards and Technology) and science scholarships (July 21, 1958, p.
    14513). By the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3,
    1975, the committee was redesignated as the Committee on Science and
    Technology and given additional jurisdiction over civil aviation
    research and development, environmental research and development,
    nonnuclear energy research and development, and the National Weather
    Service (now part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). At the
    same time the committee was given the general and special oversight
    functions set forth in clause 2(b) and former clause 3(f) (current
    clause 3(k)). When the House abolished the Joint Committee on Atomic
    Energy in the 95th Congress, this committee was given jurisdiction over
    nuclear research and development, as well (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp.
    53-70). Its jurisdiction over energy research and development (now
    subpara. (1)) was amended in the 96th Congress, effective January 3,
    1981, to specifically include energy demonstration projects and
    federally owned nonmilitary energy laboratories (H. Res. 549, Mar. 25,
    1980, pp. 6405-10). In the 100th Congress, the committee was
    redesignated as the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6). In the 103d Congress the jurisdic

      The Committee has jurisdiction over proposals dealing with U.S.
    participation in the World Science Pan-Pacific Exposition (June 24,
    1959, p. 11810); over a resolution condemning Soviet Union internal
    exile of an individual, and recommending that Government agencies
    including NASA, the National Bureau of Standards and the National
    Science Foundation defer official travel to that country (Jan. 30, 1980,
    p. 1320); with the Committees on Armed Services and Interior and Insular
    Affairs (now Resources), over bills to test the commercial viability of
    oil shale technologies within the naval oil shale reserves or on other
    public lands (Sept. 26, 1978, p. 31623); and with four other committees
    over a bill coordinating Federal agencies' research into ground water
    contamination, including that done by the Environmental Protection
    Agency (Mar. 15, 1989, p. 4163). The Committee on Resources, and not
    this committee, has jurisdiction over a bill transferring interest in a
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fisheries research
    laboratory (Oct. 1, 2002, p. ----).

      (p) Committee on Small Business.

    Sec. 736. Small Business.

          (1)  Assistance to and
    protection of small business, including financial aid, regulatory
    flexibility, and paperwork reduction.

          (2) Participation of small-business enterprises in Federal
    procurement and Government contracts.

      A Select Committee on Small Business was first established in the 77th
    Congress (H. Res. 294, pp. 9418-28) and was reconstituted each Congress
    thereafter by resolution reported from the Committee on Rules until made
    permanent in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144).

    [[Page 465]]

    34470). At the same time the general and special oversight functions
    were set forth in clause 2(b) and in former clause 3(g) (current clause
    3(l)). The 104th Congress expanded the jurisdiction of the committee
    over assistance to and protection of small business by inserting the
    references to regulatory flexibility and paperwork reduction in
    subparagraph (1) (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464; see also
    Feb. 9, 1995, p. 4328) and later effected a technical correction (H.
    Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). Clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    including the deletion of a redundant undesignated recitation of general
    and special oversight functions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      The Committee Reform Amendments of 1974 established a standing
    Committee on Small Business, effective January 3, 1975, and vested it
    with legislative jurisdiction formerly held by the Committee on Banking
    and Currency (now Financial Services) (subpara. (1)) and the Committee
    on the Judiciary (subpara. (2)) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974,
    p.

      (q) Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

          The Code of Official Conduct.

    Sec. 737. Standards of Official Conduct.

      In  the 90th
    Congress the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct was established
    as a standing committee (H. Res. 418, Apr. 13, 1967, p. 9425). Its
    precursor was the Select Committee on Standards and Conduct, created in
    the 89th Congress (H. Res. 1013, Oct. 19, 1966, pp. 27713-30). At
    various times in its history, the legislative jurisdiction of the
    committee has included jurisdiction over measures relating to (1)
    financial disclosure by Members, officers, and employees of the House
    (H. Res. 1099, 90th Cong., Apr. 3, 1968, p. 8776); (2) the raising,
    reporting, and use of campaign contributions for candidates for the
    House (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470); and (3) lobbying
    activities (H. Res. 1031, 91st Cong., July 8, 1970, p. 23141). However,
    legislative jurisdiction over measures relating to financial disclosure
    was transferred to the Committee on Rules in the 95th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70); legislative jurisdiction over measures
    relating to campaign contributions for candidates for the House was
    transferred to House Administration, and legislative jurisdiction over
    measures relating to lobbying activities was removed from the committee
    (thereby devolving on the Committee on the Judiciary) in the 94th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). Clerical and stylistic
    changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, including the deletion of a redundant undesignated recitation
    of general and special functions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Two rules relating to the official conduct of Members outside the
    confines of rule XXIII, the ``Code of Official Conduct,'' are as
    follows: rule XXIV, limitations on use of official funds, and rule XXV,
    limitations on outside earned income and acceptance of gifts.

    [[Page 466]]

      Under clause 5(a) of rule XIII, the committee is empowered to report
    as privileged resolutions recommending action by the House of
    Representatives with respect to the official conduct of an individual
    Member, officer, or employee of the House.

      In addition to its legislative jurisdiction, the committee has the
    general oversight responsibility set forth in clause 2(b) and the
    additional functions of conducting the investigations and making the
    reports and recommendations required by clause 5 of rule XIII or by
    resolution of the House (see, e.g., H. Res. 252, 95th Cong., Feb. 9,
    1977, pp. 3966-75, directing investigation of gifts from Korean
    Government; H. Res. 1042, 94th Cong., Feb. 16, 1976, pp. 3158-61,
    directing investigation of unauthorized publication of report of Select
    Committee on Intelligence; and H. Res. 608, 96th Cong., Mar. 27, 1980,
    pp. 6995-98, relating to ``Abscam'').

      The Committee has investigated roll call procedures in the House and
    recommended installation of a modernized voting system (June 19, 1969,
    p. 16629). In the 95th Congress the committee was authorized by section
    515 of Public Law 95-105 to act as the ``employing agency'' for the
    House of Representatives under the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act,
    and the committee promulgated regulations under that statute concerning
    acceptance of foreign gifts and decorations by Members and employees
    (Jan. 23, 1978, p. 452). In the 96th Congress the committee was assigned
    as additional responsibilities the functions designated in title I of
    the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-521) relating to the
    administration of government ethics laws as they apply to Members,
    officers, and employees of the House (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, p. 7).
    In the 102d Congress those responsibilities were enlarged to include
    also the functions designated in title V of the Act and the specified
    sections of title 5, United States Code (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p.
    39).

      The Committee has compiled statutory and rule-based ethical standards
    in the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong., 2d Sess.). In the Manual, the
    committee incorporates its advisory opinions issued under clause 3(a)(4)
    of rule XI, together with advisory opinions issued by the former Select
    Committee on Ethics, in its discussions of various ethical issues,
    including gifts, outside income, financial disclosure, staff rights and
    duties, official allowances and franking, casework considerations,
    campaign financing and practices, and involvement with official and
    unofficial organizations. The committee also has compiled a complete
    statement of the rules on gifts and travel, which supersedes Chapter 2
    of the 1992 House Ethics Manual (Gifts and Travel, 106th Cong., 2d
    Sess.).

    [[Page 467]]

    sory opinions compiled by the former Select Committee on Ethics have
    been incorporated in the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong., 2d Sess.).

    Sec. 738. Former Select Committees on
    Ethics.

      In the 95th  Congress, the House established a Select Committee on Ethics
    and granted it exclusive legislative jurisdiction over bills that
    incorporated into permanent law provisions of House rules addressing
    financial ethics of Members, officers, and employees (H. Res. 383, Mar.
    9, 1977, pp. 6811-16). The Select Committee was also granted
    jurisdiction to promulgate implementing regulations and to issue
    advisory opinions. The resolution creating the Select Committee provided
    that it would expire on December 31, 1977, but the committee and its
    functions ultimately were extended through the completion of its
    official business (H. Res. 871, Oct. 31, 1977, p. 35957). The advi

      In the 105th Congress a new subparagraph (3) was added at the end of
    former clause 4(e) of rule X to establish a Select Committee on Ethics
    only to resolve an inquiry originally undertaken by the standing
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in the 104th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). The Select Committee filed one report to
    the House (H. Rept. 105-1, H. Res. 31, Jan. 21, 1997, p. 393).

      (r) Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

    Sec. 739. Transportation and Infrastructure.

          (1)  Coast
    Guard, including lifesaving service, lighthouses, lightships, ocean
    derelicts, and the Coast Guard Academy.

          (2) Federal management of emergencies and natural disasters.

          (3) Flood control and improvement of rivers and harbors.

          (4) Inland waterways.

          (5) Inspection of merchant marine vessels, lights and signals,
    lifesaving equipment, and fire protection on such vessels.

          (6) Navigation and laws relating thereto, including pilotage.

          (7) Registering and licensing of vessels and small boats.

          (8) Rules and international arrangements to prevent collisions at
    sea.

          (9) The Capitol Building and the Senate and House Office
    Buildings.

          (10) Construction or maintenance of roads and post roads (other
    than appropriations therefor).

    [[Page 468]]

    the Botanic Garden, the Library of Congress, and the Smithsonian
    Institution.
          (11) Construction or reconstruction, maintenance, and care of
    buildings and grounds of

          (12) Merchant marine (except for national security aspects
    thereof).

          (13) Purchase of sites and construction of post offices,
    customhouses, Federal courthouses, and Government buildings within the
    District of Columbia.

          (14) Oil and other pollution of navigable waters, including
    inland, coastal, and ocean waters.

          (15) Marine affairs, including coastal zone management, as they
    relate to oil and other pollution of navigable waters.

          (16) Public buildings and occupied or improved grounds of the
    United States generally.

          (17) Public works for the benefit of navigation, including bridges
    and dams (other than international bridges and dams).

          (18) Related transportation regulatory agencies (except the
    Transportation Security Administration).

          (19) Roads and the safety thereof.

          (20) Transportation, including civil aviation, railroads, water
    transportation, transportation safety (except automobile safety and
    transportation security functions of the Department of Homeland
    Security), transportation infrastructure, transportation labor, and
    railroad retirement and unemployment (except revenue measures related
    thereto).

    [[Page 469]]

          (21) Water power.

      The Committee was created effective January 2, 1947, as a part of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), combining the
    Committees on Flood Control (created in 1916) (VII, 2069), Public
    Buildings and Grounds (created in 1837) (IV, 4231), Rivers and Harbors
    (created in 1883) (IV, 4118)), and Roads (created in 1913) (VII, 2065).
    The authority of the committee to report as privileged bills authorizing
    the improvement of rivers and harbors was eliminated by the Committee
    Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). At the same time the committee's
    jurisdiction over parks in the District of Columbia was transferred to
    the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs (now Resources); and it
    gained jurisdiction over transportation, including civil aviation
    (except railroads, railroad labor, and railroad pensions), over roads
    and the safety thereof, over water transportation subject to the
    jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and over related
    transportation regulatory agencies with certain exceptions. The 104th
    Congress changed the name of the Committee from Public Works and
    Transportation to Transportation and Infrastructure and expanded its
    jurisdiction by: adding subparagraphs (1), (6)-(8), (12), and (15) to
    reflect the transfer of those matters from the former Committee on
    Merchant Marine and Fisheries; adding subparagraph (4) and enlarging
    subparagraph (20) to reflect the transfer of those matters from the
    Committee on Energy and Commerce; and adding subparagraph (2) and
    inserting the reference to inland, coastal, and ocean waters in
    subparagraph (14), as clarifying consolidations of formerly
    fractionalized subjects (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress. The 106th Congress also adopted a
    substantive amendment to this provision deleting the prohibition against
    including a provision for a specific road in a bill providing for
    another specific road or in a general road bill (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). In the 109th Congress the House established the Committee
    on Homeland Security (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). The
    new committee was given jurisdiction over certain functions of the
    Department of Homeland Security that resulted in two conforming changes
    to this paragraph. For debate (and material submitted during debate)
    that may edify the reader on the jurisdictional issues surrounding the
    new committee, see January 4, 2005, p. ----.

    [[Page 470]]

    an annex to the National Gallery of Art by the Smithsonian Institution
    (Apr. 10, 1968, p. 9553); addressing the location and development of the
    J. F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts (Sept. 15, 1965, p. 23927;
    Oct. 21, 1965, p. 27803); transferring land under the control of the
    Corps of Engineers to Indian tribes (Jan. 29, 1976, p. 1577); amending
    the Interstate Commerce Act to regulate truck transportation (Feb. 24,
    1976, p. 4109; Mar. 1, 1979, p. 3754); concerning the treatment of a
    U.S. air freight carrier by the Japanese Ministry of Transport pursuant
    to an understanding negotiated under the International Air
    Transportation Competition Act of 1979 (not a Trade Act matter) (July
    28, 1988, p. 19536); and over an executive communication amending Public
    Law 90-553, reported by the committee, to authorize the transfer,
    conveyance, lease and improvement of, and construction on, certain
    property in the District of Columbia, for use as a headquarters site for
    an international organization, as sites for governments of foreign
    countries (Sept. 10, 1981, p. 20598). The Committee on Government Reform
    and Oversight (now Government Reform), and not this committee, has
    jurisdiction over a bill renaming an existing post office building (Aug.
    4, 1995, p. 22085; Oct. 1, 1998, p. 22933) and renaming an existing post
    office building that also housed a courthouse (Sept. 14, 2000, p.
    18054). However, this committee, and not the Committee on Government
    Reform and Oversight (now Government Reform), has jurisdiction over a
    bill redesignating a general-purpose Federal building as a post office
    (Apr. 24, 1997, p. 6291). This committee, and not the Committee on Ways
    and Means, has jurisdiction over a bill designating a customs building
    (Dec. 12, 1995, p. 36165). The Committee on Resources, and not this
    committee, has jurisdiction over a bill to validate certain conveyances
    of erstwhile public lands by a railway company (July 11, 1995, p.
    18397). The Committee on Government Reform, and not this committee, has
    jurisdiction over a bill transferring real property administered by the
    Coast Guard where the bill explicitly waives the Federal Property and
    Administrative Services Act and directs the Administrator of General
    Services to convey the property (Oct. 2, 1998, p. 23186).
      The Committee has jurisdiction over proposals establishing Treasury
    revolving funds for the Southeastern and Southwestern Power
    Administrations (July 2, 1959, p. 12629); directing the Secretary of the
    Army to provide school facilities for dependents of Corps of Engineers
    construction workers (June 17, 1968, p. 17429); conveying Corps of
    Engineers flood-control project lands (July 15, 1965, p. 17002) or
    naming reservoirs within such projects (Oct. 3, 1989, p. 22770) or
    allocating or limiting water use therefrom (Feb. 28, 1990, p. 2893);
    directing the Secretary of the Army to renew the license of an American
    Legion Post to use a parcel of land on a Corps of Engineer project (May
    10, 1988, p. 10282); authorizing construction of

    [[Page 471]]

    to convert from a defense economy by, inter alia, authorizing economic
    assistance for public works and economic development (June 24, 1991, p.
    16021; June 11, 1992, p. 14470); and with the Committee on Education and
    Labor (now Education and the Workforce) over bills providing labor
    protections to workers, including airline employees, in the
    transportation industry (June 24, 1991, p. 16020; Feb. 24, 1993, p.
    3577).
      The Committee has shared jurisdiction: with the Committee on Energy
    and Commerce over a bill amending the Solid Waste Disposal Act to
    provide for the cleanup of hazardous waste sites or discharges
    presenting a threat to human health and the environment, including
    navigable waters (Mar. 21, 1984, p. 6186); with the Committee on
    Government Operations (now Government Reform) over a bill to require the
    Administrator of General Services to convey certain real property (a
    Federal building) to the Museum for the American Indian and providing
    for renovation and alteration of the property (Oct. 28, 1987, p. 29685);
    with the Committee on House Administration over a bill authorizing the
    Smithsonian Institution to construct, expand, and renovate facilities at
    the Cooper-Hewitt Museum in New York (July 21, 1987, p. 20309), and over
    a bill authorizing appropriations to plan, design, construct, and equip
    museum space for the Smithsonian (July 18, 1991, p. 18830); with several
    other committees over bills

      In the 101st Congress, the committee reported a bill requiring a
    cooling-off period in a labor-management dispute between an airline and
    its unions under the Railway Labor Act (H.R. 1231, Mar. 13, 1989, p.
    4032).

      (s) Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

          (1) Veterans' measures generally.

    Sec. 740. Veterans' Affairs.

          (2)  Cemeteries of the
    United States in which veterans of any war or conflict are or may be
    buried, whether in the United States or abroad (except cemeteries
    administered by the Secretary of the Interior).

          (3) Compensation, vocational rehabilitation, and education of
    veterans.

          (4) Life insurance issued by the Government on account of service
    in the Armed Forces.

          (5) Pensions of all the wars of the United States, general and
    special.

          (6) Readjustment of servicemembers to civil life.

          (7) Servicemembers' civil relief.

          (8) Veterans' hospitals, medical care, and treatment of veterans.

    [[Page 472]]

    (Feb. 4, 1959, p. 1812), and over bills to amend the Servicemen's and
    Veterans' Survivor Benefits Act relating to service-connected deaths of
    retired members of the uniformed services (May 18, 1959, p. 8273).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Technical changes to subparagraphs (6) and (7) were effected in the
    109th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

      This committee was established January 2, 1947, as a part of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), and was vested
    with jurisdiction formerly exercised by the Committees on World War
    Veterans' Legislation (VII, 2077); Invalid Pensions (IV, 4258); and
    Pensions (IV, 4260). Jurisdiction over veterans' cemeteries administered
    by the Department of Defense was transferred from the Committee on
    Interior and Insular Affairs (now Resources) in the 90th Congress (H.
    Res. 241, Oct. 20, 1967, p. 29560). Vocational rehabilitation, except
    that pertaining to veterans, is under the jurisdiction of the Committee
    on Education and the Workforce. The Committee has jurisdiction over
    bills to amend the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act of 1940 to
    permit certain declarations of fact in lieu of affidavits

      (t) Committee on Ways and Means.

    Sec. 741. Ways and Means.

          (1)  Customs revenue,
    collection districts, and ports of entry and delivery.

          (2) Reciprocal trade agreements.

          (3) Revenue measures generally.

          (4) Revenue measures relating to insular possessions.

          (5) Bonded debt of the United States, subject to the last sentence
    of clause 4(f).

          (6) Deposit of public monies.

          (7) Transportation of dutiable goods.

          (8) Tax exempt foundations and charitable trusts.

          (9) National social security (except health care and facilities
    programs that are supported from general revenues as opposed to payroll
    deductions and except work incentive programs).

      A select Committee on Ways and Means dates from 1789. It was made a
    standing committee in 1802. Originally it considered both revenue and
    appropriations, but in 1865 the appropriation bills were given to the
    Committee on Appropriations and certain other bills to the Committee on
    Banking and Currency (now Financial Services) (IV, 4020). Its
    jurisdiction was also amended on April 5, 1911 (p. 58), and further
    defined in the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812),
    which transferred the subject of recesses and final adjournments from
    this committee to the Committee on Rules.

    [[Page 473]]

    of the Committee on Banking and Currency (now Financial Services)
    because of their impact on the economy, while it was released from:
    jurisdiction over health care and facilities programs supported from
    general revenues to the Committee on Energy and Commerce; jurisdiction
    over work incentive programs to the Committee on Education and Labor
    (now Education and the Workforce); and jurisdiction over renegotiation
    to the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs (now Financial
    Services) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The
    Committee Reform Amendments also transferred jurisdiction over general
    revenue sharing from this committee to the Committee on Government
    Operations (now Government Reform); however, revenue sharing was
    stricken from the jurisdictional statement of the Committee on
    Government Reform in the 104th Congress (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 464).
      By the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975,
    the committee gained legislative jurisdiction over tax exempt
    foundations and charitable trusts (subpara. (8)), formerly within the
    jurisdiction

      The Committee's jurisdiction over the bonded debt of the United States
    (subpara. (5)) was made subject to the last sentence of clause 4(f)
    (formerly clause 4(g)) of rule X in the 96th Congress by Public Law 96-
    78 (93 Stat. 589). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). In the 109th Congress the House established the Committee
    on Homeland Security (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). The
    new committee was given jurisdiction over certain functions of the
    Department of Homeland Security that resulted in a conforming change to
    this paragraph. For debate (and material submitted during debate) that
    may edify the reader on the jurisdictional issues surrounding the new
    committee, see January 4, 2005, p. ----.

      The revenue jurisdiction of the committee extends to such subjects as
    transportation of dutiable goods, collection districts, ports of entry
    and delivery (IV, 4026), customs unions, reciprocity treaties (IV,
    4021), revenue relations of the United States with Puerto Rico (IV,
    4025), the revenue bills relating to agricultural products generally,
    excepting oleomargarine (IV, 4022), and tax on cotton and grain futures.
    The Committee formerly had jurisdiction as to seal herds and other
    revenue-producing animals in Alaska but this jurisdiction was changed in
    the 68th Congress to the former Committee on Merchant Marine and
    Fisheries (VII, 1725, 1851). As exemplified by sequential referrals in
    the 96th Congress, the committee has jurisdiction of reported bills
    creating major oilspill and hazardous waste trust funds in the Treasury,
    funded by assessments on all quantities of oil, petrochemical
    feedstocks, and other hazardous substances sold for sale, where the
    scope and size of the funds and the method of assessment (similar to an
    excise tax) represented the collection of general revenue to fund
    particular Federal activities, a type of financing mechanism over which
    the Ways and Means Committee has traditionally exercised jurisdiction
    (May 20, 1980, p. 11862).

    [[Page 474]]

    ``preservation of the Government credit'' (IV, 4023). The Committee has
    jurisdiction over bills providing tax incentives for persons investing
    in Indian property (Feb. 1, 1964, p. 1582), providing unemployment
    compensation to individuals with military or Federal service (Apr. 28,
    1976, p. 11590), providing extended and increased unemployment
    compensation (Apr. 16, 1975, p. 10346), and over private bills waiving
    provisions of the Tariff Act to require reliquidation of certain
    imported materials as duty-free (July 13, 1982, p. 16014). The Committee
    on Transportation and Infrastructure, and not this committee, has
    jurisdiction over a bill to designate a customs administrative building
    (Dec. 12, 1995, p. 36165). The Committee on the Budget, and not this
    committee, has jurisdiction over a bill establishing a rule of
    sequestration under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
    Act (Dec. 15, 2000, p. 27085). The Committee on the Budget has primary
    jurisdiction, and this committee has additional jurisdiction, over a
    bill taking Social Security trust funds off budget (Dec. 15, 2000, p.
    27085).
      The Committee has jurisdiction over subjects relating to the Treasury
    of the United States and the deposit of the public moneys (IV, 4028),
    but it failed to make good a claim to the subjects of ``national
    finances'' and

      The Committee has exercised jurisdiction, with the Committee on Energy
    and Commerce, over executive communications reporting on inpatient
    hospital services under title XVIII (medicare) and under title XIX
    (medicaid) of the Social Security Act (Dec. 21, 1982, p. 33261); with
    the Committee on Public Works and Transportation (now Transportation and
    Infrastructure) over executive communications proposing draft
    legislation reauthorizing the Surface Transportation Act but also
    containing a revenue title raising taxes to fund surface transportation
    programs (Mar. 20, 1986, p. 5804); with the former Committee on Merchant
    Marine and Fisheries (succeeded by the Committee on Resources) over a
    bill amending the Fishermen's Protective Act to authorize the President
    to prohibit the importation of any product from a country violating an
    international fishery conservation program (Mar. 21, 1989, p. 5077); and
    with three other committees over a bill imposing certain international
    economic sanctions including tariffs (May 27, 1992, p. 12658).

    General oversight responsibilities
      The Committee in the earlier practice reported resolutions
    distributing the President's annual message (IV, 4030), but since the
    first session of the 64th Congress this practice has been discontinued
    (VIII, 3350).

    742. General oversight.

      2. (a)  The various standing
    committees shall have general oversight responsibilities as provided in
    paragraph (b) in order to assist the House in--

    [[Page 475]]

          (1) its analysis, appraisal, and evaluation of--

              (A) the application, administration, execution, and
    effectiveness of Federal laws; and

              (B) conditions and circumstances that may indicate the
    necessity or desirability of enacting new or additional legislation; and

          (2) its formulation, consideration, and enactment of changes in
    Federal laws, and of such additional legislation as may be necessary or
    appropriate.

      (b)(1) In order to determine whether laws and programs addressing
    subjects within the jurisdiction of a committee are being implemented
    and carried out in accordance with the intent of Congress and whether
    they should be continued, curtailed, or eliminated, each standing
    committee (other than the Committee on Appropriations) shall review and
    study on a continuing basis--

          (A) the application, administration, execution, and effectiveness
    of laws and programs addressing subjects within its jurisdiction;

          (B) the organization and operation of Federal agencies and
    entities having responsibilities for the administration and execution of
    laws and programs addressing subjects within its jurisdiction;

    [[Page 476]]

          (C) any conditions or circumstances that may indicate the
    necessity or desirability of enacting new or additional legislation
    addressing subjects within its jurisdiction (whether or not a bill or
    resolution has been introduced with respect thereto); and

          (D) future research and forecasting on subjects within its
    jurisdiction.

    Sec. 743. Oversight subcommittees.

      (2)  Each committee to
    which subparagraph (1) applies having more than 20 members shall
    establish an oversight subcommittee, or require its subcommittees to
    conduct oversight in their respective jurisdictions, to assist in
    carrying out its responsibilities under this clause. The establishment
    of an oversight subcommittee does not limit the responsibility of a
    subcommittee with legislative jurisdiction in carrying out its oversight
    responsibilities.

      (c) Each standing committee shall review and study on a continuing
    basis the impact or probable impact of tax policies affecting subjects
    within its jurisdiction as described in clauses 1 and 3.

      (d)(1) Not later than February 15 of the first session of a Congress,
    each standing committee shall, in a meeting that is open to the public
    and with a quorum present, adopt its oversight plan for that Congress.
    Such plan shall be submitted simultaneously to the Committee on
    Government Reform and to the Committee on House Administration. In
    developing its plan each committee shall, to the maximum extent
    feasible--

    [[Page 477]]

    nation of steps that have been or will be taken to ensure such
    coordination and cooperation;
          (A) consult with other committees that have jurisdiction over the
    same or related laws, programs, or agencies within its jurisdiction with
    the objective of ensuring maximum coordination and cooperation among
    committees when conducting reviews of such laws, programs, or agencies
    and include in its plan an expla

          (B) review specific problems with Federal rules, regulations,
    statutes, and court decisions that are ambiguous, arbitrary, or
    nonsensical, or that impose severe financial burdens on individuals;

          (C) give priority consideration to including in its plan the
    review of those laws, programs, or agencies operating under permanent
    budget authority or permanent statutory authority;

          (D) have a view toward ensuring that all significant laws,
    programs, or agencies within its jurisdiction are subject to review
    every 10 years; and

          (E) have a view toward insuring against duplication of Federal
    programs.

      (2) Not later than March 31 in the first session of a Congress, after
    consultation with the Speaker, the Majority Leader, and the Minority
    Leader, the Committee on Government Reform shall report to the House the
    oversight plans submitted by committees together with any
    recommendations that it, or the House leadership group described above,
    may make to ensure the most effective coordination of oversight plans
    and otherwise to achieve the objectives of this clause.

    [[Page 478]]

      (e) The Speaker, with the approval of the House, may appoint special
    ad hoc oversight committees for the purpose of reviewing specific
    matters within the jurisdiction of two or more standing committees.

    Special oversight functions
      Clause 2(a), and the first requirement of clause 2(b)(1) that each
    standing committee shall review the application, etc. of all laws within
    its jurisdiction, was originally contained in section 118(b) of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and was made part
    of the standing rules on January 22, 1971 (H. Res. 5, p. 144). Effective
    January 3, 1975, general oversight responsibilities set forth in the
    remainder of the clause were incorporated into the rule (H. Res. 988,
    93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). On January 14, 1975, the size of
    those standing committees required by clause 2(b)(2) (formerly clause
    2(b)(1)) to establish an oversight subcommittee or to require its
    subcommittees to conduct oversight was increased from 15 to more than 20
    (H. Res. 5, 94th Cong., p. 20). In the 100th Congress the requirement
    that representatives from the Committee on Government Operations (now
    Government Reform) meet with other committees at the beginning of each
    Congress to discuss oversight plans and that that Committee report to
    the House its oversight coordination recommendations within 60 days
    after convening of the first session was deleted (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1987, p. 6). The 104th Congress added the requirement that each standing
    committee adopt by February 15 of the first session of a Congress its
    oversight plans for that Congress, such plans to be submitted to the
    Committees on Government Reform and Oversight (now Government Reform)
    and House Oversight (now House Administration). The Committee on
    Government Reform is required to report such plans to the House by March
    31, with recommendations to ensure coordination among committees. The
    104th Congress also added paragraph (e) to authorize the Speaker to
    appoint special ad hoc oversight committees to review matters within the
    jurisdiction of more than one standing committee (sec. 203(a), H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467). The 106th Congress deleted a provision added
    in the 104th Congress making consideration of resolutions funding each
    committee contingent on submission of its oversight plans to the
    committees specified; deleted the exception for the Budget Committee
    from the general oversight responsibilities listed in clause 2(b);
    effected clerical corrections to conform references to a renamed
    committee; and effected clerical and stylistic changes when the House
    recodified its rules (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clause 2(d)(1)(B)
    was added in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(e), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p.
    25). Clause 2(d)(1)(E) was added in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(b), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 479]]

    of the stock of which is owned by the United States) as it considers
    necessary to assist it in the determination of matters within its
    jurisdiction.

    744. Special oversight.

      3.  (a) The Committee on
    Appropriations shall conduct such studies and examinations of the
    organization and operation of executive departments and other executive
    agencies (including an agency the majority

      (b) The Committee on the Budget shall study on a continuing basis the
    effect on budget outlays of relevant existing and proposed legislation
    and report the results of such studies to the House on a recurring
    basis.

      (c) The Committee on Energy and Commerce shall review and study on a
    continuing basis laws, programs, and Government activities relating to
    nuclear and other energy and nonmilitary nuclear energy research and
    development including the disposal of nuclear waste.

      (d) The Committee on Education and the Workforce shall review, study,
    and coordinate on a continuing basis laws, programs, and Government
    activities relating to domestic educational programs and institutions
    and programs of student assistance within the jurisdiction of other
    committees.

      (e) The Committee on Government Reform shall review and study on a
    continuing basis the operation of Government activities at all levels
    with a view to determining their economy and efficiency.

    [[Page 480]]

      (f) The Committee on Homeland Security shall review and study on a
    continuing basis all Government activities relating to homeland
    security, including the interaction of all departments and agencies with
    the Department of Homeland Security.

      (g) The Committee on International Relations shall review and study on
    a continuing basis laws, programs, and Government activities relating to
    customs administration, intelligence activities relating to foreign
    policy, international financial and monetary organizations, and
    international fishing agreements.

      (h) The Committee on Armed Services shall review and study on a
    continuing basis laws, programs, and Government activities relating to
    international arms control and disarmament and the education of military
    dependents in schools.

      (i) The Committee on Resources shall review and study on a continuing
    basis laws, programs, and Government activities relating to Native
    Americans.

      (j) The Committee on Rules shall review and study on a continuing
    basis the congressional budget process, and the committee shall report
    its findings and recommendations to the House from time to time.

      (k) The Committee on Science shall review and study on a continuing
    basis laws, programs, and Government activities relating to nonmilitary
    research and development.

      (l) The Committee on Small Business shall study and investigate on a
    continuing basis the problems of all types of small business.

    [[Page 481]]

    on an exclusive basis the sources and methods of entities described in
    clause 11(b)(1)(A).

      (m) The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence shall review and
    study on a continuing basis laws, programs, and activities of the
    intelligence community and shall review and study

      The oversight authority conferred on the Committee on Appropriations
    in paragraph (a) (formerly clause 2(b)(3)) was first given that
    committee on February 11, 1943 (p. 884), continued by resolution of
    January 9, 1945 (p. 135), and incorporated into permanent law in section
    202(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, and made a part of
    the standing rules on January 3, 1953 (pp. 17, 24). The special
    oversight responsibilities of the Committee on the Budget set forth in
    paragraph (b) were made part of the rules effective July 12, 1974 by
    section 101(c) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 300).
    Paragraph (c) (formerly paragraph (h)) was added on January 4, 1977,
    upon the abolition of the legislative jurisdiction in the House of the
    Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (H. Res. 5, 95th Cong., pp. 53-70). The
    special oversight responsibilities of the Committee on Energy and
    Commerce over nuclear energy to all energy programs became effective
    January 3, 1981 (H. Res. 549, Mar. 25, 1980, pp. 6405-10). The oversight
    authority conferred on the Committee on Government Operations (now
    Government Reform) in paragraph (e) (formerly clause 2(b)(2)) was first
    made effective as part of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60
    Stat. 812). In the 104th Congress conforming amendments to the special
    oversight functions of the Committees on Resources and Energy and
    Commerce were adopted to reflect the transfer of jurisdiction over
    nonmilitary nuclear energy from the Committee on Resources to the
    Committee on Commerce Energy and Commerce (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995,
    p. 35077). Paragraph (j) was added by section 226 of the Balanced Budget
    and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177). The remainder
    of the clause became effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong.,
    Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). This clause has been amended several times to
    conform references to renamed committees (H. Res. 89, Feb. 5, 1979, p.
    1848; H. Res. 549, Mar. 25, 1980, pp. 6405-10; H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993,
    p. 49; sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464; H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    1997, p. 121; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clerical and stylistic
    changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, including the transfer to this clause of oversight functions
    of the Committees on Government Reform and Appropriations found in
    clause 2 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The oversight authority of
    the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in paragraph (m) was
    added in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).
    The Committee on Homeland Security was established in the 109th Congress
    and given the oversight authority set forth in paragraph (f) (sec. 2(a),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 482]]

    on House Administration and to be composed of members of the Committee
    on House Administration, one-half from the majority party and one-half
    from the minority party. The paragraph was rewritten in the 103d
    Congress to provide that the Speaker, the Majority and Minority Leaders,
    and the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on House
    Administration be informed of tie votes in that subcommittee (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49), but the paragraph was deleted entirely in the
    104th Congress (sec. 201(d), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463).

    Additional functions of committees
      Section 9 of the House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992 (H.
    Res. 423, Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9040) added a paragraph in this clause
    creating a bipartisan Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight of the
    Committee on House Administration, to be chaired by the chairman of the
    Committee

    745. Committee on Appropriations; budget
    hearings.

      4.  (a)(1)(A) The Committee on Appropriations shall, within 30
    days after the transmittal of the Budget to Congress each year, hold
    hearings on the Budget as a whole with particular reference to--

          (i) the basic recommendations and budgetary policies of the
    President in the presentation of the Budget; and

          (ii) the fiscal, financial, and economic assumptions used as bases
    in arriving at total estimated expenditures and receipts.

      (B) In holding hearings under subdivision (A), the committee shall
    receive testimony from the Secretary of the Treasury, the Director of
    the Office of Management and Budget, the Chairman of the Council of
    Economic Advisers, and such other persons as the committee may desire.

    [[Page 483]]

    sequent day of hearing. A transcript of all such hearings shall be
    printed and a copy thereof furnished to each Member, Delegate, and the
    Resident Commissioner.

    Sec. 746. Procedure for budget hearings.

      (C)  A hearing under
    subdivision (A), or any part thereof, shall be held in open session,
    except when the committee, in open session and with a quorum present,
    determines by record vote that the testimony to be taken at that hearing
    on that day may be related to a matter of national security. The
    committee may by the same procedure close one sub

      (D) A hearing under subdivision (A), or any part thereof, may be held
    before a joint meeting of the committee and the Committee on
    Appropriations of the Senate in accordance with such procedures as the
    two committees jointly may determine.

    -  (2) <> Pursuant to section 401(b)(2) of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974, when a committee reports a bill or joint resolution
    that provides new entitlement authority as defined in section 3(9) of
    that Act, and enactment of the bill or joint resolution, as reported,
    would cause a breach of the committee's pertinent allocation of new
    budget authority under section 302(a) of that Act, the bill or joint
    resolution may be referred to the Committee on Appropriations with
    instructions to report it with recommendations (which may include an
    amendment limiting the total amount of new entitlement authority
    provided in the bill or joint resolution). If the Committee on
    Appropriations fails to report a bill or

    [[Page 484]]

    joint resolution so referred within 15 calendar days (not counting any
    day on which the House is not in session), the committee automatically
    shall be discharged from consideration of the bill or joint resolution,
    and the bill or joint resolution shall be placed on the appropriate
    calendar.
      This part of clause 4 was originally contained in section 242(c)(1) of
    the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 and was made part of the
    standing rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144).
    Paragraph (a)(1)(C), requiring open hearings, was first adopted in the
    93d Congress (H. Res. 259, Mar. 7, 1973, pp. 6713-20) and was amended in
    the 94th Congress to limit the effect of a vote to close a hearing to
    that day and one subsequent day (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      (3) In addition, the Committee on Appropriations shall study on a
    continuing basis those provisions of law that (on the first day of the
    first fiscal year for which the congressional budget process is
    effective) provide spending authority or permanent budget authority and
    shall report to the House from time to time its recommendations for
    terminating or modifying such provisions.

      (4) In the manner provided by section 302 of the Congressional Budget
    Act of 1974, the Committee on Appropriations (after consulting with the
    Committee on Appropriations of the Senate) shall subdivide any
    allocations made to it in the joint explanatory statement accompanying
    the conference report on such concurrent resolution, and promptly report
    the subdivisions to the House as soon as practicable after a concurrent
    resolution on the budget for a fiscal year is agreed to.

    [[Page 485]]

    Act of 1974 in section 402(f), and was likewise incorporated into the
    rules effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974,
    p. 34470). The requirements of subparagraph (4) (formerly paragraph (h))
    was originally contained in section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget
    Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344, July 12, 1974) and was incorporated into this
    rule effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470). It was amended by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (tit. XIII,
    P.L. 101-508) to conform to the enactment of title VI of the Budget Act.
    It was again amended by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1997 (sec. 10118,
    P.L. 105-33) to conform to the subsequent repeal of title VI. Clerical
    and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, including the transfer of former paragraph (h) to
    this paragraph as new subparagraph (4) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Subparagraph (2) first became effective on July 12, 1974, by inclusion
    in section 401(b)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat.
    317), was incorporated into the rules effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res.
    988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), was amended in the 95th
    Congress to correct an error in cross-reference (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4,
    1977, pp. 53-70), and was again amended in the 105th Congress to reflect
    the repeal of the collective definition of ``new spending authority''
    and the revision of various remaining parts (Budget Enforcement Act of
    1997 (sec. 10116, P.L. 105-33). Subparagraph (3) was also contained in
    the Congressional Budget

      (b) The Committee on the Budget shall--

    Sec. 748. Budget.

          (1)  review on a continuing basis the
    conduct by the Congressional Budget Office of its functions and duties;

          (2) hold hearings and receive testimony from Members, Senators,
    Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and such appropriate
    representatives of Federal departments and agencies, the general public,
    and national organizations as it considers desirable in developing
    concurrent resolutions on the budget for each fiscal year;

          (3) make all reports required of it by the Congressional Budget
    Act of 1974;

          (4) study on a continuing basis those provisions of law that
    exempt Federal agencies or any of their activities or outlays from
    inclusion in the Budget of the United States Government, and report to
    the House from time to time its recommendations for terminating or
    modifying such provisions;

    [[Page 486]]

    sional budget process, and report to the House from time to time the
    results of such studies, together with its recommendations; and
          (5) study on a continuing basis proposals designed to improve and
    facilitate the congres

          (6) request and evaluate continuing studies of tax expenditures,
    devise methods of coordinating tax expenditures, policies, and programs
    with direct budget outlays, and report the results of such studies to
    the House on a recurring basis.

      Paragraph (b)(1) became a part of the rules on July 12, 1974 by
    enactment of section 101(c) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88
    Stat. 300). Subparagraph (2), contained in section 301(d) of that Act,
    subparagraph (3), subparagraph (4), contained in section 606 of that
    Act, and subparagraph (5), contained in section 703 of that Act, all
    were made part of the rules effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Paragraph (b)(2) was amended in the 99th
    Congress by section 232 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
    Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177) to remove reference to the first
    concurrent resolution on the budget. Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, subparagraph (6) was found in former clause
    1(d)(5)(C) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 749. Government Reform.

      (c)(1)  The Committee on
    Government Reform shall--

          (A) receive and examine reports of the Comptroller General of the
    United States and submit to the House such recommendations as it
    considers necessary or desirable in connection with the subject matter
    of the reports;

          (B) evaluate the effects of laws enacted to reorganize the
    legislative and executive branches of the Government; and

    [[Page 487]]

    and international organizations of which the United States is a member.
          (C) study intergovernmental relationships between the United
    States and the States and municipalities and between the United States

          (2) In addition to its duties under subparagraph (1), the
    Committee on Government Reform may at any time conduct investigations of
    any matter without regard to clause 1, 2, 3, or this clause conferring
    jurisdiction over the matter to another standing committee. The findings
    and recommendations of the committee in such an investigation shall be
    made available to any other standing committee having jurisdiction over
    the matter involved.

      Paragraph (c)(1) became effective January 2, 1947, as part of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812). Paragraph (c)(2)
    was made a function of the Committee on Government Operations (now
    Government Reform) effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong.,
    Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Paragraph (c)(2) was amended in the 107th
    Congress to delete the requirement that committees include oversight
    findings and recommendations by the Committee on Government Reform in
    their reports as was required under the former clause 3(c)(4) of rule
    XIII (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). The Committee was
    renamed in the 104th and 106th Congresses (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 464; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clerical and stylistic
    changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Under section 2954 of title
    5, United States Code, an executive agency, if so requested by this
    committee or any seven members thereof, shall submit any information
    requested of it relating to any matter within the jurisdiction of the
    committee.

    Sec. 750. House Administration.

      (d)(1)  The Committee on
    House Administration shall--

    [[Page 488]]

    Sec. 752. Direction of officers.

      (A)  provide policy
    direction for the Inspector General and oversight of the Clerk,
    Sergeant-at-Arms, Chief Administrative Officer, and Inspector General;

    Sec. 753. Acceptance of gifts.

      (B)  have the function of
    accepting on behalf of the House a gift, except as otherwise provided by
    law, if the gift does not involve a duty, burden, or condition, or is
    not made dependent on some future performance by the House; and

      (C) promulgate regulations to carry out subdivision (B).

    Sec. 754. Approval of certain settlements.

      (2)  An employing
    office of the House may enter into a settlement of a complaint under the
    Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 that provides for the payment
    of funds only after receiving the joint approval of the chairman and
    ranking minority member of the Committee on House Administration
    concerning the amount of such payment.

    [[Page 489]]

    and a new paragraph (d)(2) was added to require approval by the
    committee for monetary settlements of certain employment claims (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). The 104th Congress also prohibited the
    establishment or continuation of any legislative service organization
    (as that term had been understood in the 103d Congress) and directed the
    Committee on House Oversight (now House Administration) to take such
    steps as were necessary to ensure an orderly termination and accounting
    for funds of any legislative service organization in existence on
    January 3, 1995 (sec. 222, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 469). Clerical
    and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The 107th
    Congress transferred the committee's responsibilities with respect to
    enrolled bills (formerly paragraph (d)(1)(A)) to the Clerk (clause
    2(d)(2) of rule II) (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

      The Committee's duty to arrange for memorial services of Members was
    eliminated from the rules effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Former paragraph (d)(3) required the
    committee to provide a committee scheduling service, which was provided
    through House Information Resources and was made mandatory on all
    committees and subcommittees in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    1981, pp. 98-113). The requirement was stricken altogether when two
    provisions were added by section 10 of the House Administrative Reform
    Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, 102d Cong., Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9040) to
    ensure the orderly transfer of functions and entities from elected
    officers to the Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services and
    to provide for policy direction and oversight of certain administrative
    officials and elected officers. However, the 107th Congress amended
    clause 4(d)(1) of rule X to remove the requirement that the committee
    provide policy direction to such officials and officers except the
    Inspector General (sec. 2(g), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). In the
    104th Congress the rule was amended (1) to reflect the change in the
    name of the Committee on House Administration to the Committee on House
    Oversight and (2) to reflect the abolishment of the Director of Non-
    legislative and Financial Services (sec. 201, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995,
    p. 463). Later in the 104th Congress the provision for the acceptance of
    gifts was added as paragraph (d)(3) (H. Res. 250, Nov. 16, 1995, p.
    33434). In the 105th Congress paragraph (d) was redesignated as (d)(1),
    its former subparagraphs (1) through (3) were redesignated as (1)(A)
    through (1)(C),

    Sec. 755. Annual appropriations.

      (e)(1)  Each standing
    committee shall, in its consideration of all public bills and public
    joint resolutions within its jurisdiction, ensure that appropriations
    for continuing programs and activities of the Federal Government and the
    government of the District of Columbia will be made annually to the
    maximum extent feasible and consistent with the nature, requirement, and
    objective of the programs and activities involved. In this subparagraph
    programs and activities of the Federal Government and the government of
    the District of Columbia includes programs and activities of any
    department, agency, establishment, wholly owned Government corporation,
    or instrumentality of the Federal Government or of the government of the
    District of Columbia.

    [[Page 490]]

      (2) Each standing committee shall review from time to time each
    continuing program within its jurisdiction for which appropriations are
    not made annually to ascertain whether the program should be modified to
    provide for annual appropriations.

    Budget Act responsibilities
      The provisions of this paragraph derive from section 253(c) of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140), and were made
    part of the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p.
    144). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).

    756. Concurrent resolution on Budget.

      (f)(1)  Each standing
    committee shall submit to the Committee on the Budget not later than six
    weeks after the President submits his budget, or at such time as the
    Committee on the Budget may request--

          (A) its views and estimates with respect to all matters to be set
    forth in the concurrent resolution on the budget for the ensuing fiscal
    year that are within its jurisdiction or functions; and

          (B) an estimate of the total amounts of new budget authority, and
    budget outlays resulting therefrom, to be provided or authorized in all
    bills and resolutions within its jurisdiction that it intends to be
    effective during that fiscal year.

      (2) The views and estimates submitted by the Committee on Ways and
    Means under subparagraph (1) shall include a specific recommendation,
    made after holding public hearings, as to the appropriate level of the
    public debt that should be set forth in the concurrent resolution on the
    budget.

    [[Page 491]]

    submitted to the Committee on the Budget was added in the 96th Congress
    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. 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 1981
    (H. Res. 642, Apr. 23, 1980, pp. 8789-90). The deadline for submitting
    views and estimates to the Budget Committee has changed several times
    (Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, sec. 232(c),
    P.L. 99-177; Budget Enforcement Act of 1997, sec. 10104, P.L. 105-33; H.
    Res. 5, 106th Cong., Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A former paragraph directing
    standing committees to submit reconciliation recommendations to the
    Budget Committee was deleted in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47), but committees are still required to submit such
    recommendations under section 310 of the Congressional Budget Act of
    1974. Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). Paragraph (f)(2) was amended in the 107th Congress to reflect the
    repeal of former rule XXIII (``Statutory Limit on Public Debt'') (sec.
    2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24), which was reinstated in the 108th
    Congress as rule XXVII (sec. 2(t), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).

    Election and membership of standing committees
      The requirements of paragraph (f)(1) were originally contained in
    section 301(c) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344,
    July 12, 1974), and was incorporated into this rule effective January 3,
    1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The requirement
    of paragraph (f)(2) that the Committee on Ways and Means include a
    specific recommendation as to the appropriate level of the public debt
    in its views and estimates

    757. Electing committees.

      5.  (a)(1) The standing committees
    specified in clause 1 shall be elected by the House within seven
    calendar days after the commencement of each Congress, from nominations
    submitted by the respective party caucus or conference. A resolution
    proposing to change the composition of a standing committee shall be
    privileged if offered by direction of the party caucus or conference
    concerned.

    [[Page 492]]

    1974, p. 34470)). That same resolution also eliminated the designations
    in the rules of the numbers of Members comprising the standing
    committees, thereby permitting the House to establish committee size by
    the numbers of Members elected to each committee pursuant to this
    paragraph. The role of the party caucuses in presenting privileged
    resolutions to the House electing Members to committees is discussed in
    detail in Deschler, ch. 17, Sec. 9. In the 99th Congress the requirement
    for early election of standing committees within the first seven
    calendar days and the conferral of privileged status on resolutions from
    the party caucuses to change the composition of standing committees were
    added by section 227 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
    Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177). Before the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6 of
    rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      The old rule entrusting the appointment of committees to the Speaker
    was adopted in 1789 and amended in 1790 and in 1860 (IV, 4448-4476).
    Committees are now elected on resolution offered from the floor (VIII,
    2171) and it is in order to move the previous question on each
    resolution (VIII, 2174). The resolution is not divisible (clause 5 of
    rule XVI), and is privileged (VIII, 2179) if offered by direction of the
    respective party caucus (a requirement that was made part of the rules
    effective January 3, 1975, by the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974
    (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,

    Sec. 758. Budget, composition of.

      (2)(A)  The Committee on
    the Budget shall be composed of members as follows:

          (i) Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner who are
    members of other standing committees, including five from the Committee
    on Appropriations, five from the Committee on Ways and Means, and one
    from the Committee on Rules;

          (ii) one Member designated by the elected leadership of the
    majority party; and

          (iii) one Member designated by the elected leadership of the
    minority party.

      (B) Except as permitted by subdivision (C), a member of the Committee
    on the Budget other than one described in subdivision (A)(ii) or
    (A)(iii) may not serve on the committee during more than four Congresses
    in a period of six successive Congresses (disregarding for this purpose
    any service for less than a full session in a Congress).

    [[Page 493]]

    committee, tenure on the committee shall be limited only by paragraph
    (c)(2) of this clause.

      (C) In the case of a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    elected to serve as the chairman or the ranking minority member of the

      This paragraph (formerly clause 1(d) of rule X) was amended in the
    96th Congress to relax the limitation on Members' service on the Budget
    Committee to three Congresses (from two) in any period of five
    successive Congresses, to exempt representatives from the party
    leaderships from the limitation, and to permit an incumbent chairman who
    had served on the committee for three Congresses and as chairman for not
    more than one Congress to be eligible for reelection as chairman for one
    additional Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, p. 8). It was again
    amended in the 100th Congress to eliminate as obsolete the words
    ``beginning after 1974'' following ``any period of five successive
    Congresses'' as a measure of permissible terms of service on the
    committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6). It was further amended in the
    101st Congress to permit, in that Congress only, a minority Member who
    had served on the committee for three terms to run within his party's
    caucus for the position of ranking minority member and thus be able to
    serve on the committee for one additional Congress, and to permit a
    Member elected as ranking minority member during his third term on the
    committee to serve one additional term on the committee should he be
    reelected as the ranking minority member (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p.
    72). It was again amended in the 102d Congress to extend the waiver of
    the tenure restriction for the ranking minority member of the committee
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39), but in the 103d Congress that
    provision was stricken as obsolete (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). In
    the 104th Congress the limitation on a Member's service on the committee
    was relaxed to four Congresses (from three) in any period of six
    successive Congresses, with the exception that a Member who has served
    as chairman or as ranking minority member during a fourth such Congress
    may serve in either capacity during a fifth, so long as he would not
    thereby exceed two consecutive terms as chairman or as ranking minority
    member (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). The tenure
    limitation of clause 5(a)(2)(B) was suspended during the 106th Congress
    (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The special tenure
    limitation for the chairman and ranking minority member was replaced in
    the 108th Congress with a provision subjecting the chairman only to the
    overall tenure limitation that applies to all standing committee
    chairmen (sec. 2(e-1), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). In the 109th
    Congress subdivisions (A)(ii) and (A)(iii) were amended to address a
    member designated by the elected leadership as opposed to a member of
    the elected leadership of each party, and a conforming change was made
    to subdivision (B) (sec. 2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 494]]

    with 28 from other standing committees and two from the respective
    leaderships (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 98-113), and again in the 98th
    Congress to 31 (unanimous-consent order, Feb. 7, 1983, p. 1791). The
    99th Congress amended this paragraph to remove any numerical limitation
    on the membership of the committee (H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393). In
    the 108th Congress the composition of the committee was changed to
    require inclusion of one member from the Committee on Rules (sec. 2(e),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).
      In the 94th Congress the membership of the committee was increased to
    25 (from 23), with 13 (rather than 11) members elected from committees
    other than Appropriations and Ways and Means (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975,
    p. 20). The membership was increased again in the 97th Congress to 30,

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 1(d) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 759. Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct.

      (3)(A)  The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct shall be
    composed of 10 members, five from the majority party and five from the
    minority party.

      (B) Except as permitted by subdivision (C), a member of the Committee
    on Standards of Official Conduct may not serve on the committee during
    more than three Congresses in a period of five successive Congresses
    (disregarding for this purpose any service for less than a full session
    in a Congress).

      (C) A member of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct may
    serve on the committee during a fourth Congress in a period of five
    successive Congresses only as either the chairman or the ranking
    minority member of the committee.

    [[Page 495]]

    committees of that committee during that Congress. The lists of Members,
    Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner so named shall be announced to
    the House.
      (4)(A) At the beginning of a Congress, the Speaker or his designee and
    the Minority Leader or his designee each shall name 10 Members,
    Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner from his respective party who
    are not members of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to be
    available to serve on investigative sub

      (B) Whenever the chairman and the ranking minority member of the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct jointly determine that
    Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner named under subdivision
    (A) should be assigned to serve on an investigative subcommittee of that
    committee, each of them shall select an equal number of such Members,
    Delegates, or Resident Commissioner from his respective party to serve
    on that subcommittee.

    [[Page 496]]

      Before the 93d Congress, the rule that established the size of the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct at 12 members also required
    that six members be elected from the majority and six from the minority
    party. Effective in the 93d Congress, the ratio of the committee was
    codified in the first sentence of subparagraph (3)(A) (formerly clause
    6(a)(2)) (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The Ethics Reform Act of
    1989 added a sentence to limit service on the committee (P.L. 101-194,
    Nov. 30, 1989), which was amended in the 105th and 106th Congresses
    (sec. 2, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19336; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). A requirement that two members from each party rotate off the
    committee was adopted in the 105th Congress (sec. 2, H. Res. 168, Sept.
    18, 1997, p. 19336), but was deleted in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Subparagraph (4) (formerly clause 6(a)(3)) was
    adopted in the 105th Congress (sec. 1, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p.
    19335). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    this provision was found in former clause 6(a) of rule X (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The 106th Congress also formally reduced the size
    of the committee to 10 members, which was the de facto size of the
    committee in the 105th Congress even though the Ethics Reform Act of
    1989 required each party caucus to nominate seven Members (sec. 803(b),
    P.L. 101-194, Nov. 30, 1989; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 760. Party membership as basis for election.

      (b)(1) Membership on a standing committee during the course of
    a  Congress
    shall be contingent on continuing membership in the party caucus or
    conference that nominated the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    concerned for election to such committee. Should a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner cease to be a member of a particular party caucus
    or conference, that Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall
    automatically cease to be a member of each standing committee to which
    he was elected on the basis of nomination by that caucus or conference.
    The chairman of the relevant party caucus or conference shall notify the
    Speaker whenever a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner ceases to
    be a member of that caucus or conference. The Speaker shall notify the
    chairman of each affected committee that the election of such Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner to the committee is automatically
    vacated under this subparagraph.

      (2)(A) Except as specified in subdivision (B), a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner may not serve simultaneously as a member of more
    than two standing committees or more than four subcommittees of the
    standing committees.

    [[Page 497]]

      (B)(i) Ex officio service by a chairman or ranking minority member of
    a committee on each of its subcommittees under a committee rule does not
    count against the limitation on subcommittee service.

      (ii) Service on an investigative subcommittee of the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct under paragraph (a)(4) does not count
    against the limitation on subcommittee service.

      (iii) Any other exception to the limitations in subdivision (A) may be
    approved by the House on the recommendation of the relevant party caucus
    or conference.

      (C) In this subparagraph the term ``subcommittee'' includes a panel
    (other than a special oversight panel of the Committee on Armed
    Services), task force, special subcommittee, or other subunit of a
    standing committee that is established for a cumulative period longer
    than six months in a Congress.

      The requirement that membership on standing committees be contingent
    on continuing membership in a party caucus or conference, along with the
    mechanism for the automatic vacating of a Member's election to committee
    should his party relationship cease, was added to the rules in the 98th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34). The limitation on full
    committee and subcommittee assignments was added in the 104th Congress
    (sec. 204, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467; see H. Res. 11, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 549). The exception for special service on an investigative
    subcommittee of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct from the
    limitation on subcommittee service was added in the 105th Congress (sec.
    1, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19335). A technical correction was
    effected in the 106th Congress to conform references to a renamed
    committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A technical correction to
    paragraph (b)(2)(B)(iii) was effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(l),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 498]]

    is, for the minority party to handle committee assignments for third-
    party Members (VIII, 2184-2185; H. Res. 11, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 549).
    During the 102d and 103d Congresses, the majority leadership took that
    responsibility by separate resolution for one Member who had joined
    neither major party caucus (see H. Res. 45, Jan. 24, 1991, p. 2171);
    and, beginning with the 104th Congress, when control of the House
    shifted, the minority leadership has retained responsibility for the
    committee assignments of that Member.

      The Speaker lays before the House communications relative to the
    removal of a Member from committee pursuant to this clause (see, e.g.,
    Sept. 11, 1984, p. 24790; Feb. 22, 1989, p. 2500; May 10, 1995, p.
    12396; July 19, 1999, p. 16586; Feb. 1, 2000, p. 401; Sept. 13, 2000, p.
    17832). The Speaker also lays before the House a communication from a
    Member announcing a change in his party affiliation (Sept. 13, 2000, p.
    17832). On one occasion there was a delay in laying the latter
    communication before the House, and the House by unanimous consent
    retroactively changed informational voting records from the date on the
    communication (Sept. 13, 2000, p. 17832). The earlier practice was, and
    the most recent practice

    Sec. 761. Committee chairmen.

      (c)(1)  One of the members of
    each standing committee shall be elected by the House, on the nomination
    of the majority party caucus or conference, as chairman thereof. In the
    temporary absence of the chairman, the member next in rank (and so on,
    as often as the case shall happen) shall act as chairman. Rank shall be
    determined by the order members are named in resolutions electing them
    to the committee. In the case of a permanent vacancy in the elected
    chairmanship of a committee, the House shall elect another chairman.

      (2) Except in the case of the Committee on Rules, a member of a
    standing committee may not serve as chairman of the same standing
    committee, or of the same subcommittee of a standing committee, during
    more than three consecutive Congresses (disregarding for this purpose
    any service for less than a full session in a Congress).

    [[Page 499]]

    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 6(c) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).
      The requirement that nominations for chairmen be submitted by the
    majority party caucus was made part of the rules effective January 3,
    1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The sentence
    addressing temporary and permanent vacancies in chairmanships was first
    adopted on April 5, 1911 (VIII, 2201), and was continued in the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812). The 104th
    Congress adopted a limitation on terms for committee and subcommittee
    chairmen (sec. 103(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462), and the 109th
    Congress excepted the Committee on Rules from that limitation (sec.
    2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

      In the 102d Congress a resolution included as a matter properly
    incidental to its election of the chairman of a standing committee a
    proviso that his powers and duties be exercised by the vice chairman
    until otherwise ordered by the House (H. Res. 43, Jan. 24, 1991, p.
    2169; Feb. 6, 1991, p. 3198). In the 103d Congress a privileged
    resolution, offered at the direction of the Democratic Caucus,
    authorized a named acting chairman to exercise the powers and duties of
    a chairman of a standing committee until otherwise ordered by the House
    (H. Res. 396, Mar. 23, 1994, p. 6093).

    Sec. 762. Requirement for subcommittees.

      (d)(1)  Except as
    permitted by subparagraph (2), a committee may have not more than five
    subcommittees.

      (2) A committee that maintains a subcommittee on oversight may have
    not more than six subcommittees. The Committee on Appropriations may
    have not more than 13 subcommittees. The Committee on Government Reform
    may have not more than seven subcommittees.

      This paragraph was adopted in the 104th Congress (sec. 101(b), H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462), replacing a requirement that all standing
    committees having more than 20 members (except the Committee on the
    Budget) establish at least four subcommittees (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975,
    p. 20). In the 106th Congress the paragraph was amended to delete the
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure from the list of
    exceptions to the general rule and to add a new exception for committees
    that maintain a subcommittee on oversight (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 6(d) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 500]]

    and the Committee on Armed Services was permitted to have not more than
    six during the 108th and 109th Congresses (sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    2003, p. ----; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). In the
    108th Congress the Committee on Appropriations reorganized its
    subcommittees to reflect the creation of the new Department on Homeland
    Security (P.L 107-296) by creating a new subcommittee on Homeland
    Security and combining the subcommittees on Transportation and Treasury,
    Postal Service and General Government. In the 109th Congress the
    Committee on Appropriations again reorganized its subcommittees,
    reducing the number of subcommittees to 10. In each case, the
    committee's reorganization was in compliance with this clause.

      Notwithstanding clause 5(d), the Committee on Government Reform was
    permitted to have not more than eight subcommittees during the 106th and
    107th Congresses (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47; sec. 3(c),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26); the Committee on International
    Relations was permitted to have not more than six during the 107th and
    108th Congresses and not more than seven during the 109th Congress (sec.
    3(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    2003, p. ----; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----);
    Transportation and Infrastructure was permitted to have not more than
    six during the 107th, 108th, and 109th Congresses (sec. 3(c), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----; sec.
    3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----);

      (e) The House shall fill a vacancy on a standing committee by election
    on the nomination of the respective party caucus or conference.

      This paragraph was first adopted in the 62d Congress (VIII, 2178). At
    the beginning of the 80th Congress it was amended to prevent a Member
    from serving on more than one standing committee, except that Members
    elected to serve on the Committees on District of Columbia or Un-
    American Activities (renamed the Committee on Internal Security and
    jurisdiction redefined on Feb. 19, 1969, p. 3723) could be elected to
    serve on not more than two standing committees, and that Members of the
    majority party, serving on the Committee on Expenditures in the
    Executive Departments (changed to Committee on Government Operations
    July 3, 1952, p. 9217) or House Administration could be elected to serve
    on not more than two standing committees. This limitation was continued
    through the 80th, 81st, and part of the 82d Congresses until July 3,
    1952 (p. 9217) when it was modified so that Members elected to serve on
    the Committees on the District of Columbia, Government Operations, Un-
    American Activities, or House Administration could be elected to serve
    on not more than two standing committees. It was restored to its
    original form by amendment on January 13, 1953 (p. 368) so that there
    was no limitation in House rules on the number of committees to which a
    Member may be elected until the 104th Congress added paragraph (b)(2)
    (see Sec. 760, supra). Party caucuses or conferences have also placed
    restrictions on committee assignments. The role of the respective party
    caucus or conference in making nominations to fill vacancies in standing
    committees was made part of the rule in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6(e) of rule X (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 501]]

    mittee (H. Res. 43, Jan. 24, 1991, p. 2169) with a Member subsequently
    designated by his party caucus as ``temporary'' (in order to avoid
    caucus limitations on committee assignments) (Feb. 5, 1991, p. 2814).

    Expense resolutions
      Form of resolution electing a Member to a committee and fixing his
    rank thereon (Jan. 23, 1947, p. 536; H. Res. 157, May 25, 1995, p.
    14424). The House by unanimous consent fixed the relative rank of two
    Members on a committee where an error had been made on the original
    appointment (Jan. 20, 1947, p. 481). The House has filled a vacancy on a
    standing com

    763. Primary expense resolution.

      6.  (a) Whenever a
    committee, commission, or other entity (other than the Committee on
    Appropriations) is granted authorization for the payment of its expenses
    (including staff salaries) for a Congress, such authorization initially
    shall be procured by one primary expense resolution reported by the
    Committee on House Administration. A primary expense resolution may
    include a reserve fund for unanticipated expenses of committees. An
    amount from such a reserve fund may be allocated to a committee only by
    the approval of the Committee on House Administration. A primary expense
    resolution reported to <> the House
    may not be considered in the House unless a printed report thereon was
    available on the previous calendar day. For the information of the
    House, such report shall--

          (1) state the total amount of the funds to be provided to the
    committee, commission, or other entity under the primary expense
    resolution for all anticipated activities and programs of the committee,
    commission, or other entity; and

    [[Page 502]]

    appropriate to provide the House with basic estimates of the
    expenditures contemplated by the primary expense resolution.
          (2) to the extent practicable, contain such general statements
    regarding the estimated foreseeable expenditures for the respective
    anticipated activities and programs of the committee, commission, or
    other entity as may be

    Sec. 765.
    Additional expense resolution.

      (b) After the date of adoption by the House  of a primary expense resolution for a
    committee, commission, or other entity for a Congress, authorization for
    the payment of additional expenses (including staff salaries) in that
    Congress may be procured by one or more supplemental expense resolutions
    reported by the Committee on House Administration, as necessary. A
    supplemental expense resolution reported to the House may not be
    considered in the House unless a printed report thereon was available on
    the previous calendar day. For the information of the House, such report
    shall--

          (1) state the total amount of additional funds to be provided to
    the committee, commission, or other entity under the supplemental
    expense resolution and the purposes for which those additional funds are
    available; and

          (2) state the reasons for the failure to procure the additional
    funds for the committee, commission, or other entity by means of the
    primary expense resolution.

      (c) The preceding provisions of this clause do not apply to--

    [[Page 503]]

    tion for staff services performed for, or to pay other expenses of, a
    committee, commission, or other entity at any time after the beginning
    of an odd-numbered year and before the date of adoption by the House of
    the primary expense resolution described in paragraph (a) for that year;
    or

    Sec. 766. Exception for certain initial
    funding.

          (1) a  resolution providing for the payment from committee salary
    and expense accounts of the House of sums necessary to pay compensa

          (2) a resolution providing each of the standing committees in a
    Congress additional office equipment, airmail and special-delivery
    postage stamps, supplies, staff personnel, or any other specific item
    for the operation of the standing committees, and containing an
    authorization for the payment from committee salary and expense accounts
    of the House of the expenses of any of the foregoing items provided by
    that resolution, subject to and until enactment of the provisions of the
    resolution as permanent law.

    [[Page 504]]

    this provision was found in former clause 5 of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47).
      Paragraphs (a)-(c) of this clause were contained originally in section
    110(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and
    were added to the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971,
    p. 144). Effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470), the authority of all committees to incur expenses,
    including travel expenses, was made contingent upon adoption by the
    House of resolutions reported pursuant to this clause (clause 1(b) of
    rule XI). The clause was amended in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    4, 1977, pp. 53-70) to extend its applicability to all committees,
    commissions, and entities rather than just to standing committees.
    Paragraphs (a)-(c) were amended in the 104th Congress to institute
    biennial funding of committee expenses and to require that all committee
    staff salaries and expenses (including statutory staff) be authorized by
    expense resolution (sec. 101(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). In
    the 105th Congress paragraph (a) was amended to permit a primary expense
    resolution to include a reserve fund for unanticipated expenses of
    committees (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). A technical correction to
    paragraphs (a) and (b) was effected in the 106th Congress to conform
    references to a renamed committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,

      The Committee on Appropriations is not covered by this clause, but is
    reimbursed by funds in appropriation acts for expenses of examinations
    of estimates of appropriations in the field (31 U.S.C. 22a). An
    exemption from this clause for the Committee on the Budget was effective
    from the enactment of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 through the
    103d Congress.

      Based on the exception stated in paragraph (c), a resolution
    establishing a task force of members of a standing committee and
    providing for the payment of its expenses from the contingent fund of
    the House (now referred to as ``applicable accounts of the House
    described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X'') was held not to be subject to a
    point of order under clause 5(a) for lack of report language detailing
    the funding provided, since the resolution was called up at the
    beginning of the session before consideration of a primary expense
    resolution for all committees for that calendar year (Feb. 5, 1992, p.
    1621).

    Sec. 767. Funds for committee staffs; expense
    resolutions.

      (d)  From the funds made available for the appointment of
    committee staff by a primary or additional expense resolution, the
    chairman of each committee shall ensure that sufficient staff is made
    available to each subcommittee to carry out its responsibilities under
    the rules of the committee and that the minority party is treated fairly
    in the appointment of such staff.

    [[Page 505]]

      Paragraph (d) was adopted in the 104th Congress (sec. 101(c)(4), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). A preceding form of the paragraph, first
    adopted in the 94th Congress, authorized the chairman and ranking
    minority member of a subcommittee each to appoint one staff member to
    the subcommittee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). As adopted in the
    93d Congress to take effect on the first day of the 94th Congress, the
    paragraph had required that each standing committee, upon request of a
    majority of its minority members, devote one-third of its staffing funds
    to the needs of the minority (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). As
    originally adopted in the 92d Congress, the paragraph had required that
    the minority be accorded fair consideration in the appointment of
    committee staff (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(d) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      (e) Funds authorized for a committee under this clause and clauses 7
    and 8 are for expenses incurred in the activities of the committee.

    Interim funding
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2(n)(1) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47).

    768. Interim funding.

      7. (a)  For the period beginning at
    noon on January 3 and ending at midnight on March 31 in each odd-
    numbered year, such sums as may be necessary shall be paid out of the
    committee salary and expense accounts of the House for continuance of
    necessary investigations and studies by--

          (1) each standing and select committee established by these rules;
    and

          (2) except as specified in paragraph (b), each select committee
    established by resolution.

      (b) In the case of the first session of a Congress, amounts shall be
    made available for a select committee established by resolution in the
    preceding Congress only if--

          (1) a resolution proposing to reestablish such select committee is
    introduced in the present Congress; and

          (2) the House has not adopted a resolution of the preceding
    Congress providing for termination of funding for investigations and
    studies by such select committee.

    [[Page 506]]

    the Committee on House Administration) of the total annualized amount
    made available under expense resolutions for such committee in the
    preceding session of Congress.
      (c) Each committee described in paragraph (a) shall be entitled for
    each month during the period specified in paragraph (a) to 9 percent (or
    such lesser percentage as may be determined by

      (d) Payments under this clause shall be made on vouchers authorized by
    the committee involved, signed by the chairman of the committee, except
    as provided in paragraph (e), and approved by the Committee on House
    Administration.

      (e) Notwithstanding any provision of law, rule of the House, or other
    authority, from noon on January 3 of the first session of a Congress
    until the election by the House of the committee concerned in that
    Congress, payments under this clause shall be made on vouchers signed
    by--

          (1) the member of the committee who served as chairman of the
    committee at the expiration of the preceding Congress; or

          (2) if the chairman is not a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner in the present Congress, then the ranking member of the
    committee as it was constituted at the expiration of the preceding
    Congress who is a member of the majority party in the present Congress.

      (f)(1) The authority of a committee to incur expenses under this
    clause shall expire upon adoption by the House of a primary expense
    resolution for the committee.

    [[Page 507]]

    prescribed by the Committee on House Administration.
      (2) Amounts made available under this clause shall be expended in
    accordance with regulations

      (3) This clause shall be effective only insofar as it is not
    inconsistent with a resolution reported by the Committee on House
    Administration and adopted by the House after the adoption of these
    rules.

      This clause (formerly clause 5(f) of rule XI) was originally adopted
    in the 99th Congress to provide automatic interim funding for committees
    at the beginning of a Congress (H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393).
    Resolutions providing such interim funding had been routinely adopted at
    the convening of Congress before the adoption of this standing
    authority. In the 100th Congress, the provision was amended to make the
    automatic committee funding mechanism applicable to the first three
    months of the second session of a Congress, as well as the first
    session, and to authorize the Committee on House Administration to
    establish interim funding for any committee at a percentage lower than 9
    percent of the total annualized amount (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6).
    In the 104th and 106th Congresses technical corrections were effected to
    conform references to a renamed committee (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 464; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 5(f) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clerical
    corrections were effected in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24).

    Travel
      At its organization the 104th Congress suspended the operation of
    paragraph (f) in favor of special provisions for interim funding in
    light of its abolishment of three standing committees, its reduction in
    the overall number of committee staff, and its institution of biennial
    primary expense resolutions (sec. 101(c)(3), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    462). The House by unanimous consent has agreed to a resolution
    providing funding for interim expenses of a new select committee (Feb.
    13, 2003, p. ----) and a new standing committee (Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 508]]

    authorized under this clause and clauses 6 and 8, may not be expended
    for the purpose of defraying expenses of members of a committee or its
    employees in a country where local currencies are available for this
    purpose.

    769. Committee travel.

      8. (a)  Local currencies owned by the
    United States shall be made available to the committee and its employees
    engaged in carrying out their official duties outside the United States
    or its territories or possessions. Appropriated funds, including those

      (b) The following conditions shall apply with respect to travel
    outside the United States or its territories or possessions:

          (1) A member or employee of a committee may not receive or expend
    local currencies for subsistence in a country for a day at a rate in
    excess of the maximum per diem set forth in applicable Federal law.

          (2) A member or employee shall be reimbursed for his expenses for
    a day at the lesser of--

              (A) the per diem set forth in applicable Federal law; or

              (B) the actual, unreimbursed expenses (other than for
    transportation) he incurred during that day.

    [[Page 509]]

    in complying with reporting requirements in applicable Federal law and
    shall be open for public inspection.

    Sec. 770. Travel reports.

          (3)  Each member or employee of
    a committee shall make to the chairman of the committee an itemized
    report showing the dates each country was visited, the amount of per
    diem furnished, the cost of transportation furnished, and funds expended
    for any other official purpose and shall summarize in these categories
    the total foreign currencies or appropriated funds expended. Each report
    shall be filed with the chairman of the committee not later than 60 days
    following the completion of travel for use

      (c)(1) In carrying out the activities of a committee outside the
    United States in a country where local currencies are unavailable, a
    member or employee of a committee may not receive reimbursement for
    expenses (other than for transportation) in excess of the maximum per
    diem set forth in applicable Federal law.

      (2) A member or employee shall be reimbursed for his expenses for a
    day, at the lesser of--

          (A) the per diem set forth in applicable Federal law; or

          (B) the actual unreimbursed expenses (other than for
    transportation) he incurred during that day.

      (3) A member or employee of a committee may not receive reimbursement
    for the cost of any transportation in connection with travel outside the
    United States unless the member or employee actually paid for the
    transportation.

      (d) The restrictions respecting travel outside the United States set
    forth in paragraph (c) also shall apply to travel outside the United
    States by a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House authorized under any standing rule.

    [[Page 510]]

    amended in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) to
    clarify the availability of local currencies for travel outside the
    United States and its territories and possessions, to require reports
    within 60 days for use in complying with statutory reporting
    requirements, and to authorize the Committee on House Administration to
    recommend in expense resolutions expenses for foreign as well as
    domestic travel. This clause was further amended on March 2, 1977 (H.
    Res. 287, 95th Cong., pp. 5933-53) to limit all travel expenses to the
    maximum per diem rate or actual, unreimbursed expenses, whichever is
    less. Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2(n) of rule XI, except that the
    ``lame duck'' travel prohibitions formerly found in clause 2(n)(5) of
    rule XI and clause 8 of rule I were transferred to former rule XXV
    (redesignated as rule XXIV in the 107th Congress) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).
      Before the adoption of this clause (formerly clause 2(n) of rule XI)
    and of clause 1(b) of rule XI under the Committee Reform Amendments of
    1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974,
    p. 34470), each committee was given separate authority to incur expenses
    in connection with its investigations and studies, and certain
    committees were authorized to use local currencies for foreign committee
    travel, in resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules in each
    Congress. This clause was

    Committee staffs
      Under section 502(b) of the Mutual Security Act of 1954 (22 U.S.C.
    1754(b)), foreign local currencies owned or purchased by the United
    States may be used for foreign travel expenses by members or employees
    of standing or select committees when authorized by the chairman
    thereof, and by other Members or employees when authorized by the
    Speaker. Consolidated committee reports prepared on a quarterly basis,
    and individual reports required within 30 days after the travel
    involved, must be forwarded to the Clerk of the House and published in
    the Congressional Record.

    771. Thirty professional staff.

      9.  (a)(1) Subject to
    subparagraph (2) and paragraph (f), each standing committee may appoint,
    by majority vote, not more than 30 professional staff members to be
    compensated from the funds provided for the appointment of committee
    staff by primary and additional expense resolutions. Each professional
    staff <> member appointed under this
    subparagraph shall be assigned to the chairman and the ranking minority
    member of the committee, as the committee considers advisable.

    [[Page 511]]

    or the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence) so request, not more
    than 10 persons (or one-third of the total professional committee staff
    appointed under this clause, whichever is fewer) may be selected, by
    majority vote of the minority party members, for appointment by the
    committee as professional staff members under subparagraph (1). The
    committee shall appoint persons so selected whose character and
    qualifications are acceptable to a majority of the committee. If the
    committee determines that the character and qualifications of a person
    so selected are unacceptable, a majority of the minority party members
    may select another person for appointment by the committee to the
    professional staff until such appointment is made. Each professional
    staff member appointed under this subparagraph shall be assigned to such
    committee business as the minority party members of the committee
    consider advisable.

    Sec. 773. Minority.

      (2)  Subject to paragraph (f) whenever a
    majority of the minority party members of a standing committee (other
    than the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct

    [[Page 512]]

    Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). The requirement added in 1975 that staff
    positions made available to subcommittee chairmen and ranking minority
    members pursuant to former provisions of clause 5 of rule XI be provided
    from staff positions available under this clause unless provided in a
    primary or additional expense resolution was eliminated in the 104th
    Congress (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). The 98th
    Congress added the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to the
    exception for the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (H. Res.
    58, Mar. 1, 1983, p. 3241). The 101st Congress added an exemption for
    the Committee on Rules (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). The Ethics
    Reform Act of 1989 struck the antidiscrimination provisions as redundant
    (P.L. 101-194, Nov. 30, 1989). The 104th Congress eliminated the former
    distinction between professional and clerical staff, set the authorized
    maximum for committee staff under expense resolutions at 30, eliminated
    subcommittee entitlement to staff, and set the entitlement of the full
    committee minority within that number at one-third (sec. 101(c)(5), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). The 104th Congress also mandated that the
    total number of staff of House committees be at least one-third less
    than the corresponding total in the 103d Congress (sec. 101(a), H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6 of rule XI
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      This clause (formerly clause 6 of rule XI) had its origins in section
    202 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), which
    allocated up to four nonpartisan professionals to each committee other
    than Appropriations and specifically provided for clerical staff, and
    which was incorporated into the rules on January 3, 1953 (p. 24).
    Section 302(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat.
    1140), which increased the authorized maximum for professional staff
    from four to six and added the concept of minority staffing, was
    incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22,
    1971, p. 144). In the 93d Congress the maximum was increased from six to
    18, the minority entitlement within that number was increased from two
    to six, a requirement that professional staff be appointed without
    regard to political affiliation was eliminated, and prohibitions against
    consideration of race, creed, sex, or age in the appointment of staff
    were added (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). An exemption for the
    Committee on the Budget was included in section 901 of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 330), was later omitted under the Committee
    Reform Amendments of 1974 (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), and was
    reinserted by the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5,

      Additional staff of committees are authorized by the Committee on
    House Administration and agreed to by the House. There is no legal power
    to fill a vacancy in the clerkship of a committee after one Congress has
    expired and before the next House has been organized (IV, 4539). An
    assault upon the clerk of a committee within the walls of the Capitol
    was held to be a breach of privilege (II, 1629). The pay of clerks has
    been the subject of several decisions (IV, 4536-4538).

    Sec. 774. Consultants and training.

      Committees  may, with the
    approval of the Committee on House Administration, procure the temporary
    or intermittent services of consultants and obtain specialized training
    for professional staff, subject to expense resolutions, under the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, sections 303 and 304 (2 U.S.C.
    72a(i) and (j)).

    Sec. 775. Staff duties.

      (b)(1)  The professional staff
    members of each standing committee--

          (A) may not engage in any work other than committee business
    during congressional working hours; and

    [[Page 513]]

          (B) may not be assigned a duty other than one pertaining to
    committee business.

    Sec. 776. ``Associate'' or ``shared'' staff.

      (2)(A) Subparagraph (1) does not apply to staff designated by a
    committee  as
    ``associate'' or ``shared'' staff who are not paid exclusively by the
    committee, provided that the chairman certifies that the compensation
    paid by the committee for any such staff is commensurate with the work
    performed for the committee in accordance with clause 8 of rule XXIII.

      (B) The use of any ``associate'' or ``shared'' staff by a committee
    other than the Committee on Appropriations shall be subject to the
    review of, and to any terms, conditions, or limitations established by,
    the Committee on House Administration in connection with the reporting
    of any primary or additional expense resolution.

      The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 prescribed that staff work be confined
    to committee business during congressional working hours but maintained
    exceptions for the Committees on the Budget and Rules (P.L. 101-194,
    Nov. 30, 1989). The 104th Congress eliminated exceptions by committee in
    favor of exceptions for ``associate'' or ``shared'' staff (sec.
    101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). Technical corrections were
    effected in the 104th Congress (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077);
    in the 106th Congress, which conformed references to a renamed committee
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47); in the 107th Congress, which conformed
    references to a redesignated rule (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2001,
    p. ----); and in the 108th Congress, which confined the exception for
    the Committee on Appropriations to subparagraph (B), rather than to the
    entire paragraph (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 6 of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 514]]

    imum rate of pay as in effect from time to time under applicable
    provisions of law.

    Sec. 777. Pay.

      (c)  Each employee on the professional or
    investigative staff of a standing committee shall be entitled to pay at
    a single gross per annum rate, to be fixed by the chairman and that does
    not exceed the max

      This provision (formerly clause 6(c) of rule XI) was derived from
    section 477(c) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat.
    1140) and was incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Under the Committee Reform Amendments of
    1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974,
    p. 34470), the maximum salary was set at level V of the Executive
    Schedule, rather than at the highest rate of basic pay law (5 U.S.C.
    5332(a)(1)), as specified in the 1970 Reorganization Act, and effective
    in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), the authority
    for two professional staff to be paid at level IV of the Executive
    Schedule was added to the clause. Under section 311 of the Legislative
    Branch Appropriations Act, 1988 (2 U.S.C. 60a-2a), the maximum salary
    for staff members is now set by pay order of the Speaker. At the
    beginning of the 101st Congress, references to particular levels of the
    executive schedule were deleted (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). In the
    104th Congress this paragraph was amended to reflect the elimination of
    the former distinction between ``professional'' and ``clerical'' staff
    (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 6 of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 778. Staff, Committee on Appropriations.

      (d)  Subject to
    appropriations hereby authorized, the Committee on Appropriations may
    appoint by majority vote such staff as it determines to be necessary (in
    addition to the clerk of the committee and assistants for the minority).
    The staff appointed under this paragraph, other than minority
    assistants, shall possess such qualifications as the committee may
    prescribe.

    [[Page 515]]

      This paragraph (formerly clause 6(d) of rule XI) derives from section
    202(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812),
    which was incorporated into the rules on January 3, 1953 (p. 24). The
    exemption was extended to the Committee on the Budget by section 901 of
    the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 330). The reference to
    that committee was inadvertently omitted by the 93d Congress (H. Res.
    988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470) and reinserted by the 94th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). The 104th Congress deleted the exemption
    for the Committee on the Budget (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 462). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6(d) of rule X (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 779. Detailed employees.

      (e)  A committee may not
    appoint to its staff an expert or other personnel detailed or assigned
    from a department or agency of the Government except with the written
    permission of the Committee on House Administration.

      This paragraph was contained in section 202(f) of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812) and was incorporated into the
    rules on January 3, 1953 (p. 24). In the 104th and 106th Congresses it
    was amended to conform references to a renamed committee (sec. 202(b),
    H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      (f) If a request for the appointment of a minority professional staff
    member under paragraph (a) is made when no vacancy exists for such an
    appointment, the committee nevertheless may appoint under paragraph (a)
    a person selected by the minority and acceptable to the committee. A
    person so appointed shall serve as an additional member of the
    professional staff of the committee until such a vacancy occurs (other
    than a vacancy in the position of head of the professional staff, by
    whatever title designated), at which time that person is considered as
    appointed to that vacancy. Such a person shall be paid from the
    applicable accounts of the House described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X.
    If such a vacancy occurs on the professional staff when seven or more
    persons have been so appointed who are eligible to fill that vacancy, a
    majority of the minority party members shall designate which of those
    persons shall fill the vacancy.

    [[Page 516]]

    to assist minority members of a committee pursuant to an expense
    resolution described in clause 6(a), shall be accorded equitable
    treatment with respect to the fixing of the rate of pay, the assignment
    of work facilities, and the accessibility of committee records.
      (g) Each staff member appointed pursuant to a request by minority
    party members under paragraph (a), and each staff member appointed

      (h) Paragraph (a) may not be construed to authorize the appointment of
    additional professional staff members of a committee pursuant to a
    request under paragraph (a) by the minority party members of that
    committee if 10 or more professional staff members provided for in
    paragraph (a)(1) who are satisfactory to a majority of the minority
    party members are otherwise assigned to assist the minority party
    members.

      Paragraphs (f)-(h) (formerly clause 6(f)-(h) of rule XI) are derived
    from section 302(c) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84
    Stat. 1140) and were incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988,
    93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), conforming changes were made in
    paragraphs (f) and (h) to reflect increased minority professional and
    clerical staff permitted to committees under paragraphs (a) and (b) of
    this clause. In the 104th Congress paragraphs (f)-(h) were amended to
    reflect the elimination of the former distinction between
    ``professional'' and ``clerical'' staff (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 462). The 104th Congress also mandated that the total number
    of staff of House committees be at least one-third less than the
    corresponding total in the 103d Congress (sec. 101(a), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 462). In the 105th Congress paragraph (f) was amended to
    update an archaic reference to the ``contingent fund'' (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    7, 1997, p. 121). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6 of rule XI (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A clerical correction was effected in the
    107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24), and a
    conforming change to paragraph (f) was effected in the 109th Congress
    (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 517]]

    committee staff designated exclusively for the majority or minority
    party, by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
    majority party and of a majority of the members of the minority party.

    Sec. 780. Nonpartisan staff.

      (i)  Notwithstanding paragraph
    (a)(2), a committee may employ nonpartisan staff, in lieu of or in
    addition to

      Section 202(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat.
    812), which was incorporated into the rules on January 3, 1953 (p. 24),
    required committee professional staffs to be appointed on a permanent
    basis without regard to political affiliation. The concept of minority
    staffing was added by section 302(b) of the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1970. Under the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective
    January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470),
    paragraph (i) (formerly clause 6(i) of rule XI) was added to permit
    committees to employ nonpartisan staff upon an affirmative vote of the
    majority of the members of each party. In the 104th Congress it was
    amended to reflect the elimination of the former distinction between
    ``professional'' and ``clerical'' staff (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 462). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6(i) of rule XI (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Select and joint committees

    Sec. 781. Reports on staff.

      Effective  in the 95th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), former clause 6(j) of rule XI,
    which was added on January 3, 1953 (p. 24) and which was contained in
    section 134(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1945, was
    deleted; that clause required committees to report semiannually to the
    Clerk, for printing in the Congressional Record, on the names,
    professions, and salaries of committee employees.

    [[Page 518]]

    Commissioner shall automatically cease to be a member of any select or
    joint committee to which he is assigned. The chairman of the relevant
    party caucus or conference shall notify the Speaker whenever a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner ceases to be a member of a party
    caucus or conference. The Speaker shall notify the chairman of each
    affected select or joint committee that the appointment of such Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner to the select or joint committee is
    automatically vacated under this paragraph.

    782. Party membership as basis for
    appointment.

      10. (a)  Membership on a select or joint committee appointed by
    the Speaker under clause 11 of rule I during the course of a Congress
    shall be contingent on continuing membership in the party caucus or
    conference of which the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    concerned was a member at the time of appointment. Should a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner cease to be a member of that caucus
    or conference, that Member, Delegate, or Resident

      This party membership requirement for select and joint committees,
    analogous to clause 5(b), was added in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    1983, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6(g) of rule X
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 783. Select and joint committee compliance.

      (b)  Each
    select or joint committee, other than a conference committee, shall
    comply with clause 2(a) of rule XI unless specifically exempted by law.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraph
    (b) was found in clause 2(a) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). The extension of clause 2(a) requirements to select and joint
    committees was added to clause 2(a) when that rule was rewritten by the
    Committee Reform Amendments of 1974 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470).

    [[Page 519]]

    Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

    Sec. 784. Aging.

      A  paragraph (i) of former clause 6 of rule
    X was incorporated into the rules effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res.
    988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), to provide for a permanent
    Select Committee on Aging. That provision was stricken in the 103d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49).

    785. Permanent Select Committee on
    Intelligence.

      11. (a)(1) There is  established a Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
    (hereafter in this clause referred to as the ``select committee''). The
    select committee shall be composed of not more than 21 Members,
    Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner, of whom not more than 12 may be
    from the same party. The select committee shall include at least one
    Member, Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner from each of the
    following committees:

          (A) the Committee on Appropriations;

          (B) the Committee on Armed Services;

          (C) the Committee on International Relations; and

          (D) the Committee on the Judiciary.

      (2) The Speaker and the Minority Leader shall be ex officio members of
    the select committee but shall have no vote in the select committee and
    may not be counted for purposes of determining a quorum thereof.

      (3) The Speaker and Minority Leader each may designate a member of his
    leadership staff to assist him in his capacity as ex officio member,
    with the same access to committee meetings, hearings, briefings, and
    materials as employees of the select committee and subject to the same
    security clearance and confidentiality requirements as employees of the
    select committee under this clause.

    [[Page 520]]

    other than the Speaker or the Minority Leader, may not serve as a member
    of the select committee during more than four Congresses in a period of
    six successive Congresses (disregarding for this purpose any service for
    less than a full session in a Congress).
      (4)(A) Except as permitted by subdivision (B), a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner,

      (B) In the case of a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    appointed to serve as the chairman or the ranking minority member of the
    select committee, tenure on the select committee shall not be limited.

      (b)(1) There shall be referred to the select committee proposed
    legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating
    to the following:

          (A) The Central Intelligence Agency, the Director of Central
    Intelligence, and the National Foreign Intelligence Program as defined
    in section 3(6) of the National Security Act of 1947.

          (B) Intelligence and intelligence-related activities of all other
    departments and agencies of the Government, including the tactical
    intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the Department of
    Defense.

          (C) The organization or reorganization of a department or agency
    of the Government to the extent that the organization or reorganization
    relates to a function or activity involving intelligence or
    intelligence-related activities.

    [[Page 521]]

          (D) Authorizations for appropriations, both direct and indirect,
    for the following:

              (i) The Central Intelligence Agency, the Director of Central
    Intelligence, and the National Foreign Intelligence Program as defined
    in section 3(6) of the National Security Act of 1947.

              (ii) Intelligence and intelligence-related activities of all
    other departments and agencies of the Government, including the tactical
    intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the Department of
    Defense.

              (iii) A department, agency, subdivision, or program that is a
    successor to an agency or program named or referred to in (i) or (ii).

      (2) Proposed legislation initially reported by the select committee
    (other than provisions solely involving matters specified in
    subparagraph (1)(A) or subparagraph (1)(D)(i)) containing any matter
    otherwise within the jurisdiction of a standing committee shall be
    referred by the Speaker to that standing committee. Proposed legislation
    initially reported by another committee that contains matter within the
    jurisdiction of the select committee shall be referred by the Speaker to
    the select committee if requested by the chairman of the select
    committee.

    [[Page 522]]

      (3) Nothing in this clause shall be construed as prohibiting or
    otherwise restricting the authority of any other committee to study and
    review an intelligence or intelligence-related activity to the extent
    that such activity directly affects a matter otherwise within the
    jurisdiction of that committee.

      (4) Nothing in this clause shall be construed as amending, limiting,
    or otherwise changing the authority of a standing committee to obtain
    full and prompt access to the product of the intelligence and
    intelligence-related activities of a department or agency of the
    Government relevant to a matter otherwise within the jurisdiction of
    that committee.

      (c)(1) For purposes of accountability to the House, the select
    committee shall make regular and periodic reports to the House on the
    nature and extent of the intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities of the various departments and agencies of the United States.
    The select committee shall promptly call to the attention of the House,
    or to any other appropriate committee, a matter requiring the attention
    of the House or another committee. In making such report, the select
    committee shall proceed in a manner consistent with paragraph (g) to
    protect national security.

    [[Page 523]]

    mittee. Nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the public
    disclosure in such reports of the names of persons engaged in
    intelligence or intelligence-related activities for the United States or
    the divulging of intelligence methods employed or the sources of
    information on which the reports are based or the amount of funds
    authorized to be appropriated for intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities.
      (2) The select committee shall obtain annual reports from the Director
    of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Secretary of Defense, the
    Secretary of State, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of
    Investigation. Such reports shall review the intelligence and
    intelligence-related activities of the agency or department concerned
    and the intelligence and intelligence-related activities of foreign
    countries directed at the United States or its interests. An
    unclassified version of each report may be made available to the public
    at the discretion of the select com

      (3) Within six weeks after the President submits a budget under
    section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, or at such time as the
    Committee on the Budget may request, the select committee shall submit
    to the Committee on the Budget the views and estimates described in
    section 301(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 regarding matters
    within the jurisdiction of the select committee.

      (d)(1) Except as specified in subparagraph (2), clauses 8(a), (b), and
    (c) and 9(a), (b), and (c) of this rule, and clauses 1, 2, and 4 of rule
    XI shall apply to the select committee to the extent not inconsistent
    with this clause.

    [[Page 524]]

      (2) Notwithstanding the requirements of the first sentence of clause
    2(g)(2) of rule XI, in the presence of the number of members required
    under the rules of the select committee for the purpose of taking
    testimony or receiving evidence, the select committee may vote to close
    a hearing whenever a majority of those present determines that the
    testimony or evidence would endanger the national security.

      (e) An employee of the select committee, or a person engaged by
    contract or otherwise to perform services for or at the request of the
    select committee, may not be given access to any classified information
    by the select committee unless such employee or person has--

          (1) agreed in writing and under oath to be bound by the Rules of
    the House, including the jurisdiction of the Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct and of the select committee concerning the security of
    classified information during and after the period of his employment or
    contractual agreement with the select committee; and

          (2) received an appropriate security clearance, as determined by
    the select committee in consultation with the Director of Central
    Intelligence, that is commensurate with the sensitivity of the
    classified information to which such employee or person will be given
    access by the select committee.

    [[Page 525]]

    sure of classified information clearly outweighs any infringement on the
    privacy of a person.
      (f) The select committee shall formulate and carry out such rules and
    procedures as it considers necessary to prevent the disclosure, without
    the consent of each person concerned, of information in the possession
    of the select committee that unduly infringes on the privacy or that
    violates the constitutional rights of such person. Nothing herein shall
    be construed to prevent the select committee from publicly disclosing
    classified information in a case in which it determines that national
    interest in the disclo

      (g)(1) The select committee may disclose publicly any information in
    its possession after a determination by the select committee that the
    public interest would be served by such disclosure. With respect to the
    disclosure of information for which this paragraph requires action by
    the select committee--

          (A) the select committee shall meet to vote on the matter within
    five days after a member of the select committee requests a vote; and

          (B) a member of the select committee may not make such a
    disclosure before a vote by the select committee on the matter, or after
    a vote by the select committee on the matter except in accordance with
    this paragraph.

      (2)(A) In a case in which the select committee votes to disclose
    publicly any information that has been classified under established
    security procedures, that has been submitted to it by the executive
    branch, and that the executive branch requests be kept secret, the
    select committee shall notify the President of such vote.

    [[Page 526]]

    national interest of the United States posed by the disclosure is of
    such gravity that it outweighs any public interest in the disclosure.
      (B) The select committee may disclose publicly such information after
    the expiration of a five-day period following the day on which notice of
    the vote to disclose is transmitted to the President unless, before the
    expiration of the five-day period, the President, personally in writing,
    notifies the select committee that he objects to the disclosure of such
    information, provides his reasons therefor, and certifies that the
    threat to the

      (C) If the President, personally in writing, notifies the select
    committee of his objections to the disclosure of information as provided
    in subdivision (B), the select committee may, by majority vote, refer
    the question of the disclosure of such information, with a
    recommendation thereon, to the House. The select committee may not
    publicly disclose such information without leave of the House.

      (D) Whenever the select committee votes to refer the question of
    disclosure of any information to the House under subdivision (C), the
    chairman shall, not later than the first day on which the House is in
    session following the day on which the vote occurs, report the matter to
    the House for its consideration.

      (E) If the chairman of the select committee does not offer in the
    House a motion to consider in closed session a matter reported under
    subdivision (D) within four calendar days on which the House is in
    session after the recommendation described in subdivision (C) is
    reported, then such a motion shall be privileged when offered by a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner. In either case such a motion
    shall be decided without debate or intervening motion except one that
    the House adjourn.

    [[Page 527]]

    subject to the call of the Chair. At the expiration of the recess, the
    pending question, in closed session, shall be, ``Shall the House approve
    the recommendation of the select committee?''.
      (F) Upon adoption by the House of a motion to resolve into closed
    session as described in subdivision (E), the Speaker may declare a
    recess

      (G) Debate on the question described in subdivision (F) shall be
    limited to two hours equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
    ranking minority member of the select committee. After such debate the
    previous question shall be considered as ordered on the question of
    approving the recommendation without intervening motion except one
    motion that the House adjourn. The House shall vote on the question in
    open session but without divulging the information with respect to which
    the vote is taken. If the recommendation of the select committee is not
    approved, then the question is considered as recommitted to the select
    committee for further recommendation.

      (3)(A) Information in the possession of the select committee relating
    to the lawful intelligence or intelligence-related activities of a
    department or agency of the United States that has been classified under
    established security procedures, and that the select committee has
    determined should not be disclosed under subparagraph (1) or (2), may
    not be made available to any person by a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House except as provided in
    subdivision (B).

    [[Page 528]]

    committee or a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, and permit a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner to attend a hearing of the
    select committee that is closed to the public. Whenever the select
    committee makes such information available, it shall keep a written
    record showing, in the case of particular information, which committee
    or which Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner received the
    information. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who, and a
    committee that, receives information under this subdivision may not
    disclose the information except in a closed session of the House.
      (B) The select committee shall, under such regulations as it may
    prescribe, make information described in subdivision (A) available to a

      (4) The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct shall investigate
    any unauthorized disclosure of intelligence or intelligence-related
    information by a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House in violation of subparagraph (3) and report to the
    House concerning any allegation that it finds to be substantiated.

    [[Page 529]]

    cer, or employee of the House, it shall report its findings to the House
    and recommend appropriate action. Recommendations may include censure,
    removal from committee membership, or expulsion from the House, in the
    case of a Member, or removal from office or employment or punishment for
    contempt, in the case of an officer or employee.
      (5) Upon the request of a person who is subject to an investigation
    described in subparagraph (4), the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct shall release to such person at the conclusion of its
    investigation a summary of its investigation, together with its
    findings. If, at the conclusion of its investigation, the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct determines that there has been a
    significant breach of confidentiality or unauthorized disclosure by a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, offi

      (h) The select committee may permit a personal representative of the
    President, designated by the President to serve as a liaison to the
    select committee, to attend any closed meeting of the select committee.

      (i) Subject to the Rules of the House, funds may not be appropriated
    for a fiscal year, with the exception of a bill or joint resolution
    continuing appropriations, or an amendment thereto, or a conference
    report thereon, to, or for use of, a department or agency of the United
    States to carry out any of the following activities, unless the funds
    shall previously have been authorized by a bill or joint resolution
    passed by the House during the same or preceding fiscal year to carry
    out such activity for such fiscal year:

          (1) The activities of the Central Intelligence Agency and the
    Director of Central Intelligence.

          (2) The activities of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

    [[Page 530]]

          (3) The activities of the National Security Agency.

          (4) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities of other
    agencies and subdivisions of the Department of Defense.

          (5) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the
    Department of State.

          (6) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the
    Federal Bureau of Investigation, including all activities of the
    Intelligence Division.

      (j)(1) In this clause the term ``intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities'' includes--

          (A) the collection, analysis, production, dissemination, or use of
    information that relates to a foreign country, or a government,
    political group, party, military force, movement, or other association
    in a foreign country, and that relates to the defense, foreign policy,
    national security, or related policies of the United States and other
    activity in support of the collection, analysis, production,
    dissemination, or use of such information;

          (B) activities taken to counter similar activities directed
    against the United States;

          (C) covert or clandestine activities affecting the relations of
    the United States with a foreign government, political group, party,
    military force, movement, or other association;

    [[Page 531]]

    a department, agency, bureau, office, division, instrumentality, or
    employee of the United States to pose, a threat to the internal security
    of the United States; and
          (D) the collection, analysis, production, dissemination, or use of
    information about activities of persons within the United States, its
    territories and possessions, or nationals of the United States abroad
    whose political and related activities pose, or may be considered by

          (E) covert or clandestine activities directed against persons
    described in subdivision (D).

      (2) In this clause the term ``department or agency'' includes any
    organization, committee, council, establishment, or office within the
    Federal Government.

      (3) For purposes of this clause, reference to a department, agency,
    bureau, or subdivision shall include a reference to any successor
    department, agency, bureau, or subdivision to the extent that a
    successor engages in intelligence or intelligence-related activities now
    conducted by the department, agency, bureau, or subdivision referred to
    in this clause.

      (k) Clause 12(a) of rule XXII does not apply to meetings of a
    conference committee respecting legislation (or any part thereof)
    reported by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

    [[Page 532]]

    p. 39); (7) to limit the size of the panel to 16, with no more than nine
    members from the same party; to set the tenure limitation at four
    Congresses within a period of six Congresses, with exceptions for
    ongoing service as chairman or ranking minority member; to make the
    Speaker (rather than the Majority Leader) an ex officio member of the
    panel (as opposed to his former free access to its meetings and
    information); and to conform references to renamed committees (sec. 221,
    H. Res. 6, 104th Cong., Jan. 4, 1995, p. 469); (8) to make certain
    conforming changes (Budget Enforcement Act of 1997, sec. 10104, P.L.
    105-33; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47); (9) to increase the size of the
    committee to not more than 18 members, of whom not more than 10 shall be
    of the same political party (sec. 2(h), H. Res. 5, 107th Cong., Jan. 3,
    2001, p. 25); (10) to make a clerical correction in a cross reference
    (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, 107th Cong., Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26); (11) to remove
    the tenure limitation for the chairman and ranking minority member (sec.
    2(e-1), H. Res. 5, 108th Cong., Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----); and (12) to
    increase the size of the committee to not more than 21 members, of whom
    not more than 12 shall be of the same political party (H. Res. 51, 109th
    Cong., Jan. 26, 2005, p. ----). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule XLVIII (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). By order of the House, the size of the
    committee was increased for the 107th Congress to not more than 20
    members, of whom not more than 11 shall be of the same political party
    (Jan. 6, 2001, p. 25). The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention
    Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) reorganized the intelligence community.

    Sec. 786.

      This clause (formerly rule XLVIII) was  adopted in
    the 95th Congress (H. Res. 658, July 14, 1977, pp. 22932-49) and has had
    several technical amendments: (1) to change the size of the Select
    Committee from 13 to 14 members (H. Res. 70, 96th Cong., Jan. 25, 1979,
    p. 1023); (2) to reflect a change in the name of a committee (H. Res.
    89, 96th Cong., Feb. 5, 1979, p. 1848); (3) to change the size to not
    more than 16 members (H. Res. 33, 99th Cong., Jan. 30, 1985, p. 1271);
    (4) to change the size to not more than 17 members and to change the
    cross-reference in clause 7(c)(1) to include paragraph (a) or (b) (H.
    Res. 5, 100th Cong., Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6); (5) to change the size to not
    more than 19 members (H. Res. 5, 101st Cong., Jan. 3, 1989, p. 73) and
    to permit the Speaker to attend meetings and have access to information
    (H. Res. 268, Nov. 14, 1989, p. 28789); (6) to strike obsolete language
    relating to tenure restrictions in clause 1 and relating to the
    requirement for authorizations of appropriations in clause 9 (H. Res. 5,
    102d Cong., Jan. 3, 1991,

    [[Page 533]]

      More substantive amendments have been adopted as follows: (1) clause 4
    was amended to make former clause 6(c) of rule XI (current clause 9(c)
    of rule X) applicable to salaries of the staff of the Select Committee
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16); (2) paragraph (d) (formerly clause
    4) was amended to make an exception to the provisions of clause 2(g)(2)
    of rule XI (requiring a majority of the membership of a committee be
    present in order to vote to close a hearing) to allow the Select
    Committee to vote to go into executive session if a majority of the
    members present, there being in attendance the requisite number under
    the Select Committee rules for the purpose of taking testimony,
    determine that it is necessary to do so for national security reasons
    (but in no event to be determined by less than two members) (H. Res.
    165, Mar. 29, 1979, p. 6820); (3) paragraph (d) (formerly clause 4) was
    amended to provide the Select Committee with permanent professional and
    clerical staff as provided by former clauses 6(a) and (b) of rule XI
    (current clauses 9(a) and (b) of rule X) (H. Res. 58, Mar. 1, 1983, p.
    3241); (4) paragraph (b)(2) (formerly clause 2(a)) was amended to
    clarify jurisdiction over the National Foreign Intelligence Program and
    the tactical intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the
    Department of Defense and paragraph (a)(3) (formerly clause 1(b)) was
    added to clarify staffing arrangements for the Speaker and the Minority
    Leader as ex officio members (sec. 221, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    469).

      The resolution creating the Select Committee directed the committee to
    make a study with respect to intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities of the U.S. and to report thereon, together with appropriate
    recommendations, not later than the close of the 95th Congress (sec. 3,
    H. Res. 658; see H. Rept. 95-1795, Oct. 14, 1978), and transferred to
    the Select Committee all records, files, documents, and other materials
    of the Select Committee on Intelligence of the 94th Congress in the
    possession, custody, or control of the Clerk of the House.

      The Select Committee has concurrent jurisdiction with the Committee on
    the Judiciary over bills concerning electronic surveillance of foreign
    intelligence (Nov. 4, 1977, p. 37070); concurrent jurisdiction with the
    Committees on Science, Space, and Technology (now Science) and Foreign
    Affairs (now International Relations) over a bill establishing a
    satellite monitoring commission (Mar. 15, 1988, p. 3847); and sole
    jurisdiction over a resolution of inquiry directing the Secretary of
    Defense to furnish to the House documents and information on Cuban or
    other foreign military or paramilitary presence in Panama or the Canal
    Zone (Apr. 6, 1978, p. 9105).

      Paragraph (g)(2) places restrictions on the Select Committee only with
    respect to the public disclosure of classified information in the
    possession of that committee, and does not prevent the House from
    determining to release any matter properly presented to it in secret
    session pursuant to clause 9 of rule XVII (formerly rule XXIX) (Feb. 25,
    1980, p. 3618).

      For a discussion of the role of the Permanent Select Committee on
    Intelligence in regulating access to the classified records of the
    former Select Committee on U.S. National Security and Military/
    Commercial Concerns With the People's Republic of China, House Practice,
    ch. 11, Sec. Sec. 12, 13.

      In the 107th Congress the Select Committee was given oversight
    authority described in clause 3(m) of rule X (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    3, 2001, p. 25).

                                     Rule XI

    In general
                procedures of committees and unfinished business

    787. Committee procedure.

      1.  (a)(1)(A) The Rules of the
    House are the rules of its committees and subcommittees so far as
    applicable.

    [[Page 534]]

    tion of that committee and to its rules, so far as applicable.
      (B) Each subcommittee is a part of its committee and is subject to the
    authority and direc

      (2)(A) In a committee or subcommittee--

          (i) a motion to recess from day to day, or to recess subject to
    the call of the Chair (within 24 hours), shall be privileged; and

          (ii) a motion to dispense with the first reading (in full) of a
    bill or resolution shall be privileged if printed copies are available.

      (B) A motion accorded privilege under this subparagraph shall be
    decided without debate.

      This paragraph was first adopted December 8, 1931, to provide that the
    Rules of the House are the rules of the standing committees (without
    reference to subcommittees) and to provide for a privileged motion to
    recess from day to day (VIII, 2215). The paragraph was amended March 23,
    1955, when the House adopted rules governing committee investigations
    that are now embodied in clause 2 (pp. 3569-3585). In the 92d Congress
    paragraph (a) was amended in the form contained in the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) to specifically address
    subcommittees (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). It was amended again
    in the 99th Congress to allow a privileged motion to dispense with the
    first reading of a measure where printed copies are available (H. Res.
    7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected
    when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In the 109th Congress paragraph (a) was
    reorganized and amended to provide for a privileged motion to recess
    subject to the call of the chair (within 24 hours) (sec. 2(d), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). For the requirement in Jefferson's Manual
    that a bill or resolution be read in full upon demand, before being read
    by paragraphs or sections for amendment, see Sec. 412, supra.

      Each committee may appoint subcommittees (VI, 532), which should
    include majority and minority representation (IV, 4551), and confer on
    them powers delegated to the committee itself (VI, 532) except such
    powers as are reserved to the full committee by the Rules of the House;
    but express authority also has been given subcommittees by the House
    (III, 1754-1759, 1801, 2499, 2504, 2508, 2517; IV, 4548).

    [[Page 535]]

      As indicated in Sec. 369, supra, clause 1(a)(1)(A) enables standing
    and select committees to enforce in committee applicable House rules of
    decorum, such as clause 2 of rule I and rule XVII.

    Sec. 788. Investigative authority.

      (b)(1)  Each committee may
    conduct at any time such investigations and studies as it considers
    necessary or appropriate in the exercise of its responsibilities under
    rule X. Subject to the adoption of expense resolutions as required by
    clause 6 of rule X, each committee may incur expenses, including travel
    expenses, in connection with such investigations and studies.

      (2) A proposed investigative or oversight report shall be considered
    as read in committee if it has been available to the members for at
    least 24 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays except
    when the House is in session on such a day).

      (3) A report of an investigation or study conducted jointly by more
    than one committee may be filed jointly, provided that each of the
    committees complies independently with all requirements for approval and
    filing of the report.

      (4) After an adjournment sine die of the last regular session of a
    Congress, an investigative or oversight report may be filed with the
    Clerk at any time, provided that a member who gives timely notice of
    intention to file supplemental, minority, or additional views shall be
    entitled to not less than seven calendar days in which to submit such
    views for inclusion in the report.

    [[Page 536]]

    changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Paragraph (b)(1) was incorporated into the rules under the Committee
    Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), and, together with clauses 2(m) and 2(n)
    of rule XI, eliminated the necessity that each committee obtain such
    authority each Congress by a separate resolution reported from the
    Committee on Rules. Paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), and (b)(4) were added in
    the 105th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Clerical and
    stylistic

    Sec. 789. Printing and binding.

      (c)  Each committee may have
    printed and bound such testimony and other data as may be presented at
    hearings held by the committee or its subcommittees. All costs of
    stenographic services and transcripts in connection with a meeting or
    hearing of a committee shall be paid from the applicable accounts of the
    House described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X.

      Paragraph (c) was made part of the rules by the Committee Reform
    Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong.,
    Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the 105th and 106th Congresses, it was
    amended to update a reference to the ``contingent fund'' (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47), and a conforming
    change was effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4,
    2005, p. ----). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 790. Activity reports.

      (d)(1)  Each committee shall
    submit to the House not later than January 2 of each odd-numbered year a
    report on the activities of that committee under this rule and rule X
    during the Congress ending at noon on January 3 of such year.

      (2) Such report shall include separate sections summarizing the
    legislative and oversight activities of that committee during that
    Congress.

    [[Page 537]]

    recommendations made or actions taken thereon.
      (3) The oversight section of such report shall include a summary of
    the oversight plans submitted by the committee under clause 2(d) of rule
    X, a summary of the actions taken and recommendations made with respect
    to each such plan, a summary of any additional oversight activities
    undertaken by that committee, and any

      (4) After an adjournment sine die of the last regular session of a
    Congress, the chairman of a committee may file an activities report
    under subparagraph (1) with the Clerk at any time and without approval
    of the committee, provided that--

          (A) a copy of the report has been available to each member of the
    committee for at least seven calendar days; and

          (B) the report includes any supplemental, minority, or additional
    views submitted by a member of the committee.

      The provisions of paragraph (d)(1) were first made requirements of the
    rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144,
    incorporating the provisions of sec. 118(b) of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140)), and effective on January 3,
    1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470) exemptions from
    the reporting requirements for the Committees on Appropriations, the
    Budget, House Administration, Rules, and Standards of Official Conduct
    were removed, so the paragraph from that point applied to all
    committees. The 104th Congress added paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) to
    require that activity reports include separate sections on legislative
    and oversight activities, including a summary comparison of oversight
    plans and eventual recommendations and actions (sec. 203(b), H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467). Paragraph (d)(4) was added in the 105th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Adoption of written rules
      Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, the Committee on Rules
    is required to include in its activity report a separate item
    identifying all waivers of points of order relating to Federal mandates,
    listed by bill or joint resolution number and subject matter (sec.
    107(b), P.L. 104-4; 109 Stat. 63).

    [[Page 538]]

    791. Committee rules.

      2.  (a)(1) Each standing committee
    shall adopt written rules governing its procedure. Such rules--

          (A) shall be adopted in a meeting that is open to the public
    unless the committee, in open session and with a quorum present,
    determines by record vote that all or part of the meeting on that day
    shall be closed to the public;

          (B) may not be inconsistent with the Rules of the House or with
    those provisions of law having the force and effect of Rules of the
    House; and

          (C) shall in any event incorporate all of the succeeding
    provisions of this clause to the extent applicable.

      (2) Each committee shall submit its rules for publication in the
    Congressional Record not later than 30 days after the committee is
    elected in each odd-numbered year.

      (3) A committee may adopt a rule providing that the chairman be
    directed to offer a motion under clause 1 of rule XXII whenever the
    chairman considers it appropriate.

    [[Page 539]]

    mony. In overturning a perjury conviction, the court held that the
    unpublished committee rule was not valid. United States v. Reinecke, 524
    F.2d 435 (D.C. Cir. 1975). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected
    when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Subparagraph (3) was added in the 109th Congress
    (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).
      The requirement that standing committees adopt written rules was first
    incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22,
    1971, p. 144), having been included in the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140). Under the Committee Reform Amendments of
    1974, clause 2(a) became effective in essentially its present form on
    January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the
    94th Congress it was amended to permit a record vote to close the
    committee meeting at which committee rules are adopted only on the day
    of the meeting (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). In the 102d Congress
    it was amended to allow a committee 30 days after the election of its
    members, rather than after the convening of the Congress, to publish its
    rules in the Congressional Record (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). The
    provision requiring publication of committee rules in the Congressional
    Record derived from statute (2 U.S.C. 190a-2 (repealed 1979)). A court
    interpreted that statute to be mandatory in a case where a Senate
    committee failed to publish in the Record a rule regarding a quorum for
    the purpose of taking sworn testi

      Committees have historically adopted rules under which they function
    (I, 707; III, 1841, 1842; VIII, 2214). Committee rules are compiled by
    the Committee on Rules each Congress as a committee print. It is the
    responsibility of the committees, and not the House, to construe and
    enforce additional committee rules on the calling of committee meetings
    (Speaker Albert, July 22, 1974, pp. 24436-47). This provision requires a
    select committee to publish its adopted rules in the Record (June 25,
    1998, p. 14014).

    Sec. 792. Committee procedure generally.

      Failure  to follow
    certain procedural requirements imposed on committees by this rule may
    invalidate committee actions. Violation of the requirements as to open
    meetings and hearings and other hearing irregularities improperly
    overruled (see clause 2(g)(5) of rule XI) or the prescribed committee
    procedures for reporting bills and resolutions (clause 2(h) of rule XI)
    may in some instances be the basis for a point of order in the House,
    resulting in the recommitment of the bill. However, a point of order
    does not ordinarily lie in the House against consideration of a bill by
    reason of defective committee procedures occurring before the time the
    bill is ordered reported to the House (Procedure, ch. 17, Sec. 11.1).

      Many of the procedures applicable to committees derive from
    Jefferson's Manual, which governs the House and its committees in all
    cases to which it is applicable (clause 1 of rule XXVIII). A committee
    may act only when together, and not by separate consultation and
    consent, nothing being the report (or recommendation) of the committee
    except what has been agreed to in committee actually assembled (see
    Jefferson's Manual at Sec. 407, supra). A measure before a committee for
    consideration must be read for amendment by section as in the House (see
    Jefferson's Manual at Sec. Sec. 412-414, supra), and reading of the
    measure and of amendments thereto must be in full. The procedures
    applicable in the House as in the Committee of the Whole (see
    Sec. Sec. 424, 427, supra) generally apply to proceedings in committees
    of the House of Representatives, except that since a measure considered
    in committee must be read for amendment, a motion to limit debate under
    the five-minute rule in committee must be confined to the portion of the
    bill then pending. The previous question may only be moved on the
    measure in committee if the entire measure has been read, or considered
    as read, for amendment.

    [[Page 540]]

    Regular meeting days
      Committees generally conduct their business under the five-minute rule
    but may employ the ordinary motions which are in order in the House,
    such as under clause 4 of rule XVI, and may also employ the motion to
    limit debate under the five-minute rule on a proposition which has been
    read.

    793. Committee meetings.

      (b)  Each standing committee shall
    establish regular meeting days for the conduct of its business, which
    shall be not less frequent than monthly. Each such committee shall meet
    for the consideration of a bill or resolution pending before the
    committee or the transaction of other committee business on all regular
    meeting days fixed by the committee unless otherwise provided by written
    rule adopted by the committee.
    Additional and special meetings

      (c)(1) The chairman of each standing committee may call and convene,
    as he considers necessary, additional and special meetings of the
    committee for the consideration of a bill or resolution pending before
    the committee or for the conduct of other committee business, subject to
    such rules as the committee may adopt. The committee shall meet for such
    purpose under that call of the chairman.

    [[Page 541]]

    after the filing of the request) a majority of the members of the
    committee may file in the offices of the committee their written notice
    that a special meeting of the committee will be held. The written notice
    shall specify the date and hour of the special meeting and the measure
    or matter to be considered. The committee shall meet on that date and
    hour. Immediately upon the filing of the notice, the clerk of the
    committee shall notify all members of the committee that such special
    meeting will be held and inform them of its date and hour and the
    measure or matter to be considered. Only the measure or matter specified
    in that notice may be considered at that special meeting.
    Temporary absence of chairman
      (2) Three or more members of a standing committee may file in the
    offices of the committee a written request that the chairman call a
    special meeting of the committee. Such request shall specify the measure
    or matter to be considered. Immediately upon the filing of the request,
    the clerk of the committee shall notify the chairman of the filing of
    the request. If the chairman does not call the requested special meeting
    within three calendar days after the filing of the request (to be held
    within seven calendar days

      (d) A member of the majority party on each standing committee or
    subcommittee thereof shall be designated by the chairman of the full
    committee as the vice chairman of the committee or subcommittee, as the
    case may be, and shall preside during the absence of the chairman from
    any meeting. If the chairman and vice chairman of a committee or
    subcommittee are not present at any meeting of the committee or
    subcommittee, the ranking majority member who is present shall preside
    at that meeting.

    [[Page 542]]

    men of the committee and its subcommittees (sec. 223(c), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 477). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).
      Paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) were first adopted on December 8, 1931
    (VIII, 2208), were amended on January 3, 1953 (p. 24), and were revised
    both by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and
    in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). In the 102d
    Congress paragraph (d) was amended to provide that the ranking majority
    Member of each committee and subcommittee be designated as its vice
    chairman (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). In the 104th Congress
    paragraph (d) was amended to permit the chairman of a full committee to
    designate vice chair

      A committee scheduled to meet on stated days, when convened on such
    day with a quorum present may proceed to the transaction of business
    regardless of the absence of the chairman (VIII, 2213, 2214). A
    committee meeting being adjourned for lack of a quorum, a majority of
    the members of the committee may not, without the consent of the
    chairman, call a meeting of the committee on the same day (VIII, 2213).
    Committee records

    794. Required records.

      (e)(1)(A)  Each committee shall keep
    a complete record of all committee action which shall include--

          (i) in the case of a meeting or hearing transcript, a
    substantially verbatim account of remarks actually made during the
    proceedings, subject only to technical, grammatical, and typographical
    corrections authorized by the person making the remarks involved; and

          (ii) a record of the votes on any question on which a record vote
    is demanded.

    [[Page 543]]

    Sec. 795. Public availability.

      (B)(i)  Except as provided in
    subdivision (B)(ii) and subject to paragraph (k)(7), the result of each
    such record vote shall be made available by the committee for inspection
    by the public at reasonable times in its offices. Information so
    available for public inspection shall include a description of the
    amendment, motion, order, or other proposition, the name of each member
    voting for and each member voting against such amendment, motion, order,
    or proposition, and the names of those members of the committee present
    but not voting.

      (ii) The result of any record vote taken in executive session in the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct may not be made available for
    inspection by the public without an affirmative vote of a majority of
    the members of the committee.

    Sec. 796. Committee files.

      (2)(A)  Except as provided in
    subdivision (B), all committee hearings, records, data, charts, and
    files shall be kept separate and distinct from the congressional office
    records of the member serving as its chairman. Such records shall be the
    property of the House, and each Member, Delegate, and the Resident
    Commissioner shall have access thereto.

      (B) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, other than members
    of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, may not have access
    to the records of that committee respecting the conduct of a Member,
    Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House
    without the specific prior permission of that committee.

    [[Page 544]]

      (3) Each committee shall include in its rules standards for
    availability of records of the committee delivered to the Archivist of
    the United States under rule VII. Such standards shall specify
    procedures for orders of the committee under clause 3(b)(3) and clause
    4(b) of rule VII, including a requirement that nonavailability of a
    record for a period longer than the period otherwise applicable under
    that rule shall be approved by vote of the committee.

      (4) Each committee shall make its publications available in electronic
    form to the maximum extent feasible.

      The first sentence of paragraph (e)(1) was rewritten entirely in the
    104th Congress (sec. 206, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 475). Its
    predecessor, requiring a complete record of all committee actions,
    including votes on any question on which a roll call was demanded, was
    enacted as section 133(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946
    (60 Stat. 812) and made part of the standing rules on January 3, 1953
    (p. 24). The requirement that committee roll calls be subject to public
    inspection was added by section 104(b) of the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and made a part of the rules in the 92d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). The qualified exception for
    the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct from the requirement of
    public availability of record votes was added in the 105th Congress
    (sec. 8, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19336). Effective on January 3,
    1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), the requirement
    that proxy votes in committee be made available for public inspection
    was eliminated from this paragraph since proxies were prohibited as of
    that date, but in the 94th Congress clause 2(f) of rule XI was amended
    to permit proxies in committee, and this paragraph was likewise amended
    to reinsert the requirement of availability for public inspection (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). When proxy voting was again eliminated in
    the 104th Congress, the reference thereto in the third sentence of
    paragraph (e)(1) was deleted (sec. 104(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    463). Paragraph (e)(2) derives from section 202(d) of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), was made a part of the rules
    in the 83d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1953, p. 24), and was amended in
    the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) to restrict the
    access of Members to certain records of the Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct. Paragraph (e)(3) was added in the 101st Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). Paragraph (e)(4) was added in the 105th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Clerical and stylistic
    changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 545]]

    mittee) in the possession of the House (Sept. 9, 1998, p. 19769). In the
    105th Congress the House adopted a resolution restricting Members'
    access to documents received from an independent counsel (said to relate
    to possible grounds for impeachment of the President) and referred to
    the Committee on the Judiciary (H. Res. 525, Sept. 11, 1998, p. 20020).
      Although all Members have access to committee records under this
    clause, it is not without qualification. For example, this clause: (1)
    does not give a Member the right to make photostatic copies of such
    records (Speaker Rayburn, Aug. 14, 1957, pp. 14737-39), and such records
    may not be brought into the well of the House if the committee has not
    authorized such action (Speaker Rayburn, June 3, 1960, p. 11820); (2)
    does not necessarily apply to records within the possession of the
    executive branch which the members of the committee have been allowed to
    examine under limited conditions at the discretion of the executive
    agency in possession of such materials (Speaker O'Neill, July 31, 1980,
    p. 20765); (3) does not apply to records (an executive communication not
    yet referred to com

      Testimony or evidence taken in executive sessions of a committee is
    under the control and subject to the regulation of the committee and,
    under clause 2(k)(7) of rule XI (Sec. 803, infra), cannot be released
    without the consent of the committee (June 26, 1961, p. 11233; see also
    Deschler, ch. 17, Sec. 18). Furthermore, such access allows a Member to
    examine executive session materials only in committee rooms and does not
    permit a Member to copy or to take personal notes from such materials,
    to keep such notes or copies in his personal office files, or to release
    such materials to the public without the consent of the committee or
    subcommittee under clause 2(k)(7) of rule XI (Speaker O'Neill, Dec. 6,
    1977, pp. 38470-73). Compare this clause with clause 11(g)(3) of rule X,
    which only permits access of nonmembers of the Select Committee on
    Intelligence to classified information in the possession of that
    committee when authorized by that committee. A resolution directing a
    standing committee to release executive-session material referred to it
    by special rule of the House was held to propose a change in the rules
    and, therefore, not to constitute a question of the privileges of the
    House under rule IX (Sept. 23, 1998, p. 21562).

    Prohibition against proxy voting
      In implementing clause 2(e), committees may prescribe regulations to
    govern the manner of access to their records, such as requiring
    examination only in committee rooms. See, for example, the rules of the
    Committees on the Budget, International Relations, and Armed Services,
    as compiled by the Committee on Rules.

    797. Ban on proxies.

      (f)  A vote by a member of a committee
    or subcommittee with respect to any measure or matter may not be cast by
    proxy.

      The 104th Congress adopted paragraph (f) in this form (sec. 104, H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). An earlier form of the provision was
    enacted as section 106(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970
    (84 Stat. 1140) and made part of the standing rules in the 92d Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 546]]

    proxies in committee were prohibited, but in the 94th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20), the rule was amended to permit proxies in
    committees with additional restrictions requiring an assertion that the
    grantor was absent on official business or otherwise unable to attend,
    requiring the Member to sign and date the proxy, and permitting general
    proxies for procedural matters.

    Open meetings and hearings
      The original form of this paragraph permitted committees to adopt
    written rules permitting proxies in writing, designating the persons to
    execute them and specifying the measures or matters to which they
    applied. Effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470),

    [[Page 547]]

    798. Open meetings and hearings.

      (g)(1)  Each meeting for
    the transaction of business, including the markup of legislation, by a
    standing committee or subcommittee thereof (other than the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct or its subcommittees) shall be open to the
    public, including to radio, television, and still photography coverage,
    except when the committee or subcommittee, in open session and with a
    majority present, determines by record vote that all or part of the
    remainder of the meeting on that day shall be in executive session
    because disclosure of matters to be considered would endanger national
    security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, would
    tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person, or otherwise would
    violate a law or rule of the House. Persons, other than members of the
    committee and such noncommittee Members, Delegates, Resident
    Commissioner, congressional staff, or departmental representatives as
    the committee may authorize, may not be present at a business or markup
    session that is held in executive session. This subparagraph does not
    apply to open committee hearings, which are governed by clause 4(a)(1)
    of rule X or by subparagraph (2).

      (2)(A) Each hearing conducted by a committee or subcommittee (other
    than the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct or its
    subcommittees) shall be open to the public, including to radio,
    television, and still photography coverage, except when the committee or
    subcommittee, in open session and with a majority present, determines by
    record vote that all or part of the remainder of that hearing on that
    day shall be closed to the public because disclosure of testimony,
    evidence, or other matters to be considered would endanger national
    security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or
    would violate a law or rule of the House.

      (B) Notwithstanding the requirements of subdivision (A), in the
    presence of the number of members required under the rules of the
    committee for the purpose of taking testimony, a majority of those
    present may--

          (i) agree to close the hearing for the sole purpose of discussing
    whether testimony or evidence to be received would endanger national
    security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or
    would violate clause 2(k)(5); or

          (ii) agree to close the hearing as provided in clause 2(k)(5).

    [[Page 548]]

    vote authorizes a particular committee or subcommittee, for purposes of
    a particular series of hearings on a particular article of legislation
    or on a particular subject of investigation, to close its hearings to
    Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner by the same procedures
    specified in this subparagraph for closing hearings to the public.
      (C) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not be excluded
    from non-
    participatory attendance at a hearing of a committee or subcommittee
    (other than the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct or its
    subcommittees) unless the House by majority

      (D) The committee or subcommittee may vote by the same procedure
    described in this subparagraph to close one subsequent day of hearing,
    except that the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed
    Services, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the
    subcommittees thereof, may vote by the same procedure to close up to
    five additional, consecutive days of hearings.

    [[Page 549]]

    Daily Digest and made available in electronic form.
      (3) The chairman of each committee (other than the Committee on Rules)
    shall make public announcement of the date, place, and subject matter of
    a committee hearing at least one week before the commencement of the
    hearing. If the chairman of the committee, with the concurrence of the
    ranking minority member, determines that there is good cause to begin a
    hearing sooner, or if the committee so determines by majority vote in
    the presence of the number of members required under the rules of the
    committee for the transaction of business, the chairman shall make the
    announcement at the earliest possible date. An announcement made under
    this subparagraph shall be published promptly in the

      (4) Each committee shall, to the greatest extent practicable, require
    witnesses who appear before it to submit in advance written statements
    of proposed testimony and to limit their initial presentations to the
    committee to brief summaries thereof. In the case of a witness appearing
    in a nongovernmental capacity, a written statement of proposed testimony
    shall include a curriculum vitae and a disclosure of the amount and
    source (by agency and program) of each Federal grant (or subgrant
    thereof) or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during the
    current fiscal year or either of the two previous fiscal years by the
    witness or by an entity represented by the witness.

      (5)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), a point of order does
    not lie with respect to a measure reported by a committee on the ground
    that hearings on such measure were not conducted in accordance with this
    clause.

      (B) A point of order on the ground described in subdivision (A) may be
    made by a member of the committee that reported the measure if such
    point of order was timely made and improperly disposed of in the
    committee.

      (6) This paragraph does not apply to hearings of the Committee on
    Appropriations under clause 4(a)(1) of rule X.

    [[Page 550]]

    meeting) or to one day plus one subsequent day (in the case of a
    hearing) the period during which a committee may close its session. They
    were again amended in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp.
    53-70), to require that a majority (rather than a quorum) be present
    when a committee or subcommittee votes to close a meeting or hearing and
    to provide that a noncommittee Member cannot be excluded from a hearing
    except by a vote of the House. However, subparagraph (2) was amended in
    the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, p. 8) to permit a majority
    of those present under the rules of the committee for the purpose of
    taking testimony (not less than two members as provided in clause
    2(h)(2) of rule XI) to vote to close a hearing either to discuss whether
    the testimony would endanger national security or would violate clause
    2(k)(5) of this rule, or to proceed to close the hearing as provided by
    clause 2(k)(5). In the 98th Congress subparagraph (2) was amended
    further to permit the Committees on Appropriations and Armed Services,
    and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and their
    subcommittees, when voting in open session with a quorum present, to
    close a hearing on that particular day and for up to five additional
    days, for a total of not to exceed six days (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983, p.
    34). In the 104th Congress the paragraph was amended to require that
    meetings and hearings open to the public also be open to broadcast and
    photographic media; subparagraph (2) was further amended to permit
    closed meetings only on specified conditions and to delete an exception
    for meetings relating to internal budget or personnel matters and to
    specify a new condition (sensitive law enforcement information) for
    closing hearings (sec. 105, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). The
    paragraph was also amended to conform references to renamed committees
    (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). In the 105th Congress subparagraphs (1) and (2) were again
    amended to reflect an amendment to former clause 4(e)(3) of rule X
    (currently clause 3 of rule XI) requiring meetings of the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct to occur in executive session (except for
    adjudicatory subcommittee meetings or full committee sanction hearings)
    unless opened by an affirmative vote of a majority of members (sec. 5,
    H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19336). Subparagraphs (3)-(6) derive
    from sections 111(b), 113(b), 115(b), and 242(c) respectively of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and became part
    of the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144).
    Effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470), these provisions were inadvertently omitted from the rules, and
    were therefore reinserted in the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14,
    1975, p. 20). Subparagraph (3) was amended in the 97th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 98-113) to add the requirement of prompt entering
    of public notice of committee meetings into the committee scheduling
    service of the House Information Resources. Subparagraph (3) was again
    amended in the 104th Congress to permit the calling of a hearing on less
    than seven days' notice upon a determination of good cause either by
    vote of the committee or subcommittee or by its chairman

    [[Page 551]]

    with the concurrence of its ranking minority member (H. Res. 43, Jan.
    31, 1995, p. 3028). In the 105th and 106th Congresses subparagraphs (3)
    and (2) (respectively) were amended to effect a technical correction (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Subparagraph (4) was rewritten in the 105th Congress to encourage
    committees to elicit curricula vitae and disclosures of certain
    interests from nongovernmental witnesses (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p.
    121). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).
      Subparagraphs (1) and (2) relating to open committee meetings and
    hearings, were first made part of the rules on March 7, 1973 (H. Res.
    259, 93d Cong., pp. 6713-20). They were amended in the 94th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20), to limit to one day (in case of a
    committee

    Quorum requirements
      In the 105th Congress the House adopted a resolution restricting
    access to meetings and hearings held by the Committee on the Judiciary
    on a communication received from an independent counsel relating to
    possible grounds for impeachment of the President (H. Res. 525, Sept.
    11, 1998, p. 20020).

    799. Requirement of quorum.

      (h)(1)  A measure or
    recommendation may not be reported by a committee unless a majority of
    the committee is actually present.

      This subparagraph is from section 133(d) of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812) and was made a part of the
    rules on January 3, 1953 (p. 24). Before the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause
    2(l)(2)(A) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The point of
    order that a bill was reported from a committee without a formal meeting
    and a quorum present comes too late if debate has started on a bill in
    the House (VIII, 2223; Feb. 24, 1947, p. 1374). No committee report is
    valid unless authorized with a quorum of the committee actually present
    at the time the vote is taken (IV, 4584; VIII, 2211, 2212, 2221, 2222),
    and while Speakers have indicated that committee members may come and go
    during the course of the vote if the roll call indicates that a quorum
    was present (VIII, 2222), where it is admitted that a quorum was not in
    the room at any time during the vote and the committee transcript does
    not show a quorum acting as a quorum, the Chair will sustain the point
    of order (VIII, 2212). In the 103d Congress, this provision was amended
    to provide that responses to roll calls in committee be deemed
    contemporaneous and to require that a point of no quorum with respect to
    a committee report be timely asserted in committee or considered waived
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49), but in the 104th Congress both of
    those features were deleted from the rule (sec. 207, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 467).

    [[Page 552]]

    ruled a point of order made under this provision (Oct. 22, 1987, p.
    28807). A point of no quorum pending a committee vote on ordering a
    measure reported may provoke a quorum call requiring a majority of the
    committee to be present in the committee room. A committee may act only
    when together, nothing being the report of the committee except what has
    been agreed to in committee actually assembled (see Jefferson's Manual
    at Sec. 407, supra).

      Where the committee transcript was not conclusive and the manager of
    the bill gave absolute assurance that a majority of the full committee
    was actually present when the bill was ordered reported the Speaker over

    Sec. 800. Reduced quorum.

      (2)  Each committee may fix the
    number of its members to constitute a quorum for taking testimony and
    receiving evidence, which may not be less than two.

      (3) Each committee (other than the Committee on Appropriations, the
    Committee on the Budget, and the Committee on Ways and Means) may fix
    the number of its members to constitute a quorum for taking any action
    other than one for which the presence of a majority of the committee is
    otherwise required, which may not be less than one-third of the members.

      Subparagraphs (2) and (3) (formerly subparagraphs (1) and (2)) were
    adopted in the 84th Congress and only related to the authority of a
    committee to fix a quorum of not less than two for taking testimony (H.
    Res. 151, Mar. 23, 1955, pp. 3569, 3585). In the 95th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) subparagraph (3) (formerly subparagraph (2))
    was added to authorize committees to fix a quorum less than a majority
    for certain other action. Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, paragraph (h) consisted only of subparagraphs (2) and
    (3) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Subparagraph (3) was amended in
    the 107th Congress to preserve all requirements for a majority quorum
    found in House rules (sec. 2(i), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

    [[Page 553]]

      By unanimous consent the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    was authorized to receive evidence and take testimony before a quorum of
    one of its members for the remainder of the second session of the 100th
    Congress (Oct. 13, 1988, p. 30467). Authority for a committee to conduct
    depositions or interrogatories before one member or staff of the
    committee must be specifically conferred by the House (see, e.g., H.
    Res. 167, 105th Cong., June 20, 1997, p. 11677).

    Sec. 800a. Postponing votes in committee.

      (4)(A)  Each
    committee may adopt a rule authorizing the chairman of a committee or
    subcommittee--

          (i) to postpone further proceedings when a record vote is ordered
    on the question of approving a measure or matter or on adopting an
    amendment; and

          (ii) to resume proceedings on a postponed question at any time
    after reasonable notice.

      (B) A rule adopted pursuant to this subparagraph shall provide that
    when proceedings resume on a postponed question, notwithstanding any
    intervening order for the previous question, an underlying proposition
    shall remain subject to further debate or amendment to the same extent
    as when the question was postponed.

      This subpararaph was added in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(g), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).
    Limitation on committee sittings

    801. Committees not to sit.

      (i)  A committee may not sit
    during a joint session of the House and Senate or during a recess when a
    joint meeting of the House and Senate is in progress.

    [[Page 554]]

    mitted to sit during proceedings under the five-minute rule by unanimous
    consent granted each Congress (Jan. 29, 1975, p. 1677) until it was
    exempted from the rule in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981,
    pp. 98-113). A provision that special leave to sit be granted if ten
    Members did not object was added to the clause in the 95th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). An exemption for the Committee on
    House Administration and the prohibition against committee meetings
    during joint meetings or joint sessions were added in the 101st Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). In the 103d Congress the prohibition
    against sitting during proceedings under the five-minute rule was
    stricken altogether (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49), but in the 104th
    Congress the former rule was reinstated with exemptions for the
    Committees on Appropriations, the Budget, Rules, Standards of Official
    Conduct, and Ways and Means, and also with the provision for a
    privileged motion by the Majority Leader (sec. 208, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 467), on which he controlled one hour of debate (Jan. 23, 1995,
    p. 2209). In the 105th Congress so much of paragraph (i) as related to
    proceedings under the five-minute rule was again stricken (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    Calling and questioning of witnesses
      A clause regulating when committees could sit had its origin in 1794.
    It was omitted from rule XI in the adoption of rules for the 80th
    Congress but remained effective as part of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946, the applicable provisions of which were
    continued as a part of the rules of the House. While the rule formerly
    prohibited committees from sitting at any time when the House was in
    session, it was narrowed to proscribe sittings during the five-minute
    rule by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (sec. 117(b); 84
    Stat. 1140) and this revision was made part of the standing rules in the
    92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Effective January 3,
    1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), the Committees on
    Appropriations, the Budget, and Rules were exempted from this clause;
    and in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct was also exempted. The
    Committee on Ways and Means was traditionally per

    802. Witnesses.

      (j)(1)  Whenever a hearing is conducted by a
    committee on a measure or matter, the minority members of the committee
    shall be entitled, upon request to the chairman by a majority of them
    before the completion of the hearing, to call witnesses selected by the
    minority to testify with respect to that measure or matter during at
    least one day of hearing thereon.

      (2)(A) Subject to subdivisions (B) and (C), each committee shall apply
    the five-minute rule during the questioning of witnesses in a hearing
    until such time as each member of the committee who so desires has had
    an opportunity to question each witness.

    [[Page 555]]

    question a witness for longer than five minutes. The time for extended
    questioning of a witness under this subdivision shall be equal for the
    majority party and the minority party and may not exceed one hour in the
    aggregate.
      (B) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting a specified
    number of its members to

      (C) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting committee staff
    for its majority and minority party members to question a witness for
    equal specified periods. The time for extended questioning of a witness
    under this subdivision shall be equal for the majority party and the
    minority party and may not exceed one hour in the aggregate.

    Hearing procedures
      Paragraph (j)(1) was contained in section 114(b) of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and was made a part of the
    rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Paragraph
    (j)(2) was added to the rules on that latter date. While a majority of
    the minority members of a committee are entitled to call witnesses
    selected by the minority for at least one day of hearings, no rule of
    the House requires the calling of witnesses on opposing sides of an
    issue (Oct. 14, 1987, p. 27921). In the 105th Congress paragraph (j)(2)
    was redesignated as (2)(A) and two new subparagraphs were added as
    (2)(B) and (2)(C) to enable committees to permit extended examinations
    of witnesses (for 30 additional minutes) by designated members or by
    staff (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). A technical correction was
    effected in the 106th Congress to clarify the procedure to extend
    questioning, and clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the
    House recodified its rules in the same Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    803. Hearing procedure.

      (k)(1)  The chairman at a hearing
    shall announce in an opening statement the subject of the hearing.

    [[Page 556]]

      (2) A copy of the committee rules and of this clause shall be made
    available to each witness on request.

      (3) Witnesses at hearings may be accompanied by their own counsel for
    the purpose of advising them concerning their constitutional rights.

      (4) The chairman may punish breaches of order and decorum, and of
    professional ethics on the part of counsel, by censure and exclusion
    from the hearings; and the committee may cite the offender to the House
    for contempt.

      (5) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the committee that the
    evidence or testimony at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or
    incriminate any person, or it is asserted by a witness that the evidence
    or testimony that the witness would give at a hearing may tend to
    defame, degrade, or incriminate the witness--

          (A) notwithstanding paragraph (g)(2), such testimony or evidence
    shall be presented in executive session if, in the presence of the
    number of members required under the rules of the committee for the
    purpose of taking testimony, the committee determines by vote of a
    majority of those present that such evidence or testimony may tend to
    defame, degrade, or incriminate any person; and

    [[Page 557]]

    from such person to subpoena additional witnesses.
          (B) the committee shall proceed to receive such testimony in open
    session only if the committee, a majority being present, determines that
    such evidence or testimony will not tend to defame, degrade, or
    incriminate any person.
    In either case the committee shall afford such person an opportunity
    voluntarily to appear as a witness, and receive and dispose of requests

      (6) Except as provided in subparagraph (5), the chairman shall receive
    and the committee shall dispose of requests to subpoena additional
    witnesses.

      (7) Evidence or testimony taken in executive session, and proceedings
    conducted in executive session, may be released or used in public
    sessions only when authorized by the committee, a majority being
    present.

      (8) In the discretion of the committee, witnesses may submit brief and
    pertinent sworn statements in writing for inclusion in the record. The
    committee is the sole judge of the pertinence of testimony and evidence
    adduced at its hearing.

      (9) A witness may obtain a transcript copy of his testimony given at a
    public session or, if given at an executive session, when authorized by
    the committee.

    [[Page 558]]

    of the Committee (with respect to any person) (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). In the 105th Congress subparagraph (5) was amended
    to clarify a majority of those voting (a full quorum being present) may
    decide to proceed in open session (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    ``Investigative'' was removed from the heading and subparagraphs (1),
    (3), and (5) of paragraph (k) in the 107th Congress to conform the rule
    to House practice, which is to apply this paragraph to all committee
    investigative, oversight, or legislative hearings (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).
      The provisions of paragraph (k) were first incorporated into the rules
    in the 84th Congress (H. Res. 151, Mar. 23, 1955, pp. 3569, 3585). The
    requirement of paragraph (k)(2) that a copy of committee rules be
    furnished to each witness was added in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    22, 1971, p. 144) and was amended in the 107th Congress to require the
    committee to furnish such rules only when the witness so requests (sec.
    2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). The former requirement of
    paragraph (k)(9) that a witness must pay the cost of a transcript copy
    of his testimony was eliminated under the Committee Reform Amendments of
    1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974,
    p. 34470). Paragraph (k)(5) was amended in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16) to permit a committee or subcommittee to hear
    testimony asserted to be defamatory in executive session upon a
    determination by a majority of those present that such testimony is
    indeed defamatory, degrading, or incriminating. It was amended in the
    107th Congress to permit such an assertion to be made by the witness
    (with respect to himself) or a member

    Supplemental, minority, or additional views
      The requirements of clause 2(g)(1) and (2), and of 2(m)(2)(A), of this
    rule that a majority of the committee or subcommittee shall constitute a
    quorum for the purposes of closing meetings or hearings or issuing
    subpoenas have been construed to require, under clause 2(k)(7) of this
    rule, that a majority shall likewise constitute a quorum to release or
    make public any evidence or testimony received in any closed meeting or
    hearing and any other executive session record of the committee or
    subcommittee. See also clauses 11(c) and 11(g) of rule X, which provide
    that executive session material transmitted by the Permanent Select
    Committee on Intelligence to another committee of the House becomes the
    executive session material of the recipient committee by virtue of the
    nature of the material and the injunction of clause 11(g) of rule X,
    which prohibits disclosure of information provided to committees or
    Members of the House except in a secret session. For a discussion of
    questions of the privileges of the House addressing committee hearing
    procedure, see Sec. 704, supra.

    [[Page 559]]

    804. Minority views.

      (l)  If at the time of approval of a
    measure or matter by a committee (other than the Committee on Rules) a
    member of the committee gives notice of intention to file supplemental,
    minority, or additional views for inclusion in the report to the House
    thereon, that member shall be entitled to not less than two additional
    calendar days after the day of such notice (excluding Saturdays,
    Sundays, and legal holidays except when the House is in session on such
    a day) to file such views, in writing and signed by that member, with
    the clerk of the committee.

    Power to sit and act; subpoena power
      This provision was originally included in section 107 of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and was
    incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22,
    1971, p. 144). In the 104th Congress it was amended to count as a
    ``calendar day'' any day on which the House is in session (H. Res. 254,
    Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). In the 105th Congress it was further amended
    to reduce the guaranteed time for composing separate views from three
    full days to two full days after the day of notice (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    1997, p. 121). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, paragraph (l) consisted of this paragraph and current clause
    2(c) of rule XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    805. Power to sit and to issue subpoenas; oaths.

      (m)(1)  For
    the purpose of carrying out any of its functions and duties under this
    rule and rule X (including any matters referred to it under clause 2 of
    rule XII), a committee or subcommittee is authorized (subject to
    subparagraph (3)(A))--

          (A) to sit and act at such times and places within the United
    States, whether the House is in session, has recessed, or has adjourned,
    and to hold such hearings as it considers necessary; and

          (B) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and
    testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books, records,
    correspondence, memoranda, papers, and documents as it considers
    necessary.

      (2) The chairman of the committee, or a member designated by the
    chairman, may administer oaths to witnesses.

    [[Page 560]]

    authorized by the committee or subcommittee, a majority being present.
    The power to authorize and issue subpoenas under subparagraph (1)(B) may
    be delegated to the chairman of the committee under such rules and under
    such limitations as the committee may prescribe. Authorized subpoenas
    shall be signed by the chairman of the committee or by a member
    designated by the committee.
      (3)(A)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (A)(ii), a subpoena may be
    authorized and issued by a committee or subcommittee under subparagraph
    (1)(B) in the conduct of an investigation or series of investigations or
    activities only when

      (ii) In the case of a subcommittee of the Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct, a subpoena may be authorized and issued only by an
    affirmative vote of a majority of its members.

      (B) A subpoena duces tecum may specify terms of return other than at a
    meeting or hearing of the committee or subcommittee authorizing the
    subpoena.

      (C) Compliance with a subpoena issued by a committee or subcommittee
    under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as authorized or directed
    by the House.

    [[Page 561]]

    in the 105th Congress (sec. 15, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19319).
    In the 106th Congress subparagraph (3)(B) was added, and clerical and
    stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in
    the same Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A clerical
    correction was effected to paragraph (m)(1) in the 107th Congress to
    correct a cross reference (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26).
      Before the adoption of clause 2(m) under the Committee Reform
    Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong.,
    Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), only the Committees on Appropriations, the
    Budget, Government Operations, Internal Security, and Standards of
    Official Conduct were permitted by the standing rules to perform the
    functions as specified in subparagraphs (1)(A) and (1)(B), and other
    standing and select committees were given those authorities by separate
    resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules each Congress. In the
    94th Congress the paragraph was amended to require authorized subpoenas
    to be signed by the chairman of the full committee or any member
    designated by the committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). In the
    95th Congress the paragraph was amended to permit a subcommittee, as
    well as a full committee, to authorize subpoenas and to allow a full
    committee to delegate such authority to the chairman of the full
    committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). The special rule for
    authorizing and issuing a subpoena of a subcommittee of the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct was adopted

      A subpoena issued under this clause need only be signed by the
    chairman of the committee or by any member designated by the committee,
    whereas when the House issues an order or warrant the Speaker must under
    clause 4 of rule I issue the summons under his hand and seal, and it
    must be attested by the Clerk pursuant to clause 2(c) of rule II
    (formerly clause 3 of rule III) (III, 1668; see H. Rept. 96-1078, p.
    22). Pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 191, the President of the Senate, the Speaker
    of the House of Representatives, or a chairman of any joint committee
    established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of
    Congress, or of a committee of the whole, or of any committee of either
    House of Congress, is empowered to administer oaths to witnesses in any
    case under their examination, and any Member of either House of Congress
    may administer oaths to witnesses in any matter depending in either
    House of Congress of which he is a Member, or any committee thereof.

    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
      While under this clause the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    may issue subpoenas in investigating the conduct of a Member, officer,
    or employee of the House (the extent of the committee's jurisdiction
    under rule X and functions under clause 3 of rule XI), where the House
    mandates a possible investigation by that committee of other persons not
    directly associated with the House, the committee's jurisdiction is
    thereby enlarged and a broader subpoena authority must be conferred on
    the committee (Mar. 3, 1976, p. 5165). Subparagraph (3)(B) (formerly
    subparagraph (2)(B)) has been interpreted to require authorization by
    the full House before a subcommittee chairman could intervene in a law
    suit in order to gain access to documents subpoenaed by the
    subcommittee. In re Beef Industry Antitrust Litigation, 589 F.2d 786
    (5th Cir. 1979). The authority conferred in clause 2(m)(1)(B) to require
    information ``by subpoena or otherwise'' has not been interpreted to
    authorize depositions and interrogatories. That authority must be
    conferred by separate action of the House (see Sec. 800, supra).

    [[Page 562]]

    806. Standards of Official Conduct; additional
    duties.

      3. (a) The  Committee on Standards of Official Conduct has the following
    functions:

          (1) The committee may recommend to the House from time to time
    such administrative actions as it may consider appropriate to establish
    or enforce standards of official conduct for Members, Delegates, the
    Resident Commissioner, officers, and employees of the House. A letter of
    reproval or other administrative action of the committee pursuant to an
    investigation under subparagraph (2) shall only be issued or implemented
    as a part of a report required by such subparagraph.

          (2) The committee may investigate, subject to paragraph (b), an
    alleged violation by a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
    or employee of the House of the Code of Official Conduct or of a law,
    rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable to the conduct
    of such Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee in
    the performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities.
    After notice and hearing (unless the right to a hearing is waived by the
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee), the
    committee shall report to the House its findings of fact and
    recommendations, if any, for the final disposition of any such
    investigation and such action as the committee may consider appropriate
    in the circumstances.

    [[Page 563]]

    mittee, any substantial evidence of a violation by a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House, of a law
    applicable to the performance of his duties or the discharge of his
    responsibilities that may have been disclosed in a committee
    investigation.
          (3) The committee may report to the appropriate Federal or State
    authorities, either with the approval of the House or by an affirmative
    vote of two-thirds of the members of the com

          (4) The committee may consider the request of a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House for an advisory
    opinion with respect to the general propriety of any current or proposed
    conduct of such Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee. With appropriate deletions to ensure the privacy of the person
    concerned, the committee may publish such opinion for the guidance of
    other Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and
    employees of the House.

          (5) The committee may consider the request of a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House for a written
    waiver in exceptional circumstances with respect to clause 4 of rule
    XXIII.

    [[Page 564]]

      (b)(1)(A) Unless approved by an affirmative vote of a majority of its
    members, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct may not report a
    resolution, report, recommendation, or advisory opinion relating to the
    official conduct of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
    or employee of the House, or, except as provided in subparagraph (2),
    undertake an investigation of such conduct.

      (B)(i) Upon the receipt of information offered as a complaint that is
    in compliance with this rule and the rules of the committee, the
    chairman and ranking minority member jointly may appoint members to
    serve as an investigative subcommittee.

      (ii) The chairman and ranking minority member of the committee jointly
    may gather additional information concerning alleged conduct that is the
    basis of a complaint or of information offered as a complaint until they
    have established an investigative subcommittee or either of them has
    placed on the agenda of the committee the issue of whether to establish
    an investigative subcommittee.

      (2) Except in the case of an investigation undertaken by the committee
    on its own initiative, the committee may undertake an investigation
    relating to the official conduct of an individual Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House only--

          (A) upon receipt of information offered as a complaint, in writing
    and under oath, from a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner and
    transmitted to the committee by such Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner; or

    [[Page 565]]

    information is submitted in good faith and warrants the review and
    consideration of the committee.
    If a complaint is not disposed of within the applicable periods set
    forth in the rules of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct,
    the chairman and ranking minority member shall establish jointly an
    investigative subcommittee and forward the complaint, or any portion
    thereof, to that subcommittee for its consideration. However, if at any
    time during those periods either the chairman or ranking minority member
    places on the agenda the issue of whether to establish an investigative
    subcommittee, then an investigative subcommittee may be established only
    by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the committee.
          (B) upon receipt of information offered as a complaint, in writing
    and under oath, from a person not a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner provided that a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    certifies in writing to the committee that he believes the

      (3) The committee may not undertake an investigation of an alleged
    violation of a law, rule, regulation, or standard of conduct that was
    not in effect at the time of the alleged violation. The committee may
    not undertake an investigation of such an alleged violation that
    occurred before the third previous Congress unless the committee
    determines that the alleged violation is directly related to an alleged
    violation that occurred in a more recent Congress.

    [[Page 566]]

    the Speaker shall designate a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    from the same political party as the ineligible member to act in any
    proceeding of the committee relating to that conduct.
      (4) A member of the committee shall be ineligible to participate as a
    member of the committee in a committee proceeding relating to the
    member's official conduct. Whenever a member of the committee is
    ineligible to act as a member of the committee under the preceding
    sentence,

      (5) A member of the committee may disqualify himself from
    participating in an investigation of the conduct of a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House upon the
    submission in writing and under oath of an affidavit of disqualification
    stating that the member cannot render an impartial and unbiased decision
    in the case in which the member seeks to be disqualified. If the
    committee approves and accepts such affidavit of disqualification, the
    chairman shall so notify the Speaker and request the Speaker to
    designate a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner from the same
    political party as the disqualifying member to act in any proceeding of
    the committee relating to that case.

      (6) Information or testimony received, or the contents of a complaint
    or the fact of its filing, may not be publicly disclosed by any
    committee or staff member unless specifically authorized in each
    instance by a vote of the full committee.

      (7) The committee shall have the functions designated in titles I and
    V of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, in sections 7342, 7351, and
    7353 of title 5, United States Code, and in clause 11(g)(4) of rule X.

    [[Page 567]]

    of Official Conduct or a subcommittee thereof shall occur in executive
    session unless the committee or subcommittee, by an affirmative vote of
    a majority of its members, opens the meeting to the public.
      (c)(1) Notwithstanding clause 2(g)(1) of rule XI, each meeting of the
    Committee on Standards

      (2) Notwithstanding clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI, each hearing of an
    adjudicatory subcommittee or sanction hearing of the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct shall be held in open session unless the
    committee or subcommittee, in open session by an affirmative vote of a
    majority of its members, closes all or part of the remainder of the
    hearing on that day to the public.

      (d) Before a member, officer, or employee of the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct, including members of a subcommittee of
    the committee selected under clause 5(a)(4) of rule X and shared staff,
    may have access to information that is confidential under the rules of
    the committee, the following oath (or affirmation) shall be executed:

    [[Page 568]]

    by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and appropriate action
    shall be taken.
          ``I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will not disclose, to any
    person or entity outside the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct,
    any information received in the course of my service with the committee,
    except as authorized by the committee or in accordance with its rules.''
    Copies of the executed oath shall be retained by the Clerk as part of
    the records of the House. This paragraph establishes a standard of
    conduct within the meaning of paragraph (a)(2). Breaches of
    confidentiality shall be investigated

      (e)(1) If a complaint or information offered as a complaint is deemed
    frivolous by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, the committee may take such
    action as it, by an affirmative vote of a majority of its members,
    considers appropriate in the circumstances.

      (2) Complaints filed before the One Hundred Fifth Congress may not be
    deemed frivolous by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

      The investigative authority contained in this provision (formerly
    clause 4(e) of rule X) was first conferred upon the commitee in the 90th
    Congress (H. Res. 1099, Apr. 3, 1968, p. 8802). Effective January 3,
    1975, the former requirement in paragraph (b)(1)(A) (formerly clause
    4(e)(2)(A) of rule X) that seven committee members must authorize an
    investigation was changed to permit a majority of the commitee to
    provide that authorization (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470). That provision was further amended in the 105th Congress to
    permit the chairman and ranking minority member, with respect to a
    properly filed complaint, to gather additional information or to
    establish an investigative subcommittee (sec. 11, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18,
    1997, p. 19318). Paragraph (b)(5) (formerly clause 4(e)(2)(E) of rule X)
    was added in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), to
    provide a mechanism for a committee member to disqualify himself from
    participating in an investigation, and paragraph (b)(6) (formerly clause
    4(e)(2)(F) of rule X) was added in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    15, 1979, p. 8).

    [[Page 569]]

    a general limitation on actions for committee consideration of ethics
    matters.
      This provision was amended in several particulars by the Ethics Reform
    Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-194): (1) paragraph (a)(1) (formerly clause
    4(e)(1)(A) of rule X) was amended to enable a letter of reproval or
    other administrative action of the commitee to be implemented as part of
    a report to the House, with no action required of the House; (2)
    paragraph (a)(2) (formerly clause 4(e)(1)(B) of rule X) was amended to
    require the committee to report to the House its findings of fact and
    any recommendations respecting the final disposition of a matter in
    which it votes to undertake an investigation; (3) a new paragraph (a)(4)
    (formerly clause 4(e)(1)(E) of rule X) was added to empower the commitee
    to consider requests that the rule restricting the acceptance of gifts
    be waived in exceptional circumstances; and (4) paragraph (b)(3)
    (formerly clause 4(e)(2)(C) of rule X) was amended to set

      In the beginning of the 105th Congress a subparagraph (3) was added at
    the end of former clause 4(e) of rule X to establish a Select Committee
    on Ethics only to resolve a specific inquiry originally undertaken by
    the standing Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in the 104th
    Congress but not concluded (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). The select
    commitee filed one report to the House (H. Rept. 105-1, H. Res. 31, Jan.
    21, 1997, p. 393). The current form of paragraph (c) (formerly clause
    4(e)(3) of rule X) was adopted later in the 105th Congress (sec. 5, H.
    Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19318).

    Committee agendas
      Additional amendments to this provision were adopted in the 105th
    Congress as follows: (1) paragraphs (d) and (3) (formerly clauses
    4(e)(4) and 4(e)(5)) were adopted (sec. 6 and sec. 19, H. Res. 168,
    Sept. 18, 1997, pp. 19318, 19320); (2) paragraph (b)(2) (formerly clause
    4(e)(2)(B) of rule X) was amended to address the disposition of a
    complaint after expiration of periods set forth in the commitee rules
    and to specify parameters for the filing of complaints by non-Members
    (sec. 11, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19318); and (3) paragraph
    (a)(3) (formerly clause 4(e)(1)(C) of rule X) was amended to permit the
    commitee to report to the appropriate authorities substantial evidence
    of a violation of law by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the
    members of the commitee without the approval of the House (sec. 18, H.
    Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19320). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause
    4(e) of rule X and paragraph (b)(7) was found in former clause 1(p) of
    rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clause 3(a)(5) was amended in
    the 107th Congress to reflect the redesignation of a rule (sec. 2(s), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24).

    806a. Standards of Official Conduct; committee
    rules.

      (f)  The committee shall adopt rules providing that the chairman
    shall establish the agenda for meetings of the committee, but shall not
    preclude the ranking minority member from placing any item on the
    agenda.
    Committee staff

      (g)(1) The committee shall adopt rules providing that--

    [[Page 570]]

          (A) the staff be assembled and retained as a professional,
    nonpartisan staff;

          (B) each member of the staff shall be professional and
    demonstrably qualified for the position for which he is hired;

          (C) the staff as a whole and each member of the staff shall
    perform all official duties in a nonpartisan manner;

          (D) no member of the staff shall engage in any partisan political
    activity directly affecting any congressional or presidential election;

          (E) no member of the staff or outside counsel may accept public
    speaking engagements or write for publication on any subject that is in
    any way related to his or her employment or duties with the committee
    without specific prior approval from the chairman and ranking minority
    member; and

          (F) no member of the staff or outside counsel may make public,
    unless approved by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of
    the committee, any information, document, or other material that is
    confidential, derived from executive session, or classified and that is
    obtained during the course of employment with the committee.

      (2) Only subdivisions (C), (E), and (F) of subparagraph (1) shall
    apply to shared staff.

    [[Page 571]]

      (3)(A) All staff members shall be appointed by an affirmative vote of
    a majority of the members of the committee. Such vote shall occur at the
    first meeting of the membership of the committee during each Congress
    and as necessary during the Congress.

      (B) Subject to the approval of the Committee on House Administration,
    the committee may retain counsel not employed by the House of
    Representatives whenever the committee determines, by an affirmative
    vote of a majority of the members of the committee, that the retention
    of outside counsel is necessary and appropriate.

      (C) If the committee determines that it is necessary to retain staff
    members for the purpose of a particular investigation or other
    proceeding, then such staff shall be retained only for the duration of
    that particular investigation or proceeding.

      (D) Outside counsel may be dismissed before the end of a contract
    between the committee and such counsel only by an affirmative vote of a
    majority of the members of the committee.

      (4) In addition to any other staff provided for by law, rule, or other
    authority, with respect to the committee, the chairman and ranking
    minority member each may appoint one individual as a shared staff member
    from his or her personal staff to perform service for the committee.
    Such shared staff may assist the chairman or ranking minority member on
    any subcommittee on which he serves.
    Meetings and hearings

      (h)(1) The committee shall adopt rules providing that--

    [[Page 572]]

    than any hearing held by an adjudicatory subcommittee or any sanction
    hearing held by the committee, shall occur in executive session unless
    the committee or subcommittee by an affirmative vote of a majority of
    its members opens the meeting or hearing to the public; and
          (A) all meetings or hearings of the committee or any subcommittee
    thereof, other

          (B) any hearing held by an adjudicatory subcommittee or any
    sanction hearing held by the committee shall be open to the public
    unless the committee or subcommittee by an affirmative vote of a
    majority of its members closes the hearing to the public.
    Public disclosure

      (i) The committee shall adopt rules providing that, unless otherwise
    determined by a vote of the committee, only the chairman or ranking
    minority member, after consultation with each other, may make public
    statements regarding matters before the committee or any subcommittee
    thereof.
    Requirements to constitute a complaint

    [[Page 573]]

    Duties of chairman and ranking minority member regarding properly filed
      (j) The committee shall adopt rules regarding complaints to provide
    that whenever information offered as a complaint is submitted to the
    committee, the chairman and ranking minority member shall have 14
    calendar days or five legislative days, whichever is sooner, to
    determine whether the information meets the requirements of the rules of
    the committee for what constitutes a complaint.

            complaints

      (k)(1) The committee shall adopt rules providing that whenever the
    chairman and ranking minority member jointly determine that information
    submitted to the committee meets the requirements of the rules of the
    committee for what constitutes a complaint, they shall have 45 calendar
    days or five legislative days, whichever is later, after that
    determination (unless the committee by an affirmative vote of a majority
    of its members votes otherwise) to--

          (A) recommend to the committee that it dispose of the complaint,
    or any portion thereof, in any manner that does not require action by
    the House, which may include dismissal of the complaint or resolution of
    the complaint by a letter to the Member, officer, or employee of the
    House against whom the complaint is made;

          (B) establish an investigative subcommittee; or

          (C) request that the committee extend the applicable 45-calendar
    day or five-legislative day period by one additional 45-calendar day
    period when they determine more time is necessary in order to make a
    recommendation under subdivision (A).

    [[Page 574]]

    rules of the committee for what constitutes a complaint, and the
    complaint is not disposed of within the applicable time periods under
    subparagraph (1), then they shall establish an investigative
    subcommittee and forward the complaint, or any portion thereof, to that
    subcommittee for its consideration. However, if, at any time during
    those periods, either the chairman or ranking minority member places on
    the agenda the issue of whether to establish an investigative
    subcommittee, then an investigative subcommittee may be established only
    by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the committee.
    Duties of chairman and ranking minority member regarding information not
      (2) The committee shall adopt rules providing that if the chairman and
    ranking minority member jointly determine that information submitted to
    the committee meets the requirements of the

            constituting a complaint

      (l) The committee shall adopt rules providing that whenever the
    chairman and ranking minority member jointly determine that information
    submitted to the committee does not meet the requirements of the rules
    of the committee for what constitutes a complaint, they may--

          (1) return the information to the complainant with a statement
    that it fails to meet the requirements of the rules of the committee for
    what constitutes a complaint; or

    [[Page 575]]

    Investigative and adjudicatory subcommittees
          (2) recommend to the committee that it authorize the establishment
    of an investigative subcommittee.

      (m) The committee shall adopt rules providing that--

          (1)(A) an investigative subcommittee shall be composed of four
    Members (with equal representation from the majority and minority
    parties) whenever such a subcommittee is established pursuant to the
    rules of the committee;

          (B) an adjudicatory subcommittee shall be composed of the members
    of the committee who did not serve on the pertinent investigative
    subcommittee (with equal representation from the majority and minority
    parties) whenever such a subcommittee is established pursuant to the
    rules of the committee; and

          (C) notwithstanding any other provision of this clause, the
    chairman and ranking minority member of the committee may consult with
    an investigative subcommittee either on their own initiative or on the
    initiative of the subcommittee, shall have access to information before
    a subcommittee with which they so consult, and shall not thereby be
    precluded from serving as full, voting members of any adjudicatory
    subcommittee;

    [[Page 576]]

          (2) at the time of appointment, the chairman shall designate one
    member of a subcommittee to serve as chairman and the ranking minority
    member shall designate one member of the subcommittee to serve as the
    ranking minority member; and

          (3) the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee may
    serve as members of an investigative subcommittee, but may not serve as
    non-voting, ex officio members.
    Standard of proof for adoption of statement of alleged violation

      (n) The committee shall adopt rules to provide that an investigative
    subcommittee may adopt a statement of alleged violation only if it
    determines by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
    subcommittee that there is substantial reason to believe that a
    violation of the Code of Official Conduct, or of a law, rule,
    regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable to the performance
    of official duties or the discharge of official responsibilities by a
    Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representatives, has
    occurred.
    Subcommittee powers

      (o)(1) The committee shall adopt rules providing that an investigative
    subcommittee or an adjudicatory subcommittee may authorize and issue
    subpoenas only when authorized by an affirmative vote of a majority of
    the members of the subcommittee.

    [[Page 577]]

      (2) The committee shall adopt rules providing that an investigative
    subcommittee may, upon an affirmative vote of a majority of its members,
    expand the scope of its investigation approved by an affirmative vote of
    a majority of the members of the committee.

      (3) The committee shall adopt rules to provide that--

          (A) an investigative subcommittee may, upon an affirmative vote of
    a majority of its members, amend its statement of alleged violation
    anytime before the statement of alleged violation is transmitted to the
    committee; and

          (B) if an investigative subcommittee amends its statement of
    alleged violation, the respondent shall be notified in writing and shall
    have 30 calendar days from the date of that notification to file an
    answer to the amended statement of alleged violation.
    Due process rights of respondents

      (p) The committee shall adopt rules to provide that--

    [[Page 578]]

    that evidence is being withheld and of the count to which such evidence
    relates;
          (1) not less than 10 calendar days before a scheduled vote by an
    investigative subcommittee on a statement of alleged violation, the
    subcommittee shall provide the respondent with a copy of the statement
    of alleged violation it intends to adopt together with all evidence it
    intends to use to prove those charges which it intends to adopt,
    including documentary evidence, witness testimony, memoranda of witness
    interviews, and physical evidence, unless the subcommittee by an
    affirmative vote of a majority of its members decides to withhold
    certain evidence in order to protect a witness; but if such evidence is
    withheld, the subcommittee shall inform the respondent

          (2) neither the respondent nor his counsel shall, directly or
    indirectly, contact the subcommittee or any member thereof during the
    period of time set forth in paragraph (1) except for the sole purpose of
    settlement discussions where counsel for the respondent and the
    subcommittee are present;

          (3) if, at any time after the issuance of a statement of alleged
    violation, the committee or any subcommittee thereof determines that it
    intends to use evidence not provided to a respondent under paragraph (1)
    to prove the charges contained in the statement of alleged violation (or
    any amendment thereof), such evidence shall be made immediately
    available to the respondent, and it may be used in any further
    proceeding under the rules of the committee;

          (4) evidence provided pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) shall be
    made available to the respondent and his or her counsel only after each
    agrees, in writing, that no document, information, or other materials
    obtained pursuant to that paragraph shall be made public until--

    [[Page 579]]

              (A) such time as a statement of alleged violation is made
    public by the committee if the respondent has waived the adjudicatory
    hearing; or

              (B) the commencement of an adjudicatory hearing if the
    respondent has not waived an adjudicatory hearing;

        but the failure of respondent and his counsel to so agree in
    writing, and their consequent failure to receive the evidence, shall not
    preclude the issuance of a statement of alleged violation at the end of
    the period referred to in paragraph (1);

          (5) a respondent shall receive written notice whenever--

              (A) the chairman and ranking minority member determine that
    information the committee has received constitutes a complaint;

              (B) a complaint or allegation is transmitted to an
    investigative subcommittee;

              (C) an investigative subcommittee votes to authorize its first
    subpoena or to take testimony under oath, whichever occurs first; or

              (D) an investigative subcommittee votes to expand the scope of
    its investigation;

    [[Page 580]]

          (6) whenever an investigative subcommittee adopts a statement of
    alleged violation and a respondent enters into an agreement with that
    subcommittee to settle a complaint on which that statement is based,
    that agreement, unless the respondent requests otherwise, shall be in
    writing and signed by the respondent and respondent's counsel, the
    chairman and ranking minority member of the subcommittee, and the
    outside counsel, if any;

          (7) statements or information derived solely from a respondent or
    his counsel during any settlement discussions between the committee or a
    subcommittee thereof and the respondent shall not be included in any
    report of the subcommittee or the committee or otherwise publicly
    disclosed without the consent of the respondent; and

          (8) whenever a motion to establish an investigative subcommittee
    does not prevail, the committee shall promptly send a letter to the
    respondent informing him of such vote.
    Committee reporting requirements

      (q) The committee shall adopt rules to provide that--

          (1) whenever an investigative subcommittee does not adopt a
    statement of alleged violation and transmits a report to that effect to
    the committee, the committee may by an affirmative vote of a majority of
    its members transmit such report to the House of Representatives;

          (2) whenever an investigative subcommittee adopts a statement of
    alleged violation, the respondent admits to the violations set forth in
    such statement, the respondent waives his or her right to an
    adjudicatory hearing, and the respondent's waiver is approved by the
    committee--

    [[Page 581]]

    fore the subcommittee votes on whether to adopt the report;
              (A) the subcommittee shall prepare a report for transmittal to
    the committee, a final draft of which shall be provided to the
    respondent not less than 15 calendar days be

              (B) the respondent may submit views in writing regarding the
    final draft to the subcommittee within seven calendar days of receipt of
    that draft;

              (C) the subcommittee shall transmit a report to the committee
    regarding the statement of alleged violation together with any views
    submitted by the respondent pursuant to subdivision (B), and the
    committee shall make the report together with the respondent's views
    available to the public before the commencement of any sanction hearing;
    and

              (D) the committee shall by an affirmative vote of a majority
    of its members issue a report and transmit such report to the House of
    Representatives, together with the respondent's views previously
    submitted pursuant to subdivision (B) and any additional views
    respondent may submit for attachment to the final report; and

          (3) members of the committee shall have not less than 72 hours to
    review any report transmitted to the committee by an investigative
    subcommittee before both the commencement of a sanction hearing and the
    committee vote on whether to adopt the report.

    [[Page 582]]

    relating to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and the
    process by which the House enforces standards of official conduct (Feb.
    12, 1997, p. 2058). The moratorium was extended through September 10,
    1997 (July 30, 1997, p. 16958). On September 18, 1997, the House adopted
    the recommendations of the task force with certain amendments (H. Res.
    168, 105th Cong., p. 19340), which included not only changes to the
    standing Rules of the House but also free-standing directives to the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, which were reaffirmed for
    the 106th Congress (sec. 2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47) and again
    in the 107th Congress with an exception to section 13 (sec. 3(a), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). In the 108th Congress the pertinent
    freestanding provisions were codified (including the exception to
    section 13 added in the 107th Congress) as new paragraphs (f) through
    (q) of clause 3 (sec. 2(h), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). On the
    opening day of the 109th Congress, various changes were made to
    paragraphs (b), (k), (p), and (q) (sec. 2(k), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005,
    p. ----). Later in the 109th Congress, those changes were redacted and
    the affected provisions as they existed at the close of the 108th
    Congress were reinstated (H. Res. 240, Apr. 27, 2005, p. ----).
      In the 105th Congress a 12-member bipartisan task force was informally
    appointed by the Majority and Minority Leaders to conduct a
    comprehensive review of the House ethics process. At the same time an
    order of the House was adopted imposing a moratorium on filing or
    processing ethics complaints and on raising certain questions of
    privilege under rule IX with respect to official conduct. The moratorium
    was imposed in the expectation that the recommendations of the task
    force would include changes

      Section 803 of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (2 U.S.C. 29d) contains
    several free-standing provisions, which are carried in this annotation.
    The requirement that the respective party caucuses nominate seven
    majority and seven minority members should be read in light of clause 5
    of rule X, setting the composition of the committee at 10, five from the
    majority and five from the minority. The requirement that the committee
    adopt rules establishing investigative and adjudicative subcommittees
    should be read in light of clause 3(m), which constitutes the same
    requirement. The references to clause 5(d) of rule XI applied to a
    former rule regarding minority staffing requirements, which was
    eliminated in the 104th Congress (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 462).

     ``Sec. 803. Reforms Respecting the Committee on Standards of Official
                                   __________

                                   Conduct.--

                                      * * *

      ``(b) committee composition.--The respective party caucus or
    conference of the House of Representatives shall each nominate to the
    House of Representatives at the beginning of each Congress 7 members to
    serve on the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

      ``(c) investigative subcommittees.--The Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct shall adopt rules providing--

              ``(1) for the establishment of a 4 or 6-member investigative

            subcommittee (with equal representation from the majority and

            minority parties) whenever the committee votes to undertake any

    [[Page 583]]

            investigation;

              ``(2) that the senior majority and minority members on an

            investigative subcommittee shall serve as the chairman and

            ranking minority member of the subcommittee; and

              ``(3) that the chairman and ranking minority member of the

            full committee may only serve as non-voting, ex officio members

            on an investigative subcommittee.
    ``Clause 5(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives
    shall not apply to any investigative subcommittee.

      ``(d) adjudicatory subcommittees.--The Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct shall adopt rules providing--

              ``(1) that upon the completion of an investigation, an

            investigative subcommittee shall report its findings and

            recommendations to the committee;

              ``(2) that, if an investigative subcommittee by majority vote

            of its membership adopts a statement of alleged violation, the

            remaining members of the committee shall comprise an

            adjudicatory subcommittee to hold a disciplinary hearing on the

            violation alleged in the statement;

              ``(3) that any statement of alleged violation and any written

            response thereto shall be made public at the first meeting or

            hearing on the matter which is open to the public after the

            respondent has been given full opportunity to respond to the

            statement in accordance with committee rules, but, if no public

            hearing or meeting is held on the matter, the statement of

            alleged violation and any written response thereto shall be

            included in the committee's final report to the House of

            Representatives as required by clause 4(e)(1)(B) of rule X of

            the Rules of the House of Representatives;

              ``(4) that a quorum for an adjudicatory subcommittee for the

            purpose of taking testimony and conducting any business shall

            consist of a majority of the membership of the subcommittee plus

            one; and

              ``(5) that an adjudicatory subcommittee shall determine, after

            receiving evidence, whether the counts in the statement have

            been proved and shall report its findings to the committee.
    ``Clause 5(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives
    shall not apply to any adjudicatory subcommittee.

                                      * * *

      ``(i) advice and education.--(1) The Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct shall establish within the Committee an Office on
    Advice and Education (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the
    `Office') under the supervision of the chairman.

              ``(2) The Office shall be headed by a director who shall be

            appointed by the chairman, in consultation with the ranking

            minority member, and shall be comprised of such staff as the

            chairman determines is necessary to carry out the

            responsibilities of the Office.

              ``(3) The primary responsibilities of the Office shall

    [[Page 584]]

            include:

                      ``(A) Providing information and guidance to Members,

                    officers and employees of the House regarding any laws,

                    rules, regulations, and other standards of conduct

                    applicable to such individuals in their official

                    capacities, and any interpretations and advisory

                    opinions of the committee.

                      ``(B) Submitting to the chairman and ranking minority

                    member of the committee any written request from any

                    such Member, officer or employee for an interpretation

                    of applicable laws, rules, regulations, or other

                    standards of conduct, together with any recommendations

                    thereon.

                      ``(C) Recommending to the committee for its

                    consideration formal advisory opinions of general

                    applicability.

                      ``(D) Developing and carrying out, subject to the

                    approval of the chairman, periodic educational briefings

                    for Members, officers and employees of the House on

                    those laws, rules, regulations, or other standards of

                    conduct applicable to them.

              ``(4) No information provided to the Committee on Standards of

            Official Conduct by a Member, officer or employee of the House

            of Representatives when seeking advice regarding prospective

            conduct of such Member, officer or employee may be used as the

            basis for initiating an investigation under clause 4(e)(1)(B) of

            rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, if such

            Member, officer or employee acts in accordance with the written

            advice of the committee.''.

                                   __________

    [[Page 585]]

    12, 1992, p. 5534); and to investigate violations of confidentiality by
    staff engaged in the investigation of the operation and management of
    the Office of the Postmaster (July 22, 1992, p. 18786). In compliance
    with one such direction of the House, the acting chairman of the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct inserted in the Record names
    and pertinent account information of Members and former Members found to
    have abused the privileges of the ``bank'' in the Office of the
    Sergeant-at-Arms (H. Res. 393, Apr. 1, 1992, p. 7888). In the 106th
    Congress the chairman of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    inserted in the Record an explanation of the committee's amendment to
    committee rule 20(f) to reflect that the full committee retains
    discretion whether to report to the House that an investigative
    subcommittee has not adopted a statement of alleged violation (Apr. 13,
    2000, p. 5631). In the 106th Congress the committee filed a report
    issuing a letter of reproval regarding the conduct of a Member (Oct. 16,
    2000, p. 22834).
      On occasions where the House has directed the committee to conduct
    specific investigations by separate resolution, it has authorized the
    committee to take depositions with one Member present, notwithstanding
    clause 2(h) of rule XI, to serve subpoenas within or without the United
    States, and to participate by special counsel in relevant judicial
    proceedings (see H. Res. 252, 95th Cong., Feb. 9, 1977, pp. 3966-75; H.
    Res. 608, Mar. 27, 1980, pp. 6995-98; H. Res. 254, June 30, 1983, p.
    18279), and to investigate persons other than Members, officers and
    employees with expanded subpoena authority (see H. Res. 1054, 94th
    Cong., Mar. 3, 1976, pp. 5165-68). By unanimous consent the committee
    was authorized to receive evidence and take testimony before a quorum of
    one of its Members for the remainder of the second session of the 100th
    Congress (Oct. 13, 1988, p. 30467). By resolutions considered as
    questions of the privileges of the House, the committee has been
    directed to investigate illegal solicitation of political contributions
    in the House Office Building by unnamed sitting Members (July 10, 1985,
    p. 18397); to review GAO audits of the operations of the ``bank'' in the
    Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms (Oct. 3, 1991, p. 25435), to disclose the
    names and pertinent account information of Members and former Members
    found to have abused the privileges of that entity (Mar. 12, 1992, p.
    5519), and to disclose further account information respecting Members
    and former Members having checks held by that entity (Mar.

      Under clause 3(b)(4) (formerly clause 4(e)(2)(D) of rule X), a member
    of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct is ineligible to
    participate in a committee proceeding relating to that member's official
    conduct. Upon notification to the Speaker of such ineligibility, the
    Speaker designates another Member of the same political party as the
    ineligible member to serve on the committee during proceedings relating
    to that conduct (Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 5, 1980, p. 1908; July 23, 1996,
    p. 18596). Under clause 3(b)(5) (formerly clause 4(e)(2)(E) of rule X),
    a member of the committee may be recused from serving on the committee
    during proceedings relating to a pending investigation by submitting an
    affidavit of disqualification to the committee stating that the member
    cannot render an impartial and unbiased decision relating to that
    investigation. If the committee accepts the affidavit, the chairman
    notifies the Speaker and requests the Speaker to designate another
    Member from the same political party as the disqualified member to serve
    on the committee during proceedings relating to that investigation
    (Speaker O'Neill, Mar. 18, 1980).

    [[Page 586]]

    Audio and visual coverage of committee proceedings
      The committee has compiled statutory and rule-based ethical standards
    in the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong., 2d Sess.). In the Manual, the
    committee incorporates its advisory opinions issued under clause 3(a)(4)
    (formerly clause 4(e)(1)(D) of rule X), together with advisory opinions
    issued by the former Select Committee on Ethics, in its discussions of
    various ethical issues, including gifts, outside income, financial
    disclosure, staff rights and duties, official allowances and franking,
    casework considerations, campaign financing and practices, and
    involvement with official and unofficial organizations. The committee
    also has compiled a complete statement of the rules on gifts and travel,
    which supersedes Chapter 2 of the 1992 House Ethics Manual (Gifts and
    Travel, 106th Cong., 2d Sess.) and a complete statement of the rules on
    campaign funds, which supersedes chapter 8 of such Manual (Campaign
    Activity, 107th Cong.).

    807. Coverage of committee proceedings.

      4.  (a) The purpose
    of this clause is to provide a means, in conformity with acceptable
    standards of dignity, propriety, and decorum, by which committee
    hearings or committee meetings that are open to the public may be
    covered by audio and visual means--

          (1) for the education, enlightenment, and information of the
    general public, on the basis of accurate and impartial news coverage,
    regarding the operations, procedures, and practices of the House as a
    legislative and representative body, and regarding the measures, public
    issues, and other matters before the House and its committees, the
    consideration thereof, and the action taken thereon; and

          (2) for the development of the perspective and understanding of
    the general public with respect to the role and function of the House
    under the Constitution as an institution of the Federal Government.

      (b) In addition, it is the intent of this clause that radio and
    television tapes and television film of any coverage under this clause
    may not be used, or made available for use, as partisan political
    campaign material to promote or oppose the candidacy of any person for
    elective public office.

    [[Page 587]]

    covered under authority of this clause by audio or visual means, and the
    personal behavior of the committee members and staff, other Government
    officials and personnel, witnesses, television, radio, and press media
    personnel, and the general public at the hearing or other meeting, shall
    be in strict conformity with and observance of the acceptable standards
    of dignity, propriety, courtesy, and decorum traditionally observed by
    the House in its operations, and may not be such as to--

    Sec. 808. Media coverage.

      (c) It is,  further, the intent of
    this clause that the general conduct of each meeting (whether of a
    hearing or otherwise)

          (1) distort the objects and purposes of the hearing or other
    meeting or the activities of committee members in connection with that
    hearing or meeting or in connection with the general work of the
    committee or of the House; or

          (2) cast discredit or dishonor on the House, the committee, or a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner or bring the House, the
    committee, or a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner into
    disrepute.

      (d) The coverage of committee hearings and meetings by audio and
    visual means shall be permitted and conducted only in strict conformity
    with the purposes, provisions, and requirements of this clause.

    [[Page 588]]

    or still cameras to fewer than two representatives from each medium
    (except for legitimate space or safety considerations, in which case
    pool coverage shall be authorized).

    Sec. 809. When permitted.

      (e) Whenever  a hearing or meeting
    conducted by a committee or subcommittee is open to the public, those
    proceedings shall be open to coverage by audio and visual means. A
    committee or subcommittee chairman may not limit the number of
    television

    Sec. 810. Committee rules.

      (f) Each  committee shall adopt
    written rules to govern its implementation of this clause. Such rules
    shall contain provisions to the following effect:

          (1) If audio or visual coverage of the hearing or meeting is to be
    presented to the public as live coverage, that coverage shall be
    conducted and presented without commercial sponsorship.

          (2) The allocation among the television media of the positions or
    the number of television cameras permitted by a committee or
    subcommittee chairman in a hearing or meeting room shall be in
    accordance with fair and equitable procedures devised by the Executive
    Committee of the Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.

          (3) Television cameras shall be placed so as not to obstruct in
    any way the space between a witness giving evidence or testimony and any
    member of the committee or the visibility of that witness and that
    member to each other.

          (4) Television cameras shall operate from fixed positions but may
    not be placed in positions that obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of
    the hearing or meeting by the other media.

    [[Page 589]]

    stalled in, or removed from, the hearing or meeting room while the
    committee is in session.
          (5) Equipment necessary for coverage by the television and radio
    media may not be in

          (6)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), floodlights,
    spotlights, strobelights, and flash-
    guns may not be used in providing any method of coverage of the hearing
    or meeting.

          (B) The television media may install additional lighting in a
    hearing or meeting room, without cost to the Government, in order to
    raise the ambient lighting level in a hearing or meeting room to the
    lowest level necessary to provide adequate television coverage of a
    hearing or meeting at the current state of the art of television
    coverage.

          (7) In the allocation of the number of still photographers
    permitted by a committee or subcommittee chairman in a hearing or
    meeting room, preference shall be given to photographers from Associated
    Press Photos and United Press International Newspictures. If requests
    are made by more of the media than will be permitted by a committee or
    subcommittee chairman for coverage of a hearing or meeting by still
    photography, that coverage shall be permitted on the basis of a fair and
    equitable pool arrangement devised by the Standing Committee of Press
    Photographers.

    [[Page 590]]

    Sec. 811. Press photographers.

          (8)  Photographers may not
    position themselves between the witness table and the members of the
    committee at any time during the course of a hearing or meeting.

          (9) Photographers may not place themselves in positions that
    obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of the hearing by the other media.

          (10) Personnel providing coverage by the television and radio
    media shall be currently accredited to the Radio and Television
    Correspondents' Galleries.

    Sec. 812. Accreditation.

          (11)  Personnel providing
    coverage by still photography shall be currently accredited to the Press
    Photographers' Gallery.

          (12) Personnel providing coverage by the television and radio
    media and by still photography shall conduct themselves and their
    coverage activities in an orderly and unobtrusive manner.

    [[Page 591]]

    105th Congress (H. Res. 301, Nov. 12, 1997, p. 26041). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 3 of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Pay of witnesses
      The rule permitting broadcasting of committee hearings was contained
    in section 116(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84
    Stat. 1140) and became part of the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). In the 93d Congress (H. Res. 1107, July 22,
    1974, p. 24447), the rule was amended to permit committees to adopt
    rules allowing coverage of committee meetings as well as hearings.
    Paragraphs (e), (f)(3), (f)(5), and (f)(8) of this clause were amended
    in the 99th Congress to remove the limit on the number of television
    cameras (previously four) and press photographers (previously five)
    covering committee proceedings, and to provide the committee or
    subcommittee chairman with the discretion to determine the appropriate
    number (H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393). At the beginning of the 104th
    Congress paragraph (d) was amended to delete the former characterization
    of broadcast and photographic coverage of committee meetings and
    hearings as ``a privilege made available by the House,'' and paragraph
    (e) was amended to eliminate the requirement that a committee vote to
    permit broadcast and photographic coverage of open hearings and meetings
    and to prohibit chairmen from limiting coverage to less than two
    representatives from each medium, except where space or safety
    considerations warrant pool coverage (sec. 105, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995,
    p. 463). Later in the 104th Congress this clause was again amended to
    make conforming changes in its heading and in paragraph (f) (H. Res.
    254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). Former clause 4(f)(2), permitting a
    witness to terminate audio and visual (including photographic) coverage,
    was eliminated in the

    813. Fees of witnesses before the House or
    committees.

      5.  Witnesses appearing before the House or any of its
    committees shall be paid the same per diem rate as established,
    authorized, and regulated by the Committee on House Administration for
    Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and employees of the
    House, plus actual expenses of travel to or from the place of
    examination. Such per diem may not be paid when a witness has been
    summoned at the place of examination.

      This clause (formerly rule XXXV) was adopted in 1872, with amendments
    in 1880 (III, 1825), 1930 (VI, 393), April 19, 1955 (p. 4722), August
    12, 1969 (H. Res. 495, 91st Cong., p. 23355), and July 28, 1975 (H. Res.
    517, 94th Cong. p. 25258). The last amendment eliminated the specific
    per diem and travel rate of reimbursement and allowed actual travel
    costs and per diem for witnesses requested or subpoenaed to appear at
    the same rate as established by the Committee on House Administration
    for Members and employees. In the 104th and 106th Congresses it was
    amended to conform references to a renamed committee (sec. 202(b), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former rule XXXV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). For further
    provisions relating to witnesses, see clauses 2(j) and (k) of rule XI
    (Sec. Sec. 802-803, supra).

    [[Page 592]]

    Unfinished business of the session
      Regulations of the Committee on House Administration do not permit per
    diem reimbursement for witnesses. Regulations for reimbursement of
    actual travel costs may be found in the Committees' Congressional
    Handbook, Committee on House Administration, under the section entitled
    ``Hearings and Meetings.''

    814. Resumption of business of a preceding
    session.

      6. All business  of the House at the end of one session shall be resumed at
    the commencement of the next session of the same Congress in the same
    manner as if no adjournment had taken place.

      At first the Congress attempted to follow the rule of the English
    Parliament that business unfinished in one session should begin anew at
    the next; but in 1818, after an investigation of a joint committee in
    1816, a rule was adopted that House bills remaining undetermined in the
    House should be continued at the next session after six days. This rule
    did not reach House bills sent to the Senate; but in 1848 the two Houses
    remedied this omission by a joint rule. Business referred to committees
    of the House was still subject to the old rule of Parliament; but in
    1860 the present rule was adopted as a supplement to the rule of 1818.
    In 1890, desiring to do away with the limitation of the six days and
    apparently overlooking the main purpose of the rule of 1818, the House
    rescinded that portion of this provision which dated from 1818. Also, in
    1876 the joint rules were abrogated, leaving no provision, except the
    headline of the rule, for the continuance of business not before
    committees. The practice, however, had become so well established that
    no question has ever been raised (V, 6727). Before the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule
    XXVI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 593]]

      The business of conferences between the two Houses is not interrupted
    by an adjournment of a session which does not terminate the Congress (V,
    6260-6262), and even where one House asks a conference at one session
    the other may agree to it in the next session (V, 6286). Where bills
    were enrolled and signed by the presiding officers of the two Houses at
    the close of one session they were sent to the President and approved at
    the beginning of the next session (IV, 3486-3488).

                                    Rule XII

    Messages
                  receipt and referral of measures and matters

    815. Entry of messages in the Journal and
    Record.

      1.  Messages received from the Senate, or from the President,
    shall be entered on the Journal and published in the Congressional
    Record of the proceedings of that day.

      This provision was adopted in 1867 and amended in 1880 (V, 6593). It
    was renumbered January 3, 1953 (p. 24). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule
    XXXIX (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Referral
      The House may receive a message from the Senate when the Senate is not
    in session (VIII, 3338).

    816. Referral procedures.

      2.  (a) The Speaker shall refer
    each bill, resolution, or other matter that relates to a subject listed
    under a standing committee named in clause 1 of rule X in accordance
    with the provisions of this clause.

    [[Page 594]]

      (b) The Speaker shall refer matters under paragraph (a) in such manner
    as to ensure to the maximum extent feasible that each committee that has
    jurisdiction under clause 1 of rule X over the subject matter of a
    provision thereof may consider such provision and report to the House
    thereon. Precedents, rulings, or procedures in effect before the Ninety-
    Fourth Congress shall be applied to referrals under this clause only to
    the extent that they will contribute to the achievement of the
    objectives of this clause.

      (c) In carrying out paragraphs (a) and (b) with respect to the
    referral of a matter, the Speaker--

          (1) shall designate a committee of primary jurisdiction (except
    where he determines that extraordinary circumstances justify review by
    more than one committee as though primary);

          (2) may refer the matter to one or more additional committees for
    consideration in sequence, either initially or after the matter has been
    reported by the committee of primary jurisdiction;

          (3) may refer portions of the matter reflecting different subjects
    and jurisdictions to one or more additional committees;

          (4) may refer the matter to a special, ad hoc committee appointed
    by the Speaker with the approval of the House, and including members of
    the committees of jurisdiction, for the specific purpose of considering
    that matter and reporting to the House thereon;

          (5) may subject a referral to appropriate time limitations; and

          (6) may make such other provision as may be considered
    appropriate.

    [[Page 595]]

    tion in paragraph (c)(1) was added (sec. 2(i), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003,
    p. ----). A paragraph (e) was added to the clause on January 4, 1977 (H.
    Res. 5, pp. 53-70) to abolish the legislative jurisdiction in the House
    of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. The legislative jurisdiction of
    the Joint Committee was divided among the Committees on Armed Services
    (military applications of nuclear energy), Interior and Insular Affairs
    (now Resources) (regulation of the domestic nuclear energy industry,
    since transferred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce in the 104th
    Congress), Foreign Affairs (now International Relations)
    (nonproliferation of nuclear energy and international nuclear export
    agreements), Interstate and Foreign Commerce (now Energy and Commerce)
    (the same jurisdiction over nuclear energy as exercised over other
    energy), and Science and Technology (now Science) (nondefense nuclear
    research and development). In addition, the Committee on Interstate and
    Foreign Commerce (now Energy and Commerce) was given oversight
    jurisdiction over all laws, programs, and government activities
    affecting nuclear energy. Paragraph (e) was deleted entirely in the 97th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, p. 98). At the same time the House
    deleted former paragraph (d) which required the Congressional Research
    Service of the Library of Congress to prepare factual descriptions of
    each bill or resolution introduced in the House to be published in the
    Congressional Record. Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5 of rule X (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      This provision became effective as part of the rules on January 3,
    1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Before that time
    a bill or resolution could not be divided for reference among two or
    more committees, although it contained matter properly within the
    jurisdiction of several committees (IV, 4361). Paragraph (c) was amended
    on January 4, 1977 (H. Res. 5, pp. 53-70) to authorize the Speaker to
    place an appropriate time limit for consideration by the first committee
    or committees to which referred. In the 104th Congress paragraph (c) was
    again amended to require the Speaker to initially designate a committee
    of primary jurisdiction in each referral of a measure to more than one
    committee (sec. 205, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467). In the 108th
    Congress the parenthetical excep

      An order of the House that no organizational or legislative business
    be conducted on certain days (first by provision of a concurrent
    resolution, but extended by unanimous consent) was considered not to
    deprive Members of the privilege of introducing bills and resolutions
    during pro forma sessions on those days, such measures being numbered on
    the day introduced but not noted in the Record or referred to committee
    until the day on which business was resumed (H. Con. Res. 260, 102d
    Cong., Nov. 26, 1991, p. 35840; see Jan. 22, 1992, p. 149, and Jan. 28,
    1992, p. 745).

    [[Page 596]]

    21936; Speaker Hastert, Mar. 13, 2001, p. 3448; Speaker Hastert, July
    26, 2002, p. ----). The Speaker may discharge a committee from further
    consideration of a bill not reported by it within the time for which the
    bill was referred and place the bill on the appropriate calendar
    (Speaker O'Neill, May 8, 1978, p. 12924).
      Under clause 2(c), the Speaker may (1) refer a bill to more than one
    committee for their respective consideration of such provisions of the
    bill as fall within their jurisdiction (Speaker Albert, Feb. 25, 1976,
    p. 4315), (2) divide a matter for initial reference to committees
    (Speaker Albert, Feb. 4, 1975, p. 2253; Speaker Hastert, Apr. 26, 1999,
    p. 7354), or (3) refer designated portions of a bill to one committee
    while referring the entire bill to another committee (Speaker O'Neill,
    Mar. 3, 1982, p. 3155). The Speaker also may set appropriate time
    limitations on the initial reference to each committee (Speaker O'Neill,
    Feb. 16, 1977, p. 4532; Speaker O'Neill, May 2, 1977, p. 13184). For
    example, the Speaker may refer a bill to two committees, with a time
    limit on one of the committees ending within a certain period after the
    other committee reports to the House (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 27, 1983, p.
    937; Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 2, 1983, p. 1492; Speaker Wright, Apr. 9,
    1987, p. 8665) or with a time limit on one committee ending with a date
    certain (Speaker O'Neill, July 31, 1985, p.

      Before paragraph (c) was amended in the 104th Congress to require the
    Speaker to designate a committee of primary jurisdiction, the Speaker
    announced at the convening of the 98th Congress that he would exercise
    his authority, in situations that warranted it, to designate a primary
    committee among those to which a bill was jointly referred, and to
    impose time limits on committees having a secondary interest following
    the report of the primary committee under a joint referral (Speaker
    O'Neill, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 54; reiterated by Speaker Foley, Jan. 5, 1993,
    p. 105). The Speaker may refer a bill primarily to one committee (as now
    required by paragraph (c)) while also referring it initially to
    additional committees for time periods to be subsequently determined
    when the primary committee reports, in each case for consideration of
    matters within their respective jurisdictions (Speaker Gingrich, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 123).

      Pursuant to the Speaker's authority under clause 2 of rule XIV
    (formerly clause 2 of rule XXIV), relating to messages from the Senate,
    he has discretionary authority to refer from the Speaker's table to
    standing committees, Senate amendments to House-passed bills, under any
    conditions permitted under this provision for introduced bills; he may
    for example impose a time limitation for consideration only of a portion
    of the Senate amendment, not germane to the original House bill, by the
    standing committee with subject-matter jurisdiction, without referring
    the remainder of the Senate amendment to the House committee with
    jurisdiction over the original House bill (Speaker O'Neill, H.R. 31,
    Mar. 26, 1981, p. 5397). Beginning with the 98th Congress, the Speaker
    announced a policy of referring nongermane Senate amendments under
    certain conditions (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 54; Speaker Foley,
    Jan. 5, 1993, p. 105).

    [[Page 597]]

    his authority under this clause to sequentially refer a joint resolution
    making continuing appropriations, reported as privileged by the
    Committee on Appropriations, to the committee having legislative
    jurisdiction over a legislative provision in the resolution, without a
    time limitation on the sequential referral (Speaker O'Neill, Sept. 22,
    1983, p. 25523).

    Sec. 816a. Sequential referral procedures.

      Under  clause
    2(c), the Speaker has authority to sequentially refer a bill reported
    from a committee to other committees for a time certain for
    consideration of such portions of the bill as fall within their
    respective jurisdictions (Speaker Albert, Apr. 9, 1976, p. 10265;
    Speaker Albert, May 17, 1976, p. 14093). Under that authority, the
    Speaker may limit a sequential referral to matters having a direct
    effect on subjects within the committee's jurisdiction (Speaker O'Neill,
    Apr. 5, 1982, p. 6580; Speaker O'Neill, June 7, 1983, p. 14699; Speaker
    Wright, Sept. 9, 1987, p. 23648). For example, the Speaker sequentially
    referred a bill reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce to the
    Committee on the Judiciary for a specified time for consideration of
    ``such provisions of the bill and amendment recommended by the Committee
    on Energy and Commerce as propose to narrow the purview of the Attorney
    General under section 271 of the Communications Act of 1934'' (Speaker
    Hastert, May 24, 2001, p. ----). The Speaker exercised

      The Speaker has sometimes announced the application of his authority
    on sequential referrals at the outset of a Congress. For example, in the
    97th Congress, the Speaker announced that the sequential referral of a
    measure would be based on the subject matter of any amendment
    recommended by the reporting committee, as well as upon the original
    text of the measure (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 115, 116). In
    the 100th Congress, the Speaker announced that, in certain cases, a
    sequential referral would be based only upon the text of a reported
    substitute amendment in lieu of original text (Speaker Wright, Jan. 6,
    1987, p. 22). The Speaker has sequentially referred (1) a bill for
    consideration of the bill and amendment of the previous committee
    (Speaker O'Neill, Oct. 13, 1977, p. 33716); (2) a bill to two committees
    for different periods of time, solely for consideration of designated
    sections of the first committee's recommended amendment (Speaker
    O'Neill, May 18, 1982, p. 10418; Speaker O'Neill, Aug. 1, 1985, p.
    22681); (3) a bill for consideration by a third committee of a portion
    of an amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by one of the
    committees to which the bill had been initially referred (Speaker
    O'Neill, May 22, 1985, p. 13126); and (4) a bill back to the first-
    reporting committee when it was reported from the second-reporting
    committee with a nongermane amendment within the jurisdiction of the
    first committee and not within the bounds of the initial referral
    (Speaker Wright, Oct. 4, 1988, p. 28242). The Speaker also may base a
    sequential referral only on the text of the bill as introduced, even a
    bill reported by the primary committee with an amendment in the nature
    of a substitute (Speaker Gingrich, Sept. 12, 1995, p. 24791). For
    example, the Speaker sequentially referred a bill where the amendment
    recommended by the primary committee would delete portions of the bill
    within the jurisdiction of the sequential committee (Speaker Hastert,
    May 10, 1999, p. 8690).

    [[Page 598]]

    Resources) for consideration of provisions of the committee amendment
    within their jurisdiction (Speaker O'Neill, May 20, 1981, p. 10361).
      In the 96th Congress, the Speaker followed a more restrictive policy,
    permitting a sequential committee to review (1) those portions of
    introduced text within its jurisdiction and (2) those portions of an
    amendment within its jurisdiction when the introduced version also
    warranted a sequential referral to the committee (Speaker O'Neill, Apr.
    15, 1980, p. 7760). The Speaker first exercised the authority to base
    referrals on committee amendments by sequentially referring a bill
    reported from the Committee on Public Works and Transportation (now
    Transportation and Infrastructure), relating only to Corps of Engineers'
    water projects as introduced but amended in committee to address general
    water resource policy affecting irrigation and reclamation projects and
    soil conservation programs, to the Committees on Agriculture and
    Interior and Insular Affairs (now

      The Speaker may (1) discharge a measure from the Union Calendar and
    sequentially refer it to another committee (Speaker O'Neill, Apr. 27,
    1978, p. 11742; Speaker O'Neill, May 21, 1982, p. 11169; Speaker
    O'Neill, June 19, 1986, p. 14741; Speaker Foley, June 12, 1990, p.
    13670; Speaker Hastert, Nov. 30, 2001, p. ----); (2) sequentially refer
    a bill that has been initially referred to several committees but
    reported only by one, for consideration of the reporting committee's
    amendment (Speaker O'Neill, June 17, 1982, p. 14069; Speaker Foley,
    Sept. 5, 1990, p. 23477); and (3) sequentially refer a bill referred to
    more than one committee when the first committee reports, for a period
    ending a number of days after the next committee reports (Speaker
    O'Neill, Aug. 1, 1985, p. 22681), or after all committees report
    (Speaker Wright, June 10, 1988, p. 14079).

      The Speaker may (1) extend the time of a sequentially referred bill
    and may refer the bill to yet another committee under the same
    sequential referral conditions (Speaker Albert, June 1, 1976, p. 16588);
    (2) delimit the period for sequential consideration of a bill in terms
    of legislative days (Speaker Wright, June 30, 1988, p. 16597); or (3)
    sequentially refer a bill without day (Speaker Wright, Sept. 27, 1988,
    p. 25827). On the last day of an expiring sequential referral, a
    committee has until midnight to file its report with the Clerk (Oct. 9,
    1991, p. 26045).

    Sec. 816b. Referral procedures to an ad hoc select
    committee.

      Resolutions  authorizing the Speaker to establish an ad hoc committee
    for the consideration of a particular bill under paragraph (c) of this
    clause, and extending the reporting date for such a committee, are
    privileged when offered from the floor at the Speaker's request (Speaker
    Albert, Apr. 22, 1975, p. 11261; Speaker Albert, Jan. 26, 1976, p. 876;
    Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 11, 1977, pp. 894-98; Speaker O'Neill, Apr. 21,
    1977, pp. 11550-56).

      Pursuant to his authority under paragraph (c)(4), the Speaker may
    refer a bill to a special ad hoc committee appointed by him with the
    approval of the House (from the members of the committees with
    legislative jurisdiction) for consideration and report on that
    particular bill (Speaker Albert, Apr. 22, 1975, p. 11261) or may jointly
    refer a report of a select committee filed with the Clerk to standing
    committees of the House for their study (Speaker Albert, Feb. 16, 1976,
    p. 3158).

    [[Page 599]]

    a discussion of Speaker's referrals to the former Select Committees on
    Homeland Security, see Sec. 723b, supra.
      The Speaker may refer to an ad hoc committee, established with the
    approval of the House, bills, resolutions, and other matters (including
    messages and communications) for the purpose of considering such matters
    and reporting to the House thereon, and the resolution creating such a
    committee may specify whether referrals to such a committee shall be by
    initial or sequential reference or by any of the other methods provided
    by this clause (H. Res. 508, Apr. 21, 1977, pp. 11550-56; Speaker
    O'Neill, July 11, 1977, p. 22183; Speaker O'Neill, July 20, 1977, p.
    24167). For

      Clause 7 provides the mechanism for changes of referrals erroneously
    made.

    Sec. 817. Restriction on the reference of claims.

      (d)  A bill
    for the payment or adjudication of a private claim against the
    Government may not be referred to a committee other than the Committee
    on International Relations or the Committee on the Judiciary, except by
    unanimous consent.

      The present form of this paragraph was made effective January 2, 1947,
    as a part of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812).
    It was amended several times to conform references to renamed committees
    (H. Res. 163, Mar. 19, 1975, p. 7343; H. Res. 89, Feb. 5, 1979, p. 1848;
    sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467). The old rule, adopted in
    1885 and amended May 29, 1936, provided that private claims bills be
    referred to a Committee on Invalid Pensions, Claims, War Claims, Public
    Lands, and Accounts, in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs
    (now International Relations) and the Judiciary. Certain private bills,
    resolutions and amendments are barred (see Sec. 822, infra). Before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 4 of rule XXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Petitions, memorials, and private bills
      Under this paragraph unanimous consent is required for the reference
    of a bill for the payment of a private claim to a committee other than
    the Committee on the Judiciary or the Committee on International
    Relations (May 4, 1978, p. 12615). The Committee on the Judiciary, and
    not the Committee on Ways and Means, has jurisdiction over a private
    bill specifying that a certain annuity fund is exempt from taxation
    under provisions of the Internal Revenue Code (Deschler, ch. 17,
    Sec. 43.22).

    [[Page 600]]

    tered on the Journal with the name of the Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner presenting it and shall be printed in the Congressional
    Record.

    818. Introduction and reference of petitions,
    memorials, and private bills.

      3. If a  Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner has a petition, memorial, or private bill to present, he
    shall endorse his name, deliver it to the Clerk, and may specify the
    reference or disposition to be made thereof. Such petition, memorial, or
    private bill (except when judged by the Speaker to be obscene or
    insulting) shall be en

      At the first organization of the House in 1789 the rules then adopted
    provided for the presentation of petitions to the House by the Speaker
    and Members, and for the introduction of bills by motion for leave. In
    1842 it was found necessary, in order to save time, to provide that
    petitions and memorials should be filed with the Clerk. In 1870, 1879,
    and 1887 the practice as to petitions was extended to private bills, at
    first as to certain classes and later so that all should be filed with
    the Clerk (IV, 3312, 3365; VII, 1024). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1
    of rule XXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 819. Duties of Speaker and Members
    in presenting petitions.

      Petitions, memorials,  and other papers addressed to the House may
    be presented by the Speaker as well as by a Member (IV, 3312). Petitions
    from the country at large are presented by the Speaker in the manner
    prescribed by the rule (III, 2030; IV, 3318; VII, 1025). A Member may
    present a petition from the people of a State other than his own (IV,
    3315, 3316). The House itself may refer one portion of a petition to one
    committee and another portion to another committee (IV, 3359, 3360), but
    ordinarily the reference of a petition does not come before the House
    itself. A committee may receive a petition only through the House (IV,
    4557).

    Sec. 820. As to division of bills for
    reference.

      The parliamentary  law provides that the House may commit a portion of a bill,
    or a part to one committee and part to another (V, 5558), yet under the
    practice of the House until January 3, 1975, a bill or joint resolution
    could not be divided for reference, although it might contain matters
    properly within the jurisdiction of several committees (IV, 4372, 4376).
    On that date, the Speaker was given authority over referral of bills as
    prescribed in clause 2 of this rule (formerly clause 5 of rule X). In
    the 106th Congress the Speaker referred a bill by title to two
    committees (H.R. 1554, Apr. 26, 1999, p. 7355).

    [[Page 601]]

    Sec. 821. Fraudulent introduction of a
    bill.

      The fraudulent  introduction of a bill involves a question of privilege, and a
    bill so introduced was ordered stricken from the files (IV, 3388). As
    the result of the unauthorized introduction of several bills without the
    knowledge of the Members listed as sponsors, the Speaker directed that
    all bills and resolutions must be signed by the prime sponsor thereof in
    order to be accepted for introduction (Speaker Albert, Feb. 3, 1972, p.
    2521).

    Sec. 822. Certain private bills prohibited.

      4. A  private
    bill or private resolution (including an omnibus claim or pension bill),
    or amendment thereto, may not be received or considered in the House if
    it authorizes or directs--

          (a) the payment of money for property damages, for personal
    injuries or death for which suit may be instituted under the Tort Claims
    Procedure provided in title 28, United States Code, or for a pension
    (other than to carry out a provision of law or treaty stipulation);

          (b) the construction of a bridge across a navigable stream; or

          (c) the correction of a military or naval record.

    Prohibition on commemorations
      This paragraph derives from section 131 of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812) and was made a part of the
    standing rules January 3, 1953 (p. 24). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause
    2(a) of rule XXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The prohibition
    relating to correction of a miltary record does not apply to a private
    bill that changes the computation of retired pay for a former member of
    the armed services (after exhaustion of administrative remedies) but
    does not directly correct his military record (Sept. 18, 1984, p.
    25824).

    823. Commemoratives prohibited.

      5. (a)  A bill or
    resolution, or an amendment thereto, may not be introduced or considered
    in the House if it establishes or expresses a commemoration.

    [[Page 602]]

      (b) In this clause the term ``commemoration'' means a remembrance,
    celebration, or recognition for any purpose through the designation of a
    specified period of time.

    Excluded matters
      The 104th Congress added the prohibition against commemorative
    legislation and directed the Committee on Government Reform and
    Oversight (now Government Reform) to consider alternative means for
    establishing commemorations, including the creation of an independent or
    executive branch commission for such purpose, and to report to the House
    any recommendations thereon (sec. 216, 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 2(b) of rule XXII (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47). The House by unanimous consent waived the prohibition
    against introduction of a certain joint resolution proposing a
    commemoration (which was contained in the resolved clause and not merely
    in the preamble), specified by sponsor and title (Oct. 24, 2001, p. ----
    ).

    824. Correction of errors in reference; and relation to
    jurisdiction.

      6. A  petition, memorial, bill, or resolution excluded under
    this rule shall be returned to the Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner from whom it was received. A petition or private bill that
    has been inappropriately referred may, by direction of the committee
    having possession of it, be properly referred in the manner originally
    presented. An erroneous reference of a petition or private bill under
    this clause does not confer jurisdiction on a committee to consider or
    report it.

      This clause of the rule was first adopted in 1880, although the
    portion relating to the return of certain petitions and bills was
    adapted from an older rule of 1842 (IV, 3312, 3365). In the 104th
    Congress it was amended to conform to the new prohibition against
    commemorative legislation (sec. 216, 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 3 of rule XXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 603]]

    The Speaker may correct the erroneous referral of a bill as private by
    referring it to the appropriate (Union) calendar as a public bill when
    reported (June 1, 1988, p. 13184).

    Sponsorship
      Errors in reference of petitions, memorials, or private bills are
    corrected at the Clerk's table, without action by the House, at the
    suggestion of the committee holding possession (IV, 4379). As provided
    in the rule, the erroneous reference of a private House bill does not
    confer jurisdiction, and a point of order is good when the bill comes up
    for consideration either in the House or in the Committee of the Whole
    (IV, 4382-4389). But in cases wherein the House itself refers a private
    House or Senate bill a point of order may not be raised as to
    jurisdiction (IV, 4390, 4391; VII, 2131).

    825. Introduction, reference, and change of
    reference of public bills, memorials, and resolutions.

      7. (a) Bills,  memorials,
    petitions, and resolutions, endorsed with the names of Members,
    Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner introducing them, may be
    delivered to the Speaker to be referred. The titles and references of
    all bills, memorials, petitions, resolutions, and other documents
    referred under this rule shall be entered on the Journal and printed in
    the Congressional Record. An erroneous reference may be corrected by the
    House in accordance with rule X on any day immediately after the Pledge
    of Allegiance to the Flag by unanimous consent or motion. Such a motion
    shall be privileged if offered by direction of a committee to which the
    bill has been erroneously referred or by direction of a committee
    claiming jurisdiction and shall be decided without debate.

    [[Page 604]]

      (b)(1) The primary sponsor of a public bill or public resolution may
    name cosponsors. The name of a cosponsor added after the initial
    printing of a bill or resolution shall appear in the next printing of
    the bill or resolution on the written request of the primary sponsor.
    Such a request may be submitted to the Speaker at any time until the
    last committee authorized to consider and report the bill or resolution
    reports it to the House or is discharged from its consideration.

      (2) The name of a cosponsor of a bill or resolution may be deleted by
    unanimous consent. The Speaker may entertain such a request only by the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner whose name is to be deleted
    or by the primary sponsor of the bill or resolution, and only until the
    last committee authorized to consider and report the bill or resolution
    reports it to the House or is discharged from its consideration. The
    Speaker may not entertain a request to delete the name of the primary
    sponsor of a bill or resolution. A deletion shall be indicated by date
    in the next printing of the bill or resolution.

      (3) The addition or deletion of the name of a cosponsor of a bill or
    resolution shall be entered on the Journal and printed in the
    Congressional Record of that day.

      (4) A bill or resolution shall be reprinted on the written request of
    the primary sponsor. Such a request may be submitted to the Speaker only
    when 20 or more cosponsors have been added since the last printing of
    the bill or resolution.

      The rule of 1789 provided that all bills should be introduced on
    report of a committee or by motion for leave. By various modifications
    it was first provided that all classes of private bills should be
    introduced by filing them with the Clerk, and in 1890 this system was by
    this rule extended to all public bills (IV, 3365). In the 105th and
    107th Congresses paragraph (a) was amended to effect technical
    corrections (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121; sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    3, 2001, p. 26). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 4 of rule XXII (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 605]]

    ----). In the 108th Congress, the House by unanimous consent extended
    such authority through the remainder of the Congress (Oct. 4, 2004, p.
    ----). In the 109th Congress the House adopted the same initial order
    but for the entire Congress (sec. 3(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----
    ).
      At its organization for the 106th Congress the House adopted an order
    of the House that the first 10 bill numbers be reserved for assignment
    by the Speaker during a specified period (sec. 2(g), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). In the 107th and 108th Congresses the House adopted the
    same order, but extended the applicable time to the entire first session
    (sec. 3(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24; sec. 3(c), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    7, 2003, p.

      The motion for a change of reference and subsidiary motions take
    precedence over motions to go into the Committee of the Whole for the
    consideration of appropriation bills and the consideration of conference
    reports (VII, 2124), and may not be debated (VII, 2126-2128). But the
    motion is not in order on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 2117), and is not
    privileged under the rule if the original reference was not erroneous
    (VII, 2125). The motion may be amended, but the amendment, like the
    original motion, is subject to the requirement that it be authorized by
    the committee (VII, 2127). The motion must apply to a single bill and
    not to a class of bills (VII, 2125).

      According to the later practice the erroneous reference of a public
    bill, if it remain uncorrected, in effect gives jurisdiction to the
    committee receiving it (IV, 4365-4371; VII, 1489, 2108-2113; VIII,
    2312). It is too late to move a change of reference after such committee
    has reported the bill (VII, 2110; VIII, 2312), but the Speaker may,
    pursuant to authority granted him by clause 2 (formerly clause 5 of rule
    X) effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470), refer a bill sequentially to other committees. All bills and
    resolutions must be signed by the primary sponsor thereof (Speaker
    Albert, Feb. 3, 1972, p. 2521).

      Joint sponsorship of public bills by not more than 25 Members was
    authorized in the 90th Congress (H. Res. 42, Apr. 25, 1967, p. 10712).
    Prior thereto a special committee had reported against this practice and
    the report had been adopted by the House (VII, 1029). Effective January
    3, 1979 (H. Res. 86, 95th Cong., Oct. 10, 1978, p. 34929), paragraph (b)
    was added to allow unlimited cosponsorship and to provide a mechanism
    for Members to add their names as cosponsors to bills or resolutions
    which have already been introduced, up until the bill is finally
    reported from committee, and on January 15, 1979, the Speaker announced
    his directive for the processing of lists of cosponsors pursuant to the
    new clause (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 15, 1979, p. 19).

    [[Page 606]]

    22458). A Member may request unanimous consent that his name be deleted
    as a cosponsor of an unreported bill during its consideration under
    suspension of the rules and before a final vote thereon (June 9, 1986,
    p. 12979).
      Although, before the 106th Congress, paragraph (b)(2) only permitted a
    cosponsoring Member himself to request unanimous consent for his
    deletion as a cosponsor, the primary sponsor of a measure was permitted
    to request unanimous consent to delete from the permanent Record the
    name of a cosponsor he had inadvertently or erroneously listed (Feb. 9,
    1982). This practice was codified in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47). Unanimous-consent requests to delete Members' names as
    cosponsors are not entertained after the last committee authorized to
    consider the bill has reported to the House (or has been discharged from
    further consideration) (Oct. 8, 1985, p. 26668; Feb. 10, 2000, p. 982),
    and the Speaker has vacated unanimous-consent orders of the House to
    delete cosponsors when advised that the bill had already been reported
    (Aug. 5, 1987, p.

      By unanimous consent a Member may add his own name as a cosponsor of
    an unreported bill where the primary sponsor is no longer a Member of
    the House (Aug. 4, 1983, p. 23188), and a designated Member may be
    authorized to sign and submit lists of additional cosponsors where the
    actual primary sponsor is no longer a Member (e.g., June 23, 1989, p.
    13271; Apr. 5, 2000, p. 4487; June 20, 2001, p. ----; Sept. 21, 2004, p.
    ----), but the Chair will not otherwise entertain a request to add
    cosponsors by a Member other than the primary sponsor (Mar. 5, 1991, p.
    5026). In fact, the Chair will not entertain any unanimous-consent
    request to add a cosponsor (July 24, 2000, p. 15878), whether such
    request includes only the Member making the request (Oct. 25, 1995, p.
    29352), includes all Members (Dec. 18, 1985, p. 37765), or includes a
    specified additional sponsor (Jan. 28, 1985, p. 1141; May 23, 1985, p.
    13421). Such requests must be made by a primary sponsor through the
    hopper not later than the last day on which any committee is authorized
    to consider and report the measure to the House (Nov. 4, 1997, p.
    24413).

      The Chair does not entertain a unanimous-consent request to designate
    a co-offeror of an amendment (May 20, 2004, p. ----; Sept. 4, 2004, p.
    ----).

      An order of the House that no organizational or legislative business
    be conducted on certain days (first by provision of a concurrent
    resolution, but extended by unanimous consent) was considered not to
    deprive Members of the privilege of introducing bills and resolutions
    during pro forma sessions on those days, such measures being numbered on
    the day introduced but not noted in the Record or referred to committee
    until the day on which business was resumed (H. Con. Res. 260, 102d
    Cong., Nov. 26, 1991, p. 35840; Jan. 22 and 28, 1992, pp. 149, 745).

      At its organization for the 104th Congress the House resolved that
    each of the first 20 bills and each of the first two joint resolutions
    introduced in the House in that Congress could have more than one Member
    reflected as a primary sponsor (sec. 223(g), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    469); and the Speaker stated that all signatures of ``primary'' sponsors
    would be required on the bills (Speaker Gingrich, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551).
    A Member was subsequently added as a ``primary'' sponsor by unanimous
    consent (Jan. 18, 1995, p. 1447).

    [[Page 607]]

    Sec. 826. Introduction of bills, resolutions, or memorials
    by request.

      (5)  When a bill or resolution is introduced ``by request,''
    those words shall be entered on the Journal and printed in the
    Congressional Record.

    Executive communications
      This provision was adopted in 1888 (IV, 3366). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it was found in former
    clause 6 of rule XXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). It has never
    been the practice of the House to permit the names of the persons
    requesting the introduction of the bill to be printed in the Record.

    827. Reception and reference of executive
    communications, including estimates.

      8. Estimates  of appropriations and all other
    communications from the executive departments intended for the
    consideration of any committees of the House shall be addressed to the
    Speaker for referral as provided in clause 2 of rule XIV.

      This rule was adopted in 1867 and amended in 1880 (V, 6593). It was
    renumbered January 3, 1953 (p. 24). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule XL
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Formerly estimates of appropriations
    were transmitted through the Secretary of the Treasury (IV, 3573-3576,
    4045), but under the Budget Act they are transmitted by the President.

                                    Rule XIII

    Calendars
                         calendars and committee reports

    828. Calendar for reports of committees.

      1. (a)  All
    business reported by committees shall be referred to one of the
    following three calendars:

    [[Page 608]]

    United States for money or property, or referring a claim to the Court
    of Claims.
          (1) A Calendar of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of
    the Union, to which shall be referred public bills and public
    resolutions raising revenue, involving a tax or charge on the people,
    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

          (2) A House Calendar, to which shall be referred all public bills
    and public resolutions not requiring referral to the Calendar of the
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

          (3) A Private Calendar as provided in clause 5 of rule XV, to
    which shall be referred all private bills and private resolutions.

      This provision was adopted in 1880 and amended in 1911 (VI, 742); but
    as early as 1820 a rule was adopted creating calendars for the
    Committees of the Whole. Clerical and stylistic changes were effected
    when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47), including a change in subparagraph (3) from the
    ``Calendar of the Committee of the Whole House'' to the ``Private
    Calendar.'' Bills not requiring consideration in Committee of the Whole
    were considered when reported, but in 1880 the House Calendar was
    created to remedy the delays in making reports caused by such
    consideration (IV, 3115). Reference of bills to calendars is governed by
    text of bills as referred to committees and amendments reported by
    committees are not considered (VIII, 2392).

      A motion to correct an error in referring a bill to the proper
    calendar presents a question of privilege (III, 2614, 2615); but a mere
    clerical error in the calendar does not give rise to such question (III,
    2616). A bill improperly reported is not entitled to a place on the
    calendar (IV, 3117).

      A bill on the wrong calendar may be transferred to the proper calendar
    as of date of original reference by direction of the Speaker (VI, 744-
    748; VII, 859, 2406; Dec. 7, 1950, p. 16307; Apr. 26, 1984, p. 10242;
    Sept. 10, 1990, p. 23677). But the Speaker has no authority to change
    calendar reference made by the House (VI, 749; VII, 859). Reports from
    the Court of Claims do not remain on the calendar from Congress to
    Congress, even when a law seems so to provide (IV, 3298-3302). In
    determining whether a bill should be placed on the House or Union
    Calendar, clause 3 of rule XVIII should be consulted. The Speaker may
    correct the erroneous referral of a bill as private by referring it to
    the appropriate (Union) calendar as a public bill when reported (June 1,
    1988, p. 13184).

    [[Page 609]]

    ment authority in excess of that allocated to the reporting committee in
    connection with the most recently agreed-to concurrent resolution on the
    budget (Speaker O'Neill, Sept. 8, 1977, p. 28153), or (2) by clause 2 of
    rule XII (formerly clause 5 of rule X), authorizing and directing the
    Speaker to assure that each committee has responsibility to consider
    legislation within its jurisdiction by fashioning sequential referrals
    where appropriate (Speaker O'Neill, Apr. 27, 1978, p. 11742; June 19,
    1986, p. 14741).

      Although the Speaker has no general authority to remove a reported
    bill from the Union Calendar (other than to correct the erroneous
    reference of a reported bill between calendars), he may discharge a bill
    therefrom for reference to another committee when required (1) by
    section 401(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, permitting 15-
    day referral to the Committee on Appropriations of reported bills
    providing new entitle

    Sec. 830. Motion to discharge.

      (b)  There is established a
    Calendar of Motions to Discharge Committees as provided in clause 2 of
    rule XV.

    Filing and printing of reports
      From the 106th Congress through the 108th Congress, paragraph (b) was
    occupied by a cross reference to the Corrections Calendar. The provision
    was added when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47) and was stricken when the Corrections
    Calendar was abolished in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    4, 2005, p. ----). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, the current paragraph (b) was found in former clause 5 of rule
    XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    831. Nonprivileged reports filed with the
    Clerk.

      2. (a)(1)  Except as provided in subparagraph (2), all reports of
    committees (other than those filed from the floor as privileged) shall
    be delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper
    calendar under the direction of the Speaker in accordance with clause 1.
    The title or subject of each report shall be entered on the Journal and
    printed in the Congressional Record.

    [[Page 610]]

    Sec. 832. Adverse reports.

      (2)  A bill or resolution reported
    adversely shall be laid on the table unless a committee to which the
    bill or resolution was referred requests at the time of the report its
    referral to an appropriate calendar under clause 1 or unless, within
    three days thereafter, a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    makes such a request.

      An erstwhile form of the rule applied to nonprivileged reports only
    (VI, 411). A technical amendment was effected by the 93d Congress (H.
    Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Even when reported adversely, a resolution of inquiry is privileged,
    is presented from the floor (unless filed with the Clerk under clause
    2(c)), and is referred to the House Calendar (e.g., June 16, 2004, p. --
    --).

    Sec. 833. Requirement that reports of committees be in
    writing and be printed.

      When  the House codified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, it deleted the portion of clause 2 of rule XVIII that required
    the printing of reports. That provision was redundant because this
    provision carries the same requirement (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Former clause 2 of rule XVIII was adopted in 1880 (V, 5647).

      The House insists on its requirement that all reports must be in
    writing (IV, 4655) and does not receive verbal reports as to bills (IV,
    4654). But the sufficiency of a report is passed on by the House and not
    by the Speaker (II, 1339; IV, 4653). A report is not necessarily signed
    by all those concurring (II, 1274) or even by any of those concurring,
    but minority, supplemental, and additional views are signed by those
    submitting them (IV, 4671; VIII, 2229; see clause 2(l)(5) of rule XI).
    Under this rule, the printing requirement is not a condition precedent
    to consideration of the matter reported (VIII, 2307-2309). However, for
    various availability and layover requirements in the rules, see clause 6
    of rule X (Sec. 764, supra), clauses 4, 5, and 6 of rule XIII
    (Sec. Sec. 850-852, Sec. 853, Sec. 857, infra, respectively), and clause
    8 of rule XXII (Sec. 1082, infra). See also clause 3(a)(2) of rule XIII
    (Sec. 838, infra) which excepts from the availability requirements of
    clause 4 supplemental reports to correct a technical error in the
    depiction of record votes in a committee report.

      Unless filed with the report, minority, supplemental, or additional
    views may be presented only with the consent of the House (IV, 4600;
    VIII, 2231, 2248). See clause 2(c) of rule XIII for the procedure by
    which such views may be filed as part of the committee report.

      It has been held that the fact that a report was not printed by the
    Public Printer as originally made to the House does not prevent the
    consideration of the matter reported (VIII, 2307). A committee may not
    file its report on a bill after the House has passed the bill (Sept. 30,
    1985, p. 25270).

    [[Page 611]]

    necessary to bring the measure or matter to a vote.

    Sec. 834. Chairman's duty.

      (b)(1)  It shall be the duty of
    the chairman of each committee to report or cause to be reported
    promptly to the House a measure or matter approved by the committee and
    to take or cause to be taken steps

    Sec. 835. Filing by majority of committee.

      (2)  In any event,
    the report of a committee on a measure that has been approved by the
    committee shall be filed within seven calendar days (exclusive of days
    on which the House is not in session) after the day on which a written
    request for the filing of the report, signed by a majority of the
    members of the committee, has been filed with the clerk of the
    committee. The clerk of the committee shall immediately notify the
    chairman of the filing of such a request. This subparagraph does not
    apply to a report of the Committee on Rules with respect to a rule,
    joint rule, or order of business of the House, or to the reporting of a
    resolution of inquiry addressed to the head of an executive department.

    [[Page 612]]

      Subparagraph (1) (formerly clause 2(l)(1)(A) of rule XI) is derived
    from section 133(c) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60
    Stat. 812) and was made a part of the standing rules on January 3, 1953
    (p. 24). It is sufficient authority for the chairman to call up a bill
    on Calendar Wednesday (Speaker Rayburn, Feb. 22, 1950, p. 2162).
    Subparagraph (2) (formerly clause 2(l)(1)(B) of rule XI) is derived from
    section 105 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat.
    1140) and was made part of the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Former clause 2(l)(1)(C) of rule XI was added by
    the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H.
    Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), to incorporate section 307
    of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 313), requiring the
    Committee on Appropriations to strive to complete committee action on
    all regular appropriation bills before reporting any of them to the
    House, and to submit a report comparing specified spending levels, but
    was repealed by section 232(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
    Deficit Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177). An obsolete reference in
    former subdivision (B) to the former subdivision (C) was deleted in the
    104th Congress (sec. 223(f), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 469). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 2(l)(1) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).

      Absent a special order of the House, committee reports must be
    submitted while the House is in session, except as permitted under
    clause 2(c) of rule XIII with respect to the guaranteed time for
    composing separate views (see Sec. 836, infra) (Dec. 17, 1982, p.
    31951).

    Sec. 836. Filing with minority views.

      (c)  All supplemental,
    minority, or additional views filed under clause 2(l) of rule XI by one
    or more members of a committee shall be included in, and shall be a part
    of, the report filed by the committee with respect to a measure or
    matter. When time guaranteed by clause 2(l) of rule XI has expired (or,
    if sooner, when all separate views have been received), the committee
    may arrange to file its report with the Clerk not later than one hour
    after the expiration of such time. This clause and provisions of clause
    2(l) of rule XI do not preclude the immediate filing or printing of a
    committee report in the absence of a timely request for the opportunity
    to file supplemental, minority, or additional views as provided in
    clause 2(l) of rule XI.

    Content of reports
      The first sentence of this paragraph was originally included in
    section 107 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat.
    1140) and was made a part of the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). The remainder of the paragraph (establishing
    standing authority for committees to file reports with the Clerk after
    honoring the guarantee of the rule) was adopted in the 105th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Before the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 2(l)(5)
    of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 613]]

    837. Single volume.

      3. (a)(1)  Except as provided in
    subparagraph (2), the report of a committee on a measure or matter shall
    be printed in a single volume that--

          (A) shall include all supplemental, minority, or additional views
    that have been submitted by the time of the filing of the report; and

          (B) shall bear on its cover a recital that any such supplemental,
    minority, or additional views (and any material submitted under
    paragraph (c)(3)) are included as part of the report.

    Sec. 838. Technical error.

      (2)  A committee may file a
    supplemental report for the correction of a technical error in its
    previous report on a measure or matter. A supplemental report only
    correcting errors in the depiction of record votes under paragraph (b)
    may be filed under this subparagraph and shall not be subject to the
    requirement in clause 4 or clause 6 concerning the availability of
    reports.

      Clause 3 (formerly clause 2(l)(5) of rule XI) was originally included
    in section 107 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat.
    1140) and was incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). This paragraph permits the filing of a
    supplemental report to correct a technical error in a previous report. A
    supplemental report filed under this clause is subject to the three-day
    availability under clause 4 of this rule (Deschler, ch. 17, Sec. 64.1).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2(l)(5) of rule XI, and the former
    companion provision of clause 2(l)(5) of rule XI entitling members to
    supplemental, minority, or additional views was transferred to new
    clause 2(l) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The last
    sentence of subparagraph (2) was added in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(k),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). A technical correction to subparagraph
    (1)(B) was effected in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 614]]

    and the names of members voting for and against, shall be included in
    the committee report. The preceding sentence does not apply to votes
    taken in executive session by the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct.

    Sec. 839. Vote on reporting.

      (b)  With respect to each record
    vote on a motion to report a measure or matter of a public nature, and
    on any amendment offered to the measure or matter, the total number of
    votes cast for and against,

      The requirement of subparagraph (b) (formerly clause 2(l)(2)(B) of
    rule XI) was contained in section 104(b) of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140), was incorporated into the
    rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144), and was
    restated in the 104th Congress to require that reports also reflect the
    total number of votes cast for and against any public measure or matter
    and any amendment thereto and the names of those voting for and against
    (sec. 209, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). The last sentence was
    adopted in the 105th Congress (sec. 8, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p.
    19318). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    this provision was found in former clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). If the accompanying report erroneously reflects
    information required by this paragraph, a bill would be subject to a
    point of order against its consideration, unless corrected pursuant to
    clause 3(a)(2) by a supplemental report; however, a point of order would
    not lie if the error was introduced by the Government Printing Office
    (Jan. 19, 1995, p. 1613). A question alleging that a committee report
    contained descriptions of recorded votes (as required by this clause)
    that deliberately mischaracterized certain amendments and directing the
    chairman of the committee to file a supplemental report to change those
    descriptions was held to constitute a question of privileges of the
    House (May 3, 2005, p. ----).

    Sec. 840. Content of reports.

      (c)  The report of a committee
    on a measure that has been approved by the committee shall include,
    separately set out and clearly identified, the following:

          (1) Oversight findings and recommendations under clause 2(b)(1) of
    rule X.

    [[Page 615]]

    evant programs to the appropriate levels under current law.
          (2) The statement required by section 308(a) of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974, except that an estimate of new budget authority
    shall include, when practicable, a comparison of the total estimated
    funding level for the rel

          (3) An estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the
    Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974 if timely submitted to the committee before the
    filing of the report.

          (4) A statement of general performance goals and objectives,
    including outcome-related goals and objectives, for which the measure
    authorizes funding.

      This provision (formerly clause 2(l)(3) of rule XI) became effective
    January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). It was
    amended in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), to
    correct a cross-reference, and in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    1993, p. 49) to correct the typographical transposition of a phrase.
    Subparagraphs (2) and (3) (formerly clauses 2(l)(3)(B) and 2(l)(3)(C) of
    rule XI) are requirements of sections 308(a) and 402 of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 297). Subparagraph (2)
    (formerly clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI) was amended in the 99th Congress
    by section 232(f) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
    Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177) to include new entitlement and credit
    authority in conformity with section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974, as amended by that law. It was again amended in the
    104th Congress to require estimates of new budget authority, when
    practicable, to compare the total estimated funding for the program to
    the appropriate level under current law (sec. 102(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 462). In the 104th and 106th Congresses, it was amended to
    conform references to a renamed committee (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 467; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This provision was
    amended in the 105th Congress to reflect the repeal of the collective
    definition of ``new spending authority'' and the revision of various
    remaining parts and to effect a technical and conforming change (Budget
    Enforcement Act of 1997 (sec. 10116, P.L. 105-33)). Subparagraph (4) was
    amended to replace a requirement that committees include in their
    reports oversight findings and recommendations by the Committee on
    Government Reform with a requirement that they include a statement of
    performance goals and objectives (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p.
    25).

    [[Page 616]]

    Sec. 841. Constitutional authority.

      (d)  Each report of a
    committee on a public bill or public joint resolution shall contain the
    following:

          (1) A statement citing the specific powers granted to Congress in
    the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
    resolution.

      This reporting requirement subsequently replaced former clause 2(l)(4)
    of rule XI, which became a part of the rules under the Committee Reform
    Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong.,
    Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In its original form the provision required an
    analytical statement of inflationary impact, but in the 105th Congress
    it was converted to require a statement of constitutional authority (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). If a point of order were sustained under
    this subparagraph, the measure would be ``recommitted'' to await
    possible return to the Calendar by the filing of a supplemental report
    pursuant to clause 3(a)(2) correcting the technical error (Feb. 13,
    1995, p. 4591).

    Sec. 842. Application of laws to legislative
    branch.

      Under  the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995, each report
    accompanying a bill or joint resolution relating to terms and conditions
    of employment or access to public services or accommodations must
    describe the manner in which the provisions apply to the legislative
    branch or a statement of the reasons the provisions do not apply; and
    any Member may raise a point of order against the consideration of a
    bill or joint resolution not complying with this requirement, which may
    be waived in the House by majority vote (sec. 102(b)(3), P.L. 104-1; 109
    Stat. 6).

    Sec. 843. Unfunded mandates.

      The  Unfunded Mandates Reform
    Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4; 109 Stat. 48) added a new part B to title IV of
    the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 658-658g) that imposes
    several requirements on committees with respect to measures effecting
    ``Federal mandates'' (secs. 423-424; 2 U.S.C. 658b-c) and establishes
    points of order to permit separate votes on whether to enforce those
    requirements (sec. 425; 2 U.S.C. 658d). See Sec. 1127, infra.

    Sec. 844. Estimate of cost.

          (2)(A)  An estimate by the
    committee of the costs that would be incurred in carrying out the bill
    or joint resolution in the fiscal year in which it is reported and in
    each of the five fiscal years following that fiscal year (or for the
    authorized duration of any program authorized by the bill or joint
    resolution if less than five years);

    [[Page 617]]

    mittee with any estimate of such costs made by a Government agency and
    submitted to such committee; and
          (B) a comparison of the estimate of costs described in subdivision
    (A) made by the com

          (C) when practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding
    level for the relevant programs with the appropriate levels under
    current law.

          (3)(A) In subparagraph (2) the term ``Government agency'' includes
    any department, agency, establishment, wholly owned Government
    corporation, or instrumentality of the Federal Government or the
    government of the District of Columbia.

          (B) Subparagraph (2) does not apply to the Committee on
    Appropriations, the Committee on House Administration, the Committee on
    Rules, or the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, and does not
    apply when a cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of
    the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974 has been included in the report under paragraph
    (c)(3).

    [[Page 618]]

    (formerly clause 7(d)) was amended to conform references to a renamed
    committee (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467; H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47). In the 105th Congress it was again amended to effect a
    technical change (Budget Enforcement Act of 1997 (sec. 10116, P.L. 105-
    33)). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 7 of this rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).
      This provision was adopted in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22,
    1971, p. 144) as part of the implementation of section 252(b) of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and was amended
    in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) to remove
    references to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. Subparagraph (3)(B)
    (formerly clause 7(d)) was amended in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    5, 1981, pp. 98-113) to render committee cost estimates optional where
    an estimate by the Congressional Budget Office is included in the
    report. It was amended by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C.
    900 note) to require five-year estimates of revenue changes in
    legislative reports. In the 104th Congress it was amended to require
    estimates of new budget authority, when practicable, to compare the
    total estimated funding for the program to the appropriate level under
    current law (sec. 102(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). In the 104th
    and 106th Congresses subparagraph (3)(B)

      A committee cost estimate identifying certain spending authority as
    recurring annually and indefinitely was held necessarily to address the
    five-year period required by section 308 of the Congressional Budget Act
    of 1974 (Nov. 20, 1993, p. 31354).

    Sec. 845. Unfunded mandates.

      The  Unfunded Mandates Reform
    Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4; 109 Stat. 48) added a new part B to title IV of
    the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 658-658b-c) that imposes
    several requirements on the Director of the Congressional Budget Office
    and on committees of the House with respect to measures effecting
    ``Federal mandates'' (secs. 423-424; 2 U.S.C. 658b-c) and establishes
    points of order to permit separate votes on whether to enforce those
    requirements (sec. 425; 2 U.S.C. 658d). See Sec. 1127, infra, and
    Sec. 843, supra.

    Sec. 846. ``Ramseyer Rule.''

      (e)(1)  Whenever a committee
    reports a bill or joint resolution proposing to repeal or amend a
    statute or part thereof, it shall include in its report or in an
    accompanying document--

          (A) the text of a statute or part thereof that is proposed to be
    repealed; and

          (B) a comparative print of any part of the bill or joint
    resolution proposing to amend the statute and of the statute or part
    thereof proposed to be amended, showing by appropriate typographical
    devices the omissions and insertions proposed.

    [[Page 619]]

    the changes in existing law proposed to be made by the bill or joint
    resolution as proposed to be amended.

      (2) If a committee reports a bill or joint resolution proposing to
    repeal or amend a statute or part thereof with a recommendation that the
    bill or joint resolution be amended, the comparative print required by
    subparagraph (1) shall reflect

      The first part of this paragraph (formerly clause 3) was adopted
    January 28, 1929 (VIII, 2234), was redesignated January 3, 1953 (p. 24),
    and subparagraph (2) (formerly a proviso in clause 3(2)) was added
    September 22, 1961 (p. 20823). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 3 of this
    rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Technical failure of a committee report to comply with the
    ``Ramseyer'' rule may be remedied by a supplemental report (VIII, 2247).
    While the filing of such a corrective report formerly required the
    consent of the House (VIII, 2248), it may now be filed with the Clerk
    pursuant to clause 3(a)(2). Reports held to violate the rule because
    they are not susceptible to correction by the filing of a supplemental
    report under clause 3(a)(2), as in the case of a substantial violation,
    are automatically recommitted to the respective committees reporting
    them (VIII, 2237, 2245, 2250). When a bill is so recommitted, further
    proceedings are de novo and the bill is considered again and reported by
    the committee as if no previous report had been made (VIII, 2249).

      Although a bill proposes but one minor and obvious change in existing
    law, the failure of the report to indicate the change is in violation of
    the rule (VIII, 2236). The statute proposed to be amended must be quoted
    in the report and it is not sufficient that it is incorporated in the
    bill (VIII, 2238). Under the rule the committee report on a bill
    amending existing law by the addition of a proviso should quote in full
    the section immediately preceding the proposed amendment (VIII, 2237).
    The rule applies to appropriation bills where such bills include
    legislative provisions (VIII, 2241) and reports on appropriation bills
    are also subject to the requirements of clause 3(f) of rule XIII,
    requiring a concise statement of the effect of any direct or indirect
    changes in the application of existing law. In order to fall within the
    purview of the rule the bill must seek to repeal or amend specifically
    an existing law (VIII, 2235, 2239, 2240).

      Special orders providing for consideration of bills, unless
    specifically waiving points of order, do not preclude the point of order
    that reports on such bills fail to indicate proposed changes in existing
    law (VIII, 2245). The point of order that a report fails to comply with
    the rule is properly made when the bill is called up in the House and
    comes too late after the House has resolved into the Committee of the
    Whole for its consideration (VIII, 2243-2245).

    [[Page 620]]

      Where the comparative print contained certain errors in punctuation
    and capitalization and utilized abbreviations not appearing in existing
    provisions of law, the Speaker held that the committee report was in
    substantial compliance with the rule and overruled a point of order
    against the report (Deschler, ch. 17, Sec. Sec. 60.13, 60.14).

    Sec. 847. Content of reports on appropriation
    bills.

      (f)(1)  A report of the Committee on Appropriations on a general
    appropriation bill shall include--

          (A) a concise statement describing the effect of any provision of
    the accompanying bill that directly or indirectly changes the
    application of existing law; and

          (B) a list of all appropriations contained in the bill for
    expenditures not currently authorized by law for the period concerned
    (excepting classified intelligence or national security programs,
    projects, or activities), along with a statement of the last year for
    which such expenditures were authorized, the level of expenditures
    authorized for that year, the actual level of expenditures for that
    year, and the level of appropriations in the bill for such expenditures.

      This provision (formerly clause 3 of rule XXI) became a part of the
    rules under the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January
    3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). This provision
    was amended on January 14, 1975 (H. Res. 5, 94th Cong., p. 32) to
    confine its applicability to general appropriation bills, and again in
    the 104th Congress to add subparagraph (1)(B) concerning unauthorized
    items (sec. 215(d), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Subparagraph
    (1)(B) was amended in the 107th Congress to require more detail on the
    status of unauthorized appropriations (sec. 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    2001, p. 25). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 3 of rule XXI (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 621]]

      (2) Whenever the Committee on Appropriations reports a bill or joint
    resolution including matter specified in clause 1(b)(2) or (3) of rule
    X, it shall include--

          (A) in the bill or joint resolution, separate headings for
    ``Rescissions'' and ``Transfers of Unexpended Balances''; and

          (B) in the report of the committee, a separate section listing
    such rescissions and transfers.

      This provision (formerly clause 1(b) of rule X) was added by the
    Committee Reform Amendments of 1974 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1(b) of rule X (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 848. Comparative print.

      (g)  Whenever the Committee on
    Rules reports a resolution proposing to repeal or amend a standing rule
    of the House, it shall include in its report or in an accompanying
    document--

          (1) the text of any rule or part thereof that is proposed to be
    repealed; and

          (2) a comparative print of any part of the resolution proposing to
    amend the rule and of the rule or part thereof proposed to be amended,
    showing by appropriate typographical devices the omissions and
    insertions proposed.

    [[Page 622]]

    ment of the bill into law, but not itself repealing or amending any rule
    (May 27, 1993, p. 11597).

      This provision (formerly clause 4(d) of rule XI) was added to the
    rules under the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January
    3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), and is similar
    to the ``Ramseyer Rule'' requirements of paragraph (e) relating to bills
    and joint resolutions repealing or amending existing law. Before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 4(d) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    This clause is applicable to resolutions reported from the Committee on
    Rules which propose direct permanent repeal or amendment of a rule of
    the House, but does not apply to resolutions providing temporary waivers
    of rules during the consideration of particular legislative business
    (Speaker Albert, Mar. 20, 1975, p. 7676; Mar. 24, 1975, p. 8418), or to
    a special order of business resolution providing for the consideration
    of a bill with textual modifications that would effect certain changes
    in House rules on enact

    Sec. 849. Tax complexity analysis.

      (h)(1)  It shall not be in
    order to consider a bill or joint resolution reported by the Committee
    on Ways and Means that proposes to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
    1986 unless--

          (A) the report includes a tax complexity analysis prepared by the
    Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation in accordance with section
    4022(b) of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of
    1998; or

          (B) the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means causes such a
    tax complexity analysis to be printed in the Congressional Record before
    consideration of the bill or joint resolution.

      This provision was added by the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring
    and Reform Act of 1998 as a new clause 2(l)(8) of rule XI, effective
    after January 1, 1999 (sec. 4022, P.L. 105-206). It was transferred to
    this paragraph when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      (2)(A) It shall not be in order to consider a bill or joint resolution
    reported by the Committee on Ways and Means that proposes to amend the
    Internal Revenue Code of 1986 unless--

          (i) the report includes a macroeconomic impact analysis;

          (ii) the report includes a statement from the Joint Committee on
    Internal Revenue Taxation explaining why a macroeconomic impact analysis
    is not calculable; or

    [[Page 623]]

    analysis to be printed in the Congressional Record before consideration
    of the bill or joint resolution.
          (iii) the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means causes a
    macroeconomic impact

      (B) In subdivision (A), the term `macroeconomic impact analysis'
    means--

          (i) an estimate prepared by the Joint Committee on Internal
    Revenue Taxation of the changes in economic output, employment, capital
    stock, and tax revenues expected to result from enactment of the
    proposal; and

          (ii) a statement from the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue
    Taxation identifying the critical assumptions and the source of data
    underlying that estimate.

    Availability of reports-
      This requirement of a macroeconomic analysis of any tax proposal
    replaced a provision that authorized the chairman of the Committee on
    Ways and Means to request the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue
    Taxation to prepare a dynamic estimate of revenue changes proposed in a
    measure designated by the Majority Leader as major tax legislation (sec.
    2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). The former provision was added
    in the 105th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121); but, before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it was found in former
    clause 7(e) of rule XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    850. Threeday layover.

      4. (a)(1)  Except as specified in
    subparagraph (2), it shall not be in order to consider in the House a
    measure or matter reported by a committee until the third calendar day
    (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays except when the House
    is in session on such a day) on which each report of a committee on that
    measure or matter has been available to Members, Delegates, and the
    Resident Commissioner.

    [[Page 624]]

      (2) Subparagraph (1) does not apply to--

          (A) a resolution providing a rule, joint rule, or order of
    business reported by the Committee on Rules considered under clause 6;

          (B) a resolution providing amounts from the applicable accounts
    described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X reported by the Committee on House
    Administration considered under clause 6 of rule X;

          (C) a resolution presenting a question of the privileges of the
    House reported by any committee;

          (D) a measure for the declaration of war, or the declaration of a
    national emergency, by Congress; and

          (E) a measure providing for the disapproval of a decision,
    determination, or action by a Government agency that would become, or
    continue to be, effective unless disapproved or otherwise invalidated by
    one or both Houses of Congress. In this subdivision the term
    ``Government agency'' includes any department, agency, establishment,
    wholly owned Government corporation, or instrumentality of the Federal
    Government or of the government of the District of Columbia.

    [[Page 625]]

      (b) A committee that reports a measure or matter shall make every
    reasonable effort to have its hearings thereon (if any) printed and
    available for distribution to Members, Delegates, and the Resident
    Commissioner before the consideration of the measure or matter in the
    House.

      This provision (formerly clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI) was originally
    contained in section 108 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970
    (84 Stat. 1140) and was incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). It was amended in the 94th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20), in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    4, 1977, pp. 53-70), and in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979,
    p. 8). In the 102d Congress it was amended to clarify the availability
    requirements for reported measures, including concurrent resolutions on
    the budget (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). It was amended in the 104th
    Congress to count as a ``calendar day'' any day on which the House is in
    session (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077), and again in the 105th
    Congress to achieve like treatment in the case of a concurrent
    resolution on the budget (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). The rule was
    later amended in the 105th Congress to conform to a change in the
    layover requirement for a concurrent resolution on the budget (Budget
    Enforcement Act of 1997 (sec. 10109, P.L. 105-33)). In the 106th
    Congress two technical and conforming corrections were effected. The
    106th Congress also recodified the rules, transferring this provision
    from former clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI, which consisted of this provision
    and current clause 6(a)(2) of this rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). Subparagraph (2)(C) was added in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(n), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). In the 109th Congress a conforming change
    to subparagraph (2)(B) was effected and a subdivision was deleted as
    obsolete upon the repeal of the Corrections Calendar (sec. 2(a), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 626]]

    availability requirements of this clause (Speaker Albert, July 13, 1971,
    pp. 24720-23; see also VI, 48; Deschler, ch. 14, Sec. 7.4, fn. 10, and
    Oct. 8, 1998, p. 24680, with respect to impeachment reports; and Feb.
    12, 1998, p. 1323, with respect to a resolution dismissing an election
    contest reported as privileged under clause 5(a)(3) of rule XIII).
    Clause 3(a)(2) of rule XIII was amended in the 107th Congress to except
    from the three-day layover requirement a supplemental report only
    correcting errors in the depiction of record votes under clause 3(b)
    (sec. 2(k), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).-
      The availability requirement is not applicable to privileged reports
    from the Committee on Rules or to bills before the House which have not
    been reported from committee (Speaker Albert, Aug. 10, 1976, p. 26793).
    The Committee on Rules has the authority under clause 5(a) of rule XIII
    (formerly clause 4(a) of rule XI) to report a special order making in
    order the text of an introduced bill as a substitute original text for a
    reported bill, and no point of order lies that such introduced text has
    not been available for three days under this rule, which only applies to
    the consideration of reported measures themselves (Oct. 9, 1986, p.
    29973). The exceptions from the three-day layover requirement were
    expanded in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, p. 98) to
    include resolutions called up pursuant to legislative veto provisions in
    laws having the effect of approving or invalidating the actions of any
    government agency (and not just agencies of the executive branch). That
    exception allows the consideration of a measure disapproving an
    executive branch decision pursuant to statute within three days of the
    expiration of the congressional review period, notwithstanding the
    three-day availability requirement (concurrent resolution disapproving a
    regulation of the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to the Federal Trade
    Commission Improvements Act, P.L. 96-252) (May 26, 1982, pp. 12027-30).
    A report from a committee raising a question of the privileges of the
    House, such as a report relating to the contemptuous conduct of a
    witness before the committee, may be considered notwithstanding the

    Sec. 851. Oneday layover.

      A committee  expense resolution
    reported by the Committee on House Administration pursuant to clause 5
    of rule XIII need only be available for one day. However, other
    resolutions reported from that committee which are privileged (such as a
    resolution authorizing the printing of material as a House document),
    but which do not constitute questions of the privileges of the House,
    are subject to this clause (Speaker Albert, Mar. 6, 1975, p. 5537).

    Sec. 852. Printed hearings on appropriation bills.

      (c)  A
    general appropriation bill reported by the Committee on Appropriations
    may not be considered in the House until the third calendar day
    (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except when the House
    is in session on such a day) on which printed hearings of the Committee
    on Appropriations thereon have been available to Members, Delegates, and
    the Resident Commissioner.

    [[Page 627]]

    Privileged reports, generally
      This provision from section 139(a) of the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1946 was made a part of the standing rules January 3, 1953 (p.
    24), and was amended (by the addition of the parenthetical clause) on
    January 22, 1971 (p. 144). In the 104th Congress it was amended to count
    as a ``calendar day'' any day on which the House is in session (H. Res.
    254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 7 of rule
    XXI; and a requirement that the report also be available for three days
    was deleted as redundant because reports on general appropriation bills
    are covered under the availability requirements of paragraph (a) (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In counting the ``three calendar days''
    specified in the clause, the date the bill is filed or the date on which
    it is to be called up for consideration are counted, but not both (May
    26, 1969, p. 13720).

    853. Privileged reports.

      5. (a)  The following committees
    shall have leave to report at any time on the following matters,
    respectively:

          (1) The Committee on Appropriations, on general appropriation
    bills and on joint resolutions continuing appropriations for a fiscal
    year after September 15 in the preceding fiscal year.

          (2) The Committee on the Budget, on the matters required to be
    reported by such committee under titles III and IV of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974.

          (3) The Committee on House Administration, on enrolled bills, on
    contested elections, on matters referred to it concerning printing for
    the use of the House or the two Houses, on expenditure of the applicable
    accounts of the House described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X, and on
    matters relating to preservation and availability of noncurrent records
    of the House under rule VII.

          (4) The Committee on Rules, on rules, joint rules, and the order
    of business.

    [[Page 628]]

          (5) The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, on resolutions
    recommending action by the House with respect to a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House as a result of
    an investigation by the committee relating to the official conduct of
    such Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee.

      (b) A report filed from the floor as privileged under paragraph (a)
    may be called up as a privileged question by direction of the reporting
    committee, subject to any requirement concerning its availability to
    Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner under clause 4 or
    concerning the timing of its consideration under clause 6.

      The origins of this provision appear as early as 1812, but it was in
    1886 that the various provisions were consolidated in one rule. The rule
    was amended by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat.
    812), on February 2, 1951 (p. 883), and by the Committee Reform
    Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong.,
    Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). On the latter date the privileges given to the
    Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs (now Resources) on bills for
    the forfeiture of land grants to railroad and other corporations,
    preventing speculation in the public lands and reserving public lands
    for the benefit of actual and bona fide settlers, and for the admission
    of new States, to the Committee on Public Works (now Transportation and
    Infrastructure) on bills authorizing the improvement of rivers and
    harbors, to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs on general pension bills,
    and to the Committee on Ways and Means on bills raising revenue, were
    eliminated from the rule. In the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14,
    1975, p. 20), the rule was further amended to reinsert ``contested
    elections'' under the authority of the Committee on House
    Administration, a matter inadvertently omitted by the 93d Congress (H.
    Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The rule was amended in the 97th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 98-113) to permit joint
    resolutions continuing appropriations to be privileged if reported after
    a certain date. In the 101st Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72),
    the rule was amended to include under the authority of the Committee on
    House Administration all matters relating to preservation and
    availability of noncurrent House records. In the 104th and 106th
    Congresses, it was amended to conform references to a renamed committee
    (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). In the 105th Congress it was amended to update an archaic
    reference to the ``contingent fund'' (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 4 of rule XI; as part of that
    recodification, former clause 9 of rule XVI (restating the privilege of
    general appropriation bills) was deleted as obsolete (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). A conforming change to subparagraph (3) was effected in
    the 109th Congress (sec. 2(a) H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 629]]

    (IV, 4621), and by giving this privilege the most important matters of
    business were greatly expedited. In 1890 a rule was adopted providing
    that reports should be made by filing with the Clerk, but privileged
    reports must still be made from the floor (IV, 3146; VIII, 2230). A
    privileged report from the Committee on Rules may be filed at any time
    when the House is in session, including during special-order speeches
    (Oct. 14, 1986, p. 30861). Before the original adoption of the
    provisions contained in former clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI in the 92d
    Congress (current clause 4 of rule XIII) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p.
    144), the right of reporting at any time was held to give the right of
    immediate consideration by the House (IV, 3131, 3132, 3142-3147; VIII,
    2291, 2312). However, from that date until the effective date of the
    provision of former clause 2(l)(6) (current clause 4 of this rule) on
    January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), only
    the Committees on House Administration, Rules (subject to the two-thirds
    vote requirement of clause 6 of this rule), and Standards of Official
    Conduct could call up a matter in the House for immediate consideration
    as soon as the report was filed. Now only reports from the Committee on
    Rules on rules, joint rules, and the order of business under clause 6 of
    this rule; reports from the Committee on House Administration on
    committee expense resolutions under clause 5(a) of this rule; reports
    constituting questions of privilege (see generally Deschler, ch. 14,
    Sec. 7.4, fn. 10, discussing ruling of Speaker Albert, July 13, 1971, on
    a reported contempt); and reports on the official conduct of a Member
    (e.g., H. Res. 31, Jan. 21, 1997, p. 393) are exempt from the
    requirements of former clause 2(l)(6) (current clause 4 of this rule)
    (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Other committees
    enumerated in this clause may still utilize the privilege after the
    report on the bill or resolution has been available for at least three
    calendar days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except
    when the House is in session on such a day). Once called up for
    consideration, the matter so reported remains privileged until disposed
    of (IV, 3145). The House proceeds to the consideration of privileged
    questions only on motion directed to be made by the several committees
    reporting such questions (VIII, 2310). Privileged questions reported
    adversely have the same status so far as their privilege is concerned as
    those reported favorably (VI, 413; VIII, 2310).
      At the time these privileges originated all reports were made on the
    floor, and often with great difficulty because of the pressure of
    business

    Sec. 854. Privileged reports defined.

      The  matters reported
    under the provisions of this clause are denominated ``privileged
    reports'' or ``privileged questions,'' and since the privilege relates
    merely to the order of business under the rules, they must be
    distinguished from ``questions of privilege'' which relate to the safety
    or dignity of the House itself defined in rule IX (III, 2718).
    Therefore, ``questions of privilege'' take precedence over these matters
    which are privileged under the rules (III, 2426-2530; V, 6454; VIII,
    3465).

    [[Page 630]]

    3071). But the Speaker has declined to allow a call of committees to be
    interrupted by a privileged report (IV, 3132). The presence of matter
    not privileged with privileged matter destroys the privileged character
    of a bill (IV, 4622, 4624, 4633, 4640, 4643; VIII, 2289; Speaker
    Rayburn, May 21, 1958, pp. 9212-16), or resolution (VIII, 2300), and
    when the text of a bill contains nonprivileged matter, privilege may not
    be created by a committee amendment in the nature of a substitute not
    containing the nonprivileged matter (IV, 4623).
      Privileged questions interrupt the regular order of business as
    established by former rule XXIV (current rule XIV), but when they are
    disposed of the regular order continues on from the point of
    interruption (IV, 3070,

      The House may give a committee leave to report at any time only by the
    process of changing the rules (III, 1770).

    [[Page 631]]

    The Committee on Rules also has reported as privileged a joint
    resolution repealing a statutory joint rule (mandatory July adjournment,
    sec. 132 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946) (July 27, 1990,
    p. 20178). The Committee on Rules has reported as privileged a special
    order of business nearly identical to one previously rejected by the
    House, but held not to constitute ``another of the same substance''
    within the meaning of the provisions in Jefferson's Manual on
    reconsideration (Sec. 513, supra) because it provided a different scheme
    for general debate (July 27, 1993, p. 17115).

    Sec. 855. The privilege of individual committees for
    reports.

      The  privilege given by this clause to the Committee on Rules is
    confined to ``action touching rules, joint rules, and order of
    business'' and this committee may not report as privileged a concurrent
    resolution providing for a Senate investigating committee (VIII, 2255),
    or provide for the appointment of a clerk (VIII, 2256); but the
    privilege has been held to include the right to report special orders
    for the consideration of individual bills or classes of bills (V, 6774),
    or the consideration of a specified amendment to a bill and prescribing
    a mode of considering such amendment (VIII, 2258). A special rule
    providing for the consideration of a bill is not invalidated by the fact
    that at the time the rule was reported, the bill was not on the calendar
    (VIII, 2259; Speaker McCormack, Aug. 19, 1964, p. 20212). The authority
    to report special orders of business includes authority to recommend
    consideration of measures and amendments thereto the subject of which
    might be separately pending before a standing committee (Apr. 15, 1986,
    p. 7531); to make in order the consideration of the text of an
    introduced bill as original text in a reported bill (Oct. 9, 1986, p.
    29973); to permit consideration of a previously unnumbered and
    unsponsored measure which comes into existence by virtue of adoption by
    the House of the special order (Speaker O'Neill, Apr. 16, 1986, p.
    7610); to recommend a ``hereby'' resolution, for example, that a
    concurrent resolution correcting the enrollment of a bill be considered
    as adopted by the House upon the adoption of the special order (Speaker
    Wright, May 4, 1988, p. 9865), or that a Senate amendment pending at the
    Speaker's table and otherwise requiring consideration in Committee of
    the Whole under clause 3 of rule XXII (formerly clause 1 of rule XX) be
    ``hereby'' considered as adopted upon adoption of the special order
    (Deschler, ch. 21, Sec. 16.11; Feb. 4, 1993, p. 2500); to provide that
    an amendment containing an appropriation in violation of clause 4 of
    rule XXI (formerly clause 5(a)) be considered as adopted in the House
    when the reported bill is under consideration (Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3542);
    to provide that an amendment containing an appropriation in violation of
    clause 2 of rule XXI be considered as adopted in the House when the
    reported bill is under consideration (July 27, 1993, p. 17129); and to
    provide that a nongermane amendment otherwise in violation of clause 7
    of rule XVI be considered as adopted in the House when the bill is under
    consideration (Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3542; July 27, 1993, p. 17129).

      A resolution consisting solely of privileged matter, albeit in two
    separate jurisdictions empowered to report at any time under clause
    4(a), has been referred to a primary committee, reported therefrom as
    privileged, referred sequentially, and reported as privileged from the
    sequential committee as well (H. Res. 258, 102d Cong., Nov. 8, 1991, p.
    30979; Nov. 19, 1991, p. 32903).

      The right of the Committee on Appropriations to report at any time was
    confined strictly to general appropriation bills (IV, 4629-4632; VIII,
    2282-2284) and does not include appropriations for specific purposes
    (VIII, 2285). Before privilege was extended to continuing appropriation
    bills (in 1981), the rule was construed not to apply to resolutions
    extending appropriations (VIII, 2282-2284).

      Reports from the Committee on House Administration authorizing
    appropriations from the Treasury directly for compensation of employees
    (IV, 4645) or fixing the salaries of employees are not privileged (VIII,
    2302).

    Sec. 856. Privileged motion for consideration of revenue and
    appropriation bills.

        As early as 1835 the necessity of giving
    appropriation bills precedence became apparent, and in 1837 former
    clause 9 of rule XVI was adopted to establish that principle, but was
    deleted in recodification as redundant to this rule. Former clause 4(a)
    of rule XI was amended by the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974,
    effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470) to eliminate the authority of the Committee on Ways and Means to
    report as privileged bills raising revenue, and former clause 9 of rule
    XVI was amended in the 104th Congress (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p.
    35077) to delete as obsolete the reference to bills raising revenue (see
    Sec. 853, supra). However, the privilege to call up general
    appropriation bills in both rules was retained. When both types of
    reports were privileged under the rule before the 94th Congress, motions
    to consider revenue bills and appropriation bills were of equal
    privilege (IV, 3075, 3076).

    [[Page 632]]

    719, 720). The motion could be made on a ``suspension day'' as on other
    days (IV, 3080); and on consent days the call of the former Consent
    Calendar (abolished in the 104th Congress) took precedence of the motion
    (VII, 986). On Wednesdays the privilege of the motion is limited by
    clause 6 of rule XV. It may not be amended (VI, 52, 723), debated (VI,
    716), laid on the table, or indefinitely postponed (VI, 726), and the
    previous question may not be demanded on it (IV, 3077-3079). Although
    highly privileged, it may not take precedence of a motion to reconsider
    (IV, 3087), or a motion to change the reference of a bill (VII, 2124).
    The motion is less highly privileged than the motion to discharge a
    committee from further consideration of a bill under former clause 3 of
    rule XXVII (current clause 2 of rule XV) (VII, 1011, 1016).

    Privileged reports by the Committee on Rules
      The motion may designate the particular appropriation bill to be
    considered (IV, 3074). The motion is privileged at any time after the
    approval of the Journal (subject to relevant report and hearing
    availability requirements), but only if offered at the direction of the
    committee (July 23, 1993, p. 16820). The motion is in order on District
    Mondays (VI, 716-718; VII, 876, 1123); and takes precedence of the
    motion to go into Committee of the Whole House to consider the Private
    Calendar (IV, 3082-3085; VI,

    857. Reports from Committee on Rules.

      6. (a)  A report by
    the Committee on Rules on a rule, joint rule, or the order of business
    may not be called up for consideration on the same day it is presented
    to the House except--

          (1) when so determined by a vote of two-thirds of the Members
    voting, a quorum being present;

          (2) in the case of a resolution proposing only to waive a
    requirement of clause 4 or of clause 8 of rule XXII concerning the
    availability of reports; or

          (3) during the last three days of a session of Congress.

      (b) Pending the consideration of a report by the Committee on Rules on
    a rule, joint rule, or the order of business, the Speaker may entertain
    one motion that the House adjourn. After the result of such a motion is
    announced, the Speaker may not entertain any other dilatory motion until
    the report shall have been disposed of.

    [[Page 633]]

      (c) The Committee on Rules may not report--

          (1) a rule or order proposing that business under clause 6 of rule
    XV be set aside by a vote of less than two-thirds of the Members voting,
    a quorum being present;

          (2) a rule or order that would prevent the motion to recommit a
    bill or joint resolution from being made as provided in clause 2(b) of
    rule XIX, including a motion to recommit with instructions to report
    back an amendment otherwise in order, if offered by the Minority Leader
    or a designee, except with respect to a Senate bill or resolution for
    which the text of a House-passed measure has been substituted.

    [[Page 634]]

      The Committee on Rules, ``by uniform practice of the House,''
    exercised the privilege of reporting at any time as early as 1888. The
    right to report at any time is confined to privileged matters (VIII,
    2255). This was probably the survival of a practice which existed as
    early as 1853 of giving the privilege of reporting at any time to this
    committee for a session (IV, 4650). In 1890 the committee was included
    among the committees whose reports were privileged by rule. The present
    rule (formerly clause 4(b) of rule XI) was adopted in 1892 (IV, 4621)
    and was amended on March 15, 1909. Clause 6(a)(1) (former matter found
    in parentheses in clause 4(b) of rule XI) was adopted January 18, 1924
    (pp. 1139, 1141), and the rule was further amended by the Committee
    Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d
    Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), to limit its application to reports from
    the Committee on Rules on rules, joint rules, and orders of business. In
    the 94th Congress it was amended to permit the immediate consideration
    of a resolution reported from the Committee on Rules waiving the two-
    hour layover requirement (H. Res. 868, Feb. 26, 1976, p. 4625). In the
    104th Congress the provision was amended to prohibit the Committee on
    Rules from recommending a rule or order that would prevent a motion by
    the Minority Leader or his designee to recommit a bill or joint
    resolution with instructions to report back an amendment otherwise in
    order except in the case of a Senate bill or resolution for which the
    text of a House-passed measure is being substituted (sec. 210, 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 4(b) of rule
    XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A conforming change to paragraph
    (c)(1) was effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4,
    2005, p. ----). For rulings under the earlier form of the rule, see
    Sec. 859, infra.

      Pursuant to this clause, a privileged report from the Committee on
    Rules may be considered on the same legislative day only by a two-thirds
    vote, but a report properly filed by the committee at any time before
    the convening of the House on the next legislative day may be called up
    for immediate consideration without the two-thirds requirement (Speaker
    Albert, July 31, 1975, p. 26243), including a report filed during
    special-order speeches after legislative business on that prior
    legislative day (Oct. 14, 1986, p. 30861), and if the House continues in
    session into a second calendar day and then meets again that day, or
    convenes for two legislative days on the same calendar day, any report
    filed on the first legislative day may be called up on the second
    without the question of consideration being raised (Speaker O'Neill,
    Dec. 16, 1985, p. 36755; Speaker Wright, Oct. 29, 1987, p. 29937). This
    clause does not require that a privileged resolution, and the report
    thereon, from the Committee on Rules be printed before it is called up
    for consideration (Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 2, 1977, p. 3344).

      In the case of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on
    Rules, the two-thirds vote requirement for consideration on the same day
    reported does not apply. This clause provides for the immediate
    consideration of a resolution from the Rules Committee waiving the
    requirement that copies of reports and reported measures be available
    for three days before their consideration, and waiving the requirement
    that copies of conference reports or amendments reported from conference
    in disagreement be available for two hours before their consideration
    (see Aug. 10, 1984, p. 23978).

      Although highly privileged, a report from the Committee on Rules
    yields to questions of privilege (VIII, 3491; Mar. 11, 1987, p. 5403),
    and is not in order after the House has voted to go into Committee of
    the Whole (V, 6781). Also a conference report has precedence of it, even
    when the yeas and nays and previous question have been ordered (V,
    6449). Formerly if a report from the Committee on Rules contained
    substantive propositions, a separate vote could be had on each
    proposition (VIII, 2271, 2272, 2274, 3167); but these decisions were
    nullified by the adoption of clause 5(b)(2) of rule XVI (formerly clause
    6). A report from the Committee on Rules takes precedence over a motion
    to consider a measure which is ``highly privileged'' pursuant to a
    statute enacted as an exercise in the rulemaking authority of the House,
    acknowledging the constitutional authority of the House to change its
    rules at any time (Speaker Wright, Mar. 11, 1987, p. 5403). Before the
    House adopts rules, the Speaker may recognize a Member to offer for
    immediate consideration a special order providing for the consideration
    of a resolution adopting the rules (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 447).

    [[Page 635]]

    1975, p. 8418), or which would otherwise establish an exclusive
    procedure for consideration of a particular type of measure (Speaker
    O'Neill, Apr. 16, 1986, p. 7610; Speaker Wright, Mar. 11, 1987, p.
    5403). No rule of the House precludes the Committee on Rules from
    reporting a special order making in order specified amendments that have
    not been preprinted as otherwise required by an announced policy of that
    committee (Oct. 23, 1991, p. 28097). No point of order lies against a
    resolution reported from the Committee on Rules that waives points of
    order against a measure or provides special procedures for its
    consideration, where no law constituting a rule of the House prohibits
    consideration of such a resolution (resolution providing for
    consideration of a budget resolution, where a statute (P.L. 96-389),
    reaffirmed congressional commitment to balanced Federal budgets but did
    not dictate what legislation could be considered or otherwise constitute
    a rule of the House) (June 10, 1982, p. 13353).
      The Committee on Rules may report and call up as privileged
    resolutions temporarily waiving or altering any rule of the House,
    including statutory provisions enacted as an exercise of the House's
    rulemaking authority which would otherwise prohibit the consideration of
    a bill being made in order by the resolution. (Speaker Albert, Mar. 20,
    1975, p. 7676; Mar. 24,

      For a discussion of the Speaker's announced policy with respect to his
    entertaining unanimous-consent requests in the House to alter a special
    order previously adopted by the House, see Sec. 956, infra. For a
    discussion of the unanimous-consent requests that may not be entertained
    in the Committee of the Whole if their effect is to materially modify
    procedures required by a special order adopted by the House, see
    Sec. 993, infra.

    [[Page 636]]

    sider the vote on ordering the previous question on the rule and
    amendment thereto is not (see V, 5739; Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575), and
    may be laid on the table without carrying with it the resolution itself
    (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575). Only one motion to adjourn is admissible
    during the consideration of a report from the Committee on Rules (July
    23, 1997, pp. 15366, 15374; Mar. 20, 2002, p. ----), and the motion may
    not be made when another Member has the floor (Sept. 27, 1993, p.
    22608). Where the House adjourns during the consideration of a report
    from the Committee on Rules, further consideration of the report becomes
    the unfinished business on the following day, and debate resumes from
    the point where interrupted (Sept. 27, 1993, p. 22609; Sept. 28, 1993,
    p. 22719). The Chair has held that a virtually consecutive invocation of
    former rule XXX (current clause 6 of rule XVII), resulting in a second
    pair of votes on use of a chart and on reconsideration thereof, was not
    dilatory under this clause (or former clause 10 of rule XVI (current
    clause 1 of rule XVI)) (July 31, 1996, p. 20693). In the 107th Congress
    clause 6 of rule XVII was amended to render the Chair's recognition for
    a motion on the use of charts completely discretionary (see Sec. 963,
    infra).

    Sec. 858. Dilatory motions not permitted.

      In  the later
    practice it has been held that the question of consideration may not be
    raised against a report from the Committee on Rules (V, 4961-4963; VIII,
    2440, 2441). The clause forbidding dilatory motions has been construed
    strictly  (V, 5740-5742), and in the later practice the following have
    been excluded: (1) the motion to commit after the ordering of the
    previous question (V, 5593-5601; VIII, 2270, 2750; Feb. 22, 1984, p.
    2965); (2) an appeal from the Chair's decision not to entertain the
    question of consideration or a motion to lay the pending resolution on
    the table (V, 5739); and (3) the motion to postpone to a day certain
    (Oct. 9, 1986, p. 29972). A motion to reconsider the vote on ordering
    the previous question has been held not dilatory (V, 5739). Before
    debate has begun on a report from the Committee on Rules, a question of
    the privileges of the House takes precedence (VIII, 3491; Mar. 11, 1987,
    p. 5403). In the event that the previous question is rejected on a
    privileged resolution from the Committee on Rules, the provisions of
    clause 6(b) prohibiting ``dilatory'' motions no longer strictly apply;
    the resolution is subject to proper amendment, further debate, or a
    motion to table or refer, and the Member who lead the opposition to the
    previous question has the prior right to recognition (Oct. 19, 1966, pp.
    27713, 27725-29; May 29, 1980, pp. 12667-78), subject to being preempted
    by a preferential motion offered by another Member (Aug. 13, 1982, pp.
    20969, 20975-78). The member of the Committee on Rules calling up a
    privileged resolution on behalf of the committee may offer an amendment,
    and House rules do not require a specific authorization from the
    committee (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575). A motion to table such a pending
    amendment is dilatory and not in order under this provision, but the
    motion to recon

      A motion to recommit a special rule from the Committee on Rules is not
    in order (VIII, 2270, 2753).

    Sec. 859. Restrictions on authority of Committee on
    Rules.

      From  1934 until the amendment to this provision in the 104th
    Congress (sec. 210, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468), it was
    consistently held that the Committee on Rules could recommend a special
    order that limited, but did not totally prohibit, a motion to recommit
    pending passage of a bill or joint resolution, as by precluding the
    motion from containing instructions relating to specified amendments
    (Speaker Rainey, Jan. 11, 1934, pp. 479-83 (sustained on appeal)); or by
    omitting to preserve the availability of amendatory instructions in the
    case that the bill is entirely rewritten by the adoption of a substitute
    made in order as original text (Speaker Foley, June 4, 1991, p. 13170;
    Speaker Foley, Nov. 25, 1991, p. 34460); or by expressly allowing only a
    simple (``straight'') motion to recommit (without instructions) (Oct.
    16, 1990, p. 29657 (sustained by tabling of appeal); Feb. 26, 1992, p.
    3441 (sustained by tabling of appeal); May 7, 1992, p. 10586 (sustained
    by tabling of appeal); June 16, 1992, p. 14973 (sustained by tabling of
    appeal); Nov. 21, 1993, p. 31544; Nov. 22, 1993, p. 31815). A special
    order providing for consideration of a bill under suspension of the
    rules does not prevent a motion to recommit from being made ``as
    provided in clause 4 of rule XVI,'' i.e., after the previous question is
    ordered on passage, a procedure not applicable to a motion to suspend
    the rules (VIII, 2267; Speaker Foley, June 21, 1990, p. 15229). See
    Deschler, ch. 21, Sec. 26.11; see generally Deschler, ch. 23, Sec. 25.

    [[Page 637]]

    ered as adopted by the House upon the adoption of the special order), so
    long as not precluding the motion to recommit a bill or joint resolution
    (Speaker Wright, May 4, 1988, p. 9865).
      The caveat against including in a special order matter privileged to
    be reported by another committee (Deschler, ch. 21, Sec. 17.13) does not
    extend to a ``hereby'' resolution (e.g., that a concurrent resolution
    correcting the enrollment of a bill within the jurisdiction of another
    committee be consid

      The Committee on Rules has reported special rules to dispose of Senate
    amendments that have ordered the previous question to adoption without
    intervening motion. At this stage the special order need not preserve
    (under clause 6(c) of rule XIII) the motion to recommit (as provided in
    clause 2(b) of rule XIX) because the bill is not at the stage of initial
    passage. For an illustrative list of such rules, see House Practice, ch.
    51, Sec. 11. For an exchange of correspondence between the chairman and
    ranking minority member of the Rules Committee regarding this practice,
    see January 24, 1996, pp. 1228, 1229.

    Sec. 860. Unfunded mandates.

      The  Unfunded Mandates Reform
    Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4; 109 Stat. 48) added a new part B to title IV of
    the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 658-658g) that, effective
    on January 1, 1996, or 90 days after appropriations are made available
    to the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to the 1995 Act (whichever
    is earlier), imposes several requirements on committees with respect to
    ``Federal mandates'' (secs. 423, 424; 2 U.S.C. 658b, 658c), establishes
    points of order to permit separate votes on whether to enforce those
    requirements (sec. 425; 2 U.S.C. 658d), and permits a vote on the
    consideration of a rule or order waiving such points of order in the
    House (sec. 426(a); 2 U.S.C. 658e(a)). See Sec. 1127, infra.

    [[Page 638]]

    Sec. 861. Filing reports.

      (d)  The Committee on Rules shall
    present to the House reports concerning rules, joint rules, and the
    order of business, within three legislative days of the time when they
    are ordered. If such a report is not considered immediately, it shall be
    referred to the calendar. If such a report on the calendar is not called
    up by the member of the committee who filed the report within seven
    legislative days, any member of the committee may call it up as a
    privileged question on the day after the calendar day on which the
    member announces to the House his intention to do so. The Speaker shall
    recognize a member of the committee who rises for that purpose.

      (e) An adverse report by the Committee on Rules on a resolution
    proposing a special order of business for the consideration of a public
    bill or public joint resolution may be called up as a privileged
    question by a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner on a day when
    it is in order to consider a motion to discharge committees under clause
    2 of rule XV.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in one paragraph, former paragraph (c) of clause 4
    of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). What is now paragraph (d)
    was initially adopted January 18, 1924, and was amended on January 6,
    1987 (H. Res. 5, p. 6) (requiring one calendar day's notice before
    calling up a special order eligible under the rule. What is now
    paragraph (e) was amended December 8, 1931 (VIII, 2268), January 3, 1949
    (p. 16) (establishing the so-called ``21-day rule''), January 3, 1951
    (p. 18) (abolishing the ``21-day rule''), January 4, 1965 (p. 24)
    (reestablishing the ``21-day rule''), January 10, 1967 (H. Res. 7, p.
    28) (abolishing the ``21-day rule''). Technical changes to this
    provision were effected on January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974,
    p. 34470). A special order reported from the Committee on Rules and not
    called up within seven legislative days may be called up by any member
    of that committee, including a minority member (Nov. 13, 1979, p. 32185;
    May 6, 1982, p. 8905).

    Sec. 862.

      (f)  If the House has adopted a resolution making
    in order a motion to consider a bill or resolution, and such a motion
    has not been offered within seven calendar days thereafter, such a
    motion shall be privileged if offered by direction of all reporting
    committees having initial jurisdiction of the bill or resolution.

    [[Page 639]]

    by declaration of the Speaker pursuant to a special order of business
    rather than by adoption of a motion.

      This provision was contained in section 109 of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and became part of the rules
    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 2(l)(7) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In
    modern practice, this subparagraph is normally inapplicable in light of
    clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, which provides for the House resolving into
    the Committee of the Whole

    Sec. 863. Specifying waivers.

      (g)  Whenever the Committee on
    Rules reports a resolution providing for the consideration of a measure,
    it shall (to the maximum extent possible) specify in the resolution the
    object of any waiver of a point of order against the measure or against
    its consideration.

    Resolutions of inquiry
      This provision (formerly clause 4(e) of rule XI) was adopted in this
    form in the 104th Congress (sec. 211, 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 4(e) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    864. Resolution of inquiry.

      7. A  report on a resolution of
    inquiry addressed to the head of an executive department may be filed
    from the floor as privileged. If such a resolution is not reported to
    the House within 14 legislative days after its introduction, a motion to
    discharge a committee from its consideration shall be privileged.

      The House has exercised the right, from its earliest days, to call on
    the President and heads of departments for information. The first rule
    on the subject was adopted in 1820 for the purpose of securing greater
    care and deliberation in the making of requests. The present form of
    rule, in its essential features, dates from 1879 (III, 1856), while the
    time period for a committee to report was extended from one week to 14
    legislative days in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 5 of rule XXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 640]]

    for the House in calling on the President for information, especially
    with relation to foreign affairs, to use the qualifying clause ``if not
    incompatible with the public interest'' (II, 1547; III, 1896-1901; V,
    5759; VI, 436). But in some instances the House has made its inquiries
    of the President without condition, and has even made the inquiry
    imperative (III, 1896-1901). Resolutions of inquiry are delivered under
    direction of the Clerk (III, 1879) and are answered by subordinate
    officers of the Government either directly or through the President
    (III, 1908-1910).

    Sec. 865. Forms of resolutions of inquiry and
    delivery thereof.

      Resolutions of  inquiry are usually simple rather than concurrent in
    form (III, 1875), and are never joint resolutions (III, 1860). A
    resolution authorizing a committee to request information has been
    treated as a resolution of inquiry (III, 1860). It has been considered
    proper to use the word ``request'' in asking for information from the
    President and ``direct'' in addressing the heads of departments (III,
    1856, footnote, 1895). It is usual

    Sec. 866. Privileged status of resolutions of
    inquiry.

      The practice of  the House gives to resolutions of inquiry a privileged
    status. Thus, they are privileged for report and consideration at any
    time after their reference to a committee (III, 1870; VI, 413, 414), but
    not before (III, 1857), and are in order for consideration only on
    motion directed to be made by the committee reporting the same (VI, 413;
    VIII, 2310). They are privileged for consideration on ``Suspension
    days'' and took precedence of the former Consent Calendar (VI, 409)
    before its abolishment in the 104th Congress (H. Res. 168, June 20,
    1995, p. 16574), but are not in order on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 896-
    898). And only resolutions addressed to the President and the heads of
    the executive departments have the privilege (III, 1861-1864; VI, 406).
    To enjoy the privilege a resolution should call for facts rather than
    opinions (III, 1872, 1873; VI, 413, 418-432; July 7, 1971, pp. 23810-
    11), should not require investigations (III, 1872-1874; VI, 422, 427,
    429, 432), and should not present a preamble (III, 1877, 1878; VI, 422,
    427); but if a resolution on its face calls for facts, the Chair will
    not investigate the probability of the existence of the facts called for
    (VI, 422). However, a resolution inquiring for such facts as would
    inevitably require the statement of an opinion to answer such inquiry is
    not privileged (Speaker Longworth, Feb. 11, 1926, p. 3805).

      Questions of privilege (as distinguished from privileged questions)
    have sometimes arisen in cases wherein the head of a department has
    declined to respond to an inquiry and the House has desired to demand a
    further answer (III, 1891; VI, 435); but a demand for a more complete
    reply (III, 1892) or a proposition to investigate as to whether or not
    there has been a failure to respond may not be presented as involving
    the privileges of the House (III, 1893).

    [[Page 641]]

    the resolution may have been delayed in reaching the committee (III,
    1871). The motion to discharge is not debatable (III, 1868; VI, 415).
    However, if the motion is agreed to, the resolution is debatable under
    the hour rule unless the previous question is ordered (VI, 416, 417). If
    a committee reports a privileged resolution of inquiry (favorably or
    adversely), it may then be called up only by an authorized member of the
    reporting committee and not by another Member of the House (VI, 413;
    VIII, 2310). The Member calling up a privileged resolution of inquiry
    reported from committee is recognized to control one hour of debate and
    may move to lay the resolution on the table before or after that time
    (July 7, 1971, pp. 23807-10; Oct. 20, 1971, pp. 37055-57).

    Sec. 867. Discharge of a committee from a
    resolution of inquiry.

      Committees are  required to report resolutions of inquiry back
    to the House within one week (now 14 days) of the reference, and this
    time is construed to be legislative days (VIII, 3368; Speaker Rayburn,
    Feb. 9, 1950, p. 1755) exclusive of the day of introduction and the day
    of discharge (III, 1858, 1859). If a committee refuses or neglects to
    report the resolution back, the House may reach the resolution only by a
    motion to discharge the committee (III, 1865). The ordinary motion to
    discharge a committee is not privileged (VIII, 2316); but the practice
    of the House has given privilege to the motion in cases of resolutions
    of inquiry (III, 1866-1870). And this motion to discharge is privileged
    at the end of the time period, though

    Sec. 868. Resolutions of inquiry as related to
    the Executive.

      The President  having failed to respond to a resolution of inquiry,
    the House respectfully reminded him of the fact (III, 1890). In 1796 the
    House declared that its constitutional requests of the Executive for
    information need not be accompanied by a statement of purposes (II,
    1509). As to the kind of information which may be required, especially
    as to the papers that may be demanded, there has been much discussion
    (III, 1700, 1738, 1888, 1902, 1903; VI, 402, 435). There have been
    several conflicts with the Executive (II, 1534, 1561; III, 1884, 1885-
    1889, 1894) over demands for papers and information, especially when the
    resolutions have called for papers relating to foreign affairs (II,
    1509-1513, 1518, 1519).

                                    Rule XIV

                         order and priority of business

    Sec. 869. The rule for the order of business in the House.

      1. The daily order of business (unless varied by the application of
    other rules and except for the disposition of matters of higher
    precedence) shall be as follows:

    First. Prayer by the Chaplain. l   Second. Reading and approval of the
    Journal, unless postponed under clause 8 of rule XX.

      Third. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

      Fourth. Correction of reference of public bills.

    [[Page 642]]

      Fifth. Disposal of business on the Speaker's table as provided in
    clause 2.

      Sixth. Unfinished business as provided in clause 3.

      Seventh. The morning hour for the consideration of bills called up by
    committees as provided in clause 4.

      Eighth. Motions that the House resolve into the Committee of the Whole
    House on the state of the Union subject to clause 5.

      Ninth. Orders of the day.

      Originally the House had no rule prescribing an order of business, but
    certain simple usages were gradually established by practice before the
    first rule on the subject was adopted in 1811. The rule was amended
    frequently to arrange the business to give the House as large a freedom
    as possible in selecting for consideration and completing the
    consideration of the bills that it deems most important. The basic form
    of the rule has been in place since 1890 (IV, 3056). The 98th Congress
    made a conforming change to the second order of business relating to the
    postponement of the vote on approval of the Journal (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    1983, p. 34). The 104th Congress added the present third order of
    business respecting the Pledge of Allegiance (sec. 218, 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 1 of rule XXIV (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A correction to a cross reference was
    effected in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p.
    26).

      The Speaker does not entertain a point of no quorum before the prayer
    is offered (VI, 663). Under clause 7 of rule XX, a point of no quorum
    may not be entertained unless a question is pending (see Sec. 1027,
    infra).

      In response to serial parliamentary inquiries regarding the pledge of
    allegiance to the flag, the Chair advised that (1) under clause 1 of
    rule XIV, the third element of the daily order of business is the Pledge
    of Allegiance; (2) section 4 of title 4, United States Code, prescribes
    the text of the pledge; (3) when the pledge is delivered as the third
    element of the daily order of business, the Record reflects the pledge
    in its statutory form; and (4) the statute prescribes the manner of
    delivery of the pledge (Apr. 27, 2004, p. ----).

    [[Page 643]]

    order of business could be superseded by operation of other rules (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). But on any day, when the order of business
    is interrupted by a privileged matter, the business in order goes on
    from the place of interruption (IV, 3070, 3071) unless the House
    adjourns. After an adjournment the House begins again at the beginning.
    While privileged matters may interrupt the order of business, they may
    do so only with the consent of a majority of the House, expressed as to
    appropriation bills by the vote on going into Committee of the Whole to
    consider such bills, and as to matters like conference reports,
    questions of privilege, etc., by raising and voting on the question of
    consideration. The only exceptions to the principle that a majority may
    prevent interruption is contained in clauses 5 and 7 of rule XV,
    providing for a call of the Private Calendar on the first Tuesday of
    each month and a call of committees on Wednesdays. By this combination
    of an order of business with privileged interruptions the House is
    enabled to give precedence to its most important business without at the
    same time losing the power by majority vote to go to any other bills on
    its calendars.
    <>   The privileged matters which may interrupt the order of
    business include: l  (1) General appropriation bills (clause 5 of rule
    XIII; IV, 3072). l  (2) Conference reports (clause 7(a) of rule XXII; V,
    6443) and motions to discharge or instruct conferees (clause 7(c) of
    rule XXII).

    Sec. 870. Privileged interruptions of the order of
    business in the House.

      This rule  does not, however, bind the House to a daily
    routine, since the system of making certain important subjects
    privileged (see clause 5 of rule XIII and rule XXII) permits the
    interruption of the order of business by matters which, in fact, often
    supplant it entirely for days at a time. In the 106th Congress the
    recodification acknowledged in the parenthetical of this clause that the
    prescribed daily

      (3) Special orders reported by the Committee on Rules for
    consideration by the House (clause 5 of rule XIII; IV, 3070-3076, 4621).

      (4) Consideration of amendments between the Houses after disagreement
    (IV, 3149, 3150).

      (5) Questions of privilege (rule IX; III, 2521).

      (6) Privileged bills reported under the right to report at any time
    (clauses 5 and 7 of rule XIII; IV, 3142-3144, 4621).

      (7) Call of committees on Wednesdays for bills on House and Union
    Calendars (clause 6 of rule XV).

      (8) Private business on Tuesday (clause 5 of rule XV).

      (9) Motions on the second and fourth Mondays of the month to discharge
    committees on public bills and resolutions (clause 2 of rule XV), and
    consideration of District of Columbia business (clause 4 of rule XV; IV,
    3304).

      (10) Motions to suspend the rules and pass bills out of the regular
    order (clause 1 of rule XV; V, 6790).

      (11) Bills coming over from a previous day with the previous question
    ordered (V, 5510-5517).

      (12) Bills returned with the objections of the President (IV, 3534-
    3536).

      (13) Motions to send a bill to conference (under clause 1 of rule
    XXII; Aug. 1, 1972, p. 26153).

    [[Page 644]]

    reception of messages (V, 6602). Before the 104th Congress, addressing
    the House out of order by unanimous consent, the Speaker announced that
    on at least two subsequent days he would recognize designated Members
    after approval of the Journal to lead the House in the Pledge of
    Allegiance to the Flag (Speaker Wright, Sept. 9, 1988, p. 23310).
    Requests of Members for leaves of absence are in practice put before the
    House at the time of adjournment (IV, 3151).
      In addition to these matters, the House by practice permits its order
    of business to be interrupted, at the discretion of the Speaker, for the

    Sec. 872. The interruption of the order of business
    by the request for unanimous consent.

      When the  House has no rule establishing
    an order of business, as at the beginning of a session before the
    adoption of rules, it is in order for any Member who is recognized by
    the Chair to offer a proposition relating to the order of business
    without asking consent of the House (IV, 3060). But after the adoption
    of the rule for the order of business, interruptions are confined to
    matters privileged to interrupt or to cases wherein the House gives
    unanimous consent for an interruption. A request for unanimous consent
    to consider a bill is in effect a request to suspend the order of
    business temporarily (IV, 3059). Therefore any Member, including the
    Speaker, may object, or reserve the right to object and inquire, for
    example, about the reasons for the request, or demand the ``regular
    order'' (IV, 3058). Debate under a reservation of objection proceeds at
    the sufferance of the House and may not continue after a demand for the
    regular order (see, e.g., Speaker Foley, Nov. 14, 1991, p. 32128; Dec.
    15, 1995, p. 37142). A Member objecting to a unanimous-consent request
    or demanding the regular order when another has reserved the right to
    object must stand to be observed by the Chair (Nov. 7, 1991, p. 30633;
    June 23, 1992, p. 15703). The Speaker, however, usually signifies his
    objection by declining to put the request of the Member, thus saving the
    time of the House. The Speaker's guidelines for recognition for
    unanimous-consent requests for consideration of unreported measures are
    issued pursuant to clause 2 of rule XVII and are discussed in Sec. 956,
    infra. The request for unanimous consent began to be used about 1832
    when the House first felt a pressure of business and the necessity of
    adhering to a fixed order (IV, 3155-3159). In 1909, by the adoption of
    former clause 4 of rule XIII, a Consent Calendar was established, which
    was abolished in the 104th Congress (H. Res. 168, June 20, 1995, p.
    16574). For discussion of unanimous-consent requests and reservations of
    objections, see Sec. 956, infra. Unanimous consent for the immediate
    consideration of a measure in the House does not preclude a demand for a
    record vote when the Chair puts the question on final passage, since it
    merely permits consideration of a matter not otherwise privileged (Dec.
    16, 1987, p. 35816).

    [[Page 645]]

    Sec. 873. Disposal of
    business on the Speaker's table.

      2. Business on the Speaker's table  shall be disposed of as follows:

          (a) Messages from the President shall be referred to the
    appropriate committees without debate.

          (b) Communications addressed to the House, including reports and
    communications from heads of departments and bills, resolutions, and
    messages from the Senate, may be referred to the appropriate committees
    in the same manner and with the same right of correction as public bills
    and public resolutions presented by Members, Delegates, or the Resident
    Commissioner.

          (c) Motions to dispose of Senate amendments on the Speaker's table
    may be entertained as provided in clauses 1, 2, and 4 of rule XXII.

          (d) Senate bills and resolutions substantially the same as House
    measures already favorably reported and not required to be considered in
    the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union may be
    disposed of by motion. Such a motion shall be privileged if offered by
    direction of all reporting committees having initial jurisdiction of the
    House measure.

    [[Page 646]]

      A rule to govern disposition of business on the Speaker's table (to be
    distinguished from the table of the House, which is the Clerk's table)
    was adopted in 1832. In 1880 and 1885 efforts were made to so modify the
    rule as to prevent delays in business on the Speaker's table, but it was
    not until 1890 that the present rule was adopted (IV, 3089). Before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision and
    clause 2 of rule XXII occupied a single clause (formerly clause 2 of
    rule XXIV) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 874. Matters on Speaker's table for action by the
    House or by the Speaker alone.

      Such  portions of messages from the Senate as
    require action by the House, all messages from the President except
    those transmitting his objections to bills (IV, 3534-3536), and all
    communications and reports from the heads of departments go to the
    Speaker's table when received, to be disposed of under this rule. Simple
    resolutions of the Senate that do not require any action by the House
    are not referred (VII, 1048). All of the President's messages are
    referred. Such portions of Senate messages (House bills with Senate
    amendments) that do not require consideration in Committee of the Whole
    may be laid before the House for action. Communications from the
    President, other than messages; all portions of Senate messages
    requiring consideration in Committee of the Whole (IV, 3101); and Senate
    bills of all kinds (with the exception noted in the rule) may be
    referred to the appropriate standing committees under direction of the
    Speaker without action by the House (IV, 3107, 3111; VI, 727). Under
    clause 2 of former rule XXIV (current rule XIV), the Speaker may
    temporarily retain custody of an executive communication addressed to
    him (or may pursuant to former clause 1 of rule IV (current clause 3(a)
    of rule II) order the Sergeant-at-Arms to assume custody) pending House
    disposition of a special order reported from the Committee on Rules
    relating to a referral of the communication to committee (Sept. 9, 1998,
    p. 19769).

    [[Page 647]]

    rule (IV, 3098, 3099; VI, 727, 734, 737), and must have come to the
    House after and not before the House bill ``substantially the same'' has
    been placed on the House Calendar (IV, 3096; VI, 727, 736, 738) or
    Private Calendar (IV, 3102) and not involving an expenditure (IV, 3103).
    In the event the House bill has passed before the Senate bill is
    received, the Senate bill may nevertheless be disposed of on motion
    directed by the committee (VI, 734, 735). The House bill must be
    correctly on the House Calendar (VI, 736). In determining whether the
    House bill is substantially the same as the Senate bill, amendments
    recommended by the House committee must be considered (VI, 734, 736).
    The rule applies to private as well as to public Senate bills (IV,
    3101), and to concurrent resolutions as well as to bills (IV, 3097).
    Although a committee must authorize the calling up of the Senate bill
    (VI, 739), the actual motion need not be made by a member of the
    committee (IV, 3100). The authority of a committee to call up a bill
    must be given at a formal meeting of the committee (VIII, 2211, 2212,
    2222).
      A House bill returned with Senate amendments involving a new matter of
    appropriation, whether with or without a request for a conference, may
    be referred directly to a standing committee (VI, 731), and on being
    reported therefrom is referred directly to the Committee of the Whole
    (IV, 3094, 3095, 3108-3110). However, the usual practice is to take the
    bill from the Speaker's table and concur, concur with an amendment, or
    send to conference by unanimous consent, special rule, or suspension of
    the rules (VI, 732) (although a motion to send to conference may be
    privileged under clause 1 of rule XXII). The Speaker's authority under
    this clause includes the discretionary authority to refer from the
    Speaker's table Senate amendments to House-passed bills, to standing
    committees, under any conditions permitted under current clause 2 of
    rule XII (formerly clause 5 of rule X) for referral of introduced bills;
    he may for example impose a time limitation for consideration only of a
    portion of the Senate amendment, not germane to the original House bill,
    by the standing committee with subject-matter jurisdiction, without
    referring the remainder of the Senate amendment to the House committee
    with jurisdiction over the original House bill (Speaker O'Neill, H.R.
    31, Mar. 26, 1981, p. 5397). The Speaker announced his policy regarding
    referral of nongermane Senate amendments to committee (Jan. 3, 1983, p.
    54; Jan. 6, 1987, p. 21); and his policy regarding recognition for
    unanimous-consent requests to dispose of Senate amendments at the
    Speaker's table (Apr. 26, 1984, p. 10194; Feb. 4, 1987, p. 2676)
    discussed in Sec. 956, infra. A Senate bill to come before the House
    directly from the table must conform to the conditions prescribed by the

    Sec. 875. Reference of President's messages from the
    Speaker's table.

      A  message of the President on the Speaker's table is
    regularly laid before the House only at the time prescribed by the order
    of business (V, 6635-6638). While it is always read in full and entered
    on the Journal and the Congressional Record (V, 6963), the accompanying
    documents are not read on demand of a Member or entered in the Journal
    or Record (V, 5267-5271; VII, 1108). The annual message of the President
    is usually referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of
    the Union by the House on motion (V, 6631). In the earlier practice it
    was distributed to appropriate standing committees by resolutions
    reported from the Committee on Ways and Means (V, 6621, 6622) but since
    the first session of the 64th Congress the practice has been
    discontinued (VIII, 3350). A portion of the annual message has been
    referred directly to a select committee (V, 6628). A message other than
    an annual message is usually referred directly to a standing committee
    by direction of the Speaker (IV, 4053; VIII, 3346), but may be referred
    by the House itself on motion by a Member (V, 6631; VIII, 3348), and
    such motion is privileged (VIII, 3348). This reference may be to a
    select as well as to a standing committee (V, 6633, 6634).

    [[Page 648]]

    all other unfinished business shall be resumed whenever the class of
    business to which it belongs shall be in order under the rules.

    Sec. 876. Unfinished business.

      3.  Consideration of
    unfinished business in which the House may have been engaged at an
    adjournment, except business in the morning hour and proceedings
    postponed under clause 8 of rule XX, shall be resumed as soon as the
    business on the Speaker's table is finished, and at the same time each
    day thereafter until disposed of. The consideration of

      The first rule relating to unfinished business was adopted in 1794.
    Changes were made in 1860 and 1880, but the rule finally became
    unsatisfactory, because of delays caused by it, and in 1890 the present
    form was adopted (IV, 3112). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 3 of rule
    XXIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A clerical correction to a cross
    reference was effected in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    3, 2001, p. 26).

    Sec. 877. Construction of rule as to unfinished
    business.

      This  clause should be understood in light of clause 8 of rule XX,
    which permits the Chair to postpone record votes on certain questions to
    a designated time within two legislative days (see Sec. 1030, infra).
    The ``business in which the House may be engaged at an adjournment''
    means, literally, business in the House, as distinguished from the
    Committee of the Whole; and it further means business in which the House
    is engaged in its general legislative time, as distinguished from the
    special periods set aside for classes of business, like the morning hour
    for calls of committee, Tuesdays for private bills, etc. In general, all
    business unfinished in the general legislative time goes over as
    unfinished business under the rule, but there are a few exceptions.
    Thus, a motion relating to the order of business does not recur as
    unfinished business on a succeeding day, even though the yeas and nays
    may have been ordered on it (IV, 3114). The question of consideration,
    also, when not disposed of at an adjournment, does not recur as
    unfinished business on a succeeding day (V, 4947, 4948), but may be
    again raised on a subsequent day when the matter is again called up as
    unfinished business (VIII, 2438). Where the House adjourns during the
    consideration of a report from the Committee on Rules, further
    consideration of the report becomes the unfinished business on the
    following day, and debate resumes from the point where interrupted
    (Sept. 27, 1993, p. 22609; Sept. 28, 1993, p. 22719). When the House
    adjourns on the second legislative day after postponement of a question
    under clause 8 of rule XX without resuming proceedings thereon, the
    question remains unfinished business on the next legislative day (Oct.
    1, 1997, p. 20922; Oct. 2, 1997, p. 20991). When the House adjourns
    while a motion to instruct under clause 7(c) of rule XXII is pending,
    the motion to instruct becomes unfinished business on the next day and
    does not need to be renoticed (Oct. 1, 1997, p. 20894).

    [[Page 649]]

    tions for the previous question were made (V, 5518). When the previous
    question is ordered on a bill undisposed of at adjournment on Friday,
    the bill comes up for disposition on the next legislative day (VIII,
    2694). A bill going over from Calendar Wednesday with the previous
    question ordered on it should be disposed of on the next legislative day
    (VII, 967), but when the previous question is ordered on a bill
    undisposed of when the House adjourns Tuesday, the bill goes over until
    Thursday (VII, 890-894; VIII, 2674, 2691). A bill coming over from a
    preceding day with the previous question ordered was of equal privilege
    with business on the former Consent Calendar (VII, 990).

    Sec. 878. Effect of previous question.

      When the  House
    adjourns before voting on a proposition on which the previous question
    has been ordered, either directly or by the terms of a special order
    (IV, 3185), the matter comes up the next day as unfinished business (V,
    5510-5517; VIII, 2691; Aug. 2, 1989, p. 18187). If several bills come
    over in this situation, they have precedence in the order in which the
    several mo

    Sec. 879. Business unfinished in periods set apart
    for classes of business.

      The rule  excepts by its terms certain classes of
    business which are considered in periods set apart for classes of
    business, viz: l  (a) Bills considered in the morning hour and on
    Calendar Wednesday for the call of committees. l  (b) Bills in Committee
    of the Whole.

      (c) Private bills considered on Tuesdays.

      (d) District of Columbia bills.

      (e) Bills brought up under the rule setting apart days for motions to
    suspend the rules, motions to discharge committees, and bills under
    consideration after a committee has been discharged.

      A bill brought up in the morning hour and undisposed of when the call
    ceases for the day remains as unfinished business in the morning hour
    (IV, 3113, 3120), i.e., it is considered when the House next goes to a
    call of committees. Business unfinished when the Committee of the Whole
    rises remains unfinished, to be considered first in order when the House
    next goes into Committee of the Whole to consider that business (IV,
    4735, 4736).

      On District of Columbia day business unfinished on the preceding
    District day is in order for consideration, but does not come before the
    House unless called up (IV, 3307; VII, 879). Unless postponed under
    clause 8 of rule XX, a motion to suspend the rules, which is undisposed
    of on one suspension day, goes over as unfinished business to the next
    suspension day, individual motions going over to a committee day, and
    vice versa (V, 6814-6816; VII, 1005; VIII, 3411, 3412).

    [[Page 650]]

    mittees before the House passes to other business, the next call shall
    resume at the point it left off, giving preference to the last bill or
    resolution under consideration. A committee that has occupied the call
    for two days may not call up another bill or resolution until the other
    committees have been called in their turn.

    Sec. 880. The morning hour for the call of
    committees.

      4. After the  unfinished business has been disposed of, the Speaker
    shall call each standing committee in regular order and then select
    committees. Each committee when named may call up for consideration a
    bill or resolution reported by it on a previous day and on the House
    Calendar. If the Speaker does not complete the call of the com

      The morning hour is one of the oldest devices of the rules for
    devoting an early portion of the session to a specific class of
    business. Until 1885 it was the hour for the reception of reports from
    committees. In 1890 it was provided that reports should be filed with
    the Clerk, and the morning hour was by this rule devoted to a call of
    committees for the consideration of House Calendar bills (IV, 3181).
    Since the adoption of the Calendar Wednesday rule (clause 6 of rule XV),
    the morning hour has been used but rarely. Before the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former
    clause 4 of rule XXIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 651]]

    Sec. 881. Procedure in the morning
    hour.

      Originally the  morning hour was a fixed period of 60 minutes (IV, 3118); but
    under the present rule it does not terminate until the call is exhausted
    or until the House adjourns (IV, 3119), unless the House on motion made
    at the end of 60 minutes votes to go into Committee of the Whole House
    on the state of the Union (clause 5 of rule XIV; IV, 3134), or unless
    other privileged matter intervenes (IV, 3131, 3132). Before the
    expiration of the 60 minutes the Speaker has declined to permit the call
    to be interrupted by a privileged report (IV, 3132) or by unanimous
    consent (IV, 3130). Where the business for which the call is interrupted
    is concluded, the call is resumed unless there be other interrupting
    business or the House adjourns (IV, 3133). A bill once brought up on the
    call continues before the House in that order of business until disposed
    of (IV, 3120), unless withdrawn by authority of the committee before
    action which puts it in possession of the House (IV, 3129); and may not
    be made a special order for a future day by a motion to postpone to a
    day certain (IV, 3164). In order to be called up in this order a bill
    must actually be on the House Calendar, and properly there, in order to
    be considered (IV, 3122-3126), and a bill on the Union Calendar may not
    be brought up on call of committees under this clause (VI, 753). If the
    authority of the committee to call up a bill is disputed, the Chair does
    not consider it his duty to decide the question (IV, 3127), but the
    Chair may base its decision on statements from the chairman and other
    members of the committee (IV, 3128).

    Sec. 882. Interruption of the call of committees by
    motion to go into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the
    Union.

      5. After  consideration of bills or resolutions under clause 4 for one
    hour, it shall be in order, pending consideration thereof, to entertain
    a motion that the House resolve into the Committee of the Whole House on
    the state of the Union or, when authorized by a committee, that the
    House resolve into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the
    Union to consider a particular bill. Such a motion shall be subject to
    only one amendment designating another bill. If such a motion is decided
    in the negative, another such motion may not be considered until the
    matter that was pending when such motion was offered is disposed of.

      This portion of the rule was adopted in 1890 as part of the plan for
    enabling the House at will to go at any time to any public bill on its
    calendars (IV, 3134). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5 of rule XXIV (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    6. <>   All questions relating to the priority of business
    shall be decided by a majority without debate.

    [[Page 652]]

    Sec. 883. Conditions of the motion to go into
    Committee of the Whole at the end of one hour.

      The words  of the rule ``one
    hour'' have been interpreted to mean a less time in case the call of
    committees shall have exhausted itself before the expiration of one hour
    (IV, 3135); but not otherwise (IV, 3141). After the House has been in
    Committee of the Whole under this order and has risen and reported, and
    the report has been acted on by the House, other motions to go into
    Committee to consider other bills are in order (IV, 3136). The motion to
    go into Committee generally may be made by the individual Member (IV,
    3138), but when it is proposed to designate a particular bill he must
    have the authority of a committee (IV, 3138). The amendment to the
    motion to consider a particular bill must refer to a bill on the Union
    Calendar (IV, 3139). This order of business is used entirely for
    nonprivileged bills and is not used in the House for consideration of
    bills in Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union if
    otherwise privileged under clause 5 of rule XIII.

      This provision was adopted in 1803 to prevent obstructive debate (IV,
    3061). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former rule XXV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    The question of consideration under clause 3 of rule XVI and the motion
    that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole are not
    debatable (VIII, 2447; IV, 3062, 3063).

      This rule may not be invoked to establish an order of business or to
    inhibit the Speaker's power of recognition (Speaker Albert, July 31,
    1975, p. 26249). It has been held that appeals from decisions of the
    Chair as to priority of business are not debatable under this rule (V,
    6952).

                                     Rule XV

    Suspensions
                        business in order on special days

    885. Motions to suspend the rules.

      1. (a)  A rule may not be
    suspended except by a vote of two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum
    being present. The Speaker may not entertain a motion that the House
    suspend the rules except on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays and during
    the last six days of a session of Congress.

    [[Page 653]]

    3(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). That authority was extended by
    unanimous consent through the last Wednesday in June (Apr. 30, 2003, p.
    ----) and by resolution through the entire 108th Congress (H. Res. 297,
    June 26, 2003, p. ----). The 109th Congress amended the rule to permit
    motions to suspend the rules every Wednesday (sec. 2(e), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    4, 2005, p. ----). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1 of rule XXVII (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      This provision (formerly clause 1 of rule XXVII) developed from a rule
    adopted in 1794, which provided that no rule should be rescinded without
    one day's notice. In 1822 a paragraph was added that no rule should be
    suspended except by a two-thirds vote. In 1828 it was amended to provide
    that the order of business, as established by the rules, should not be
    changed except by a two-thirds vote. Originally contemplating motions to
    suspend the rules on any day, the rule was amended in 1847 to restrict
    the motion to Mondays of each week, and, in 1880, to the first and third
    Mondays of each month. In 1874 the old limit of 10 days at the end of
    the session was reduced to six days. In the 93d Congress, the rule was
    amended to permit motions to suspend the rules on the first and third
    Mondays and on the Tuesdays immediately following those days and to
    eliminate the distinction between days on which committees and
    individuals had preference (H. Res. 6, Jan. 3, 1973, pp. 26, 27). In the
    95th Congress, the rule was amended to permit such motions on every
    Monday and Tuesday (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, 95th Cong., pp. 53-70).
    During the first session of the 108th Congress, the House authorized the
    Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules on
    Wednesdays through the second Wednesday in April as though under this
    clause (sec.

    Sec. 886. Nature of the motion to suspend the
    rules.

      Originally,  when the House was operating under the older rules for the
    order of business, the motion was used to establish a special order of
    business for the consideration of a particular measure (IV, 3152, 3162;
    V, 6852). In 1890, the House adopted rules for the order of business
    which enabled the House on any day to consider public bills on its
    calendars. About the same time, the House perfected the process of
    establishing a special order of business by a majority vote through a
    report from the Committee on Rules (IV, 3169). As a result of these
    changes, the use of the motion to suspend gradually changed from one
    that established a special order of business to one that passes or
    adopts a measure (V, 6790, 6846, 6847). The latter motion suspends all
    rules inconsistent with its purposes, including a rule requiring that a
    recess be taken (V, 5752) or that a quorum be present when a bill is
    reported from committee (Sept. 22, 1992, p. 26932).

      Although the normal use of the motion is to pass or adopt a
    noncontroversial measure, the motion may also be used to change or
    suspend a rule or order that is susceptible to suspension or to suspend
    the parliamentary law of Jefferson's Manual (V, 6796, 6862). The rules
    forbid the Speaker to entertain a motion to suspend the rules relating
    to the privilege of the floor (clause 2(b) of rule IV; V, 7283; VIII,
    3634), the use of the Hall of the House (clause 1 of rule IV; V, 7270),
    or prohibiting the introduction of persons in the galleries (clause 7 of
    rule XVII; VI, 197).

    [[Page 654]]

      The motion to suspend may include a series of actions, such as the
    discharge of a committee from consideration of a bill and the passage of
    it (V, 6850), the reconsideration of the vote passing a bill, amendment
    of it, and passage again (V, 6849), the permission for a committee to
    report several bills (V, 6857), an order to the Clerk to incorporate in
    the engrossment of a general appropriation bill a provision not
    otherwise in order (IV, 3845), an authorization to the House to
    entertain a specified motion to suspend the rules on a future day, not a
    suspension day (IV, 3845), a motion to take a bill (V, 6288; VIII, 3425)
    or a motion to reconsider, from the table (V, 5640). A motion to suspend
    may provide for agreeing to a conference report which has been ruled out
    of order by the Speaker (Dec. 20, 1974, p. 41860) or may provide for
    passage of a bill that consists of the text of two bills previously
    passed by the House (Sept. 19, 2000, p. 18510). One motion to suspend
    the rules having been rejected, the Speaker may recognize for a similar
    motion (Dec. 21, 1973, pp. 43270-81).

      A motion to suspend the rules may provide for the passage of a bill
    regardless of whether it has been reported by committee, referred to a
    calendar, or even previously introduced (VIII, 3421; July 16, 1996, p.
    17228). It may include an amendment without the formality of committee
    approval (June 22, 1992, p. 15617). Copies of reports on bills
    considered under suspension are not required to be available in advance.
    No advance notice to Members of bills to be called up under suspension
    of the rules is required (Mar. 20, 1978, p. 7535). However, where a
    special rule requires that the object of a motion to suspend the rules
    be announced on the floor at least one hour before the Chair's
    entertaining the motion, unanimous consent is required to permit the
    Chair to entertain the motion before that time (Sept. 28, 1996, p.
    25765, 25774).

    Sec. 886a. Consideration of the motion to suspend the
    rules.

      The  motion that the House ``suspend the rules and pass [or adopt]''
    a measure is not subject to the demand for a division of the question,
    either as to the two branches of the motion or as to distinct
    substantive propositions in the subject of the motion (V, 6141-6143).
    The motion may not be amended (V, 5322, 5405, 6858; Deschler, ch. 21,
    Sec. 14.6; Apr. 11, 2000, p. 5206), and the power to modify the motion
    rests with its proponent (July 18, 2005, p. ----). The motion may not be
    postponed (V, 5322) or laid on the table (V, 5405). The motion to
    reconsider may not be applied to a negative vote on the motion (V, 5645,
    5646; VIII, 2781; Sept. 28, 1996, p. 25797), although it may be applied
    to an affirmative vote (Sept. 28, 1996, p. 25796). The motion to refer
    may not be applied to the bill that it is proposed to pass under
    suspension of the rules (V, 6860). Pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XV,
    the Speaker may entertain one motion to adjourn pending a motion to
    suspend the rules. However, after that vote, the Speaker may not
    entertain any other motion until the vote is taken on the motion to
    suspend the rules.

      Some older precedents indicate that the right of a Member to have read
    the paper on which he is called to vote is not changed by the fact that
    the procedure is by suspension of the rules (V, 5277; VIII, 3400), and
    in earlier instances the separate motion to suspend the rules and
    dispense with reading of pending measures was held in order (V, 5278-
    84). However, under the modern practice, only the motion to suspend the
    rules is itself read, and the Clerk reports the title of the bill only.
    Amendments included in the motion are not reported separately. Where a
    motion to suspend the rules and agree to a resolution that provided for
    concurring in a Senate amendment with an amendment consisting of the
    text of a bill introduced in the House, the Speaker ruled that the
    reading of the resolution itself was sufficient and that it could be re-
    read to the House only by unanimous consent (Dec. 21, 1973, pp. 43251-
    63).

    [[Page 655]]

      For a discussion of debate on the motion and the Chair's recognition
    of a Member to control time in opposition to the motion, see Sec. 891,
    infra.

    Sec. 887. Precedence of the motion to suspend the
    rules.

      In the  early practice, when the motion to suspend the rules was used
    to enable a matter to be taken up for consideration out of order, it was
    not admitted when a subject was already before the House (V, 5278, 6836,
    6837, 6852, 6853). However, a motion to suspend the rules was in order
    to dispense with the reading of a pending measure (V, 5278). A bill
    taken up under this early practice might be amended by the House (V,
    6842, 6856) or withdrawn by the mover, in which case another Member
    might not present it (V, 6854, 6855).

      In the later practice, where the motion includes both suspension of
    the rules and action on the subject, it is admitted even though another
    matter is pending (V, 6834), the yeas and nays are demanded on another
    privileged motion (V, 6835), or the previous question has been ordered
    or moved on another matter (V, 6827, 6831-6833; VIII, 3418; Sept. 17,
    1990, p. 24695). Earlier rulings did not permit a motion to suspend the
    rules to permit a vote to be taken in gross on a series of pending
    Senate amendments (V, 6828, 6830). The motion to suspend the rules has
    been ruled out of order when the House is considering a bill under a
    special order (V, 6838) or when a question of privilege under rule IX is
    before the House (V, 6825, 6826; VI, 553, 565). The motion to suspend
    the rules has been held of equal privilege with the motion to instruct
    conferees under former clause 1(c) of rule XXVIII (current clause 7(c)
    of rule XXII), which is of the highest privilege (Mar. 1, 1988, pp.
    2749, 2751, 2754). A motion to suspend the rules and approve the Journal
    was held in order, although the Journal had not been read and the highly
    privileged motion to fix the day to which the House should adjourn was
    pending (IV, 2758). Although the motion is privileged, it may be
    superseded by a question of the privileges of the House (III, 2553; VI,
    565). Moreover, in the absence of a motion to suspend, the ordinary
    motions relating to business of the House may be made on suspension days
    as on other days (IV, 3080).

      The motion to suspend the rules may be made on days other than
    suspension days by unanimous consent (V, 6795) or by adoption of a
    resolution reported by the Rules Committee. On suspension days the
    motion to suspend the rules has been admitted at the discretion of the
    Speaker since 1881 (V, 6791-6794, 6845; VIII, 3402-3404), and no appeal
    may be taken from the Speaker's denial of recognition (II, 1425).

    [[Page 656]]

    including specific authorization to include an amendment (V, 6812); but
    after the motion was seconded and debate had begun it was too late to
    raise a question as to the authorization (V, 6808). The committee could
    not present a bill which had not been referred to it (V, 6813) or was
    not within its jurisdiction (V, 6848).

    Sec. 888. Individual and committee motions to suspend
    the rules.

      Before  the 93d Congress, the rule gave to individuals preference
    on the first Monday of the month for making motions to suspend the
    rules, and preference on the third Mondays for committees to make the
    motion (V, 6790). If on a committee day an individual motion was made
    and seconded, it was then too late to make a point of order (V, 6809).
    In rare instances, under earlier House practice, the Speaker called the
    committees in regular order for motions to suspend the rules, but this
    method was not required (V, 6810, 6811). The earlier practice also
    required a motion to be formally and specifically authorized by a
    committee (V, 6805-6807),

      Authorization by a committee is not required for the Speaker to
    recognize for a motion to suspend the rules (VIII, 3410), including a
    motion to suspend the rules and pass a measure ``as amended'' (June 22,
    1992, p. 15617).

    Sec. 889. The second of the motion to suspend the
    rules.

      Before  the 102d Congress, certain motions to suspend the rules were
    required to be seconded, if demanded, by a majority by tellers, but this
    requirement was eliminated from the rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p.
    39). The requirement for a second was adopted in 1874, was rescinded two
    years later, but was again adopted in 1880. The object of it was to
    prevent consumption of the time of the House by forcing consideration of
    undesirable propositions (V, 6797). The requirement (formerly clause 2
    of rule XXVII) was amended in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15,
    1979, pp. 7-16) so that a second was not required where printed copies
    of the proposed measure were available. The constitutional right of a
    Member to demand the yeas and nays, or the right of a Member under
    clause 1(b) of rule XX to demand a recorded vote, did not exist on the
    question of ordering a second under the former clause 2 of rule XXVII,
    which only permitted the ordering of a second by tellers if a quorum was
    present (V, 6032-6036; VIII, 3109; Dec. 16, 1981, p. 31851). The fact
    that a majority of the Members of the House did not pass between the
    tellers on the question of ordering a second did not conclusively show
    that a quorum was not present in the Chamber, and the Speaker could
    count the House to determine whether a quorum was actually present (Dec.
    16, 1981, p. 31851). However, where a quorum failed on the vote for a
    second, under clause 6 of rule XX the yeas and nays were ordered (IV,
    3053-3055; Dec. 21, 1973, pp. 43251-63).

    Sec. 889a. Withdrawal of motion.

      A  motion to suspend the
    rules may be withdrawn at any time before the Chair puts the question
    and a voice vote is taken thereon (V, 6840, 6844; VIII, 3405, 3419). The
    motion may be withdrawn by unanimous consent, even after the Speaker has
    put the question on its adoption and postponed further proceedings
    (Deschler, ch 21 Sec. 13.23).

    [[Page 657]]

    tain any other motion until the vote is taken on the suspension.

    Sec. 890. Dilatory motions pending motions to suspend
    rules.

      (b)  Pending a motion that the House suspend the rules, the Speaker
    may entertain one motion that the House adjourn. After the result of
    such a motion is announced, the Speaker may not enter

      This provision (formerly clause 8 of rule XVI) was adopted in 1868 (V,
    5743), and amended in 1911 (VIII, 2823). A motion for a recess (V, 5748-
    5751) and for a call of the House when there was no doubt of the
    presence of a quorum (V, 5747) were held to be dilatory motions within
    the meaning of the rule. But where a motion to suspend the rules has
    been made and, after one motion to adjourn has been acted on, a quorum
    has failed, another motion to adjourn has been admitted (V, 5744-5746).

    Sec. 891. The 40 minutes of debate on motion to suspend
    the rules.

      (c)  A motion that the House suspend the rules is debatable for
    40 minutes, one-half in favor of the motion and one-half in opposition
    thereto.

      This provision (formerly clause 2 of rule XXVII) was adopted in 1880
    (V, 6821). It was amended and redesignated from clause 3 to clause 2 of
    rule XXVII in the 102d Congress to conform to the repeal of the former
    clause 2, relating to the requirement of a second (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 of rule XXVII.
    Former clause 2 consisted of paragraph (b) and another provision
    currently found in clause 1(a) of rule XIX permitting 40 minutes debate
    on an otherwise debatable question on which the previous question has
    been ordered without debate (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Before the
    adoption of this provision in 1880 (V, 6821) the motion to suspend the
    rules was not debatable (V, 5405, 6820). The 40 minutes of debate is
    divided between the mover and a Member opposed to the bill, unless it
    develops that the mover is opposed to the bill, in which event some
    Member in favor is recognized for debate (VIII, 3416; Oct. 5, 2004, p.
    ----). When the mover and the opponent divide their time with others,
    the practice as to alternation of recognitions is not insisted on so
    rigidly as in other debate (II, 1442). Debate should be confined to the
    object of the motion and may not range to the merits of a bill not
    scheduled for suspension on that day (Nov. 23, 1991, p. 34189).

    [[Page 658]]

      Where recognition for the 20 minutes in opposition is contested, the
    Speaker will accord priority first on the basis of true opposition, then
    on the basis of committee membership, and only then on the basis of
    party affiliation, the latter preference inuring to the minority party
    (VIII, 3415; Nov. 18, 1991, p. 32510). The Chair will not examine the
    degree of opposition to the motion by a member of the committee who
    seeks the time in opposition (Aug. 3, 1999, p. 19275). Where the Chair
    allocates the time in opposition to the motion to the ranking minority
    member of the reporting committee, a challenge that that member does not
    qualify as opposed, in order to control such time, must be made when the
    time is allocated by the Chair (May 15, 1984, p. 12215; Speaker Wright,
    June 2, 1987, p. 14223).

    Discharge motions, second and fourth Mondays
      This paragraph formerly included a provision dealing with the
    Speaker's authority to postpone further proceedings on motions to
    suspend the rules and pass bills or resolutions. It was added in the 93d
    Congress (H. Res. 998, Apr. 9, 1974, pp. 10195-99), amended in the 95th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70), and amended further in
    the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16). It was deleted
    entirely in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 98-113) when
    all of the Speaker's postponing authorities were consolidated into
    clause 5 of rule I (current clause 8 of rule XX).

    892. Motion to discharge a committee.

      2. (a)  Motions to
    discharge committees shall be in order on the second and fourth Mondays
    of a month.

      (b)(1) A Member may present to the Clerk a motion in writing to
    discharge--

          (A) a committee from consideration of a public bill or public
    resolution that has been referred to it for 30 legislative days; or

          (B) the Committee on Rules from consideration of a resolution that
    has been referred to it for seven legislative days and that proposes a
    special order of business for the consideration of a public bill or
    public resolution that has been reported by a standing committee or has
    been referred to a standing committee for 30 legislative days.

    [[Page 659]]

      (2) Only one motion may be presented for a bill or resolution. A
    Member may not file a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from
    consideration of a resolution providing for the consideration of more
    than one public bill or public resolution or admitting or effecting a
    nongermane amendment to a public bill or public resolution.

      (c) A motion presented under paragraph (b) shall be placed in the
    custody of the Clerk, who shall arrange a convenient place for the
    signatures of Members. A signature may be withdrawn by a Member in
    writing at any time before a motion is entered on the Journal. The Clerk
    shall make signatures a matter of public record, causing the names of
    the Members who have signed a discharge motion during a week to be
    published in a portion of the Congressional Record designated for that
    purpose on the last legislative day of the week and making cumulative
    lists of such names available each day for public inspection in an
    appropriate office of the House. The Clerk shall devise a means for
    making such lists available to offices of the House and to the public in
    electronic form. When a majority of the total membership of the House
    shall have signed the motion, it shall be entered on the Journal,
    published with the signatures thereto in the Record, and referred to the
    Calendar of Motions to Discharge Committees.

    [[Page 660]]

    charge shall have precedence in the order of their entry on the Journal.
      (d)(1) On the second and fourth Mondays of a month (except during the
    last six days of a session of Congress), immediately after the Pledge of
    Allegiance to the Flag, a motion to discharge that has been on the
    calendar for at least seven legislative days shall be privileged if
    called up by a Member whose signature appears thereon. When such a
    motion is called up, the House shall proceed to its consideration under
    this paragraph without intervening motion except one motion to adjourn.
    Privileged motions to dis

      (2) When a motion to discharge is called up, the bill or resolution to
    which it relates shall be read by title only. The motion is debatable
    for 20 minutes, one-half in favor of the motion and one-half in
    opposition thereto.

      (e)(1) If a motion prevails to discharge the Committee on Rules from
    consideration of a resolution, the House shall immediately consider the
    resolution, pending which the Speaker may entertain one motion that the
    House adjourn. After the result of such a motion to adjourn is
    announced, the Speaker may not entertain any other dilatory motion until
    the resolution has been disposed of. If the resolution is adopted, the
    House shall immediately proceed to its execution.

    [[Page 661]]

    priate calendar, where it shall have the same status as if the committee
    from which it was discharged had duly reported it to the House.
      (2) If a motion prevails to discharge a standing committee from
    consideration of a public bill or public resolution, a motion that the
    House proceed to the immediate consideration of such bill or resolution
    shall be privileged if offered by a Member whose signature appeared on
    the motion to discharge. The motion to proceed is not debatable. If the
    motion to proceed is adopted, the bill or resolution shall be considered
    immediately under the general rules of the House. If unfinished before
    adjournment of the day on which it is called up, the bill or resolution
    shall remain the unfinished business until it is disposed of. If the
    motion to proceed is rejected, the bill or resolution shall be referred
    to the appro

      (f)(1) When a motion to discharge originated under this clause has
    once been acted on by the House, it shall not be in order to entertain
    during the same session of Congress--

          (A) a motion to discharge a committee from consideration of that
    bill or resolution or of any other bill or resolution that, by relating
    in substance to or dealing with the same subject matter, is
    substantially the same; or

          (B) a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from
    consideration of a resolution providing a special order of business for
    the consideration of that bill or resolution or of any other bill or
    resolution that, by relating in substance to or dealing with the same
    subject matter, is substantially the same.

      (2) A motion to discharge on the Calendar of Motions to Discharge
    Committees that is rendered out of order under subparagraph (1) shall be
    stricken from that calendar.

    [[Page 662]]

    resolution the House immediately voted on adoption of the resolution
    (Speaker Rayburn, Jan. 24, 1944, p. 631).
      This clause (formerly clause 3 of rule XXVII) was adopted December 8,
    1931, and amended January 3, 1935 (VII, 1007). It displaced a rule
    providing for a motion to instruct a committee to report a public bill
    or resolution. The first discharge rule was adopted in the 61st Congress
    (June 17, 1910, pp. 8439, 8445). It was amended during the 62d Congress
    (Apr. 4-5, 1911, pp. 18, 80). It was further amended in the 62d Congress
    (H. Res. 407, Feb. 3, 1912, p. 1685), the 68th Congress (H. Res. 146,
    Jan. 18, 1924, p. 1143), and the 69th Congress (H. Res. 6, Dec. 7, 1925,
    p. 383). This provision was redesignated from clause 4 to clause 3 in
    the 102d Congress to conform to the repeal of the former clause 2 of
    rule XXVII, relating to the requirement of a second; it was at the same
    time amended to enable debate on a resolution discharged from the
    Committee on Rules (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). Under the previous
    form of the rule, where the Committee on Rules was discharged from
    further consideration of a

      In the 103d Congress, after a successful petition under this clause
    placed on the calendar a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from
    further consideration of a resolution to require publication of the
    names of Members who had signed pending discharge petitions, the clause
    was so amended (H. Res. 134, Sept. 28, 1993, p. 22698). In the 104th
    Congress the clause was amended to ensure the periodic publication of
    such names (sec. 219, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Before the 103d
    Congress signatures on a motion to discharge a committee were not made
    public until the requisite number had signed the motion (VII, 1008; Apr.
    12, 1934, p. 6489). In the 105th Congress the clause was amended to
    clarify that, to be a proper object of a discharge petition, a
    resolution providing a special rule must address the consideration of
    only one measure and must not propose to admit or effect a nongermane
    amendment (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). A clerical correction was
    effected in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p.
    26).

      The phrase ``a majority of the total membership of the House'' was
    construed to mean 218 Members (Speaker Byrns, Apr. 15, 1936, p. 5509),
    not including Delegates or the Resident Commissioner; and a Delegate or
    the Resident Commissioner may not sign a discharge petition even by
    unanimous consent (Oct. 1, 2003, p. ----). The rule does not authorize
    signature of discharge motions by proxy (VII, 1014). When a Member
    withdraws his signature from a discharge petition at any time before it
    garners 218 signatures and is entered on the Journal, the withdrawal is
    printed in the Record (Apr. 23, 1998, p. 6590).

      The rule does not apply to a bill that has been reported by a
    committee during the interval between the placing of a motion to
    discharge on the calendar and the day when such motion is called up for
    action in the House (Apr. 23, 1934, p. 7156). The Committee on Rules may
    not be discharged from further consideration of a resolution providing
    for an investigating committee (Apr. 23, 1934, p. 7161).

    [[Page 663]]

    also received the requisite number of signatures on the same day it was
    filed (Feb. 24, 1994, p. 2999). In the 107th Congress a petition
    received the requisite signatures to enable a motion to discharge a rule
    providing for the consideration of a measure to provide campaign finance
    reform (Jan. 24, 2002, p. ----).
      The death or resignation of a Member who has signed a motion does not
    invalidate his signature because a majority of the whole House is
    necessary for a discharge motion (May 31, 1934, p. 10159). It may be
    withdrawn by his successor (Dec. 7, 1943, p. 10388; Jan. 17, 1946, p.
    96; Mar. 5, 1946, p. 1968; July 30, 1946, pp. 10464, 10491; Mar. 2,
    1948, pp. 1993, 2001; Jan. 16, 1950, p. 436). The seven days that the
    motion must be on the calendar before it may be called up begins to run
    as of the day the motion is placed on the calendar (Dec. 14, 1937, p.
    1517). A discharge petition in the 102d Congress received the requisite
    number of signatures on the same day it was filed (May 20, 1992, p.
    12222), and subsequently by unanimous consent the House dispensed with
    the motion to discharge and agreed to consider the object of the
    petition (a special order of business resolution) on a date certain
    under the same terms as if discharged by motion (June 4, 1992, p.
    13618). In the 103d Congress a discharge petition

      The right to close 20 minute debate on a motion to discharge a
    committee is reserved to the proponent of the motion (VII, 1010a); and
    the chairman of the committee being discharged, if opposed to the
    motion, has been recognized to control the 10 minutes in opposition
    (Aug. 10, 1970, p. 27999).

      Where a measure not requiring consideration in the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union is brought before the House by a
    successful motion to discharge, the Member moving its consideration is
    recognized in the House under the hour rule (Aug. 10, 1970, p. 28004).

      The point of order provided in clause 4 of rule XXI (formerly clause
    5(a) of rule XXI) does not apply to an appropriation in a bill taken
    away from a committee by the motion to discharge (VII, 1019a).

    Adverse report by the Committee on Rules, second and fourth Mondays
      Under Jefferson's Manual (Sec. 364, supra) a line of Members waiting
    to sign a discharge petition should proceed to the rostrum from the far
    right-hand aisle and should not stand between the Chair and Members
    engaging in debate (Oct. 24, 1997, p. 23293).

    893. Adverse report by Rules Committee.

      3. An  adverse
    report by the Committee on Rules on a resolution proposing a special
    order of business for the consideration of a public bill or public joint
    resolution may be called up under clause 6(e) of rule XIII as a
    privileged question by a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner on a
    day when it is in order to consider a motion to discharge committees
    under clause 2.

    [[Page 664]]

    District of Columbia business, second and fourth Mondays
      This provision was initially adopted January 18, 1924, amended
    December 8, 1931 (VIII, 2268), January 3, 1949 (p. 16), January 3, 1951
    (p. 18), January 4, 1965 (p. 24) (inserting the so-called ``21-day
    rule''), January 10, 1967 (H. Res. 7, p. 28) (deleting the ``21-day
    rule'' in effect in the 89th Congress), January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988,
    93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found only in former
    clause 4(c) of rule XI. It is currently found in both this provision and
    clause 6(e) of rule XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    894. District of Columbia.

      4.  The second and fourth Mondays
    of a month shall be set apart for the consideration of such District of
    Columbia business as may be called up by the Committee on Government
    Reform after the disposition of motions to discharge committees and
    after the disposal of such business on the Speaker's table as requires
    reference only.

      The first rule allocating a fixed day for District of Columbia
    business was adopted in 1870. In 1890 the rule (formerly clause 8 of
    rule XXIV) was amended (IV, 3304). It was again amended December 8, 1931
    (VII, 872). In the 104th Congress it was amended to reflect that the
    jurisdiction of the former Committee on the District of Columbia had
    been subsumed within the amalgamated jurisdiction of the newly
    designated Committee on Government Reform and Oversight (and in the
    106th Congress to reflect a change in the name of a committee) (sec.
    202, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 465; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 8 of rule XXIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

      The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight (now Government
    Reform) may not, on a District day, call up a bill reported from another
    committee (IV, 3311). If certain of the committee's bills are on one of
    the calendars of the Committees of the Whole, a motion to go into
    committee to consider them is in order (IV, 3310). Bills reported from
    the District Committee (now Government Reform) are not so privileged as
    to prevent their being taken up under call of committees on Wednesday
    (VII, 937). Business unfinished on one District day does not come up on
    the next unless called up (IV, 3307; VII, 879, 880). The question of
    consideration may not be demanded against District business generally,
    but may be demanded against any bill as it is presented (IV, 3308,
    3309).

    [[Page 665]]

    Private Calendar, first and third Tuesdays
      On District days it is in order to go into the Committee of the Whole
    to consider revenue or general appropriation bills (VI, 716-718; VII,
    876, 1123). Consideration of conference reports is in order on District
    Monday (VIII, 3202). District of Columbia business is in order on the
    second and fourth Mondays of the month before or after other business
    (such as motions to suspend the rules), and the fact that the House has
    considered some District of Columbia business before motions to suspend
    the rules does not affect the eligibility of further such business after
    suspensions have been completed (Sept. 17, 1984, p. 25523).

    895. Interruption of the regular order on Tuesdays for
    consideration of the Private Calendar.

      5. (a)  On the first Tuesday of a
    month, the Speaker shall direct the Clerk to call the bills and
    resolutions on the Private Calendar after disposal of such business on
    the Speaker's table as requires reference only. If two or more Members,
    Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner object to the consideration of a
    bill or resolution so called, it shall be recommitted to the committee
    that reported it. No other business shall be in order before completion
    of the call of the Private Calendar on this day unless two-thirds of the
    Members voting, a quorum being present, agree to a motion that the House
    dispense with the call.

    [[Page 666]]

      (b)(1) On the third Tuesday of a month, after the disposal of such
    business on the Speaker's table as requires reference only, the Speaker
    may direct the Clerk to call the bills and resolutions on the Private
    Calendar. Preference shall be given to omnibus bills containing the
    texts of bills or resolutions that have previously been objected to on a
    call of the Private Calendar. If two or more Members, Delegates, or the
    Resident Commissioner object to the consideration of a bill or
    resolution so called (other than an omnibus bill), it shall be
    recommitted to the committee that reported it. Two-thirds of the Members
    voting, a quorum being present, may adopt a motion that the House
    dispense with the call on this day.

      (2) Omnibus bills shall be read for amendment by paragraph. No
    amendment shall be in order except to strike or to reduce amounts of
    money or to provide limitations. An item or matter stricken from an
    omnibus bill may not thereafter during the same session of Congress be
    included in an omnibus bill. Upon passage such an omnibus bill shall be
    resolved into the several bills and resolutions of which it is composed.
    The several bills and resolutions, with any amendments adopted by the
    House, shall be engrossed, when necessary, and otherwise considered as
    passed severally by the House as distinct bills and resolutions.

      (c) The Speaker may not entertain a reservation of the right to object
    to the consideration of a bill or resolution under this clause. A bill
    or resolution considered under this clause shall be considered in the
    House as in the Committee of the Whole. A motion to dispense with the
    call of the Private Calendar under this clause shall be privileged.
    Debate on such a motion shall be limited to five minutes in support and
    five minutes in opposition.

    [[Page 667]]

    1997, p. 11015; Nov. 17, 2003, p. ----). Clause 4 of rule XII prohibits
    consideration of certain private bills. Under former clause 6(e)(2) of
    rule XV (current clause 7(b) of rule XX), the Speaker may in his
    discretion recognize a Member to move a call of the House before the
    call of the Private Calendar (July 8, 1987, p. 18972).

    Sec. 896. Tuesday as a day for private
    business.

      This  provision (formerly clause 6 of rule XXIV) was adopted in
    the 62d Congress in lieu of special orders under which pension and
    private business formerly had been considered. The rule was amended on
    April 23, 1932 (VII, 846) and was adopted in its present form on March
    27, 1935 (pp. 4480-89, 4538). When the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was transferred from former clause 6 of
    rule XXIV and the archaic reference to the ``Calendar of the Committee
    of the Whole House'' was changed to the ``Private Calendar'' (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A Member serving as an ``official objector'' for
    the Private Calendar has periodically included in the Record an
    explanation of how bills on the Private Calendar are considered (see,
    e.g., Dec. 5, 1995, p. 35354; June 17,

    Sec. 897. Methods of considering omnibus
    bills.

      During the  consideration of omnibus bills the Chair declines to recognize
    Members for unanimous-consent requests to address the House (May 7,
    1935, p. 7100); motions to strike out the last word are not in order,
    and requests for extension of time under the five-minute rule are not
    entertained (Speaker Byrns, Mar. 17, 1936, pp. 3890, 3894).

      An omnibus private bill is normally passed over by the Clerk when the
    Private Calendar is called on the first Tuesday of the month, but the
    House may prescribe, by special order, that such omnibus bills shall be
    passed over (June 27, 1968, p. 19106). During the consideration of the
    First Omnibus Bill of 1968, seven roll calls occurred and seven of the
    15 bills carried therein were stricken by motion (Sept. 17, 1968, pp.
    27165-84). Amendments to the bill were strictly limited by the rule to
    those striking out or reducing amounts of money carried in the bill or
    to provide limitations, and debate on those permissible motions was
    under the five-minute rule. After the passage of an omnibus bill, it is
    resolved into the various private bills of which it is composed and each
    is engrossed and messaged to the Senate as if individually passed; thus
    it is possible, after passage of the omnibus bill, to lay on the table a
    private House or Senate bill which was included therein (by unanimous
    consent) (Sept. 17, 1968, p. 27184).

      On the third Tuesday of the month, the calendar is not called unless
    the Speaker so directs (Oct. 16, 1990, p. 29646); and when he does
    direct the Clerk to call the Private Calendar, omnibus bills on the
    Calendar are called before individual bills thereon (Feb. 17, 1970, pp.
    3605-13). A motion to dispense with the call of the Private Calendar on
    the third Tuesday of each month is likewise in order in the Chair's
    discretion because no rule or precedent prohibits the motion, and it is
    consistent with the discretionary authority of the Chair to dispense
    with the call of the entire Calendar (appeal from the Chair's ruling
    laid on the table) (Nov. 17, 1981, p. 27770).

    [[Page 668]]

    Calendar for three days before being called therefrom (sec. 2(n), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, the provision was found in former clause 4 of rule
    XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The House could by unanimous
    consent direct the call of the Corrections Calendar on a day other than
    a ``corrections day'' (June 24, 1996, p. 14974). In the 105th Congress
    the House established a Corrections Calendar Office to assist the
    Speaker in management of the Calendar (H. Res. 7, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 142;
    2 U.S.C. 74d; see Sec. 1124, infra). Section 106 of the Legislative
    Branch Appropriations Act, 2004, transferred the positions, and
    associated funding, of the Corrections Calendar Office to the Speaker
    and the Minority Leader (117 Stat. 1041).

    Sec. 898. Former Corrections Calendar.

      In the  109th Congress
    the Corrections Calendar (formerly clause 6 of rule XV) was abolished
    (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). The Corrections Calendar
    was established in the 104th Congress as a replacement for the Consent
    Calendar (H. Res. 168, June 20, 1995, p. 16574). Later in the 104th
    Congress several technical changes were effected to admit amendments by
    a designee of the chairman of the primary committee (H. Res. 254, Nov.
    30, 1995, p. 14974). In the 105th Congress it was amended to permit
    bills to be called from the Calendar at any time on a ``corrections
    day'' and in any order (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). In the 107th
    Congress it was amended to delete the requirement that a bill be on the
    Corrections

    Sec. 899. Former Consent Calendar.

      The  original form of
    former clause 4 of rule XIII, providing for the former Consent Calendar,
    was adopted March 15, 1909, amended January 18, 1924; December 7, 1925;
    December 8, 1931; and April 23, 1932 (VII, 972). Bills must have been on
    the printed calendar three legislative days in order to be eligible for
    consideration (VII, 992, 994). When a House bill was on the Consent
    Calendar, by unanimous consent the House committee could have been
    discharged from the consideration of a Senate bill on the same subject,
    and the Senate bill considered in lieu of the House bill (VII, 1004).
    The status of bills on the Consent Calendar was not affected by their
    consideration from another calendar and such bills could have been
    called up for consideration from the Consent Calendar while pending as
    unfinished business in the House or Committee of the Whole (VII, 1006).

    Calendar Call of Committees, Wednesdays
      The former rule did not preclude the Speaker from recognizing Members
    to suspend the rules before completion of the Consent Calendar (decided
    by the House, VIII, 3405; also held by Speaker Clark, Oct. 5, 1914, p.
    16182, and by Speaker Gillett, Sept. 4, 1919, p. 5128). Recognition to
    suspend the rules did not preclude the continuation of the call of the
    calendar later in the day (VII, 991). The call of the Consent Calendar
    on days devoted to its consideration took precedence of the motion to go
    into the Committee of the Whole to consider revenue or appropriation
    bills (VII, 986), and a contested-election case could not supplant the
    call of the Calendar (VII, 988), but the Speaker could recognize a
    Member to call up a conference report before directing the call of the
    Consent Calendar (May 4, 1970, pp. 13991-95).

    [[Page 669]]

    being present, agree to a motion that the House dispense with the call.
    Such a motion shall be privileged. Debate on such a motion shall be
    limited to five minutes in support and five minutes in opposition.

    900. Calendar Wednesday business.

      6. (a)  On Wednesday of
    each week, business shall not be in order before completion of the call
    of the committees (except as provided by clause 4 of rule XIV) unless
    two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum

      (b) A bill or resolution on either the House or the Union Calendar,
    except bills or resolutions that are privileged under the Rules of the
    House, may be called under this clause. A bill or resolution called up
    from the Union Calendar shall be considered in the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union without motion, subject to clause
    3 of rule XVI. General debate on a measure considered under this clause
    shall be confined to the measure and may not exceed two hours equally
    divided between a proponent and an opponent.

      (c) When a committee has occupied the call under this clause on one
    Wednesday, it shall not be in order on a succeeding Wednesday to
    consider unfinished business previously called up by that committee
    until the other committees have been called in their turn unless--

          (1) the previous question has been ordered on such unfinished
    business; or

          (2) the House adopts a motion to dispense with the call under
    paragraph (a).

    [[Page 670]]

      (d) If any committee has not been called under this clause during a
    session of a Congress, then at the next session of that Congress the
    call shall resume where it left off at the end of the preceding session.

      (e) This clause does not apply during the last two weeks of a session
    of Congress.

      (f) The Speaker may not entertain a motion that the Speaker be
    authorized to declare a recess on a Wednesday except during the last two
    weeks of a session of Congress.

      The first portion of this rule (formerly clause 7 of rule XXIV) was
    adopted March 1, 1909, and amended March 15, 1909. The last sentence of
    paragraph (b) (first proviso of former clause 7 of rule XXIV) and
    paragraph (c) (second proviso of former clause 7 of rule XXIV) were
    adopted January 18, 1916. Paragraph (d) (the last proviso of former
    clause 7 of rule XXIV) was adopted December 8, 1931 (VII, 881), and was
    amended in the 102d Congress to specify that the alphabetical call of
    the committees under Calendar Wednesday resumes where left off between
    sessions within a Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). Technical
    corrections to paragraphs (e) and (f) were effected in the 109th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    Sec. 901. Decisions on Calendar Wednesday.

      The rule  applies
    to unprivileged bills only, and when a bill otherwise unprivileged is
    given a privileged status by unanimous consent or by rule it is
    automatically rendered ineligible for consideration on Calendar
    Wednesday (VII, 932-935). House Calendar bills have no preference over
    Union Calendar bills (VII, 938). The motion to dispense with a call of
    committees under this rule is privileged and may be made before the
    consideration of District of Columbia business under clause 4 of this
    rule (June 11, 1973, pp. 19028-30).

      When a bill on the Union Calendar is called up on Calendar Wednesday
    the House automatically resolves itself into the Committee of the Whole
    House on the state of the Union (VII, 939; Jan. 25, 1984, p. 358), and
    when a Union Calendar bill is the unfinished business the Speaker
    declares the House in Committee of the Whole without motion (VII, 940,
    942).

      The question of consideration may be raised on a bill on the House
    Calendar on Calendar Wednesday, even after one Wednesday has been
    devoted to its consideration (VIII, 2447), and the question of
    consideration is properly raised on Union Calendar bills in the House
    before automatically going into Committee of the Whole House on the
    state of the Union (VII, 952).

    [[Page 671]]

    was held that one committee could not occupy more than two Calendar
    Wednesdays (except for unfinished business) until other committees were
    called, notwithstanding the fact that the call rested on said committee
    (VII, 944), but the adoption of the second proviso of the rule has
    defined the status of debate and unfinished business more explicitly. It
    was formerly held that a bill undisposed of on Calendar Wednesday became
    the unfinished business on the following Calendar Wednesday (VII, 965),
    but since the adoption of paragraph (c) (the second proviso of former
    clause 7 of rule XXIV), one committee can occupy but one Calendar
    Wednesday for the consideration of its business (unless the House by
    two-thirds vote shall otherwise determine).
      During the 61st and 62d Congresses it was held that the call of
    committees rested where the call left off on the preceding day, whether
    the last call was on a Wednesday or during the morning hour on another
    day, thus making but one committee call under the two rules. But under
    the later practice there have been two distinct calls of committees, one
    under clause 4 of rule XIV (formerly clause 4 of rule XXIV), the morning
    hour, and another under Calendar Wednesday (VII, 944). Before the
    adoption of paragraph (c) (the second proviso of former clause 7 of rule
    XXIV), it

      The same rule of debate applies to House Calendar bills called up on
    Calendar Wednesday as on other days, and the Member in charge of the
    bill may move the previous question at any time (VII, 955).

      The previous question having been ordered on a bill undisposed of when
    the House adjourns Tuesday, the bill goes over as unfinished business
    until Thursday, and is not in order for consideration on Calendar
    Wednesday (VII, 890-894). The previous question having been ordered on a
    bill on Calendar Wednesday, the bill becomes the unfinished business on
    Thursday (VII, 895, 967).

      It is in order to consider a vetoed bill on Calendar Wednesday, since
    such a question is privileged under the Constitution of the United
    States (VII, 912), but a bill privileged by reason of the Rules of the
    House cannot be called up on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 932); for example,
    a general appropriation bill (VII, 904), or a bill under consideration
    by reason of a special order, unless the special order expressly sets
    aside Calendar Wednesday (VII, 773), or a conference report (VII, 899).
    A motion to reconsider an action taken on a bill on Tuesday may be
    entered, but may not be considered on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 905).
    Privileged bills may be reported but not considered on Calendar
    Wednesday (VII, 907), except by unanimous consent (Jan. 25, 1984, p.
    357). The Speaker has entertained a unanimous-consent request for
    business (to send a bill to conference) before the call of committees on
    Calendar Wednesday (Mar. 28, 1984, p. 6869). District of Columbia
    business is eligible for consideration on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 937).
    Once the call of committees on Calendar Wednesday is completed, other
    business may be conducted (VII, 921).

      The Committee on Rules cannot report a rule which is aimed strictly or
    directly toward setting aside Calendar Wednesday, but the committee is
    not thereby prevented from reporting a resolution couched in general
    terms which may indirectly accomplish that ultimate result, such as a
    resolution providing for six days' suspension of the rules (VIII, 2267).

      The motion to grant a committee an additional Wednesday under
    paragraph (c) (the second proviso of former clause 7 of rule XXIV) is in
    order before the Wednesday on which the committee is called (VII, 946).

    [[Page 672]]

    may be claimed by some Member who is in favor of the bill (VII, 962),
    but this principle has been questioned (VII, 961).
      It has been held that if no Member opposed to the bill desires to
    claim the hour specified in the rule for general debate against the
    bill, the time

      Clause 2(b) of rule XIII (formerly clause 2(l)(1) of rule XI),
    requiring the chairman of each committee to report or cause to be
    reported promptly measures approved by his committee and to take such
    necessary steps to bring the matter to a vote, is sufficient authority
    for the chairman to call up a bill on Calendar Wednesday, but any other
    committee member must obtain specific authority of his committee to call
    up a reported bill on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 928, 929; Feb. 22, 1950,
    p. 2162; Feb. 1, 1984, p. 1193; Sept. 12, 1984, p. 25100). Before the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 and the subsequent adoption of
    former clause 2(l)(1)(A) of rule XI, authority to call up a bill on
    Calendar Wednesday must have been given to a chairman by his committee
    (IV, 3127).

                                    Rule XVI

    Motions
                             motions and amendments

    902. Motions reduced to writing and entered on the
    Journal.

      1.  Every motion entertained by the Speaker shall be reduced to
    writing on the demand of a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    and, unless it is withdrawn the same day, shall be entered on the
    Journal with the name of the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    offering it. A dilatory motion may not be entertained by the Speaker.

      The first sentence of this clause was made up in 1880 of old rules
    adopted in 1789 and 1806 (V, 5300). The last sentence of this clause
    (formerly clause 10 of rule XVI) was adopted in 1890 (V, 5706) to make
    permanent a principle already enunciated in a ruling of the Speaker, who
    had declared that the ``object of a parliamentary body is action, and
    not stoppage of action'' (V, 5713). When the House recodified its rules,
    it consolidated clause 1 and former clause 10 of rule XVI under this
    clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 673]]

    ing the motion to adjourn (Sept. 27, 1993, p. 22608; Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    509), and the demand may be initiated by the Chair (July 24, 1986, p.
    17641). Consistent with this clause, the Chairman of the Committee of
    the Whole requires that each amendment be reduced to writing (July 22,
    1994, p. 17617). Although a motion to recommit is properly presented in
    writing, no rule requires that the proponent distribute copies on the
    floor (June 28, 2000, p. 12749).
      Because of this provision it has been held not in order to amend or
    strike out a Journal entry setting forth a motion exactly as made (IV,
    2783, 2789). A motion not entertained is not entered on the Journal (IV,
    2813, 2844-2846). See Sec. 71, supra, for discussion of Journal entries.
    Any Member may demand that a motion be reduced to writing and in the
    proper form, includ

    Withdrawal

    Sec. 903. Dilatory motions.

      The  Speaker has declined to
    entertain debate or appeal on a question as to the dilatoriness of a
    motion, as to do so would be to nullify the rule (V, 5731); but has
    recognized that the authority conferred by the rule should not be
    exercised until the object of the dilatory motion ``becomes apparent to
    the House'' (V, 5713, 5714). For example, the Chair has held that a
    virtually consecutive invocation of former rule XXX (current clause 6 of
    rule XVII), resulting in a second pair of votes on use of a chart and on
    reconsideration thereof, was not dilatory under this provision (or
    former clause 4(b) of rule XI (current clause 6(b) of rule XIII)) (July
    31, 1996, p. 20700). Usually, but not always, the Speaker awaits a point
    of order from the floor before acting (V, 5715-5722). The rule has been
    applied to the motions to adjourn (V, 5721, 5731-5733; VIII, 2796,
    2813), to reconsider (V, 5735; VIII, 2797, 2815, 2822), to fix the time
    of five-minute debate in Committee of the Whole (V, 5734; VIII, 2817),
    to lay on the table (VIII, 2816), and to the question of consideration
    (V, 5731-5733). The point of ``no quorum'' also has been ruled out (V,
    5724-5730; VIII, 2801, 2808), and former clause 6 of rule XV (current
    clause 7 of rule XX), as adopted in the 93d Congress and as amended in
    the 95th Congress prevents the making of a point of no quorum under
    certain circumstances. A demand for tellers has been held dilatory (V,
    5735, 5736; VIII, 2436, 2818-2821), but the constitutional right of the
    Member to demand the yeas and nays may not be overruled (V, 5737; VIII,
    3107). For ruling by Speaker Gillett construing dilatory motions, see
    VIII, 2804. For a discussion of dilatory motions pending consideration
    of Rules Committee report, see Sec. Sec. 857-858, supra.

    904. Stating and withdrawing of motions.

      2.  When a motion
    is entertained, the Speaker shall state it or cause it to be read aloud
    by the Clerk before it is debated. The motion then shall be in the
    possession of the House but may be withdrawn at any time before a
    decision or amendment thereon.

    [[Page 674]]

    became obsolete very early, and it was dropped from the rule in 1880 (V,
    5304). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).
      The provisions of this clause were adopted first in 1789. At that time
    a second was required for every motion, but in practice this requirement

      The House always insists that the motion shall be stated or read
    before debate shall begin (V, 4983) and the Clerk's reading may be
    dispensed with only by unanimous consent (Dec. 15, 1975, p. 40671; see
    also Sec. 432, supra). It is the duty of the Speaker to put a motion in
    order under the rules and practice without passing on its constitutional
    effect (IV, 3550; VIII, 2225, 3031, 3071, 3427). In a case wherein a
    clerk presiding during organization of the House declined to put a
    question, a Member-elect put the question from the floor (I, 67).

      Under certain circumstances (such as the practice of extinguishing
    reconsideration by laying a motion to reconsider on the table), a Member
    may offer a double motion (V, 5637).

    Sec. 905. Conditions of withdrawal of motions.

      A motion  may
    be withdrawn at any time before a decision thereon, including a motion
    to instruct conferees (Oct. 31, 2000, p. 25737) and a contempt
    resolution (Oct. 27, 2000, p. 25200). Unanimous consent is not required
    to withdraw a pending unanimous-consent request (Dec. 16, 1985, p.
    36575).

      While the House was dividing on a second of the previous question
    (this second is no longer required) on a motion to refer a resolution,
    the Member was permitted to withdraw the resolution (V, 5350). A motion
    was withdrawn after the previous question had been ordered on an appeal
    from a decision on a point of order as to the motion (V, 5356).

      A motion to suspend the rules could be withdrawn at any time before a
    second was ordered (a second is no longer required) (V, 6844; VIII,
    3405, 3419), even on another suspension day (V, 6844). However, the
    motion could not be withdrawn if a second were ordered, except by
    unanimous consent (VIII, 3420). In the modern practice, where a second
    is not required on a motion to suspend the rules, the motion may be
    withdrawn at any time before action is taken thereon (July 27, 1981, p.
    17563).

    [[Page 675]]

      A motion may be withdrawn although an amendment has been offered and
    is pending (V, 5347; VI, 373; VIII, 2639). In the House an amendment,
    whether simple or in the nature of a substitute, may be withdrawn at any
    time before an amendment is adopted thereto or a decision is had thereon
    (VI, 587; VIII, 2332, 2764). The same right to withdraw an amendment
    exists in the House as in Committee of the Whole (IV, 4935; June 26,
    1973, p. 21315) and in standing committees where general procedures of
    the House as in the Committee of the Whole apply (Sec. 427, supra).
    However, unanimous consent to withdraw an amendment is required in
    Committee of the Whole (V, 5221, 5753; VI, 570; VIII, 2465, 2859, 3405),
    unless withdrawal authority has been conferred by the House (July 22,
    1999, p. 17291; Apr. 3, 2003, p. ----). An amendment disposed of in the
    Committee of the Whole by voice vote may not be withdrawn (June 17,
    2004, p. ----).

      A motion may be withdrawn after the affirmative side has been taken on
    a division (V, 5348). Withdrawal of a pending resolution is not in order
    when the absence of a quorum has been announced by the Chair (Oct. 14,
    1970, pp. 36665-69). A motion that the House resolve into the Committee
    of the Whole for the consideration of a bill may be withdrawn pending a
    point of order against consideration of the bill. If the motion is
    withdrawn, the Chair is not obligated to rule on the point of order
    (VIII, 3405; Dec. 3, 1979, p. 34385).

      A decision which prevents withdrawal may consist of the following: (1)
    the ordering of the yeas and nays (V, 5353), either directly on the
    motion or on a motion to lay it on the table (V, 5354); (2) the ordering
    of the previous question (V, 5355; June 29, 1995, p. 17967), or the
    demand therefor (V, 5489), or (3) the refusal to lay on the table (V,
    5351, 5352; VIII, 2640).

      Where the Speaker has put the question on adoption of a resolution to
    a voice vote without the ordering of the previous question, and the yeas
    and nays have not been ordered, the resolution may be withdrawn (V,
    5349; Feb. 26, 1985, p. 3501). A privileged resolution called up in the
    House is debated under the hour rule; and the Member calling up such a
    resolution is recognized for an hour notwithstanding the fact that the
    resolution has been previously considered, debated, and then withdrawn
    before action thereon (Apr. 8, 1964, pp. 7303-08).

      Where proceedings are postponed on a motion for the previous question
    pending a point of no quorum on a voice vote thereon (pursuant to former
    clause 5 of rule I (current clause 8 of rule XX)), the manager may
    withdraw the motion when it is again before the House as unfinished
    business (July 24, 1989, p. 15818).

    Question of consideration
      A Member having the right to withdraw a motion before a decision
    thereon has the resulting power to modify the motion (V, 5358; Oct. 23,
    1990, p. 32667), and a Member having the right to withdraw a motion to
    instruct conferees before a decision thereon has the resulting power to
    modify the motion by offering a different motion at the same stage of
    proceedings (July 14, 1993, p. 15661). A motion being withdrawn, all
    proceedings on an appeal arising from a point of order related to it
    fell thereby (V, 5356).

    906. The question of consideration.

      3.  When a motion or
    proposition is entertained, the question, ``Will the House now consider
    it?'' may not be put unless demanded by a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner.

    [[Page 676]]

    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It is the means by which the House protects itself from
    business that it does not wish to consider (V, 4936; VIII, 2436). The
    refusal to consider does not amount to the rejection of a bill or
    prevent its being brought before the House again (V, 4940), and an
    affirmative vote does not prevent the question of consideration from
    being raised on a subsequent day when the bill is again called up as
    unfinished business (VIII, 2438). It has once been held that a question
    of privilege which the House has refused to consider may be brought up
    again on the same day (V, 4942). The question of consideration is not
    debatable (VIII, 2447), and thus not subject to the motion to lay on the
    table (Oct. 4, 1994, p. 27643). See also clause 6 of rule XIV (Sec. 884,
    supra), which provides that questions relating to the priority of
    business are not debatable.
      The question of consideration is an outgrowth of the practice of the
    House, and was in use as early as 1808. The rule was adopted in 1817 in
    order to limit its use. Clerical and stylistic changes were effected
    when

    Sec. 907. Raising the question of consideration.

      A  Member
    may demand the question of consideration, although the Member in charge
    of the bill may claim the floor for debate (V, 4944, 4945; VI, 404); but
    after debate has begun the demand may not be made (V, 4937-4939). It has
    been admitted, however, after the offering of a motion to lay on the
    table but before its disposition (V, 4943). The demand for the question
    of consideration may not be prevented by a motion for the previous
    question (V, 5478), but after the previous question is ordered it may
    not be demanded (V, 4965, 4966), even on another day, unless other
    business has intervened (V, 4967, 4968). The question of consideration
    pending, a motion to refer is not in order (V, 5554).

      The intervention of an adjournment does not destroy the right to raise
    the question of consideration (V, 4946), but this right did not hold
    good in a case where the yeas and nays had been ordered and the House
    had adjourned pending the failure of a quorum on the roll call (V,
    4949). A question of consideration undisposed of at an adjournment does
    not recur as unfinished business on a succeeding day (V, 4947, 4948). It
    is not in order to reconsider the vote whereby the House refuses to
    consider a bill (V, 5626, 5627), although it is in order to reconsider
    an affirmative vote on the question of consideration (Oct. 4, 1994, p.
    27644).

    [[Page 677]]

    the Whole under clause 2 of rule XVIII. The question may be raised
    against a bill on the Union Calendar on Calendar Wednesday before
    resolving into the Committee of the Whole even after one Wednesday has
    been devoted to it (VIII, 2447); but it may not be raised against a
    report from the Committee on Rules relating to the order of considering
    individual bills (V, 4961-4963; VIII, 2440, 2441, see Sec. 858, supra).

    Sec. 908. Questions subject to the question of
    consideration.

      The  question of consideration may be demanded against a
    matter of the highest privilege, such as the right of a Member to his
    seat (V, 4941), a question involving the privilege of the House (VI,
    560), against the motion to reconsider (VIII, 2437), but not against a
    bill returned with the President's objection (V, 4960, 4970). It may not
    be raised against a proposition before the House for reference merely,
    as a petition (V, 4964). It may not be demanded against a class of
    business in order under a special order or rule, but may be demanded
    against each bill individually (IV, 3308, 3309; V, 4958, 4959). It may
    be raised against a bill that has been made a special order (IV, 3175;
    V, 4953-4957), unless the order provides for immediate consideration (V,
    4960) or provides for the Speaker's declaration that the House resolve
    into the Committee of

      The question of consideration may not be raised on a motion relating
    to the order of business (V, 4971-4976; VIII, 2442; May 21, 1958, p.
    9216); to a motion to discharge a committee (V, 4977); or against a
    motion to take from the Speaker's table Senate bills substantially the
    same as House bills already favorably reported and on the House Calendar
    (VIII, 2443). On a motion to go into Committee of the Whole to consider
    a bill the House expresses its wish as to consideration by its vote on
    this motion (V, 4973-4976; VI, 51; VIII, 2442; May 21, 1958, p. 9216).

    Sec. 909. Relation of question of consideration to points of
    order.

      A  point of order against the eligibility for consideration of a
    bill which if sustained might prevent consideration should be made and
    decided before the question of consideration is put (V, 4950, 4951; VII,
    2439), but if the point relates merely to the manner of considering, it
    should be passed on afterwards (V, 4950). In general, after the House
    has decided to consider, a point of order raised with the object of
    preventing consideration, in whole or part, comes too late (IV, 4598; V,
    4952, 6912-6914), but on a conference report the question of
    consideration may be demanded before points of order are raised against
    the substance of the report (VIII, 2439; Speaker Albert, Sept. 28, 1976,
    p. 33019).

    Precedence of motions

    Sec. 910. Unfunded mandates.

      The  Unfunded Mandates Reform
    Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4; 109 Stat. 48) added a new part B to title IV of
    the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 658-658g) that imposes
    several requirements on committees with respect to ``Federal mandates''
    (secs. 423-424; 2 U.S.C. 658b-c), establishes points of order to permit
    votes on whether to enforce those requirements (sec. 425; 2 U.S.C.
    658d), and permits a vote on the question of consideration of a rule or
    order waiving such points of order in the House (sec. 426(a); 2 U.S.C.
    658e(a)). The latter provision also prescribes that such points of order
    be disposed of by the question of consideration with respect to the
    proposition against which they are lodged (after 20 minutes of debate)
    (sec. 426(b); 2 U.S.C. 658e(b)). See Sec. 1127, infra.

    911. Precedence of privileged motions.

      4.  (a) When a
    question is under debate, only the following motions may be entertained
    (which shall have precedence in the following order):

    [[Page 678]]

          (1) To adjourn.

          (2) To lay on the table.

          (3) For the previous question.

          (4) To postpone to a day certain.

          (5) To refer.

          (6) To amend.

          (7) To postpone indefinitely.

      (b) A motion to adjourn, to lay on the table, or for the previous
    question shall be decided without debate. A motion to postpone to a day
    certain, to refer, or to postpone indefinitely, being decided, may not
    be allowed again on the same day at the same stage of the question.

      (c)(1) It shall be in order at any time for the Speaker, in his
    discretion, to entertain a motion--

          (A) that the Speaker be authorized to declare a recess; or

          (B) that when the House adjourns it stand adjourned to a day and
    time certain.

      (2) Either motion shall be of equal privilege with the motion to
    adjourn and shall be decided without debate.

      The first form of this clause appears in 1789, but amendments have
    been made at various times (V, 5301; VIII, 2757). Paragraph (c) (former
    final two sentences of the clause) were added in the 93d Congress to
    enable a privileged, nondebatable motion to fix the adjournment (H. Res.
    6, Jan. 3, 1973, pp. 26-27), and amended in the 102d Congress to enable
    a privileged, nondebatable motion for recess authority (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    3, 1991, p. 39). When the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, the provision of this clause addressing the motion for the
    previous question was transferred to clause 2 of rule XIX (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 679]]

      The application of the first sentence of the clause is confined to
    cases wherein a question is ``under debate'' (V, 5379). It has been held
    that a question ceases to be ``under debate'' after the previous
    question has been ordered (V, 5415). For a discussion of the motion for
    the previous question, see Sec. Sec. 994-1000, infra.

    Sec. 912. The motion to adjourn.

      The  motion to adjourn not
    only has the highest precedence when a question is under debate, but,
    with certain restrictions, it has the highest privilege under all other
    conditions. Even the following yield to it: (1) a question of privilege
    (III, 2521), including a resolution considered to be a ``question of
    high constitutional privilege'' such as one declaring the office of
    Speaker vacant and to direct the House to proceed at once to the
    election of a new Speaker (VIII, 2641); (2) the filing of a privileged
    report pursuant to former clause 4(a) of rule XI (current clause 5 of
    rule XIII) (Apr. 29, 1985, p. 9699); (3) a motion to suspend the rules
    (Aug. 11, 1992, p. 23086); (4) a motion to reconsider (V, 5605; see also
    clause 3 of rule XIX); (5) in the absence of a quorum, the motion for a
    call of the House (VIII, 2642); (6) a motion to dispense with further
    proceedings under the call (VIII, 2643); (7) a motion directing the
    Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest absentees during a call of the House (June 6,
    1973, p. 18403). A conference report may defer it only until the report
    is before the House (V, 6451-6453).

      Pursuant to clause 6(b) of rule XIII or clause 1(b) of rule XV, only
    one motion to adjourn is in order pending consideration of a privileged
    report from the Committee on Rules or a motion that the House suspend
    the rules, respectively. The motion may be made: (1) after the yeas and
    nays are ordered and before the roll call has begun (V, 5366); (2)
    before the reading of the Journal (IV, 2757) or the Speaker's approval
    thereof (Speaker Wright, Nov. 2, 1987, p. 30386); (3) pending a motion
    to reconsider (Sept. 20, 1979, p. 25512); (4) after the House rejects a
    motion to table a motion to instruct conferees and before the vote
    occurs on the motion to instruct (May 29, 1980, pp. 12717-19); or (5)
    when the Speaker is absent and the Clerk is presiding (I, 228). The
    motion to adjourn may not interrupt a Member who has the floor (V, 5369,
    5370; VIII, 2646; Mar. 25, 1993, p. 6373; Oct. 1, 1997, p. 20902) as,
    for example, by virtue of unanimous-consent permission to announce to
    the House the legislative program (Dec. 14, 1982, p. 30549), or a call
    of the yeas and nays (V, 6053), or the actual act of voting by other
    means (V, 5360), or be made after the House has voted to go into
    Committee of the Whole (IV, 4728; V, 5367, 5368), or defer the right of
    a Member to take the oath (I, 622) and may not be repeated in the
    absence of intervening business (Speaker Albert, July 31, 1975, p.
    26243); and when no question is under debate it may not displace a
    motion to fix the day to which the House shall adjourn (V, 5381). The
    motion to adjourn is not available when the previous question has been
    ordered by special rule to final passage without intervening motion (IV,
    3211-3213, June 14, 2001, p. ----). A Member's mere revelation that he
    seeks to offer a motion to adjourn does not suffice to make that motion
    ``pending,'' and thus the Chair remains able to declare a short recess
    under clause 12 of rule I (Oct. 28, 1997, p. 23524; June 25, 2003, p. --
    --).

    [[Page 680]]

    the equally privileged motion to fix the day and time to which the House
    shall adjourn); nor by stating the purposes of adjournment (V, 5371,
    5372; VIII, 2647). However, when the hour of daily meeting is not fixed,
    the motion to adjourn may fix it (V, 5362, 5363). A motion to adjourn is
    in order in simple form only (VIII, 2647), is not debatable (V, 5359;
    Feb. 13, 2002, p. ----), may not be laid on the table (Aug. 3, 1990, p.
    22195), is not in order in Committee of the Whole (IV, 4716), and is not
    entertained when the Committee of the Whole rises to report proceedings
    incident to securing a quorum (VI, 673; VIII, 2436). After the motion is
    made neither another motion nor an appeal may intervene before the
    taking of the vote (V, 5361). When the House adopts the motion to
    adjourn, it must adjourn immediately; and a unanimous-consent request
    that the House proceed to the calling of special-order speeches is not
    in order (Sept. 27, 1993, p. 22608).
      When the House has fixed the hour of daily meeting, the simple motion
    to adjourn may neither be amended (V, 5754) by specifying a particular
    day (V, 5360) or hour (V, 5364) (but see Sec. 913, infra, for a
    discussion of

    Sec. 913. Motion to fix the day to which the House shall
    adjourn and motion to authorize the Speaker to declare a
    recess.

      The  motion to fix the day and time to which the House shall
    adjourn, in its present form, was included in this clause and given
    privileged status in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 6, Jan. 3, 1973, p. 26).
    At several times during the 19th Century, the motion to fix the day to
    which the House should adjourn was included within the rule as to the
    precedence of motions but was dropped because of its use in obstructive
    tactics (V, 5301, 5379). The following precedent relates to the use of
    the motion in its earlier form: No question being under debate, a motion
    to fix the day to which the House should adjourn, already made, was held
    not to give way to a motion to adjourn (V, 5381). But if the motion to
    adjourn be made first, the motion to fix the day or for a recess is not
    entertained (V, 5302). The motion to fix the day is not debatable (V,
    5379, 5380; VIII, 2648, 3367), requires a quorum for adoption (IV, 2954;
    June 19, 1975, p. 19789; June 22, 1976, p. 19755), and is only in order
    if offered on the day on which the adjournment applies (Sept. 23, 1976,
    p. 32104). The House may convene and adjourn twice on the same calendar
    day pursuant to a motion under this clause that when the House adjourn
    it adjourn to a time certain later in the day, thereby meeting for two
    legislative days on the same calendar day (Nov. 17, 1981, p. 27771; Oct.
    29, 1987, p. 29933; June 29, 1995, p. 17716). When the Speaker exercises
    his discretion to entertain at any time a motion that when the House
    adjourn it stand adjourned to a day and time certain, the motion is of
    equal privilege with the simple motion to adjourn and takes precedence
    over a pending question on which the vote has been objected to for lack
    of a quorum (Nov. 17, 1981, p. 27770). The motion is not subject to the
    motion to lay on the table since it is not debatable and the precedence
    conferred on the motion to table only applies to a question that is
    ``under debate'' (Nov. 17, 1981, p. 27770).

    [[Page 681]]

    the Speaker to declare a recess for up to three days (Dec. 15, 1995, p.
    37102).
      Under the express terms of clause 4, the motion to authorize the
    Speaker to declare a recess is nondebatable and has equal privilege with
    the motion to adjourn. The House (without the consent of the Senate) may
    authorize

    Sec. 914. Motion to lay on the table.

      The  motion to lay on
    the table is used in the House for a final, adverse disposition of a
    matter without debate (V, 5389), and is in order before the Member
    entitled to prior recognition for debate has begun his remarks (V, 5391-
    5395; VIII, 2649, 2650). Under the explicit terms of this clause, the
    motion is not debatable (Oct. 17, 1991, p. 26749). The motion is
    applicable to a motion to reconsider (VIII, 2652, 2659), a motion to
    postpone to a day certain (VIII, 2654, 2657), a resolution presenting a
    question of privilege (VI, 560), a privileged resolution offered at the
    direction of a party caucus electing Members to committees (Feb. 5,
    1997, p. 1541), an appeal from a decision of the Chair (VIII, 3453), a
    motion to discharge a committee from a resolution of inquiry (VI, 415),
    a proposal to investigate with a view to impeachment (VI, 541), a
    concurrent resolution to adjourn sine die (Mar. 27, 1936, p. 4512), and
    a resolution to expel a Member (Oct. 1, 1976, p. 35111). But a question
    of privilege (affecting the right of a Member to a seat) that has been
    laid on the table may be taken therefrom on motion made and agreed to by
    the House (V, 5438). The motion to lay on the table has the precedence
    given it by the rule, but may not be made after the previous question is
    ordered (V, 5415-5422; VIII, 2655), or even after the yeas and nays have
    been ordered on the demand for the previous question (V, 5408, 5409);
    but pending the demand for the previous question on a motion that is
    under debate, the motion to lay the primary motion on the table is
    preferential and is voted on first (Speaker Albert, Sept. 22, 1976, pp.
    31876-82; Speaker O'Neill, July 10, 1985, pp. 18397-18400). The previous
    question having been ordered on a bill to final passage, the motion to
    lay the bill on the table may not then be offered pending a motion to
    reconsider the vote whereby the bill had been passed or rejected (Sept.
    20, 1979, p. 25512).

    [[Page 682]]

    the latter is laid on the table (V, 5431-5433); a bill does not
    accompany a motion to instruct conferees which is laid on the table
    (VIII, 2658).
      When a bill is laid on the table, pending motions connected therewith
    go to the table also (V, 5426, 5427); and when a proposed amendment is
    laid on the table the pending bill goes there also (V, 5423; VIII,
    2656), and if a pending amendment to a special order reported from the
    Committee on Rules were tabled, it would carry the resolution with it
    and is thus considered dilatory under former clause 4(b) of rule XI
    (current clause 6(b) of rule XIII) (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575). This rule
    holds good as to a House bill with Senate amendments (V, 5424, 6201-
    6203; Sept. 28, 1978, p. 32334), but laying on the table the motion to
    postpone consideration of Senate amendments was held not to carry to the
    table pending motions for their disposition (VIII, 2657). The Journal
    does not accompany a proposed amendment to the table (V, 5435, 5436);
    the original question does not accompany an appeal (V, 5434); a
    resolution does not accompany another resolution with which it is
    connected, or a preamble (V, 5248, 5430); and a petition does not
    accompany the motion to receive it when

      A motion to lay on the table a motion to reconsider the vote by which
    an amendment to a resolution had been agreed to would not carry the
    resolution to the table (VIII, 2652).

      The motion is not in order in Committee of the Whole (IV, 4719, 4720;
    VIII, 2330, 2556a, 3455; Mar. 16, 1995, p. 8112; July 21, 1999, p.
    17054) and does not apply to motions to go into the Committee of the
    Whole (VI, 726). It may not be amended (V, 5754), for example, to
    operate for a specified time (Oct. 17, 1991, p. 26749).

      The motion to lay on the table generally is not applicable to motions
    that are neither debatable nor amendable. As such, it is not applicable
    to the following motions: (1) to adjourn (Aug. 3, 1990, p. 22195); (2)
    that when the House adjourn it stand adjourned to a day and time certain
    (Nov. 17, 1981, p. 27770); (3) to dispense with further proceedings
    under a call of the House (Speaker McCormack, Aug. 27, 1962, pp. 17651-
    54); (4) to order the previous question (V, 5410, 5411; Oct. 4, 1994, p.
    27649). Furthermore, the motion may not be applied to a motion: (1) to
    suspend the rules (V, 5405); (2) to commit after the previous question
    is ordered (V, 5412-5414; VIII, 2653, 2655); (3) to any motion relating
    to the order of business (V, 5403, 5404). It may not be applied to a
    motion to discharge a committee under former clause 3 of rule XXVII
    (current clause 2 of rule XV) (June 11, 1945, p. 5892) but may be
    applied to the motion to discharge a committee from consideration of a
    resolution of inquiry (V, 5407).

      The motion to lay on the table is applicable to debatable secondary or
    privileged motions for disposal of another matter; thus a motion to
    refer (V, 5433; Aug. 13, 1982, pp. 20969, 20975-78) or a motion to
    recede and concur in a Senate amendment in disagreement may be laid on
    the table (Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 22, 1978, p. 4072) without carrying the
    pending matter to the table. The motion is not applicable to a
    conference report (V, 6540).

    Sec. 914a. The motion for the previous question.

        The
    precedents relating to the motion for the previous question are
    annotated in Sec. Sec. 994-1000.

    [[Page 683]]

    leged business (VIII, 2614). Where consideration of a measure postponed
    to a day certain resumes as unfinished business in the House,
    recognition for debate does not begin anew but recommences from the
    point where it was interrupted (June 10, 1980, p. 13801). It is not in
    order to postpone pending business to Calendar Wednesday (VIII, 2614),
    but if so postponed by consent, when consideration is concluded on that
    Wednesday, the remainder of the day is devoted to business in order
    under the Calendar Wednesday rule (VII, 970). The motion is not
    available in Committee of the Whole (July 14, 1998, p. 15305), but a
    motion that a bill be reported with the recommendation that it be
    postponed is in order in the Committee of the Whole proceeding under the
    general rules of the House (IV, 4765; VIII, 2372), is debatable (VIII,
    2372), and is a preferential motion (VIII, 2372, 2615), but debate is
    confined to the advisability of postponement only (VIII, 2372). It has
    been held in order to postpone an appeal (VIII, 2613). A bill under
    consideration in the morning hour may not be made a special order by a
    motion to postpone to a day certain (IV, 3164).

    Sec. 915. The motions to postpone.

      As  indicated in the rule,
    the motions to postpone are two in number and distinct. The first one is
    to postpone to a day certain, and the second one is to postpone
    indefinitely. Each must apply to the whole and not a part of the pending
    proposition (V, 5306). Neither may be entertained after the previous
    question is ordered (V, 5319-5321; VIII, 2616, 2617), or be applied to a
    special order providing for the consideration of a class of bills (V,
    4958); but when a bill comes before the House under the terms of a
    special order that assigns a day merely, a motion to postpone may be
    applied to the bill (IV, 3177-3182). Business postponed to a day certain
    is in order on that day immediately after the approval of the Journal
    and disposition of business on the Speaker's table, unless displaced by
    more highly privi

      The motion to postpone to a day certain may not specify the hour (V,
    5307). The motion may be amended (V, 5754; VIII, 2824). It is debatable
    within narrow limits only (V, 5309, 5310), the merits of the bill to
    which it is applied not being within those limits (V, 5311-5315; VIII,
    2372, 2616, 2640).

      The motion to postpone indefinitely opens to debate all the merits of
    the proposition to which it is applied (V, 5316). It may not be applied
    to the motion to refer (V, 5317), the motion to suspend the rules (V,
    5322), or the motion to resolve into the Committee of the Whole (VI,
    726), and it is reasonable to infer that it is equally inapplicable to
    the other secondary or privileged motions enumerated in the rule and to
    motions relating to the order of business. However, the motion to
    postpone indefinitely may be applied to the motion that the House
    resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole pursuant to the
    provisions of a statute, enacted under the rulemaking power of the House
    of Representatives, that specifically allows such a motion in the
    consideration of a resolution disapproving a certain executive action
    (Mar. 10, 1977, p. 7021; Aug. 3, 1977, p. 26528).

    [[Page 684]]

    question to which applied is ``under debate,'' whether the motion itself
    is debatable, whether a minority Member or a Member opposed to the
    question to which the motion is applied is entitled to a priority of
    recognition, and whether the prohibition against a special order
    reported from the Committee on Rules denying a motion to recommit a bill
    or joint resolution pending final passage is applicable. For a
    discussion of the motion to recommit, see the annotations under clause 2
    of rule XIX. The motion may not be used in direct form in Committee of
    the Whole (IV, 4721; VIII, 2326); and where a bill is being considered
    under the provisions of a resolution stating that ``at the conclusion of
    the consideration of the bill for amendment under the five-minute rule
    the Committee shall rise and report the bill back to the House with such
    amendments as may have been adopted,'' a motion that the Committee rise
    and report to the House with the recommendation that the bill be
    recommitted to the legislative committee reporting it is not in order
    (Aug. 10, 1950, p. 12219). It may be made after the engrossment and
    third reading of a bill, even though the previous question may not have
    been ordered (V, 5562, 5563).

    Sec. 916. The motions to refer.

      The  parliamentary motion to
    refer is explicitly recognized and given status in four different
    situations under House rules: The ordinary motion provided for in this
    clause; the motion to recommit with or without instructions after the
    previous question has been ordered on a bill or joint resolution to
    final passage, provided in clause 2 of rule XIX; the motion to commit,
    with or without instructions, pending the motion for or after ordering
    of the previous question as provided in clause 1 of rule XIX (V, 5569);
    and the motion to refer, with or without instructions, pending a vote in
    the House to strike out the enacting clause as provided in clause 9 of
    rule XVIII. The terms ``refer,'' ``commit,'' and ``recommit'' are
    sometimes used interchangeably (V, 5521; VIII, 2736), but when used in
    the precise manner and situation contemplated in each rule, reflect
    certain differences based upon whether the

      If the previous question is rejected on a preferential motion to
    dispose of Senate amendments in disagreement, the preferential motion
    remains ``under debate'' and the motion to refer may be offered under
    this clause (Speaker Albert, Sept. 16, 1976, p. 30887). A motion to
    refer takes precedence over motion to amend when a question is under
    debate (such as where the previous question has been rejected), and the
    Chair recognizes the Member seeking to offer the preferential motion
    before the less preferential motion is read (Aug. 13, 1982, pp. 20969,
    20975-78).

      The simple motion to refer under the first sentence of this clause is
    debatable within narrow limits (V, 5054) and may be offered by any
    Member (who need not qualify as being in opposition to the pending
    question) when that question is ``under debate,'' i.e., when the
    previous question has not been moved or ordered, but the merits of the
    proposition sought to be referred may not be brought into the debate (V,
    5564-5568; VI, 65, 549; VIII, 2740). The motion to refer with
    instructions is also debatable (V, 5561); but the previous question is
    preferential (Mar. 22, 1990, p. 4997).

    [[Page 685]]

    Sec. 917. Instructions with the motion to refer.

      The  motion
    to refer may specify that the reference shall be to a select as well as
    a standing committee (IV, 4401) without regard for rules of jurisdiction
    (IV, 4375; V, 5527) and may provide for reference to another committee
    than that reporting the bill (VIII, 2696, 2736), or to the Committee of
    the Whole (V, 5552, 5553), and even that the committee be endowed with
    power to send for persons and papers (IV, 4402). Unless the previous
    question is ordered the motion may be amended (VIII, 2712, 2738), in
    part (V, 5754); by substitute (VIII, 2698, 2738, 2759); or by adding
    instructions (V, 5521, 5570, 5582-5584; VIII, 2695, 2762; Aug. 13, 1982,
    pp. 20969, 20975-78).

    Divisibility

    Sec. 918. Repetition of motions.

      The  rule specifies that the
    motions to postpone and refer shall not be repeated on the same day at
    the same stage of the question (V, 5301, 5591; VIII, 2738, 2760). Under
    the practice, a motion to adjourn may be repeated only after intervening
    business (V, 5373; VIII, 2814), debate (V, 5374), the ordering of the
    yeas and nays (V, 5376, 5377), decision of the Chair on a question of
    order (V, 5378), or reception of a message (V, 5375). The motion to lay
    on the table may also be repeated after intervening business (V, 5398-
    5400); but the ordering of the previous question (V, 5709), a call of
    the House (V, 5401), or decision of a question of order have been held
    not to be such intervening business, it being essential that the pending
    matter be carried to a new stage in order to permit a repetition of the
    motion (V, 5709).

    919. Division of the question.

      5.  (a) Except as provided in
    paragraph (b), a question shall be divided on the demand of a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner before the question is put if it
    includes propositions so distinct in substance that, one being taken
    away, a substantive proposition remains.

      (b)(1) A motion or resolution to elect members to a standing committee
    of the House, or to a joint standing committee, is not divisible.

      (2) A resolution or order reported by the Committee on Rules providing
    a special order of business is not divisible.

    Sec. 920. Motion to strike out and insert not
    divisible.

      (c)  A motion to strike and insert is not divisible, but
    rejection of a motion to strike does not preclude another motion to
    amend.

    [[Page 686]]

    entered on the Journal) was transferred to clause 2(c)(2) of rule II,
    paragraphs (a) and (b) were found in former clause 6, and paragraph (c)
    was found in the first part of former clause 7 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47).
      Paragraphs (a) and (b) (former clause 6) was first adopted in 1789,
    and was amended in 1837 (V, 6107). Paragraph (b)(1) (first part of the
    former proviso) was adopted April 2, 1917 (VIII, 2175), and paragraph
    (b)(2) (last part of the former proviso) was adopted May 3, 1933 (VIII,
    3164). Paragraph (c) (first part of former clause 7) was adopted in
    1811, and amended in 1822 (V, 5767). When the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, former clause 5 of this rule (requiring time of
    adjournment to be

      The House may by adoption of a resolution reported from the Committee
    on Rules suspend the rule providing for the division of a question (VII,
    775).

    Sec. 921. Principles governing the division of the
    question.

      The  principle that there must be at least two substantive
    propositions in order to justify division is insisted on rigidly (V,
    6108-6113), as failure to do so produces difficulties (III, 1725). The
    question may not be divided after it has been put (V, 6162), or after
    the yeas and nays have been ordered (V, 6160, 6161); but division of the
    question may be demanded after the previous question is ordered (V,
    5468, 6149; VIII, 3173). In passing on a demand for division the Chair
    considers only substantive propositions and not the merits of the
    question presented (V, 6122). It seems to be most proper, also, that the
    division should depend on grammatical structure rather than on the
    legislative propositions involved (I, 394; V, 6119), but a question
    presenting two propositions grammatically is not divisible if either
    does not constitute a substantive proposition when considered alone
    (VII, 3165). Thus a resolution censuring a Member and adopting a report
    of a committee thereon, which recommends censure on the basis of the
    committee's findings, is not divisible since those questions are
    substantially equivalent (Speaker O'Neill, Oct. 13, 1978, p. 37016); and
    an adjournment resolution that also authorizes the receipt of veto
    messages from the President during the adjournment is not subject to a
    division of the question, as the receipt authority would be nonsensical
    standing alone (June 30, 1976, p. 21702). However, a concurrent
    resolution on the budget is subject to a demand for a division of the
    question if, for example, the resolution grammatically and substantively
    relates to different fiscal years (May 7, 1980, pp. 10185-87), or
    includes a separate, hortatory section having its own grammatical and
    substantive meaning (Speaker Foley, Mar. 5, 1992, p. 4657).

    [[Page 687]]

    7344) may be divided. A resolution of impeachment presenting discrete
    articles may be divided (VI, 545; Dec. 18, 1998, p. 11064).
      Decisions have been made that a resolution affecting two individuals
    may be divided, although such division may involve a reconstruction of
    the text (I, 623; V, 6119-6121). The better practice seems to be,
    however, that this reconstruction of the text should be made by the
    adoption of a substitute amendment of two branches, rather than by
    interpretation of the Chair (II, 1621). But merely formal words, such as
    ``resolved,'' may be supplied by interpretation of the Chair (V, 6114-
    6118). A resolution with two resolve clauses separately certifying the
    contemptuous conduct of two individuals is divisible (Feb. 27, 1986, p.
    3040); as is a resolution with one resolve clause certifying
    contemptuous conduct of several individuals (Oct. 27, 2000, p. 25200,
    contrast, Deschler-Brown, ch. 30, Sec. 49.1). A measure containing a
    series of simple resolutions (V, 6149), and a resolution confirming
    several nominations (Speaker Albert, Mar. 19, 1975, p.

      Except on resolutions to elect Members to committees or on resolutions
    reported from the Committee on Rules providing a special order of
    business, where division of the question is prohibited by this clause, a
    resolution reported from the Committee on Rules may be divided where
    otherwise appropriate. Thus a resolution reported from that committee
    establishing several select committees in grammatically divisible
    titles, not being a special order of business, is subject to a demand
    for a division of the question (Jan. 8, 1987, p. 1036). However, it is
    not in order to demand a division of a subject incorporated by reference
    in the pending text, as when a resolution to adopt a series of rules,
    not made a part of the resolution, was before the House, it was held not
    in order to demand a separate vote on each rule (V, 6159).

      The question on engrossment and third reading under former clause 1 of
    rule XXI (current clause 8(c) of rule XVI) is not divisible (Speaker
    Foley, Aug. 3, 1989, p. 18544); and in voting on the engrossment or
    passage of a bill or joint resolution, a separate vote may not be
    demanded on the various portions (V, 6144-6146; VIII, 3172), or on the
    preamble (V, 6147).

      Where an amendment is offered to an appropriation bill providing that
    no part of the appropriation may be paid to named individuals, the
    amendment may be divided for a separate vote on each name (Feb. 5, 1943,
    p. 645). An amendment (to a joint resolution making continuing
    appropriations) containing separate paragraphs appropriating funds for
    different programs may be substantively and grammatically divisible
    although preceded by the same prefatory language applicable to all the
    paragraphs, and the Clerk will read each paragraph as including the
    prefatory language before the Chair's putting the question thereon (Nov.
    8, 1983, p. 31495). A division may be demanded on an amendment to strike
    out various unrelated phrases (VIII, 3166; Mar. 28, 1984, p. 6898). An
    amendment proposing to change a figure in one paragraph of an
    appropriation bill and also to insert a new (``fetch-back'') paragraph
    at another point in the bill is divisible (July 15, 1993, p. 15843).
    Absent a contrary order, the question may be divided on an amendment en
    bloc comprising discrete instructions to amend, even though unanimous
    consent has just been granted for the en bloc consideration (July 25,
    1990, p. 19174; July 18, 1991, p. 18851).

    [[Page 688]]

    several resolutions is proposed; but after this amendment has been
    agreed to, it is in order to demand a division of the original
    resolution as amended (V, 6127, 6128). When, however, an amendment
    simply adding or inserting is proposed, it is in order to divide the
    amendment (V, 6129-6133). To a motion to strike certain words and insert
    others, a simple motion to strike out the words may not be offered as a
    substitute, as it would have the effect of dividing the motion to strike
    out and insert (June 29, 1939, pp. 8282, 8284; June 19, 1979, pp. 15566-
    68).
      A division of the question may not be demanded on a motion to strike
    out and insert (V, 5767, 6123; VIII, 3169), including substitutes for
    pending amendments (V, 6127; VIII, 3168; Aug. 17, 1972, pp. 28887-90;
    July 2, 1980, pp. 18288-92), although an amendment comprising two
    discrete instructions to strike and insert may be divided (June 4, 1998,
    p. 5418) and a perfecting amendment to an amendment may be divided if
    not in the form of a motion to strike out and insert (V, 6131). When it
    is proposed to strike out and insert not one but several connected
    matters, it is not in order to demand a separate vote on each of those
    matters (V, 6124, 6125), as when an amendment in the nature of a
    substitute containing

      A division may be demanded on the motion to recede from disagreement
    to a Senate amendment and concur therein (see Sec. 525, supra; V, 6209;
    VIII, 3197-3199, 3203), but may not be demanded on Senate amendments
    when sending to conference (V, 6151-6156; VIII, 3175). A division of the
    question may not be demanded, with respect to a motion to concur in a
    Senate amendment with an amendment, between concurring and amending
    (VIII, 3176), and may not be demanded on separate parts of the proposed
    amendment if it is not properly divisible under the same tests that
    apply to any other amendment (Aug. 3, 1973, pp. 28124-26; Oct. 11, 1984,
    p. 32188). Thus a proposed amendment to a Senate amendment is not
    divisible if in the form of a motion to strike out and insert (Oct. 15,
    1986, p. 32135). Each Senate amendment must be voted on as a whole
    (VIII, 3175) but the Committee of the Whole having reported a Senate
    amendment with the recommendation that it be agreed to with an
    amendment, a separate vote was had on the amendment to the Senate
    amendment (VIII, 2420). When Senate amendments to a House bill are
    considered in the House, a separate vote may be had on each amendment
    (VIII, 2383, 2400, 3191), and separate votes may be had on nongermane
    portions of Senate amendments as provided in clause 10 of rule XXII.

      It is not in order to divide a motion to lay several connected
    propositions on the table (V, 6138-6140). Similarly, it is not in order
    to divide a motion for the previous question on two related
    propositions, as on a spe`cial order reported from the Committee on
    Rules and a pending amendment thereto (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575). An
    appeal from a decision of the Speaker involving two distinct questions
    may be divided (V, 6157).

    [[Page 689]]

      On a motion to commit with instructions it is not in order to demand a
    separate vote on the instructions or various branches thereof (V, 6134-
    6137; VIII, 2737, 3170; Speaker Rayburn, Apr. 11, 1956, p. 6157; June
    29, 1993, p. 14618). However, an amendment reported forthwith pursuant
    to instructions contained in a successful motion to recommit may be
    divided on the question of its adoption if composed of substantively and
    grammatically distinct propositions (June 29, 1993, p. 14618). A motion
    to recommit a bill to conference with various instructions may not be
    divided (Sept. 29, 1994, p. 27681). However, a motion to instruct
    conferees under clause 7(c) of rule XXII (when multiple motions are in
    order) may be divided (Speaker Byrns, May 26, 1936, p. 7951; Sept. 20,
    2000, p. 18622), provided that separate substantive propositions are
    presented (Speaker Rayburn, May 9, 1946, p. 4750).

      A division of the question may not be demanded on bills or joint
    resolutions for reference (IV, 4376) or change of reference (VII, 2125),
    a motion to elect Members to committees of House (VIII, 2175, 3164), a
    question against which a point of order is pending (VIII, 3432), a
    proposition under a motion to suspend the rules (V, 6141-6143; VIII,
    3171). A proposition reported from the Committee of the Whole as an
    entire and distinct amendment may not be divided, but must be voted on
    in the House as a whole (IV, 4883-4892). A separate vote may not be
    demanded in the House on an amendment adopted in the Committee of the
    Whole to an amendment (VIII, 2422, 2426, 2427).

      After the vote on the first member of the question, the second is open
    to debate and amendments, unless the previous question is ordered (see
    Sec. 482, supra). Where a motion to concur in a Senate amendment is
    divided pursuant to a special rule permitting that procedure, the Chair
    puts the question first on the first portion of the Senate amendment,
    and then on the remaining portion (Mar. 4, 1993, p. 4163). Where a
    division of the question is demanded on a portion of an amendment, the
    Chair puts the question first on the remaining portions of the
    amendment, and that portion on which the division is demanded remains
    open for further debate and amendment (Oct. 21, 1981, pp. 24785-89).
    However, where no further debate or amendment is in order on the divided
    portion, the Chair may put the question first on the divided portion(s)
    and then immediately on the remaining portion (Aug. 17, 1972, Deschler,
    ch. 27, Sec. 22.14; June 8, 1995, p. 15302). Where a division of the
    question is demanded on more than one portion of an amendment, the Chair
    may put the question first on the remaining portions of the amendment
    (if any), then (after further debate) on the first part on which a
    division is demanded, and then (after further debate) on the last part
    on which a division is demanded (Oct. 21, 1981, pp. 24785-89). Where the
    question on adopting an amendment is divided by special rule (rather
    than on demand from the floor), the Chair puts the question on each
    divided portion of the amendment in the order in which it appears (May
    23, 1996, p. 12316).

    Amendments
      A demand for a division of the question on a separate portion of an
    amendment may be withdrawn before the question is put on the first
    portion thereof (July 15, 1993, p. 15843), but once the Chair has put
    the question on the first portion of the amendment, a demand for a
    division may be withdrawn only by unanimous consent (Sept. 9, 1976, pp.
    29538-40).

    [[Page 690]]

    substitute for the original motion to amend, to which one amendment may
    be offered but which may not be voted on until the original amendment is
    perfected. An amendment may be withdrawn in the House at any time before
    a decision or amendment thereon. An amendment to the title of a bill or
    resolution shall not be in order until after its passage or adoption and
    shall be decided without debate.

    922. Amendments to text and to title.

      6.  When an amendable
    proposition is under consideration, a motion to amend and a motion to
    amend that amendment shall be in order, and it also shall be in order to
    offer a further amendment by way of

      This provision (formerly rule XIX) was adopted in 1880, with an
    amendment adding the portion in relation to the title in 1893. The rule
    of 1880, however, merely stated in form of rule what had been the
    practice of the House for many years (V, 5753). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former rule XIX (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). For further discussion
    see Deschler, ch. 27, Sec. Sec. 15-19.

    Sec. 923. Conditions of the motion to amend.

      It  is not in
    order to offer more than one motion to amend of the same nature at a
    time (V, 5755; VIII, 2831), but the four motions specified by the rule
    may be pending at the same time (V, 5793; VIII, 2883, 2887). Where,
    pursuant to a special rule, a committee amendment in the nature of a
    substitute is being read as original text for purpose of amendment,
    there may be pending to that text the four stages of amendment permitted
    by this rule (Apr. 23, 1969, p. 10066). When a request for a recorded
    vote in the Committee of the Whole is postponed under authority of a
    special order of the House (such authority now found in clause 6(g) of
    rule XVIII), the amendment becomes unfinished business and is no longer
    pending, thereby permitting the offering of another amendment (May 10,
    2000, p. 7513). An amendment in the third degree is not specified by the
    rule and is not permissible (V, 5754; VIII, 2580, 2888, 2891), even when
    the third degree is in the nature of a substitute for an amendment to a
    substitute (V, 5791; VIII, 2889).

    [[Page 691]]

      An amendment must contain instructions to the Clerk as to the portion
    of the bill it seeks to amend and is subject to a point of order if not
    in proper form (Oct. 3, 1985, p. 25970). An amendment may not propose to
    change portions of a measure not yet read for amendment (Mar. 24, 1999,
    p. 5418). Under a ``modified-closed'' rule permitting only amendments
    printed in the report accompanying the rule, the Chair will permit an
    amendment to be offered in the form actually submitted for printing
    rather than requiring that it be offered in the erroneous form printed
    (Mar. 10, 1994, p. 4405). The Chair does not entertain a unanimous-
    consent request to designate a co-offeror of an amendment (May 20, 2004,
    p. ----; Sept. 14, 2004, p. ----).

      A Member may not amend or modify his own amendment except by unanimous
    consent (Oct. 1, 1985, p. 25453); and where the Chair recognizes the
    proponent of an amendment to propound such a unanimous-consent request
    before commencing debate, 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. 11849). Under the
    five-minute rule, the proponent of an amendment may not yield to another
    to offer an amendment to the amendment; rather an amendment to the
    amendment may be offered after the proponent of the pending amendment
    has explained it (Sept. 7, 1995, p. 24071).

      Two independent amendments may be voted on at once only by unanimous
    consent of the House (V, 5979). Amendments en bloc, once pending, are
    open to perfecting amendment at any point (June 12, 1991, p. 14337). If
    a point of order is sustained against a discrete portion of an en bloc
    amendment, the entire en bloc amendment may not be considered; however,
    each constituent amendment may be offered separately if otherwise in
    order (Sept. 16, 1981, pp. 20735-38). An amendment considered with
    others en bloc and rejected may be offered separately at a subsequent
    time (Deschler, ch. 27, Sec. 35.15; Nov. 4, 1991, p. 29932).

      The substitute provided for in this rule has been construed as a
    substitute for the amendment and not as a substitute for the original
    text (VIII, 2883). A substitute amendment may be amended by striking out
    all after its first word and inserting a new text (V, 5793, 5794). While
    this is in effect a substitute, it is not technically so. A substitute
    always proposes to replace all the words of a pending amendment. The
    amendatory instructions contained in a substitute direct changes to be
    made in the original language rather than to the pending amendment.
    Although a substitute may change parts of a bill not changed by the
    pending amendment, the substitute must be germane to the pending
    amendment (VIII, 2879, 2880; Deschler, ch. 27, Sec. 18.6). A substitute
    may result in similar language to the original text proposed to be
    changed by the pending amendment, but may not result in identical
    language (Deschler, ch. 27, Sec. 18.15). To an amendment adding a new
    section, an amendment making perfecting changes in the bill rather than
    in the amendment is not a proper perfecting amendment, but may, if
    germane, be offered as a substitute for the amendment (Deschler, ch. 27,
    Sec. 18.7). The Chair will not look behind the form of the amendment in
    determining whether it is a perfecting amendment or a substitute (June
    13, 1994, p. 12731). Once a perfecting amendment to an amendment is
    disposed of, the original amendment, as amended or not, remains open to
    further perfecting amendment (June 20, 1991, p. 15610); and all such
    amendments are disposed of before voting on substitutes for the original
    amendment and amendments thereto (July 26, 1984, p. 21253).

    [[Page 692]]

    the amendment to which offered, and in the second case the question is
    the relationship between the original amendment and the text of the bill
    (V, 5797; VIII, 2843). An amendment that is adopted as amended by a
    substitute may not be reoffered in its original form if it would
    directly change the amended portion of the bill. However, it may be
    reoffered if the original amendment amends a different part of the bill
    (as in the case where the amendatory instructions of the substitute
    displaces the language of the original amendment). In such a case the
    vote on the amendment as amended by the substitute is not equivalent to
    a direct vote on the original amendment (June 25, 1987, p. 17416). An
    amendment considered with others en bloc and rejected may be offered
    separately at a subsequent time (Deschler, ch. 27, Sec. 35.15; Nov. 4,
    1991, p. 29932).
      An amendment offered as a substitute and rejected may again be offered
    as an original amendment without presenting an equivalent question. In
    the first case the question is the relationship between the substitute
    and

      An amendment in the nature of a substitute always proposes to strike
    out all after the enacting or resolving words in order to insert a new
    text (V, 5785, footnote). An amendment in the nature of a substitute may
    be proposed before amendments to the pending portion of original text
    have been acted on, but may not be voted on until such amendments have
    been disposed of (V, 5787). When a bill is considered by sections or
    paragraphs an amendment in the nature of a substitute is properly
    offered after the reading for amendment is concluded (V, 5788). However,
    when it is proposed to offer a single substitute for several paragraphs
    of a bill that is being considered by paragraphs, the substitute may be
    moved to the first paragraph, with notice that, if agreed to, motions
    will be made to strike out the remaining paragraphs (V, 5795; VIII,
    2898, 2900-2903; July 29, 1969, p. 21218). An amendment in the nature of
    a substitute, as well as the original proposition, may be perfected by
    amendments before the vote on it is taken (V, 5786). Where there is
    pending an amendment in the nature of a substitute, it is in order to
    offer a perfecting amendment to the pending portion of original text
    (VIII, 2861; Apr. 27, 1976, p. 11411; see also Deschler, ch. 27,
    Sec. 5.34). An amendment in the nature of a substitute having been
    agreed to, the vote is then taken on the original proposition as amended
    (II, 983; V, 5799, 5800), and no further amendment is in order (Speaker
    O'Neill, Mar. 26, 1985, p. 6274). If a perfecting amendment to an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute, striking out all after the
    short title and inserting a new text, is agreed to, further amendments
    to the text so perfected are not in order, but amendments are in order
    to add new language at the end of the amendment in the nature of a
    substitute as amended (May 16, 1979, p. 11420).

    [[Page 693]]

    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 Deschler-Brown, ch.
    31, Sec. Sec. 6.39, 6.41). When enough of an amendment has been read to
    show that it is out of order, a point of order may be raised without
    waiting for the reading to be completed (V, 6886-6887; VIII, 2912,
    3437), though the Chair may decline to rule until the entire proposition
    has been read (Dec. 14, 1973, pp. 41716-18). A timely reservation of a
    point of order by one Member inures to the benefit of any other Member
    who desires to press a point of order (V, 6906; July 18, 1990, p.
    17930).

    Sec. 924. Relation of point of order to motion to
    amend.

      A  point of order against an amendment is timely if made or
    reserved before formal recognition of the proponent to commence debate
    thereon (July 16, 1991, p. 18391), but thereafter comes too late (V,
    6894, 6898-6899) except as provided in clauses 4 and 5(a) of rule XXI.
    To preclude a point of order, debate should be on the merits of the
    proposition (V, 6901). 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

    Sec. 925. Withdrawal of the motion to amend.

      While  the rule
    provides that either an ordinary or substitute amendment may be
    withdrawn in the House (V, 5753) or ``in the House as in Committee of
    the Whole'' (IV, 4935; June 26, 1973, p. 21315), it may not be withdrawn
    or modified in Committee of the Whole except by unanimous consent
    (clause 5 of rule XVIII; V, 5221; VIII, 2564, 2859).

    Sec. 926. Precedence of the motion to amend.

      Pursuant  to
    clause 4 of rule XVI, the motion for the previous question takes
    precedence of a motion to amend (Nov. 8, 1971, p. 39944); and if the
    previous question is not ordered, the motion to refer also has
    precedence of the motion to amend (V, 5555; VI, 373). Amendments
    reported by a committee are acted on before those offered from the floor
    (V, 5773; VIII, 2862, 2863), but a floor amendment to the text of a
    pending section is considered before a committee amendment adding a new
    section at the end of the pending section (Oct. 4, 1972, pp. 33779-82),
    and there is a question as to the extent to which the chairman of the
    committee reporting a bill should be recognized to offer amendments to
    perfect it in preference to other Members (II, 1450). Amendments may not
    be offered by proxy (VIII, 2830). The motion to strike out the enacting
    clause has precedence of the motion to amend, and may be offered while
    an amendment is pending (V, 5328-5331; VIII, 2622-2624); but the motion
    to amend takes precedence over a motion that the Committee of the Whole
    rise and report the bill with the recommendation that it pass (July 27,
    1937, p. 7699).

    Sec. 927. Relation of the motion to amend to other
    motions.

      With  some exceptions an amendment may attach itself to secondary
    and privileged motions (V, 5754). Thus, the motions to postpone, refer,
    amend, for a recess, and to fix the day to which the House shall adjourn
    may be amended (V, 5754; VIII, 2824). But the motions for the previous
    question, to lay on the table, to adjourn (V, 5754) and to go into
    Committee of the Whole to consider a privileged bill may not be amended
    (IV, 3078, 3079; VI, 723-725).

    [[Page 694]]

    Germaneness
      An amendment to the title of a bill is not in order in Committee of
    the Whole (Jan. 29, 1986, p. 682).

    928. Germane amendments.

      7.  No motion or proposition on a
    subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under
    color of amendment.

      This clause was adopted in 1789, and amended in 1822 (V, 5767, 5825).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this clause
    and clause 5(c) occupied a single former clause 7 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 695]]

    p. 17415). The burden of proof is on the proponent of an amendment to
    establish its germaneness (VIII, 2995; July 10, 2000, p. 13605), and
    where an amendment is equally susceptible to more than one
    interpretation, one of which will render it not germane, the Chair will
    rule it out of order (June 20, 1975, p. 19967).
      It introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary
    law (V, 5825), but of high value in the procedure of the House (V,
    5866). Before the adoption of rules, when the House is operating under
    general parliamentary law, as modified by the usage and practice of the
    House, an amendment may be subject to the point of order that it is not
    germane to the proposition to which offered (Jan. 3, 1969, p. 23). The
    principle of the rule applies to a proposition by which it is proposed
    to modify the pending bill, and not to a portion of the bill itself (V,
    6929); thus a point of order will not lie that an appropriation in a
    general appropriation bill is not germane to the rest of the bill (Dec.
    16, 1963, p. 24753). In general, an amendment simply striking out words
    already in a bill may not be ruled out as not germane (V, 5805; VIII,
    2918) unless such action would change the scope and meaning of the text
    (VIII, 2917-2921; Mar. 23, 1960, p. 6381); and a pro forma amendment
    ``to strike out the last word'' has been considered germane (July 28,
    1965, p. 18639). While a committee may report a bill or resolution
    embracing different subjects, it is not in order during consideration in
    the House to introduce a new subject by way of amendment (V, 5825). The
    rule that amendments should be germane applies to amendments reported by
    committees (V, 5806), but a resolution providing for consideration of
    the bill with committee amendments may waive points of order (Oct. 10,
    1967, p. 28406), and the point of order under this rule does not apply
    to a special order reported from the Committee on Rules ``self-
    executing'' the adoption in the House of a nongermane amendment to a
    bill, since the amendment is not separately before the House during
    consideration of the special order (Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3542; July 27,
    1993, p. 17117). A resolution reported from the Committee on Rules
    providing for the consideration of a bill relating to a certain subject
    may be amended neither by an amendment that would substitute the
    consideration of a different proposition (V, 5834-5836; VIII, 2956;
    Sept. 14, 1950, p. 14844) nor an amendment that would permit the
    additional consideration of a nongermane amendment to the bill (May 29,
    1980, pp. 12667-73; Aug. 13, 1982, p. 20972). The Chair will not
    interpret as a point of order under a specific rule of the House an
    objection to a substitute as narrowing the scope of a pending amendment,
    absent some stated or necessarily implied reference to germaneness or
    other rule (June 25, 1987,

    Sec. 929. Proposition to which amendment must be
    germane.

      Under  the later practice an amendment should be germane to the
    particular paragraph or section to which it is offered (V, 5811-5820;
    VIII, 2922, 2936; Oct. 14, 1971, pp. 36194, 36211; Sept. 19, 1986, p.
    24729), without reference to subject matter of other titles not yet read
    (July 31, 1990, p. 20816), and an amendment inserting an additional
    section should be germane to the portion of the bill to which it is
    offered (V, 5822; VIII, 2927, 2931; July 14, 1970, pp. 24033-35), though
    it may be germane to more than one portion of a bill (Mar. 27, 1974, p.
    8508), and when offered as a separate paragraph is not required to be
    germane to the paragraph immediately preceding or following it (VII,
    1162; VIII, 2932-2935).

      The test of germaneness in the case of a motion to recommit with
    instructions is the relationship of the instructions to the bill taken
    as a whole (and not merely to the separate portion of the bill
    specifically proposed to be amended in the instructions) (Mar. 28, 1996,
    p. 6932).

      Subject to clause 2(c) of rule XXI (requiring that limitation
    amendments to general appropriation bills be offered at the end of the
    reading of the bill for amendment), an amendment limiting the use of
    funds by a particular agency funded in a general appropriation bill may
    be germane to the paragraph carrying the funds, or to any general
    provisions portion of the bill affecting that agency or all agencies
    funded by the bill (July 16, 1979, p. 18807). However, to a paragraph
    containing funds for an agency but not transferring funds to that
    account from other paragraphs in the bill, an amendment increasing that
    amount by transfer from an account in another paragraph is not germane,
    since affecting budget authority for a different agency not the subject
    of the pending paragraph (July 17, 1985, p. 19436). Similarly, an
    amendment to a general appropriation bill in the form of a limitation on
    funds therein but extending to activities prescribed by laws unrelated
    to the functions of departments and agencies addressed by the bill is
    not germane (July 10, 2000, p. 13605).

      In passing on the germaneness of an amendment, the Chair considers the
    relationship between the amendment and the bill as modified by the
    Committee of the Whole (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11545; July 8, 1987, p.
    19013).

    [[Page 696]]

    1991, p. 16152). An amendment in the form of a new title, when offered
    at the end of a bill containing several diverse titles on a general
    subject, need not be germane to the portion of the bill to which
    offered, it being sufficient that the amendment be germane to the bill
    as a whole in its modified form (Nov. 4, 1971, p. 39267; July 2, 1974,
    p. 22029; Sept. 18, 1975, p. 29322; July 11, 1985, p. 18601; Oct. 8,
    1985, pp. 26548-51). While the heading of the final title of a bill as
    ``miscellaneous'' does not thereby permit amendments to that title which
    are not germane thereto, the inclusion of sufficiently diverse
    provisions in such title affecting various provisions in the bill may
    permit further amendments which need only be germane to the bill as a
    whole (Apr. 10, 1979, pp. 8034-37).
      An amendment adding a new section to a bill being read by titles must
    be germane to the pending title (Sept. 17, 1975, p. 28925), but where a
    bill is considered as read and open to amendment at any point, an
    amendment must be germane to the bill as a whole and not to a particular
    section (Sept. 29, 1975, p. 30761; Jan. 30, 1986, p. 1052). Where a
    title of a bill is open to amendment at any point, the germaneness of an
    amendment perfecting one section therein depends on its relationship to
    the title as a whole and not merely on its relationship to the one
    section (June 25,

      Under clause 10 of rule XXII, a portion of a conference report
    incorporating part of a Senate amendment in the nature of a substitute
    to a House bill, or incorporating part of a Senate bill that the House
    has amended, must be germane to the bill in the form passed by the
    House; thus where a House-passed bill contained several sections and
    titles amending diverse portions of the Internal Revenue Code relating
    to tax credits, a modified Senate provision adding a new section dealing
    with another tax credit was held germane to the House-passed measure as
    a whole (Speaker Albert, Mar. 26, 1975, p. 8900); but a Senate provision
    in a conference report, on a Senate bill with a House amendment in the
    nature of a substitute, which authorized appointment of a special
    prosecutor for any criminal offenses committed by certain Federal
    officials was held not germane to the bill as passed by the House, which
    related to offenses directly related to official duties and
    responsibilities of Federal officials (Oct. 12, 1978, pp. 36459-61).

      The test of germaneness of an amendment to or a substitute for an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute is its relationship to the
    substitute and not its relationship to the bill to which the amendment
    in the nature of a substitute has been offered (July 19, 1973, p. 24958;
    July 22, 1975, p. 23990; June 1, 1976, pp. 16051-56; July 28, 1982, pp.
    18355-58, 18361), and an amendment to a substitute is not required to
    affect the same page and line numbers as the substitute in order to be
    germane, it being sufficient that the amendment is germane to the
    subject matter of the substitute (Aug. 1, 1979, pp. 21944-47). When an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute is offered at the end of the
    first section of a bill, the test of germaneness is the relationship
    between the amendment and the entire bill, and the germaneness of an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute for a bill is not necessarily
    determined by an incidental portion of the amendment which if offered
    separately might not be germane to the portion of the bill to which
    offered (July 8, 1975, p. 21633).

      The test of germaneness of an amendment offered as a substitute for a
    pending amendment is its relationship to the pending amendment and not
    its relationship to the underlying bill (Feb. 14, 1995, p. 4714).

    [[Page 697]]

    motions to strike out the following sections which it would supersede
    (V, 5823; July 29, 1969, p. 21221). Where a perfecting amendment to the
    text is offered pending a vote on a motion to strike out the same text,
    the perfecting amendment must be germane to the text to which offered,
    not to the motion to strike (Oct. 3, 1969, p. 28454).
      An amendment germane to the bill as a whole, but hardly germane to any
    one section, may be offered at an appropriate place with notice of

    Sec. 930. Instructions to committees and amendments
    thereto.

      The  rule that amendments must be germane applies to amendments to
    the instructions in a motion to instruct conferees (VIII, 3230, 3235),
    and the test of germaneness of an amendment to a motion to instruct
    conferees, in addition to the measurement of scope of conference, is the
    relationship of the amendment to the subject matter of the House or
    Senate version of the bill (Deschler-Brown, ch. 28, Sec. 28.2). The rule
    of germaneness similarly applies to the instructions in a motion to
    recommit a bill to a committee of the House, as it is not in order to
    propose as part of a motion to recommit any proposition that would not
    have been germane if proposed as an amendment to the bill in the House
    (V, 5529-5541; VIII, 2708-2712; Mar. 2, 1967, p. 5155), and the
    instructions must be germane to the bill as perfected in the House (Nov.
    19, 1993, p. 30513), even where the instructions do not propose a direct
    amendment to the bill but merely direct the committee to pursue an
    unrelated approach (Speaker O'Neill, Mar. 2, 1978, p. 5272; July 16,
    1991, p. 18397) or direct the committee not to report the bill back to
    the House until an unrelated contingency occurs (VIII, 2704). Under the
    same rationale as amendments to a motion to instruct conferees,
    amendments to a motion to recommit to a standing committee with
    instructions must be germane to the subject matter of the bill (see V,
    6888; VIII, 2711).

      The fact that an amendment is offered in conjunction with a motion to
    recommit a bill with instructions to a standing committee does not
    affect the requirement that the subject matter of the amendment be
    germane and within the jurisdiction of the committee reporting the bill
    (Mar. 2, 1967, p. 5155; July 16, 1991, p. 18397).

    [[Page 698]]

    ment with an amendment is the relationship between the amendment and the
    motion, and not between the amendment and the Senate amendment to which
    the motion has been offered (Aug. 3, 1973, Deschler-Brown, ch. 28,
    Sec. 27.6). Formerly, a Senate amendment was not subject to the point of
    order that it was not germane to the House bill (VIII, 3425), but under
    changes in the rules points of order may be made and separate votes
    demanded on portions of Senate amendments and conference reports
    containing language that would not have been germane if offered in the
    House. Clause 10 of rule XXII permits points of order against language
    in a conference report which was originally in the Senate bill or
    amendment and which would not have been germane if offered to the House-
    passed version, and permits a separate motion to reject such portion of
    the conference report if found nongermane (Oct. 15, 1986, p. 31498). For
    purposes of that rule, the House-passed version, against which Senate
    provisions are compared, is that finally committed to conference, taking
    into consideration all amendments adopted by the House, including House
    amendments to Senate amendments (July 28, 1983, p. 21401). Clause 10 of
    rule XXII permits points of order against motions to concur or concur
    with amendment in nongermane Senate amendments, the stage of
    disagreement having been reached, and, if such points of order are
    sustained, permits separate motions to reject such nongermane matter.
    Clause 10 of rule XXII is not applicable to a provision contained in a
    motion to recede and concur with an amendment (the stage of disagreement
    having been reached) which is not contained in any form in the Senate
    version, the only requirement in such circumstances being that the
    motion as a whole be germane to the Senate amendment as a whole under
    clause 7 of rule XVI (Oct. 4, 1978, pp. 33502-06; June 30, 1987, p.
    18294).

    Sec. 931. Senate amendments and matter contained in
    conference reports.

      In  the consideration of Senate amendments to a House
    bill an amendment must be germane to the particular Senate amendment to
    which it is offered (V, 6188-6191; VIII, 2936; May 14, 1963, p. 8506;
    Dec. 13, 1980, p. 34097), and it is not sufficient that an amendment to
    a Senate amendment is germane to the original House bill if it is not
    germane to the subject matter of a Senate amendment that merely inserts
    new matter and does not strike out House provisions (V, 6188; VIII,
    2936). But where a Senate amendment proposes to strike out language in a
    House bill, the test of the germaneness of a motion to recede and concur
    with an amendment is the relationship between the language in the motion
    and the provisions in the House bill proposed to be stricken, as well as
    those to be inserted, by the Senate amendment (June 8, 1943, p. 5511;
    June 15, 1943, p. 5899; Dec. 12, 1974, p. 39272). The test of the
    germaneness of an amendment to a motion to concur in a Senate amend

    [[Page 699]]

    of a rule of the House but confined in its scope to the issue of access
    to committee hearings and meetings, an amendment to another clause of
    that rule relating to committee staffing (Mar. 7, 1973, p. 6714); to a
    title of a bill that only addresses the administrative structure of a
    new department and not its authority to carry out transferred programs,
    an amendment prohibiting the department from withholding funds to carry
    out certain objectives (June 12, 1979, p. 14485); to an amendment
    authorizing the use of funds for a specific study, an amendment naming
    any program established in the bill for an unrelated purpose for a
    specified Senator (Aug. 15, 1986, p. 22075); to one of two
    reconciliation bills reported by the Budget Committee, an amendment
    making a prospective indirect change to the other reconciliation bill
    not then pending before the House (June 25, 1997, p. 12488); to a bill
    reauthorizing the National Sea Grant College Program, a proposal to
    amend existing law to provide for automatic continuation of
    appropriations in the absence of timely enactment of a regular
    appropriation bill (June 18, 1997, p. 11333); to a bill regulating
    immigration, an amendment reaffirming an agreement with Japan (VIII,
    3050); to a bill opposing concessional loans to a country and outlining
    principles governing the conduct of industrial cooperation projects of
    U.S. nationals in that country, an amendment waiving provisions of other
    law by requiring changes in tariff schedules to achieve overall trade
    reciprocity between that country and the United States (Nov. 6, 1997, p.
    24824); to a resolution authorizing the deployment of troops to
    implement a peace agreement, an amendment expressing support for the
    armed forces in carrying out such mission (Mar. 11, 1999, p. 4301); to a
    bill addessing enforcement of State liquor laws, an amendment addressing
    enforcement of State firearm laws (Aug. 3, 1999, p. 19213); to a bill
    addressing taxation under the Internal Revenue Code, an amendment
    extending unemployment insurance benefits (May 9, 2003, p. ----); to a
    bill reauthorizing the National Transportation Safety Board, an
    amendment extending unemployment insurance benefits (May 15, 2003, p. --
    -- (sustained on appeal)).

    Sec. 932. Subject matter as test of
    germaneness.

      An  amendment must relate to the subject matter under
    consideration. Thus, the following are not germane: To a bill seeking to
    eliminate wage discrimination based on the sex of the employee, an
    amendment to make the provisions of the bill applicable to
    discrimination based on race (July 25, 1962, p. 14778); to a bill
    establishing an office in the Department of the Interior to manage
    biological information, an amendment addressing socioeconomic matters
    (Oct. 26, 1993, p. 26082); to a bill authorizing military assistance to
    Israel and funds for the United Nations emergency force in the Middle
    East, an amendment expressing the sense of Congress that the President
    conduct negotiations to obtain a peace treaty in the Middle East and the
    resumption of diplomatic and trade relations between Arab nations and
    the United States and Israel (Dec. 11, 1973, p. 40842); to a concurrent
    resolution expressing congressional concern over certain domestic
    policies of a foreign government and urging that government to improve
    those internal problems in order to enhance better relations with the
    United States, amendments expressing the necessity for United States
    diplomatic initiatives as a consequence of that foreign government's
    policies (July 12, 1978, pp. 20500-05); to a resolution amending several
    clauses

    [[Page 700]]

    ment directing the Administrator to issue preliminary summer guidelines
    for citizen fuel use (as a further delineation of those functions) (Mar.
    6, 1974, p. 5436).
      An amendment that is germane, not being ``on a subject different from
    that under consideration,'' belongs to a class illustrated by the
    following: to a bill providing for an interoceanic canal by one route,
    an amendment providing for a different route (V, 5909); to a bill
    providing for the reorganization of the Army, an amendment providing for
    the encouragement of marksmanship by enlisted personnel (V, 5910); to a
    proposition to create a board of inquiry, an amendment specifying when
    it shall report (V, 5915); to a bill relating to ``oleomargarine and
    other imitation dairy products,'' an amendment on the subject of
    ``renovated butter'' (V, 5919); to a resolution rescinding an order for
    final adjournment, an amendment fixing a new date therefor (V, 5920); to
    a proposition directing a feasibility investigation, an amendment
    requiring the submission of legislation to implement that investigation
    (Dec. 14, 1973, p. 41747); and to a section of a bill prescribing the
    functions of a new Federal Energy Administration by conferring wide
    discretionary powers upon the Administrator, an amend

      A bill comprehensively addressing a subject requires careful analysis
    to determine whether an amendment addresses a different subject. For
    example, to an amendment in the nature of a substitute comprehensively
    amending several sections of the Clean Air Act with respect to the
    impact of shortages of energy resources on standards imposed under that
    Act, an amendment to another section of the Act suspending temporarily
    the authority of the Administrator of the EPA to control automobile
    emissions was held germane (Dec. 14, 1973, p. 41688). On the other hand,
    to a bill comprehensively restructuring the production and distribution
    of food, an amendment proposed in a motion to recommit to provide
    nutrition assistance, including food stamps and soup kitchen programs,
    was held not germane (Feb. 29, 1996, p. 3257).

    Sec. 933. Fundamental purpose as test of
    germaneness.

      The  fundamental purpose of an amendment must be germane to
    the fundamental purpose of the bill (VIII, 2911). The Chair discerns the
    fundamental purpose of a bill by examining the text of the bill and its
    report language (Deschler-Brown, ch. 28, Sec. 5.6; Aug. 3, 1999, p.
    19213), rather than the motives that circumstances may suggest (V, 5783,
    5803; Dec. 13, 1973, pp. 41267-69; Aug. 15, 1974, p. 28438). To a bill
    that comprehensively addresses a subject matter, an amendment that
    relates to that subject matter may not be ruled out as nongermane merely
    because the amendment may be characterized as private legislation
    benefitting certain individuals offered to a public bill (May 30, 1984,
    p. 14495). Similarly, to a bill proposing to accomplish a result by
    methods comprehensive in scope, an amendment in the nature of a
    substitute seeking to achieve the same result was held germane where it
    was shown that additional provisions not contained in the original bill
    were merely incidental conditions or exceptions that were related to the
    fundamental purpose of the bill (Aug. 2, 1973, pp. 27673-75; July 8,
    1975, p. 21633; Sept. 29, 1980, pp. 27832-52). On the other hand, an
    amendment may relate to the same subject matter yet still stray from
    adherence to a common fundamental purpose. For example, an amendment
    singling out one constituent element of a larger subject for specific
    and unrelated scrutiny is not germane (Aug. 3, 1999, p. 19213).
    Similarly, to a bill appropriating for only one fiscal year (and
    containing no provisions extending beyond that fiscal year), an
    amendment to extend an appropriation to another fiscal year is not
    germane (June 20, 2001, p. ----).

    [[Page 701]]

    (the Committee of the Whole overruling the Chair) (VII, 3042); to a
    proposition to accomplish a result through regulation by a governmental
    agency, an amendment to accomplish the same fundamental purpose through
    regulation by another governmental agency (Dec. 15, 1937, pp. 1572-89;
    June 9, 1941, p. 4905; Dec. 19, 1973, p. 42618); to a bill to achieve a
    certain purpose by conferring discretionary authority to set fair labor
    standards upon an independent agency, an amendment in the nature of a
    substitute to attain that purpose by a more inflexible method
    (prescribing fair labor standards) (Dec. 15, 1937, pp. 1590-94; Oct. 14,
    1987, p. 27885); to a proposition to accomplish the broad purpose of
    settling land claims of Alaska natives by a method general in scope, an
    amendment accomplishing the same purpose by a method more detailed in
    its provisions (Oct. 20, 1971, p. 37079); to an amendment
    comprehensively amending the Natural Gas Act to deregulate interstate
    sales of new natural gas and regulate aspects of intrastate gas use, a
    substitute providing regulatory authority for interstate and intrastate
    gas sales of large producers (Feb. 4, 1976, p. 2387); to a bill
    providing a temporary extension of existing authority, an amendment
    achieving the same purpose by providing a nominally permanent authority
    was held germane where both the bill and the amendment were based on
    reported economic projections under which either would achieve the same,
    necessarily temporary result by method of direct or indirect amendment
    to the same existing law (May 13, 1987, p. 12344); to a bill subjecting
    employers who fail to apprise their workers of health risks to penalties
    under other laws and regulations, a substitute subjecting such employers
    to penalties prescribed in the substitute itself (Oct. 14, 1987, p.
    27885); to an amendment freezing the obligation of funds for fiscal year
    1996 for missile defense until the Secretary of Defense rendered a
    specified readiness certification, an amendment permitting an increase
    in the obligation of such funds on the basis of legislative findings
    concerning readiness, as each proposition addressed the relationship
    between 1996 funding levels for missile defense and readiness (Feb. 15,
    1995, p. 5026).
      In order to be germane, an amendment must not only have the same end
    as the matter sought to be amended, but must contemplate a method of
    achieving that end that is closely allied to the method encompassed in
    the bill or other matter sought to be amended (Aug. 11, 1970, p. 28165).
    Thus the following are germane: to a bill raising revenue by several
    methods of taxation, an amendment proposing a tax on undistributed
    profits

    [[Page 702]]

    in certain places, restricting monetary contributions by lobbyists, and
    providing civil penalties for violating Rules of the House in relation
    to floor privileges (Sept. 28, 1976, p. 33070) (but to a similar bill,
    an amendment requiring disclosure of any lobbying communication made on
    the floor of the House or Senate or in adjoining rooms, but not
    regulating such conduct, was held germane (Apr. 26, 1978, p. 11641)); to
    a bill seeking to accomplish a purpose by one method (creation of an
    executive branch agency), an amendment accomplishing that result by a
    method not contemplated in the bill (creation of office within
    legislative branch as function of committee oversight) (Nov. 5, 1975, p.
    35041); to a bill authorizing foreign military assistance programs, an
    amendment authorizing contributions to an international agency for
    nuclear missile inspections (Mar. 3, 1976, p. 5226); to a joint
    resolution proposing a constitutional amendment for representation of
    the District of Columbia in Congress, a motion to recommit with
    instructions that the Committee on the Judiciary consider a resolution
    retroceding populated portions of the District to Maryland (Speaker
    O'Neill, Mar. 2, 1978, p. 5272, implicitly overruling V, 5582); to a
    bill prohibiting poll taxes, a motion to recommit the bill with
    instructions that the committee report it back in the form of a joint
    resolution amending the Constitution to accomplish the purpose of the
    bill (Deschler-Brown, ch. 28, Sec. 23.8); to an amendment to achieve a
    national production goal for synthetic fuels for national defense needs
    by loans and grants and development of demonstration synthetic fuel
    plants, a substitute to require by regulation that any fuel sold in
    commerce require a certain percentage of synthetic fuels, as broader in
    scope and an unrelated method (June 26, 1979, pp. 16663-74); to a bill
    to provide financial assistance to domestic agriculture through price
    support payments, an amendment to protect domestic agriculture by
    restricting imports in competition therewith as proposing an unrelated
    method of assistance within the jurisdiction of another committee (Oct.
    14, 1981, p. 23899); to a bill authorizing financial assistance to
    unemployed individuals for employment opportunities, an amendment
    providing instead for tax incentives to stimulate employment as
    employing an unrelated method within the jurisdiction of a different
    committee of the House (Sept. 21, 1983, p. 25145); to a bill relating to
    one government agency, an amendment having as its fundamental purpose a
    change in the law relating to another agency, even though it
    contemplated a consultative role for the agency covered by the bill
    (July 8, 1987, p. 19014); to a proposition changing congressional budget
    procedures to require consideration of balanced budgets, an amendment
    changing concurrent resolutions on the budget to joint resolutions,
    bringing executive enforcement mechanisms into play (July 18, 1990, p.
    17920); to a bill to promote technological advancement by fostering
    Federal research and development, and amendment exhorting to do so by
    changes in tax and antitrust laws (July 16, 1991, p. 18397); to a bill
    extending unemployment compensation benefits during a period of economic
    recession, an amendment to stimulate economic growth by tax incentives
    and regulatory reform (Sept. 17, 1991,

    [[Page 703]]

    p. 23156); an amendment to change a direct appropriation of new budget
    authority from the general fund into a reappropriation (in effect a
    rescission) of funds previously appropriated for an entirely different
    purpose in a special reserve account (Feb. 28, 1985, p. 4146); to a bill
    addressing substance abuse through prevention and treatment, an
    amendment imposing civil penalties on drug dealers (Sept. 16, 1998, p.
    20587); to a resolution impeaching the President, an amendment censuring
    the President (Dec. 19, 1998, p. 28107); to a bill authorizing a State
    attorney general to bring a civil action in Federal court against a
    person who has violated a State law regulating intoxicating liquor, an
    amendment singling out certain violations of liquor laws on the basis of
    their regard for any and all firearms issues (Aug. 3, 1999, p. 19213);
    to the same bill, an amendment creating new Federal laws to regulate
    intoxicating liquor (Aug. 3, 1999, p. 19216); to a bill addressing
    persons convicted of sex offenses against children with criminal
    punishment, an amendment addressing such perpetrators by treatment and
    rehabilitation (Mar. 14, 2002, p. ----).
      However, an amendment to accomplish a similar purpose by an unrelated
    method, not contemplated by the bill, is not germane. Thus, the
    following are not germane: to a bill providing relief to foreign
    countries through government agencies, an amendment providing for relief
    to be made through the International Red Cross (Dec. 10, 1947, pp.
    11242-44); to a bill to aid in the control of crime through research and
    training an amendment to accomplish that result through regulation of
    the sale of firearms (Aug. 8, 1967, pp. 21846-50); to a bill providing
    assistance to Vietnam war victims, amendments containing foreign policy
    declarations as to culpability in the Vietnam war (Apr. 23, 1975, p.
    11510); to a bill conserving energy by civil penalties on manufacturers
    of autos with low gas mileage, an amendment conserving energy by tax
    rebates to purchasers of high-mileage autos (June 12, 1975, p. 18695);
    to a proposition whose fundamental purpose was registration and public
    disclosure by, but not regulation of the activities of, lobbyists,
    amendments prohibiting lobbying

    [[Page 704]]

    for reclamation and public works projects, subjects within the
    jurisdictions of the Committees on Appropriations and Interior and
    Insular Affairs (May 3, 1977, p. 13242); to a bill reported from the
    Committee on Armed Services authorizing military procurement and
    personnel strengths for one fiscal year, a proposition imposing
    permanent prohibitions and conditions on troop withdrawals from the
    Republic of Korea since including statements of policy within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (May 24, 1978, pp.
    15293-95); to a bill reported from the Committee on Government
    Operations creating a new department, transferring the administration of
    existing laws to it, and authorizing appropriations to carry out the Act
    subject to provisions in existing law, an amendment prohibiting the use
    of funds so authorized to carry out a designated funding program
    transferred to the department, where the purpose of the authorization is
    to allow appropriations in general appropriation bills for the
    department to carry out its functions but where changes in the laws to
    be administered by the department remain within the jurisdiction of
    other committees of the House (June 19, 1979, p. 15570); to a bill
    reported by the Committee on Public Works authorizing funds for highway
    construction and mass transportation systems using motor vehicles, an
    amendment relating to urban mass transit (then within the jurisdiction
    of the Committee on Banking and Currency) and the railroad industry
    (then within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
    Commerce) (Oct. 5, 1972, p. 34115); to a bill reported from the
    Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs designating certain areas in a
    State as wilderness, an amendment providing unemployment benefits to
    workers displaced by the designation (a subject in the jurisdiction of
    other committees) (Mar. 21, 1983, p. 6347); to a bill reported from the
    Committee on Science and Technology authorizing environmental research
    and development activities of an agency, an amendment expressing the
    sense of Congress with respect to that agency's regulatory and
    enforcement authority, within the jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Energy and Commerce (Feb. 9, 1984, p. 2423); to a bill authorizing
    environmental research and development activities of an agency for two
    years, an amendment adding permanent regulatory authority for that
    agency by amending a law not within the jurisdiction of the committee
    reporting the bill (June 4, 1987, p. 14757); to a bill reported from the
    Committee on Education and Labor dealing with education, an amendment
    regulating telephone communications (a matter within the jurisdiction of
    the Committee on Energy and Commerce) (Apr. 19, 1988, p. 7355); to a
    bill addressing various research programs and authorities, an amendment
    addressing matters of fiscal and economic policy and regulation (July
    16, 1991, p. 18391; Sept. 22, 1992, pp. 26734, 26741); to a bill
    reported from the Committee on Ways and Means addressing unemployment
    compensation, an amendment addressing stimuli for economic growth
    involving the jurisdictions of the Committees on Banking, Finance, and
    Urban Affairs and the Judiciary (Sept. 17, 1991, p. 23177); to a bill
    reported from the Committee on Armed Services amending several laws
    within that commit

    [[Page 705]]

    tee's jurisdiction on military procurement and policy, an amendment to
    the Renegotiation Act, a matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee
    on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs and not solely related to military
    contracts (June 26, 1985, pp. 17417-19) and an amendment requiring
    reports on Soviet Union compliance with arms control commitments, a
    matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Foreign
    Affairs (Deschler-Brown, ch. 28, Sec. 4.26); to a bill reported from the
    Committee on Energy and Commerce, relating to mentally ill individuals,
    an amendment prohibiting the use of general revenue sharing funds
    (within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Government Operations)
    (Jan. 30, 1986, p. 1053); to a bill reported from the Committee on
    Merchant Marine and Fisheries authorizing various activities of the
    Coast Guard, an amendment urging the Secretary of State in consultation
    with the Coast Guard to elicit cooperation from other nations concerning
    certain Coast Guard and military operations (a matter within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Foreign Affairs) (July 8, 1987, p.
    19013); to a bill reported by the Committee on Banking, Finance and
    Urban Affairs dealing with housing and community development grant and
    credit programs, an amendment expressing the sense of Congress on tax
    policy (the deductibility of mortgage interest), a matter within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means (Aug. 1, 1990, p.
    21256); to a bill reported from the Committee on Education and Labor
    authorizing a variety of civilian national service programs, an
    amendment establishing a contingent military service obligation (a
    matter within the selective service jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Armed Services) (July 28, 1993, p. 17398); to a bill reauthorizing
    programs administered by two agencies within one committee's
    jurisdiction, an amendment more general in scope affecting agencies
    within the jurisdiction of other committees (May 12, 1994, p. 10024); to
    a bill reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
    reforming and privatizing Amtrak, an amendment rescinding previously
    appropriated funds for certain administrative expenses, a matter within
    the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations (Nov. 30, 1995, p.
    35071); to a measure expressing a sense of Congress with respect to the
    availability of public funds for expenses incurred in the evaluation of
    a problem, an amendment addressing legislative responses to that
    problem, within the jurisdiction of other committees (Feb. 4, 1998, p.
    794); to a bill reported from Government Reform and Oversight proposing
    to alter responsibilities of executive branch agencies under an existing
    law, an amendment proposing to extend the application of that law to
    entities of the legislative branch, a matter within the jurisdiction of
    the Committee on House Administration (Mar. 12, 1998, p. 3389); to a
    resolution authorizing the deployment of troops to implement a peace
    agreement within the jurisdiction of the Committee on International
    Relations, an amendment expressing support for the armed forces carrying
    such mission within the jurisdiction of both the Committees on Armed
    Services and International Relations (Mar. 11, 1999, p. 4301); to a bill
    addressing certain diplomatic efforts to curb alleged price-fixing in
    the global oil mar

    [[Page 706]]

    ket within the jurisdiction of the Committee on International Relations,
    an amendment proposing to suspend oil exportation through changes to the
    Mineral Leasing Act within the jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Resources and an amendment proposing to change the Energy Policy and
    Conservation Act to reauthorize Presidential authority to draw down the
    strategic petroleum reserve, a matter within the jurisdiction of the
    Committee on Commerce (Mar. 22, 2000, p. 3281).

    Sec. 934. Committee jurisdiction as test of
    germaneness.

      An  amendment when considered as a whole should be within the
    jurisdiction of the committee reporting the bill (Jan. 29, 1976, p.
    1582; July 25, 1979, pp. 20601-03; June 27, 1985, pp. 17417-19),
    although committee jurisdiction over the subject of an amendment and of
    the original bill is not the exclusive test of germaneness (Aug. 2,
    1973, pp. 27673-75), and the Chair relates the amendment to the bill in
    its perfected form (Aug. 17, 1972, p. 28913). Thus, the following are
    not germane: To a bill reported from the Committee on Agriculture
    providing price support programs for various agricultural commodities,
    an amendment repealing price control authority for all commodities under
    an act reported from the Committee on Banking and Currency (July 19,
    1973, p. 24950); to a bill reported from the Committee on Ways and Means
    providing for a temporary increase in the public debt ceiling for the
    current fiscal year (not directly amending the Second Liberty Bond Act),
    an amendment proposing permanent changes in that Act and also affecting
    budget and appropriation procedures (matters within the jurisdiction of
    other House committees) (Nov. 7, 1973, p. 36240); to a bill relating to
    intelligence activities of the executive branch, an amendment effecting
    a change in the Rules of the House by directing a committee to impose an
    oath of secrecy on its members and staff (May 1, 1991, p. 9669); to a
    bill reported by the Committee on Government Operations creating an
    executive agency to protect consumers, an amendment conferring on
    congressional committees with oversight over consumer protection the
    authority to intervene in judicial or administrative proceedings (a
    rulemaking provision within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules)
    (Nov. 6, 1975, p. 35373); to a proposition reported from the Committee
    on Public Works and Transportation, authorizing funds for local public
    works employment, an amendment to mandate expenditure of already
    appropriated funds (as a purported disapproval of deferral of such funds
    under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974) and to set discount rates

      Committee jurisdiction is not the sole test of germaneness where: (1)
    the proposition to which the amendment is offered is so comprehensive
    (overlapping several committees' jurisdictions) as to diminish the
    pertinency of that test; (2) the amendment does not demonstrably affect
    a law within another committee's jurisdiction (July 21, 1976, p. 23167;
    Oct. 8, 1985, pp. 26548-51); (3) the portion of the bill also contains
    language, related to the amendment, not within the jurisdiction of the
    committee reporting the bill (Apr. 2, 1976, p. 9254; Aug. 10, 1984, p.
    23975); or (4) the bill has been amended to include matter within the
    jurisdiction of another committee thus permitting further similar
    amendments to be germane (July 11, 1985, p. 18601; Sept. 19, 1986, p.
    24769). Thus, to a bill reported from the Committee on Agriculture
    relating to the food stamp program, an amendment requiring the Secretary
    of the Treasury, after consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture,
    to collect from certain recipients the monetary value of food stamps
    received was held germane since the performance of new duties by the
    Secretary of the Treasury and by the Internal Revenue Service not
    affecting the application of the Internal Revenue Code is not a matter
    solely within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means (July
    27, 1977, pp. 25249-52). On the other hand, to a comprehensive farm bill
    authorizing a variety of programs within the jurisdiction of the
    Committees on Agriculture and International Relations, and amended to
    include matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and
    Commerce (but not amending laws within the jurisdiction of other
    committees), an amendment proposing to alter an existing interstate
    dairy compact and grant consent to additional compacts, matters within
    the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary, is not germane (Oct.
    4, 2001, p. ----).

      To a bill amending an existing law to grant to merchant mariners
    benefits substantially equivalent to those granted to veterans in a
    separate law in the jurisdiction of another committee, an amendment
    directly changing the separate law to extend its benefits to merchant
    mariners was held not germane (Sept. 9, 1992, p. 23951); but where the
    pending bill incorporates by reference provisions of a law from another
    committee and conditions the bill's effectiveness upon actions taken
    pursuant to a section of that law, an amendment to alter that section of
    the law may be germane (Apr. 8, 1974, pp. 10108-10).

    [[Page 707]]

    ment which, if considered separately, might be within the jurisdiction
    of another committee (Aug. 2, 1973, p. 27673; June 1, 1976, pp. 16021-
    25). However, the House may by adopting a special rule allow a point of
    order that a section of a committee amendment in the nature of a
    substitute would not have been germane if offered separately to the bill
    as introduced (May 23, 1978, pp. 15094-96; May 24, 1978, pp. 15293-95;
    Aug. 11, 1978, p. 25705).
      The test of the germaneness of an amendment in the nature of a
    substitute for a bill is its relationship to the bill as a whole, and is
    not necessarily determined by the content of an incidental portion of
    the amend

      The fact that an amendment is offered in conjunction with a motion to
    recommit a bill with instructions does not affect the requirement that
    the subject matter of the amendment be germane and within the
    jurisdiction of the committee reporting the bill (Mar. 2, 1967, p.
    5155). Thus the following are not germane: to a bill reported from the
    Committee on Foreign Affairs addressing U.S. claims against Iraq, a
    motion to recommit with instructions to prohibit the admission of former
    members of Iraq's armed forces to the United States as refugees (a
    matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary) is not
    germane (Apr. 28, 1994, p. 8803); and to a bill amending a law reported
    by the Committee on Banking and Financial Services opposing concessional
    loans to a country and outlining principles governing the conduct of
    industrial cooperation projects of U.S. nationals in that country, an
    amendment proposed in a motion to recommit waiving provisions of other
    law by requiring changes in tariff schedules to achieve overall trade
    reciprocity between that country and the United States, a subject within
    the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means (Nov. 6, 1997, p.
    24824).

    [[Page 708]]

    23-25); to a general tariff bill, an amendment creating a tariff board
    (May 6, 1913, p. 1234; Speaker Clark, May 8, 1913, p. 1381); to a
    proposition to sell two battleships and build a new battleship with the
    proceeds, a proposition to devote the proceeds to building wagon roads
    (VIII, 2973); to a bill authorizing a State attorney general to bring a
    civil action in Federal court against a person who has violated a State
    law regulating intoxicating liquor, an amendment singling out certain
    violations of liquor laws on the basis of their regard for any and all
    firearms issues (Aug. 3, 1999, p. 19213).

    Sec. 935. Various tests of germaneness are not
    exclusive.

      The  standards by which the germaneness of an amendment may be
    measured, as set forth in Sec. Sec. 932-934, supra, are not exclusive;
    an amendment and the matter to which offered may be related to some
    degree under the tests of subject matter, purpose, and jurisdiction, and
    still not be considered germane under the precedents. Thus, the
    following have been held not to be germane: To a proposition relating to
    the terms of Senators, an amendment changing the manner of their
    election (V, 5882); to a bill relating to commerce between the States,
    an amendment relating to commerce within the several States (V, 5841);
    to a proposition to relieve destitute citizens of the United States in
    Cuba, a proposition declaring a state of war in Cuba and proclaiming
    neutrality (V, 5897); to a proposition for the appointment of a select
    committee to investigate a certain subject, an amendment proposing an
    inquiry of the executive on that subject (V, 5891); to a bill granting a
    right of way to a railroad, an amendment providing for the purchase of
    the railroad by the Government (V, 5887); to a provision for the
    erection of a building for a mint, an amendment to change the coinage
    laws (V, 5884); to a resolution proposing expulsion, an amendment
    proposing censure (VI, 236); to a resolution authorizing the
    administration of the oath to a Member-elect, an amendment authorizing
    such oath administration but adding several conditions of punishment
    predicated on acts committed in a prior Congress (Jan. 3, 1969, pp.

    [[Page 709]]

    funds for a certain purpose to be expended by one agency, an amendment
    containing funds for another agency for the same purpose (July 24, 1981,
    p. 17226); to an amendment exempting national defense budget authority
    from the reach of a proposed Presidential rescission authority, an
    amendment exempting social security (Feb. 2, 1995, p. 5501); to a Senate
    amendment striking an earmarking from an appropriation bill, a House
    amendment reinserting part of the amount but adding other earmarking for
    unrelated programs (Nov. 15, 1989, p. 29019); to a Senate amendment
    relating to a feasibility study of a land transfer in one State, a House
    amendment requiring an environmental study of land in another State
    (Nov. 15, 1989, p. 29035); to a bill prohibiting certain uses of
    polygraphy in the private sector, an amendment applying the terms of the
    bill to the Congress (Nov. 4, 1987, p. 30870); to a bill to determine
    the equitability of Federal pay practices under statutory systems
    applicable to agencies of the executive branch, an amendment to extend
    the scope of the determination to pay practices in the legislative
    branch (ruling sustained by Committee of Whole, Sept. 28, 1988, p.
    26422); to a special appropriation bill providing funds and authority
    for agricultural credit programs but containing no transfers of funds,
    reappropriations, or rescissions, an amendment (contained in a motion to
    recommit) deriving funds for the bill by transfer of unobligated
    balances in the Energy Security Reserve and thus decreasing and
    transferring funds provided for a program unrelated to the subject
    matter or method of funding provided in the bill (Feb. 28, 1985, p.
    4146); to a bill prohibiting importation of goods made in whole or in
    part by convict, pauper, or detained labor, or made in whole or in part
    from materials that have been made in whole or in part in any manner
    manipulated by convict or prison labor, an amendment prohibiting
    importation of goods produced by child labor, a second discrete class
    (VIII, 2963); similarly, to an amendment authorizing grants to States
    for purchase of one class of equipment (photographic and fingerprint
    equipment) for law enforcement purposes, an amendment including
    assistance for the purchase of a different class of equipment
    (bulletproof vests) (Oct. 12, 1979, pp. 28121-24); to a bill repealing
    section 14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act and making conforming
    changes in two related sections of labor law, all pertaining solely to
    the so-called ``right-to-work'' issue, an amendment excluding from the
    applicability of certain labor-management agreements members of
    religious groups (July 28, 1965, p. 18633); to a bill relating to the
    design of certain coin currency, an amendment specifying the metal
    content of other coin currency (Sept. 12, 1973, p. 29376); to a
    proposition to accomplish a single purpose without amending a certain
    existing law, an amendment to accomplish another individual purpose by
    changing that existing law (Dec. 14, 1973, pp. 41723-25); to a bill
    regulating poll closing time in Presidential general elections, an
    amendment extending its provisions to Presidential primary elections
    (Jan. 29, 1986, p. 684); to a bill authorizing grants to private
    entities furnishing health care to underserved populations, an amendment
    authorizing grants to States to control a public

    [[Page 710]]

    health hazard was held not germane as relating to a different category
    of recipient (Mar. 5, 1986, p. 3604); to a bill siting a certain type of
    repository for a specified kind of nuclear waste, an amendment
    prohibiting the construction at another site of another type of
    repository for another kind of nuclear waste (July 21, 1992, p. 18718);
    to a bill addressing violent crimes, an amendment addressing nonviolent
    crimes, such as crimes of fraud and deception or crimes against the
    environment (May 7, 1996, pp. 10342, 10343); to a bill naming a facility
    after a specific person, an amendment proposing to substitute the name
    of a different person is not germane (VIII, 2955) where it could not be
    shown that the amendment intended a return to the facility's existing
    designation (Feb. 4, 1998, p. 792); to a joint resolution addressing
    whether public funds should be available for specified endeavors of one
    group, an amendment addressing the same question for unrelated endeavors
    of another group (Feb. 4, 1998, p. 819); to a bill proposing to alter
    responsibilities of executive branch agencies under an existing law, an
    amendment proposing to extend the application of that law to entities of
    the legislative branch (Mar. 12, 1998, p. 3389); to a joint resolution
    proposing an amendment to the Constitution authorizing Congress to
    prohibit physical desecration of the flag, a motion to recommit with
    instructions proposing an amendment to the Constitution requiring a
    balanced budget or requiring that Social Security receipts and outlays
    be counted as receipts or outlays of the United States (June 22, 2005,
    p. ----, p. ----).

    Sec. 936. One individual proposition not germane to
    another.

      One  individual proposition may not be amended by another
    individual proposition even though the two belong to the same class
    (VIII, 2951-2953, 2963-2966, 3047; Jan. 29, 1986, p. 684; Oct. 22, 1990,
    p. 32346; Oct. 24, 1991, p. 28561). Thus, the following are not germane:
    To a bill proposing the admission of one territory into the Union, an
    amendment for admission of another territory (V, 5529); to a bill
    amending a law in one particular, amending the law in another particular
    (VIII, 2949); to a proposition to appropriate or to authorize
    appropriations for only one year (and containing no provisions extending
    beyond that year), an amendment to extend the authorization or
    appropriation to another year (VIII, 2913; Nov. 13, 1980, pp. 29523-28;
    see also May 2, 1979, p. 9564; Oct. 12, 1979, pp. 28097-99); to a
    measure earmarking funds in an appropriation bill, an amendment
    authorizing the program for which the appropriation is made (Nov. 15,
    1989, p. 29019); to a bill for the relief of one individual, an
    amendment proposing similar relief for another (V, 5826-5829); to a
    resolution providing a special order for one bill, an amendment to
    include another bill (V, 5834-5836); to a provision for extermination of
    the cotton-boll weevil, an amendment including the gypsy moth (V, 5832);
    to a provision for a clerk for one committee, an amendment for a clerk
    to another committee (V, 5833); to a Senate amendment dealing with use
    of its contingent fund for art restoration in that body, a proposed
    House amendment for use of the House contingent fund for a similar but
    broader purpose (May 24, 1990, p. 12203); to a bill prohibiting
    transportation of messages relative to dealing in cotton futures, an
    amendment adding wheat, corn, etc. (VIII, 3001); to a bill prohibiting
    cotton futures, an amendment prohibiting wheat futures (VIII, 3001); to
    a bill for the relief of certain aliens, an amendment for the relief of
    other persons who are not aliens (May 14, 1975, p. 14360); to a bill
    providing relief for agricultural producers, an amendment extending such
    relief to commercial fishermen, another class within the jurisdiction of
    another committee (Apr. 24, 1978, p. 11080); to a bill governing the
    political activities of Federal civilian employees, an amendment to
    cover members of the uniformed services (June 7, 1977, p. 17713); to a
    bill covering the civil service system for Federal civilian employees,
    an amendment bringing other classes of employees (postal and District of
    Columbia employees) within the scope of the bill (Sept. 7, 1978, pp.
    28437-39; Oct. 9, 1985, pp. 26951-54); to a portion of an appropriation
    bill containing

    [[Page 711]]

    35); to an amendment to a budget resolution changing one functional
    category only, an amendment changing several other categories and
    covering an additional fiscal year (May 2, 1979, pp. 9556-64); to a bill
    authorizing funds for radio broadcasting to Cuba, an amendment
    broadening the bill to include broadcasting to all dictatorships in the
    Caribbean Basin (Aug. 10, 1982, p. 20256); to a bill relating to
    aircraft altitude over units of the National Park System, an amendment
    relating to aircraft collision avoidance generally (Sept. 18, 1986, p.
    24084); to a proposition prohibiting the use of funds appropriated for a
    fiscal year for a specified purpose, an amendment prohibiting the use of
    funds appropriated for that or any prior fiscal year for an unrelated
    purpose is not germane (June 30, 1987, p. 18294); to a proposition
    providing for a training vessel for one state maritime academy, an
    amendment relating to training vessels for all state maritime academies
    is not germane (June 30, 1987, p. 18296); to a proposition waiving a
    requirement in existing law that an authorizing law be enacted before
    the obligation of certain funds, an amendment affirmatively enacting
    bills containing not only that authorization but also other policy
    matters (Sept. 28, 1988, p. 26108); to a proposition pertaining only to
    a certain appropriation account in a bill, an amendment relating not
    only to that account but also to funds in other acts (Sept. 30, 1988, p.
    27148); to a proposition raising an employment ceiling for one year, an
    amendment proposing also to address in permanent law a hiring preference
    system for such employees (Oct. 11, 1989, p. 24089); to an omnibus farm
    bill, with myriad programs to improve agricultural economy, an amendment
    to the Animal Welfare Act but not limited to agricultural pursuits (Aug.
    1, 1990, p. 21573); to a bill authorizing Federal funding for qualifying
    State national service programs, an amendment conditioning a portion of
    such funding on the enactment of State laws immunizing volunteers in
    nonprofit or public programs, generally, from certain legal liabilities
    (July 28, 1993, p. 17401); to an amendment addressing particular
    educational requirements imposed on educational agencies by the
    underlying bill, an amendment addressing any requirements imposed on
    educational agencies by the underlying bill (Mar. 21, 1994, p. 5771); to
    a bill reauthorizing programs administered by the Economic Development
    Administration and the Appalachian Regional Commission, an amendment
    providing for the waiver of any Federal regulation that would interfere
    with economic development (May 12, 1994, p. 10024); to a bill
    prohibiting a certain class of abortion procedures, an amendment
    prohibiting any or all abortion procedures (Mar. 20, 1997, p. 4425); to
    a bill addressing a class of imported goods (those produced by forced
    labor), an amendment addressing all imported goods from one specified
    country (Nov. 5, 1997, p. 24643); and to a general appropriation bill,
    an amendment in the form of a limitation on funds therein for activities
    unrelated to the functions of departments and agencies addressed by the
    bill (July 10, 2000, p. 13605).

    Sec. 937. A general provision not germane to a specific
    subject.

      A  specific subject may not be amended by a provision general in
    nature, even when of the class of the specific subject (V, 5843-5846;
    VIII, 2997, 2998; July 31, 1985, pp. 21832-34; see also Deschler-Brown,
    ch. 28, Sec. 9). Thus the following are not germane: To a bill for the
    admission of one territory into the Union, an amendment providing for
    the admission of several other territories (V, 5837); to a bill relating
    to all corporations engaged in interstate commerce, an amendment
    relating to all corporations (V, 5842); to a bill proscribing certain
    picketing in the District of Columbia, an amendment making the
    provisions thereof applicable throughout the United States (Aug. 22,
    1966, p. 20113); to a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the
    Constitution prohibiting the United States or any State from denying
    persons 18 years of age or older the right to vote, an amendment
    requiring the United States and all States to treat persons 18 years and
    older as having reached the age of majority for all purposes under the
    law (Mar. 23, 1971, p. 7567); to a bill dealing with enforcement of
    United Nations sanctions against one country in relation to a specific
    trade commodity, an amendment imposing United States sanctions against
    all countries for all commodities and communications (Mar. 14, 1977, p.
    7446); to a bill to enable the Department of HEW to investigate and
    prosecute fraud and abuse in medicare and medicaid health programs, an
    amendment to prohibit any officer or employee from disclosing any
    identifiable medical record absent patient approval (Sept. 23, 1977, pp.
    30534-

    [[Page 712]]

    is not germane (Sept. 27, 1967, p. 26957). Thus, the following are not
    germane: to a bill establishing an office without regulatory authority
    in the Department of the Interior to manage biological information, an
    amendment addressing requirements of compensation for constitutional
    takings by other regulatory agencies (Oct. 26, 1993, p. 26076); to a
    bill amending an authority of an agency under an existing law, an
    amendment independently expressing the sense of Congress on regulatory
    agencies generally (May 14, 1992, p. 11287); to a proposition
    authorizing activities of certain government agencies for a temporary
    period, an amendment permanently changing existing law to cover a
    broader range of government activities (May 5, 1988, p. 9938); and to a
    joint resolution continuing funding within one executive department,
    neither an amendment addressing funding for other departments nor one
    addressing the compensation of Federal employees on a government-wide
    basis (Dec. 20, 1995, pp. 37886, 37888).
      To a bill limited in its applicability to certain departments and
    agencies of government, an amendment applicable to all departments and
    agencies

      To a bill modifying an existing law as to one specific particular, an
    amendment relating to the terms of the law other than those dealt with
    by the bill is not germane (V, 5806-5808). Thus, the following are not
    germane: to a bill amending the war-time prohibition act in one
    particular, an amendment repealing that act (VIII, 2949); to a
    proposition temporarily suspending certain requirements of the Clean Air
    Act, an amendment temporarily suspending other requirements of all other
    environmental protection laws (Dec. 14, 1973, p. 41751); to an amendment
    striking from a bill one activity from those covered by the law being
    amended, a substitute striking out the entire subsection of the bill,
    thereby eliminating the applicability of existing law to a number of
    activities (Sept. 23, 1982, p. 24963); to a bill amending an existing
    law to authorize a program, an amendment restricting authorizations
    under that or any other act (Dec. 10, 1987, p. 34676); to a bill
    proposing a temporary change in law, an amendment making permanent
    changes in that law (Nov. 19, 1991, p. 32893); and to a bill amending an
    existing law in one particular, an amendment amending other laws and
    more comprehensive in scope (Nov. 19, 1993, pp. 30513, 30515, 30517).

      A bill dealing with an individual proposition but rendered general in
    its scope by amendment is then subject to further amendment by
    propositions of the same class (VIII, 3003). While a specific
    proposition covering a defined class may not be amended by a proposition
    more general in scope, the Chair may consider all pending provisions
    being read for amendment in determining the generality of the class
    covered by that proposition (Jan. 30, 1986, p. 1051).

    [[Page 713]]

    in several other cities (V, 5840); to a resolution embodying two
    distinct phases of international relationship, an amendment embodying a
    third (V, 5839); to an amendment prohibiting indirect assistance to
    several countries, an amendment to include additional countries within
    that prohibition (Aug. 3, 1978, p. 24244); to a portion of a bill
    providing two categories of economic assistance to foreign countries, an
    amendment adding a further specific category (Apr. 9, 1979, pp. 7755-
    57); to a bill bringing two new categories within the coverage of
    existing law, an amendment to include a third category of the same class
    (Nov. 27, 1967, p. 33769); to a proposition providing for prepayment of
    loans by those within a certain class of borrowers who meet a specified
    criterion, a proposed House amendment eliminating the criterion to
    broaden the applicability of the Senate amendment to additional
    borrowers within the same class (June 30, 1987, p. 18308); to an
    amendment addressing a range of criminal prohibitions, an amendment
    addressing another criminal prohibition within that range (Oct. 17,
    1991, p. 26767); to a bill addressing violent crimes, an amendment
    addressing violent crimes involving the environment (May 7, 1996, p.
    10344).

    Sec. 938. Specific subjects germane to general propositions
    of the class.

      A  general subject may be amended by specific propositions
    of the same class (VIII, 3002, 3009, 3012; see also Deschler-Brown, ch.
    28, Sec. 11). Thus, the following have been held to be germane: To a
    bill admitting several territories into the Union, an amendment adding
    another territory (V, 5838); to a bill providing for the construction of
    buildings in each of two cities, an amendment providing for similar
    buildings

    [[Page 714]]

      Where a bill seeks to accomplish a general purpose (support of arts
    and humanities) by diverse methods, an amendment that adds a specific
    method to accomplish that result (artist employment through National
    Endowment for the Arts) may be germane (Apr. 26, 1976, p. 11101; see
    also June 12, 1979, p. 14460). However, to a resolution authorizing a
    class of employees in the service of the House, an amendment providing
    for the employment of a specified individual was held not to be germane
    (V, 5848-5849). Other examples of amendments that have been held to be
    germane under this theory include: to a proposition relating in many
    diverse respects to the political rights of the people of the District
    of Columbia, an amendment conferring upon that electorate the additional
    right of electing a nonvoting Delegate to the Senate (Oct. 10, 1973, p.
    33656); to a bill containing definitions of several of the terms used
    therein, an amendment modifying one of the definitions and adding
    another (Sept. 26, 1967, p. 26878); to a bill authorizing a broad
    program of research and development, an amendment directing specific
    emphasis in the administration of the program (Dec. 19, 1973, p. 42607);
    to a bill providing for investigation of relationships between
    environmental pollution and cancer, an amendment to investigate the
    impact of personal health habits, such as cigarette smoking, on that
    relationship (Sept. 15, 1976, pp. 30496-98); to a supplemental
    appropriation bill containing funds for several departments and
    agencies, an amendment in the form of a new chapter providing funds for
    capital outlays for subway construction in the District of Columbia (May
    11, 1971, p. 14437); to a proposal authorizing military procurement,
    including purchase of food supplies, an amendment authorizing
    establishment that fiscal year of a military preparedness grain reserve,
    as a more specific authorization (July 20, 1982, pp. 17073, 17074,
    17092, 17093).

    [[Page 715]]

    permanent law, an amendment permanently changing the organic law
    governing that agency's operations is not germane (Dec. 2, 1982, p.
    28537, concerning Sept. 28, 1982, p. 25465). However, to a bill
    authorizing appropriations for a department for one fiscal year, where
    the effect of the department's activities pursuant to that authorization
    may extend beyond such year, an amendment directing a specific use of
    those funds to perform an activity that may not be completed within the
    fiscal year was nevertheless germane, since limited to funds in the bill
    (Oct. 18, 1979, p. 28763). Similarly, to a one-year authorization bill
    containing diverse limitations and directions to the agency in question
    during such year, an amendment further directing the agency to obtain
    information from the private sector, and to make such information public
    during such year, was held germane (Oct. 18, 1979, pp. 28815-17). While
    an amendment making a permanent change in existing law has been held not
    germane to a bill proposing a temporary change in that law, where it is
    apparent that the fundamental purpose of the amendment is to have only
    temporary effect and to accomplish the same result as the bill it may be
    germane. Thus to a bill providing a temporary extension of existing
    authority, an amendment achieving the same purpose by providing a
    nominally permanent authority was held germane where both the bill and
    the amendment were based on reported economic projections under which
    either would achieve the same, necessarily temporary result by method of
    direct or indirect amendment to the same existing law (May 13, 1987, p.
    12344). However, to a proposal continuing the availability of
    appropriated funds and also imposing diverse legislative conditions upon
    the availability of appropriations, an amendment directly and
    permanently changing existing law as to the eligibility of recipients of
    funds was held to be nongermane (Dec. 10, 1981, pp. 30536-38). To a bill
    extending an existing law in modified form, an amendment proposing
    further modification of that law may be germane (Apr. 23, 1969, p.
    10067; Feb. 19, 1975, p. 3596). But to a bill amending a law in one
    particular, an amendment repealing the law is not germane (Jan. 14,
    1964, p. 423). To a bill amending a general law in several particulars,
    an amendment providing for the repeal of the whole law was held germane
    (V, 5824), but the bill amending the law must so vitally affect the
    whole law as to bring the entire act under consideration before the
    Chair will hold an amendment repealing the law or amending any section
    of the law germane to the bill (VIII, 2944; Apr. 2, 1924, p. 5437).
    Where a bill repeals a provision of law, an amendment modifying that
    provision rather than repealing it may be germane (Oct. 30, 1969, p.
    32466); but the modification must relate to the provision of law being
    repealed (July 28, 1965, p. 18636). Generally to a bill amending one
    existing law, an amendment changing the provisions of another law or
    prohibiting assistance under any other law is not germane (May 11, 1976,
    p. 13419; Aug. 12, 1992, p. 23238). To a bill amending the Bretton Woods
    Act in relation to the International Monetary Fund, an amendment
    prohibiting the alienation of gold to the IMF or to any other
    international organization or its agents was held not

    [[Page 716]]

    germane (July 27, 1976, p. 24040). However, to a bill comprehensively
    amending several laws within the same class, an amendment further
    amending one of those laws on a subject within that class is germane
    (May 12, 1976, p. 13530); and to a bill authorizing funding for the
    intelligence community for one fiscal year and making diverse changes in
    permanent laws relating thereto, an amendment changing another permanent
    law to address accountability for intelligence activities was held
    germane (Oct. 17, 1990, p. 30171). To a title of a bill dealing with a
    number of unrelated authorities of the Secretary of Agriculture, an
    amendment amending another act within the jurisdiction of the Committee
    on Agriculture to require the adoption of a minimum standard for the
    contents of ice cream was held germane since restricted to the authority
    of the Secretary of Agriculture (July 22, 1977, pp. 24558-70). But to a
    section of a bill amending a section of the National Labor Relations Act
    dealing with procedural rules governing labor elections and
    organizations, an amendment changing the same section of law to require
    promulgation of rules defining certain conduct as an unfair labor
    practice was held not germane, where neither the pending section nor the
    bill itself addressed the subject of unfair labor practices dealt with
    in another section of the law (Oct. 5, 1977, p. 32507). To a bill
    narrowly amending one subsection of existing law dealing with one
    specific criminal activity, an amendment postponing the effective date
    of the entire section, affecting other criminal provisions and classes
    of persons as well as the one amended by the bill, or an amendment to
    another subsection of the law dealing with a related but separate
    prohibition was held not germane (May 16, 1979, pp. 11470-72), but to an
    amendment adding sundry punitive sections to the Federal criminal code,
    an amendment creating an exception to the prohibition of another such
    section was held germane (Oct. 17, 1991, p. 26767).

    Sec. 939. Amendments to bills amending existing law.

      To  a
    bill amending a general law on a specific point an amendment relating to
    the terms of the law rather than to those of the bill was ruled not to
    be germane (V, 5808; VIII, 2707, 2708); thus a bill amending several
    sections of one title of the United States Code does not necessarily
    bring the entire title under consideration so as to permit an amendment
    to any portion thereof (Oct. 11, 1967, p. 28649), and where a bill
    amends existing law in one narrow particular, an amendment proposing to
    modify such existing law in other particulars will generally be ruled
    out as not germane (Aug. 16, 1967, p. 22768; VIII, 2709, 2839, 3013,
    3031; May 12, 1976, p. 13532). To a bill narrowly amending an anti-
    discrimination provision in the Education Amendments of 1972 only to
    clarify the definition of a discriminating entity subject to the
    statutory penalties (denial of Federal funding), amendments re-defining
    a class of discrimination (sex), expanding the definition of persons who
    are the subject of discrimination (to include the unborn), and deeming a
    new entity (Congress) to be a recipient of Federal assistance (a class
    not necessarily covered by the class covered by the bill), were ruled
    not to be germane (June 26, 1984, pp. 18847, 18857, 18861). But to the
    same bill, an amendment merely defining a word used in the bill was held
    germane (June 26, 1984, p. 18865). Unless a bill so extensively amends
    existing law as to open up the entire law to amendment, the germaneness
    of an amendment to the bill depends on its relationship to the subject
    of the bill and not to the entire law being amended (Oct. 28, 1975, p.
    34031). But a bill amending several sections of an existing law may be
    sufficiently broad to permit amendments that are germane to other
    sections of that law not mentioned in the bill (Feb. 19, 1975, p. 3596;
    Sept. 14, 1978, p. 29487). To a bill continuing and re-enacting an
    existing law amendments germane to the existing act sought to be
    continued have been held germane to the pending bill (VIII, 2940, 2941,
    2950, 3028; Oct. 31, 1963, p. 20728; June 1, 1976, p. 16045); but where
    a bill merely extends an official's authority under existing law, an
    amendment permanently amending that law has been held not in order
    (Sept. 29, 1969, pp. 27341-43). Thus where a bill authorized
    appropriations to an agency for one year but did not amend the organic
    law by extending the existence of that agency, an amendment extending
    the life of another entity mentioned in the organic law was held not
    germane (May 20, 1976, p. 14912). An amendment making permanent changes
    in the law relating to organization of an agency is not germane to a
    title of a bill only authorizing appropriations for such agency for one
    fiscal year (Nov. 29, 1979, p. 34090); to a general appropriation bill
    providing funds for one fiscal year, an amendment changing a permanent
    appropriation in existing law and changing congressional procedures for
    consideration of that general appropriation bill in future years is more
    general in scope and in part within the jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Rules and therefore is not germane (June 29, 1987, p. 18083); and to a
    temporary authorization bill prescribing the use of an agency's funds
    for two years but not amending

    [[Page 717]]

    of Congress (Sept. 25, 1979, pp. 26150-52); an amendment proposing a
    conditional restriction on the availability of funds to carry out an
    activity, that merely requires observation of similar activities of
    another country, which similar conduct already constitutes the policy
    basis for the funding of that governmental activity (May 16, 1984, p.
    12510); an amendment restricting the payment of Federal funds in a bill
    to States that enact certain laws relating to the activities being
    funded (July 28, 1993, p. 17403); an amendment that conditions the
    availability of funds authorized in the bill by adopting as a measure of
    their availability the expenditure during the fiscal year of a
    comparable percentage of funds authorized by other acts as long as the
    amendment does not directly affect the use of other funds (July 26,
    1973, p. 26210); to a bill authorizing certain housing programs, an
    amendment restricting the amounts of direct spending in the bill to the
    levels set in the concurrent resolution on the budget as merely a
    measure of availability of funds in the bill and not a provision
    directly affecting the congressional budget process (June 11, 1987, p.
    15540); to a proposition restricting the availability of funds to a
    certain category of recipients, an amendment further restricting the
    availability of funds to a subcategory of the same recipients (Sept. 25,
    1979, pp. 26135-43); to a bill authorizing appropriations for an agency,
    an amendment prohibiting the use of funds for any purpose to which the
    funds may otherwise be applied (Nov. 5, 1981, p. 26716); an amendment
    that conditions the availability of funds covered by a bill by adopting
    as a measure of their availability the monthly increases in the public
    debt as long as the amendment does not directly affect other provisions
    of law or impose unrelated contingencies (Sept. 25, 1979, pp. 26150-52);
    to a bill authorizing defense assistance to a foreign nation, an
    amendment delaying the availability of that assistance until that
    nation's former ambassador testified before a House committee, which had
    been directed by the House to investigate gifts by that nation's
    representatives to influence Members and employees, as a contingency
    that sought to compel the furnishing of information related to efforts
    to induce defense assistance to that nation (Aug. 2, 1978, p. 23932); to
    a provision authorizing funds for a fiscal year, an amendment
    restricting the availability of funds appropriated pursuant thereto for
    a specified purpose until enactment of a subsequent law authorizing that
    purpose (July 21, 1983, p. 20198); to a bill authorizing humanitarian
    and evacuation assistance to war refugees, an amendment making such
    authorization contingent on a report to Congress on costs of a portion
    of the evacuation program (but not requiring implementation of any new
    program) (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11529); and to an amendment precluding the
    availability of an authorization for part of a fiscal year and then
    permitting availability for the remainder of the year based upon a
    contingency, an amendment constituting a prohibition on the availability
    of the same funds for the entire fiscal year (May 16, 1984, p. 12567).

    Sec. 940. Amendments imposing conditions,
    qualifications, and limitations.

      Restrictions,  qualifications, and limitations
    sought to be added by way of amendment must be germane to the provisions
    of the bill. Conditioning the availability of funds may be germane if
    the condition is related to the general purpose and within the scope of
    the pending proposition (Deschler-Brown, ch. 28, Sec. Sec. 29-34). Thus,
    the following are germane: to a bill authorizing the funding of a
    variety of programs that satisfy several stated requirements in order to
    accomplish a general purpose, an amendment conditioning the availability
    of those funds upon implementation by their recipients of another
    program related to that general purpose (June 18, 1973, p. 20100); to a
    bill authorizing funds for military procurement and construction, an
    amendment declaring that none of the funds be used to carry out military
    operations in North Vietnam (Mar. 2, 1967, p. 5143); an amendment to an
    authorization bill that conditions the expenditure of funds covered by
    the bill by restricting their availability during months in which there
    is an increase in the public debt, as long as the amendment does not
    directly affect other provisions of law or impose contingencies
    textually predicated upon other unrelated actions

    [[Page 718]]

    duct of congressional hearings addressing an unrelated subject (July 22,
    1994, p. 17613); to a proposition conditioning the availability of funds
    upon the enactment of an authorizing statute for the enforcing agency, a
    substitute conditioning the availability of some of those funds upon a
    prohibition of certain imports into the United States, a contingency
    unrelated to that to which offered (Nov. 7, 1985, p. 30984); to a bill
    authorizing funds for military assistance to certain foreign countries,
    an amendment to make the availability of those funds contingent upon
    efforts by those countries to control narcotic traffic to the United
    States, and to authorize the President to offer the assistance of
    Federal agencies for that purpose, where the subjects of narcotics and
    the accessibility of Federal agencies are not contained in the bill
    (June 17, 1971, p. 20589); to a bill authorizing funds for foreign
    assistance, an amendment placing restrictions on funds authorized or
    appropriated in prior years (Aug. 24, 1967, p. 24002); to an amendment
    changing a dollar amount in a bill, a substitute therefor not only
    changing the figure but also restricting the use of any funds in
    furtherance of a certain activity (June 7, 1972, p. 19920); to a
    proposal to restrict availability of agency funds for a year and
    amending the organic law as it relates to the internal functions
    thereof, an amendment further restricting funding but also applying with
    respect to the use of funds in the bill provisions of criminal and other
    laws not applicable thereto (Oct. 26, 1989, p. 26269); to a provision
    prohibiting aid to a certain country unless certain conditions were met,
    an amendment prohibiting aid to another country until that nation took
    certain acts, and referring to funds provided in other acts (Nov. 17,
    1967, p. 32968); and an amendment conditioning the availability of funds
    to certain recipients based upon their compliance with Federal law not
    otherwise applicable to them and within the jurisdiction of other House
    committees (conditioning defense funds for procurement contracts with
    foreign contractors on their compliance with domestic law regarding
    discrimination) (June 16, 1983, p. 16060).
      On the other hand, the following conditions on the availability of
    funds are not germane: an amendment conditioning the use of funds on the
    con

      An amendment to a general appropriation bill in the form of a
    limitation on funds therein for activities unrelated to the functions of
    departments and agencies addressed by the bill is not germane (July 10,
    2000, p. 13605).

    [[Page 719]]

      An amendment delaying the availability of authorizations pending
    unrelated determinations involving agencies and committee jurisdictions
    not within the purview of the bill is also not germane (Feb. 7, 1973, p.
    3708; July 8, 1981, p. 15010; July 9, 1981, p. 15218). Thus, the
    following are not germane: to a bill authorizing military assistance to
    Israel and funds for a U.N. emergency force in the Middle East, an
    amendment postponing the availability of funds to Israel until the
    President certifies the existence of a designated level of domestic
    energy supplies (Dec. 11, 1973, p. 40837); an amendment delaying the
    availability of an appropriation pending the enactment of certain
    revenue legislation (Oct. 25, 1979, p. 29639); to a bill authorizing
    radio broadcasting to Cuba, an amendment prohibiting the use of those
    funds until Congress has considered a constitutional amendment mandating
    a balanced budget (Aug. 10, 1982, p. 20250).

      Similarly, while it may be in order on a general appropriation bill to
    delay the availability of certain funds therein if the contingency does
    not impose new duties on executive officials, the contingency must be
    related to the funds being withheld and cannot affect other funds in the
    bill not related to that factual situation (VII, 1596, 1600), may not be
    made applicable to a trust fund provided (IV, 4017), or may not be made
    applicable to money appropriated in other acts (IV, 3927; VII, 1495,
    1597-1599). Thus, to a general appropriation bill containing funds not
    only for a former President but also for other departments and agencies,
    an amendment delaying the availability of all funds in the bill until
    the former President had made restitution of a designated amount of
    money is not germane (Oct. 2, 1974, p. 33620). On the other hand, to a
    general appropriation bill providing funds for the Department of
    Agriculture and including specific allocation of funds for pest control,
    an amendment was germane that prohibited the use of funds for use of
    pesticides prohibited by State or local law (May 26, 1969, p. 13753).

      It is not in order to amend a bill to delay the effectiveness of the
    legislation pending an unrelated contingency (VIII, 3035, 3037). Thus
    the following are not germane: An amendment delaying the bill's
    effectiveness pending unrelated determinations involving agencies and
    committee jurisdictions not within the purview of the bill (Feb. 7,
    1973, p. 3708; July 8, 1981, p. 15010; July 9, 1981, p. 15218); an
    amendment delaying the bill's effectiveness pending enactment of
    unrelated State legislation (June 29, 1967, p. 17921; July 28, 1993, p.
    17401); to a bill proposing relief for women and children in Germany, an
    amendment delaying the effectiveness of such relief until a soldier's
    compensation act shall have been enacted (VIII, 3035); to a bill naming
    an airport, an amendment conditioning the naming on approval by an
    entity without jurisdiction over the administration of the airport (Feb.
    4, 1998, p. 794). On the other hand, the following are germane: an
    amendment delaying operation of a proposed enactment pending an
    ascertainment of a fact when the fact to be ascertained relates to the
    subject matter of the bill (VIII, 3029; Dec. 15, 1982, pp. 30957-61); an
    amendment postponing the effective date of a title of a bill to a date
    certain (July 25, 1973, p. 25828); to a provision to become effective
    immediately, an amendment deferring the time at which it shall become
    effective, without involving affirmative legislation (VIII, 3030).

    [[Page 720]]

    amendment restricting such regulatory authority by requiring that
    petroleum products allocated for public school transportation be used
    only between the student's home and the closest school (Dec. 13, 1973,
    pp. 41267-69); to a bill extending the authorities of one government
    agency, including requirements for consultation with several other
    agencies, an amendment requiring that agency to perform a function based
    upon an analysis furnished by yet another agency, as an additional
    limitation on the authority of the agency being extended which did not
    separately mandate the performance of an unrelated function by another
    entity (July 27, 1978, p. 23107); to a proposition authorizing a program
    to be undertaken, a substitute providing for a study to determine the
    feasibility of undertaking the same type of program, as a more limited
    approach involving the same agency (June 26, 1985, pp. 17453, 17458,
    17460) (in effect overruling VIII, 2989); and to a bill limiting an
    official's authority to construe legal authorities transferred to him in
    the bill, an amendment further restricting his authority to construe
    under any circumstances certain other laws to be administered by him (as
    an additional, although more restrictive, curtailment of existing
    authorities transferred by the bill) (June 11, 1979, pp. 14226-38).
      Where a proposition confers broad discretionary power on an executive
    official, an amendment is germane which directs that official to take
    certain actions in the exercise of the authority or proposes to limit
    such authority (VIII, 3022). Thus the following are germane: to an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute authorizing the Federal Energy
    Administrator to restrict exports of certain energy resources, an
    amendment directing that official to prohibit the exportation of
    petroleum products for use in Indochina military operations (Dec. 14,
    1973, p. 41753); to a provision conferring Presidential authority to
    establish priorities among users of petroleum products and requiring
    priority to education and transportation users, an

      An amendment providing a privileged procedure for expedited review of
    an agency's regulations is not germane where the bill does not contain
    such procedures (Aug. 13, 1982, pp. 20969, 20975-78). On the other hand
    to a bill authorizing an agency to undertake certain activities, an
    amendment allowing Congress to disapprove regulations issued pursuant
    thereto if the disapproval mechanism does not amend the rules or
    procedures of the House is germane (May 4, 1976, p. 12348); and to a
    bill directing the furnishing of certain intelligence information to the
    House without amending any House procedure, an amendment imposing
    relevant conditions of security on the handling of such information in
    committee (also without amending any House procedure) for the period
    covered by the bill is also germane (June 11, 1991, p. 14204).

    [[Page 721]]

    of recipient upon a related contingency such as action or inaction by
    another class of recipient or agent not covered by the bill (Mar. 5,
    1986, p. 3613).
      It is germane to condition or restrict assistance to a particular
    class of recipient covered by the underlying measure. Thus, the
    following are germane: to a bill providing aid to shipping, an amendment
    to limit such aid to ships equipped with saving devices (VIII, 3027); to
    a bill authorizing the insurance of vessels, an amendment denying such
    insurance to vessels charging exorbitant rates (VIII, 3023); to a
    proposition denying benefits to recipients failing to meet a certain
    qualification, a substitute denying the same benefits to some recipients
    but excepting others (July 28, 1982, pp. 18355-58, 18361). While a bill
    relating to benefits based on indemnification of liability arising out
    of an activity does not ordinarily admit as germane amendments relating
    to regulation of that activity, an amendment conditioning benefits upon
    agreement by its recipient to be governed by certain safety regulations
    may be germane if related to the activity giving rise to the liability
    (July 29, 1987, p. 21448). On the other hand, it is not germane to
    condition or restrict assistance to a particular class

      To a bill not only granting consent of Congress to an interstate
    compact but also imposing conditions on the granting of that consent, an
    amendment stating an additional related condition to that consent and
    not directly changing the compact may be germane (Oct. 7, 1997, p.
    21475). To a bill regulating immigration, an amendment providing that
    the operation of the act should not conflict with an agreement with
    Japan is not germane (VIII, 3050).

    Readings
      Amendments providing exceptions or exemptions must also be within the
    scope of the proposition. Thus, to a bill requiring that a certain
    percentage of autos sold in the United States be manufactured
    domestically, and imposing an import restriction for autos on persons
    violating that requirement, an amendment waiving those restrictions with
    respect to a foreign nation where the President has issued a
    proclamation that that nation is not imposing unfair import restrictions
    on any United States product was held not germane, dealing with overall
    trade issues rather than domestic content requirement for autos sold in
    the United States (Nov. 2, 1983, p. 30776). However, an amendment to the
    same bill prohibiting its implementation if resulting in United States
    violation to resolve conflicts under those agreements, was held germane
    since the bill already comprehensively addressed those subject matters
    by disclaiming any purpose to amend international agreements or to
    confer court jurisdiction relative thereto, and by conferring court
    jurisdiction over adjudication of penalties assessed under the bill
    (Nov. 2, 1983, p. 30546). Similarly, the following are germane: to a
    bill providing for the deportation of aliens, an amendment to exempt a
    portion of such aliens from deportation (VIII, 3029); to a bill
    prohibiting the issuance of injunctions by the courts in labor disputes,
    an amendment to except all labor disputes affecting public utilities
    (VIII, 3024).

    941. Reading, engrossment, and passage of bills.

      8.  Bills
    and joint resolutions are subject to readings as follows:

          (a) A first reading is in full when the bill or joint resolution
    is first considered.

    [[Page 722]]

    state of the Union under clause 5 of rule XVIII.
          (b) A second reading occurs only when the bill or joint resolution
    is read for amendment in a Committee of the Whole House on the

          (c) A third reading precedes passage when the Speaker states the
    question: ``Shall the bill [or joint resolution] be engrossed [when
    applicable] and read a third time?'' If that question is decided in the
    affirmative, then the bill or joint resolution shall be read the final
    time by title and then the question shall be put on its passage.

      This provision (formerly clause 1 of rule XXI) was adopted in 1789,
    amended in 1794, 1880 (IV, 3391), and on Jan. 4, 1965 (H. Res. 8, 89th
    Cong., p. ----). This latest amendment eliminated the provision which
    permitted a Member to demand the reading in full of the engrossed copy
    of a House bill. Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1 of rule XXI. The
    recodification also clarified paragraphs (a) and (b) to reflect the
    modern practice of first and second readings (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47).

    Sec. 942. First and second readings.

      Formerly a  bill was
    read for the first time by title at the time of its introduction, but
    since 1890 all bills have been introduced by filing them with the Clerk,
    thus rendering a reading by title impossible at that time (IV, 3391).
    But the titles of all bills introduced are printed in the Journal and
    Record, thereby carrying out the real purpose of the rule.

      Under paragraph (a), the first reading of a bill is in full and occurs
    when a bill is called up in the House (IV, 3391). The initial step of
    consideration in the Committee of the Whole is sometimes referred to as
    the ``first reading.'' Under clause 5 of rule XVIII that reading is in
    full and occurs before general debate commences. However, it customarily
    is dispensed with by unanimous consent or special rule, although a
    motion to dispense with the first reading is not in order (VIII, 2335,
    2436). The Speaker may object to a request for unanimous consent to
    dispense with the first reading (IV, 3390; VII, 1054).

      Under paragraph (b), the second reading of a bill comprises its
    reading for amendment in the Committee of the Whole (Apr. 28, 1977, p.
    12635).

    [[Page 723]]

    question had been ordered (IV, 3395-3399; VII, 1062). A privileged
    motion may not intervene before the third reading (IV, 3405), and the
    question on engrossment and third reading is not subject to a demand for
    division of the question (Aug. 3, 1989, p. 18544). A vote on passage
    must first be reconsidered to remedy the omission to read a bill a third
    time (IV, 3406). Senate bills are not engrossed in the House; but are
    ordered to a third reading. The demand for the reading of the engrossed
    copy of a Senate bill cannot be made in the House (VIII, 2426).

    Sec. 943. The third reading after
    engrossment.

      The right to  demand the reading in full of the engrossed copy of a
    bill formerly guaranteed by the rule existed only immediately after it
    had passed to be engrossed and before it had been read a third time by
    title (IV, 3400, 3403, 3404; VII, 1061); or before the yeas and nays had
    been ordered on passage (IV, 3402). The right to demand the reading in
    full caused the bill to be laid aside until engrossed even though the
    previous

    Sec. 944. Voting on bills.

      A bill in  the House (as
    distinguished from the Committee of the Whole) is amended pending the
    engrossment and third reading (V, 5781; VI, 1051, 1052). The question on
    engrossment and third reading being decided in the negative the bill is
    rejected (IV, 3420, 3421). A bill must be considered and voted on by
    itself (IV, 3408). Where the two Houses pass similar but distinct bills
    on the same subject it is necessary that one or the other House act
    again on the subject (IV, 3386). The requirement of a two-thirds vote
    for proposed constitutional amendments has been construed in the later
    practice to apply only to the vote on the final passage (V, 7029, 7030;
    VIII, 3504). A bill having been rejected by the House, a similar but not
    identical bill on the same subject was afterwards held to be in order
    (IV, 3384).

                                    Rule XVII

    Decorum
                               decorum and debate

    945. Obtaining the floor for debate; and relevancy and
    decorum therein.

      1. (a)  A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who
    desires to speak or deliver a matter to the House shall rise and
    respectfully address himself to ``Mr. Speaker'' and, on being
    recognized, may address the House from any place on the floor. When
    invited by the Chair, a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may
    speak from the Clerk's desk.

    [[Page 724]]

      (b) Remarks in debate (which may include references to the Senate or
    its Members) shall be confined to the question under debate, avoiding
    personality.

      This clause (formerly clause 1 of rule XIV) was adopted in 1880, but
    was made up, in its main provisions, from older rules, which dated from
    1789 and 1811 (V, 4979). A rule of comity prohibiting most references in
    debate to the Senate was first enunciated in Jefferson's Manual and was
    strictly enforced in the House through the 108th Congress (albeit with
    certain exceptions adopted in the 100th and 101st Congresses and were
    outlined in paragraph (b)) (Sec. 371, supra; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1987, p.
    6; H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). In the 109th Congress the exceptions
    were deleted and the parenthetical in paragraph (b) was inserted (sec.
    2(g), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). The rule continues to require
    Members to avoid personality, and the Chair remains under a duty to call
    to order a Member who violates the rule. Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1
    of rule XIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This clause, and rulings
    of the Chair with respect to references in debate to the Senate, are
    discussed in Sec. Sec. 361, 371, supra.

    [[Page 725]]

    to the Speaker, himself, a Member directs his remarks to the occupant of
    the Chair and addresses him as ``Mr. Speaker'' pursuant to this clause
    (Nov. 1, 1983, p. 30267).
      The Speaker, who has a responsibility under rule I to maintain and
    enforce decorum in debate, and the Chairman of the Committee of the
    Whole, who enforces decorum in debate under rule XVIII, have reminded
    and advised Members of the following: (1) clause 1 requires Members
    seeking recognition to rise and to address themselves to the question
    under debate, avoiding personality; (2) Members should address their
    remarks to the Chair only and not to other entities such as the press or
    the television audience, and the Chair enforces this rule on its own
    initiative (see, e.g., Nov. 8, 1979, p. 31519; Sept. 29, 1983, p. 26501;
    Dec. 17, 1987, p. 36139); (3) Members should not refer to or address any
    occupant of the galleries; (4) Members should refer to other Members in
    debate only in the third person, by State designation (Speaker O'Neill,
    June 14, 1978, p. 17615; Oct. 2, 1984, p. 28520; Mar. 7, 1985, p. 5028);
    (5) Members should refrain from using profanity or vulgarity in debate
    (Mar. 5, 1991, p. 5036; Feb. 18, 1993, p. 2973; Nov. 17, 1995, p. 33744;
    July 23, 1998, p. 17032; Oct. 11, 2000, p. 22189; Oct. 2, 2003, p. ----;
    Mar. 10, 2004, p. ----); (6) the Chair may interrupt a Member engaging
    in personalities with respect to another Member of the House, as the
    Chair does with respect to such references to the Senate or the
    President (Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551); (7) Members should refrain from
    discussing the President's personal character (May 10, 1994, p. 9697);
    (8) Members should heed the gavel (e.g., Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4081; May 22,
    2003, p. ----; Oct. 2, 2003, p. ----; May 19, 2004, p. ----), and
    remarks uttered in debate while not under recognition do not appear in
    the Congressional Record (e.g., May 22, 2003, p. ----; Oct. 2, 2003, p.
    ----; May 19, 2004, p. ----); (9) Members may not use audio devices
    during debate (May 24, 2005, p. ----). The Speaker has deplored the
    tendency to address remarks directly to the President (or others not in
    the Chamber) in the second person, and cautions Members on his own
    initiative (see, e.g., Oct. 16, 1989, p. 24715; Oct. 17, 1989, p. 24764;
    Jan. 24, 1990, p. 426; Oct. 9, 1991, p. 25999). Even when referring in
    debate

      Members should refrain from speaking disrespectfully of the Speaker or
    arraigning the personal conduct of the Speaker, and under the precedents
    the sanctions for such violations transcend the ordinary requirements
    for timeliness of challenges (II, 1248; Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551; Jan. 18,
    1995, p. 1441; Jan. 19, 1995, p. 1599). Engaging in personalities with
    respect to the Speaker's conduct is not in order even though possibly
    relevant to a pending resolution granting him certain authority (Sept.
    24, 1996, p. 24485).

      This clause also has been interpreted to proscribe the wearing of
    badges by Members to communicate a message, since Members must rise and
    address the Speaker to deliver any matter to the House (Speaker O'Neill,
    Apr. 15, 1986, p. 7525; Feb. 22, 1995, p. 5435; Mar. 29, 1995, p. 9662;
    Oct. 19, 1995, pp. 28522, 28540, 28646; Nov. 17, 1995, p. 5435; Mar. 7,
    1996, p. 4083; Sept. 26, 1996, p. 25117; July 24, 1998, p. 17157; Sept.
    28, 2000, p. 19940; Sept. 22, 2004, p. ----). A Member's comportment may
    constitute a breach of decorum even though the content of that Member's
    speech is not, itself, unparliamentary (July 29, 1994, p. 18609). Under
    this standard the Chair may deny recognition to a Member who has engaged
    in unparliamentary debate and ignored repeated admonitions by the Chair
    to proceed in order, subject to the will of the House on the question of
    his proceeding in order (Sept. 18, 1996, p. 23535).

      For further discussion of personalities in debate with respect to
    references to the official conduct of a Member, see Sec. Sec. 361-363,
    supra; with respect to references to the President, see Sec. 370, supra;
    and with respect to references to the Senate, see Sec. Sec. 371-374,
    supra.

      Aside from ``special-order,'' ``morning-hour,'' or ``one-minute''
    debate, where no question is pending and recognition is by unanimous
    consent or leadership listings, it is a general rule that a motion must
    be made before a Member may proceed in debate (V, 4984, 4985), and this
    motion may be required to be reduced to writing (V, 4986). A motion must
    also be stated by the Speaker or read by the Clerk before debate may
    begin (V, 4982, 4983, 5304). The withdrawal of a motion precludes
    further debate on it (V, 4989). But sometimes when a communication or a
    report has been before the House it has been debated before any specific
    motion has been made in relation to it (V, 4987, 4988). In a few cases,
    such as conference reports and reports from the Committee of the Whole,
    the motion to agree is considered as pending without being offered from
    the floor (IV, 4896; V, 6517).

    [[Page 726]]

      In presenting a question of personal privilege the Member is not
    required in the first instance to offer a motion or offer a resolution,
    but such is not the rule in presenting a case involving the privileges
    of the House (III, 2546, 2547; VI, 565, 566, 580; see Sec. 708, supra ).
    Personal explanations merely are made by unanimous consent (V, 5065).

    Sec. 946. Interruption of a Member in debate.

      A  Member
    having the floor may not be taken off his feet by an ordinary motion,
    even the highly privileged motion to adjourn (V, 5369, 5370; VIII,
    2646), or the motion to table (Mar. 18, 1992, p. 6022). He may not be
    deprived of the floor by a parliamentary inquiry (VIII, 2455-2458), a
    question of privilege (V, 5002; VIII, 2459), a motion that the Committee
    rise (VIII, 2325), or a demand for the previous question (VIII, 2609;
    Mar. 18, 1992, p. 6022), but he may be interrupted for a conference
    report (V, 6451; VIII, 3294). It is a custom also for the Speaker to
    request a Member to yield for the reception of a message. A Member may
    yield the floor for a motion to adjourn or that the Committee of the
    Whole rise without losing his right to continue when the subject is
    again continued (V, 5009-5013), but where the House has by resolution
    vested control of general debate in the Committee of the Whole in
    designated Members, their control of general debate may not be abrogated
    by another Member moving to rise, unless they yield for that purpose
    (May 25, 1967, p. 14121; June 10, 1999, p. 12471). A Member may also
    resume his seat while a paper is being read in his time without losing
    his right to the floor (V, 5015). A Member who, having the floor, moved
    the previous question was permitted to resume the floor on withdrawing
    the motion (V, 5474). But a Member may not yield to another Member to
    offer an amendment without losing the floor (V, 5021, 5030, 5031; VIII,
    2476), and a Member may not offer an amendment in time secured for
    debate only (VIII, 2474), or request unanimous consent to offer an
    amendment unless yielded to for that purpose by the Member controlling
    the floor (Sept. 24, 1986, p. 25589). A Member recognized under the
    five-minute rule in the Committee of the Whole may not yield to another
    Member to offer an amendment, as it is within the power of the Chair to
    recognize each Member to offer amendments (Apr. 19, 1973, p. 13240; Dec.
    12, 1973, p. 41171). A Member desiring to interrupt another in debate
    should address the Chair for permission of the Member speaking (V, 5006;
    VI, 193), but the latter may exercise his own discretion as to whether
    or not he will yield (V, 5007, 5008; VI, 193; VIII, 2463, 2465). It is
    not in order to disrupt a Member's remarks in debate by repeatedly
    interrupting to ask whether he will yield after he has declined to do so
    (Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9040; Nov. 13, 1997, p. 26533). Where a Member
    interrupts another during debate without being yielded to or otherwise
    recognized (as on a point of order), his remarks are not printed in the
    Record (Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 7, 1985, p. 2229; July 21, 1993, p. 16545;
    July 29, 1994, p. 18609). Members should not engage in disruption while
    another is speaking (Dec. 20, 1995, p. 37878; June 27, 1996, p. 15915).

    [[Page 727]]

    or rights, usually without asking consent of the House (II, 1367, 1368,
    1371; III, 1950; V, 6097). In more recent years, Speakers have
    frequently entered into debate from the floor on substantive legislative
    issues before the House for decision, and the right to participate in
    debate in the Committee of the Whole is without question (see, e.g.,
    Apr. 30, 1987, p. 10811).

    Sec. 947. Speaker in debate.

      The  Speaker may of right speak
    from the Chair on questions of order and be first heard (II, 1367), but
    with this exception he may speak from the Chair only by leave of the
    House and on questions of fact (II, 1367-1372). On occasions
    comparatively rare Speakers have called Members to the Chair and
    participated in debate on questions of order or matters relating their
    own conduct

    Sec. 948. Member must confine himself to the subject.

      It  has
    always been held, and generally quite strictly, that in the House the
    Member must confine himself to the subject under debate (V, 5043-5048;
    VI, 576; VIII, 2481, 2534). The Chair normally waits for the question of
    relevancy of debate to be raised and does not take initiative (Sept. 27,
    1990, p. 26226; Mar. 23, 1995, p. 8986; Nov. 14, 1995, pp. 32354-57,
    32374; Dec. 15, 1995, p. 37118; Mar. 12, 1996, p. 4149; Mar. 20, 2002,
    p. ----).

    [[Page 728]]

    the occupant of the Chair during that speech may enforce the rule of
    relevancy in debate by requiring that the remarks be confined to the
    subject so specified (Jan. 23, 1984, p. 93). Debate on a question of
    personal privilege must be confined to the statements or issue which
    gave rise to the question of privilege (V, 5075-5077; VI, 576, 608;
    VIII, 2448, 2481; May 31, 1984, p. 14623). Debate on a privileged
    resolution recommending disciplinary action against a Member, while it
    may include comparisons with other such actions taken by or reported to
    the House for purposes of measuring severity of punishment, may not
    extend to the conduct of another sitting Member not the subject of a
    committee report (Dec. 18, 1987, p. 36271). The question whether a
    Member should be relieved from committee service is debatable only
    within very narrow limits (IV, 4510; June 16, 1975, p. 19056). Debate on
    a resolution electing a Member to a committee is confined to the
    election of that Member and should not extend to that committee's agenda
    (July 10, 1995, p. 18258).
      During debate on a bill, a Member under recognition must confine his
    remarks to the pending legislation; that is, he must not dwell on
    another measure not before the House (Nov. 4, 1999, p. 28524), rather he
    must maintain a constant nexus between debate and the subject of the
    bill (Nov. 14, 1995, pp. 32354-57; Mar. 12, 1996, p. 4450; Mar. 20,
    2002, p. ----; June 3, 2003, p. ----, p. ----, p. ----). Debate on a
    motion to amend must be confined to the amendment, and may neither
    include the general merits of the bill (V, 5049-5051), nor range to the
    merits of a proposition not included in the underlying resolution (Jan.
    31, 1995, p. 3032). Similarly, debate on a motion to recommit with
    instructions should be confined to the subject of the motion rather than
    dwelling on the general merits of the bill (Mar. 7, 1996, p. 4092).
    However, the Chair has accorded Members latitude in debating a series of
    amendments in the nature of a substitute to a concurrent resolution on
    the budget (Mar. 25, 1999, p. 5734). On a motion to suspend the rules,
    debate is confined to the object of the motion and may not range to the
    merits of a bill not scheduled for such consideration (Nov. 23, 1991, p.
    34189; June 11, 2002, p. ----). Debate on a special order providing for
    the consideration of a bill may range to the merits of the bill to be
    made in order (Sept. 26, 1989, p. 21532; Oct. 16, 1990, p. 29668; Oct.
    1, 1991, p. 24836), because the question of consideration of the bill is
    involved, but should not range to the merits of a measure not to be
    considered under that special order (Sept. 27, 1990, p. 26226; July 25,
    1995, p. 20323; Sept. 20, 1995, p. 15838; Dec. 15, 1995, p. 37118; May
    1, 1996, p. 9888; May 8, 1996, p. 10511; May 15, 1996, p. 1131; Mar. 13,
    1997, p. 3833; Mar. 20, 2002, p. ----) or to the Rules of the House in
    general (July 9, 2004, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of appeal)). Debate
    on a resolution providing authorities to expedite the consideration of
    end-of-session legislation may neither range to the merits of a measure
    that might or might not be considered under such authorities nor engage
    in personalities with respect to the official conduct of the Speaker,
    even as asserted to relate to the question of granting the authorities
    proposed (Sept. 24, 1996, pp. 24485, 24486). If a unanimous-consent
    request for a Member to address the House for one hour specifies the
    subject of the address,

      While the Speakers have entertained appeals from their decisions as to
    irrelevancy, they have held that such appeals were not debatable (V,
    5056-5063).

    Recognition
    <>   2. When two or more
    Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner rise at once, the
    Speaker shall name the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who is
    first to speak. * * *

      Under prior practice in Committee of the Whole, a Member did not have
    to confine himself to the subject during general debate (V, 5233-5238;
    VIII, 2590; June 28, 1974, p. 21743); but under modern practice a
    special order providing for consideration of a measure in the Committee
    of the Whole typically does require such relevance in debate. All five-
    minute debate in Committee of the Whole is confined to the subject (V,
    5240-5256), even on a pro forma amendment (VIII, 2591), in which case
    debate must relate to an issue in the pending portion of the bill (VIII,
    2592, 2593); thus, where a general provisions title is pending debate
    may relate to any agency funded by the bill (June 13, 1991, p. 14692).

      This provision was adopted in 1789 (V, 4978). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 2 of rule XIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 729]]

    necessarily came to pertain to the bill or other business which would be
    before the House under the rule regulating the order of business. Hence
    the necessity that the Speaker should not be compelled to heed the
    claims of Members as individuals was expressed in 1879 in a report from
    the Committee on Rules, which declared that ``in the nature of the case
    discretion must be lodged with the presiding officer'' (II, 1424). And
    in 1881 the Speaker declined to entertain an appeal from his decision on
    a question of recognition (II, 1425-1428), establishing thereby a
    practice which continues (VI, 292; VIII, 2429, 2646, 2762). It also has
    been determined that a Member may not invoke clause 6 of rule XIV
    (formerly rule XXV) (Sec. 884, supra), providing that questions relating
    to the priority of business shall be decided by a majority without
    debate, to inhibit the Speaker's power of recognition under this clause
    (Speaker Albert, July 31, 1975, p. 26249).--
      In the early history of the House, when business proceeded on
    presentation by individual Members, the Speaker recognized the Member
    who arose first; and in case of doubt there was an appeal from his
    recognition (II, 1429-1434). But as the membership and business of the
    House increased it became necessary to establish and adhere to a fixed
    order of business, and recognitions, instead of pertaining to the
    individual Member,

    Sec. 950. Oneminute and specialorder
    speeches.

      Recognition  for one-minute speeches by unanimous consent and the order
    of recognition are entirely within the discretion of the Speaker (Nov.
    15, 1983, p. 32657; Mar. 7, 2001, p. 3027). When the House has a heavy
    legislative schedule, the Speaker may refuse to recognize Members for
    that purpose until the completion of legislative business (Deschler-
    Brown, ch. 29, Sec. 73; July 24, 1980, p. 19386). It is not in order to
    raise as a question of the privileges of the House a resolution
    directing the Speaker to recognize for such speeches, since a question
    of privilege cannot amend or interpret the Rules of the House (July 25,
    1980, pp. 19762-64). The modern practice of limiting recognition before
    legislative business to one minute began August 2, 1937 (p. 8004) and
    was reiterated by Speaker Rayburn on March 6, 1945 (Deschler, ch. 21,
    Sec. 6.1).

    [[Page 730]]

    imous consent but, rather, on lists submitted by the respective party
    Leaders. This policy, the result of bipartisan negotiations, was a
    departure from the modern practice as described in Deschler, ch. 21,
    Sec. 7.1 (special-order speeches following legislative business are
    enabled only by unanimous consent). Under the Speaker's policy: (1)
    recognition does not extend beyond midnight; (2) recognition for longer
    speeches occurs after five-minute speeches and is limited (except on
    Tuesdays) to four hours equally divided between the majority and
    minority; (3) the first hour for each party is reserved to its
    respective Leader or his designees; (4) time within each party is
    allotted in accord with a list submitted to the Chair by the respective
    Leader; (5) recognition for the first hour alternates between the
    parties from day to day; (6) the respective Leaders may establish
    additional guidelines for entering requests; and (7) a Member recognized
    for a five-minute special order may not be recognized for a longer
    special order (Feb. 11, 1994, p. 2244; May 23, 1994, p. 1154; June 10,
    1994, p. 12684; Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551; Feb. 16, 1995, p. 5096; May 12,
    1995, p. 12765; Jan. 21, 1997, p. 460; Jan. 31, 2001, p. 1078).
      Since the 98th Congress the Speaker has followed announced policies of
    (1) alternating recognition for one-minute speeches and special-order
    speeches between majority and minority Members and (2) recognizing for
    special-order speeches of five minutes or less before longer speeches
    (Speaker O'Neill, Aug. 8, 1984, p. 22963; Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551). In the
    101st Congress, the Chair continued the practice of alternating
    recognition for one-minute speeches but began a practice of recognizing
    Members suggested by their party leadership before others in the well
    (Apr. 19, 1990, p. 7406). From August 8, 1984, through February 23,
    1994, the Speaker also followed an announced policy of recognizing
    Members of the same party within a given category in the order in which
    their unanimous-consent requests for special orders were granted
    (Speaker O'Neill, Aug. 8, 1984, p. 22963; Jan. 5, 1993, p. 106).
    However, on February 24, 1994, the Speaker announced a new policy
    governing recognition for special-order speeches. With respect to
    recognition for five-minute special orders, the Speaker announced that
    the Chair would recognize for speeches of five minutes or less first,
    before longer speeches, and that Members may not enter requests for
    five-minute special orders earlier than one week in advance. With
    respect to recognition for longer special orders, the Speaker announced
    a policy of recognition that would depend not on orders by unan

      While the Chair's calculation of time consumed under one-minute
    speeches is not subject to challenge, the Chair endeavors to recognize
    majority and then minority Members by allocating time in a nonpartisan
    manner (Aug. 4, 1982, p. 19319). Before legislative business, the
    Speaker will traditionally recognize a Member only once by unanimous
    consent for a one-minute speech, and will not entertain a second request
    (May 1, 1985, p. 9995). The Chair will not entertain a unanimous-consent
    request to extend a five-minute special order (Mar. 7, 1995, p. 7152) or
    to extend a special order beyond midnight (Oct. 7, 1998, p. 24394). The
    Chair will recognize for subdivisions of the first hour reserved for
    special orders only on designations (and reallocations) by the
    leadership concerned (Oct. 2, 1998, p. 23151; Dec. 12, 2001, p. ----). A
    Member who is recognized to control time during special orders may yield
    to colleagues for such amounts of time as the Member may deem
    appropriate but may not yield blocks of time to be enforced by the
    Chair. Members regulate the duration of their yielding by reclaiming the
    time when appropriate (Jan. 31, 2001, p. 1078).-

    [[Page 731]]

    hour early (rather than 90 minutes); (2) time for debate is limited to
    25 minutes for each party (rather than 30 minutes); and (3) in no event
    is morning-hour debate to continue beyond 10 minutes before the House is
    to convene (May 12, 1995, p. 12765). The House extended such order in a
    modified form to accommodate early convening times on any Monday or
    Tuesday (Jan. 20, 2004, p. ----; Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). The above-cited
    orders of the House also: (1) postpone the Prayer, approval of the
    Journal, and the Pledge of Allegiance during morning-hour debates; and
    (2) require the Chair to recognize Members for not more than five
    minutes each, alternating between the majority and minority parties in
    accord with lists supplied by their respective Leaders. Under the
    customary order of the House establishing morning-hour debate, the Chair
    does not entertain a unanimous-consent request to extend a five-minute
    period of recognition (Apr. 28, 1998, p. 6924; Nov. 12, 2002, p. ----).
    During morning-hour debate it is not in order to request that a name be
    removed from a list of cosponsors of a bill (Apr. 26, 1994, p. 8544).-

    Sec. 951. Morninghour debates.

      Beginning  in the second
    session of the 103d Congress, the House has by unanimous consent agreed
    (without prejudice to the Speaker's ultimate power of recognition under
    this rule) to convene early on Mondays and Tuesdays for morning-hour
    debate (Feb. 11, 1994, p. 2244; May 23, 1994, p. 11459; June 8, 1994, p.
    12305; June 10, 1994, p. 12684; Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551; Feb. 16, 1995, p.
    5096; Jan. 21, 1997, p. 460; Jan. 19, 1999, p. 602; Jan. 3, 2001, p. 38;
    Jan. 23, 2002, p. ----; Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----; Jan. 20, 2004, p. ----;
    Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). On May 12, 1995, the House extended and modified
    the above order to accommodate earlier convening times after mid-May of
    each year. The modified order changes morning-hour debates on Tuesdays
    after mid-May of each year as follows: (1) the House convenes one

    Sec. 952. ``Oxford''style debates.

      In  the 103d Congress the
    House agreed by unanimous consent to conduct at a time designated by the
    Speaker structured debate on a mutually agreeable topic announced by the
    Speaker, with four participants from each party in a format announced by
    the Speaker (Feb. 11, 1994, p. 2244; Mar. 11, 1994, p. 4772; May 23,
    1994, p. 11459; June 8, 1994, p. 12305; June 10, 1994, p. 12648).
    Pursuant to that authority the House conducted three ``Oxford''-style
    debates (Mar. 16, 1994, p. 5088; May 4, 1994, p. 9300; July 20, 1994, p.
    17245). As a precursor to those structured debates, special-order time
    was used for a ``Lincoln-Douglas''-style debate involving five Members,
    with one Member acting as ``moderator'' by controlling the hour under
    this clause (Nov. 3, 1993, p. 27312).

    [[Page 732]]

    allowable motions intended to expedite it (II, 1452, 1457; VI, 296,
    300). This principle does not, however, apply to the Chairman of the
    Committee of the Whole (II, 1453). Once the proponent of a pending
    motion has been recognized for debate thereon, a unanimous-consent
    request to modify the motion may be entertained only if the proponent
    yields for that purpose (Jan. 5, 1996, p. 348). The Member who
    originally introduces the bill which a committee reports has no claims
    to recognition as opposed to the claims of the members of the committee,
    but in cases where a proposition is brought directly before the House by
    a Member the mover is entitled to prior recognition for motions and
    debate (II, 1446, 1454; VI, 302-305, 417; VIII, 2454, 3231). This
    principle applies to the makers of certain motions. Thus, the Member on
    whose motion the enacting clause of a bill is stricken in Committee of
    the Whole is entitled to prior recognition when the bill is reported to
    the House (V, 5337; VIII, 2629). Where a Member raised an objection in a
    joint session to count the electoral vote, and the Houses separated to
    consider the objection, the Chair first recognized the Member who raised
    the objection (III, 1956; Jan. 6, 2005, p. ----) or a co-signer of the
    objection (Jan. 6, 1969, pp. 145-7). But a Member may not, by offering a
    debatable motion of higher privilege than the pending motion, deprive
    the Member in charge of the bill of possession of the floor for debate
    (II, 1460-1463; VI, 290, 297-299; VIII, 2454, 3193, 3197, 3259). The
    Member in charge of the bill and having the floor may demand the
    previous question, although another Member may propose to offer a motion
    of higher privilege (VIII, 2684); but the motion of higher privilege
    must be put before the previous question (V, 5480; VIII, 2684). The
    Member who has been recognized to call up a measure in the House has
    priority of recognition to move the previous question thereon, even over
    the chairman of the committee reporting that measure (Oct. 1, 1986, p.
    27468). The fact that a Member has the floor on one matter does not
    necessarily entitle him to prior recognition on a motion relating to
    another matter (II, 1464). It is because the Speaker is governed by
    these usages that he often asks, when a Member seeks recognition, ``For
    what purpose does the gentleman rise?''. By this question he determines
    whether the Member proposes business or a motion which is entitled to
    precedence and he may deny recognition (VI, 289-291, 293; Aug. 13, 1982,
    pp. 20969, 20975-78; Speaker Wright, Feb. 17, 1988, p. 1583; Feb. 27,
    1992, p. 3656). For example, a Member's mere revelation that he seeks to
    offer a motion to adjourn does not suffice to make that motion
    ``pending,'' and thus the Chair remains able to declare a short recess
    under clause 12 of rule I (Oct. 28, 1997, p. 23524; June 25, 2003, p. --
    --). There is no appeal from such denial of recognition (II, 1425; VI,
    292; VIII, 2429, 2646, 2762; Feb. 27, 1992, p. 3656). Recognition for
    parliamentary inquiry lies in the discretion of the Chair (VI, 541), who
    may take a parliamentary inquiry under advisement (VIII, 2174),
    especially where not related to the pending proceedings (Apr. 7, 1992,
    p. 8273).

    Sec. 953. Speaker governed by usage in
    recognitions.

      Although  there is no appeal from the Speaker's recognition, he is
    not a free agent in determining who is to have the floor. The practice
    of the House establishes rules from which he should not depart. For
    example, on February 24, 1994, the Speaker announced a policy with
    respect to recognition for special-order speeches that departed from the
    established practice of recognition by unanimous consent (Deschler, ch.
    21, Sec. 7.1; see Sec. 26, supra). The Speaker's new policy was the
    product of bipartisan negotiations, which justified the departure from
    the then-established practice. The policy became the new established
    practice of the House, from which the Speaker should not depart except
    by unanimous consent. When the order of business brings before the House
    a certain bill he must first recognize, for motions for its disposition,
    the Member who represents the committee which has reported it (II, 1447;
    VI, 306, 514). This is not necessarily the chairman of the committee,
    for a chairman who, in committee, has opposed the bill, must yield the
    prior recognition to a member of his committee who has favored the bill
    (II, 1449). Usually, however, the chairman has charge of the bill and is
    entitled at all stages to prior recognition for

    [[Page 733]]

    tional time to make their remarks in debate (Dec. 18, 1998, p. 27834;
    May 18, 2004, p. ----).
      The Chair may follow a tradition of the House to allow the highest
    ranking elected leaders (Speaker, Majority Leader, and Minority Leader)
    addi

    Sec. 954. Loss of right to recognition by Member in
    charge.

      When  an essential motion made by the Member in charge of a bill is
    decided adversely, the right to prior recognition passes to the Member
    who the Speaker perceives to be leading the opposition to the motion
    (II, 1465-1468; VI, 308). Under this principle control of a measure
    passes when the House disagrees to a recommendation of the committee
    reporting the measure (II, 1469-1472) or when the Committee of the Whole
    reports the measure adversely (IV, 4897; VIII, 2430). Similarly, this
    principle applies when a motion for the previous question is rejected
    (VI, 308). However, a Member who led the opposition to ordering the
    previous question may be preempted by a motion of higher precedence
    (Aug. 13, 1982, pp. 20969, 20975-78). On the other hand, the mere defeat
    of an amendment proposed by the Member in charge does not cause the
    right to prior recognition to pass to an opponent (II, 1478, 1479).

      Rejection of a conference report after the previous question has been
    ordered thereon does not cause recognition to pass to a Member opposed
    to the report, and the manager retains control to offer the initial
    motion to dispose of amendments in disagreement (Speaker Albert, May 1,
    1975, p. 12761). Similarly, the invalidation of a conference report on a
    point of order, which is equivalent to its rejection by the House, does
    not give the Member raising the question of order the right to the floor
    (VIII, 3284) and exerts no effect on the right to recognition (VI, 313).
    In most cases, when the House refuses to order the previous question on
    a conference report, it then rejects the report (II, 1473-1477; V,
    6396). However, control of a Senate amendment reported from conference
    in disagreement passes to an opponent when the House rejects a motion to
    dispose thereof (Aug. 6, 1993, p. 19582).

    Sec. 955. Prior right of Members to recognition for
    debate.

      In  debate the members of the committee--except the Committee of
    the Whole (II, 1453)--are entitled to priority of recognition for debate
    (II, 1438, 1448; VI, 306, 307), but a motion to lay a proposition on the
    table is in order before the Member entitled to prior recognition for
    debate has begun his remarks (V, 5391-5395; VI, 412; VIII, 2649, 2650).

    [[Page 734]]

      In recognizing for debate under general House rules the Chair
    alternates between those favoring and those opposing the pending matter,
    preferring members of the committee reporting the bill (II, 1439-1444).
    When a member of a committee has occupied the floor in favor of a
    measure the Chair attempts to recognize a Member opposing next, even
    though he be not a member of the committee (II, 1445). The principle of
    alternation is not insisted on rigidly where a limited time is
    controlled by Members, as in the 40 minutes of debate on motions for
    suspension of the rules and the previous question (II, 1442).

    [[Page 735]]

    context has been construed to apply only to the Minority Leader and not
    to the entire hierarchy of minority leadership, where the Chair had been
    assured that the Minority Leader had been consulted (Apr. 25, 1985, p.
    9415). It is not a proper parliamentary inquiry to ask the Chair to
    indicate which side of the aisle has failed under the Speaker's
    guidelines to clear a unanimous-consent request (Feb. 1, 1996, p. 2260;
    Nov. 22, 2002, p. ----), but the Chair may indicate his cognizance of a
    source of objection for the Record (Feb. 4, 1998, p. 799). In addition,
    with respect to unanimous-consent requests to dispose of Senate
    amendments to House bills on the Speaker's table, the Chair will
    entertain such a request only if made by the chairman of the committee
    with jurisdiction, or by another committee member authorized to make the
    request (Apr. 26, 1984, p. 10194; Feb. 4, 1987, p. 2675; Jan. 3, 1996,
    p. 86; Jan. 4, 1996, pp. 200, 210; Deschler, ch. 21, Sec. 1.23). For a
    discussion of recognition for unanimous-consent requests to vary
    procedures in the Committee of the Whole governed by a special order
    adopted by the House, see Sec. 993, infra.

    Sec. 956. Exceptions to the usages constraining the Speaker
    as to recognitions.

      As  to motions to suspend the rules, which are in
    order on Mondays and Tuesdays of each week, the Speaker exercises a
    discretion to decline to recognize (V, 6791-6794, 6845; VIII, 3402-
    3404). He also may decline to recognize a Member who desires to ask
    unanimous consent to set aside the rules in order to consider a bill not
    otherwise in order, this being the way of signifying his objection to
    the request. But this authority did not extend to the former Consent
    Calendar. Where the previous question was ordered to passage of a bill
    without intervening motion except recommittal, the Chair declined to
    entertain a unanimous-consent request to further amend the pending bill
    as an exercise of his discretionary power of recognition under this
    clause (Feb. 10, 2000, p. 1019). The Chair has declined to entertain a
    unanimous-consent request to print a separate volume of tributes given
    in memory of a deceased former Member absent concurrence of the Joint
    Committee on Printing (Aug. 1, 1996, p. 21247). The Speaker has
    announced and enforced a policy of conferring recognition for unanimous-
    consent requests for the consideration of certain legislation only when
    assured that the majority and minority floor and committee leaderships
    have no objection (see, e.g., Dec. 15, 1981, p. 31590; May 4, 1982, p.
    8613; Nov. 16, 1983, p. 33138; Jan. 25, 1984, p. 354; Jan. 26, 1984, p.
    449; Jan. 31, 1984, p. 1063; Oct. 2, 1984, p. 28516; Feb. 4, 1987, p.
    2675; Jan. 3, 1989, p. 89; Jan. 3, 1991, p. 64; Jan. 5, 1993, p. 106;
    Apr. 4, 1995, p. 12097). This policy includes: (1) requests relating to
    reported bills (July 23, 1993, p. 16820); (2) requests for immediate
    consideration of matters (separately unreported) comprising a portion of
    a measure already passed by the House (Dec. 19, 1985, p. 38356); (3)
    requests to consider a motion to suspend the rules and pass an
    unreported bill (on a nonsuspension day) (Aug. 12, 1986, p. 21126; Mar.
    30, 1998, p. 5153); (4) requests to permit consideration of (nongermane)
    amendments to bills (Nov. 14, 1991, p. 32083; Dec. 20, 1995, p. 37877;
    June 27, 2002, p. ----; July 28, 2005, p. ----); (5) requests to permit
    expedited consideration of measures on subsequent days, as by waiving
    the requirement that a bill be referred to committee for 30 legislative
    days before a motion to discharge may be presented under clause 2 of
    rule XV (formerly clause 3 of rule XXVII) (June 9, 1992, p. 13900); (6)
    requests relating to Senate-passed bills on the Speaker's table (Oct.
    25, 1995, p. 29347; Jan. 3, 1996, p. 58; Aug. 2, 1999, p. 18942),
    including one identical to a House-passed bill (Feb. 4, 1998, p. 799)
    and a Senate concurrent resolution to correct an enrollment (Oct. 20,
    1998, p. 27358); and (7) requests to dispose of Senate amendments to
    House bills on the Speaker's table (Jan. 4, 1996, pp. 200, 210; Nov. 22,
    2002, p. ----). The Speaker will recognize for an ``omnibus'' unanimous-
    consent request (one request disposing of various measures) only when
    assured that the request, and each constituent part of the request, has
    been cleared under this policy (Oct. 10, 2002, p. ----; Oct. 16, 2002,
    p. ----; Nov. 14, 2002, p. ----). The Speaker's enforcement of this
    policy is not subject to appeal (Apr. 4, 1995, p. 10298). ``Floor
    leadership'' in this

    Sec. 957. The hour rule in debate.

      2.  * * * A Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not occupy more than one hour in
    debate on a question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole House
    on the state of the Union except as otherwise provided in this rule.

      This provision (formerly clause 2 of rule XIV) dates from 1841, when
    the increase of membership had made it necessary to prevent the making
    of long speeches which sometimes occupied three or four hours each (V,
    4978). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2 of rule XIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 736]]

    time limitations on debate (Jan. 4, 1995, pp. 457-552). The Chair has
    announced that he would accommodate as many unanimous-consent requests
    to insert remarks in debate as necessary provided they comprise a
    simple, declarative statement of the Member's attitude toward the
    pending measure; however, any embellishment of such a request with other
    oratory may become an imposition on the time of the Member who yielded
    for that purpose (see, e.g., Mar. 24, 1995, p. 9215; June 22, 2002, p.
    ----; May 9, 2003, p. ----; June 26, 2003, p. ----; July 24, 2003, p. --
    --; Nov. 21, 2003, p. ----).
      This provision applies to debate on a question of privilege, as well
    as to debate on other questions (V, 4990; VIII, 2448). When the time for
    debate has been placed within the control of those representing the two
    sides of a question, it must be assigned to Members in accordance with
    this rule (V, 5004, 5005; VIII, 2462). A Member recognized to call up a
    privileged resolution may yield the floor upon expiration of his hour
    without moving the previous question, thereby permitting another Member
    to be recognized for a successive hour (Dec. 18, 1998, p. 27838). Under
    this clause a Member recognized for one hour for a ``special-order''
    speech in the House may not extend that time, even by unanimous consent
    (Feb. 9, 1966, p. 2794; July 12, 1971, pp. 24594, 24603; Oct. 23, 1997,
    p. 23254). The Chair has advised that he will recognize the managers of
    a measure (as so designated by a special rule governing consideration of
    the measure) for unanimous-consent requests to enlarge the time for
    debate (Oct. 8, 2002, p. ----). In the 104th Congress the Speaker
    announced his intention to strictly enforce

    Managing debate
      For a discussion of morning-hour debates and ``Oxford''-style debates,
    see Sec. Sec. 951-952, supra.

    958. The opening and closing of general debate.

      3. (a)  The
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who calls up a measure may
    open and close debate thereon. When general debate extends beyond one
    day, that Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall be entitled
    to one hour to close without regard to the time used in opening.

    Sec. 959. Member to speak but once to the same question;
    right to close controlled debate.

      (b)  Except as provided in paragraph (a),
    a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not speak more than
    once to the same question without leave of the House.

      (c) A manager of a measure who opposes an amendment thereto is
    entitled to close controlled debate thereon.

      Paragraphs (a) and (c) (formerly clause 3 of rule XIV) were adopted in
    1847 and perfected in 1880 (V, 4996). Paragraph (b) (formerly clause 6
    of rule XIV) was adopted in 1789, and amended in 1840 (V, 4991). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraphs (a) and
    (c) were found in former clause 3 of rule XIV and paragraph (b) was
    found in former clause 6 of rule XIV. The recodification also added
    paragraph (c) to codify modern practice (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).

    [[Page 737]]

    manager of the bill who represents the primary committee of jurisdiction
    is entitled to close general debate; for example, as against another
    manager representing an additional committee of jurisdiction (May 13,
    1998, p. 9042, 9050); or as against the subject of a disciplinary
    resolution (July 24, 2002, p. ----). Where an order of the House divides
    debate on an unreported measure among four Members, the Chair will
    recognize for closing speeches in the reverse order of the original
    allocation (Mar. 24, 1999, p. 5454). Where a special order of the House
    allocates time for debate, which is further fractionalized under a later
    order by unanimous consent, the Chair recognizes for closing speeches in
    the reverse order of their original recognitions, concluding with the
    Member who opened the debate. This is true even when the manager who
    opened debate is opposed, as in the case of a measure reported adversely
    (July 22, 1998, p. 16726; July 27, 1999, p. 18012; June 21, 2000, pp.
    11704, 11721; July 26, 2000, p. 16437). In response to a parliamentary
    inquiry, the Chair advised that time unused by a minority manager in
    general debate is considered as yielded back upon recognition of the
    majority manager to close general debate (Feb. 27, 2002, p. ----). For
    further discussion of management of time for general debate and for
    debate on amendments in the Committee of the Whole, see Sec. 978, infra.
      In the later practice this right to close may not be exercised after
    the previous question is ordered (V, 4997-5000). This clause applies to
    general debate in Committee of the Whole (Mar. 26, 1985, p. 6283). A
    majority

      A Member who has spoken once to the main question may speak again to
    an amendment (V, 4993, 4994). It is too late to make the point of order
    that a Member has spoken already if no one claims the floor until he has
    made some progress in his speech (V, 4992). Paragraph (b) is often
    circumscribed by modern practice and by special orders of business that
    vest control of debate in designated Members and permit them to yield
    more than once to other Members (Apr. 5, 2000, p. 4497). For a
    discussion of the right of a Member to speak more than once under the
    five-minute rule, see Sec. 981, infra. The right to close may not be
    exercised after the previous question has been ordered (V, 4997-5000).
    The right to close does not belong to a Member who has merely moved to
    reconsider the vote on a bill which he did not report (V, 4995). The
    right of a contestant in an election case to close when he is permitted
    to speak in the contest has been a matter of discussion (V, 5001).

    [[Page 738]]

    will assume that the manager of a measure is representing the committee
    of jurisdiction even where the measure called up is unreported (Apr. 15,
    1996, p. 7421; July 24, 1998, p. 17263), where an unreported compromise
    text is made in order as original text in lieu of committee amendments
    (Oct. 19, 1995, p. 28650), or where the committee reported the measure
    without recommendation (Feb. 12, 1997, pp. 2108, 2109). Where the
    pending text includes a provision recommended by a committee of
    sequential referral, a member of that committee is entitled to close
    debate against an amendment thereto (June 15, 1989, pp. 12084-87). Where
    the rule providing for the consideration of an unreported measure
    designates managers who do not serve on a committee of jurisdiction,
    those managers are entitled to close controlled debate against an
    amendment thereto (Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19325). The majority manager of
    the bill will be recognized to control time in opposition to an
    amendment thereto, without regard to the party affiliation of the
    proponent, where the special order allocated control to ``a Member
    opposed'' (May 13, 1998, p. 9110). The right to close debate in
    opposition to an amendment devolves to a member of the committee of
    jurisdiction who derived debate time by unanimous consent from a manager
    who originally had the right to close debate (Sept. 10, 1998, pp. 19961-
    63). Such right to close may not devolve to the manager of a bill who
    derived debate time by unanimous consent from a non-committee Member
    controlling time in opposition because that right may be transferred
    only where there has been an unbroken line of committee affiliation in
    opposition to the amendment (July 17, 2003, p. ----). The proponent of a
    first-degree amendment who controls time in opposition to a second-
    degree amendment that favors the original bill over the first-degree
    amendment does not qualify as a ``manager'' within the meaning of clause
    3(c) of rule XVII in opposing (June 15, 2000, pp. 11040, 11047).
      As codified in paragraph (c), the manager of a bill or other
    representative of the committee position and not the proponent of an
    amendment has the right to close debate on an amendment on which debate
    has been limited and allocated under the five-minute rule in Committee
    of the Whole (VIII, 2581; July 16, 1981, p. 16043; Apr. 4, 1984, p.
    7841; June 5, 1985, p. 14302; July 10, 1985, p. 18496; Oct. 24, 1985, p.
    28824; May 2, 1988, p. 9638; May 5, 1988, p. 9961; July 26, 2002, p. --
    --), including the minority manager (June 29, 1984, p. 20253; Aug. 14,
    1986, p. 21660; July 26, 1989, p. 16403; Oct. 27, 1997, p. 23212; July
    26, 2002, p. ----) and including the manager of a measure that was
    reported adversely (Feb. 13, 2002, p. ----). This is so even where the
    manager is also the proponent of a pending amendment to the amendment
    (Mar. 16, 1983, p. 5792). The Chair

    [[Page 739]]

    a measure is being managed by a single reporting committee and the
    Member controlling time in opposition, though a member of the committee
    having jurisdiction over the amendment, does not represent the reporting
    committee (Nov. 9, 1995, p. 31964).

    Call to order
      Under certain circumstances, however, the proponent of the amendment
    may close debate where he represents the position of the reporting
    committee (Aug. 14, 1986, p. 21660); for example, the proponent of a
    ``manager's amendment'' may close controlled debate thereon where a
    member of the committee does not claim time in opposition (May 13, 1998,
    p. 9092). Similarly, the proponent may close debate where neither a
    committee representative nor a Member assigned a managerial role by the
    governing special order oppose the amendment (Aug. 15, 1986, p. 22057;
    May 6, 1998, pp. 8307, 8316; July 14, 1998, p. 15321; July 17, 2003, p.
    ----). Where a committee representative is allocated control of time in
    opposition to an amendment not by recognition from the Chair but by
    unanimous-consent request of a third Member who was allocated the time
    by the Chair, then the committee representative is not entitled to close
    debate as against the proponent (July 24, 1997, pp. 15684, 15685,
    15689). Similarly, the proponent of the amendment may close debate where
    no representative from the reporting committee opposes an amendment to a
    multijurisdictional bill (Mar. 9, 1995, p. 7467); where the measure is
    unreported and has no ``manager'' under the terms of a special rule
    (Apr. 24, 1985, p. 9206); or where

    960. The call to order for words spoken in
    debate.

      4. (a)  If a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, in speaking
    or otherwise, transgresses the Rules of the House, the Speaker shall, or
    a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may, call to order the
    offending Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, who shall
    immediately sit down unless permitted on motion of another Member,
    Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner to explain. If a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner is called to order, the Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner making the call to order shall
    indicate the words excepted to, which shall be taken down in writing at
    the Clerk's desk and read aloud to the House.

    [[Page 740]]

    call to order, and may not be subject to the censure of the House
    therefor, if further debate or other business has intervened.

      (b) The Speaker shall decide the validity of a call to order. The
    House, if appealed to, shall decide the question without debate. If the
    decision is in favor of the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    called to order, the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall be
    at liberty to proceed, but not otherwise. If the case requires it, an
    offending Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall be liable to
    censure or such other punishment as the House may consider proper. A
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not be held to answer a

      The first sentence of paragraph (a) and all but the last sentence of
    paragraph (b) (formerly clause 4 of rule XIV) was adopted in 1789 and
    amended in 1822 and 1880 (V, 5175). The last sentence of paragraph (a)
    and the last sentence of paragraph (b) (formerly clause 5 of rule XIV)
    was adopted in 1837 and amended in 1880, although the practice of
    writing down objectionable words had been established in 1808. When the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it consolidated former
    clauses 4 and 5 of rule XIV into a single clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 961. Words taken down and other calls to order
    for unparliamentary debate.

      Members  transgressing the rules of debate and
    decorum may be called to order by the Speaker (VIII, 2481, 2521, 3479),
    a Member (II, 1344; V, 5154, 5161-5163, 5175, 5192), or a Delegate (II,
    1295). A Member may initiate a call to order either by making a point of
    order that a Member is transgressing the rules or by formally demanding
    that words be taken down under this clause (Sept. 12, 1996, pp. 22897,
    22899; Sept. 17, 1996, p. 23426; Sept. 18, 1996, p. 23535; Sept. 25,
    1996, p. 24759). A Member's comportment in debate may constitute a
    breach of decorum even though the content of the Member's speech is not,
    itself, unparliamentary (July 29, 1994, p. 18609). Except for naming the
    offending Member, the Speaker may not otherwise censure or punish him
    (II, 1345; VI, 237; Sept. 18, 1996, p. 23535; see also Sec. 366, supra).
    The House may by proper motions under this clause dictate the
    consequences of a ruling by the Chair that a Member was out of order
    (May 26, 1983, p. 14048). As an exercise of recognition, the Chair's
    determination that a Member's time in debate has expired is not subject
    to appeal (Mar. 22, 1996 p. 6086; see also Sec. Sec. 622, 629, supra).
    Furthermore, a Member speaking while not under recognition (as when
    speaking beyond the allotted time) is not entitled to in-House
    amplification (Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4081; see also Sec. 684, supra).

    [[Page 741]]

    will of the House on the question of his proceeding in order (Speaker
    O'Neill, June 16, 1982, p. 13843; July 29, 1994, p. 18609; Sept. 18,
    1996, p. 23535). The Chair may admonish a Member for words spoken in
    debate and request that they be removed from the Record even before a
    demand that the words be taken down (Sept. 24, 1992, p. 27345).
      As discussed in Sec. 374, supra, it is customary for the Chair to
    initiate the call to order of a Member who engages in personality in
    debate with respect to Members of the Senate, including an insertion in
    the Record (Speaker Albert, Apr. 17, 1975, p. 10458; Oct. 7, 1975, p.
    32055; Feb. 27, 1997, pp. 2784, 2785). On the other hand, it is
    customary for the Chair to await an initiative from the floor to call to
    order a Member who engages in personality in debate with respect to
    another Member of the House (June 29, 1987, p. 18072; Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    551; Feb. 27, 1997, pp. 2784, 2785). The Chair may take initiative to
    call to order a Member engaging in verbal outburst either following
    expiration of his recognition for debate (Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4081) or
    during recognition of another Member (June 5, 2003, p. ----). He may
    order the offending Member to take his seat (June 5, 2003, p. ----) or
    may deny further recognition, subject to the

      This clause (formerly clause 5) prohibits the taking down of words
    after intervening business (V, 5177; VIII, 2536; Sept. 16, 1991, p.
    23032; Mar. 28, 1996, p. 6934). However, a Member on his feet and
    seeking recognition at the appropriate time may yet be recognized to
    demand that words be taken down even though brief debate may have
    intervened, and a request that a Member uttering objectionable words
    yield does not forfeit the right to demand that the words be taken down
    (VIII, 2528). Action taken by the Chair to determine whether a point of
    order from the floor is intended as a demand that words be taken down is
    not such intervening debate or business as would render the demand
    untimely (Oct. 2, 1984, p. 28522). Similarly, a parliamentary inquiry
    concerning the propriety of words just spoken in debate does not render
    untimely a demand that the words be taken down as unparliamentary (May
    6, 2004, p. ----). However, an improper parliamentary inquiry concerning
    the substantive content of the words does render untimely such demand
    (July 20, 2005, p. ----). Although under this clause a Member may not be
    held to answer a call to order if further debate or business has
    intervened, the Chair may under clause 2 of rule I generally admonish
    Members to preserve proper decorum even after intervening debate (Dec.
    5, 2001, p. ----). For instances in which the Chair admonished Members
    for improper references to the Senate after brief intervening debate,
    see Sec. 371, supra.

      While a demand that a Member's words be taken down is pending, that
    Member should be seated immediately (July 29, 1994, p. 18609; Jan. 25,
    1995, p. 2352), and no Member may engage the Chair until the demand has
    been disposed of (Nov. 9, 1995, p. 31913; Nov. 14, 1995, p. 32472).
    Where two Members consecutively demand that each others' words be taken
    down as unparliamentary, the Chair advises both Members to be seated and
    then directs the Clerk to report the first words objected to (June 19,
    1996, p. 14655). An offending Member may be directed by the Chair to be
    seated even if a formal demand that the Member's words be taken down is
    not pending; for example, where a Member declines to proceed in order at
    the directive of the Chair after points of order have been sustained
    against unparliamentary references in debate, the Chair may, under rule
    I and this rule, deny the Member further recognition as a disposition of
    the question of order, subject to the will of the House on the question
    of proceeding in order (Sept. 12, 1996, p. 22900; Sept. 17, 1996, p.
    23427; Sept. 18, 1996, p. 23535; see also Sec. 366, supra).

    [[Page 742]]

    his demand that words be taken down before a ruling by the Chair (June
    18, 1986, p. 14232).
      The Chair may entertain a unanimous-consent request to withdraw or
    modify words taken down either before (Deschler-Brown, ch. 29,
    Sec. 51.1) or after (Deschler-Brown, ch. 29, Sec. 51.2) the words have
    been reported to the House. Unanimous consent is not required for a
    Member to withdraw

      The words having been read from the desk, the Chair decides whether
    they are in order (II, 1249; V, 5163, 5169, 5187), as read by the Clerk
    and not as otherwise alleged to have been uttered (June 9, 1992, p.
    13902). When a Member denies that the words taken down are the exact
    words used by himself, the question as to the words is put to the House
    for decision (V, 5179, 5180). Where demands are made to take down words
    both as spoken in a one-minute speech and as reiterated when the
    offending Member is permitted by unanimous consent to explain, the Chair
    may rule simultaneously on both (July 25, 1996, p. 19170). A decision of
    the Chair on words taken down is subject to appeal (Sept. 28, 1996, p.
    25780; Apr. 9, 2003, p. ----).

      The rule permits a motion that an offending Member be permitted to
    explain before the Chair rules on the words taken down, and the Chair
    has discretion to ask for explanation before ruling on the words (Feb.
    1, 1940, p. 954). The Chair also may recognize an offending Member,
    permitted by unanimous consent, to explain words ruled out of order
    (Nov. 10, 1971, p. 40442).

      If words taken down are ruled out of order, the Member loses the floor
    (V, 5196-5199; Jan. 25, 1995, p. 2352) and may not proceed on the same
    day without the permission of the House (Jan. 29, 1946, p. 533; Aug. 21,
    1974, p. 29652; Jan. 25, 1995, p. 2352; Apr. 17, 1997, p. 5832), even on
    yielded time (V, 5147), and may not insert unspoken remarks in the
    Record (Jan. 25, 1995, p. 2352), but still may exercise his right to
    vote or to demand the yeas and nays (VIII, 2546). The ruling does not
    take the issue off the floor, and other Members may proceed to debate
    the same subject (July 25, 1996, p. 19170). The offending Member will
    not lose the floor if the House permits the Member to proceed in order
    (see, e.g., May 10, 1990, p. 9992), which motion may be stated on the
    initiative of the Chair (Oct. 8, 1991, p. 25757; Mar. 29, 1995, p. 9676;
    July 25, 1996, p. 1970; June 13, 2002, p. ----) or offered by any Member
    (July 25, 1996, p. 1970). The motion is not inconsistent with the
    immediate consequence of the call to order because this clause (formerly
    clause 4) also permits the House to determine the extent of the sanction
    for a given breach (Oct. 10, 1991, p. 26102). The motion is debatable
    within narrow limits of relevance under the hour rule, and consequently
    also is subject to the motion to lay on the table (Speaker Foley, Oct.
    8, 1991, p. 25757).

    [[Page 743]]

    will of the House, as by a vote on the question whether the Member
    should be permitted to proceed in order (Sept. 12, 1996, p. 22899; Sept.
    17, 1996, p. 23426; Sept. 18, 1996, p. 23535; Sept. 25, 1996, p. 24759).
      Where a Member has been called to order not in response to a formal
    demand that words be taken down but in response to a point of order, the
    former practice was to test the opinion of the House by a motion ``that
    the gentleman be allowed to proceed in order'' (V, 5188, 5189; VIII,
    2534). Under the modern practice the Chair either may invite the
    offending Member to proceed in order (see, e.g., Sept. 12, 1996, p.
    22898) or, particularly where admonitions have been ignored, may deny
    the Member recognition for the balance of the time for which he was
    recognized, subject to the

      Words taken down and ruled out of order by the Chair are subject to a
    motion that they be stricken or expunged from the Record. This motion
    has precedence (VIII, 2538-2541; Aug. 21, 1974, p. 29652). Unanimous
    consent to expunge such words often is granted upon the initiative of
    the Chair (May 10, 1990, p. 9992; June 13, 2002, p. ----), and is
    debatable within narrow limits (VIII, 2539; Speaker Martin, June 12,
    1947, p. 6896). However, the motion may not be entertained in the
    Committee of the Whole (Feb. 18, 1941, p. 1126) or offered by the Member
    called to order (Feb. 11, 1941, pp. 894, 899), although that Member may
    ask unanimous consent to withdraw his words (VIII, 2528, 2538, 2540,
    2543, 2544; July 16, 1998, p. 15827; June 28, 2000, pp. 12771, 12776).

      When disorderly words are spoken in the Committee of the Whole, they
    are taken down and read at the Clerk's desk, and the Committee rises
    automatically (VIII, 2533, 2538, 2539) and reports them to the House
    (II, 1257-1259, 1348). Action in the House on words reported from the
    Committee of the Whole is limited to the words reported (VIII, 2528),
    and it is not in order as a question of privilege in the House to
    propose censure of a Member for disorderly words spoken in Committee of
    the Whole but not reported therefrom (V, 5202). After words reported to
    the House from Committee of the Whole have been disposed of (by decision
    of the Chair and any associated action by the House), the Committee
    resumes its sitting without motion (VIII, 2539, 2541).

      The House has censured a Member for disorderly words (II, 1253, 1254,
    1259, 1305; VI, 236). The House may proceed to censure or other action
    although business may have intervened in certain exceptional cases, such
    as when disorderly words are part of an occurrence constituting a breach
    of privilege (II, 1657), when a Member's language has been investigated
    by a committee (II, 1655), when a Member has reiterated on the floor
    certain published charges (III, 2637), when a Member has uttered words
    alleged to be treasonable (II, 1252), or when a Member has uttered an
    attack on the Speaker (II, 1248; Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551; Jan. 19, 1995, p.
    1599).

    Comportment
      For a discussion of resolving the use of objectional exhibits that are
    a breach of decorum, see Sec. 622, supra; and for a discussion of
    resolving the use of objectional exhibits that are not necessarily a
    breach of decorum, see clause 6, Sec. 963, infra.

    [[Page 744]]

    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner is speaking, a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not pass between the person
    speaking and the Chair. During the session of the House, a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not wear a hat or remain by the
    Clerk's desk during the call of the roll or the counting of ballots. A
    person may not smoke or use a wireless telephone or personal computer on
    the floor of the House. The Sergeant-at-Arms is charged with the strict
    enforcement of this clause.

    962. Decorum of Members in the Hall.

      5.  When the Speaker is
    putting a question or addressing the House, a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner may not walk out of or across the Hall. When a

      Until the 104th Congress this clause (formerly clause 7 of rule XIV)
    was made up of provisions adopted in 1789, 1837, 1871, and 1896. In the
    104th Congress a reference to the former Doorkeeper was deleted and a
    prohibition against using any personal electronic office equipment was
    added (secs. 201 and 223, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, pp. 463, 469).
    However, that prohibition was modified in the 108th Congress to cover
    only a wireless telephone or personal computer (sec. 2(k), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 7 of rule XIV
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 745]]

      Originally Members wore their hats during sessions, as in Parliament,
    and the custom was not abolished until 1837 (II, 1136). In the 103d
    Congress the Speaker announced that the prohibition against Members
    wearing hats included doffing the hat in tribute to a group (Speaker
    Foley, June 22, 1993, p. 13569; June 10, 1996, p. 13560). In the 96th
    Congress the Speaker announced that he considered as proper the
    customary and traditional attire for Members, including a coat and tie
    for male Members and appropriate attire for female Members (where
    thermostat controls had been raised in the summer to conserve energy);
    the House then adopted a resolution, offered as a question of the
    privileges of the House, requiring Members to wear proper attire as
    determined by the Speaker, and denying noncomplying Members the
    privilege of the floor (July 17, 1979, pp. 19008, 19073). In the 106th
    Congress Members were reminded of the need to be in proper attire in the
    Chamber (June 28, 2000, p. 12654), and the Chair has so admonished a
    Member speaking in debate without his jacket (Apr. 3, 2001, p. 5361). In
    the 97th Congress, the Speaker announced during a vote by electronic
    device that Members were not permitted under the traditions of the House
    to wear overcoats on the House floor (Dec. 16, 1981, p. 31847).

      The prohibition against using personal electronic office equipment was
    affirmed by response to a parliamentary inquiry (Feb. 23, 1995, p.
    5639). The Chair announced that the use of cellular telephones was not
    permitted on the floor of the House or in the gallery (July 13, 1999, p.
    15744; Oct. 7, 1999, p. 24415; Jan. 27, 2000, p. 132) and that Members
    should disable wireless telephones on entering the Chamber (e.g., June
    12, 2000, p. 10369; July 19, 2000, p. 15344; Oct. 10, 2000, p. 22021;
    Oct. 19, 2000, p. 23616; May 13, 2004, p. ----).

      Smoking is not permitted in the Hall during sessions of the House
    (Oct. 15, 1990, p. 29248), nor during sittings of the Committee of the
    Whole (Aug. 14, 1986, p. 21707); and the prohibition extends to smoking
    behind the rail (Feb. 23, 1995, p. 5640).

      On the opening day of the 101st Congress, the Speaker prefaced his
    customary announcement of policies concerning such aspects of the
    legislative process as recognition for unanimous-consent requests and
    privileges of the floor with a general statement concerning decorum in
    the House, including particular adjurations against engaging in
    personalities, addressing remarks to spectators, and passing in front of
    the Member addressing the Chair (Jan. 3, 1989, p. 88; see also Jan. 5,
    1993, p. 105; Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551). In the 104th Congress the Speaker
    announced: (1) that Members should not traffic, or linger in, the well
    of the House while another Member is speaking (Feb. 3, 1995, p. 3541;
    Mar. 3, 1995, p. 6721; Dec. 15, 1995, p. 37111), including Members who
    may have been invited to the well by the Member speaking (June 12, 2003,
    p. ----); and (2) that Members should not engage in disruption while
    another Member is speaking (Dec. 20, 1995, p. 37878). Under this
    provision the Chair may require a line of Members waiting to sign a
    discharge petition to proceed to the rostrum from the far right-hand
    aisle and require the line not to stand between the Chair and Members
    engaging in debate (Oct. 24, 1997, p. 23293).

      Hissing and jeering is not proper decorum in the House (May 21, 1998,
    p. 10282).

    Exhibits
      A former Member must observe proper decorum under this clause, and the
    Chair may direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to assist the Chair in maintaining
    such decorum (Sept. 17, 1997, p. 19027). In the 105th Congress the House
    adopted a resolution offered as a question of the privileges of the
    House alleging indecorous behavior of a former Member and instructing
    the Sergeant-at-Arms to ban the former Member from the floor, and rooms
    leading thereto, until the resolution of a contested election to which
    he was party (H. Res. 233, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19340).

    [[Page 746]]

    in his discretion, may submit the question of its use to the House
    without debate.

    963. Objections to use of exhibits.

      6.  When the use of an
    exhibit in debate is objected to by a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner, the Chair,

      This provision was rewritten in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    1993, p. 49) to address the use of exhibits in debate rather than the
    reading from papers. As rewritten in the 103d Congress, an objection to
    the use of an exhibit automatically triggered a vote by the House on its
    use. The clause was amended in the 107th Congress to permit the Chair in
    his discretion to submit the question of its use to the House (sec.
    2(o), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule XXX
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      When the use of an exhibit in debate was objected to before the clause
    was rewritten in the 107th Congress, the Chair immediately put the
    question on whether use of the exhibit would be permitted (the Chair was
    not determining a breach of decorum under clause 2 of rule I) (Nov. 1,
    1995, p. 31154; Nov. 10, 1995, p. 20689; July 31, 1996, p. 20689). The
    Chair put the question without debate, and without requiring the
    objecting Member to state the basis for the objection (Nov. 10, 1995, p.
    20689). As such, an objection under this rule was not a point of order:
    it could have been resolved by withdrawal of the exhibit; that failing,
    it amounted to a demand that the Chair put to the House the question
    whether the exhibit may be used (July 31, 1996, p. 20700).

      It is not a proper parliamentary inquiry to ask the Chair to judge the
    accuracy or authenticity of the content of an exhibit (Nov. 10, 1995, p.
    32142; July 11, 2001, p. ----). The Chair has held that a second
    virtually consecutive invocation of this provision, resulting in a
    second pair of votes on use of a chart and on reconsideration thereof,
    was not dilatory under former clause 10 of rule XVI (current clause 1 of
    rule XVI) or former clause 4(b) of rule XI (current clause 6(b) of rule
    XIII) (July 31, 1996, p. 20700). It is not in order to request that the
    voting display be turned on during debate as an exhibit to accompany a
    Member's debate (Oct. 12, 1998, p. 25770). For a discussion of the
    Speaker's responsibility to preserve decorum that may require that he
    disallow the use of exhibits in debate that would be demeaning to the
    House, or to any Member of the House, or that would be disruptive of the
    decorum thereof, see Sec. 622, supra.

    [[Page 747]]

    a report, the reading of it could be demanded as a matter of right, but
    the latest ruling left to the House to determine whether or not an
    accompanying record of testimony should be read (V, 5261, 5262). In
    general the reading of a report was held to be in the nature of debate
    (V, 5292); but where a report presented facts and conclusions but no
    legislative proposition, it was read if submitted for action (IV, 4663).
    Where a paper is offered as involving a matter of privilege it may be
    read to the House (III, 2597; VI, 606; VIII, 2599), rather than by the
    Speaker privately (III, 2546), but a Member may not, as a matter of
    right, require the reading of a book or paper on suggestion that it
    contains matter infringing on the privileges of the House (V, 5258).

    Sec. 964. History of former rule on reading of
    papers.

      The earlier  form of the rule (formerly rule XXX), originally adopted in
    1794 and amended in 1802 and 1880 (V, 5257), addressed reading from
    papers. It recognized the right of a Member under the general
    parliamentary law to have read the paper on which the House is to vote
    (V, 5258), but when that paper had been read once, the reading could not
    be repeated unless by order of the House (V, 5260). The right could be
    abrogated by suspension of the rules (V, 5278-5284; VIII, 3400); but was
    not abrogated simply by the fact that the current procedure was taking
    place under the rule for suspension (V, 5273-5277). On a motion to refer

      The former rule XXX prohibiting the reading of papers in debate was
    held to apply to the exhibition of articles as evidence or in
    exemplification in debate (VIII, 2452, 2453; June 2, 1937, p. 6104; Aug.
    5, 1949, p. 10859), and the new form of the rule adopted in the 103d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49) marks the modern relevance of
    that application. While Members may use exhibits such as charts during
    debate subject to this rule, the Speaker may, pursuant to his authority
    to preserve order and decorum under rule I (see Sec. 622, supra), direct
    the removal of a chart from the well of the House which is not being
    utilized during debate (Apr. 1, 1982, p. 6304), or which is otherwise
    disruptive of decorum.

    [[Page 748]]

    Galleries

    Sec. 965. Earlier practice.

      The reading  of papers other than
    the one on which the vote was about to be taken was usually permitted
    without question (V, 5258), and the Member in debate usually read such
    papers as he pleased. However, this privilege was subject to the
    authority of the House if another Member objected (V, 5285-5291; VIII,
    2597, 2602; Dec. 19, 1974, p. 41425; Dec. 10, 1987, p. 34669). This
    principle applied even to the Member's own written speech (V, 5258;
    VIII, 2598), to a report which he proposed to have read in his own time
    or to read in his place (V, 5293), and to excerpts from the
    Congressional Record (VIII, 2597). After the previous question was
    ordered, a Member could not ask the decision of the House on a request
    for the reading of a paper not before the House for action (V, 5296),
    even though it be the report of the committee (V, 5294, 5295). For
    further discussion, see Sec. Sec. 432-436, supra. Pursuant to the former
    form of this rule, the consent of the House for a Member to read a paper
    in debate only permitted the Member seeking such permission to read as
    much of the paper as possible in the time yielded or allotted to that
    Member, and did not necessarily grant permission to read or to insert
    the entire document (Mar. 1, 1979, p. 3748). Where a Member objected to
    another's reading from a paper, the Chair put the question without
    debate. It was not in order under the guise of parliamentary inquiry to
    debate that question by indicating that the objection was a dilatory
    tactic (Dec. 10, 1987, p. 34672).

    966. Gallery occupants not to be introduced.

      7.  During a
    session of the House, it shall not be in order for a Member, Delegate,
    or Resident Commissioner to introduce to or to bring to the attention of
    the House an occupant in the galleries of the House. The Speaker may not
    entertain a request for the suspension of this rule by unanimous consent
    or otherwise.

    Congressional Record
      This clause was adopted April 10, 1933 (VI, 197). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 8 of rule XIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The Chair
    enforces this clause on his own initiative (Deschler-Brown, ch. 29,
    Sec. Sec. 45.4, 45.7).

    967. Revisions of remarks in debate.

      8. (a)  The
    Congressional Record shall be a substantially verbatim account of
    remarks made during the proceedings of the House, subject only to
    technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections authorized by the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner making the remarks.

      (b) Unparliamentary remarks may be deleted only by permission or order
    of the House.

    Sec. 968. Standard of conduct.

      (c)  This clause establishes a
    standard of conduct within the meaning of clause 3(a)(2) of rule XI.

    [[Page 749]]

    Record by unanimous consent only (Mar. 20, 2002, p. ----). Remarks
    uttered while not under recognition (such as when a Member fails to heed
    the gavel at the expiration of debate time) do not appear in the Record
    (e.g., May 22, 2003, p. ----; Oct. 2, 2003, p. ----; May 19, 2004, p. --
    --). Paragraph (a) also applies to statements and rulings of the Chair
    (Jan. 20, 1995, p. 1866). For a discussion of rules relating to the
    Congressional Record, see Sec. Sec. 685-692, supra.

    Secret sessions
      This clause was adopted in the 104th Congress (sec. 213, 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 9 of rule XIV
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Under paragraph (a) a unanimous-
    consent request to revise and extend remarks permits a Member (1) to
    make technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections to remarks
    uttered and (2) to include in the Record additional remarks not uttered
    to appear in a distinctive typeface; however, such a unanimous-consent
    request does not permit a Member to remove remarks actually uttered
    (Jan. 4, 1995, p. 541). For example, remarks held irrelevant by the
    Chair may be removed from the

    969. Secret session of the House.

      9.  When confidential
    communications are received from the President, or when the Speaker or a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner informs the House that he has
    communications that he believes ought to be kept secret for the present,
    the House shall be cleared of all persons except the Members, Delegates,
    Resident Commissioner, and officers of the House for the reading of such
    communications, and debates and proceedings thereon, unless otherwise
    ordered by the House.

      This provision (formerly rule XXIX), in a somewhat different form, was
    adopted in 1792, although secret sessions had been held by the House
    before that date. They continued to be held at times with considerable
    frequency until 1830. In 1880, at the time of the general revision of
    the rules, the House concluded to retain the rule, although it had been
    long in disuse (V, 7247; VI, 434). Before the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule XXIX (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      The two Houses have legislated in secret session, transmitting their
    messages also in secrecy (V, 7250); but the House has declined to be
    bound to secrecy by act of the Senate (V, 7249). Motions to remove the
    injunction of secrecy should be made with closed doors (V, 7254). In
    1843 a confidential message from the President was referred without
    reading; but no motion was made for a secret session (V, 7255).

    [[Page 750]]

    that the Member has a secret communication to make to the House (June 6,
    1978, p. 16376).
      The House and not the Committee of the Whole determines whether the
    Committee may sit in executive session, and an inquiry relative to
    whether the Committee of the Whole should sit in secret session is
    properly addressed to the Speaker and not to the Chairman of the
    Committee of the Whole (May 9, 1950, p. 6746; June 6, 1978, p. 16376;
    June 20, 1979, p. 15710). A Member seeking to offer the motion that the
    House resolve itself into secret session must qualify, as provided by
    the rule, by asserting

      On June 20, 1979, the House adopted by voice vote a motion that the
    House resolve itself into secret session pursuant to this rule (the
    first such occasion since 1830), where the Member offering the motion
    had ensured the Speaker that he had confidential communications to make
    to the House as required by the rule (pp. 15711-13). The Speaker pro
    tempore announced on that occasion before the commencement of the secret
    session that the galleries would be cleared of all persons, that the
    Chamber would be cleared of all persons except Members and those
    officers and employees specified by the Speaker whose attendance was
    essential to the functioning of the secret session, who would be
    required to sign an oath of secrecy, and that all proceedings in the
    secret session must be kept secret until otherwise ordered by the House
    (June 20, 1979, pp. 15711-13). Where the House has concluded a secret
    session and has not voted to release the transcripts of that session,
    the injunction of secrecy remains and the Speaker may informally refer
    the transcripts to appropriate committees for their evaluation and
    report to the House as to ultimate disposition to be made (June 20,
    1979, pp. 15711-13).

      The following procedures apply during a secret session. The motion for
    a secret session is not debatable (June 20, 1979, p. 15711; Mar. 31,
    1998, p. 5229). The Member who offers the motion may be recognized for
    one hour of debate after the House resolves into secret session, and the
    normal rules of debate, including the principle that no motions would be
    in order unless he yields for that purpose, apply. The Speaker having
    found that a Member has qualified to make the motion for a secret
    session, having confidential communications to make, no point of order
    lies that the material in question must be submitted to the Members to
    make that determination (the motion for a secret session having been
    adopted by the House). No point of order lies in secret session that
    employees designated by the Speaker as essential to the proceedings, who
    have signed an oath of secrecy, may not be present. A motion in secret
    session to make public the proceedings therein is debatable for one
    hour, within narrow limits of relevancy. At the conclusion of debate in
    secret session, a Member may be recognized to offer a motion that the
    session be dissolved (July 17, 1979, pp. 19057-59).

    [[Page 751]]

    1980, p. 3618). Another secret session was held in the 98th Congress
    pending consideration of a bill amending the Intelligence Authorization
    Act to prohibit United States support for military or paramilitary
    operations in Nicaragua (July 19, 1983, p. 19776).
      The House conducted another secret session in the 96th Congress to
    receive confidential communications consisting of classified information
    in the possession of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Permanent
    Select Committee on Intelligence, which those committees had authorized
    to be used in a secret session of the House if ordered; on that occasion
    the Speaker overruled a point of order against the motion for a secret
    session since the Speaker must rely on the assurance of a Member that he
    has confidential communications to make to the House, and since the
    Speaker was aware that the committee with possession of the materials
    had authorized those materials to be used in a secret session (Feb. 25,

      The House may subsequently by unanimous consent order printed in the
    Congressional Record proceedings in secret session, with appropriate
    deletions and revisions agreeable to the committees to which the secret
    transcript has been referred for review (July 17, 1979, p. 19049).

      Under his authority in clause 3 of rule I, the Speaker may convene a
    classified briefing for Members on the House floor when the House is not
    in session (e.g., Mar. 18, 1999, p. 4863).

                                   Rule XVIII

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

    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 752]]

      This provision (formerly 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. 47).

    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). The Chairman recognizes for debate (V, 5003). Like the Speaker,
    the Chairman is forbidden to recognize for requests to suspend the rule
    of admission to the floor (V, 7285).

      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). For example, the
    Chairman does not respond to a parliamentary inquiry relating to
    possible proceedings in the House on a motion to recommit (Feb. 27,
    2002, p. ----). 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. 29537).

      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. 9954). An appeal is debatable in the Committee
    of the Whole under the five-minute rule (June 24, 2003, p. ----). A
    majority vote sustains the ruling (Aug. 1, 1989, p. 17159).

      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). However, 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). 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).

    [[Page 753]]

      Although 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). 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. 14095).

    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 6 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 754]]

    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. 47). A conforming
    change to paragraph (a) was effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(f),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, 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. 47).

    973. Subjects requiring consideration in Committee of the
    Whole.

      3.  All public 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 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. 47). A technical correction
    to this clause was effected in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 755]]

      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. 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 must
    bills ultimately authorizing officials in certain contingencies to part
    with property belonging to the United States (VIII, 2399). 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). 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).

      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). Although conference reports were formerly
    considered in Committee of the Whole, they may not be sent there as a
    result if a point of order that they contain matter ordinarily requiring
    consideration therein (V, 6559-6561).

      When a bill is granted a special order for its consideration in the
    House by special rule (IV, 3216-3224) or by unanimous consent (IV, 4823;
    VIII, 2393), the effect is to discharge the Committee of the Whole. If
    the special order so dictates, the bill is before the full House for
    consideration (IV, 3216; VII, 788). Otherwise, the bill is considered in
    the House as in the Committee of the Whole (VIII, 2393). For a
    discussion of the modern practice of the House, under which a special
    order reported from the Committee on Rules that makes in order no
    amendments, or only one amendment, normally provides for consideration
    of a measure on the Union Calendar in the House, see House Practice, ch.
    12, Sec. 3.

      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).

      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(j)(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 held in the
    Treasury in trust for a nongovernmental entity (IV, 4835, 4836, 4853;
    VIII, 2413), is not governed by the rule.

    [[Page 756]]

    Order of business
      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 a 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). Although 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).

    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. 47). 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 the 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 757]]

    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).

    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.

      (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 758]]

    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). 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. 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. 47). 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. 47).
      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

      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). Time unused by a
    minority manger in general debate will be considered as yielded back
    upon recognition of the majority manager to close general debate (Feb.
    27, 2002, p. ----). In the 104th Congress the Speaker announced his
    intention to strictly enforce time limitations on debate (Jan. 4, 1995,
    p. 457). The Chair manages the sequence in which committees use their
    time for general debate under a special rule as a matter of recognition
    and may recognize any member of the committee who is filling the role of
    chairman or ranking minority member under the governing special rule
    (Mar. 9, 2005, p. ----). For a further discussion of management of time
    for general debate and debate on amendments in the Committee of the
    Whole, see Sec. 959, supra.

    [[Page 759]]

    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.
    8200).
      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. 12522; Sept. 4, 2003, p. ----, p. ----, p. --
    --). However, a Member may not, in time yielded to him for general

    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 (formerly 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, pp. 13437, 13442).-

    Sec. 980. Reading and amendment under the fiveminute
    rule.

      The  second reading 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). The recodification
    of the 106th Congress conformed paragraph (a) to reflect the modern
    practice of first and second readings (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Revenue, general appropriation, lighthouse, and river and harbor bills
    are generally read by paragraphs. Other bills are read by sections (IV,
    4738, 4740). Absent an order of the House to the contrary, 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 Senate
    amendment, however, is read in its entirety, and not by either
    paragraphs or sections (V, 6194). An amendment in the nature of a
    substitute offered from the floor also must be read in its entirety and
    is then open to amendment at any point. Where a special order of
    business provides that an amendment inserting a provision in a bill be
    considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole,
    the text thereby inserted in the bill is not read for amendment in the
    Committee of the Whole (May 23, 2002, p. ----).

    [[Page 760]]

    the floor be read by sections for amendment is not in order (Mar. 25,
    1975, p. 8490). The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole normally
    looks to the manager of a general appropriation bill for any request to
    accelerate the reading by paragraph, although the Chair may recognize a
    Member seeking unanimous consent to offer an amendment to a portion of a
    bill not yet read (July 26, 2001, p. ----).
      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 unanimous-consent request in Committee of the
    Whole that an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered from

      To a bill read by paragraph, a motion to strike an entire title,
    encompassing multiple paragraphs, is not in order (Aug. 5, 1998, p.
    18928). 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). Where a bill is considered by title, the
    offering of an amendment inserting a new title precludes subsequent
    amendment to the pending title (Sept. 14, 2005, p. ----; see also
    Deschler-Brown, ch. 27, Sec. 10.13).

      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, 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). By unanimous consent,
    the Committee of the Whole permitted a Member to withdraw an amendment
    and to reserve her right to reoffer it at a later time, even though that
    portion of the bill would have been passed in the reading (June 28,
    2001, p. ----). 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 (or other portion of the bill then
    open to amendment) should be made before the next paragraph (or portion
    of the bill) is read or before an amendment is offered thereto (V, 6931;
    VIII, 2351; June 16, 2004, p. ----). 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 the amendment (IV, 4751).

      The Member recognized during five-minute debate 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. 11976); 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). For a further discussion of management of time for debate on
    amendments in the Committee of the Whole, see Sec. 959, supra.

    [[Page 761]]

    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. 15735). Recognition of Members to offer
    amendments in the Committee of the Whole under the five-minute rule is
    within the discretion of the Chair and cannot be challenged on a point
    of order (Deschler-Brown, ch. 29, Sec. 9.6). The Chair does not
    anticipate the order in which amendments may be offered nor does he
    declare in advance the order in which he will recognize Members
    proposing amendments (Deschler-Brown, ch. 29, Sec. 21.3).

      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). 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). An amendment that has
    been disposed of in the Committee of the Whole may not be withdrawn
    (June 17, 2004, p. ----).-

    [[Page 762]]

    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).

    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. 15298; May 23, 2002, 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

    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 763]]

    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 of the Union is operating
    under the five-minute

      (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 764]]

    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. 47).
      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 (formerly 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

      The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole must entertain a point of
    order of no quorum during the five-minute rule if a quorum has not yet
    been established in the Committee on the bill then pending (and the fact
    that a quorum of the Committee has previously been established on
    another bill on that day is irrelevant during consideration (Sept. 19,
    1984, p. 26082)). Where a recorded vote on a prior amendment or motion
    during the five-minute rule on that bill on that day has established a
    quorum, a subsequent point of no quorum during debate is precluded (June
    3, 1992, p. 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 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 765]]

    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 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

    Sec. 983. Rising and reports of Committee of the
    Whole.

      Under  clause 6(d), the presence of a quorum is not necessary for
    adoption of a motion that the Committee of the Whole rise (IV, 2975,
    2976, 4914; Mar. 5, 1980, p. 4801; Oct. 3, 1985, p. 26096; May 21, 1992,
    p. 12394; July 21, 2004, p. ----).

    [[Page 766]]

      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. 8203). 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. For a point of
    order against the motion to rise and report an appropriation bill to the
    House where the bill, as proposed to be amended, exceeds an applicable
    allocation of new budget authority under section 302(b) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and setting forth procedures in the
    Committee of the Whole in the event that the point of order is
    sustained, see Sec. 1044b, infra.

      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 recorded 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.

    -  (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. 47).

    [[Page 767]]

    tronic voting on the first in any series of questions shall be 15
    minutes.

      (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 intervening business, provided that the minimum
    time for elec

      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. 47). A vote by division is not such intervening
    business as would preclude a five-minute vote under this paragraph (July
    22, 1994, p. 17609).

      Paragraph (g) was added in the 107th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    2001, p. 25). 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 before adoption of paragraph (g) commonly
    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 (e.g., Aug.
    5, 1998, p. 18950); (2) an amendment pending as unfinished business
    where proceedings 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. 4037; July 19, 2005, 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. 7994); (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. 9954); (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. 11526); 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. 13615).

    [[Page 768]]

    by the voice vote thereon (e.g., Sept. 17, 1998, p. ----, June 25, 2004,
    p. ----) unless the request proposes that the Chair put the question de
    novo (Sept. 22, 2004, p. ----).
      Pursuant to this clause, where the Speaker has announced that he will
    postpone a request for a recorded vote that was made pending a point of
    order of no quorum, the point of order is considered as withdrawn
    because the question is no longer pending after the Speaker's
    announcement (see Sec. 1026, infra). 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. 12087; June 27, 2000, p. 12586). A request for a record vote
    under this paragraph may be withdrawn by unanimous consent before
    proceedings resume on the request as unfinished business, in which case
    the amendment stands disposed of

    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).

    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 769]]

    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. 47).

    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 770]]

    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 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

      This clause (formerly 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.
    121). 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. 47). A clerical correction was
    effected to paragraph (c) in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26).

    [[Page 771]]

    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. 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

      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 (formerly clause 7) 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. 15304), 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. 8348). The motion may be ruled out when
    dilatory (V, 5734).

    [[Page 772]]

    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 by
    motion: (1) 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) 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.
    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

      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. 7515). 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
    (e.g., July 16, 1981, p. 16044; Feb. 28, 1995, pp. 6306-08). 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) a manager of the bill controlling time in opposition to
    an amendment, and not the proponent of the pending amendment, has the
    right to close debate on the amendment (July 16, 1981, p. 16043), even
    where he is the proponent of a pending amendment to the amendment (Mar.
    16, 1983, p. 5792).

    [[Page 773]]

    ever 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 constitute a rejection of the bill or resolution. When

      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 (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. 47). 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 774]]

    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), 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

      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). However, 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 and not on the bill, itself, as well (June 20,
    1975, p. 19966). For more concerning debate on the motion, see Deschler,
    ch. 19, Sec. 13.

      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 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 775]]

    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).
      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

    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).

    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--

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

    [[Page 776]]

          (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.

    Unfunded mandates
      Paragraph (a) (first sentence of former clause 8 of rule XXIII) was
    added 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. 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. 47).

    [[Page 777]]

    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.

    991. Unfunded mandates.

      11. (a)  In the Committee of the
    Whole House on the state of the Union, an amendment proposing only to
    strike

      (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.

    Applicability of Rules of the House
      This provision (formerly 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. 121). 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. 47). An amendment has been
    admitted under this clause to a bill being considered under a modified-
    closed rule that did not specifically preclude such amendment (Apr. 21,
    2005, p. ----).

    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. 47).

    [[Page 778]]

    ing 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. 19218; Oct. 21, 1999, p.
    26492); (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, pp. 13437, 13442; Feb. 9, 2005, p. ---- (Chair corrected himself))
    of general debate specified by the House, including a ``wrap up'' debate
    following the amendment process (Mar. 25, 2004, p. ----); (6) 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);
    (7) to postpone a vote on an appeal of a ruling of the Chair (June 8,
    2000, p. 9954); (8) 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); (9) 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. 11914; July 29, 1999, p. ----); (10) 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. 11914; June 24, 2005, p. ----); (11) to
    permit another to offer an amendment vested in a specified Member (May
    1, 1990, p. 9030); (12) to permit a division of the question on an
    amendment rendered indivisible by a special order (July 16, 1996, p.
    17318); (13) to preclude procedural votes (where the order of the House
    refrained from precluding any form of motion to rise) (July 26, 2001, p.
    ----); (14) to preclude further amendment except as specified (Apr. 3,
    2003, p. ----); (15) to permit the offering of a pro forma amendment to
    an amendment when the special order governing consideration occupied the
    field by permitting pro forma amendments to the bill only (July 7, 2004,
    p. ----).

    Sec. 993.
    Modification of special orders.

      The Chair may not entertain a unanimous-consent  request in the Committee of the Whole
    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 requir

    [[Page 779]]

    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; Mar. 25, 2004, 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); (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. 3980); 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. 10546; July 10,
    2002, p. ----).
      Unanimous-consent requests have been entertained in Committee of the
    Whole: (1) to permit the modification of a designated amendment made in
    order by a special rule, once offered, if the request is propounded by
    the proponent of the amendment (e.g., Sept. 1, 1976, p. 28877; Nov. 19,
    1993, p. 30472; July 24, 1996, p. 18906; Mar. 29, 2000, p. 4017; Mar.
    13, 2002, p. ----), including as unfinished business where proceedings
    on a request for a recorded vote have been postponed (Mar. 30, 2000, p.
    4037); (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

    [[Page 780]]

      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.
    15751). For a description of the authority under clause 6(g) for the
    Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone and cluster requests
    for recorded votes on amendments (which, before the adoption of that
    clause, was commonly provided by special orders of the House), and the
    Chair's interpretation thereof, see Sec. 984, supra.

                                    Rule XIX

    Previous question
                      motions following the amendment stage

    994. The previous question.

      1. (a)  There shall be a motion
    for the previous question, which, being ordered, shall have the effect
    of cutting off all debate and bringing the House to a direct vote on the
    immediate question or questions on which it has been ordered. Whenever
    the previous question has been ordered on an otherwise debatable
    question on which there has been no debate, it shall be in order to
    debate that question for 40 minutes, equally divided and controlled by a
    proponent of the question and an opponent. The previous question may be
    moved and ordered on a single question, on a series of questions
    allowable under the rules, or on an amendment or amendments, or may
    embrace all authorized motions or amendments and include the bill or
    resolution to its passage, adoption, or rejection.

    [[Page 781]]

    motion to commit from clause 1 of rule XVII to clause 2 of this rule (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      The House adopted a rule for the previous question in 1789, but did
    not turn it into an instrument for closing debate until 1811. The
    history of the motion for the previous question is discussed in V, 5443,
    5446; VIII, 2661. In 1880 the previous question rule was amended to
    apply to single motions or a series of motions as well as to amendments,
    and the motion to commit pending the motion for the previous question or
    after the previous question is ordered to passage was added (V, 5443).
    From 1880 to 1890, the previous question could only be ordered to the
    engrossment and third reading, and then again ordered on passage, but in
    1890 the rule was changed to permit ordering the previous question to
    final passage (V, 5443). When the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, it consolidated former clause 1 of rule XVII and a
    provision included in former clause 2 of rule XXVII, permitting 40
    minutes debate on which the previous question has been ordered without
    there having been debate under this clause. The 106th Congress also
    transferred the provision addressing the

      The previous question is the only motion used for closing debate in
    the House itself (V, 5456; VIII, 2662). It is not in order in Committee
    of the Whole (IV, 4716; Apr. 25, 1990, p. 8257) but is in order in the
    House as in Committee of the Whole (VI, 639). The motion may not include
    a provision that it shall take effect at a certain time (V, 5457).

    Sec. 996. Application of the previous
    question.

      The  provisions of the rule define the application of the
    previous question with considerable accuracy. It may not be moved on
    more than one bill, or on motions to agree to a conference report while
    also to dispose of differences not included in the report, except by
    unanimous consent (V, 5461-5465). When ordered on a motion to send to
    conference, it applies to that motion alone and does not extend to a
    subsequent motion to instruct conferees (VIII, 2675). It may apply to
    the main question and a pending motion to refer (V, 5466; VI, 373; VIII,
    2678), or to a pending resolution and a pending amendment thereto (Sept.
    25, 1990, p. 25575; July 16, 1998, p. 15793). When a bill is reported
    from the Committee of the Whole with the recommendation that the
    enacting words be stricken out, it may be applied to the motion to
    concur without covering further action on the bill (V, 5342). During
    consideration ``in the House as in Committee of the Whole'' it may be
    demanded while Members still desire to offer amendments (IV, 4926-4929;
    VI, 639), but it may not be moved on a single section of a bill (IV,
    4930). When ordered on a resolution with a preamble there is doubt of
    its application to the preamble, unless the motion specifies (V, 5469,
    5470). It may be moved on a series of resolutions, but this does not
    preclude a division of the resolutions on the vote (V, 5468), although
    where two propositions on which the previous question is moved are
    related, as in the case of a special order reported from the Committee
    on Rules and a pending amendment thereto, a division is not in order
    (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575). The previous question is often ordered on
    nondebatable propositions to prevent amendment (V, 5473, 5490), but may
    not be moved on a motion that is both nondebatable and unamendable (IV,
    3077). It applies to questions of privilege as to other questions (II,
    1256; V, 5459, 5460; VIII, 2672).

    [[Page 782]]

    of the reporting committee (Oct. 1, 1986, p. 27468). If, after debate,
    the Member in charge of the bill does not move the previous question,
    another Member may (V, 5475); but where a Member intervenes on a pending
    proceeding to make a preferential motion, such as the motion to recede
    from a disagreement with the Senate, he may not move the previous
    question on that motion as against the rights of the Member in charge
    (II, 1459), and the Member in charge is entitled to recognition to move
    the previous question even after he has surrendered the floor in debate
    (VIII, 2682, 3231). Where a Member controlling the time on a bill or
    resolution in the House yields for the purpose of amendment (or offers
    an amendment himself), another Member may move the previous question
    before the Member offering the amendment is recognized to debate it
    (Deschler, ch. 23, Sec. 18.3; July 24, 1979, p. 20385). Where under a
    rule of the House debate time on a motion or proposition is equally
    divided and controlled by the majority and the minority, or between
    those in favor and those opposed (see, e.g., clauses 2 and 6 of rule
    XV), or where a block of time for debate has been yielded by the
    manager, the previous question may not be moved until the other side has
    used or yielded back its time; and the Chair may vacate the adoption of
    the previous question where it was improperly moved while the other side
    was still seeking time (Oct. 3, 1989, p. 22842). The previous question
    may not be demanded on a proposition against which a point of order is
    pending (VIII, 3433).

    Sec. 997. The right to move the previous
    question.

      The  Member in charge of the bill and having the floor may demand
    the previous question although another Member may propose a motion of
    higher privilege (VIII, 2684), but the motion of higher privilege must
    be put first (V, 5480; VIII, 2609, 2684), and if the Member in charge of
    the bill claims the floor in debate another Member may not demand the
    previous question (II, 1458); but having the floor, unless yielded to
    for debate only, any Member may make the motion although the effect may
    be to deprive the Member in charge of the bill (V, 5476; VIII, 2685).
    The Member who has called up a measure in the House has priority of
    recognition to move the previous question thereon, even over the
    chairman

    Sec. 998. Relation of the previous question to
    motions.

      The  motion to lay on the table may not be applied to the previous
    question (V, 5410, 5411); and it may not be applied to the main question
    after the previous question has been ordered (V, 5415-5422; VIII, 2655),
    or after the yeas and nays have been ordered on the demand for the
    previous question (V, 5408, 5409).

      The motion to postpone may not be applied to the main question after
    the previous question has been ordered (V, 5319-5321; VIII, 2617). The
    previous question may be applied both to the main question and a pending
    motion to refer (V, 5342; VI, 373). The motion to adjourn is not
    available when the previous question has been ordered by special rule to
    final passage without intervening motion (IV, 3211-3213, June 14, 2001,
    p. ----; Apr. 18, 2002, p. ----).

    [[Page 783]]

    ment and the original proposition, which has been debated (V, 5504)
    (although when the previous question is ordered merely on an amendment
    that has not been debated, the 40 minutes are allowed (V, 5503)); (3) on
    incidental motions (V, 5497-5498); (4) on propositions previously
    debated in Committee of the Whole (V, 5505); (5) on conference reports
    accompanying measures that were debated before being sent to conference
    (V, 5506-5507); (6) on ancillary measures, such as a concurrent
    resolution to correct an enrolled bill (V, 5508). Debate allowed under
    this provision is equally divided and controlled between the person
    demanding the time and a Member representing the opposition (V, 5495;
    Sept. 13, 1965, pp. 23602-06; May 8, 1985, p. 11073). Priority in
    recognition for time in opposition is accorded to a Member truly opposed
    (VIII, 2689).

    Sec. 999. The 40 minutes of debate on undebated
    propositions.

      This  clause allows 40 minutes of debate when the previous
    question is ordered on an otherwise debatable proposition on which there
    has been no debate (V, 6821; VIII, 2689; Sept. 13, 1965, p. 23602; Mar.
    22, 1990, p. 4996). However, any previous debate on the merits of the
    main proposition precludes the 40 minutes (V, 5499-5502). The demand for
    40 minutes of debate must come before the vote is taken on the main
    question (V, 5496). It is not available: (1) when the question on which
    the previous question is ordered is otherwise nondebatable, such as the
    motion to close debate (VIII, 2555, 2690); (2) on an undebated amendment
    where the motion for the previous question covers both the amend

    Sec. 1000. Questions of order pending the motion for the
    previous question.

      (b)  Incidental questions of order arising during the
    pendency of a motion for the previous question shall be decided, whether
    on appeal or otherwise, without debate.

      This provision was adopted in 1837 to prevent delay by debate on
    points of order after the demand for the previous question (V, 5448).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 3 of rule XVII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). Under the present practice, the Chair may recognize and
    respond to a parliamentary inquiry although the previous question may
    have been demanded (Mar. 27, 1926, p. 6469).

    Recommit
      A question of privilege relating to the integrity of action of the
    House itself has been distinguished from ordinary questions of order and
    has been thrown open to debate after the ordering of the previous
    question (III, 2532).

    [[Page 784]]

    dent Commissioner who is opposed to the measure.

    1001. Recommit.

      2. (a)  After the previous question has been
    ordered on passage or adoption of a measure, or pending a motion to that
    end, it shall be in order to move that the House recommit (or commit, as
    the case may be) the measure, with or without instructions, to a
    standing or select committee. For such a motion to recommit, the Speaker
    shall give preference in recognition to a Member, Delegate, or Resi

      (b) Except as provided in paragraph (c), if a motion that the House
    recommit a bill or joint resolution on which the previous question has
    been ordered to passage includes instructions, it shall be debatable for
    10 minutes equally divided between the proponent and an opponent.

      (c) On demand of the floor manager for the majority, it shall be in
    order to debate the motion for one hour equally divided and controlled
    by the proponent and an opponent.

      The motion to commit or recommit described in paragraph (a) was added
    to the previous question rule (formerly clause 1 of rule XVII) in 1880
    (V, 5443). The portion of paragraph (a) that gives preference in
    recognition to one opposed to the measure was added to former clause 4
    of rule XVI in the 61st Congress (Mar. 15, 1909, pp. 22-34). Paragraphs
    (b) and (c), relating to debate on the motion to recommit with
    instructions were added to former clause 4 of rule XVI by section 123 of
    the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 and made a part of the
    standing rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 21, 1971, p. 14).
    That provision was also amended in the 99th Congress to provide that on
    the demand of the majority floor manager of a bill or joint resolution,
    the 10 minutes of debate on a motion to recommit with instructions, the
    previous question having been ordered, may be extended to one hour,
    equally divided and controlled (H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393). When
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it consolidated
    the last sentence of former clause 1 of rule XVII and provisions of
    former clause 4 of rule XVI, addressing the motion to recommit, under
    this clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). For a general discussion
    of the motion to refer see Sec. 916, supra.

    [[Page 785]]

    ments after the stage of disagreement where utilized to displace a
    pending preferential motion (Speaker Albert, Sept. 16, 1976, p. 30887).

    Sec. 1002. Application of motion.

      The  motion to commit under
    this rule applies to resolutions of the House alone as well as to bills
    (V, 5572, 5573; VIII, 2742), and to a motion to amend the Journal (V,
    5574). It does not apply to a report from the Committee on Rules
    providing a special order of business (V, 5593-5601; VIII, 2270, 2750),
    or to a pending amendment to a proposition in the House (V, 5573). A
    motion to commit under this clause, with instructions to report
    forthwith with an amendment, has been allowed after the previous
    question has been ordered on a motion to dispose of Senate amendments
    before the stage of disagreement (V, 5575; VIII, 2744, 2745). However, a
    motion to commit under this clause does not apply to a motion disposing
    of Senate amend

      The motion to commit may be made pending the demand for the previous
    question on passage (or adoption), whether a bill or resolution is under
    consideration (V, 5576). However, when the demand covers all stages of
    the bill to passage, the motion to commit is made only after the third
    reading and is not in order pending the demand or before third reading
    (V, 5578-5581). When separate motions for the previous question are
    made, respectively, on the third reading and on passage of a bill, the
    motion to commit should be made only after the previous question is
    ordered on passage (V, 5577). When the House refuses to order a bill to
    be engrossed and read a third time, the motion to commit may not be made
    (V, 5602, 5603). When the previous question has been ordered on a simple
    resolution (as distinguished from a joint resolution) and a pending
    amendment, the motion to commit should be made after the vote on the
    amendment (V, 5585-5588). A motion to commit has been entertained after
    ordering of the previous question even before the adoption of rules at
    the beginning of a Congress (VIII, 2755; Jan. 5, 1981, p. 111).

      When a special order declares that at a certain time the previous
    question shall be considered as ordered on a bill to final passage, it
    has usually, but not always, been held that a motion to commit is
    precluded (IV, 3207-3209). Under clause 6(c) of rule XIII (formerly
    clause 4(b) of rule XI) the Committee on Rules is prohibited from
    reporting a special order that precludes the motion to recommit as
    provided in clause 2 of rule XIX (VIII, 2260, 2262-2264; see also
    Sec. 1001, supra). That provision was amended in the 104th Congress to
    further prohibit the Committee on Rules from denying the Minority Leader
    or his designee the right to include proper amendatory instructions in a
    motion to recommit except with respect to a Senate measure for which the
    text of a House-passed measure has been substituted (sec. 210, H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 460). Where a special order providing for
    consideration of a matter in the House provides that the previous
    question shall be considered as ordered thereon without intervening
    motion and does not simply state that the previous question be
    considered as ordered after debate, the previous question is considered
    as ordered from the beginning of the debate, precluding the
    consideration of any intervening motion (Mar. 12, 1980, pp. 5387-93;
    June 14, 2001, p. ----).

      Where a bill is recommitted under this motion the previous question
    being pending but not ordered on final passage and, having been reported
    again, is again amended and subjected to the previous question, another
    motion to commit is in order after the engrossment and third reading (V,
    5591).

    [[Page 786]]

    in the rule (June 22, 1995, p. 16844). Before the amendment of this
    clause in the 92d Congress, no debate was permitted on a motion to
    recommit with instructions after the previous question was ordered (V,
    5561, 5582-5584; VIII, 2741). The 10 minutes of debate provided under
    this clause on motions to recommit with instructions does not apply to a
    motion to recommit with instructions of a simple or concurrent
    resolution or conference report, since the clause limits its
    applicability to bills and joint resolutions (Nov. 15, 1973, p. 37151;
    Mar. 29, 1976, p. 8444; Speaker O'Neill, June 19, 1986, p. 14698). The
    manager of a bill or joint resolution, if opposed, and not the proponent
    of a motion to recommit with instructions has the right to close
    controlled debate on a motion to recommit (Speaker Wright, Dec. 3, 1987,
    p. 34066). The Member recognized for five minutes in favor of the motion
    may not reserve time (Speaker Wright, June 29, 1988, p. 16510; June 29,
    1989, p. 13938). Although time for debate on a motion to recommit with
    instructions is not ``controlled,'' and therefore Members may not
    reserve or yield blocks of time, a Member under recognition may yield to
    another while remaining on his feet (Feb. 27, 2002, p. ----).

    Sec. 1002a. Consideration of motion.

      When  the previous
    question is ordered on a bill to final passage, debate on a straight
    motion to recommit under this clause is no longer in order and only a
    motion to recommit with instructions is debatable for the 10 minutes
    specified

      Although the ordering of the previous question on a bill and all
    amendments to final passage precludes debate (other than that specified
    in clause 2 of rule XIX) on a motion to recommit, it does not exclude
    amendments to such motion (V, 5582; VIII, 2741); and, unless the
    previous question is ordered on a motion to recommit with instructions,
    the motion is open to amendment germane to the bill (see V, 6888; VIII,
    2711). An amendment to a motion to recommit is read in full (unless the
    reading is dispensed with by unanimous consent) (Feb. 27, 2002, p. ----
    ). An amendment to a motion to recommit is not debatable (Feb. 27, 2002,
    p. ----). An amendment striking out all of the proposed instructions and
    substituting others cannot be ruled out as interfering with the right of
    the minority to move recommitment (VIII, 2698, 2759). The Member
    offering a motion to recommit a bill with instructions may, at the
    conclusion of the 10 minutes of debate thereon, yield to another Member
    to offer an amendment to the motion if the previous question has not
    been ordered on the motion to recommit (Speaker Albert, July 19, 1973,
    p. 24967).

      The motion may be withdrawn in the House at any time before action or
    decision thereon (VIII, 2764). The motion may not be laid on the table
    after the previous question has been ordered (V, 5412-5414).

    [[Page 787]]

    Sec. 1002b. Instructions with motion.

      The  simple motion to
    recommit and the motion to recommit with instructions are of equal
    privilege and have no relative precedence (VIII, 2714, 2758, 2762; Nov.
    25, 1970, p. 38997). It has been a practice to permit a motion to
    recommit with instructions that the committee report ``forthwith,'' in
    which case the chairman makes report at once without awaiting action by
    the committee (V, 5545-5547; VIII, 2730), and the bill is before the
    House for immediate consideration (V, 5550; VIII, 2735).

      It is not in order to propose as instructions anything that might not
    be proposed directly as an amendment such as: (1) to propose an
    amendment that is not germane (V, 5529-5541, 5834, 5889; VIII, 2705,
    2707, 2708); (2) to amend or eliminate an amendment adopted by the House
    (unless permitted by special order) (V, 5531; VIII, 2712, 2714, 2715,
    2720-2724); (3) to propose an amendment in violation of clauses 2, 4, or
    5 of rule XXI (V, 5533-5540; Sept. 1, 1976, p. 28883; Sept. 19, 1983, p.
    24646; Speaker Foley, Aug. 1, 1989, p. 17159, and Aug. 3, 1989, p.
    18546, each time sustained by tabling of appeal; July 1, 1992, p. 17294;
    June 22, 1995, p. 16844); or (4) to change the Rules of the House by
    authorizing a committee to report at any time (V, 5543) or directing a
    committee to report by a date certain (V, 5549). However, it has been
    held in order to reoffer an amendment rejected by the House (VIII,
    2728). A waiver of all points of order against consideration of a bill
    does not inure to the motion to recommit (May 9, 2003, p. ----).

      Where a special rule providing for the consideration of a bill
    prohibited the offering of amendments to a certain title of the bill (at
    any point during consideration), it was held not in order to offer a
    motion to recommit with instructions to amend the restricted title (Jan.
    11, 1934, pp. 479-83). However, that precedent should be read in light
    of clause 6(c)(2) of rule XIII, which precludes the Rules Committee from
    reporting a rule that would prevent a motion to recommit from including
    amendatory instructions (see Sec. 857, supra).

      In cases where amendatory instructions are not in order, the motion
    has directed a committee to study an issue and to report ``promptly''
    its recommendations (Mar. 29, 1990, p. 1834). Instructions must be
    germane to the bill regardless of whether they directly propose an
    amendment thereto (Sept. 23, 1992, p. 27178). Unlike the case of a
    motion to recommit with instructions to report back ``forthwith'' (the
    adoption of which occasions an immediate report on the floor), the
    adoption of a motion to recommit with instructions to report back
    ``promptly'' sends the bill to committee, whose eventual report (if any)
    would not be immediately before the House (Deschler, ch. 23, Sec. 32.25;
    May 24, 2000, p. 9151).

      Only one motion to commit is in order (V, 5577, 5582, 5585; VIII,
    2763). If one motion to recommit is ruled out, a proper motion is
    admissible (VIII, 2736, 2760, 2761, 2763; June 22, 2005, p. ----).
    Similarly, if the House votes pursuant to section 426(b)(3) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 not to consider a motion to recommit
    against which a Member has made a point of order under section 425(a) of
    that Act, a proper motion to recommit remains available (Mar. 28, 1996,
    p. 6932).

      A motion to recommit with instructions was ruled out of order before
    the entire motion had been read as a matter of form where a special
    order of business precluded instructions (May 6, 2004, p. ----).

    [[Page 788]]

    a bill to a committee with instructions to report it back forthwith with
    certain amendments, the amendments must be adopted by the House after
    the report by the committee (VIII, 2734).
      When a bill is recommitted, it is before the committee as a new
    subject (IV, 4557; V, 5558), but the committee must confine itself to
    the instructions if there be any (IV, 4404; V, 5526). Where the House
    has recommitted

      The motion to recommit may not be accompanied by preamble or otherwise
    include argument, explanation, or other matter in the nature of debate
    (V, 5589; VIII, 2749). Thus, a motion to recommit a bill to a standing
    committee with recommendations for producing legislation that the
    President could sign was held inadmissible in both form and content
    (Feb. 27, 1992, p. 3778).

    Sec. 1002c. Recognition to offer motion.

      Before  former
    clause 4 of rule XVI was amended in 1909 to give priority in recognition
    for the motion to recommit to an opponent of a bill or joint resolution
    pending final passage, it was held that the opponents of a bill had no
    claim to prior recognition (II, 1456). Although the provision as amended
    in 1909 applied only to bills and joint resolutions, the principle
    embodied in that provision was applied also to motions to recommit
    simple or concurrent resolutions or conference reports under former
    clause 1 of rule XVII (VIII, 2764; Nov. 28, 1979, p. 33914). When the
    House consolidated the last sentence of former clause 1 of rule XVII and
    provisions of former clause 4 of rule XVI, addressing the motion to
    recommit, under this clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47), the
    sentence conferring prior recognition to the opposition was formally
    applied to all measures. However, precedents under former clause 1 of
    rule XVII still dictate that recognition to offer a motion to commit a
    resolution offered from the floor as a privileged matter without having
    been referred to committee does not depend on opposition to the
    resolution or on party affiliation (Speaker Albert, Feb. 19, 1976, p.
    3920).

    [[Page 789]]

    Members to reflect on the importance of the Chair's being able to rely
    on the veracity of a Member's assertion, when qualifying to offer a
    motion to recommit, that he is opposed to the bill; and he recited to
    the Members the following apology by the ranking minority member of the
    Committee on Appropriations in 1979: ``The honorable, if not technical,
    duty of a Member offering a motion to recommit is to vote against the
    bill on final passage'' (Speaker Hastert, June 23, 2005, p. ----,
    quoting from Deschler-Brown, ch. 29, Sec. 23.49).The priority of
    recognition of a Member of the minority who is opposed is not diminished
    by the fact that the minority party may have successfully led the
    opposition to the previous question on the special order governing
    consideration of the bill and offered a ``modified-closed'' rule
    permitting only minority Members to offer perfecting amendments to the
    majority text (June 26, 1981, p. 14740). However, although the motion to
    recommit is the prerogative of the minority if opposed, a Member who in
    the Speaker's determination led the opposition to the previous question
    on the motion to recommit, such as the chairman of the committee
    reporting the bill, is entitled to offer an amendment to the motion to
    recommit, regardless of party affiliation (June 26, 1981, pp. 14791-93).
    The right to offer a motion to recommit a House bill with a Senate
    amendment belongs to a Member who is opposed to the whole bill in
    preference to a Member who is merely opposed to the Senate amendment
    (VIII, 2772). Where the previous question has been ordered on both the
    pending resolution and its preamble, a Member may qualify to offer a
    motion to recommit on the basis of his opposition to the preamble, even
    though it is not otherwise subject to separate vote or amendment (Feb.
    12, 1998, p. 1333). A Member rising in opposition to a motion to
    recommit must likewise qualify as opposed to the motion (Apr. 29, 1998,
    p. 7156).

    Reconsideration
      When applying this rule the Speaker looks first to the Minority Leader
    or his designee (as imputed by the form of former clause 4(b) of rule XI
    adopted in the 104th Congress (current clause 6(c) of rule XIII)). If
    the Minority Leader is not seeking recognition, the Speaker looks to
    minority members of the committee reporting the bill, in order of their
    rank on the committee (Speaker Garner, Jan. 6, 1932, p. 1396; Speaker
    Byrns, July 2, 1935, p. 10638), then to other Members on the minority
    side (Speaker Rayburn, Aug. 16, 1950, p. 12608). Until a qualifying
    minority Member has had his motion read by the Clerk, he is not entitled
    to the floor so as to prevent another, senior qualifying minority member
    from the reporting committee from seeking recognition to offer the
    motion to recommit (Speaker O'Neill, Apr. 24, 1979, p. 8360). If no
    Member of the minority qualifies, a majority Member who is opposed to
    the bill may be recognized (Speaker Garner, Apr. 1, 1932, p. 7327). The
    Chair does not assess the degree of a Member's opposition (Oct. 23,
    1991, p. 28258). A Member who is opposed to the bill ``in its present
    form'' (i.e., in the form before the House when the motion is made)
    qualifies to offer the motion (Speaker Martin, Apr. 15, 1948, p. 4547;
    Speaker McCormack, Mar. 12, 1964, p. 5147). In response to a
    parliamentary inquiry, the Chair requested all

    [[Page 790]]

    sion of Congress, such a motion shall be disposed of when entered.

    1003. The motion to reconsider.

      3.  When a motion has been
    carried or lost, it shall be in order on the same or succeeding day for
    a Member on the prevailing side of the question to enter a motion for
    the reconsideration thereof. The entry of such a motion shall take
    precedence over all other questions except the consideration of a
    conference report or a motion to adjourn, and may not be withdrawn after
    such succeeding day without the consent of the House. Once entered, a
    motion may be called up for consideration by any Member. During the last
    six days of a ses

      The motion to reconsider used in the Continental Congress and in the
    House of Representatives from its first organization, in 1789, was first
    made the subject of a rule in 1802; and at various times this rule has
    been perfected by amendments (V, 5605). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1
    of rule XVIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      The motion is not used in Committee of the Whole (IV, 4716-4718; VIII,
    2324, 2325), but is in order in the House as in Committee of the Whole
    (VIII, 2793). It is not in order in the House during the absence of a
    quorum when the vote proposed to be reconsidered requires a quorum (V,
    5606). However, on votes incident to a call of the House the motion to
    reconsider may be entertained and also laid on the table, although a
    quorum may not be present (V, 5607, 5608).

    Sec. 1004. Maker of the motion to reconsider.

      The  mover of a
    proposition is entitled to prior recognition to move to reconsider (II,
    1454). A Member may make the motion at any time without thereby
    abandoning a prior motion made by himself and pending (V, 5610). A
    Delegate or the Resident Commissioner may not make the motion in the
    House (rule III; II, 1292; VI, 240). The provision of the rule that the
    motion may be made by any Member of the majority is construed, in case
    of a tie vote, to mean any Member of the prevailing side (V, 5615,
    5616), and the same construction applies in case of a two-thirds vote
    (II, 1656; V, 5617, 5618; VIII, 2778-2780). Where the yeas and nays have
    not been ordered recorded in the Journal, any Member, irrespective of
    whether he voted with the majority or not, may make the motion to
    reconsider (V, 5611-5613, 5689; VIII, 2775, 2785; Sept. 23, 1992, p.
    27196); but a Member who was absent (V, 5619), or who was paired in
    favor of the majority contention and did not vote, may not make the
    motion (V, 5614; VIII, 2774). When proxy voting was permitted in
    committee, it was generally held that a member who was not present at a
    vote, but cast his vote by proxy, did not qualify to make the motion to
    reconsider thereon. Any Member may object to the Chair's statement that
    by unanimous consent the motion to reconsider a vote is laid on the
    table, and the objecting Member need not have voted on the prevailing
    side, but if objection is made, the Chair's statement is ineffective and
    only a Member who voted on the prevailing side may offer the motion to
    reconsider the vote (Aug. 15, 1986, p. 22139). The Chair, having voted
    on the prevailing side, may offer the motion to reconsider by stating
    the pendency of the motion (Oct. 9, 1997, p. 22017).

    [[Page 791]]

    tion has been moved on a motion to postpone (V, 5663), and a motion to
    reconsider the vote on the third reading may be made and acted on after
    a motion for the previous question on the passage has been made (V,
    5656). It also takes precedence of the motion to go into Committee of
    the Whole to consider an appropriation bill (VIII, 2785), or even of a
    demand that the House return to Committee after the appearance of a
    quorum (IV, 3087). However, in a case wherein the House had passed a
    bill and disposed of a motion to reconsider the vote on its passage, it
    was held to be too late to reconsider the vote sustaining the decision
    of the Chair which brought the bill before the House (V, 5652), and that
    a motion to vacate those proceedings was not in order (Speaker O'Neill,
    Dec. 17, 1985, pp. 37472-74). After a conference has been agreed to and
    the managers for the House appointed, it is too late to move to
    reconsider the vote whereby the House acted on the amendments in
    disagreement (V, 5664). Although the motion has high privilege for
    entry, it may not be considered while another question is before the
    House (V, 5673-5676; July 2, 1980, p. 18354), or while the House is
    dividing (VIII, 2791). A motion to reconsider a secondary motion to
    postpone that has previously been offered and rejected is highly
    privileged, even after the manager of the main proposition has yielded
    time to another Member and before that Member has begun his remarks (May
    29, 1980, p. 12663). When it relates to a bill belonging to a particular
    class of business, consideration of the motion is in order only when
    that class of business is in order (V, 5677-5681; VIII, 2786). It may
    then be called up at any time; but is not the regular order until called
    up (V, 5682; VIII, 2785, 2786). When once entered it may remain pending
    indefinitely, even until a succeeding session of the same Congress (V,
    5684). The motion to reconsider is subject to the question of
    consideration (VIII, 2437), and may be laid on the table (VIII, 2652,
    2659). The motion to reconsider an action taken on a bill on Tuesday may
    be entered but may not be considered on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 905).

    Sec. 1005. Precedence of the motion to
    reconsider.

      The  precedence given the motion by the rule permits it to be
    made even after the previous question has been demanded (V, 5656) or
    while it is operating (V, 5657-5662; VIII, 2784). The motion to
    reconsider the vote on the engrossment of a bill may be admitted after
    the previous ques

      The motion to reconsider is in order in the procedure of standing
    committees and may be made on the same day on which the action is taken
    to which it is proposed to be applied, or on the next day thereafter on
    which the committee convenes with a quorum present at a properly
    scheduled meeting at which business of that class is in order (VIII,
    2213). In a committee reconsideration of an amendment may require that
    the motion to report first be reconsidered, and then the ordering of the
    previous question on the measure, before a motion can be offered to
    reconsider the amendment (Cf. VIII, 2789).

    [[Page 792]]

    taken the oath and entered upon the duties of his office (U.S. v. Smith,
    286 U.S. 6 (1932)). The fact that the House had informed the Senate that
    it had agreed to a Senate amendment to a House bill was held not to
    prevent a motion to reconsider the vote on agreeing (V, 5672). When a
    motion is made to reconsider a vote on a bill that has gone to the
    Senate, a motion to recall the bill is privileged (V, 5669-5671). The
    motion to reconsider may be applied once only to a vote ordering the
    previous question (V, 5655; VIII, 2790), and may not be applied to a
    vote ordering the previous question that has been partially executed (V,
    5653, 5654); but a vote agreeing to an order of the House has been
    reconsidered, although the execution of the order had begun (III, 2028;
    V, 5665). The vote ordering the previous question on a special order
    reported from the Committee on Rules may be reconsidered and is not
    dilatory under clause 6(b) of rule XIII (formerly clause 4(b) of rule
    XI) (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575).

    Sec. 1006. Application of the motion to reconsider.

      A  motion
    to reconsider may be entertained, although the bill or resolution to
    which it applies may have gone to the other House or the President (V,
    5666-5668). However, unanimous consent is required to initiate
    reconsideration of a measure passed by both Houses (IV, 3466-3469). The
    Senate may not reconsider the confirmation of a nomination after a
    commission has been issued by the President to a nominee and the latter
    has

    [[Page 793]]

    p. 27323). For a discussion of the application of the motion to
    reconsider in committees, see Sec. 416, supra.
      The motion may not be applied to negative votes on motions to adjourn
    (V, 5620-5622), or for a recess (V, 5625), or to go into Committee of
    the Whole (V, 5641). The motion to reconsider may be applied however to
    an affirmative vote on the motion to resolve into the Committee of the
    Whole while the Speaker is still in the chair (V, 5368; Apr. 20, 1978,
    p. 10990). A motion to reconsider the vote by which the House had
    decided a question of parliamentary procedure was held not to be in
    order (VIII, 2776). Motions to reconsider negative votes on motions to
    fix the day to which the House shall adjourn have been the subject of
    conflicting rulings (V, 5623, 5624). It is in order to reconsider a vote
    postponing a bill to a day certain (V, 5643; May 29, 1980, p. 12663). It
    is not in order to reconsider a negative decision of the question of
    consideration (V, 5626, 5627), although it is in order to reconsider an
    affirmative vote on the question of consideration (Oct. 4, 1994, p.
    27644). It is not in order to reconsider a negative vote on the motion
    to suspend the rules (V, 5645, 5646; VIII, 2781; Sept. 28, 1996, p.
    25796), although it is in order to reconsider an affirmative vote on
    that motion (Sept. 28, 1996, p. 25795). It is not in order to reconsider
    a vote on reconsideration of a bill returned with the objections of the
    President (VIII, 2778). A vote whereby a second is ordered may be
    reconsidered (V, 5642). The motion to reconsider a vote on a proposition
    having been once agreed to, and the said vote having again been taken, a
    second motion to reconsider may not be made unless the nature of the
    proposition has been changed by amendment (V, 5685-5688; VIII, 2788;
    Sept. 20, 1979, p. 25512). After disposition of a conference report and
    amendments reported from conference in disagreement, it is in order on
    the same day to move to reconsider the vote on a motion disposing of one
    of the amendments; but laying on the table a motion to reconsider the
    vote whereby the House has amended a Senate amendment does not preclude
    the House from acting on a subsequent Senate amendment to that House
    amendment, or considering any other proper motion to dispose of an
    amendment that might remain in disagreement after further Senate action
    (Oct. 5, 1983,

    Sec. 1007. Effect of the motion to reconsider.

      A  bill is not
    considered passed or an amendment agreed to if a motion to reconsider is
    pending, the effect of the motion being to suspend the original
    proposition (V, 5704); and the Speaker declines to sign an enrolled bill
    until a pending motion to reconsider has been disposed of (V, 5705).
    However, when the Congress expires leaving undisposed a motion to
    reconsider the vote whereby a simple resolution of the House has been
    agreed to, it is probable that the resolution would be operative; and
    where a bill has been enrolled, signed by the Speaker, and approved by
    the President, it is undoubtedly a law, even though a motion to
    reconsider may not have been disposed of (V, 5704, note). A Member-elect
    may not take the oath until a motion to reconsider the vote determining
    his title is disposed of (I, 335); but when, in such a case, the motion
    is disposed of, the right to be sworn is complete (I, 622). When the
    motion to reconsider is decided in the affirmative the question
    immediately recurs on the question reconsidered (V, 5703). When a vote
    whereby an amendment has been agreed to is reconsidered the amendment
    becomes simply a pending amendment (V, 5704). When the vote ordering the
    previous question is reconsidered, it is in order to withdraw the motion
    for the previous question, the ``decision'' having been nullified (V,
    5357). When the previous question has been ordered on a series of
    motions and its force has not been exhausted, the reconsideration of the
    vote on one of the motions does not throw it open to debate (V, 5493).
    Under the earlier practice, when a vote taken under the operation of the
    previous question was reconsidered, the main question stood divested of
    the previous question, and was debatable and amendable without
    reconsideration separately of the motion for the previous question (V,
    5491-5492, 5700). However, under the modern practice, where the House
    adopts a motion to reconsider a vote on a question on which the previous
    question has been ordered, the question to be reconsidered is neither
    debatable nor amendable (unless the vote on the previous question is
    separately reconsidered) (July 2, 1980, p. 18355). It is in order to
    move to reconsider the ordering of the yeas and nays on a question
    before the question has been finally decided (V, 5689-5691, 6029; VIII,
    2790; Sept. 24, 1997, p. 19946); but where the House had voted to
    reconsider the vote whereby it had rejected a bill but had not
    separately reconsidered the ordering of a record vote, the Speaker put
    the question de novo and entertained a new demand for a record vote
    (Sept. 20, 1979, p. 25512).

    [[Page 794]]

    Sec. 1008. The vote on the motion to reconsider.

      The  motion
    to reconsider is agreed to by majority vote, even when the vote
    reconsidered requires two-thirds for affirmative action (II, 1656; V,
    5617, 5618; VIII, 2795), or when only one-fifth is required for
    affirmative action, as in votes ordering the yeas and nays (V, 5689-
    5692, 6029; VIII, 2790). However, one motion to reconsider the yeas and
    nays having been acted on, another motion to reconsider is not in order
    (V, 6037).

    Sec. 1009. Relation of the motion to reconsider to the
    motion to lay on the table.

      A  vote on the motion to lay on the table may
    be reconsidered whether the decision be in the affirmative (V, 5628,
    5695, 6288; VIII, 2785) or in the negative (V, 5629). It is in order to
    reconsider the vote laying an appeal on the table (V, 5630), although
    during proceedings under a call of the House this motion was once ruled
    out (V, 5631). The motion to reconsider may not be applied to the vote
    whereby the House has laid another motion to reconsider on the table (V,
    5632-5640; June 20, 1967, p. 16497); and a motion to reconsider may be
    laid on the table only before the Chair has put the question on the
    motion to a vote (Sept. 20, 1979, p. 25512).

    Sec. 1010. Debate on the motion to reconsider.

      A  motion to
    reconsider is debatable only if the motion proposed to be reconsidered
    was debatable (V, 5694-5699; VIII, 2437, 2792; Sept. 13, 1965, p.
    23608); so the motion to reconsider a vote ordering the previous
    question is not debatable (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575) and the application
    of the previous question makes a motion to reconsider nondebatable (V,
    5701; VIII, 2792; Sept. 20, 1979, p. 25512; July 2, 1980, p. 18355).
    Where a resolution providing for the order of business was agreed to
    without adoption of the previous question, the Speaker advised that a
    motion to reconsider would be debatable and that the Member moving the
    reconsideration would be recognized to control the one hour of debate
    (Speaker McCormack, Sept. 13, 1965, p. 23608).

    Sec. 1011. Application of motion to reconsider to bills in
    committees.

      4.  A bill, petition, memorial, or resolution referred to a
    committee, or reported therefrom for printing and recommitment, may not
    be brought back to the House on a motion to reconsider.

    [[Page 795]]

      This clause (formerly clause 2 of rule XVIII) was first adopted in
    1860, and amended in 1872, to prevent a practice of using the privilege
    of the motion to reconsider to secure consideration of bills otherwise
    not in order (V, 5647). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 2 of rule
    XVIII, and in recodification a provision requiring written reports was
    deleted as redundant of the requirement contained in clause 2 of rule
    XIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). There is a question as to whether
    or not the rule applies to a case wherein the House, after considering a
    bill, recommits it (V, 5648-5650). After a committee has reported a bill
    it is too late to reconsider the vote by which it was referred (V,
    5651).

                                     Rule XX

                             voting and quorum calls

    Sec. 1012. Voting viva voce, by division, by electronic
    device.

      1. (a)  The House shall divide after the Speaker has put a question to
    a vote by voice as provided in clause 6 of rule I if the Speaker is in
    doubt or division is demanded. Those in favor of the question shall
    first rise from their seats to be counted, and then those opposed.

      (b) If a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner requests a
    recorded vote, and that request is supported by at least one-fifth of a
    quorum, the vote shall be taken by electronic device unless the Speaker
    invokes another procedure for recording votes provided in this rule. A
    recorded vote taken in the House under this paragraph shall be
    considered a vote by the yeas and nays.

    [[Page 796]]

    in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(a) of
    rule I (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      This provision (formerly clause 5(a) of rule I) was adopted in 1789
    and its present form reflects the revisions and amendments of 1860, 1880
    (II, 1311), 1972 (H. Res. 1123, Oct. 13, 1972, pp. 36005-08), and 1993
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). From January 22, 1971 (when H. Res. 5
    of the 92d Congress was adopted incorporating provisions in the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, 84 Stat. 1140), until October
    13, 1972, this rule provided a two-step procedure for ordering ``tellers
    with clerks'' before installation of the electronic voting system, and
    for the first time permitted Members to be recorded on votes in
    Committee of the Whole. The last two sentences of this paragraph
    permitting a single-step ``recorded vote'' and voting by means of
    electronic device installed in the Chamber in 1972, were contained in a
    House resolution adopted on October 13, 1972, and were made effective by
    adoption of the rules of the 93d Congress (H. Res. 6, Jan. 3, 1973, p.
    26). The general provision for demanding a vote by tellers was repealed
    in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). The provision
    providing that a recorded vote taken pursuant thereto shall be
    considered a vote by the yeas and nays was added in the 105th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Before the House recodified its rules

      The former right to demand tellers was not precluded by the fact that
    the yeas and nays had been refused (V, 5998; VIII, 3103), that a point
    of no quorum had been made against a division vote on the question on
    which tellers were requested (VIII, 3104), by a point of no quorum and a
    call of the House following a division vote on the question on which
    tellers were demanded (Sept. 25, 1969, p. 27041), or by the intervention
    of a quorum call following the refusal of the Committee of the Whole to
    order a recorded vote (Feb. 27, 1974, p. 4447).

      One of the suppositions on which parliamentary law is founded is that
    the Speaker will not betray his duty to make an honest count on a
    division (V, 6002) and the integrity of the Chair in counting a vote
    should not be questioned in the House (VIII, 3115; July 11, 1985, p.
    18550). A vote by division takes no cognizance of Members present but
    not voting, and consequently the number of votes counted by division has
    no tendency to establish a lack of a quorum (June 29, 1988, p. 16504).
    Only one demand for a vote by division on a pending question is in order
    (July 26, 1984, p. 21259; June 29, 1994, p. 15206). However, where a
    division vote is demanded on a proposition in the House and the vote
    thereon is then postponed pursuant to paragraph (b) of this clause, a
    division may again be demanded when the question is put de novo on the
    proposition as unfinished business (since a demand for a division may be
    made by any Member) (Mar. 18, 1980, p. 5739).

      In a full House (total membership of 435), a recorded vote is ordered
    by one-fifth of a quorum (44), but in Committee of the Whole a recorded
    vote is ordered by 25 (clause 6(e) of rule XVIII), rather than 20 in
    both cases as in prior practice (V, 5986; Dec. 20, 1974, p. 41793). The
    Chair's count of Members demanding a recorded vote is not appealable
    (June 24, 1976, p. 20390).

      Only one request for a recorded vote on a pending question is in order
    (Jan. 21, 1976, p. 508). The request may not be renewed where the
    absence of a quorum is disclosed immediately following the refusal to
    order a recorded vote (June 6, 1979, p. 13648; Oct. 25, 1983, p. 29227).
    However, while a request for a recorded vote once denied may not be
    renewed, the request remains pending where the Chair interrupts the
    count of Members standing in favor of the request in order to count for
    a quorum pursuant to a point of order that a quorum is not present (Aug.
    5, 1982, pp. 19658, 19659; July 22, 2003, p. ----). A recorded vote may
    be had in the House on a separate vote on an amendment adopted in the
    Committee of the Whole on which a recorded vote had been refused (May
    13, 1998, p. 9134). A demand for the yeas and nays if refused by the
    House may not be renewed, even when the question is put de novo as
    unfinished business (Deschler-Brown, ch. 30, Sec. 55.5).

    [[Page 797]]

    a recorded vote are requested, the Chair will count for a recorded vote
    (July 22, 2003, p. ----). Recognition by the Chair for a parliamentary
    inquiry, or remarks uttered without recognition, immediately following
    the Chair's announcement of a voice vote on an amendment is not such
    intervening business as to prevent a demand for a recorded vote thereon
    where the Chair has not announced the final disposition of the amendment
    (May 23, 1984, p. 13928; July 26, 1984, p. 21249; June 10, 1998, p.
    11856).
      A demand for a record vote cannot interrupt a vote by division which
    is in progress (June 10, 1975, p. 18048). Where both a division vote and

    Sec. 1013. Former ordering of tellers and taking of the
    vote.

      Under  the precedents recorded before the abolition of tellers, it was
    the duty of the Member to serve as teller when appointed by the Chair
    (V, 5987); but when Members of one side had declined, the second teller
    was appointed from the other side (V, 5988) or the position was left
    vacant (V, 5989). A Delegate could have been appointed teller (II,
    1302). Where there was doubt as to the count by tellers, the Chair could
    have ordered the vote taken again (V, 5991; July 19, 1946, p. 9466), but
    this must have been done before the result was announced (V, 5993-5995;
    VIII, 3098). The Chair could have been counted without passing between
    the tellers (V, 5996, 5997; VIII, 3100, 3101).

      (c) In case of a tie vote, a question shall be lost.

      This provision was adopted in 1789. Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, it was found in former clause 6 of rule I
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 798]]

    or quorum call by electronic device shall be 15 minutes.

    Sec. 1014. Use of electronic equipment in recording
    roll calls.

      2. (a)  Unless the Speaker directs otherwise, the Clerk shall
    conduct a record vote or quorum call by electronic device. In such a
    case the Clerk shall enter on the Journal and publish in the
    Congressional Record, in alphabetical order in each category, the names
    of Members recorded as voting in the affirmative, the names of Members
    recorded as voting in the negative, and the names of Members answering
    present as if they had been called in the manner provided in clause 3.
    Except as otherwise permitted under clause 8 or 9 of this rule or under
    clause 6 of rule XVIII, the minimum time for a record vote

      The permissive use of an electronic voting system was incorporated in
    the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (sec. 121; 84 Stat. 1140) and
    was made a part of the standing rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). The clause in its essential form was adopted the
    next year (formerly clause 5(a) of rule XV) (H. Res. 1123, Oct. 13,
    1972, p. 36012). A technical correction to paragraph (a) was effected in
    the 108th Congress (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). The
    electronic system was first utilized in the House on January 23, 1973
    (p. 1793).

      The Speaker inserted in the Record a detailed statement describing
    procedures to be followed during votes and quorum calls by electronic
    device and by the backup procedures therefor (Jan. 15, 1973, pp. 1054-
    57). The Speaker may direct that a call of the House be conducted by an
    alphabetical call of the roll by the Clerk where, in his discretion, he
    does not utilize the electronic voting device (Mar. 7, 1973, p. 6699),
    and pursuant to this clause and clause 6 (formerly clause 4 of rule XV)
    the Speaker may, in his discretion, direct the Clerk to call the roll,
    in lieu of taking the vote by electronic device, where a quorum fails to
    vote on any question and objection is made for that reason (May 16,
    1973, p. 15850).

      A request that the voting display be turned on during debate is not in
    order (Oct. 12, 1998, p. 25770).

      At the end of a 15-minute vote, after the electronic voting stations
    are closed but before the Speaker's announcement of the result, a Member
    may cast an initial vote or change a vote by ballot card in the well
    (Speaker Albert, Sept. 23, 1975, p. 29850; Speaker Wright, Oct. 29,
    1987, p. 30239). In 1975 Speaker Albert announced that changes could no
    longer be made at the electronic stations but would have to be made by
    ballot card in the well (Speaker Albert, Sept. 17, 1975, p. 28903). In
    1976 Speaker Albert announced that changes could be made electronically
    during the first 10 minutes of a 15-minute voting period, but changes
    during the last 5 minutes would have to be made by ballot card in the
    well (Speaker Albert, Mar. 22, 1976, p. 7394). In 1977 Speaker O'Neill
    announced that changes could be made electronically at any time during a
    vote reduced to five minutes under the rules (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 4,
    1977, pp. 53-70).

    [[Page 799]]

      The Speaker declines to entertain unanimous-consent requests to
    correct the Journal and Record on votes taken by electronic device (Apr.
    18, 1973, p. 13081; May 10, 1973, p. 15282; June 17, 1986, p. 14038),
    unless the request is to delete a vote that was not actually cast (June
    26, 2000, p. 12371). A recorded vote or quorum call may not be reopened
    once the Chair has announced the result (June 15, 2000, p. 11098).
    However, the Speaker may announce a change in the result of a vote taken
    by electronic device where required to correct an error in identifying a
    signature on a voting card submitted in the well (June 11, 1981).

      On a call of the House, or a vote, conducted by electronic device,
    Members are permitted a minimum of 15 minutes to respond, but it is
    within the discretion of the Chair, following the expiration of 15
    minutes, to allow additional time for Members to record their presence,
    or vote, before announcing the result (June 6, 1973, p. 18403; Oct. 9,
    1997, p. 22016; Sept. 8, 2003, p. ----; Mar. 30, 2004, p. ----; July 8,
    2004, p. ----; July 9, 2004, p. ----). When an emergency recess under
    clause 12(b) of rule I occurred during an electronic vote, the Chair
    extended the period of time in which to cast a vote by 15 additional
    minutes (May 11, 2005, p. ----; June 29, 2005, p. ----). A resolution
    alleging intentional misuse of House practices and customs in holding a
    vote open for approximately three hours for the sole purpose of
    circumventing the will of the House, and directing the Speaker to take
    such steps as necessary to prevent further abuse, constitutes a question
    of the privileges of the House (Dec. 8, 2003, p. ----).

      Because this clause is incorporated by reference into clause 6 of rule
    XVIII (formerly clause 2 of rule XXIII), the Chairman of the Committee
    of the Whole need not convert to a regular quorum call precisely at the
    expiration of 15 minutes if 100 Members have not appeared on a notice
    quorum call, but he may continue to exercise his discretion under that
    clause at any time during the conduct of the call (July 17, 1974, p.
    23673).

      Because the Chair has the discretion to close the vote and to announce
    the result at any time after 15 minutes have elapsed, those precedents
    guaranteeing Members in the Chamber the right to have their votes
    recorded even if the Chair has announced the result (e.g., V, 6064,
    6065; VIII, 2143), which predate the use of an electronic voting system,
    do not require the Chair to hold open indefinitely a vote taken by
    electronic device (Mar. 14, 1978, p. 6838). In the 103d Congress the
    Speaker inserted in the Record his announcement that, in order to
    expedite the conduct of votes by electronic device, the Cloakrooms were
    directed not to forward to the Chair individual requests to hold a vote
    open (Speaker Foley, Jan. 6, 1993, p. 106). In the 104th and 105th
    Congresses the Speaker announced that each occupant of the Chair would
    have his full support in striving to close each electronic vote at the
    earliest opportunity and that Members should not rely on signals relayed
    from outside the Chamber to assume that votes will be held open until
    they arrive (Speaker Gingrich, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 552; June 10, 1998, p.
    11849); however, the Chair will not close a vote while a Member is in
    the well attempting to vote (Feb. 10, 1995, p. 4385; June 22, 1995, p.
    16814).

    [[Page 800]]

    Sec. 1014a. Procedure when electronic voting system
    inoperable.

      (b) When  the electronic voting system is inoperable or is not used,
    the Speaker or Chairman may direct the Clerk to conduct a record vote or
    quorum call as provided in clause 3 or 4.

      When the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was added as a cross reference to the backup procedures found
    in clauses 3 and 4(a) and to clarify the Chair's discretion to choose
    either backup procedure (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    --  3. <> The
    Speaker may direct the Clerk to conduct a record vote or quorum call by
    call of the roll. In such a case the Clerk shall call the names of
    Members, alphabetically by surname. When two or more have the same
    surname, the name of the State (and, if necessary to distinguish among
    Members from the same State, the given names of the Members) shall be
    added. After the roll has been called once, the Clerk shall call the

    [[Page 801]]

    names of those not recorded, alphabetically by surname. Members
    appearing after the second call, but before the result is announced, may
    vote or announce a pair.

      In the event of a malfunction in the electronic voting system during a
    record vote, the Chair may vacate the results of the electronic vote and
    direct that the record vote be conducted by call of the roll under
    clause 3 of rule XX (May 4, 1988, pp. 9846, 9847; Oct. 6, 1999, p.
    24198) or may direct a new electronic vote with a new 15-minute voting
    period (July 13, 2004, p. ----). The question whether the electronic
    voting system is functioning reliably is in the discretion of the Chair,
    who may base a judgment on certification by the Clerk (Oct. 6, 1999, p.
    24198). For example, the Speaker continued to use the electronic system,
    even though the electronic display panels or certain voting stations
    were temporarily inoperative, while urging Members to verify their votes
    (Sept. 19, 1985, p. 24245; Feb. 4, 1994, p. 1640; Feb. 10, 2000, p.
    1021; Apr. 9, 2002, p. ----; Sept. 19, 2002, p. ----; Sept. 4, 2003, p.
    ----). Similarly, where the electronic voting system malfunctioned only
    temporarily, the Chair continued an electronic vote but advised Members
    to verify that they were recorded correctly (Mar. 25, 2004, p. ----). On
    the other hand, the Chair vacated the results of an electronic vote and
    directed that the record vote be taken by call of the roll where there
    was a malfunction in the electronic display panel and the Chair could
    not obtain from the Clerk verification that the vote would be recorded
    with 100 percent accuracy (Oct. 6, 1999, p. 24198). On one occasion,
    when the electronic voting system became inoperative during a vote, the
    Chair announced that (1) the vote would be held open until all Members
    were recorded; (2) the Clerk would retrieve the names of Members already
    recorded from the electronic display board; (3) the Clerk would combine
    the names of Members voting electronically and those who signed tally
    cards to form a valid vote; and (4) the vote would remain open until
    Members had returned from a memorial service at the National Cathedral
    (Sept. 14, 2001, p. ----).

      The first form of this clause (formerly clause 1 of rule XV) was
    adopted in 1789, and amendments were added in 1870, 1880, 1890 (V,
    6046), 1969 (H. Res. 7, 91st Cong., Jan. 3, 1969, p. 35), and 1972 (H.
    Res. 1123, 92d Cong., Oct. 13, 1972, pp. 36005-012). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 1 of rule XV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). While this
    clause permits the announcement of a ``live'' pair, the practice of
    general pairs found in former clause 2 of rule VIII was deleted in the
    106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47; see Sec. 1031, infra).

      The names of Members who have not been sworn are not entered on the
    roll from which the yeas and nays are called for entry on the Journal
    (V, 6048; VI, 638; VIII, 3122).

      Commencing in 1879 the Clerk, in calling the roll, called Members by
    the surnames with the prefix ``Mr.'' instead of calling the full names
    (V, 6047), but since the 62d Congress the practice has been discontinued
    in the interest of brevity (VIII, 3121). The Speaker's name is not on
    the voting roll and is not ordinarily called (V, 5970). When he votes
    his name is called at the close of the roll (V, 5965). In case of a tie
    which is revealed by a correction of the roll, he has voted after
    intervening business or even on another day (V, 5969, 6061-6063; VIII,
    3075). Where the Speaker through an error of the Clerk in reporting the
    yeas and nays announces a result different from that actually had, the
    status of the question is governed by the vote as recorded and
    subsequent announcement by the Speaker of the changed result is
    authoritative, or he may entertain a motion for correction of the
    Journal in accordance with the vote as finally ascertained (VIII, 3162).

    [[Page 802]]

    lation if the result has been announced (VIII, 3124), but errors in the
    record of such votes may be corrected (VIII, 3125). A motion that a vote
    be recapitulated is not privileged (VIII, 3126). The Speaker has
    declined to order a recapitulation of a vote taken by electronic device
    (Speaker Albert, July 30, 1975, p. 25841).
      Under this clause, as under clause 6, the roll is called twice, and
    those Members appearing after their names are called but before the
    announcement of the result may vote or announce a ``live'' pair. Under
    the former practice, before the amendment adopted on January 3, 1969, a
    Member who had failed to respond on either the first or second call of
    the roll could not be recorded before the announcement of the result (V,
    6066-6070; VIII, 3134-3150) unless he qualified by declaring that he had
    been within the Hall, listening, when his name should have been called
    and failed to hear it (V, 6071-6072; VIII, 3144-3150), and then only on
    the theory that his name may have been inadvertently omitted by the
    Clerk (VIII, 3137). Under the former practice where the roll was called
    by the Clerk, either before announcement of the result (V, 6064) or
    after such announcement (VIII, 3125), the Speaker could order the vote
    recapitulated (V, 6049, 6050; VIII, 3128). A Member may not change his
    vote on recapitu

    Sec. 1016. Bell system.

      The  legislative call system was
    designed to alert Members to certain occurrences on the floor of the
    House. The Speaker has directed that the bells and lights comprising the
    system be utilized as follows (Jan. 23, 1979, p. 701):

      Tellers--one ring and one light on left. Because the demand for teller
    votes was discontinued at the beginning of the 103d Congress, this
    signal is no longer utilized.

      Recorded vote, yeas and nays, or automatic record vote taken either by
    electronic system or by use of tellers with ballot cards--two bells and
    two lights on left indicate a vote by which Members are recorded by
    name. Bells are repeated five minutes after the first ring. When by
    unanimous consent waiving the five-minute minimum set by clause 9
    (formerly clause 5(b)(3) of rule I) the House authorized the Speaker to
    put remaining postponed questions to two-minute electronic votes, two
    bells were rung (Oct. 4, 1988, pp. 28126, 28148).

      Recorded vote, yeas and nays, or automatic record electronic vote to
    be followed immediately by possible five-minute vote under clauses 8(c)
    or 9 of rule XX or clauses 6(f) or 6(g) of rule XVIII--two bells rung at
    beginning of first vote, followed by five bells, indicate that Chair
    will order five-minute votes if recorded vote, yeas and nays, or
    automatic vote is ordered immediately thereafter. Two bells repeated
    five minutes after first ring. Five bells on each subsequent electronic
    vote.

      Recorded vote, yeas and nays, or automatic roll call by call of the
    roll--two bells, followed by a brief pause, then two bells indicate such
    a vote taken by a call of the roll in the House. The bells are repeated
    when the Clerk reaches the ``R's'' in the first call of the roll.

      Regular quorum call--three bells and three lights on left indicate a
    quorum call either in the House or in Committee of the Whole by
    electronic system or by clerks. The bells are repeated five minutes
    after the first ring. Where quorum call is by call of the roll, three
    bells followed by a brief pause, then three more bells, with the process
    repeated when the Clerk reaches the ``R's'' in the first call of the
    roll, are utilized.

      Regular quorum call in Committee of the Whole, which may be followed
    immediately by five-minute electronic recorded vote--three bells rung at
    beginning of quorum call, followed by five bells, indicate that Chair
    will order five-minute vote if recorded vote is ordered on pending
    question. Three bells repeated five minutes after first ring. Five bells
    for recorded vote on pending question if ordered.

    [[Page 803]]

    vacate proceedings when a quorum of the Committee appears. Bells are
    repeated every five minutes unless (a) the call is vacated by ringing of
    one long bell and extinguishing of three lights, or (b) the call is
    converted into a regular quorum call and three regular bells are rung.
      Notice or short quorum call in Committee of the Whole--one long bell
    followed by three regular bells, and three lights on left, indicate that
    the Chair has exercised his discretion under clause 6 of rule XVIII and
    will

      Adjournment--four bells and four lights on left.

      Any five-minute vote--five bells and five lights on left.

      Recess of the House--six bells and six lights on left.

      Civil Defense Warning--twelve bells, sounded at two-second intervals,
    with six lights illuminated.

      The light on the far right--seven--indicates that the House is in
    session.

      Failure of the signal bells to announce a vote does not warrant
    repetition of the roll call (VIII, 3153-3155, 3157) nor does such a
    failure permit a Member to be recorded following the conclusion of the
    call (June 9, 1938, p. 8662).

    Sec. 1017. Changes and corrections of votes.

      Before  the
    result of a vote has been finally and conclusively pronounced by the
    Chair, but not thereafter, a Member may change his vote (V, 5931-5933,
    6093, 6094; VIII, 3070, 3123, 3124, 3160), and a Member who has answered
    ``present'' may change it to ``yea'' or ``nay'' (V, 6060). However, a
    vote given by a Member may not be withdrawn without leave of the House
    (V, 5930).

      When a vote actually given fails to be recorded during a call of the
    roll (V, 6061-6063) the Member may, before the approval of the Journal,
    demand as a matter of right that correction be made (V, 5969; VIII,
    3143). However, statements of other Members as to alleged errors in a
    recorded vote must be very definite and positive to justify the Speaker
    in ordering a change of the roll (V, 6064, 6099). The Speaker declines
    to entertain requests to correct the Journal and Record on votes taken
    by electronic device, based upon the technical accuracy of the
    electronic system if properly utilized and upon the responsibility of
    each Member to correctly cast and verify his vote (Apr. 18, 1973, p.
    13081; May 10, 1973, p. 15282). By unanimous consent the House may
    vacate proceedings on a recorded vote conducted in the Committee of the
    Whole and require a vote de novo where it is alleged that Members were
    improperly prevented from being recorded (June 22, 1995, p. 16815).

    [[Page 804]]

    The rules do not preclude a Member from announcing after a recorded vote
    on which he failed to answer, how he would have voted if present
    (Speaker Rayburn, June 27, 1957, p. 10521; contra VIII, 3151), but
    neither the rules nor the practice permit a Member to announce after a
    recorded vote how absent colleagues would have voted if present (VI,
    200; Apr. 3, 1933, p. 1139; Apr. 28, 1933, p. 2587; May 20, 1933, p.
    3834; Mar. 16, 1934, pp. 4691, 4700; Apr. 14, 1937, pp. 3489, 3490; Apr.
    15, 1937, p. 3563).

    Sec. 1018. Interruptions of the roll call.

      When  once begun
    the roll call may not be interrupted even by a motion to adjourn (V,
    6053; VIII, 3133), a parliamentary inquiry (VIII, 3132), a question of
    personal privilege (V, 6058, 6059; VI, 554, 564), the arrival of the
    time fixed for another order of business (V, 6056) or for a recess (V,
    6054, 6055; VIII, 3133), or the presentation of a conference report (V,
    6443). However, it is interrupted for the reception of messages and by
    the arrival of the hour fixed for adjournment sine die (V, 6715-6718). A
    Member-elect may be sworn during a record vote (Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----;
    Jan. 6, 2005, p. ----; Jan. 25, 2005, p. ----). Incidental questions
    arising during the roll call, such as the refusal of a Member to vote
    (V, 5946-5948), are considered after the completion of the call and the
    announcement of the vote (V, 5947).

    Sec. 1019. Quorum call by clerks.

      4. (a)  The Speaker may
    direct a record vote or quorum call to be conducted by tellers. In such
    a case the tellers named by the Speaker shall record the names of the
    Members voting on each side of the question or record their presence, as
    the case may be, which the Clerk shall enter on the Journal and publish
    in the Congressional Record. Absentees shall be noted, but the doors may
    not be closed except when ordered by the Speaker. The minimum time for a
    record vote or quorum call by tellers shall be 15 minutes.

      This paragraph was adopted as part of the general revision of this
    rule (formerly rule XV) which was required by the implementation of the
    electronic voting system (H. Res. 1123, 92d Cong., Oct. 13, 1972, p.
    36012). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    this provision was found in former clause 2(b) of rule XV (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The Speaker, in his discretion, may direct that
    the presence of Members be recorded by this procedure in lieu of using
    the electronic system, or the Chair may, in his discretion, direct that
    a quorum call be taken by an alphabetical call of the roll (Mar. 7,
    1973, p. 6699). The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole also may
    direct that a quorum call be conducted by depositing quorum tally cards
    with clerk tellers, rather than by electronic device or a call of the
    roll (July 13, 1983, p. 18858).

    [[Page 805]]

      Exercising his authority under this paragraph, the Speaker ordered the
    doors to the Chamber closed and locked during a call of the House and
    instructed the Doorkeeper to enforce the rule and let no Members leave
    the Hall (Deschler, ch. 20, Sec. 6.3). This clause does not give the
    Speaker the authority to lock the doors during a recorded vote (June 11,
    1997, p. 10665). For a discussion of the count to determine a quorum,
    see House Practice, ch. 43, Sec. 5.

    Sec. 1020. Count of those not voting to make a quorum of
    record on a roll call.

      (b)  On the demand of a Member, or at the suggestion
    of the Speaker, the names of Members sufficient to make a quorum in the
    Hall of the House who do not vote shall be noted by the Clerk, entered
    on the Journal, reported to the Speaker with the names of the Members
    voting, and be counted and announced in determining the presence of a
    quorum to do business.

      This clause was adopted in 1890 (IV, 2905), but it merely formalized a
    principle already established by a decision of the Chair (IV, 2895). It
    was much in use in the first years after its adoption (III, 2620; IV,
    2905-2907); but with the decline of obstruction in the House and the
    adoption of clause 6 (formerly clause 4 of rule XV) of this rule the
    necessity for its use has disappeared to a large extent. Before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 3 of rule XV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    The Speaker may direct the Clerk to note names of Members under this
    rule even on a vote for which a quorum is not necessary (VIII, 3152).
    For a discussion of the count to determine a quorum, see House Practice,
    ch. 43, Sec. 5.

    Sec. 1021. The call of the House.

      5. (a)  In the absence of a
    quorum, a majority comprising at least 15 Members, which may include the
    Speaker, may compel the attendance of absent Members.

    [[Page 806]]

    to the Clerk to be entered on the Journal as present.

      (b) Subject to clause 7(b) a majority described in paragraph (a) may
    order the Sergeant-at-Arms to send officers appointed by him to arrest
    those Members for whom no sufficient excuse is made and shall secure and
    retain their attendance. The House shall determine on what condition
    they shall be discharged. Unless the House otherwise directs, the
    Members who voluntarily appear shall be admitted immediately to the Hall
    of the House and shall report their names

      The essential portions of this provision were adopted in 1789 and
    1795, with minor amendments in 1888, 1890 (IV, 2982), and 1971 (H. Res.
    5, 92d Cong., Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Later in the 92d Congress several
    provisions of this rule, including this clause, were amended to reflect
    the implementation of the electronic voting system (H. Res. 1123, Oct.
    13, 1972, pp. 36005-12). The provisions relating to the call of the roll
    by the Clerk were deleted. Calls of the House are now taken by the
    electronic device unless the Speaker, in his discretion orders the use
    of the alternative procedure in clause 2(b). Together with clause 7
    (formerly clause 6(e)(2) of rule XV) this provision was further amended
    in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16) to conform to
    the requirement in that provision that further proceedings under the
    call shall be dispensed with unless the Speaker in his discretion
    recognizes for a call of the House or a motion to compel attendance
    under this paragraph. This clause must be read in light of clause 7
    (formerly clause 6(e) of rule XV), which prohibits the point of order
    that a quorum is not present unless the Speaker has put a question to a
    vote. Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2(a) of rule XV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). A technical correction to paragraph (b) was effected in
    the 109th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    Sec. 1022. Ordering and conducting the call.

      Under  this rule
    a call may not be ordered by less than 15, and without that number
    present the motion for a call is not entertained (IV, 2983). It must be
    ordered by majority vote, and a minority of 15 or more favoring a call
    on such vote is not sufficient (IV, 2984). A quorum not being present no
    motion is in order but for a call of the House or to adjourn (IV, 2950,
    2988; VI, 680), and at this stage the motion to adjourn has precedence
    over the motion for a call of the House (VIII, 2642).

      While the following precedents predate the use of the electronic
    voting and recording system, they are retained in the Manual because of
    their general applicability with respect to calls of the House. A roll
    call under paragraph (a) may not be interrupted by a motion to dispense
    with further proceedings under the call (IV, 2992), and a recapitulation
    of the names of those who appear after their names have been called may
    not be demanded (IV, 2933). However, during proceedings under the call
    the roll may be ordered to be called again by those present (IV, 2991).

    [[Page 807]]

    ordered the arrest of those who are unexcused, a motion to excuse an
    absentee is in order when he is brought to the bar (IV, 3012).
      During a call less than a quorum may revoke leaves of absence (IV,
    3003, 3004) and excuse a Member from attendance (IV, 3000, 3001), but
    may not grant leaves of absence (IV, 3002). The roll is sometimes called
    for excuses, and motions to excuse are in order during this call (IV,
    2997), but neither the motion to excuse nor an incidental appeal are
    debatable (IV, 2999). After the roll has been called for excuses, and
    the House has

    Sec. 1023. Arrest of Members.

      An  order of arrest for absent
    Members may be made after a single calling of the roll (IV, 3015, 3016),
    and a warrant issued on direction of those present, such motion having
    precedence of a motion to dispense with proceedings under the call (IV,
    3036). The Sergeant-at-Arms is required to arrest Members wherever they
    may be found (IV, 3017), and leave for a committee to sit during
    sessions does not release its Members from liability to arrest (IV,
    3020). A motion to require the Sergeant-at-Arms to report progress in
    securing a quorum is in order during a call of the House (VI, 687). A
    Member who appears and answers is not subject to arrest (IV, 3019), and
    in a case where a Member complained of wrongful arrest the House ordered
    the Sergeant-at-Arms to investigate and amend the return of his warrant
    (IV, 3021). A Member once arrested having escaped it was held that he
    might not be brought back on the same warrant (IV, 3022). A privileged
    motion to compel the attendance of absent Members is in order after the
    Chair has announced that a quorum has not responded on a negative
    recorded vote on a motion to adjourn (Nov. 2, 1987, p. 30386).

      The former practice of presenting Members at the bar during a call of
    the House (IV, 3030-3035) is obsolete, and Members now report to the
    Clerk and are recorded without being formally excused unless brought in
    under compulsion (VI, 684). Those present on a call may prescribe a fine
    as a condition of discharge, and the House has by resolution revoked all
    leaves of absence and directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to deduct from the
    salary of Members compensation for days absent without leave (VI, 30,
    198), but this penalty has been of rare occurrence (IV, 3013, 3014,
    3025). Form of resolution for the arrest of Members absent without leave
    (VI, 686). Having rejected a motion to adjourn, less than a quorum of
    the House rejected a motion directing the Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest
    absent Members, rejected a second motion to adjourn, and then adopted a
    motion authorizing the Speaker to compel the attendance of absent
    members (Nov. 2, 1987, p. 30387).

      The motion to dispense with further proceedings under the call of the
    House is not in order when a motion to arrest absent Members is pending
    (IV, 3029, 3037); is not entertained until a quorum responds on the
    call, but may be agreed to by less than a quorum thereafter (IV, 3038,
    3040; VI, 689; Sept. 11, 1968, p. 26453; Dec. 22, 1970, p. 43311); is
    neither debatable nor subject to amendment, thus the motion to lay it on
    the table is not in order (Aug. 27, 1962, p. 17653; Dec. 18, 1970, p.
    42504).

    [[Page 808]]

    motions for the previous question (V, 5458), to reconsider and to lay
    the motion to reconsider on the table (V, 5607, 5608), to adjourn, which
    is in order even in the midst of the call of the roll for excuses (IV,
    2998) or while the House is dividing on a motion for a call of the House
    (VIII, 2644), and which takes precedence over a motion to dispense with
    further proceedings under the call (VIII, 2643), and an appeal from a
    decision of the Chair (IV, 3010, 3037; VI, 681). The yeas and nays may
    also be ordered (IV, 3010), but a question of privilege may not be
    raised unless it be something connected immediately with the proceedings
    (III, 2545). Motions not strictly incidental to the call are not
    admitted, as for a recess (IV, 2995, 2996), to excuse a Member from
    voting even when otherwise in order (IV, 3007), to enforce the statute
    relating to deductions of pay of Members for absence (IV, 3011; VI,
    682), to construe a rule or make a new rule (IV, 3008), or to order a
    change of a Journal record (IV, 3009). A motion for a call of the House
    is not debatable (VI, 683, 688). The motion to compel the attendance of
    absent Members, being neither debatable nor amendable, is not subject to
    a motion to lay on the table (Speaker Wright, Nov. 2, 1987, p. 30389).

    Sec. 1024. Motions during a call.

      During  the call, which in
    later practice has been invoked only in absence of a quorum, incidental
    motions may be agreed to by less than a quorum (IV, 2994, 3029; VI,
    681), and under clause 7 (formerly clause 6(a)(4) of rule XV) a point of
    order of no quorum may not be made during the offering, consideration,
    and disposition of any motion incidental to a call of the House. This
    includes

    Sec. 1024a. ``Provisional quorum.''

      (c)(1) If  the House
    should be without a quorum due to catastrophic circumstances, then--

          (A) until there appear in the House a sufficient number of
    Representatives to constitute a quorum among the whole number of the
    House, a quorum in the House shall be determined based upon the
    provisional number of the House; and

          (B) the provisional number of the House, as of the close of the
    call of the House described in subparagraph (3)(C), shall be the number
    of Representatives responding to that call of the House.

    [[Page 809]]

    House, the provisional number of the House shall be adjusted
    accordingly.
      (2) If a Representative counted in determining the provisional number
    of the House thereafter ceases to be a Representative, or if a
    Representative not counted in determining the provisional number of the
    House thereafter appears in the

      (3) For the purposes of subparagraph (1), the House shall be
    considered to be without a quorum due to catastrophic circumstances if,
    after a motion under clause 5(a) of rule XX has been disposed of and
    without intervening adjournment, each of the following occurs in the
    stated sequence:

          (A) A call of the House (or a series of calls of the House) is
    closed after aggregating a period in excess of 72 hours (excluding time
    the House is in recess) without producing a quorum.

          (B) The Speaker--

              (i) with the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader, receives
    from the Sergeant-at-Arms (or his designee) a catastrophic quorum
    failure report, as described in subparagraph (4);

              (ii) consults with the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader
    on the content of that report; and

              (iii) announces the content of that report to the House.

          (C) A further call of the House (or a series of calls of the
    House) is closed after aggregating a period in excess of 24 hours
    (excluding time the House is in recess) without producing a quorum.

    [[Page 810]]

    lish a quorum is attributable to catastrophic circumstances involving
    natural disaster, attack, contagion, or similar calamity rendering
    Representatives incapable of attending the proceedings of the House.
      (4)(A) For purposes of subparagraph (3), a catastrophic quorum failure
    report is a report advising that the inability of the House to estab

      (B) Such report shall specify the following:

          (i) The number of vacancies in the House and the names of former
    Representatives whose seats are vacant.

          (ii) The names of Representatives considered incapacitated.

          (iii) The names of Representatives not incapacitated but otherwise
    incapable of attending the proceedings of the House.

          (iv) The names of Representatives unaccounted for.

      (C) Such report shall be prepared on the basis of the most
    authoritative information available after consultation with the
    Attending Physician to the Congress and the Clerk (or their respective
    designees) and pertinent public health and law enforcement officials.

      (D) Such report shall be updated every legislative day for the
    duration of any proceedings under or in reliance on this paragraph. The
    Speaker shall make such updates available to the House.

      (5) An announcement by the Speaker under subparagraph (3)(B)(iii)
    shall not be subject to appeal.

    [[Page 811]]

    not incapacitated but otherwise incapable of attending the proceedings
    of the House.
      (6) Subparagraph (1) does not apply to a proposal to create a vacancy
    in the representation from any State in respect of a Representative

      (7) For purposes of this paragraph:

          (A) The term ``provisional number of the House'' means the number
    of Representatives upon which a quorum will be computed in the House
    until Representatives sufficient in number to constitute a quorum among
    the whole number of the House appear in the House.

          (B) The term ``whole number of the House'' means the number of
    Representatives chosen, sworn, and living whose membership in the House
    has not been terminated by resignation or by the action of the House.

      This paragraph was added in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(h), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). In extraordinary circumstances, section 8 of
    title 2, United States Code, prescribes special election rules to
    expedite the filling of vacancies in representation of the House.

    Sec. 1024b. Accounting for vacancies.

      (d)  Upon the death,
    resignation, expulsion, disqualification, removal, or swearing of a
    Member, the whole number of the House shall be adjusted accordingly. The
    Speaker shall announce the adjustment to the House. Such an announcement
    shall not be subject to appeal. In the case of a death, the Speaker may
    lay before the House such documentation from Federal, State, or local
    officials as he deems pertinent.

    [[Page 812]]

      This paragraph was added in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). In the 109th Congress it was redesignated from
    paragraph (c) to paragraph (d) and the Speaker's responsibility to
    announce an adjustment was extended to the swearing of a Member (sec.
    2(h), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

    Sec. 1025. The call of the House in the new
    form.

      6. (a)  When a quorum fails to vote on a question, a quorum is not
    present, and objection is made for that cause (unless the House shall
    adjourn)--

          (1) there shall be a call of the House;

          (2) the Sergeant-at-Arms shall proceed forthwith to bring in
    absent Members; and

          (3) the yeas and nays on the pending question shall at the same
    time be considered as ordered.

      (b) The Clerk shall record Members by the yeas and nays on the pending
    question, using such procedure as the Speaker may invoke under clause 2,
    3, or 4. Each Member arrested under this clause shall be brought by the
    Sergeant-at-Arms before the House, whereupon he shall be noted as
    present, discharged from arrest, and given an opportunity to vote; and
    his vote shall be recorded. If those voting on the question and those
    who are present and decline to vote together make a majority of the
    House, the Speaker shall declare that a quorum is constituted, and the
    pending question shall be decided as the requisite majority of those
    voting shall have determined. Thereupon further proceedings under the
    call shall be considered as dispensed with.

    [[Page 813]]

    the House adjourns on such a motion, all proceedings under this clause
    shall be considered as vacated.

      (c) At any time after Members have had the requisite opportunity to
    respond by the yeas and nays, but before a result has been announced, a
    motion that the House adjourn shall be in order if seconded by a
    majority of those present, to be ascertained by actual count by the
    Speaker. If

      This clause (formerly clause 4 of rule XV) was adopted in 1896 (IV,
    3041; VI, 690); and amended in 1972 to make its provisions subject to
    clause 2 (formerly clause 5) of this rule (H. Res. 1123, 92d Cong., p.
    36012). In the 108th Congress paragraph (c) was amended to clarify the
    privileged nature of the motion to adjourn during the call (sec. 2(m),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Before the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 4 of
    rule XV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Where objection is raised to a vote in the House on the ground that a
    quorum is not present, and a quorum is in fact not present, the Speaker
    may direct that the call of the House be taken by electronic device
    under clause 2 (formerly clause 5), or may, in his discretion, direct
    the Clerk to call the roll pursuant to this clause (May 16, 1973, p.
    15860).

      It applies only to votes wherein a quorum is required, and hence does
    not apply to an affirmative vote on a motion to adjourn (July 25, 1949,
    p. 10092; Nov. 4, 1983, p. 30946), or motions incidental to a call of
    the House which may be agreed to by less than a quorum (IV, 2994, 3029;
    VI, 681), or to a call when there is no question pending (IV, 2990).
    While a quorum is not required to adjourn, a point of no quorum on a
    negative vote on adjournment, if sustained, precipitates a call of the
    House under the rule (VI, 700; June 4, 1951, pp. 6097, 6098; June 15,
    1951, p. 6621). Where less than a quorum rejects a motion to adjourn,
    the House may not consider business but may dispose of motions to compel
    the attendance of absent Members (Nov. 2, 1987, p. 30387).

    [[Page 814]]

    would proceed with necessary and efficacious steps, and that pending the
    establishment of a quorum no further business, including unanimous-
    consent requests for recess authority, could be entertained (Nov. 2,
    1987, p. 30389).
      When a Member objects to a vote on the ground that a quorum is not
    present and makes the point of order under this clause, the Speaker may
    count the House and determine the presence of a quorum and is not
    required to announce his actual count under the first sentence of this
    clause (Sept. 30, 1981, p. 22456). Where the Speaker ascertains the
    presence of a quorum by actual count following an objection to a vote
    under this clause, or on a rejected demand for the yeas and nays and a
    division vote is then had on the pending question, the division vote is
    intervening business (see VIII, 2804) permitting another objection to
    the lack of a quorum, and the Speaker must again count the House (Mar.
    17, 1976, p. 6792; Aug. 2, 1979, p. 22006). However, where the announced
    absence of a quorum has resulted in a record vote under this clause (on
    the Speaker's approval of the Journal), the House may not, even by
    unanimous consent, vacate the vote in order to conduct another voice
    vote in lieu of the record vote, since no business, including a
    unanimous-consent agreement, is in order in the announced absence of a
    quorum (July 13, 1983, p. 18844; Feb. 24, 1988, p. 2450). The House
    having authorized the Speaker to compel the attendance of absent
    Members, the Speaker announced that the Sergeant-at-Arms

    Sec. 1026. Conduct of the call in the new form.

      Under  this
    clause the roll is called over twice, and those appearing after their
    names are called may vote (IV, 3052). A motion to adjourn may be made
    before the call begins (IV, 3050). After the roll has been called, and
    while the proceedings to obtain a quorum are going on, motions to excuse
    Members are in order (IV, 3051).

      The Sergeant-at-Arms is required to detain those who are present and
    bring in absentees (IV, 3045-3048), and he does this without the
    authority of a resolution adopted by those present (IV, 3049). There is
    doubt as to whether or not a warrant is necessary but it is customary
    for the Speaker to issue one on the authority of the rule (IV, 3043; VI,
    702). When arrested, Members are arraigned at the bar, and either vote
    or are noted as present, after which they are discharged (IV, 3044).

      When a quorum fails to vote on a yea-and-nay vote on a motion which
    requires a quorum to be present, and a quorum is not present, the Chair
    takes notice of the fact, and unless the House adjourns, a call of the
    House is ordered by the Chair under this rule, and the vote is taken on
    the question de novo (IV, 3045, 3052; VI, 679). If the House does
    adjourn, the question is put de novo the next meeting day (Oct. 10,
    1940, p. 13535).

      An automatic roll call results under this rule when the objection that
    a quorum is not present and voting is made after a viva voce vote (VI,
    697). An automatic roll call under this rule is not in order in
    Committee of the Whole (Aug. 2, 1966, p. 17844). Pursuant to clause 8,
    if a vote is objected to under this clause, further proceedings may be
    postponed, in which case the question is put de novo when that vote
    recurs as unfinished business. Furthermore, when such proceedings are
    postponed, the point of order that a quorum is not present is considered
    as withdrawn because no longer in order (a question not being put after
    the Speaker's announcement of postponement) (see clause 7, infra).

    Sec. 1027. Quorum; when not required.

      7. (a)  The Speaker may
    not entertain a point of order that a quorum is not present unless a
    question has been put to a vote.

    [[Page 815]]

    House, further proceedings under the call shall be considered as
    dispensed with unless the Speaker recognizes for a motion to compel
    attendance of Members under clause 5(b).

    Sec. 1028. Speaker's discretion to recognize for motion
    for call of House.

      (b)  Subject to paragraph (c) the Speaker may recognize
    a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner to move a call of the House
    at any time. When a quorum is established pursuant to a call of the

    Sec. 1029. Relation of previous question to failure of a
    quorum.

      (c)  A call of the House shall not be in order after the previous
    question is ordered unless the Speaker determines by actual count that a
    quorum is not present.

      Paragraphs (a) and (b) were adopted in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 998,
    Apr. 9, 1974, pp. 10195-99) and amended in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) and in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15,
    1979, pp. 7-16) to dispense with further proceedings under any call of
    the House when a quorum appears unless the Speaker at his discretion
    recognizes for a motion. Paragraph (c) (formerly clause 2 of rule XVII)
    was adopted in 1860 (V, 5447). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, paragraphs (a) and (b) were found in former clause 6
    of rule XV and paragraph (c) was found in former clause 2 of rule XVII.
    The 106th Congress also transferred former clause 6(b) of rule XV to
    clause 6(d) of rule XVIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Under this clause the Speaker may not entertain a point of order of no
    quorum when he has not put a question to a vote in the House (Speaker
    O'Neill, Jan. 11, 1977, p. 891; Jan. 31, 1977, p. 2640; Sept. 30, 1997,
    p. 20837; July 21, 1998, p. 16342; June 14, 2001, p. ----). The Chair
    may not entertain a point of order of no quorum pending a request that a
    committee be permitted to sit under the five-minute rule, because the
    Chair has not put the question on a pending proposition to a vote (June
    18, 1980, p. 15316). However, under this clause the Speaker may at any
    time in his discretion recognize a Member of his choice to move a call
    of the House (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 19, 1977, p. 1719; Jan. 31, 1977, p.
    2640; Aug. 6, 1986, p. 19370), or may choose not to do so (Sept. 30,
    1997, p. 20837), even, for example, before the call of the Private
    Calendar, which is in order after approval of the Journal and
    disposition of business on the Speaker's table (July 8, 1987, p. 18972).
    For precedents addressing timeliness in raising a point of order of no
    quorum, see Deschler, ch. 20, Sec. 13.

    [[Page 816]]

    of no quorum is not admissible unless he has put the pending question to
    a vote (Oct. 28, 1987, p. 29682).
      The Speaker's refusal to entertain a point of order of no quorum when
    a pending question has not been put to a vote is not subject to an
    appeal, since the clause contains an absolute and unambiguous
    prohibition against entertaining such a point of order (Sept. 16, 1977,
    p. 29562). During debate on a measure in the House the Speaker will not
    respond to an inquiry as to the number of Members present in the
    Chamber, because a point

    Postponement of proceedings
      In adopting this rule, the House has presumably determined that the
    mere conduct of debate in the House, where the Chair has not put the
    pending motion or proposition to a vote, is not such business as
    requires a quorum under the Constitution (art. I, sec. 5, cl. 1), and
    neither a point of order of no quorum during debate only nor a point of
    order against the enforcement of this clause lies independently under
    the Constitution (Sept. 8, 1977, p. 28114; Sept. 12, 1977, p. 28800;
    Feb. 27, 1986, p. 3060). Clause 7(c) of rule XX provides that after the
    previous question is ordered a call of the House shall only be in order
    if the Speaker determines by actual count of the House that a quorum is
    not present.

    1030. Postponing record votes on passage.

      8. (a)(1)  When a
    recorded vote is ordered, or the yeas and nays are ordered, or a vote is
    objected to under clause 6--

          (A) on any of the questions specified in subparagraph (2), the
    Speaker may postpone further proceedings to a designated place in the
    legislative schedule within two additional legislative days; and

          (B) on the question of agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the
    Journal, the Speaker may postpone further proceedings to a designated
    place in the legislative schedule on that legislative day.

      (2) The questions described in subparagraph (1) are as follows:

          (A) The question of passing a bill or joint resolution.

          (B) The question of adopting a resolution or concurrent
    resolution.

    [[Page 817]]

    if the managers have filed a report in the House).
          (C) The question of agreeing to a motion to instruct managers on
    the part of the House (except that proceedings may not resume on such a
    motion under clause 7(c) of rule XXII

          (D) The question of agreeing to a conference report.

          (E) The question of ordering the previous question on a question
    described in subdivision (A), (B), (C), or (D).

          (F) The question of agreeing to a motion to suspend the rules.

          (G) The question of agreeing to a motion to reconsider or the
    question of agreeing to a motion to lay on the table a motion to
    reconsider.

          (H) The question of agreeing to an amendment reported from the
    Committee of the Whole.

      (b) At the time designated by the Speaker for further proceedings on
    questions postponed under paragraph (a), the Speaker shall resume
    proceedings on each postponed question.

      (c) The Speaker may reduce to five minutes the minimum time for
    electronic voting on a question postponed under this clause, or on a
    question incidental thereto, that follows another electronic vote
    without intervening business, so long as the minimum time for electronic
    voting on the first in any series of questions is 15 minutes.

    [[Page 818]]

      (d) If the House adjourns on a legislative day designated for further
    proceedings on questions postponed under this clause without disposing
    of such questions, then on the next legislative day the unfinished
    business is the disposition of such questions.

      This provision (formerly clause 5(b) of rule I) was added in the 96th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, p. 7), and paragraph (a) was amended
    in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 98-113) to
    consolidate most authority for the postponing of further proceedings on
    certain questions into this paragraph. This consolidation was
    accomplished with the addition of the authority to postpone further
    proceedings on reports from the Committee on Rules and motions to
    suspend the rules. The Speaker was granted additional authority to
    postpone further proceedings as follows: (1) the Speaker's approval of
    the Journal until later that legislative day in the 98th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34); (2) motions to instruct conferees under
    clause 7(c) of rule XXII in the 101st Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989,
    p. 72); (3) the original motion to instruct conferees in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47); (4) ordering the previous
    question on another question that is, itself, susceptible of
    postponement (and the list was reordered) in the 104th Congress (sec.
    223(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 469); (5) certain questions during
    consideration of bills called from the Corrections Calendar in the 105th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121), but that provision was
    stricken in the 109th Congress when the Corrections Calendar was
    repealed (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----); (6) questions
    incidental to a postponed question (and to permit the first postponed
    vote in a series to be a five-minute vote if it immediately follows a
    15-minute vote) in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. ----
    ); and (7) the question of agreeing to the motion to reconsider, the
    question of agreeing to the motion to lay on the table a motion to
    reconsider, and the question of agreeing to an amendment reported from
    the Committee of the Whole in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(i), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(b) of rule I
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Technical corrections to paragraphs
    (a), (b), and (d) of clause 8 were effected in the 108th Congress (sec.
    2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). The House by unanimous consent
    authorized the Speaker to postpone further proceedings on a specified
    class of record votes to a date certain beyond the two legislative days
    permitted under this clause (e.g., Sept. 17, 2003, p. ----).

      In the 108th Congress clause 9 was expanded to include the authority
    described in clause 8(c) (sec. 2(n), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).
    Clause 9 permits the Speaker to reduce to five minutes a record vote on
    any question arising without intervening business after an electronic
    vote on another question if notice of possible five-minute voting was
    properly issued.

    [[Page 819]]

    106th Congress, unanimous consent was required to permit the Speaker to
    postpone such record votes (Oct. 6, 1986, p. 28704).
      The Speaker first exercised his authority to postpone a record vote on
    the approval of the Journal on November 10, 1983 (p. 32097). That
    authority includes the power to postpone a division vote on the approval
    of the Journal that is objected to under clause 6 of rule XX (formerly
    clause 4 of rule XV) (Sept. 21, 1993, p. 21820). On questions not
    enumerated in this paragraph, such as the initial motion to instruct
    conferees before the

      Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XX (formerly clause 6(e) of rule XV),
    prohibiting a point of order of no quorum unless the Speaker has put the
    pending proposition to a vote, the Speaker announces, after postponing a
    vote on a motion to suspend the rules where objection has been made to
    the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present, that the point of
    order is considered as withdrawn, since the Chair is no longer putting
    the question (May 16, 1977, p. 14785). At the conclusion of debate on
    all motions to suspend the rules on a legislative day, the Speaker
    announces that he will put the question on each motion on which further
    proceedings have been postponed--either de novo if objection to the vote
    has been made under clause 6 of rule XX (formerly clause 4 of rule XV)
    or for a ``yea and nay'' or recorded vote if previously ordered by the
    House in the order in which the motions had been entered (June 4, 1974,
    pp. 17521-47). Clause 8(a) of rule XX (formerly clause 5(b) of rule I)
    does not require the Chair's customary announcement at the beginning of
    consideration of motions to suspend the rules that the Chair intends to
    postpone possible record votes (Feb. 23, 1993, p. 3281; Nov. 14, 1995,
    p. 32385).

      Under the authority to postpone further proceedings on a specified
    question to a designated time within two legislative days, the Speaker
    may simultaneously designate separate times for the resumption of
    proceedings on separate postponed questions (Mar. 3, 1992, p. 4072).
    Once the Speaker has postponed record votes to a designated place in the
    legislative schedule, he may subsequently redesignate the time when the
    votes will be taken within the appropriate period (June 6, 1984, p.
    15080; Oct. 3, 1988, pp. 27782, 27878). When the House adjourns on the
    second legislative day after postponement of a question under this
    clause without resuming proceedings thereon, the question remains
    unfinished business on the next legislative day (Oct. 1, 1997, p.
    20922).

    [[Page 820]]

    of that series, the vote on the first postponed measure could have been
    reduced to five minutes only by unanimous consent (May 24, 1983, p.
    13595; July 22, 1996, p. 18410). By unanimous consent waiving the five-
    minute minimum set by paragraph (c) (formerly clause 5(b)(3) of rule I),
    the House has authorized the Speaker to put remaining postponed
    questions to two-minute electronic votes (Oct. 4, 1988, pp. 28126,
    28148). The Speaker may ``cluster'' postponed votes on a motion to
    suspend the rules and on adoption of a resolution in the order in which
    those questions were considered on the preceding day (July 19, 1983, p.
    19774). The requirement that the Speaker put each question on motions to
    suspend the rules in the order in which postponed, does not prevent the
    Speaker from entertaining a unanimous-consent request for the
    consideration of a similar Senate measure following passage of a House
    bill and before the next postponed vote (Feb. 15, 1983, p. 2175). Since
    a resolution raising a question of the privileges of the House takes
    precedence over a motion to suspend the rules, it may be offered and
    voted on between motions to suspend the rules on which the Speaker has
    postponed record votes until after debate on all suspensions (May 17,
    1983, p. 12486). Proceedings may not resume on a postponed question of
    agreeing to a 20-day motion to instruct conferees after the managers
    have filed a conference report in the House (Oct. 19, 1999, p. 25961).
      Following the first postponed vote on motions to suspend the rules,
    the Speaker may in his discretion reduce to not less than five minutes
    the time for taking votes on any or all of the subsequent motions on
    which votes have been postponed (June 4, 1974, p. 17547). Having
    clustered record votes on motions to suspend the rules and then having
    clustered record votes on passage of other measures considered
    immediately after debate on the suspension motions, the Speaker may,
    pursuant to this clause, conduct all the postponed votes in one sequence
    and reduce to five minutes the time for all electronic votes after the
    first suspension vote (May 17, 1983, p. 12508; Oct. 2, 1989, p. 22724).
    However, the Chair may decline, in his discretion, to recognize for a
    unanimous-consent request to reduce to five minutes the first vote in
    the series, since the bell and light system would not give adequate
    notice of the initial five-minute vote (Oct. 8, 1985, p. 26666; see also
    Sec. 1032, infra). However, before the 106th Congress, where a series of
    votes had been postponed pursuant to this clause to occur following a
    15-minute vote on another measure not a part

      For several years before the 107th Congress, special rules adopted by
    the House commonly provided the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole
    authority to postpone and cluster requests for recorded votes on
    amendments. In the 107th Congress that authority was given to the
    Chairman in the standing rules by adoption of a new clause 6(g) of rule
    XVIII. For a discussion of such authority, see Sec. 984, supra.

    Sec. 1031. Former pairs.

      Former  clause 2 of rule VIII was
    adopted in 1880, although the practice of pairing had then existed in
    the House for many years (V, 5981). The language of the clause was
    slightly altered by amendment in 1972 to reflect the installation of
    electronic voting in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 1123, Oct. 13, 1972, pp.
    36005-12). It was amended in the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14,
    1975, p. 20) to permit pairs to be announced in the Committee of the
    Whole. Former clause 2 of rule VIII was deleted in the 106th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). ``Live'' pairs still may be announced
    under clause 3 of rule XX (Sec. 1015, supra).

    [[Page 821]]

    of pairing in the House and Senate (VIII, 3076). On questions requiring
    a two-thirds majority Members were paired two in the affirmative against
    one in the negative (VIII, 3088; Nov. 15, 1983, p. 32685). For Speaker
    Clark's interpretation of the rule and practice of the House of
    Representatives as to pairs, see VIII, 3089.

    Five-minute votes--
      Before the 106th Congress, pairs were not announced at a time other
    than that prescribed by the former rule (V, 6046), and the voting
    intentions of an absent Member were not otherwise announced by a
    colleague (VIII, 3151). Before the 94th Congress pairs were not
    permitted in Committee of the Whole (V, 5984; Speaker Albert, Jan. 15,
    1973, p. 1054). The House did not consider questions arising out of the
    breaking of a pair (V, 5982, 5983, 6095; VIII, 3082, 3085, 3087-3089,
    3093), or permit a Member to vote after the call on the plea that he had
    refrained because of misunderstanding as to a pair (V, 6080, 6081).
    Discussion of the origin of the practice

    1032. ``15and5'' voting.

      9.  The Speaker may reduce to five
    minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any question arising
    without intervening business after an electronic vote on another
    question if notice of possible five-minute voting for a given series of
    votes was issued before the preceding electronic vote.

      The Speaker's authority to reduce record votes to five minutes,
    provided the first vote in any series is a 15-minute vote, gradually
    expanded over the years as follows: (1) on a bill, resolution, or
    conference report following a vote on a motion to recommit as first
    added in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16); (2) on
    amendments reported from the Committee of the Whole following a vote on
    the first such amendment, as added in the 101st Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72); (3) on adoption of a special order of business
    following a vote on ordering the previous question thereon as added in
    the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49), and expanded to any
    underlying question following a vote on ordering the previous question
    in the 104th Congress (sec. 223(e), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 469);
    (4) on any incidental question under this clause as added in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47); and (5) finally (the present
    language of the rule), on any question arising without intervening
    business after an electronic vote on another question in the 108th
    Congress (sec. 2(n), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). The 106th
    Congress, when the House recodified its rules, transferred this
    provision from former clause 5(b) of rule XV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47).

    [[Page 822]]

    vote. This clause does not give the Chair the authority to reduce to
    five minutes the vote on a motion to recommit occurring immediately
    after a recorded vote on an amendment reported from the Committee of the
    Whole (June 29, 1994, p. 15107). The Chair will not entertain a
    unanimous-consent request to reduce a vote to five minutes where Members
    have not been given sufficient notice (e.g., July 14, 1999, p. 16008;
    June 23, 2004, p. ----; Sept. 15, 2005, p. ----). However, the Chair
    will permit such request with sufficient notice (June 24, 2005, p. ----
    ).
      Five-minute votes are now permitted at the discretion of the Chair in
    the following circumstances: (1) under clause 9 on any question arising
    without intervening business after an electronic vote on another
    question if notice of possible five-minute voting was properly issued
    (which includes the authority also granted under clause 8(c)); (2) under
    clause 6(b)(3) of rule XVIII, on a pending question immediately
    following a regular quorum call in Committee of the Whole; (3) under
    clause 6(f) of rule XVIII, on any or all pending amendments immediately
    following a 15-minute recorded vote on the first such pending amendment
    in Committee of the Whole; and (4) under clause 6(g) of rule XVIII, on a
    postponed question on adoption of an amendment that immediately follows
    another electronic

    Automatic yeas and nays
      Where five-minute voting is interrupted by a one-minute speech,
    unanimous consent is required to continue five-minute voting (June 25,
    2002, p. ----). A voice vote on the question of adoption of a resolution
    following a 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question was not
    construed as ``intervening business'' such as would preclude five-minute
    votes on certain postponed questions (Sept. 26, 2002, p. ----). In the
    95th Congress, the Speaker announced that changes could be made
    electronically at any time during a vote reduced to five minutes under
    the rules (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70).

    1033. Yeas and nays ordered on certain questions.

      10.  The
    yeas and nays shall be considered as ordered when the Speaker puts the
    question on passage of a bill or joint resolution, or on adoption of a
    conference report, making general appropriations, or increasing Federal
    income tax rates (within the meaning of clause 5 of rule XXI), or on
    final adoption of a concurrent resolution on the budget or conference
    report thereon.

    Ballot votes
      This clause was adopted in the 104th Congress (sec. 214, 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 7 of rule XV
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The Chair announced the ordering of
    the yeas and nays under this clause on passage of a joint resolution not
    only further continuing appropriations for the current fiscal year but
    also enacting by reference six general appropriation bills (Oct. 21,
    2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 823]]

    majority on the first ballot, the process shall be repeated until a
    majority is obtained. In all balloting blanks shall be rejected, may not
    be counted in the enumeration of votes, and may not be reported by the
    tellers.

    1034. Elections by ballot.

      11.  In a case of ballot for
    election, a majority of the votes shall be necessary to an election.
    When there is not such a

      This rule was first adopted in 1789 and was amended in 1837 (V, 6003).
    It was renumbered January 3, 1953 (p. 24). The last election by ballot
    seems to have occurred in 1868 (V, 6003).

                                    Rule XXI

    Reservation of certain points of order
                          restrictions on certain bills

    1035. Reservation of points of order.

      1.  At the time a
    general appropriation bill is reported, all points of order against
    provisions therein shall be considered as reserved.

    General appropriation bills and amendments
      This clause was added in the 104th Congress (sec. 215(e), H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468), rendering unnecessary the former practice that a
    Member reserve points of order when a general appropriation bill was
    referred to the calendar of the Committee of the Whole House on the
    state of the Union, in order that provisions in violation of rule XXI
    could be stricken in the Committee of the Whole (see Sec. 1044, infra).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 8 of rule XXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 824]]

    1036. Unauthorized appropriations in reported
    general appropriation bills or amendments thereto.

      2. (a)(1)  An appropriation
    may not be reported in a general appropriation bill, and may not be in
    order as an amendment thereto, for an expenditure not previously
    authorized by law, except to continue appropriations for public works
    and objects that are already in progress.

    Sec. 1037. Reappropriations prohibited.

      (2)  A
    reappropriation of unexpended balances of appropriations may not be
    reported in a general appropriation bill, and may not be in order as an
    amendment thereto, except to continue appropriations for public works
    and objects that are already in progress. This subparagraph does not
    apply to transfers of unexpended balances within the department or
    agency for which they were originally appropriated that are reported by
    the Committee on Appropriations.

    Sec. 1038. Legislation in reported general appropriation
    bills; exceptions.

      (b)  A provision changing existing law may not be
    reported in a general appropriation bill, including a provision making
    the availability of funds contingent on the receipt or possession of
    information not required by existing law for the period of the
    appropriation, except germane provisions that retrench expenditures by
    the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill (which may include
    those recommended to the Committee on Appropriations by direction of a
    legislative committee having jurisdiction over the subject matter) and
    except rescissions of appropriations contained in appropriation Acts.

    [[Page 825]]

    ment proposing a limitation not specifically contained or authorized in
    existing law for the period of the limitation shall not be in order
    during consideration of a general appropriation bill.

    Sec. 1039. Legislation or limitations in amendments to
    general appropriation bills.

      (c)  An amendment to a general appropriation
    bill shall not be in order if changing existing law, including an
    amendment making the availability of funds contingent on the receipt or
    possession of information not required by existing law for the period of
    the appropriation. Except as provided in paragraph (d), an amend

    Sec. 1040. Motion to rise and report as preferential to
    amendments.

      (d)  After a general appropriation bill has been read for
    amendment, a motion that the Committee of the Whole House on the state
    of the Union rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments
    as may have been adopted shall, if offered by the Majority Leader or a
    designee, have precedence over motions to amend the bill. If such a
    motion to rise and report is rejected or not offered, amendments
    proposing limitations not specifically contained or authorized in
    existing law for the period of the limitation or proposing germane
    amendments that retrench expenditures by reductions of amounts of money
    covered by the bill may be considered.

    [[Page 826]]

    Sec. 1041. Designated emergencies in reported
    appropriation bills.

      (e)  A provision other than an appropriation
    designated an emergency under section 251(b)(2) or section 252(e) of the
    Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, a rescission of
    budget authority, or a reduction in direct spending or an amount for a
    designated emergency may not be reported in an appropriation bill or
    joint resolution containing an emergency designation under section
    251(b)(2) or section 252(e) of such Act and may not be in order as an
    amendment thereto.

    Sec. 1042. Offsetting amendments en bloc to appropriation
    bills.

      (f)  During the reading of an appropriation bill for amendment in
    the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, it shall be
    in order to consider en bloc amendments proposing only to transfer
    appropriations among objects in the bill without increasing the levels
    of budget authority or outlays in the bill. When considered en bloc
    under this paragraph, such amendments may amend portions of the bill not
    yet read for amendment (following disposition of any points of order
    against such portions) and are not subject to a demand for division of
    the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.

    Sec. 1043. History of clause 2 of rule XXI.

      The  25th
    Congress in 1837 was the first to adopt a rule prohibiting
    appropriations in a general appropriation bill or amendment thereto not
    previously authorized by law, in order to prevent delay of appropriation
    bills because of contention over propositions of legislation. In 1838
    that Congress added the exception to permit unauthorized appropriations
    for continuation of works in progress and for contingencies for carrying
    on departments of the Government. The rule remained in that form until
    the 44th Congress in 1876, when William S. Holman of Indiana persuaded
    the House to amend the rule to permit germane legislative retrenchments.
    In 1880, the 46th Congress dropped the exception which permitted
    unauthorized appropriations for contingencies of Government departments,
    and modified the ``Holman Rule'' to define retrenchments as the
    reduction of the number and salary of officers of the United States, the
    reduction of compensation of any person paid out of the Treasury of the
    United States, or the reduction of the amounts of money covered by the
    bill. That form of the retrenchment exception remained in place until
    the 49th Congress in 1885, when it was dropped until the 52d Congress in
    1891, and then reinserted through the 53d Congress until 1894. It was
    again dropped in the 54th Congress from 1895 until reinserted in the 62d
    Congress in 1911 (IV, 3578; VII, 1125).

    [[Page 827]]

    transferred to clause 2(a)(2) and former clause 2(a) became clause
    2(a)(1) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      The clause remained unamended until January 3, 1983, when the 98th
    Congress restructured it in the basic form of paragraphs (a)-(d).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, including a change to clause 2(a)(2) to
    clarify that the point of order lies against the offending provision in
    the text and not against consideration of the entire bill. At that time
    former clause 6 was

      Paragraph (a)(1) (formerly paragraph (a)) retained the prohibition
    against unauthorized appropriations in general appropriation bills and
    amendments thereto except in continuation of works in progress.

      Paragraph (a)(2) (formerly clause 6), from section 139(c) of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 190f(c)), was made part
    of the standing rules in the 83d Congress (Jan. 3, 1953, p. 24).
    Previously, a reappropriation of an unexpended balance for an object
    authorized by law was in order on a general appropriation bill (IV,
    3591, 3592; VII, 1156, 1158). This provision was amended in the 99th
    Congress by section 228(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
    Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177) to permit the Committee on
    Appropriations to report transfers of unexpended balances within the
    department or agency for which originally appropriated.

      Paragraph (b) narrowed the ``Holman Rule'' exception from the
    prohibition against legislation to cover only retrenchments reducing
    amounts of money included in the bill as reported, and permitted
    legislative committees with proper jurisdiction to recommend such
    retrenchments to the Appropriations Committee for discretionary
    inclusion in the reported bill. The last exception in paragraph (b),
    permitting the inclusion of legislation rescinding appropriations in
    appropriation Acts, was added in the 99th Congress by the Balanced
    Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (sec. 228(a), P.L. 99-
    177). The latter feature of the paragraph does not extend to a
    rescission of budget authority provided by a law other than an
    appropriation Act (see, Sec. 1052, infra). In the 105th Congress
    paragraph (b) was amended to treat as legislation a provision reported
    in a general appropriation bill that makes funding contingent on whether
    circumstances not made determinative by existing law are ``known'' (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).

      Paragraph (c) retained the prohibition against amendments changing
    existing law but permitted limitation amendments during the reading of
    the bill by paragraph only if specifically authorized by existing law
    for the period of the limitation. In the 105th Congress paragraph (c)
    was amended to treat as legislation an amendment to a general
    appropriation bill that makes funding contingent on whether
    circumstances not made determinative by existing law are ``known'' (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).

    [[Page 828]]

    the motion preferential to any motion to amend at that stage (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).
      Paragraph (d) provided a new procedure for consideration of
    retrenchment and other limitation amendments only when the reading of a
    general appropriation bill has been completed and only if the Committee
    of the Whole does not adopt a motion to rise and report the bill back to
    the House (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34). In the 104th Congress
    paragraph (d) was amended to limit the availability of its preferential
    motion to rise and report to the Majority Leader or his designee (sec.
    215(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). In the 105th Congress it was
    further amended to make

      Paragraphs (e) and (f) were added in the 104th Congress (sec. 215, H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). However, paragraph (e) is no longer
    effective with respect to discretionary spending because under section
    275 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act section 251
    expired on September 30, 2002. A technical correction to paragraph (f)
    was effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005,
    p. ----).

    Sec. 1044. Points of order on general
    appropriation bills generally.

      As the rule  applies only to general appropriation
    bills, which are not enumerated or defined in the rules (VII, 1116),
    bills appropriating only for one purpose have been held not to be
    ``general'' within the meaning of this clause (VII, 1122). The following
    have been held not to be ``general appropriation bills'' within the
    purview of this clause: (1) a joint resolution providing an
    appropriation for a single Government agency (Jan. 31, 1962, p. 1352);
    (2) a joint resolution only containing continuing appropriations for
    diverse agencies to provide funds until regular appropriation bills are
    enacted (Sept. 21, 1967, p. 26370); (3) a joint resolution providing an
    appropriation for a single Government agency and permitting a transfer
    of a portion of those funds to another agency (Oct. 25, 1979, p. 29627);
    (4) a joint resolution transferring funds already appropriated from one
    specific agency to another (Mar. 26, 1980, p. 6716); (5) a joint
    resolution transferring unobligated balances to the President to be
    available for specified purposes but containing no new budget authority
    (Mar. 3, 1988, p. 3239).

      A point of order under this rule does not apply to a special order
    reported from the Committee on Rules ``self-executing'' the adoption in
    the House of an amendment changing existing law (July 27, 1993, p.
    17117). By unanimous consent the Committee of the Whole may vacate
    proceedings under specified points of order (June 7, 1991, p. 13973). A
    point of order may be withdrawn as a matter of right (in the Committee
    of the Whole as well as in the House) before action thereon (May 19,
    2000, p. 8600).

    [[Page 829]]

    session, it was not necessary that they be reserved again when the
    report ultimately was presented as privileged when the House was in
    session, as the initial reservation carried over to the subsequent
    filing (Mar. 1, 1983, p. 3241). In an instance where points of order
    were not reserved against an appropriation bill when it was reported to
    the House and referred to the Committee of the Whole, points of order in
    the Committee of the Whole against a proposition in violation of this
    clause were overruled on the ground that the Chairman of the Committee
    of the Whole lacked authority to pass upon the question (Apr. 8, 1943,
    p. 3150, 3153).
      As all bills making or authorizing appropriations require
    consideration in Committee of the Whole, it follows that the enforcement
    of the rule must ordinarily occur during consideration in Committee of
    the Whole, where the Chair, in response to a point of order, may rule
    out any portion of the bill in conflict with the rule (IV, 3811; Sept.
    8, 1965, pp. 23140, 23182). Portions of the bill thus stricken are not
    reported back to the House. Before the adoption of clause 1 (formerly
    clause 8) in the 104th Congress (see Sec. 1035, supra), it was necessary
    that some Member reserve points of order when a general appropriation
    bill was referred to the calendar of the Committee of the Whole House on
    the state of the Union, in order that provisions in violation of the
    rule could be stricken in the Committee (V, 6921-6925; VIII, 3450; Feb.
    6, 1926, p. 3456). Where points of order had been reserved pending a
    unanimous-consent request that the committee be permitted to file its
    report when the House would not be in

      The enforcement of the rule also occurs in the House in that a motion
    to recommit a general appropriation bill may not propose an amendment
    containing legislation (Sept. 1, 1976, p. 28883) or a limitation not
    considered in the Committee of the Whole (Speaker Foley, Aug. 1, 1989,
    p. 17159; Aug. 3, 1989, p. 18546); and such amendment is precluded
    whether the Committee of the Whole has risen and reported automatically
    pursuant to a special rule or, instead, by a motion at the end of the
    reading for amendment (June 22, 1995, p. 16844).

      Points of order against unauthorized appropriations or legislation on
    general appropriation bills may be made as to the whole or only a
    portion of a paragraph (IV, 3652; V, 6881). The fact that a point of
    order is made against a portion of a paragraph does not prevent another
    point of order against the whole paragraph (V, 6882; July 31, 1985, p.
    21895), nor does it prevent another Member from demanding that the
    original point of order be extended to the entire paragraph (e.g., July
    16, 1998, p. 15806; Sept. 4, 2003, p. ----, p. ----; Sept. 14, 2004, p.
    ----; June 29, 2005, p. ----). If a portion of a proposed amendment is
    out of order, it is sufficient for the rejection of the whole amendment
    (V, 6878-6880). If a point of order is sustained against any portion of
    a package of amendments considered en bloc, all the amendments are ruled
    out of order and must be reoffered separately, or those which are not
    subject to a point of order may be considered en bloc by unanimous
    consent (Sept. 16, 1981, pp. 20735-38; June 21, 1984, p. 17687; July 26,
    2001, p. ----). Where a point of order is sustained against the whole of
    a paragraph the whole must go out, but it is otherwise when the point of
    order is made only against a portion (V, 6884, 6885).

    [[Page 830]]

    directing the Clerk to read further, but he does not make such an
    inquiry where the Clerk has actually read the paragraph (May 31, 1984,
    p. 14608). Where a portion of the bill is considered as having been read
    and open to amendment by unanimous consent, points of order against
    provisions in that portion must be made before amendments are offered,
    and may not be reserved (Dec. 1, 1982, p. 28175; May 19, 2000, p. 8595;
    July 26, 2003, p. ----). Where a chapter is considered as read by
    unanimous consent and open to amendment at any point, no amendments are
    offered and the Clerk begins to read the next chapter, it is too late to
    make a point of order against a paragraph in the preceding chapter (June
    11, 1985, p. 15181). It is too late to rule out the entire paragraph
    after points of order against specific portions have been sustained and
    an amendment to the paragraph has been offered (June 27, 1974, pp.
    21670-72).
      General appropriation bills are read ``scientifically'' only by
    paragraph headings and appropriation amounts, and points of order
    against a paragraph must be made before an amendment is offered thereto
    or before the Clerk reads the next paragraph heading and amount
    (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 2.26). A point of order against a paragraph
    under this clause may be made only after that paragraph has been read by
    the Clerk, and not before its reading pending consideration of an
    amendment inserting language immediately prior thereto (June 6, 1985,
    pp. 14605, 14609). Where the reading of a paragraph of a general
    appropriation bill has been dispensed with by unanimous consent, the
    Chair inquires whether there are points of order against the paragraph
    before entertaining amendments or

      The fact that legislative jurisdiction over the subject matter of an
    amendment may rest with the Committee on Appropriations does not
    immunize the amendment from the application of clause 2(c) of rule XXI
    (July 17, 1996, p. 17550; July 24, 1996, p. 18898). The ``works in
    progress exception'' under clause 2(a) of rule XXI is a defense to a
    point of order against an unauthorized appropriation reported in a
    general appropriation bill and is not a defense to a point of order
    under clause 2(c) of rule XXI that an amendment to an appropriation bill
    constitutes legislation (July 24, 1996, p. 18898).

      For a discussion of perfecting amendments to unauthorized
    appropriations or legislation permitted to remain in a general
    appropriation bill by failure to raise or by waiver of a point of order,
    see Sec. 1057, infra.

    Sec. 1044a. Points of order on general appropriation bills,
    deliberation of.

      To  resolve an ambiguity when ruling on a point of order,
    the Chair may: (1) examine legislative history established during debate
    on an amendment against which a point of order has been reserved (June
    14, 1978, p. 17651); (2) inquire after its author's intent (Oct. 29,
    1991, p. 28818); (3) examine the accompanying report to determine the
    intent of the section (June 25, 2004, p. ----).

    [[Page 831]]

    or of an amendment, as the case may be, has the burden to show the
    following: (1) that any duties imposed by a limitation are merely
    ministerial or already required under existing law (July 16, 1998, p.
    15829); (2) in the case of language proposing a double-negative, that
    the object of the double-negative is specifically contemplated by
    existing law (July 23, 2003, p. ----, p. ----; see Sec. 1053, infra);
    (3) that the amendment does not increase levels of budget authority or
    outlays within the meaning of clause 2(f) (e.g., Oct. 11, 2001, p. ----;
    July 13, 2004, p. ----, p. ----, where the chair sustained the point of
    order in part because the manager's averment that the amendment
    increased outlays went unchallenged); (4) if the language is susceptible
    to more than one interpretation, that it merits the construction that it
    does not violate the rule (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 22.26), although that
    burden may be met by a showing that only the requirements of existing
    law, and not any new requirements, are recited in the language (Sept.
    23, 1993, p. 22206).
      In the administration of the rule, it is the practice that those
    upholding an item of appropriation should have the burden of showing the
    law authorizing it (IV, 3597; VII, 1179, 1233, 1276; June 23, 2000, p.
    12123). Thus, the burden of proving the authorization for appropriations
    carried in a bill, or that the language in the bill constitutes a valid
    limitation which does not change existing law, falls on the proponents
    and managers of the bill (May 28, 1968, p. 15357; Nov. 30, 1982, p.
    28062; June 25, 2004, p. ----). By the same token, the proponent of an
    amendment has the burden of proof to show that an appropriation
    contained in an amendment is authorized by law (e.g., May 11, 1971, p.
    14471; Oct. 29, 1991, p. 28791; July 26, 1995, p. 20567; July 27, 1995,
    pp. 20808, 20811; July 31, 1995, p. 21207) or that the amendment
    constitutes a valid limitation (July 17, 1975, p. 23239; June 16, 1976,
    p. 18666; July 18, 1995, p. 19357; June 24, 2003, p. ----). For example,
    the proponent of a provision in the bill

      The mere recitation in an amendment that a determination is to be made
    pursuant to existing laws and regulations, absent a citation to the law
    imposing such responsibility, is not sufficient proof by the proponent
    of an amendment to overcome a point of order that the amendment
    constitutes legislation (Sept. 16, 1980, p. 25606).

      The Chair may overrule a point of order that appropriations for a
    certain agency are unauthorized upon citation to an organic statute
    creating the agency, absent any showing that the organic law has been
    overtaken by a scheme of periodic reauthorization; the Chair may hear
    further argument and reverse his ruling, however, where existing law not
    previously called to the Chair's attention would require the ruling to
    be reversed (VIII, 3435; June 8, 1983, p. 14854, where a law amending
    the statute creating the Bureau of the Mint with the express purpose of
    requiring annual authorizations was subsequently called to the Chair's
    attention). Reported provisions in a general appropriation bill
    described in the accompanying report as directly or indirectly changing
    the application of existing law are presumably legislation, absent
    rebuttal by the committee (May 31, 1984, p. 14591).

    [[Page 832]]

    21534; July 23, 1986, p. 17431; Apr. 23, 1987, p. 9613), but only after
    completion of the reading and disposition of amendments not otherwise
    precluded (June 30, 1992, p. 17135). Thus a motion that the Committee
    rise and report the bill to the House with the recommendation that it be
    recommitted, with instructions to report back to the House (forthwith or
    otherwise) with an amendment proposing a limitation, does not take
    precedence over the motion to rise and report the bill to the House with
    such amendments as may have been adopted (Sept. 19, 1983, p. 24647
    (sustained on appeal)). An amendment not only reducing an amount in a
    paragraph of an appropriation bill but also limiting expenditure of
    those funds on a particular project (i.e., a limitation not contained in
    existing law) was held not in order during the reading of that paragraph
    but only at the end of the bill under clause 2(d) (July 23, 1986, p.
    17431; June 15, 1988, p. 14719). Where language of limitation was
    stricken from a general appropriation bill on a point of order that it
    changed existing law, an amendment proposing to reinsert the limitation
    without its former legislative content was held not in order before
    completion of the reading for amendment (June 18, 1991, p. 15214; Sept.
    23, 1993, p. 22214). A motion that the Committee of the Whole rise and
    report to the House with the recommendation that the enacting clause be
    stricken out takes precedence over the motion to amend under clause 9 of
    rule XVIII (formerly clause 7 of rule XXIII) and also over the motion to
    rise and report under clause 2(d) (July 24, 1986, p. 17641).

    Sec. 1044b. Motion to rise and report.

      Where  the reading of
    a general appropriation bill for amendment has been completed (or
    dispensed with), including the last paragraph of the bill containing the
    citation to the short title (July 30, 1986, p. 18214), the Chair (under
    the former form of the rule, which made the preferential motion
    available to any Member) might first inquire whether any Member sought
    to offer an amendment (formerly, one not prohibited by clauses 2(a) or
    (c)) before recognizing Members to offer limitation or retrenchment
    amendments (June 2, 1983, p. 14317; Sept. 22, 1983, p. 25406; Oct. 27,
    1983, p. 29630), including pro forma amendments (Aug. 2, 1989, p.
    18126). Pursuant to clause 2(d), a motion that the Committee rise and
    report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been
    adopted is not debatable (Apr. 23, 1987, p. 9613) and takes precedence
    over any amendment (formerly only over a limitation or retrenchment
    amendment) (July 30, 1985, p.

      The 109th Congress adopted a resolution creating a point of order
    against the motion to rise and report an appropriation bill to the House
    where the bill, as proposed to be amended, exceeds an applicable
    allocation of new budget authority under section 302(b) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and setting forth procedures in the
    Committee of the Whole in the event that the point of order is sustained
    (sec. 2, H. Res. 248, Apr. 28, 2005, p. ----), to wit:

      Sec. 2. (a) During the One Hundred Ninth Congress, except as provided
    in subsection (c), a motion that the Committee of the Whole rise and
    report a bill to the House shall not be in order if the bill, as
    amended, exceeds an applicable allocation of new budget authority under
    section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as estimated by
    the Committee on the Budget.

      (b) If a point of order under subsection (a) is sustained, the Chair
    shall put the question: `Shall the Committee of the Whole rise and
    report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been
    adopted notwithstanding that the bill exceeds its allocation of new
    budget authority under section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of
    1974?'. Such question shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided
    and controlled by a proponent of the question and an opponent but shall
    be decided without intervening motion.

      (c) Subsection (a) shall not apply--

    [[Page 833]]

              (1) to a motion offered under clause 2(d) of rule XXI; or

              (2) after disposition of a question under subsection (b) on a

            given bill.

      (d) If a question under subsection (b) is decided in the negative, no
    further amendment shall be in order except--

              (1) one proper amendment, which shall be debatable for 10

            minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an

            opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be

            subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or

            in the Committee of the Whole; and

              (2) pro forma amendments, if offered by the chairman or

            ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or

            their designees, for the purpose of debate.

    Sec. 1045. Authorization of law for
    appropriations.

      A treaty  may provide the authorization by existing law required
    in the rule to justify appropriations if it has been ratified by the
    contracting parties (IV, 3587); however, where existing law authorizes
    appropriations for the U.S. share of facilities to be recommended in an
    agreement with another country containing specified elements, an
    agreement in principle with that country predating the authorization law
    and lacking the required elements is insufficient authorization (June
    28, 1993, p. 14421). An Executive Order does not constitute sufficient
    authorization in law absent proof of its derivation from a statute
    enacted by Congress authorizing the order and expenditure of funds (June
    15, 1973, p. 19855; June 25, 1974, p. 21036). Thus a Reorganization Plan
    submitted by the President pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 906 has the status of
    statutory law when it becomes effective and is sufficient authorization
    to support an appropriation for an office created by Executive Order
    issued pursuant to the Reorganization Plan (June 21, 1974, p. 20595). A
    constitutional guarantee of just compensation for a governmental taking
    of private property for public use does not itself constitute sufficient
    authorization by law for appropriations in a general appropriation bill
    for compensation of particular private property owners (July 18, 2001,
    p. ----).

    [[Page 834]]

      A resolution of the House has been held sufficient authorization for
    an appropriation for the salary of an employee of the House (IV, 3656-
    3658) even though the resolution may have been agreed to only by a
    preceding House (IV, 3660). Previous enactment of items of appropriation
    unauthorized by law does not justify similar appropriations in
    subsequent bills (VII, 1145, 1150, 1151) unless if through
    appropriations previously made, a function of the Government has been
    established which would bring it into the category of continuation of
    works in progress (VII, 1280), or unless legislation in a previous
    appropriation act has become permanent law (May 20, 1964, p. 11422). The
    omission to appropriate during a series of years for an object
    authorized by law does not repeal the law, and consequently an
    appropriation when proposed is not subject to the point of order (IV,
    3595).

      The law authorizing each head of a department to employ such numbers
    of clerks, messengers, copyists, watchmen, laborers, and other employees
    as may be appropriated for by Congress from year to year is held to
    authorize appropriations for those positions not otherwise authorized by
    law (IV, 3669, 3675, 4739); but this law does not apply to offices not
    within departments or not at the seat of Government (IV, 3670-3674). A
    permanent law authorizing the President to appoint certain staff,
    together with legislative provisions authorizing additional employment
    contained in an appropriation bill enacted for that fiscal year,
    constituted sufficient authorization for a lump sum supplemental
    appropriation for the White House for the same fiscal year (Nov. 30,
    1973, p. 38854). By a general provision of law, appropriations for
    investigations and the acquisition and diffusion of information by the
    Agriculture Department on subjects related to agriculture are generally
    in order in the agricultural appropriation bill (IV, 3649). It has once
    been held that this law would also authorize appropriations for the
    instrumentalities of such investigations (IV, 3615); but these would not
    include the organization of a bureau to conduct the work (IV, 3651). The
    law does not authorize general investigations by the department (IV,
    3652), or cooperation with State investigations (IV, 3650; VII, 1301,
    1302), or the investigation of foods in relation to commerce (IV, 3647,
    3648; VII, 1298), or the compiling of tests at an exposition (IV, 3653).

      A paragraph appropriating funds for matching grants to States was held
    unauthorized where the authorizing law did not require State matching
    funds (June 28, 1993, p. 14418). A paragraph funding a project from the
    Highway Trust Fund was held unauthorized where such funding was
    authorized only from the general fund (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22175; June
    26, 2001, p. ----; Nov. 28, 2001, p. ----) or from the Airport and
    Airway Trust Fund (e.g., Sept. 14, 2004, p. ----; June 29, 2005, p. ----
    ). A paragraph providing funds for the President to meet ``unanticipated
    needs'' was held unauthorized (July 16, 1998, p. 15808). The
    authorization must be enacted before the appropriation may be included
    in an appropriation bill; thus delaying the availability of an
    appropriation pending enactment of an authorization does not protect the
    item of appropriation against a point of order under this clause (Apr.
    26, 1972, p. 14455). Similarly, an amendment limiting funds to the
    extent provided in authorizing legislation on or after the date of
    enactment of the pending appropriation bill is not in order (May 19,
    2005, p. ----).

    [[Page 835]]

    authorizations (June 14, 1978, pp. 17616, 17622, 17626, 17630) or on
    whether a periodic authorization scheme has subsequently occupied the
    field (Sept. 9, 1997, p. 18197). An authorization of ``such sums as may
    be necessary'' is sufficient to support any dollar amount, but has no
    tendency to relieve other conditions of the authorization law (June 28,
    1993, p. 1442). Where existing law authorizes certain appropriations
    from a particular trust fund without fiscal year limitation, language
    that such an appropriation remain available until expended does not
    constitute legislation (July 15, 1993, p. 15848).
      The failure of Congress to enact into law separate legislation
    specifically modifying eligibility requirements for grant programs under
    existing law does not necessarily render appropriations for those
    programs subject to a point of order, where more general existing law
    authorizes appropriations for all of the programs proposed to be
    modified by new legislation pending before Congress (June 8, 1978, p.
    16778). However, whether organic statutes or general grants of authority
    in law constitute sufficient authorization to support appropriations
    depends on whether the general laws applicable to the function or
    department in question require specific or annual

      An amendment to a general appropriation bill providing that ``not less
    than'' (or ``not to exceed'') a certain amount be made available to a
    program requires an authorization (June 21, 1988, p. 15440; July 12,
    2000, p. 14070; July 13, 2000, p. 14084).

      Pursuant to clause 11(i) of rule X (formerly clause 9 of rule XLVIII),
    no funds may be appropriated to certain agencies carrying out
    intelligence and intelligence-related activities, unless such funds have
    been authorized by law for the fiscal year in question.

    Sec. 1046. Authorization for claims and
    salaries.

      Judgments of  courts certified to Congress in accordance with law or
    authorized by treaty (IV, 3634, 3635, 3644) and audited under authority
    of law have been held to be authorization for appropriations for the
    payment of claims (IV, 3634, 3635). However, unadjudicated claims (IV,
    3628), even though ascertained and transmitted by an executive officer
    (IV, 3625-3640), and findings filed under the Bowman Act do not
    constitute authorization (IV, 3643).

      An appropriation for an object not otherwise authorized does not
    constitute authorization to justify a continuance of the appropriation
    another year (IV, 3588, 3589; VII, 1128, 1145, 1149, 1191), and the mere
    appropriation for a salary does not create an office so as to justify
    appropriations in succeeding years (IV, 3590, 3672, 3697), it being a
    general rule that propositions to appropriate for salaries not
    established by law or to increase salaries fixed by law are out of order
    (IV, 3664-3667, 3676-3679). An exception to these general principles is
    found in the established practice that in the absence of a general law
    fixing a salary the amount appropriated in the last appropriation bill
    has been held to be the legal salary (IV, 3687-3696). A law having
    established an office and fixed a salary, it is not in order to provide
    for an unauthorized office and salary in lieu of it (IV, 3680).

    [[Page 836]]

    does not fix a limit of cost such as would exclude future appropriations
    (IV, 3761). A declaration of policy in an act followed by specific
    provisions conferring authority upon a governmental agency to perform
    certain functions was construed not to authorize appropriations for
    purposes germane to the policy but not specifically authorized by the
    act (VII, 1200). A point of order will not lie against an amendment
    proposing to increase a lump sum for public works projects where
    language in the bill limits use of the lump sum appropriation to
    projects as authorized by law (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 19.6), but where
    language in the bill limits use of the lump sum both to projects
    ``authorized by law'' and ``subject, where appropriate, to enactment of
    authorizing legislation,'' that paragraph constitutes an appropriation
    in part for some unauthorized projects and is not in order (June 6,
    1985, p. 14617). Language in an appropriation bill precluding funds for
    projects not authorized by law or beyond the amount authorized was held
    to limit expenditures to authorized projects and was not legislation
    (Deschler, ch. 25, Sec. 2.18).

    Sec. 1047. Authorizations for public works.

      An  appropriation
    for a public work in excess of a fixed limit of cost (IV, 3583, 3584;
    VII, 1133), or for extending a service beyond the limits assigned by an
    executive officer exercising a lawful discretion (IV, 3598), or by
    actual law (IV, 3582, 3585), or for purposes prohibited by law are out
    of order (IV, 3580, 3581, 3702), as is an appropriation from the Highway
    Trust Fund where the project is specifically authorized from the general
    fund (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22175). However, the mere appropriation of a
    sum to complete a work

    [[Page 837]]

    meant tangible matters like buildings, roads, etc., and not duties of
    officials in executive departments (IV, 3709-3713), or the continuance
    of a work indefinite as to completion and intangible in nature like the
    gauging of streams (IV, 3714, 3715). A general system of roads on which
    some work has been done, or an extension of an existing road (Sept. 22,
    1993, p. 22140), may not be admitted as a work in progress (VII, 1333).
    Concerning reappropriation for continuation of public works in progress,
    see Sec. 1031, supra.

    Sec. 1048. Continuation of a public work by
    appropriations.

      The provision  excepting public works and objects that are already in
    progress from the requirement that appropriations be authorized by
    existing law (IV, 3578) has historically been applied only in cases of
    general revenue funding (Sept. 22, 1993, p. 22140; Sept. 23, 1993, p.
    22173). An appropriation in violation of existing law or to extend a
    service beyond a fixed limit is not in order as the continuance of a
    public work (IV, 3585, 3702-3724; VII, 1332; Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22173;
    Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 8.9). The ``works in progress'' exception may not
    be invoked to fund a project governed by a lapsed authorization and may
    not be invoked to fund a project that is not yet under construction
    (July 31, 1995, p. 21207). Where existing law (40 U.S.C. 606)
    specifically prohibits the making of an appropriation to construct or
    alter any public building involving more than $500,000 unless approved
    by the House and Senate Public Works Committees, an appropriation for
    such purposes not authorized by both committees is out of order
    notwithstanding the ``works in progress'' exemption, since the law
    specifically precludes the appropriation from being made (June 8, 1983,
    p. 14855). An appropriation from the Highway Trust Fund for an ongoing
    project was held not in order under the ``works in progress'' exception
    where the Internal Revenue Code ``occupied the field'' with a
    comprehensive authorization scheme not embracing the specified project
    (Sept. 22, 1993, p. 22140; Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22173). Interruption of a
    work does not necessarily remove it from the privileges of the rule (IV,
    3705-3708); but the continuation of the work must not be so conditioned
    in relation to place as to become a new work (IV, 3704). It has been
    held that a work has not been begun within the meaning of the rule when
    an appropriation has been made for a site for a public building (IV,
    3785), or when a commission has been created to select a site or when a
    site has actually been selected for a work (IV, 3762, 3763), or when a
    survey has been made (IV, 3782-3784). By ``public works and objects
    already in progress'' are

    Sec. 1049. Examples illustrating the continuation of
    a public work.

      Thus the  continuation of the following works has been admitted:
    A topographical survey (IV, 3796, 3797; VII, 1382), a geological map
    (IV, 3795), marking of a boundary line (IV, 3717), marking graves of
    soldiers (IV, 3788), a list of claims (IV, 3717), and recoinage of coins
    in the Treasury (IV, 3807); but the following works have not been
    admitted: Investigation of materials, like coal (IV, 3721), scientific
    investigations (IV, 3719; VII, 1345), duties of a commission (IV, 3720;
    VII, 1344), extension of foreign markets for goods (IV, 3722), printing
    of a series of opinions indefinite in continuance (IV, 3718), free
    evening lectures in the District of Columbia (IV, 3789), certain ongoing
    projects from the Highway Trust Fund (Sept. 22, 1993, pp. 22140; Sept.
    23, 1993, p. 22173), extension of an existing road (Sept. 22, 1993, p.
    22140), continuation of an extra compensation for ordinary facility for
    carrying the mails (IV, 3808), although the continuation of certain
    special mail facilities has been admitted (IV, 3804-3806). However,
    appropriations for rent and repairs of buildings or Government roads
    (IV, 3793, 3798) and bridges (IV, 3803) have been admitted as in
    continuation of a work (IV, 3777, 3778), although it is not in order as
    such to provide for a new building in place of one destroyed (IV, 3606).
    It is not in order to repair paving adjacent to a public building but in
    a city street, although it may have been laid originally by the
    Government (IV, 3779). The purchase of adjoining land for a work already
    established has been admitted under this principle (IV, 3766-3773) and
    also additions to existing buildings in cases where no limits of cost
    have been shown (IV, 3774, 3775). However, the purchase of a separate
    and detached lot of land is not admitted (IV, 3776). The continuation of
    construction at the Kennedy Library, a project owned by the United
    States and funded by a prior year's appropriation, has been admitted
    notwithstanding the absence of any current authorization (June 14, 1988,
    p. 14335). A provision of law authorizing Commissioners of the District
    of Columbia to take over and operate the fish wharves of the city of
    Washington was held insufficient authority to admit an appropriation for
    reconstructing the fish wharf (VII, 1187).

    [[Page 838]]

    yards (IV, 3755-3759) and other establishments (IV, 3751-3754).
    Appropriations for new schoolhouses in the District of Columbia (IV,
    3750; VII, 1358), for new Army hospitals (IV, 3740), for new lighthouses
    (IV, 3728), armor-plate factories (IV, 3737-3739), and for additional
    playgrounds for children in the District of Columbia (IV, 3792) have
    also been held not to be in continuation of a public work.

    Sec. 1050. New buildings at existing
    institutions as in continuance of a public work.

      Appropriations for  new buildings at
    Government institutions have sometimes been admitted (IV, 3741-3750)
    when intended for the purposes of the institution (IV, 3747); but later
    decisions, in view of the indefinite extent of the practice made
    possible by the early decisions, have ruled out propositions to
    appropriate for new buildings in navy

    Sec. 1051. New vessel for naval and other services
    as in continuation of a public work.

      By a former  broad construction of the rule an
    appropriation of a new and not otherwise authorized vessel of the Navy
    had been held to be a continuance of a public work (IV, 3723, 3724); but
    this line of decisions has been overruled (VII, 1351; Jan. 22, 1926, p.
    2621). While appropriations for new construction and procurement of
    aircraft and equipment for the Navy are not in order, appropriations for
    continuing experiments and development work on all types of aircraft are
    in order (Jan. 22, 1926, p. 2623). This former interpretation was
    confined to naval vessels, and did not apply to vessels in other
    services, like the Coast and Geodetic Survey or Lighthouse Service (IV,
    3725, 3726), or to floating or stationary drydocks (IV, 3729-3736). The
    construction of a submarine cable in extension of one already laid was
    held not to be the continuation of a public work (IV, 3716), but an
    appropriation for the Washington-Alaska military cable has been held in
    order (VII, 1348).

    Sec. 1052. Legislation generally.

      A  provision changing
    existing law is construed to mean the enactment of law where none exists
    (IV, 3812, 3813). For example, the following provisions have been held
    out of order: (1) permitting funds to remain available until expended or
    beyond the fiscal year covered by the bill where existing law does not
    permit such availability (Aug. 1, 1973, p. 27288); (2) permitting funds
    to be available immediately upon enactment before the fiscal year
    covered by the bill (July 29, 1986, p. 17981; June 28, 1988, p. 16255);
    (3) permitting funds to be available to the extent provided in advance
    in appropriation Acts but not explicitly beyond the fiscal year in
    question (July 21, 1981, p. 16687); or (4) setting a floor on spending
    that is not established by existing law (July 23, 2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 839]]

    in a separate resolution of disapproval under that Act (July 29, 1982,
    pp. 18625, 18626).
      Although clause 2(b) permits the Committee on Appropriations to report
    rescissions of appropriations, an amendment proposing a rescission
    constitutes legislation under clause 2(c) (May 26, 1993, p. 11319), as
    does a provision proposing a rescission of budget authority provided in
    law other than appropriations acts, such as contract authority (e.g.,
    Sept. 22, 1993, p. 22138; May 15, 1997, p. 8510; July 23, 1997, p.
    15353; July 29, 1998, p. 17956) or a loan guarantee program (July 13,
    2004, p. ----). Similarly, a provision canceling funds under the Farm
    Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 was held to be legislation
    (June 16, 2004, p. ----). A provision constituting congressional
    disapproval of a deferral of budget authority proposed by the President
    pursuant to the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is not in order if
    included in a general appropriation bill rather than

      A proposal to amend existing law to provide for automatic continuation
    of appropriations in the absence of timely enactment of a regular
    appropriation bill constitutes legislation in contravention of clause
    2(c) (July 17, 1996, p. 17550; July 24, 1996, p. 18898). A proposal to
    designate an appropriation as ``emergency spending'' within the meaning
    of the budget-enforcement laws (or so designated under provisions of a
    budget resolution) is fundamentally legislative in character (e.g.,
    Sept. 8, 1999, pp. 20900; June 19, 2000, p. ---- (sustained on appeal);
    June 20, 2001, p. ----; Oct. 16, 2003, p. ----; Mar. 15, 2005, p. ----
    (sustained on appeal)). Similarly, a provision containing an averment
    necessary to qualify for certain scorekeeping under the Budget Act was
    conceded to be legislation (July 20, 1989, p. 15374), even though the
    Budget Act contemplates that expenditures may be mandated to occur
    before or following a fiscal period if the law making those expenditures
    specifies that the timing is the result of a ``significant'' policy
    change (July 20, 1989, p. 15374).

      Language in an appropriation bill precluding funds for projects not
    authorized by law or beyond the amount authorized has been held in order
    as simply limiting expenditures to authorized projects (Deschler, ch.
    25, Sec. 2.18). However, an amendment limiting funds to the extent
    provided for in authorizing legislation on or after the date of
    enactment of the pending appropriation bill is not in order (May 19,
    2005, p. ----).

      Although the object to be appropriated for may be described without
    violating the rule (IV, 3864), an amendment proposing an appropriation
    under a heading that indicates an unauthorized purpose as its object has
    been ruled out (Oct. 29, 1991, p. 28814). For example, an amendment
    proposing to make certain funds available for a specified report not
    contemplated by existing law was held to constitute legislation in
    violation of clause 2(c) (June 13, 2000, p. 10509). The fact that a
    legislative item has been carried in appropriation bills for many years
    does not exempt it from a point of order (VII, 1445, 1656). The
    reenactment from year to year of a law intended to apply during the year
    of its enactment only is not relieved, however, from the point that it
    is legislation (IV, 3822). Limits of cost for public works may not be
    made or changed (IV, 3761, 3865-3867; VII, 1446), or contracts
    authorized (IV, 3868-3870; May 14, 1937, p. 4595).

      An amendment to a general appropriation bill stating a legislative
    position constitutes legislation (July 24, 2001, p. ----).

    [[Page 840]]

    ments during the reading of the bill by paragraph unless specifically
    authorized by existing law for the period of the limitation, even if the
    amendment is expanding a limitation already in the bill (July 23, 2003,
    p. ----).

    Sec. 1053. Limitations on appropriations
    generally.

      Although the  rule forbids a provision ``changing existing law,'' the
    House, by practice, has established the principle that certain
    ``limitations'' may be admitted. Just as the House may decline to
    appropriate for a purpose authorized by law, so may it by limitation
    prohibit the use of the money for part of the purpose while
    appropriating for the remainder of it (IV, 3936; VII, 1595). Paragraph
    (c) prohibits consideration of limitation amend

      The language of the limitation provides that some or all of the
    appropriation under consideration may not be used for a certain
    designated purpose (IV, 3917-3926; VII, 1580). This designated purpose
    may reach the question of qualifications, for while it is not in order
    to legislate as to the qualifications of the recipients of an
    appropriation (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. Sec. 53, 57.15), the House may
    specify that no part of the appropriation may go to recipients lacking
    certain qualifications (IV, 3942-3952; VII, 1655; June 4, 1970, p.
    18412; June 27, 1974, p. 21662; Oct. 9, 1974, p. 34712; June 9, 1978, p.
    16990).

      A limitation amendment prohibiting the use of funds for the
    construction of certain facilities unless such construction were subject
    to a project agreement was held not in order during the reading of the
    bill, even though existing law directed Federal officials to enter into
    such project agreements, on the ground that limitation amendments are in
    order during the reading only where existing law requires or permits the
    inclusion of limiting language in an appropriation Act, and not merely
    where the limitation is alleged to be ``consistent with existing law''
    (June 28, 1988, p. 16267).

      A limitation may place some minimal, incidential duties on Federal
    officials, who must determine the effect of such a limitation on
    appropriated funds. However, a provision may not impose additional
    duties not required by law, either explicitly or implicitly, or make the
    appropriation contingent upon the performance of such duties (VII, 1676;
    June 11, 1968, p. 16712; July 31, 1969, pp. 21631-33; May 28, 1968, p.
    15350; July 26, 1985, p. 20807; see Sec. 1054, infra). The fact that a
    limitation may indirectly interfere with an executive official's
    discretionary authority by denying the use of funds (June 24, 1976, p.
    20408) or may impose certain incidental burdens on executive officials
    (Aug. 25, 1976, p. 27737) does not destroy the character of the
    limitation as long as it does not otherwise amend existing law and is
    descriptive of functions and findings already required to be undertaken
    by existing law. For example, a limitation precluding funds for
    specified Federal departments to file certain motions in specified civil
    actions (all matters of public record in the litigation and therefore
    available to responsible intervening Federal officials) was held to be a
    proper limitation (July 18, 2001, p. ----).

    [[Page 841]]

    tion,'' such that the presence of the same limitation in the annual bill
    for the previous fiscal year does not justify its inclusion in the
    pending annual bill (Sept. 22, 1983, p. 25406, June 26, 2000, p. 12355).
      The limitation must apply solely to the money of the appropriation
    under consideration (VII, 1597, 1600, 1720; Feb. 26, 1958, p. 2895). For
    example, a limitation on funds: (1) may not apply to money appropriated
    in other Acts (IV, 3927, 3928; VII, 1495, 1525; June 28, 1971, p. 22442;
    June 27, 1974, pp. 21670-72; May 13, 1981, p. 9663); (2) may not require
    funds available to an agency in any future fiscal year for a certain
    purpose to be subject to limitations specified in advance in
    appropriations Acts (May 8, 1986, p. 10156). The tendency of a
    limitation to change existing law is measured against the state of
    existing law ``for the period of the limita

      A restriction on authority to incur obligations is legislative in
    nature and not a limitation on funds (July 13, 1987, p. 19507; Sept. 23,
    1993, p. 22204; July 15, 2004, p. ----). For example, a limitation on
    the authority of the Commodity Credit Corporation to purchase sugar is
    legislative in nature and not a limitation on funds (June 29, 2000, p.
    13109).

      In construing a proposed limitation, the Chair may examine whether the
    purpose of the limitation is legislative. For example, a limitation
    accompanied by language stating a legislative motive or purpose is not
    in order (Aug. 8, 1978, p. 24969; July 22, 1980, p. 19087; Sept. 16,
    1980, p. 25604; Sept. 22, 1981, p. 21577). Similarly, where existing law
    and the Constitution require a census to be taken of all persons, an
    amendment that seeks to preclude the use of funds to exclude another
    class ``known'' to the Secretary is not in order (Aug. 1, 1989, p.
    17156). However, language may, by negatively refusing to include funds
    for all or part of an authorized executive function, thereby affect
    policy and restrict executive discretion to the extent of its denial of
    availability of funds (IV, 3968-3972; VII, 1583, 1653, 1694; Sept. 14,
    1972, p. 30749; June 21, 1974, p. 20601; Oct. 9, 1974, p. 34716). For
    example, an appropriation may be withheld from a designated object by a
    negative limitation on the use of funds, notwithstanding that contracts
    may be left unsatisfied thereby (IV, 3987; July 10, 1975, pp. 22006-07).

      The Chair has stated that a limitation amendment that comprises a
    textual ``double-negative'' (the coupling of a denial of an
    appropriation with a negative restriction on official duties) is suspect
    and may result in an affirmative direction or an affirmative statement
    of intent that constitutes legislation and is therefore not in order
    (VII, 1690-1692; Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 51.15 (note); July 23, 2003, p.
    ----). In order to carry the burden of proof on an amendment proposing a
    double-negative, a Member must be able to show that the object of the
    double-negative is specifically contemplated by existing law (July 23,
    2003, p. ----, p. ----). For example, the following have been held out
    of order for using a double-negative: (1) a provision to limit funds to
    prohibit the obligation of funds up to a specified amount for an
    unauthorized transportation project (effectively authorizing an
    unauthorized project) (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22209); (2) an amendment to
    limit funds to prohibit projects that promote the participation of women
    in international peace efforts, such promotion not specifically
    contemplated by law (July 23, 2003, p. ----); (3) an amendment to limit
    funds to prohibit the establishment of an independent commission not
    contemplated by existing law (July 23, 2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 842]]

    tain period of time (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 51.23), or by precluding the
    obligation of certain funds until funds provided by another Act have
    been obligated (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 48.8). The burden is on the
    proponent to show that such a proposal does not change existing law by
    restricting the timing of the expenditure of funds rather than their
    availability for specified objects (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. Sec. 64.23,
    80.5).
      It is not in order, even by language in the form of a limitation, to
    restrict not the use or amount of appropriated funds but the
    discretionary authority conferred by law to administer their
    expenditure, such as by limiting the percentage of funds that may be
    apportioned for expenditure within a cer

      As long as a limitation merely restricts the expenditure of Federal
    funds carried in the bill without changing existing law, the limitation
    is in order, even if the Federal funds in question are commingled with
    non-Federal funds that would have to be accounted for separately in
    carrying out the limitation (Aug. 20, 1980, p. 22171).

      The fact that existing law authorizes funds to be available until
    expended or without regard to fiscal year limitation does not prevent
    the Committee on Appropriations from limiting their availability to the
    fiscal year covered by the bill unless existing law mandates
    availability beyond the fiscal year (June 25, 1974, p. 21040; see also
    Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 32). The fact that a provision would constitute
    legislation for only a year does not make it a limitation in order under
    the rule (IV, 3936).

      A proposition to construe a law may not be admitted (IV, 3936-3938,
    see Sec. 1055, infra). Care also should be taken that the language of
    limitation be not such as, when fairly construed, would change existing
    law (IV, 3976-3983) or justify an executive officer in assuming an
    intent to change existing law (IV, 3984; VII, 1706).

      Although the Committee on Appropriations may include in a general
    appropriation bill language not in existing law limiting the use of
    funds in the bill, if such language also constitutes an appropriation it
    must be authorized by law (June 21, 1988, p. 15439). An amendment
    placing a limitation on funds for activities unrelated to the functions
    of departments and agencies addressed by the bill is not germane under
    clause 7 of rule XVI (July 10, 2000, p. 13605).

    Sec. 1054. New duties or determinations;
    executive discretion.

      Propositions to  establish affirmative directions for executive
    officers (IV, 3854-3859; VII, 1443; July 31, 1969, p. 21675; June 18,
    1979, p. 15286; July 1, 1987, pp. 18654, 18655; June 27, 1994, p.
    14572), even in cases where they may have discretion under the law so to
    do (IV, 3853; June 4, 1970, p. 18401; Aug. 8, 1978, p. 24959), or to
    affirmatively take away an authority or discretion conferred by law (IV,
    3862, 3863; VII, 1975; Mar. 30, 1955, p. 4065; June 21, 1974, p. 20600;
    July 31, 1985, p. 21909), are subject to a point of order.

    [[Page 843]]

    local law where that interpretation is not required by existing law
    (July 17, 1981, p. 16327); (5) require new determinations of full
    Federal compliance with mandates imposed upon States (July 22, 1981, p.
    16829); (6) require the evaluation of the theoretical basis of a program
    (July 22, 1981, p. 16822); (7) require new determinations of propriety
    or effectiveness (Oct. 6, 1981, p. 23361; May 25, 1988, p. 12275), or
    satisfactory quality (Aug. 1, 1986, p. 18647); (8) incorporate by
    reference determinations already made in administrative processes not
    affecting programs funded by the bill (Oct. 6, 1981, p. 23361); (9)
    require new determinations of rates of interest payable (July 29, 1982,
    p. 18624; Dec. 9, 1982, p. 29691); (10) a determination of whether the
    Office of Management and Budget interfered with the rulemaking authority
    of a regulatory agency (Nov. 30, 1982, p. 28062); (11) authorize the
    President to reduce each appropriation in the bill by not more than 10
    percent (May 31, 1984, p. 14617; June 6, 1984, p. 15120); (12) apply
    standards of conduct to foreign entities where existing law requires
    such conduct only by domestic entities (July 17, 1986, p. 16951); (13)
    require the enforcement of a standard where existing law only requires
    inspection of an area (July 30, 1986, p. 18189); (14) prohibit the
    availability of funds for the purchase of ``nondomestic'' goods and
    services (Sept. 12, 1986, p. 23178); (15) mandate contractual provisions
    (May 18, 1988, p. 11389); (16) authorize the adjustment of wages of
    Government employees (June 21, 1988, p. 15451; Apr. 26, 1989, p. 7525)
    or permit an increase in Members' office allowances only ``if requested
    in writing'' (Oct. 21, 1990, p. 31708); (17) convert an existing legal
    prerequisite for the issuance of a regulatory permit into a prerequisite
    for even the preliminary processing of such a permit (July 22, 1992, p.
    18825); (18) mandate reductions in various appropriations by a variable
    percentage calculated in relation to ``overhead'' (Deschler, ch. 26,
    Sec. 5.6; June 24, 1992, p. 16110); (19) require an agency to
    investigate and determine whether private airports are collecting
    certain fees for each enplaning passenger (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22213);
    (20) require an agency to investigate and determine whether a person or
    entity entering into a contract with funds under the pending bill is
    subject to a legal proceeding commenced by the Federal Government and
    alleging fraud (Sept. 17, 1997, p. 19045); (21) require an agency to
    determine whether building services are ``usually'' provided through the
    Federal Building Fund to an agency not paying a level of assessment
    specified elsewhere (and not necessarily applicable) (July 16, 1998, p.
    15816); (22) require a determination of ``successor agency'' status
    (Sept. 26, 1997, p. 20347); (23) require a determination whether a
    delegate or envoy to the United Nations has ``advocated'' the adoption
    of a certain convention (June 26, 2000, p. 12355); (24) require tests or
    reports not required under existing law (May 19, 2000, p. 8616) or
    require all quarterly and annual reports required by law in accordance
    with standards for reports under a specified law not otherwise
    applicable (Sept. 9, 2003, p. ----); (25) impose a new duty to tally
    violations of law by contractors where existing law required information
    on violations but not on the number thereof (June

    [[Page 844]]

    7, 2000, p. 9849); (26) require an investigation of the conscription
    requirements of other nations (July 13, 2000, p. 14121); (27) require a
    determination whether ``efforts'' have been made to change any nation's
    laws regarding abortion, family planning, or population control (July
    13, 2000, p. 14130); (28) impose a new duty to calculate the ``total
    amount'' of payments under a Federal program paid to a husband and wife
    (to determine whether an exception to an otherwise valid limitation
    would apply) (July 11, 2001, p. ----); (29) require an investigation
    into the extent to which World Trade Organization challenges against
    foreign laws and policies promote access to certain pharmaceuticals
    (July 18, 2001, p. ----); (30) require an investigation into whether an
    applicant for immigration has been involved in the harvesting of organs
    (July 18, 2001, p. ----); (31) require the Inspector General to opine on
    audited financial statements of certain components of the Department of
    Defense where the issuance of such opinion was not shown to be required
    by existing law (June 27, 2002, p. ----); (32) require the examination
    of certain legislative reports to determine whether an entity is
    specifically identified by name (July 17, 2002, p. ----); (33) require
    several agencies to process certain information where current law
    required only one specific agency to process that information (June 24,
    2003, p. ----); (34) in the case of a limitation with respect to certain
    roads on public land, require a determination of the precise nature of
    those roads including their ownership and the types of vehicles allowed
    to travel on them (July 17, 2003, p. ----); (35) require a determination
    that certain trade agreements achieved generic undefined policy goals
    that were not set forth in existing law (July 23, 2003, p. ----); (36)
    require a determination that a drug has been prescribed ``for the
    purpose of relieving or managing pain'' (July 7, 2004, p. ----); (37)
    require a determination as to the date on which various road
    construction projects in a National Forest were commenced within the
    periods in which they were authorized to commence (May 19, 2005, p. ----
    ); (38) require the Food and Drug Administration to examine a registry
    of clinical trials maintained by a the National Institutes of Health, a
    different entity (June 8, 2005, p. ----); (39) require a determination
    regarding a specific type of employment behavior before initiating an
    employment investigation (June 8, 2005, p. ----); (40) require a
    determination as to whether a local educational agency had obtained
    parental consent before providing military recruiters student
    information (June 24, 2004, p. ----); (41) in the case of a limitation
    on the enforcement of a regulation against a specified class, require a
    determination as to whether a person is a member of that class (June 30,
    2005, p. ----). The fact that an executive official may have been
    directed by an Executive Order to consult another executive official
    before taking an action does not permit inclusion of language directing
    the official being consulted to make determinations not specifically
    required by law (July 22, 1980, p. 19087).
      A limitation may not: (1) be applied directly to the official
    functions of executive officers (IV, 3957-3966; VII, 1673, 1678, 1685),
    (2) directly interfere with discretionary authority in law by
    establishing a level of funding below which expenditures may not be made
    (VII, 1704; July 20, 1978, p. 21856), (3) require a judgment as to
    whether racial imbalance had been overcome (July 31, 1969, pp. 21653,
    21675); (4) condition the availability of funds or the exercise of
    contract authority upon an interpretation of

    [[Page 845]]

    existing law if the description of those duties precisely follows
    existing law and does not require them to perform new duties (June 24,
    1976, p. 20373); (2) denying the use of funds to a Federal official not
    in compliance with an existing law that he is charged with enforcing
    (Sept. 10, 1981, p. 20110); (3) reducing the availability of funds for
    trade adjustment assistance by amounts of unemployment insurance
    entitlements where the law establishing trade adjustment assistance
    already required the disbursing agency to take into consideration levels
    of unemployment insurance in determining payment levels (June 18, 1980,
    p. 15355); (4) denying the use of funds to carry out (or pay the
    salaries of persons who carry out) tobacco crop and insurance programs
    (July 20, 1995, p. 19798); (5) denying the use of funds for any transit
    project exceeding a specified cost-effectiveness index where the Chair
    was persuaded that the limitation applied to projects for which indexes
    were already required by law (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22206); (6) denying the
    use of funds to enforce FAA regulations to require domestic air carriers
    to surrender more than a specified number of ``slots'' at a given
    airport in preference of international air carriers where the Chair was
    persuaded that existing regulations already required the FAA to
    determine the origin of withdrawn slots (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22212); (7)
    denying the use of funds for troops ``except in time of war'' (Deschler,
    ch. 26, Sec. 70.1) or ``except in time of emergency'' (VII, 1657, which
    was the basis for the preceding ruling); (8) denying the use of funds to
    implement any sanction imposed by the United States on private
    commercial sales of agricultural commodities, medicine, or medical
    supplies to Cuba except for a sanction imposed pursuant to agreement
    with one or more other countries (July 20, 2000, p. 15751); (9) denying
    the use of funds by the Forest Service to construct roads or prepare
    timber sales in certain roadless areas where the executive was already
    charged by law with ongoing responsibility to maintain a comprehensive
    and detailed inventory of all land and renewable resources of the
    National Forest System (July 18, 1995, p. 19357); (10) denying the use
    of funds to eliminate an existing legal requirement for sureties on
    custom bonds (June 27, 1984, p. 19101); (11) denying the use of funds by
    any Federal official in any manner that would prevent a provision of
    existing law from being enforced (relating to import restrictions) (June
    27, 1984, p. 19101); (12) denying the use of funds for any reduction in
    the number of Customs Service regions or for any consolidation of
    Customs Service offices (June 27, 1984, p. 19102); (13) denying the use
    of funds for specified Federal departments to file certain motions in
    specified civil actions (all matters of public record in the litigation
    and therefore available to responsible intervening Federal officials)
    (July 18, 2001, p. ----); (14) denying the use of funds in contravention
    of a cited statute (May 17, 2005, p. ----).
      On the other hand, the following limitations have been held in order
    as not placing new duties on Federal officials: (1) denying the use of
    funds to pay the salaries of Federal officials who perform certain
    functions under

    [[Page 846]]

    ments not required of them by law, regardless of whether private or
    State officials administering the funds in question commonly make such
    determinations (June 17, 1977, p. 1969; June 30, 1993, p. 14871; July
    16, 1998, p. 15828). The fact that such a provision relating to abortion
    funding may have been included in appropriation Acts in prior years
    applicable to funds in those laws does not permit the inclusion of
    similar language requiring such determinations, not required by law,
    with respect to funds for the fiscal year in question (Sept. 22, 1983,
    p. 25406); and where the provision, applicable to Federal funds, was
    permitted to remain in a bill (no point of order having been made), an
    amendment striking the word ``Federal,'' and thereby broadening the
    provision to include District of Columbia funds as well, was ruled out
    (Nov. 15, 1989, p. 29004). However, to such a provision permitted to
    remain in a general appropriation bill, an amendment ``merely
    perfecting'' the exemption to address cases where the health of the
    mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term was held
    not to constitute further legislation by requiring a different or more
    onerous determinations (June 27, 1984, p. 19113). An amendment providing
    that no Federal funds provided in the District of Columbia general
    appropriation bill be used to perform abortions is not legislation,
    since Federal officials have the responsibility to account for all
    appropriations for the annual Federal payment and for disbursement of
    all taxes collected by the District of Columbia, pursuant to the D.C.
    Code (July 17, 1979, p. 19066).
      A paragraph prohibiting the use of funds to perform abortions except
    where the mother's life would be endangered if the fetus were carried to
    term (or where the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest) is
    legislation, since requiring Federal officials to make new
    determinations and judg

      An exception to a limitation on funds for the Office of Personnel
    Management to enter contracts for health benefit plans that required
    determinations of ``equivalence'' of benefits was held to impose new
    duties (July 16, 1998, p. 15829). However, an exception to a similar
    limitation that merely excepted certain specified coverage and plans was
    held not to impose new duties (July 16, 1998, p. 15841). Similarly, a
    limitation denying the use of funds in an appropriation bill for the
    General Services Administration to dispose of Federally owned
    ``agricultural'' land declared surplus was held to impose new duties
    since the determination whether surplus lands are ``agricultural'' was
    not required by law (Aug. 20, 1980, pp. 22156-58). However, a limitation
    denying the use of funds for any transit project exceeding a specified
    cost-effectiveness index was held not to impose new duties where the
    Chair was persuaded that the limitation applied to projects for which
    indexes were already required by law (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22206).

    [[Page 847]]

    admitting as a valid limitation an amendment prohibiting the use of
    funds in the bill to execute certain accounting transactions when
    specified conditions were ``made known'' to the disbursing official
    (July 17, 1996, p. 17542). In the 105th Congress this entire line of
    precedent was overtaken by changes in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
    clause that treat as legislation a provision that makes funding
    contingent on whether circumstances not determinative under existing law
    are ``known'' (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121; July 15, 1997, p. 14493;
    July 24, 1997, p. 15758).

      Over a period dating from 1908, the House had developed a line of
    precedent to the effect that language restricting the availability of
    funds in a general appropriation bill could be a valid limitation if,
    rather than imposing new duties on a disbursing official or requiring
    new determinations of that official, it passively addressed the state of
    knowledge of the official (VII, 1695; cf. Aug. 1, 1989, p. 17156, and
    June 22, 1995, p. 16844 (limitations in recommittal ruled out on basis
    of form rather than of legislative content)). This reasoning culminated
    in a ruling in the 104th Congress

    Sec. 1055. Contingencies and congressional
    actions.

      An amendment  making an appropriation contingent upon a recommendation
    (June 27, 1979, p. 17054) or action not specifically required by law is
    legislation; such as a provision limiting the use of funds in a bill
    ``unless'' or ``until'' an action contrary to existing law is taken
    (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 47.1; July 24, 1996, p. 18888). Where existing
    law requires an agency to furnish certain information to congressional
    committees upon request, without a subpoena, it is not in order to make
    funding for that agency contingent upon its furnishing information to
    subcommittees upon request (July 29-30, 1980, p. 20475), or contingent
    upon submission of an agreement by a Federal official to Congress and
    congressional review thereof (July 31, 1986, p. 18370). Similarly, it is
    not in order to condition funds on legal determinations to be made by a
    Federal court and an executive department (June 28, 1988, p. 16261; see
    Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 47.2).

      Provisions making the availability of funds contingent upon subsequent
    congressional action have, under the most recent precedents, been ruled
    out as legislation (June 30, 1942, p. 5826; May 15, 1947, p. 5378; June
    27, 1994, p. 14613). However, a limitation on the use of funds to buy
    real estate or establish new offices except where Congress had approved
    and funded such activity (June 18, 1991, p. 15218) was held in order.

      The following provisions have been ruled out as legislation: (1)
    making the availability of certain funds contingent upon subsequent
    congressional action on legislative proposals resolving the policy issue
    (Nov. 18, 1981, p. 28064); (2) making the availability of funds
    contingent upon subsequent enactment of legislation containing specified
    findings (Nov. 2, 1983, p. 30503); and (3) changing a permanent
    appropriation in existing law to restrict its availability until all
    general appropriation bills are presented to the President (June 29,
    1987, p. 18083). A section in a general appropriation bill directly
    contravening existing law to subject the use of local funds to
    congressional approval was held to constitute legislation where it was
    shown that some local (District of Columbia) funds deriving from
    interest accounts were available to the Financial Control Board without
    subsequent congressional approval (Aug. 6, 1998, p. 19079).

    [[Page 848]]

      Two rulings upholding the admissibility of amendments making the
    availability of funds contingent upon subsequent congressional action
    have been superseded by the precedents cited above (June 11, 1968, p.
    16692; Sept. 6, 1979, p. 23360).

      The following provisions also have been held to be legislation as they
    required: (1) a congressional committee to promulgate regulations to
    limit the use of an appropriation (June 13, 1979, p. 14670), or
    otherwise to direct the activities of a committee (June 24, 1992, p.
    16087); (2) a substantive determination by a State or local government
    official or agency that is not otherwise required by existing law (July
    25, 1985, p. 20569); (3) the Selective Service Administration to issue
    regulations to bring its classifications into conformance with a Supreme
    Court decision (July 20, 1989, p. 15405); (4) a change in a rule of the
    House (IV, 3819); (5) an agency to submit all quarterly and annual
    reports required by law in accordance with standards for reports under a
    specified law not otherwise applicable (Sept. 9, 2003, p. ----).

    Sec. 1056. Construing or amending existing
    law.

      A provision  proposing to construe existing law is itself legislative and
    therefore not in order (IV, 3936-3938; May 2, 1951, p. 4747; July 26,
    1951, p. 8982). However, an official's general responsibility to
    construe the language of a limitation on the use of funds, absent
    imposition of an affirmative direction not required by law, does not
    destroy the validity of a limitation (June 27, 1974, pp. 21687-94).

      Where it is asserted that duties ostensibly occasioned by a limitation
    are already imposed by existing law, the Chair may take cognizance of
    judicial decisions and rule the limitation out on the basis that the
    case law is not uniform, current, or finally dispositive (June 16, 1977,
    pp. 19365-74; June 7, 1978, p. 16676). For example, a limitation
    prohibiting the use of funds for an inspection conducted by a regulatory
    agency without a search warrant has been held out of order as imposing a
    new duty not uniformly required by case law (June 16, 1977, pp. 19365-
    74). Similarly, an amendment denying the use of funds for an agency to
    apply certain provisions of law under court decisions in effect on a
    prior date has been held out of order as requiring the official to apply
    noncurrent case law (June 7, 1978, p. 16655).

    [[Page 849]]

    to deprive any share renter of payments'' to which he might otherwise be
    entitled was held in order (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 66.1);
      A provision prescribing a rule of construction is legislation
    (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 25.15). For example, a provision prescribing a
    prospective rule of construction for possible (future) tax enactments
    was held to constitute legislation (June 21, 2000, p. 11773). Similarly,
    a provision construing a limitation in a bill by affirmatively declaring
    the meaning of the prohibition is legislation (May 17, 1988, p. 11305);
    and a provision prescribing definitions for terms contained in a
    limitation may be legislation (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. Sec. 25.7, 25.11).
    Language excepting certain appropriations from the sweep of a broader
    limitation may be in order (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 25.2). It also has
    been held in order to except from the operation of a specific limitation
    on expenditures certain of those expenditures that are authorized by law
    by prohibiting a construction of the limitation in a way that would
    prevent compliance with that law (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 25.10; June 18,
    1991, p. 15218). Similarly, a limitation on certain payments to persons
    in ``excess of $500,'' but stating that the limitation would not be
    ``construed

      The mere recitation in an amendment that a determination is to be made
    pursuant to existing laws and regulations, absent a citation to the law
    imposing such responsibility, is not sufficient proof by the proponent
    of an amendment to overcome a point of order that the amendment
    constitutes legislation (Sept. 16, 1980, p. 25606; May 8, 1986, p.
    10156). A limitation denying the use of funds to apply certain
    provisions of the Internal Revenue Code other than under regulations in
    effect on a prior date is legislation since requiring an official to
    apply regulations no longer current in order to render an appropriation
    available (June 7, 1978, p. 16655; Aug. 19, 1980, pp. 21978-80).
    However, an exception to a limitation on the use of funds for designated
    Federal activities that were already authorized by law in more general
    terms, was held in order as not containing legislation (June 27, 1979,
    pp. 17033-35).

      Language waiving provisions of an existing law that did not
    specifically permit inclusion of such a waiver in an appropriation bill
    has been ruled out (e.g., Nov. 13, 1975, p. 36271; June 20, 1996, p.
    14847; May 19, 2000, p. 8600), as has language identical to that
    contained in an authorization bill previously passed by the House but
    not yet signed into law (Aug. 4, 1978, p. 24436), or a proposition for
    repeal of existing law (VII, 1403).

      Existing law may be repeated verbatim without violating the rule (IV,
    3814, 3815), but the slightest change of the text renders it liable to a
    point of order (IV, 3817; VII, 1391, 1394; June 4, 1970, p. 18405). It
    is in order to include language descriptive of authority provided in law
    for the operation of Government agencies and corporations so long as the
    description is precise and does not change that authority in any respect
    (June 15, 1973, p. 19843; Aug. 3, 1978, p. 24249); although language
    merely reciting the applicability of current law to the use of earmarked
    funds is permitted, a provision that elevates existing guidelines to
    mandates for spending has been ruled out (July 12, 1989, p. 14432).

    [[Page 850]]

      It is in order by way of limitation to deny the use of funds for
    implementation of the following: (1) an Executive Order, which was
    precisely described in the amendment (Mar. 16, 1977, p. 7748); (2) a
    regulation, which was promulgated pursuant to court order and
    constitutional provisions--the authority for the regulation being an
    argument on the merits of the amendment and not rendering it legislative
    in nature (Aug. 19, 1980, pp. 21981-84); (3) a ruling of the Internal
    Revenue Service that taxpayers are not entitled to certain charitable
    deductions because merely descriptive of an existing ruling already
    promulgated and not requiring any new determinations as to the
    applicability of the limitation to other categories of taxpayers (July
    16, 1979, pp. 18808-10); (4) any changes to a set of overtime
    compensation regulations in existence on a given date (with a certain
    nonlegislative exception) because not requiring the Department to
    administer superseded regulations (Sept. 4, 2004, p. ----).

      An amendment proposing to increase budget authority and to offset that
    increase by proposing a change in the application of the Internal
    Revenue Code of 1986 was held to constitute legislation (see, e.g.,
    Sept. 8, 1999, pp. 20896-98; June 24, 2003, p. ---- (sustained on
    appeal); July 10, 2003, p. ----).

    Sec. 1057. Mandating expenditures.

      A provision  that mandates
    a distribution of funds in contravention of an allocation formula in
    existing law is legislation (July 29, 1982, pp. 18637, 18638; Oct. 5,
    1983, p. 27335; Aug. 2, 1989, p. 18123; July 24, 1995, p. 20141), as is
    an amendment that by such a mandate interferes with an executive
    official's discretionary authority (Mar. 12, 1975, p. 6338), as in an
    amendment requiring not less than a certain sum to be used for a
    particular purpose where existing law does not mandate such expenditure
    (June 18, 1976, p. 19297; July 29, 1982, p. 18623), or where an
    amendment earmarks appropriated funds to the arts to require their
    expenditure pursuant to standards otherwise applicable only as
    guidelines (July 12, 1989, p. 14432). Where existing law directed a
    Federal official to provide for sale of certain Government property to a
    private organization in ``necessary'' amounts, an amendment providing
    that no such property be withheld from distribution from qualifying
    purchasers was legislation, since requiring disposal of all property and
    restricting discretionary authority to determine ``necessary'' amounts
    (Aug. 7, 1978, p. 24707). An amendment directing the use of funds to
    assure compliance with an existing law, where existing law does not so
    mandate, also is legislation (June 24, 1976, p. 20370). So-called
    ``hold-harmless'' provisions that mandate a certain level of expenditure
    for certain purposes or recipients, where existing law confers
    discretion or makes ratable reductions in such expenditures, also
    constitute legislation (Apr. 16, 1975, p. 10357; June 25, 1976, p.
    20557). A transfer of available funds from one department to another
    with directions as to the use to which those funds must be put is
    legislation (and also a reappropriation in violation of clause 2(a)(2)
    of this rule) (Dec. 8, 1982, p. 29449). A provision requiring States to
    match funds provided in an appropriation bill was held to constitute
    legislation where existing law contained no such requirement (June 28,
    1993, p. 14418). Where existing law prescribes a formula for the
    allocation of funds among several categories, an amendment merely
    reducing the amount earmarked for one of the categories is not
    legislation, so long as it does not textually change the statutory
    formula (July 24, 1995, p. 20133).

    [[Page 851]]

    is in order (IV, 3823-3835, 3838; VII, 1405, 1413-1415; June 9, 1954, p.
    5963; July 27, 1954, p. 12287; Oct. 1, 1975, p. 31058; June 8, 1977, p.
    17941; July 17, 1985, p. 19435; Sept. 11, 1985, p. 23398; June 14, 1988,
    p. 14341). However, this does not permit an amendment that adds
    additional legislation (IV, 3836, 3837, 3862; VII, 1402-1436; Dec. 9,
    1971, p. 4595; Aug. 1, 1973, p. 27291; June 10, 1977, p. 1802; July 30,
    1985, p. 21532; July 23, 1986, p. 17446; June 26, 1987, p. 17655; June
    28, 1988, pp. 16203, 16213; Aug. 2, 1989, p. 18172; Nov. 15, 1989, p.
    29004, June 23, 1998, p. 13475; July 13, 2000, p. 14093), proposes a new
    unauthorized purpose (Dec. 8, 1971, p. 45487; Aug. 7, 1978, pp. 24710-
    12; May 25, 1988, p. 12256), earmarks for unauthorized purposes (July
    17, 1985, p. 19435; July 17, 1986, p. 16918; July 26, 1995, p. 20528;
    June 5, 1996, p. 13120), earmarks by directing a new use of funds not
    required by law (July 26, 1985, pp. 20811, 20813), or increases an
    authorized amount above the authorized ceiling (Aug. 4, 1999, p. 19513).

    Sec. 1058. Waivers; amending legislation permitted
    to remain.

      The House  may, by agreeing to a report from the Committee on Rules or
    by adopting an order under suspension of the rules, allow legislation on
    general appropriation bills (IV, 3260-3263, 3839-3845). Where an
    unauthorized appropriation or legislation is permitted to remain in a
    general appropriation bill by waiver or by failure to raise a point of
    order, an amendment merely changing that amount and not adding
    legislative language or earmarking separate funds for another
    unauthorized purpose

      An amendment adding a new paragraph indirectly increasing an
    unauthorized amount contained in a prior paragraph permitted to remain
    is subject to a point of order because the new paragraph is adding a
    further unauthorized amount not merely perfecting (July 12, 1995, p.
    18628; July 16, 1997, pp. 14746; Sept. 9, 1997, p. 19121; Sept. 17,
    1998, p. 20818). However, a new paragraph indirectly reducing an
    unauthorized amount permitted to remain in a prior paragraph passed in
    the reading is not subject to a point of order because it is not adding
    a further unauthorized amount (July 16, 1997, p. 14747). Where by
    unanimous consent an amendment is offered en bloc to a paragraph
    containing an unauthorized amount not yet read for amendment, the
    amendment increasing that unauthorized figure is subject to a point of
    order since at that point it is not being offered to a paragraph that
    has been read and permitted to remain (June 21, 1984, p. 17687). As
    required by clause 2(f), the Chair will query for points of order
    against the provisions of an appropriation bill not yet reached in the
    reading but addressed by an amendment offered en bloc under that clause
    as budget authority and outlay neutral (July 22, 1997, p. 15250).

      The Chair examined an entire legislative provision permitted to remain
    when ruling that an amendment to a portion of the provision was merely
    perfecting (July 15, 1999, pp. 16284, 16291). An amendment to a general
    appropriation bill is not subject to a point of order as adding
    legislation for restating, verbatim, a legislative provision already
    contained in the bill and permitted to remain (Aug. 27, 1980, p. 23519).

    [[Page 852]]

    payments and benefits to persons benefiting from a certain tax status
    determined on wholly unrelated criteria (Aug. 3, 1995, p. 21967); (3) an
    amendment adding an additional nation to a legislative provision
    addressing sanctions against one nation (July 13, 2000, p. 14092).
      To a legislative provision permitted to remain conferring assistance
    on a certain class of recipients, an amendment adding another class is
    further legislation and is not merely perfecting (June 22, 1983, p.
    16851). For example, the following amendments to legislative provisions
    permitted to remain have been held to propose additional legislation:
    (1) an amendment striking text that resulted in extending the
    legislative reach of the pending bill (July 17, 1996, p. 17533); (2) an
    amendment extending a legislative provision that placed certain
    restrictions on recipients of a defined set of Federal

      On the other hand, to a legislative provision permitted to remain, an
    amendment particularizing a definition in the language was held not to
    constitute additional legislation where it was shown that the definition
    being amended already contemplated inclusion of the covered class (Aug.
    5, 1998, p. 18934). To a legislative provision permitted to remain that
    excepted from a denial of funds for abortions cases where the life of
    the mother would be endangered if a fetus were carried to term, an
    amendment excepting instead cases where the health of the mother would
    be endangered if the fetus were carried to term was held not to
    constitute further legislation, since determinations on the endangerment
    of life necessarily subsume determinations on the endangerment of
    health; and the amendment did not therefore require any different or
    more onerous determinations (June 27, 1984, p. 19113).

      To a paragraph permitted to remain though containing a legislative
    proviso restricting the obligation of funds until a date within the
    fiscal year, an amendment striking the delimiting date, thus applying
    the restriction for the entire year, was held to be perfecting (July 30,
    1990, p. 20442); but striking the date and inserting a new trigger (the
    enactment of other legislation), was held to be additional legislation
    (July 30, 1990, p. 20442).

    Sec. 1059. Senate amendments.

      The principle  seems to be
    generally well accepted that the House proposing legislation on a
    general appropriation bill should recede if the other House persists in
    its objection (IV, 3904-3908), and clause 5 of rule XXII (Sec. 1076,
    infra) prohibits House conferees from agreeing to a Senate amendment
    that proposes legislation on an appropriation bill without specific
    authority from the House. However, where a Senate amendment proposing
    legislation on a general appropriation bill is, pursuant to the edict of
    clause 5 of rule XXII, reported back from conference in disagreement, a
    motion to concur in the Senate amendment with a further amendment is in
    order, even if the proposed amendment adds legislation to that contained
    in the Senate amendment, and the only test is whether the proposed
    amendment is germane to the Senate amendment reported in disagreement
    (IV, 3909; VIII, 3188, 3189; Speaker McCormack, Dec. 15, 1970, p. 41504;
    Aug. 1, 1979, pp. 22007-11; Speaker O'Neill, Dec. 12, 1979, p. 35520;
    June 30, 1987, p. 18308).

                   ``holman rule'' on retrenching expenditures

    [[Page 853]]

    where the decision can be made on other grounds. The practice of using
    limitations in appropriation bills has been perfected in recent years so
    that most modern decisions by the Chair deal with distinctions between
    such limitations and matters that are considered to be legislation (see
    Sec. Sec. 1053-1057, supra). Under the modern practice, the ``Holman
    Rule'' only applies where an obvious reduction is achieved by the
    provision in question and does not apply to limiting language
    unaccompanied by a reduction of funds in the bill (July 16, 1979, pp.
    18808-10). It has no application to an amendment to an appropriation
    bill that does not legislate but is merely a negative limitation citing
    but not changing existing law (June 18, 1980, p. 15355).

    Sec. 1062. Legislation reducing
    expenditures.

      Decisions under  the so-called ``Holman Rule'' in clause 2 of rule XXI
    have been rare in the modern practice of the House. The trend in
    construing language in general appropriation bills or amendments thereto
    has been to minimize the importance of the ``Holman Rule'' in those
    cases

      A paragraph containing legislation reported in an appropriation bill
    to be in order must on its face show a retrenchment of a type that
    conforms to the requirements of the rule (Mar. 17, 1926, p. 5804).

      The reduction of expenditure must appear as a necessary result, in
    order to bring an amendment or provision within the exception to the
    rule. It is not sufficient that such reduction would probably, or would
    in the opinion of the Chair, result therefrom (IV, 3887; VII, 1530-
    1534). Thus, an amendment to a general appropriation bill providing that
    appropriations made in that act are hereby reduced by $7 billion, though
    legislative in form, was held in order under the ``Holman Rule''
    exception (Apr. 5, 1966, p. 7689), but an amendment providing for
    certain reductions of appropriations carried in the bill based on the
    President's budget estimates was held not to show a reduction on its
    face and to provide merely speculative reductions (Deschler, ch. 26,
    Sec. 5.6; June 24, 1992, p. 16110). An amendment authorizing the
    President to reduce each appropriation in the bill by not more than 10
    percent was ruled out as legislation conferring new authority on the
    President (May 31, 1984, p. 14617; June 6, 1984, p. 15120). An amendment
    reducing an unauthorized amount permitted to remain in a general
    appropriation bill is in order as a retrenchment under this clause (Oct.
    1, 1975, p. 31058). An amendment to a general appropriation bill denying
    the availability of funds to certain recipients but which requires
    Federal officials to make additional determinations as to the
    qualifications of recipients is legislation and is not a retrenchment of
    expenditures where it is not apparent that the prohibition will reduce
    the amounts covered by the bill (June 26, 1973, p. 21389).

    [[Page 854]]

      The amendment must not only show on its face an attempt to retrench
    but also must be germane to some provision in the bill even though
    offered by direction of the committee having jurisdiction of the subject
    matter of the amendment (VII, 1549; Dec. 16, 1911, p. 442). An amendment
    providing that appropriations ``herein and heretofore made'' shall be
    reduced by $70 million through the reduction of Federal employees as the
    President determines was held to be legislative and not germane to the
    bill, since it went to funds other than those carried therein, and was
    therefore not within the ``Holman Rule'' exception (Oct. 18, 1966, p.
    27425).

      An amendment reducing an amount in an appropriation bill for the
    Postal Service and prohibiting the use of funds therein to implement
    special bulk third-class rates for political committees was held in
    order since not specifically requiring a new determination and since
    constituting a retrenchment of expenditures even if assumed to be
    legislative (July 13, 1979, pp. 18453-55).

      As long as an amendment calls for an obvious reduction at some point
    in time during the fiscal year, the amendment is in order under the
    ``Holman Rule'' even if the reduction takes place in the future in an
    amount actually determined when the reduction takes place (for example,
    by formula) (VII, 1491, 1505; July 30, 1980, pp. 20499-20503). To an
    amendment that is in order under the ``Holman Rule,'' containing
    legislation but retrenching expenditures by formula for every agency
    funded by the bill, an amendment exempting from that reduction several
    specific programs does not add further legislation and is in order (July
    30, 1980, pp. 20499-20503).

      A motion to recommit the District of Columbia appropriation bill with
    instructions to reduce the proportion of the fund appropriated from the
    Public Treasury from one-half, as provided in the bill, to one-fourth of
    the entire appropriation is in order, since the effect of the amendment
    if adopted would reduce the expenditure of public money although not
    reducing the amount of the appropriation (VII, 1518).

      The term ``retrenchment'' means the reduction of the amount of money
    to be taken out of the Federal Treasury by the bill, and therefore a
    reduction of the amount of money to be contributed toward the expenses
    of the District of Columbia is in order as a retrenchment (VII, 1502).

      An amendment proposed to an item for the recoinage of uncurrent
    fractional silver, which amendment struck out the amount appropriated
    and added a provision for the coinage of all the bullion in the Treasury
    into standard silver dollars, the cost of such coinage and recoinage to
    be paid out of the Government's seigniorage, was held not to be in order
    under the rule; first, because not germane to the subject matter of the
    bill (the sundry civil); second, because it did not appear that any
    retrenchment of expenditure would result, the seigniorage being the
    property of the Government as other funds in the Treasury (VII, 1547).

      To an item of appropriation for inland transportation of mails by star
    routes an amendment was offered requiring the Postmaster General to
    provide routes and make contracts in certain cases, with the further
    provision ``and the amount of appropriation herein for star routes is
    hereby reduced to $500.'' A point of order made against the first or
    legislative part of the amendment was sustained, which decision was, on
    appeal, affirmed by the committee (VII, 1555).

    [[Page 855]]

    was not germane to the appropriation bill; and that to be in order both
    branches of the amendment must be germane to the bill (VII, 1548).
      To a clause appropriating for the foreign mail service an amendment
    reducing the appropriation, and in addition repealing the act known as
    the ``subsidy act,'' was held not in order because the repealing of this
    act

      A provision in the agricultural appropriation bill transferring the
    supervision of the importation of animals from the Treasury to the
    Department of Agriculture is out of order, being a provision changing
    law and not retrenching expenditure (IV, 3886).

      Where a paragraph containing new legislation provides in one part for
    a discharge of employees, which means a retrenchment, and in another
    part embodies legislation to bring about the particular retrenchment
    which in turn shows on its face an expenditure the amount of which is
    not apparent, the Chair is unable to hold that the net result will
    retrench expenditures. However, where the additional legislation does
    not show on its face an additional expenditure, the Chair will not
    speculate as to a possible expenditure under the additional legislation
    (VII, 1500).

      As explained in the annotation in Sec. 1043, supra, the amendment of
    clause 2(b) in the 98th Congress narrowed the ``Holman Rule'' exception
    to the general prohibition against legislation to cover only
    retrenchments reducing amounts of money covered by the bill, and not
    retrenchments resulting from reduction of the number and salary of
    officers of the United States or of the compensation of any person paid
    out of the U.S. Treasury. Accordingly, the Chair held out of order an
    amendment mandating the reduction of certain Federal salaries and
    expenses as not confined to a reduction of funds in the bill (June 17,
    1994, p. 13422). Paragraph (b) also eliminated separate authority
    conferred upon legislative committees or commissions with proper
    jurisdiction to report amendments retrenching expenditures, and
    permitted legislative committees to recommend such retrenchments by
    reduction of amounts covered by the bill to the Appropriations Committee
    for discretionary inclusion in the reported bill. Paragraph (d) as added
    in the 98th Congress provides a new procedure for consideration of all
    retrenchment amendments only when reading of the bill has been completed
    and only if the Committee of the Whole does not adopt a motion to rise
    and report the bill back to the House. Other decisions which involved
    interpretation of the ``Holman Rule,'' but which do not reflect the
    current form or interpretation of that rule, are found in IV, 3846,
    3885-3892; VII, 1484, 1486-1492, 1498, 1500, 1515, 1563, 1564, 1569;
    June 1, 1892, p. 4920.

    [[Page 856]]

    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47), violations of this clause are enforced only
    against specific provisions in general appropriation bills containing
    reappropriations rather than against consideration of the bill (see
    Deschler, ch. 25, Sec. 3).

    Sec. 1063. Reappropriations.

      This  provision from section
    139(c) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 190f(c))
    was made part of the standing rules in the 83d Congress (Jan. 3, 1953,
    p. 24). Previously, a reappropriation of an unexpended balance for an
    object authorized by law was in order on a general appropriation bill
    (IV, 3591, 3592; VII, 1156, 1158). This clause was amended in the 99th
    Congress by section 228(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
    Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177) to permit the Committee on
    Appropriations to report certain transfers of unexpended balances.
    Consistent with clause 2 of rule XXI, and as codified in the 106th
    Congress (H. Res.

      A provision in a general appropriation bill, or an amendment thereto,
    providing that funds for a certain purpose are to be derived by
    continuing the availability of funds previously appropriated for a prior
    fiscal year is in violation of clause 2(a)(2) (formerly clause 6 of rule
    XXI) (Aug. 20, 1951, p. 10393; Mar. 29, 1960, p. 6862; June 17, 1960, p.
    13138; June 20, 1973, p. 20530; July 29, 1982, p. 18625; June 28, 1988,
    p. 16255), and a reappropriation of unexpended prior year balances
    prohibited by this clause is not in order under the guise of a ``Holman
    Rule'' exception to clause 2 of rule XXI (Oct. 18, 1966, p. 27424). An
    amendment to a general appropriation bill making any appropriations
    which are available for the current fiscal year available for certain
    new purposes was held out of order under clause 2(a)(2) since it was not
    confined to the funds in the bill and would permit reappropriation of
    unexpended balances (Oct. 1, 1975, p. 31090). That appropriations may be
    authorized in law for a specified object does not permit an amendment to
    a general appropriation bill to include legislative language mandating
    the reappropriation of funds from other Acts (July 28, 1992, p. 19652).

      This rule, however, is not applicable when the reappropriation
    language is identical to legislative authorization language enacted
    subsequent to the adoption of the rule, since the law is a more recent
    expression of the will of the House (Sept. 5, 1961, p. 18133), nor when
    a measure transferring unobligated balances of previously appropriated
    funds contains legislative provisions and rules changes but no
    appropriation of new budget authority and is neither in the form of an
    appropriation bill nor the subject of a privileged report by the
    Committee on Appropriations under rule XIII (Mar. 3, 1988, p. 3239).

      The return of an unexpended balance to the Treasury is in order (IV,
    3594).

      A provision in a general appropriation bill that authorizes an
    official to transfer funds among appropriation accounts in the bill
    changes existing law in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI by including
    language conferring new authority (Deschler, ch 26 Sec. 29.2). However,
    direct transfers of appropriations within the confines of the same bill
    normally are considered in order (VII, 1468) as a ``within-bill''
    transfer rather than a transfer of unexpended balances of the kind
    addressed by clause 2(a)(2).

    [[Page 857]]

    authorized amount contained in the bill (Aug. 4, 1999, p. 19513). The
    Chair will query for points of order against provisions of a bill
    addressed by an offsetting amendment but not yet read (e.g., May 17,
    2005, p. ----).

    Transportation obligation limitations

    Sec. 1063a. Offsetting en bloc amendments.

      To  invoke the
    protection of clause 2(f), an amendment must not increase the levels of
    budget authority or outlays carried in the bill (Aug. 4, 1999, p. 19513;
    July 12, 2000, p. 14071; July 13, 2004, pp. ----, ----); and the
    proponent of an amendment carries the burden of so proving (see
    Sec. 1044a, supra). An amendment otherwise in order under this paragraph
    may nevertheless be in violation of clause 2(a)(1) if increasing an
    appropriation above the

    1064. Transportation obligation limitations.

      3.  It shall
    not be in order to consider a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
    conference report that would cause obligation limitations to be below
    the level for any fiscal year set forth in section 8003 of the Safe,
    Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
    Users, as adjusted, for the highway category or the mass transit
    category, as applicable. For purposes of this clause, any obligation
    limitation relating to surface transportation projects under section
    1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century and section
    1702 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
    Act: A Legacy for Users shall be assumed to be administered on the basis
    of sound program management practices that are consistent with past
    practices of the administering agency permitting States to decide High
    Priority Project funding priorities within State program allocations.

    [[Page 858]]

    surface transportation projects under section 1602 of P.L. 105-178 shall
    be assumed to be administered on the basis of sound program management
    practices that are consistent with past practices of the administering
    agency permitting States to decide High Priority Project funding
    priorities within state program allocations.'' Section 8005 of SAFETEA-
    LU states as follows: ``For purposes of clauses 2 and 3 of rule XXI of
    the House of Representatives, it shall be in order to transfer funds, in
    amounts specified in annual appropriation Acts to carry out the Safe,
    Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
    Users (including the amendments made by that Act), from the Federal
    Transit Administration's administrative expenses account to other mass
    transit budget accounts under section 250(c)(4)(C) of the Balanced
    Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.''
      The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (sec. 8101(e), P.L.
    105-178; 2 U.S.C. 901 note) added this provision as a new clause 9 of
    rule XXI. In the 106th Congress, this provision was transferred to
    clause 3 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In the 109th Congress the
    first sentence of this clause was amended to conform the rule to the
    current law authorizing funds for highway and transit programs, and a
    second sentence was added (sec. 8004, Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
    Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU),
    P.L. 109-59; 2 U.S.C. 901 note). The second sentence was derived from
    the following provision of the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency
    Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999 (sec. 108, div. C, P.L. 105-277;
    112 Stat. 2681-586): ``Sec. 108. For the purpose of any Rule of the
    House of Representatives, notwithstanding any other provision of law,
    any obligation limitation relating to

    Sec. 48114. Funding for Aviation Programs.

    Sec. 1064a. Funding for aviation programs.

      Section 48114  of
    title 49 (a provision first added by the Wendell H. Ford Aviation
    Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (sec. 106, P.L. 106-181),
    and extended to 2007 by its reenactment in title 49 (sec. 104, P.L. 108-
    176)) provides a point of order to enforce guarantees of total budget
    resources in a fiscal year for certain aviation investment programs as
    follows:

      (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--

              (1) Airport and airway trust fund guarantee.--

                      (A) In general.--The total budget resources made

                    available from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund each

                    fiscal year through fiscal year 2007 pursuant to

                    sections 48101, 48102, 48103, and 106(k) of title 49,

                    United States Code, shall be equal to the level of

                    receipts plus interest credited to the Airport and

                    Airway Trust Fund for that fiscal year. Such amounts may

                    be used only for aviation investment programs listed in

                    subsection (b).

                      (B) Guarantee.--No funds may be appropriated or

                    limited for aviation investment programs listed in

                    subsection (b) unless the amount described in

                    subparagraph (A) has been provided.

              (2) Additional authorizations of appropriations from the

            general fund.--In any fiscal year through fiscal year 2007, if

            the amount described in paragraph (1) is appropriated, there is

            further authorized to be appropriated from the general fund of

            the Treasury such sums as may be necessary for the Federal

            Aviation Administration Operations account.

      (b) Definitions.--In this section, the following definitions apply:

              (1) Total budget resources.--The term ``total budget

            resources'' means the total amount made available from the

            Airport and Airway Trust Fund for the sum of obligation

            limitations and budget authority made available for a fiscal

            year for the following budget accounts that are subject to the

    [[Page 859]]

            obligation limitation on contract authority

            provided in this title and for which appropriations are provided

            pursuant to authorizations contained in this title:

                      (A) 69-8106-0-7-402 (Grants in Aid for Airports).

                      (B) 69-8107-0-7-402 (Facilities and Equipment).

                      (C) 69-8108-0-7-402 (Research and Development).

                      (D) 69-8104-0-7-402 (Trust Fund Share of Operations).

              (2) Level of receipts plus interest.--The term ``level of

            receipts plus interest'' means the level of excise taxes and

            interest credited to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund under

            section 9502 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for a fiscal

            year as set forth in the President's budget baseline projection

            as defined in section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency

            Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) (Treasury

            identification code 20-8103-0-7-402) for that fiscal year

            submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States

            Code.

      (c) Enforcement of Guarantees.--

              (1) Total airport and airway trust fund funding.--It shall not

            be in order in the House of Representatives or the Senate to

            consider any bill, joint resolution, amendment, motion, or

            conference report that would cause total budget resources in a

            fiscal year for aviation investment programs described in

            subsection (b) to be less than the amount required by subsection

            (a)(1)(A) for such fiscal year.

              (2) Capital priority.--It shall not be in order in the House

            of Representatives or the Senate to consider any bill, joint

            resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report that

            provides an appropriation (or any amendment thereto) for any

            fiscal year through fiscal year 2007 for Research and

            Development or Operations if the sum of the obligation

            limitation for Grants-in-Aid for Airports and the appropriation

            for Facilities and Equipment for such fiscal year is below the

            sum of the authorized levels for Grants-in-Aid for Airports and

            for Facilities and Equipment for such fiscal year.

    Appropriations on legislative bills
      The chairmen of the Committee on Rules and the Committee on
    Transportation and Infrastructure inserted in the Record correspondence
    concerning points of order established in this section (Mar. 15, 2000,
    p. 2805).

    [[Page 860]]

    ing that jurisdiction. A point of order against an appropriation in such
    a bill, joint resolution, or amendment thereto may be raised at any time
    during pendency of that measure for amendment.

    1065. Restriction of power to report appropriations.

      4.  A
    bill or joint resolution carrying an appropriation may not be reported
    by a committee not having jurisdiction to report appropriations, and an
    amendment proposing an appropriation shall not be in order during the
    consideration of a bill or joint resolution reported by a committee not
    hav

      This portion of the rule was adopted June 1, 1920 (VII, 2133). When
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47), this clause was returned to clause 4 where it had been
    until moved to former clause 5(a) of rule XXI in the 93d Congress (H.
    Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470).

      A point of order under this rule cannot be raised against a motion to
    suspend the rules (VIII, 3426), against a motion to discharge a
    nonappropriating committee from consideration of a bill carrying an
    appropriation (VII, 2144), or against a Senate amendment to an
    appropriation bill (VII, 1572). However, it may be directed against an
    item of appropriation in a Senate bill (VII, 2136, 2147; July 30, 1957,
    pp. 13056, 13181). If the House deletes a provision in a Senate bill
    under this rule, the bill is messaged to the Senate with the deletion in
    the form of an amendment. The point of order may be made against an
    appropriation in a Senate bill that, although not reported in the House,
    is considered in lieu of a reported House ``companion bill'' (VII, 2137;
    Mar. 29, 1933, p. 988). This clause applies to an amendment proposed to
    a Senate amendment to a House bill not reported from the Committee on
    Appropriations (Oct. 1, 1980, pp. 28638-42). The rule does not apply to
    private bills since the committees having jurisdiction of bills for the
    payment of private claims may report bills making appropriations within
    the limits of their jurisdiction (VII, 2135; Dec. 12, 1924, p. 538). The
    point of order under this rule does not apply to an appropriation in a
    bill which has been taken away from a nonappropriating committee by a
    motion to discharge (VII, 1019a). The point of order under this rule
    does not apply to a special order reported from the Committee on Rules
    ``self-executing'' the adoption in the House to a reported bill of an
    amendment containing an appropriation, since the amendment is not
    separately before the House during consideration of the special order
    (Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3542).

    [[Page 861]]

    minute rule, and a point of order against similar language permitted to
    remain in the House version and included in a conference report on a
    bill will not lie, since the only rule prohibiting such inclusion
    (clause 5 of rule XXII) is limited to language originally contained in a
    Senate amendment where the House conferees have not been specifically
    authorized to agree thereto (May 1, 1975, p. 12752). Where the House has
    adopted a resolution waiving points of order against certain
    appropriations in a legislative bill, a point of order may nevertheless
    be raised against an amendment to the bill containing an identical
    provision, since under this rule a point of order may be raised against
    the amendment ``at any time'' (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11512). A point of
    order against a direct appropriation in a bill initially reported from a
    legislative committee and then sequentially referred to and reported
    adversely by the Committee on Appropriations was conceded and sustained
    as in violation of this clause (Nov. 10, 1975, p. 35611). The point of
    order should be directed to the item of appropriation in the bill and
    not to the act of reporting the bill (VII, 2143), and cannot be directed
    to the entire bill (VII, 2142; Apr. 28, 1975, p. 12043).
      The provision in this clause that a point of order against an
    amendment containing an appropriation to a legislative bill may be made
    ``at any time'' has been interpreted to require that the point of order
    be raised during the pendency of the amendment under the five-minute
    rule (Mar. 18, 1946, p. 2365; Apr. 28, 1975, p. 12043), and a point of
    order will lie against an amendment during its pendency, even in its
    amended form, although the point of order is against the amendment as
    amended by a substitute and no point of order was raised against the
    substitute before its adoption (Apr. 23, 1975, pp. 11512-13). However,
    the point of order must be raised during the initial consideration of
    the bill or amendment under the five-

      The term ``appropriation'' in the rule means the payment of funds from
    the Treasury, and the words ``warranted and make available for
    expenditure for payments'' are equivalent to ``is hereby appropriated''
    and therefore not in order (VII, 2150). The words ``available until
    expended,'' making an appropriation already made for one year available
    for ensuing years, are not in order (VII, 2145).

      The point of order provided for in this clause is not applicable to
    the following provisions: (1) authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury
    to use proceeds from the sale of bonds under the Second Liberty Bond Act
    (public debt transactions) for the purpose of making loans, since such
    loans do not constitute ``appropriations'' within the purview of the
    rule (June 28, 1949, pp. 8536-38; Aug. 2, 1950, p. 11599); (2) exempting
    loan guarantees in a legislative bill from statutory limitations on
    expenditures (July 16, 1974, p. 23344); (3) authorizing the availability
    of certain loan receipts where it can be shown that the actual
    availability of those receipts remains contingent upon subsequent
    enactment of an appropriation act (Sept. 10, 1975, p. 28300); (4)
    increasing the duties of a commission (VII, 1578); (5) authorizing
    payment from an appropriation to be made (Jan. 31, 1923, p. 2794).

    [[Page 862]]

    making payments for such new purposes ``effective only to the extent and
    in such amounts as are provided in advance in appropriation acts'' does
    not violate this clause (Oct. 1, 1980, pp. 28638-42).
      Language reappropriating, making available, or diverting an
    appropriation or a portion of an appropriation already made for one
    purpose to another (VII, 2146; Mar. 29, 1933, p. 988; Aug. 10, 1988, p.
    21719), or for one fiscal year to another (Mar. 26, 1992, p. 7223), is
    not in order. For example, the following provisions have been held out
    of order: (1) expanding the definition in existing law of recipients
    under a Federal subsidy program as permitting a new use of funds already
    appropriated (May 11, 1976, pp. 13409-11); (2) authorizing the use,
    without a subsequent appropriation, of funds directly appropriated by a
    previous statute for a new purpose (Oct. 1, 1980, pp. 28637-40).
    However, a modification of such a provision

      The following provisions have also been held to be in violation of
    this clause: (1) directing a departmental officer to pay a certain sum
    out of unexpended balances (VII, 2154); (2) authorizing the use of funds
    of the Shipping Board (VII, 2147); (3) directing payments out of Indian
    trust funds (VII, 2149); (4) making excess foreign currencies
    immediately available for a new purpose (Aug. 3, 1971, p. 29109); (5)
    authorizing the collection of fees or user charges by Federal agencies
    and making the revenues collected therefrom available without further
    appropriation (June 17, 1937, pp. 5915-18; Mar. 29, 1972, pp. 10749-51);
    (6) transferring existing Federal funds into a new Treasury trust fund
    to be immediately available for a new purpose (June 20, 1974, pp. 20273-
    75); (7) transferring unexpended balances of appropriations from an
    existing agency to a new agency created therein (Apr. 9, 1979, p. 7774);
    (8) making a direct appropriation to carry out a part of the Energy
    Security Act (Oct. 24, 1985, p. 28812); (9) requiring the diversion of
    previously appropriated funds in lieu of the enactment of new budget
    authority if a maximum deficit amount under the Deficit Control Act of
    1985 is exceeded, though its stated purpose may be to avoid the
    sequestration of funds (Aug. 10, 1988, p. 21719).

    Tax and tariff measures and amendments
      Section 401(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 317)
    prohibits consideration in the House of any bill or resolution or
    amendment which provides new spending authority (as that term is defined
    in that section) unless that measure also provides that such new
    spending authority is to be available only to the extent provided in
    appropriation act (see Sec. 1127, supra). See also Deschler, ch. 25,
    Sec. 4 for a discussion of appropriations on legislative bills
    generally.

    [[Page 863]]

    may be raised at any time during pendency of that measure for amendment.

    1066. Restriction on bills and amendments carrying
    taxes or tariffs.

      5. (a)(1)  A bill or joint resolution carrying a tax or tariff
    measure may not be reported by a committee not having jurisdiction to
    report tax or tariff measures, and an amendment in the House or proposed
    by the Senate carrying a tax or tariff measure shall not be in order
    during the consideration of a bill or joint resolution reported by a
    committee not having that jurisdiction. A point of order against a tax
    or tariff measure in such a bill, joint resolution, or amendment thereto

      (2) For purposes of paragraph (1), a tax or tariff measure includes an
    amendment proposing a limitation on funds in a general appropriation
    bill for the administration of a tax or tariff.

      Subparagraph (1) was added in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    1983, p. 34). Subparagraph (2) was added in the 108th Congress (sec.
    2(o), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause
    5(b) of rule XXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      A point of order under this paragraph against a provision in a bill is
    in order at any time during consideration of the bill for amendment in
    Committee of the Whole (Aug. 1, 1986, p. 18649). On October 4, 1989, the
    Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, before ruling on several points
    of order under this paragraph, enunciated several guidelines to
    distinguish taxes and tariffs on the one hand and user or regulatory
    fees and other forms of revenue on the other (p. 23260). On the opening
    day of the 102d Congress, Speaker Foley inserted in the Congressional
    Record the following statement of jurisdictional concepts underlying
    those same distinctions and indicated his intention to exercise his
    referral authority under rule X in a manner consistent with this
    paragraph (Jan. 3, 1991, p. 64 (reiterated at the beginning of each
    Congress, e.g., Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551; Jan. 3, 2001, p. 39)):

              Clause 5(b) (current clause 5(a)) of rule XXI prohibits the

            reporting of a tax or tariff matter by any committee not having

            that jurisdiction. Most of the questions of order arising under

            this clause since its adoption in 1983 have related to

            provisions that clearly affected the operation of the Internal

            Revenue Code or the customs laws. From time to time, however,

            such a question has related to a provision drafted as a user or

            regulatory fee levied on members of a class that occasions or

            avails itself of a particular governmental activity, typically

            to generate revenue in support of that activity. In order to

            provide guidance concerning the referral of bills, to assist

            committees in staying within their appropriate jurisdictions

            under rule X, to assist committees without jurisdiction over tax

            or tariff measures in complying with clause 5(b) of rule XXI,

            and to protect the constitutional prerogative of the House to

            originate revenue bills, the Speaker will make the following

            statement: Standing committees of the House (other than the

            Committees on Appropriations and Budget) have jurisdiction to

            consider user, regulatory and other fees, charges, and

            assessments levied on a class directly availing itself of, or

            directly subject to, a governmental service, program, or

            activity, but not on the general public, as measures to be

    [[Page 864]]

            utilized solely to sup

            port, subject to annual appropriations, the service, program, or

            activity (including agency functions associated therewith) for

            which such fees, charges, and assessments are established and

            collected and not to finance the costs of Government generally.

            The fee must be paid by a class benefiting from the service,

            program or activity, or being regulated by the agency; in short,

            there must be a reasonable connection between the payors and the

            agency or function receiving the fee. The fund that receives the

            amounts collected is not itself determinative of the existence

            of a fee or a tax. The Committee on Ways and Means has

            jurisdiction over ``revenue measures generally'' under rule X.

            That committee is entitled to an appropriate referral of broad-

            based fees and could choose to recast such fees as excise taxes.

            A provision only reauthorizing or amending an existing fee

            without fundamental change, or creating a new fee generating

            only a de minimis aggregate amount of revenues, does not

            necessarily require a sequential referral to the Committee on

            Ways and Means. The Chair intends to coordinate these principles

            with the Committee on the Budget and the Congressional Budget

            Office, especially in the reconciliation process, so that budget

            scorekeeping does not determine, and reconciliation directives

            and their implementation will not be inconsistent with,

            committee jurisdiction. Further, it should be emphasized that

            the constitutional prerogative of the House to originate revenue

            measures will continue to be viewed broadly to include any

            meaningful revenue proposal that the Senate may attempt to

            originate.

    [[Page 865]]

    (Sept. 9, 2003, p. ----); (2) a limitation on funds to process the
    importation of any product from Iran (June 18, 2004, p. ----).
      The adoption of subparagraph (2) in the 108th Congress established a
    different standard for determining a violation of this clause by an
    amendment to a reported general appropriation bill than for a provision
    in the appropriation bill itself. Before its adoption, a Member raising
    a point of order under this paragraph against a provision in, or an
    amendment to, a general appropriation bill affecting the use of funds
    therein (otherwise traditionally in order if admissible under clause 2
    of rule XXI), carried the burden of showing a necessary, certain, and
    inevitable change in revenue collections or tax statuses or liabilities
    (Sept. 12, 1984, pp. 25108, 25109, 25120; July 26, 1985, p. 20806; Aug.
    1, 1986, p. 18649; July 13, 1990, p. 17473; June 18, 1991, p. 15189).
    The intent of the rules change, as expressed during debate on the
    change, was ``to ease the burden on the maker of a point of order
    [against an amendment] from having to show a necessary, certain and
    inevitable change in revenue collections, tax statuses, or liability as
    previous precedents required, to one of showing a textual relationship
    between the amendment and the administration of the Internal Revenue or
    tariff laws'' (Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Under that standard the following
    amendments to a general appropriation bill have been held to impose a
    limitation on funds in violation of this clause: (1) a limitation on
    funds to assess or collect any tax liability attributable to the
    inclusion of certain economic assistance in the taxpayer's gross income

      The precedents developed under this clause before its change in the
    108th Congress still apply to the Chair's determination whether a
    limitation in a general appropriation bill (rather than an amendment
    thereto) constitutes a tax or tariff measure proscribed by this
    paragraph. Prior precedents addressing amendments are still viable for
    that determination. The Chair will consider argument as to whether the
    limitation effectively and inevitably changes revenue collections and
    tax status or liability (Aug. 1, 1986, p. 18649). For example, in
    determining whether an amendment to a general appropriation bill
    proposing a change in IRS funding priorities constituted a tax measure
    proscribed by this paragraph, the Chair considered argument as to
    whether the change would necessarily or inevitably result in a loss or
    gain in tax liability and in tax collection (June 18, 1991, p. 15189).

    [[Page 866]]

      A limitation on the use of funds contained in a general appropriation
    bill was held to violate this paragraph by denying the use of funds by
    the Customs Service to enforce duty-free entry laws with respect to
    certain imported commodities, thereby requiring the collection of
    revenues not otherwise provided for by law (Oct. 27, 1983, p. 29611).
    Similar rulings were issued: (1) where it was shown that the imposition
    of the restriction on IRS funding for the fiscal year would effectively
    and inevitably preclude the IRS or the Customs Service from collecting
    revenues otherwise due and owing by law or require collection of revenue
    not legally due or owing (July 26, 1985, p. 20806; Aug. 1, 1986, pp.
    18649, 18650; July 17, 1996, p. 17563); and (2) where a provision in a
    general appropriation bill prohibited the use of funds to impose or
    assess certain taxes due under specified portions of the Internal
    Revenue Code (July 13, 1990, p. 17473). In the 98th Congress, the Chair
    sustained points of order under this paragraph against motions to concur
    in three Senate amendments to a general appropriation bill (not reported
    by the Committee on Ways and Means): (1) an amendment denying the use of
    funds in that or any other Act by the IRS to impose or assess any tax
    due under a designated provision of the Internal Revenue Code, thereby
    rendering the tax uncollectable through the use of any funds available
    to the agency (Sept. 12, 1984, p. 25108); (2) an amendment directing the
    Secretary of the Treasury to admit free of duty certain articles
    imported by a designated organization (Sept. 12, 1984, p. 25109); and
    (3) an amendment to the Tariff Act of 1930 to expand the authority of
    the Customs Service to seize and use the proceeds from the sale of
    contraband imports to defray operational expenses, and to offset owed
    customs duties under one section of that law (Sept. 12, 1984, p. 25120).
    An amendment to a general appropriation bill proposing to divert an
    increase in funding for the IRS from spot-checks to targeted audits was
    held not to constitute a tax within the meaning of this paragraph
    because it did not necessarily affect revenue collection levels or tax
    liabilities (June 18, 1991, p. 15189).

      In the 99th Congress, the following provisions in a reconciliation
    bill reported from the Budget Committee were ruled out as tax measures
    not reported from the Committee on Ways and Means: (1) a recommendation
    from the Committee on Education and Labor (now Education and the
    Workforce) excluding certain interest on obligations from the Student
    Loan Marketing Association from application of the Internal Revenue
    Code, affecting interest deductions against income taxes (Oct. 24, 1985,
    pp. 28776, 28827); and (2) a recommendation from the Committee on
    Merchant Marine and Fisheries expanding tax benefits available to
    shipowners through a capital construction fund (Oct. 24, 1985, pp.
    28802, 28827). In the 101st Congress, the following provisions in an
    omnibus budget reconciliation bill were ruled out: (1) a fee per
    passenger on cruise vessels, with revenues credited as proprietary
    receipts of the Coast Guard to be used for port safety, security,
    navigation, and antiterrorism activities (Oct. 4, 1989, p. 23260); (2) a
    per acre ``ocean protection fee'' on oil and gas leaseholdings in the
    Outer Continental Shelf, with receipts to be used to offset costs of
    various ocean protection programs (Oct. 4, 1989, p. 23261); (3) an
    amendment to the Internal Revenue Code relating to the tax deductibility
    of pension fund contributions (Oct. 4, 1989, p. 23262); (4) a fee
    incident to termination of employee benefit plans, with receipts to be
    applied to enforcement and administration of plans remaining with the
    system (Oct. 4, 1989, p. 23262); and (5) a fee incident to the filing of
    various pension benefit plan reports required by law, with revenues to
    be transferred to the Department of Labor for the enforcement of that
    law (Oct. 5, 1989, p. 23328).

    [[Page 867]]

    a purpose to defray costs of Government, generally (Oct. 23, 1990, p.
    32650). To a bill reported by the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure, an amendment increasing a user fee was ruled out as a
    tax measure where the fee overcollected to offset a reduction in another
    fee, thus attenuating the relationship between the amount of the fee and
    the cost of the Government activity for which it was assessed (May 9,
    1995, p. 12180). To a bill reported by the Committee on Science, Space,
    and Technology (now Science), an amendment proposing sundry changes in
    the Federal income tax by direct amendments to the Internal Revenue Code
    of 1986 was ruled out of order as carrying a tax measure in violation of
    this paragraph (Sept. 16, 1992, p. 25205).

    Passage of tax rate increases-
      To a bill reported from the Committee on Education and Labor (now
    Education and the Workforce) authorizing financial assistance to
    unemployed individuals for employment opportunities, an amendment
    providing instead for tax incentives to stimulate employment was held to
    be a tax measure in violation of this paragraph (Sept. 21, 1983, p.
    25145). A provision in a bill reported from the Committee on Foreign
    Affairs (now International Relations) imposing a uniform fee at ports of
    entry to be collected by the Customs Service as a condition of
    importation of a commodity was held to constitute a tariff within the
    meaning of this paragraph (June 4, 1985, p. 14009), as was an amendment
    to a bill reported from that committee amending the tariff schedules to
    deny ``most favored nation'' trade treatment to a certain nation (July
    11, 1985, p. 18590). A provision in a general appropriation bill
    creating a new tariff classification was held to constitute a tariff
    under this paragraph (June 15, 1994, p. 13103). A motion to concur in a
    Senate amendment constituting a tariff measure (imposing an import ban
    on certain dutiable goods) to a bill reported by a committee not having
    tariff jurisdiction was ruled out under this paragraph (Sept. 30, 1988,
    p. 27316). A proposal to increase a fee incident to the filing of a
    securities registration statement, with the proceeds to be deposited in
    the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts, was held to
    constitute a tax within the meaning of this paragraph because the amount
    of revenue derived and the manner of its deposit indicated

    1067. Threefifths vote to increase income tax rates.

      (b)  A
    bill or joint resolution, amendment, or conference report carrying a
    Federal income tax rate increase may not be considered as passed or
    agreed to unless so determined by a vote of not less than three-fifths
    of the Members voting, a quorum being present. In this paragraph the
    term ``Federal income tax rate increase'' means any amendment to
    subsection (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) of section 1, or to section 11(b)
    or 55(b), of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, that imposes a new
    percentage as a rate of tax and thereby increases the amount of tax
    imposed by any such section.

    [[Page 868]]

    only pending the question of final passage of a measure alleged to carry
    a Federal income tax rate increase, and not in advance upon adoption of
    a special order waiving that provision (Oct. 26, 1995, p. 29477).

    Consideration of retroactive tax rate increases
      This provision was added in the 104th Congress (sec. 106(a), H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463), and in the 105th Congress it was amended to
    clarify the definition of ``Federal income tax rate increase'' as
    limited to a specific amendment to one of the named subsections (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(c) of rule
    XXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). On one occasion the Chair held
    that a provision repealing a ceiling on total tax liability attributable
    to a net capital gain was not subject to the original version of this
    paragraph (Apr. 5, 1995, p. 10614). This paragraph does not apply to a
    concurrent resolution (Speaker Gingrich, May 18, 1995, p. 13499). A
    resolution reported from the Rules Committee waiving this paragraph may
    be adopted by majority vote (Oct. 26, 1995, p. 29477). The Speaker rules
    on the applicability of this paragraph

    1068. Prohibition against retroactive income tax rate
    increase.

      (c)  It shall not be in order to consider a bill, joint
    resolution, amendment, or conference report carrying a retroactive
    Federal income tax rate increase. In this paragraph--

          (1) the term ``Federal income tax rate increase'' means any
    amendment to subsection (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) of section 1, or to
    section 11(b) or 55(b), of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, that
    imposes a new percentage as a rate of tax and thereby increases the
    amount of tax imposed by any such section; and

          (2) a Federal income tax rate increase is retroactive if it
    applies to a period beginning before the enactment of the provision.

    Designation of public works
      This paragraph was added in the 104th Congress (sec. 106(b), H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463), and it was amended in the 105th Congress to
    clarify the definition of ``Federal income tax rate increase'' (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(d) of rule
    XXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 869]]

    1068a. Restriction on designation of public works.

      6.  It
    shall not be in order to consider a bill, joint resolution, amendment,
    or conference report that provides for the designation or redesignation
    of a public work in honor of an individual then serving as a Member,
    Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator.

      This clause was adopted in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(q), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

                                    Rule XXII

    Senate amendments
                           house and senate relations

    1069. Motion for conference.

      1.  A motion to disagree to
    Senate amendments to a House proposition and to request or agree to a
    conference with the Senate, or a motion to insist on House amendments to
    a Senate proposition and to request or agree to a conference with the
    Senate, shall be privileged in the discretion of the Speaker if offered
    by direction of the primary committee and of all reporting committees
    that had initial referral of the proposition.

      This provision (proviso in former clause 1 of rule XX), added by the
    89th Congress (H. Res. 8, Jan. 4, 1965, p. 21), provides a method
    whereby bills can be sent to conference by majority vote. As contained
    in section 126(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84
    Stat. 1140) and adopted as part of the Rules of the House in the 92d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144), this clause included
    language relating to separate votes on nongermane Senate amendments that
    was, in the 93d Congress, modified and transferred to former clause 5 of
    rule XXVIII (current clause 10 of rule XXII) (H. Res. 998, Apr. 9, 1974,
    pp. 10195-99). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, clauses 1 and 3 of this rule occupied a single clause
    (formerly clause 1 of rule XX) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Technical changes were effected in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(u), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 870]]

    that were previously reported to the House, the motion must be
    authorized by the committees reporting those corresponding bills (Oct.
    1, 1998, p. 22944). Where such a motion has been rejected by the House,
    it may be repeated if the committee having jurisdiction over the subject
    matter again authorizes its chairman to make the motion (Deschler-Brown,
    ch. 33, Sec. 2.13). The motion to send to conference is in order only if
    the Speaker in his discretion recognizes for that purpose, and the
    Speaker will not recognize for the motion where he has referred a
    nongermane Senate amendment in question to a House committee with
    jurisdiction and they have not yet had the opportunity to consider the
    amendment (June 28, 1984, p. 19770). Under clause 2(a)(2) of rule XI, a
    committee may adopt a rule providing that the chairman be directed to
    offer a motion under this clause whenever the chairman considers it
    appropriate (Sec. 791, supra).

    Sec. 1070. Motion for conference.

      The motion to  send a bill
    to conference under this clause is in order notwithstanding the fact
    that the stage of disagreement has not been reached (Aug. 1, 1972, p.
    26153). On a bill that has been initially referred and reported in the
    House, the motion must be authorized by all committees reporting thereon
    (Sept. 26, 1978, p. 31623). This clause was recodified in the 106th
    Congress to reflect this practice (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    However, a committee receiving sequential referral of a bill or not
    reporting thereon need not authorize the motion (Oct. 4, 1994, p.
    27643). On a Senate bill with a House amendment consisting of the text
    of two corresponding House bills

    Sec. 1071. Privilege of certain Senate amendments.

      2.  A
    motion to dispose of House bills with Senate amendments not requiring
    consideration in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the
    Union shall be privileged.

      This provision was adopted in 1890 (IV, 3089) as part of the rule
    governing disposal of business on the Speaker's table (formerly clause 2
    of rule XXIV). When the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, former clause 2 of rule XXIV was transferred to clause 2 of
    rule XIV, except this provision (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). For a
    discussion of referral of Senate amendments at the Speaker's table see
    Sec. 873, supra.

    Sec. 1072. Consideration of Senate amendments in Committee
    of the Whole.

      3.  Except as permitted by clause 1, before the stage of
    disagreement, a Senate amendment to a House bill or resolution shall be
    subject to the point of order that it must first be considered in the
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union if, originating
    in the House, it would be subject to such a point under clause 3 of rule
    XVIII.

    [[Page 871]]

      This provision was adopted in 1880 to prevent Senate amendments of the
    class described from escaping consideration in Committee of the Whole
    (IV, 4796). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    clauses 1 and 3 of this rule occupied a single clause (formerly clause 1
    of rule XX) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 1073. Consideration of Senate amendments in
    Committee of the Whole.

      While  a Senate amendment that is merely a
    modification of a House proposition, like the increase or decrease of
    the amount of an appropriation, and does not involve new and distinct
    expenditure, may not be required to be considered in Committee of the
    Whole (IV, 4797-4806; VIII, 2382-2385), where the question was raised
    against a Senate amendment which on its face apparently placed a charge
    upon the Treasury the Speaker held it devolved upon those opposing the
    point of order to cite proof to the contrary (VIII, 2387). When in the
    House an amendment is offered to provide an appropriation for another
    purpose than that of the Senate amendment, the House goes into Committee
    of the Whole to consider it (IV, 4795). When an amendment is referred,
    the entire bill goes to the Committee of the Whole (IV, 4808), but the
    committee considers only the Senate amendment (V, 6192). It usually
    considers all the amendments, although they may not all be within the
    rule requiring such consideration (V, 6195). In Committee of the Whole a
    Senate amendment, even though it be very long, is considered as an
    entirety and not by paragraphs or sections (V, 6194). When reported from
    the Committee of the Whole, Senate amendments are voted on en bloc and
    only those amendments are voted on severally on which a separate vote is
    demanded (VIII, 3191). It has been held that each amendment is subject
    to general debate and amendment under the five-minute rule (V, 6193,
    6196). The requirement of this clause that certain Senate amendments be
    considered in Committee of the Whole applies only before the stage of
    disagreement has been reached on the Senate amendment, and it is too
    late to raise a point of order that Senate amendments should have been
    considered in Committee of the Whole after the House has disagreed
    thereto and the amendments have been reported from conference in
    disagreement (Oct. 20, 1966, p. 28240; Dec. 4, 1975, p. 38714). The
    Committee on Rules may recommend a special order of business providing
    that a Senate amendment pending at the Speaker's table and otherwise
    requiring consideration in Committee of the Whole under this clause be
    ``hereby'' adopted, which special order, if adopted, would obviate the
    requirement of this clause (Deschler, ch. 21, Sec. 16.11; Feb. 4, 1993,
    p. 2500).

    [[Page 872]]

    House amendment with a further amendment, the matter was privileged in
    the House for further disposition since the House had communicated its
    insistence and request for a conference to the Senate (Speaker Albert,
    Sept. 16, 1976, p. 30868).

    Sec. 1074. Stage of disagreement between Houses.

      When  the
    stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill with amendments of the
    other House, motions to dispose of said amendments are privileged in the
    House (clause 4 of rule XXII; IV, 3149, 3150; VI, 756; VIII, 3185,
    3194). The stage of disagreement between the two Houses is reached after
    the House in possession of the papers has either disagreed to the
    amendment(s) of the other House or has insisted on its own amendment to
    a measure of the other House (Sept. 16, 1976, p. 30868), and not merely
    where the other House has returned a bill with an amendment (Dec. 7,
    1977, p. 38728). Thus, where the House concurred in a Senate amendment
    to a House bill with an amendment, insisted on the amendment and
    requested a conference, and the Senate then concurred in the

    Sec. 1075. Privilege when stage of disagreement
    reached.

      4.  When the stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill or
    resolution with House or Senate amendments, a motion to dispose of any
    amendment shall be privileged.

      This provision was adopted when the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress to codify the privilege of a motion to dispose of an
    amendment after the stage of disagreement has been reached (a practice
    described in Sec. 1074, supra) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 1076. Conferees may not agree to certain Senate
    amendments.

      5. (a)  Managers on the part of the House may not agree to a
    Senate amendment described in paragraph (b) unless specific authority to
    agree to the amendment first is given by the House by a separate vote
    with respect thereto. If specific authority is not granted, the Senate
    amendment shall be reported in disagreement by the conference committee
    back to the two Houses for disposition by separate motion.

      (b) The managers on the part of the House may not agree to a Senate
    amendment described in paragraph (a) that--

          (1) would violate clause 2(a)(1) or (c) of rule XXI if originating
    in the House; or

          (2) proposes an appropriation on a bill other than a general
    appropriation bill.

    [[Page 873]]

      This clause was adopted on June 1, 1920 (pp. 8109, 8120). Before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 2 of rule XX. The recodification also extended
    the rule to Senate amendments containing reappropriations of unexpended
    balances now referenced in clause 2(c) of rule XXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

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

    [[Page 874]]

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

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

      6. A Senate amendment carrying a tax or tariff measure in violation of
    clause 5(a) of rule XXI may not be agreed to.

    Conference reports; amendments reported in disagreement
      This provision was adopted when the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress to reiterate the prohibition found in clause 5(a) of rule
    XXI against a bill or joint resolution carrying a tax or tariff measure
    not reported by the Committee on Ways and Means (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    1077. High privilege of conference reports; and form
    of accompanying statement.

      7. (a)  The presentation of a conference report
    shall be in order at any time except during a reading of the Journal or
    the conduct of a record vote, a vote by division, or a quorum call.

    [[Page 875]]

    6, 1999, p. 47). For the requirement of a tax complexity analysis in
    either the joint statement or the Record, see clause 11 of this rule.
      The practice of giving conference reports privilege dates from 1850,
    having had its origin in a temporary rule. This practice was continued
    by rulings of the Chair until this rule was adopted in 1880 (V, 6443-
    6446, 6454). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1(a) of rule XXVIII
    (H. Res. 5, Jan.

      Under the language of the rule, a conference report may be presented:
    (1) while a Member is occupying the floor in debate (V, 6451; VIII
    3294); (2) while a bill is being read (V, 6448); (3) after the yeas and
    nays have been ordered (V, 6457); (4) after a vote by tellers and
    pending the question of ordering the yeas and nays, although it may not
    be presented while the House is dividing (V, 6447); (5) after the
    previous question has been demanded or ordered (V, 6449, 6450); (6)
    during a call of the House if a quorum be present (V, 6456); and (7) on
    Calendar Wednesday (VII, 907), but consideration of such reports yields
    to Calendar Wednesday business (VII, 899). It takes precedence of: (1) a
    motion to adjourn (V, 6451-6453), although as soon as the report is
    presented the motion to adjourn may be put (V, 6451-6453); (2) a report
    from the Committee on Rules (V, 6449), and has been permitted to
    intervene when a special order provides that the House shall consider a
    certain bill ``until the same is disposed of'' (V, 6454); (3) the motion
    to reconsider (V, 5605); (4) the motion to go into the Committee of the
    Whole for consideration of general appropriation bills (VIII, 3291); (5)
    consideration of District of Columbia business on Monday (VIII, 3292);
    (6) unfinished business (Speaker O'Neill, Oct. 4, 1978, p. 33473). The
    consideration of a conference report may be interrupted, even in the
    midst of the reading of the statement, by the arrival of the hour
    previously fixed for a recess (V, 6524). Of course, a question of
    privilege which relates to the integrity of the House as an agency for
    action may not be required to yield precedence to a matter entitled to
    priority merely by the rules relating to the order of business (V,
    6454).

      The question of consideration under clause 3 of rule XVI may be
    demanded against a conference report before points of order against the
    report are raised (VIII, 2439; Speaker Albert, Sept. 28, 1976, p.
    33019). The motion to lay on the table may not be applied to a
    conference report (V, 6540). The Chair will not recognize for a
    unanimous-consent request to correct a conference report, including the
    joint statement of managers, as it is a joint report to the two Houses
    (Oct. 3, 2000, p. 20560).

      While the rule provides that the managers of the House asking for
    conference shall leave the papers with the managers of the other
    (Sec. Sec. 555, 556, supra), if the managers on the part of the House
    agreeing to a conference surrender the papers to the House asking the
    conference, the report may be received first by the House asking the
    conference (VIII, 3330).

    [[Page 876]]

      For further discussion of conference reports, see provisions of
    Jefferson's Manual at Sec. Sec. 527-559, supra.

    Sec. 1078. Time for debate on motions to
    instruct.

      (b)(1)  Subject to subparagraph (2) the time allotted for debate on
    a motion to instruct managers on the part of the House shall be equally
    divided between the majority and minority parties.

      (2) If the proponent of a motion to instruct managers on the part of
    the House and the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of the
    other party identified under subparagraph (1) both support the motion,
    one-third of the time for debate thereon shall be allotted to a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who opposes the motion on demand of
    that Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.

      This paragraph was added in the 101st Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    1989, p. 72). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, it was found in former clause 1(b) of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The division of debate time specified in this
    clause does not apply to an amendment to a motion after defeat of the
    previous question thereon, and the proponent of such an amendment is
    recognized for one hour under clause 2 of rule XVII (formerly clause 2
    of rule XIV) (Oct. 3, 1989, p. 22863; July 14, 1993, p. 15668; Aug. 1,
    1994, p. 18868). The proponent of a motion to instruct conferees has the
    right to close debate (July 28, 1994, p. 18405; July 26, 1996, p.
    19450).

    [[Page 877]]

    nounces to the House his intention to do so and the form of the motion.

    Sec. 1079. Motions privileged after 20 calendar days
    and 10 legislative days of conference.

      (c)(1)  A motion to instruct managers
    on the part of the House, or a motion to discharge all managers on the
    part of the House and to appoint new conferees, shall be privileged
    after a conference committee has been appointed for 20 calendar days and
    10 legislative days without making a report, but only on the day after
    the calendar day on which the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
    offering the motion an

      (2) The Speaker may designate a time in the legislative schedule on
    that legislative day for consideration of a motion described in
    subparagraph (1).

      (3) During the last six days of a session of Congress, a motion under
    subparagraph (1) shall be privileged after a conference committee has
    been appointed for 36 hours without making a report and the motion meets
    the notice requirement in subparagraph (1).

      (d) Instructions to conferees in a motion to instruct or in a motion
    to recommit to conference may not include argument.

      Paragraph (c) (formerly clause 1(c) of rule XXVIII) was adopted
    December 8, 1931 (VIII, 3225). The notice requirement was added on
    January 3, 1989 (H. Res. 5, 101st Cong., p. 72), and amended on January
    5, 1993 (H. Res. 5, 103d Cong., p. 49) to clarify that both the motion
    to discharge conferees and appoint new conferees and the motion to
    instruct conferees after the requisite time in conference are subject to
    one day's notice, and to authorize the Speaker to designate a time in
    that day's legislative schedule for the consideration of a noticed
    motion to discharge or instruct conferees. Paragraph (c) was amended
    again in the 108th Congress to permit the motion to be offered after not
    only 20 calendar days but also after 10 legislative days, measured
    concurrently (sec. 2(p), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----); and a
    technical amendment to paragraph (c)(3) was effected in the 109th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraph (c) was found in
    former clause 1(c) of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    Recodification resulted in certain unintended changes to paragraph (c),
    and the paragraph was restored to its original intent in the 107th
    Congress (sec. 2(r), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). Paragraph (d) was
    added in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(r), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

    [[Page 878]]

    first House to act thereon, since the conferees are not discharged and
    the original conference remains in being (June 28, 1990, p. 16156). A
    motion under this clause may instruct House conferees to insist on
    holding conference sessions under just and fair conditions, and in
    executive session if desirable (Aug. 1, 1935, p. 12272), and may
    instruct House conferees to meet with Senate conferees (May 2, 1984, p.
    10732). The motion to instruct conferees under this clause is of equal
    privilege with the motion to suspend the rules on a suspension day (Mar.
    1, 1988, pp. 2749, 2751, 2754). The motion to adjourn is in order while
    a motion to instruct under this paragraph is pending (Sept. 30, 1997, p.
    20886), and, if such a motion to adjourn is adopted, the motion to
    instruct is rendered unfinished business on the next day without need
    for further notice under this paragraph (Oct. 1, 1997, p. 20894). Under
    clause 8(a)(2)(C) of rule XX, proceedings may not resume on a postponed
    question of agreeing to a 20-day motion to instruct conferees after the
    managers have filed a conference report in the House (Oct. 19, 1999, p.
    25961; Nov. 20, 2003, p. ----; May 19, 2004, p. ----).

      The motion to instruct conferees under this clause may be repeated
    notwithstanding prior disposition of an identical motion to instruct,
    because any number of proper motions to instruct are in order after
    conferees have not reported within the requisite time (Speaker Albert,
    July 22, 1974, p. 24448; July 10, 1985, p. 18440), and the motion
    remains available when a conference report, filed after the requisite
    time, is recommitted by the

    Sec. 1080. The statement accompanying a conference
    report.

      (e)  Each conference report to the House shall be printed as a
    report of the House. Each such report shall be accompanied by a joint
    explanatory statement prepared jointly by the managers on the part of
    the House and the managers on the part of the Senate. The joint
    explanatory statement shall be sufficiently detailed and explicit to
    inform the House of the effects of the report on the matters committed
    to conference.

      The original rule requiring the submission of a statement was adopted
    in 1880 (V, 6443) and remained in effect through the 91st Congress. The
    precedents carried in this annotation are in interpretation of that
    earlier rule, which required only that the statement be signed by a
    majority of the House managers (V, 6505, 6506) and did not anticipate a
    statement jointly prepared by the managers on the part of the House and
    those on the part of the Senate. The rule was revised in the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (sec. 125(b); 84 Stat. 1140) and made a part
    of the standing Rules of the House in its present form 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 1(d) of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 879]]

    not be received without the accompanying statement (V, 6504, 6514,
    6515). A quorum among the managers on the part of the House at a
    committee of conference is established by their signatures on the
    conference report and joint explanatory statement (Oct. 4, 1994, p.
    27662). When the House by unanimous consent permitted the chairman of a
    House committee to insert in the Record extraneous material to
    supplement a joint statement of managers, the Chair announced that the
    insertion did not constitute a revised joint statement of managers (Oct.
    10, 1998, p. 25502).
      The Speaker may require the statement to be in proper form (V, 6513),
    but it is for the House and not the Speaker to determine whether or not
    it conforms to the rule in other respects (V, 6511, 6512). A report may

    Sec. 1081. Unfunded mandates.

      The  Unfunded Mandates Reform
    Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4; 109 Stat. 48) added a new part B to title IV of
    the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 658-658g) that requires a
    committee of conference to ensure that the Director of that Office
    prepares a statement with respect to unfunded costs of any additional
    Federal mandate contained in the conference agreement. See Sec. 1127,
    infra.

    Sec. 1082. Layover requirements.

      8. (a)(1)  Except as
    specified in subparagraph (2), it shall not be in order to consider a
    conference report until--

          (A) the third calendar day (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal
    holidays except when the House is in session on such a day) on which the
    conference report and the accompanying joint explanatory statement have
    been available to Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner in
    the Congressional Record; and

          (B) copies of the conference report and the accompanying joint
    explanatory statement have been available to Members, Delegates, and the
    Resident Commissioner for at least two hours.

      (2) Subparagraph (1)(A) does not apply during the last six days of a
    session of Congress.

    [[Page 880]]

    Act of 1970 and made part of the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). The paragraph was amended again the next year to
    clarify the manner of counting the three days for the layover period (H.
    Res. 1153, Oct. 13, 1972, p. 36023). In the 104th Congress it was
    amended once more to count as a ``calendar day'' any day on which the
    House is in session (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). The
    paragraph was amended in the 94th Congress (Feb. 26, 1976, p. 4625) to
    require copies of conference reports to be available for two hours
    before consideration and to allow for the immediate consideration of a
    resolution from the Committee on Rules waiving that requirement (clause
    8(e)). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2(a) of rule XXVIII. At that time
    the portion of clause 2(a) permitting immediate consideration of a
    resolution reported by the Rules Committee only waiving the layover
    requirement was tranferred to clause 8(e) and the portion of clause 2(a)
    addressing debate was transferred to clause 8(d) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).
      The original rule (formerly clause 2(a) of rule XXVIII) requiring that
    conference reports be printed in the Record was adopted in 1902 (V,
    6516). The three-day layover requirement, as well as the provisions
    relating to the availability of copies of the conference report and the
    division of time for debate, were added by section 125(b) of the
    Legislative Reorganization

      For an example of a resolution reported by the Rules Committee only
    waiving the availability requirement of this clause and called up the
    same day reported without a two-thirds vote, see August 10, 1984 (p.
    23978). When managers report that they have been unable to agree, the
    report is not acted on by the House (V, 6562; VIII, 3329; Aug. 23, 1957,
    p. 15816).

    Sec. 1083. Consideration of amendments in
    disagreement.

      (b)(1)  Except as specified in subparagraph (2), it shall not be
    in order to consider a motion to dispose of a Senate amendment reported
    in disagreement by a conference committee until--

          (A) the third calendar day (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal
    holidays except when the House is in session on such a day) on which the
    report in disagreement and any accompanying statement have been
    available to Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner in the
    Congressional Record; and

    [[Page 881]]

          (B) copies of the report in disagreement and any accompanying
    statement, together with the text of the Senate amendment, have been
    available to Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner for at
    least two hours.

      (2) Subparagraph (1)(A) does not apply during the last six days of a
    session of Congress.

      This provision (formerly clause 2(b)(1) of rule XXVIII), relating to
    the consideration of amendments reported from conference in
    disagreement, was added in 1972 (H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13, 1972, p. 36023)
    and became effective at the end of the 92d Congress. In the 94th
    Congress the provision was amended to require copies of amendments
    reported from conference in disagreement to be available for two hours
    before consideration and to allow for the immediate consideration of a
    resolution from the Committee on Rules waiving that requirement (H. Res.
    868, Feb. 26, 1976, p. 4625). In the 104th Congress the provision was
    amended to count as a ``calendar day'' any day on which the House is in
    session (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 2(b)(1) of rule XXVIII. At that time the portion of clause
    2(b)(1) addressing debate was transferred to clause 8(d) of rule XXII,
    and the portion of clause 2(b)(1) permitting immediate consideration of
    a resolution reported by the Rules Committee only waiving the layover
    requirement was transferred to clause 8(e) of this rule (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47).

      Until the adoption of paragraph (b), a report in total disagreement
    was not printed in the Record before the amendment in disagreement was
    again taken up in the House (VIII, 3299, 3332).

    [[Page 882]]

    dered on the preferential motion to its adoption without intervening
    motion.

    Sec. 1084. Certain motions to insist as
    preferential.

      (3)  During consideration of a Senate amendment reported in
    disagreement by a conference committee on a general appropriation bill,
    a motion to insist on disagreement to the Senate amendment shall be
    preferential to any other motion to dispose of that amendment if the
    original motion offered by the floor manager proposes to change existing
    law and the motion to insist is offered before debate on the original
    motion by the chairman of the committee having jurisdiction of the
    subject matter of the amendment or a designee. Such a preferential
    motion shall be separately debatable for one hour equally divided
    between its proponent and the proponent of the original motion. The
    previous question shall be considered as or

      This provision was added in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    1993, p. 49) to make preferential and separately debatable a motion to
    insist on disagreement to a Senate amendment to a general appropriation
    bill, if: (1) the Senate amendment has been reported from conference in
    disagreement; (2) the original motion to dispose of the Senate amendment
    proposes to change existing law; and (3) the motion to insist is timely
    offered by the chairman of a committee of jurisdiction or a designee.
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 2(b)(2) of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
    (now Government Reform) has jurisdiction under clause 1 of rule X over
    the subject of a Senate legislative amendment entitling Forest Service
    employees to separation pay, enabling the chairman of that committee to
    offer a preferential motion to insist under this clause (Oct. 20, 1993,
    p. 25589).

    Sec. 1085. Certain conference reports considered as
    read.

      (c)  A conference report or a Senate amendment reported in
    disagreement by a conference committee that has been available as
    provided in paragraph (a) or (b) shall be considered as read when called
    up.

      Paragraph (c) was added 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(c) of rule XXVIII
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 1086. Debate.

      (d)(1)  Subject to subparagraph (2), the
    time allotted for debate on a conference report or on a motion to
    dispose of a Senate amendment reported in disagreement by a conference
    committee shall be equally divided between the majority and minority
    parties.

    [[Page 883]]

    who opposes the conference report or motion on demand of that Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.

      (2) If the floor manager for the majority and the floor manager for
    the minority both support the conference report or motion, one-third of
    the time for debate thereon shall be allotted to a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner

      This provision was adopted in the 99th Congress as former clauses 2(a)
    and 2(b)(1) of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393). When the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, those provisions
    addressing debate in clause 2(a) and 2(b)(1) were consolidated into this
    provision (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Recognition of one Member in opposition does not depend upon party
    affiliation and is within the discretion of the Speaker (Dec. 11, 1985,
    p. 36069; Dec. 16, 1985, p. 36716; Oct. 15, 1986, p. 31631), who accords
    priority in recognition to a member of the conference committee (Speaker
    Wright, Dec. 21, 1987, pp. 37093, 37516). The Chair will assume that the
    minority manager supports a conference report if the manager signed the
    report and is not immediately present to claim the contrary (Oct. 12,
    1995, p. 27795). Where the time is divided three ways, the right to
    close debate falls to the majority manager calling up the conference
    report (May 2, 2002, p. ----), preceded by the minority manager,
    preceded in turn by the Member in opposition--i.e., the reverse order of
    the recognition to begin debate (Aug. 4, 1989, p. 19301).

      Following rejection of a conference report on a point of order, debate
    on a motion to dispose of the Senate amendment remaining in disagreement
    is evenly divided between the majority and minority under the rationale
    contained in this provision (Sept. 30, 1976, pp. 34074-34100). Following
    vitiation of a conference report held to violate clause 9 of rule XXII,
    debate on a motion to recede and concur in a Senate amendment with an
    amendment also is evenly divided. (Nov. 14, 2002, p. ----).

    [[Page 884]]

    Member from the other party from controlling half the debate and from
    offering a proper preferential motion to dispose of the Senate amendment
    (July 2, 1980, p. 18360). The right to close the debate on a motion to
    dispose of an amendment where the time is divided three ways falls to
    the manager offering the motion (Nov. 21, 1989, p. 30814).
      The custom has developed, however, of equally dividing between
    majority and minority parties the time on all motions to dispose of
    amendments emerging from conference in disagreement, whether reported in
    disagreement or before the House upon rejection of a conference report
    by a vote or on a point of order (Speaker Albert, Sept. 27, 1976, pp.
    32719-26; Sept. 30, 1976, pp. 34074-34100), upon rejection of an initial
    motion to dispose of the amendment (July 2, 1980, pp. 18357-59; Aug. 6,
    1993, p. 19582), on a motion to concur in a new Senate amendment where
    the Senate had receded with an amendment from one of its amendments
    reported from conference in disagreement (Mar. 24, 1983, p. 7301), or on
    a motion to dispose of a further stage of amendment which is
    subsequently before the House (Aug. 1, 1985, p. 22561; Dec. 19, 1985, p.
    38360). A Member offering a preferential motion does not thereby control
    one-half of the time, as all debate is allotted under the original
    motion (May 14, 1975, p. 14385). The minority Member in charge controls
    30 minutes for debate only and can only yield to other Members for
    debate (Dec. 4, 1975, p. 38716). Where time for debate on such a motion
    is equally divided, the previous question may not be moved by the Member
    first recognized so as to prevent the

      The division of time for debate on a motion to dispose of a Senate
    amendment reported from conference in disagreement under this provision
    does not extend to separate debate on an amendment thereto, which is
    governed by the general hour rule in the House (clause 2 of rule XVII)
    (Sept. 17, 1992, p. 25437).

    Sec. 1087. Waiver.

      (e)  Under clause 6(a)(2) of rule XIII, a
    resolution proposing only to waive a requirement of this clause
    concerning the availability of reports to Members, Delegates, and the
    Resident Commissioner may be considered by the House on the same day it
    is reported by the Committee on Rules.

      This provision was adopted in the 94th Congress to former clauses 2(a)
    and 2(b)(1) of rule XXVIII (Feb. 26, 1976, p. 4625). When the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, those provisions in former
    clauses 2(a) and 2(b)(1) permitting immediate consideration of a
    resolution from the Committee on Rules only waiving the layover
    requirement were consolidated into this provision (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 885]]

    specific matter committed to the conference committee by either or both
    Houses if that modification is beyond the scope of that specific matter
    as committed to the conference committee.

    Sec. 1088. Conferees may report germane modification of
    amendment in nature of substitute within scope of
    differences.

      9.  Whenever a disagreement to an amendment has been
    committed to a conference committee, the managers on the part of the
    House may propose a substitute that is a germane modification of the
    matter in disagreement. The introduction of any language presenting
    specific additional matter not committed to the conference committee by
    either House does not constitute a germane modification of the matter in
    disagreement. Moreover, a conference report may not include matter not
    committed to the conference committee by either House and may not
    include a modification of

      This provision (formerly clause 3 of rule XXVIII) is derived from
    section 135(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat.
    812) and originally was made a part of the standing rules on January 3,
    1953 (p. 24). The clause was revised on January 22, 1971 (p. 144)
    following the passage of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84
    Stat. 1140) which carried a similar provision in section 125(b). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 3 of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).

      Where one House strikes out of a bill of the other all after the
    enacting clause and inserts a new text, House managers, under the
    restrictions of this clause, may not agree to the deletion of certain
    language committed to conference if the effect of such deletion results
    in broadening the scope of the matter in disagreement (Dec. 14, 1971, p.
    46779). Where one House authorizes certain funds for a fiscal year and
    the other House authorizes a lesser amount for that year as well as
    additional funds for the subsequent year, and neither version contains
    an overall amount, House managers do not exceed their authority under
    this rule by including in the report the amount authorized by one House
    for the first year and the other House for the subsequent year, even
    though the total authorization resulting from this compromise exceeds
    that possible under either version (June 8, 1972, p. 20281). Where a
    House version authorized endowment payments for certain colleges and the
    Senate version conferred land-grant college status on those institutions
    and contained a higher endowment figure, House conferees remained within
    their authority under this clause by accepting the Senate provision on
    land-grant status and the lower House figure for endowment payments
    (Speaker Albert, June 8, 1972, p. 20280). Where the House version of a
    bill contained provisions for local funding of merit schools, but
    neither version contained a provision for State funding, a motion to
    recommit to conference with instructions to provide State funding for
    merit schools was held to exceed the scope of the differences committed
    to conference (Sept. 30, 1992, p. 29126). A conference report containing
    a provision that the joint statement of managers described as having no
    counterpart in either the House bill or Senate amendment was held to
    exceed scope (Nov. 14, 2002, p. ----).

    [[Page 886]]

    version and not demonstrably contained in existing law may be ruled out
    as an additional issue not committed to conference in violation of this
    clause (Speaker Albert, Dec. 20, 1974, p. 41849). Thus where one House
    has amended an existing law and the other House has implicitly taken the
    position of existing law by only authorizing sums for the purpose of
    existing law, the scope of differences committed to conference may be
    measured between issues presented in the amending language and relevant
    provisions of the existing law; but the inclusion in a conference report
    of requirements and issues incorporated into existing law which were not
    contained in either version and which are not repetitive of existing law
    may be ruled out in violation of this paragraph (Speaker O'Neill, Oct.
    14, 1977, pp. 33770-73).
      While the scope of differences committed to conference--where one
    House has amended an existing law and the other House has implicitly
    taken the position of existing law by remaining silent on the subject--
    may properly be measured between those issues presented in the amending
    language and comparable provisions of existing law, the inclusion in a
    conference report of new matter not specifically contained in the
    amending

      A mere change in phraseology in a conference report (from language in
    either the House or Senate version) may be permitted to achieve
    legislative consistency where it is not shown that its effect is to
    broaden the scope of the language beyond the differences committed to
    conference, as where the report waives provisions of law for all
    programs in the bill and the House version waives those provisions for
    one section of the bill only (the Senate having no comparable provision)
    but the scope of programs covered by the report was coextensive with
    those in the designated section of the House version (Speaker Albert,
    May 1, 1975, p. 12752). The conferees may include language clarifying
    and limiting the duties imposed on an official by one House's version
    where that modification does not expand the authority conferred in that
    version or contained in existing law (the position of the other House)
    (Speaker Albert, July 29, 1975, p. 25515) and may confer broader
    authority on an official than that contained in one House's version if
    such authority is coextensive with the authority contained in existing
    law which the other House has retained (Apr. 13, 1976, p. 10803). Where
    the Senate version authorized citizen suits to enforce existing law
    except where Federal officials were pursuing enforcement proceedings and
    the House version, with no comparable provision, retained existing law
    which did not permit such suits, the conferees exceeded the scope of the
    differences by further prohibiting citizen suits where State officials
    were pursuing enforcement proceedings--a new exception allowing State
    preemption of citizen suits (Sept. 27, 1976, p. 33019). A point of order
    was sustained against a motion to instruct conferees since directing the
    conferees to agree to matter violating this clause: the House bill
    created an energy trust fund composed of certain revenues to be
    distributed by subsequent legislation; the Senate amendment created a
    similar trust fund with suggested but not mandated distribution, and the
    motion directed House conferees to insist on a mandatory allocation of
    revenues in question among specified purposes, some of which were not
    addressed in the Senate amendment (Feb. 28, 1980, p. 4304).

    [[Page 887]]

    (VIII, 3266) and exercise broad discretion in incorporating germane
    amendments (VIII, 3263-3265), even to the extent of reporting a new bill
    germane to the subject (V, 6421, 6423, 6424; VIII, 3248). However, the
    present language of the rule prohibits the inclusion in a conference
    report or in a motion to instruct House conferees of additional topics
    not committed to conference by either House or beyond the scope of the
    differences committed to conference; and the precedents predating the
    adoption of this clause in 1971 must be read in light of the explicit
    restrictions now contained in the clause (Sept. 27, 1976, p. 32719). As
    such, a conference report may not include a new topic or issue that,
    although germane, was not committed to conference by either House (Mar.
    25, 1992, p. 6843; Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9022). For example, a motion to
    instruct conferees on a general appropriation bill may not instruct the
    conferees to include a funding limitation not contained in the House
    bill or Senate amendment (Sept. 13, 1994, p. 24402). Similarly, a motion
    to recommit a conference report may not instruct conferees to expand
    definitions to include classes not covered under the House bill or
    Senate amendment (Sept. 29, 1994, p. 26781) or to include provisions not
    contained in the House bill or Senate amendment (Dec. 21, 1995, p.
    38138). A waiver of all points of order against a conference report to
    accompany a measure and against its consideration does not inure to
    instructions contained in a motion to recommit such measure to
    conference (Sept. 29, 1994, p. 26781). Some latitude does remain to
    House managers to eliminate specific words or phrases contained in
    either version and add words or phrases not included in either version
    so long as they remain within the scope of the differences committed to
    conference and do not incorporate additional topics, issues, or
    propositions not committed to conference (Speaker Albert, Sept. 28,
    1976, pp. 33020-23).
      Before the revision of this clause in 1971, where one House struck out
    of a bill of the other all after the enacting clause and inserted a new
    text, conferees could discard language occurring both in the bill and
    substitute

      For a discussion of the remedy where managers exceed their authority,
    see Sec. 547, supra.

    Sec. 1089. Nongermane matter in conference
    agreements and amendments in disagreement.

      10. (a)(1)  A Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner may raise a point of order against nongermane
    matter, as specified in subparagraph (2), before the commencement of
    debate on--

          (A) a conference report;

    [[Page 888]]

          (B) a motion that the House recede from its disagreement to a
    Senate amendment reported in disagreement by a conference committee and
    concur therein, with or without amendment; or

          (C) a motion that the House recede from its disagreement to a
    Senate amendment on which the stage of disagreement has been reached and
    concur therein, with or without amendment.

      (2) A point of order against nongermane matter is one asserting that a
    proposition described in subparagraph (1) contains specified matter that
    would violate clause 7 of rule XVI if it were offered in the House as an
    amendment to the underlying measure in the form it was passed by the
    House.

      (b) If a point of order under paragraph (a) is sustained, a motion
    that the House reject the nongermane matter identified by the point of
    order shall be privileged. Such a motion is debatable for 40 minutes,
    one-half in favor of the motion and one-half in opposition thereto.

      (c) After disposition of a point of order under paragraph (a) or a
    motion to reject under paragraph (b), any further points of order under
    paragraph (a) not covered by a previous point of order, and any
    consequent motions to reject under paragraph (b), shall be likewise
    disposed of.

    [[Page 889]]

    under subparagraph (2) or (3), as the case may be.
      (d)(1) If a motion to reject under paragraph (b) is adopted, then
    after disposition of all points of order under paragraph (a) and any
    consequent motions to reject under paragraph (b), the conference report
    or motion, as the case may be, shall be considered as rejected and the
    matter remaining in disagreement shall be disposed of

      (2) After the House has adopted one or more motions to reject
    nongermane matter contained in a conference report under the preceding
    provisions of this clause--

          (A) if the conference report accompanied a House measure amended
    by the Senate, the pending question shall be whether the House shall
    recede and concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment consisting
    of so much of the conference report as was not rejected; and

          (B) if the conference report accompanied a Senate measure amended
    by the House, the pending question shall be whether the House shall
    insist further on the House amendment.

      (3) After the House has adopted one or more motions to reject
    nongermane matter contained in a motion that the House recede and concur
    in a Senate amendment, with or without amendment, the following motions
    shall be privileged and shall have precedence in the order stated:

          (A) A motion that the House recede and concur in the Senate
    amendment with an amendment in writing then available on the floor.

          (B) A motion that the House insist on its disagreement to the
    Senate amendment and request a further conference with the Senate.

          (C) A motion that the House insist on its disagreement to the
    Senate amendment.

    [[Page 890]]

    House agrees to recede, then a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner may raise a point of order against nongermane matter, as
    specified in paragraph (a)(2), before the commencement of debate on
    concurring in the Senate amendment, with or without amendment. A point
    of order under this paragraph shall be disposed of according to the
    preceding provisions of this clause in the same manner as a point of
    order under paragraph (a).

      (e) If, on a division of the question on a motion described in
    paragraph (a)(1)(B) or (C), the

      This provision (formerly clause 4 of rule XXVIII addressing nongermane
    matter in conference reports) was included as part of the revision of
    former rules XX and XXVIII that took place effective at the end of the
    92d Congress (H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13, 1972, p. 36023). The same
    resolution repealed the former clause 3 of rule XX, which had been
    enacted as part of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 to
    restrict the authority of House conferees to agree without prior
    permission of the House to Senate amendments that would violate clause 7
    of rule XVI if offered in the House. This provision (formerly clause 5
    of rule XXVIII addressing nongermane matter in amendments in
    disagreement) was added on April 9, 1974 (H. Res. 998, 93d Cong., pp.
    10195-99) which deleted from clause 1 of rule XX and transferred to
    former clause 5 of rule XXVIII the procedures concerning disposition of
    Senate nongermane amendments. The provision was amended on April 9, 1974
    (H. Res. 998, 93d Cong., pp. 10195-99) in order to make this clause
    applicable to provisions originally contained in Senate bills sent to
    conference, and not merely to Senate amendments to House bills in
    conference. The provision was further amended in the 96th Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16) to provide that if the conference
    report is considered read under this rule, a point of order under this
    clause must be made immediately upon consideration of the conference
    report. When the House recodified its rules, it consolidated former
    clauses 4 and 5 of rule XXVIII under this clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 891]]

    amendment not rejected as recommended in the conference report and to
    insist on disagreement to those amendments which have been rejected.

    Sec. 1090. Nongermane matter in conference
    agreements.

      The  procedure provided in this clause for addressing
    nongermane matter in conference reports was first utilized on September
    11, 1973 (pp. 29243-46), when the Chair sustained two points of order
    against portions of a conference report which were modifications of
    portions of a Senate amendment in the nature of a substitute not germane
    to a House bill. If any motion to reject is adopted under this clause
    and the matter then pending before the House consists of numbered Senate
    amendments in disagreement, the pending question is whether to dispose
    of each Senate

      Where a point of order against a portion of a conference report has
    been sustained under this clause, the Speaker will not entertain another
    point of order against the report or against another portion thereof
    until a motion to reject the portion held nongermane (if made) has been
    disposed of (Speaker Albert, Dec. 15, 1975, p. 40671). The Member
    representing the conference committee in opposition to a motion to
    reject under this clause, and not the proponent of the motion, has the
    right to close debate thereon (Oct. 15, 1986, p. 31502).

      Once a motion to reject a nongermane portion has been adopted by the
    House and the Speaker has recognized a Member to offer a motion
    comprising the pending question under this clause, the report is
    rejected and it is too late to make a point of order against the entire
    conference report under clause 9 (formerly clause 3) of this rule
    (Speaker Albert, Dec. 15, 1975, p. 40671).

      Where possible, the Speaker rules on points of order against
    conference reports which if sustained will vitiate the entire conference
    report (as under clause 9 of this rule or under the Congressional Budget
    Act of 1974) before entertaining points of order under this clause
    (Speaker Albert, Sept. 23, 1976, p. 32099).

    [[Page 892]]

    Sec. 1091. Nongermane matter in amendments in
    disagreement.

      The  provisions of this clause addressing nongermane matter
    in amendments in disagreement was first utilized on July 31, 1974 (p.
    26083), when the Chair sustained a point of order against a portion of a
    motion to recede and concur in a Senate amendment (reported from
    conference in disagreement) with a further amendment, on the ground that
    that portion of the Senate amendment contained in the motion was not
    germane to the House-passed measure, and a motion rejecting that portion
    of the motion to recede and concur with an amendment was offered and
    defeated. This clause is not applicable to a provision contained in a
    motion to recede and concur with an amendment which was not contained in
    any form in the Senate version and which is not therefore a modification
    of the Senate provision, the only requirement in such circumstances
    being that the motion as a whole be germane to the Senate amendment as a
    whole under clause 7 of rule XVI (Oct. 4, 1978, p. 33502; June 30, 1987,
    p. 18294). A point of order under clause 4 (formerly clause 5(a)) of
    rule XXI (appropriations on a legislative bill) against a motion to
    dispose of a Senate amendment in disagreement which, if sustained, would
    vitiate the entire motion, must be disposed of before a point of order
    against a nongermane amendment in disagreement under this clause which,
    if sustained, would merely permit a separate vote on rejection of that
    portion of the motion (Oct. 1, 1980, pp. 28638-42).

    Sec. 1092. Tax complexity analysis.

      11.  It shall not be in
    order to consider a conference report to accompany a bill or joint
    resolution that proposes to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
    unless--

          (a) the joint explanatory statement of the managers includes a tax
    complexity analysis prepared by the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue
    Taxation in accordance with section 4022(b) of the Internal Revenue
    Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998; or

          (b) the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means causes such a
    tax complexity analysis to be printed in the Congressional Record before
    consideration of the conference report.

      The Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998
    (sec. 4022, P.L. 105-206) added this provision as a new clause 7 of rule
    XXVIII. When the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was transferred to clause 11 of rule XXII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 1093. Open conference meetings.

      12. (a)(1)  Subject to
    subparagraph (2), a meeting of each conference committee shall be open
    to the public.

      (2) In open session of the House, a motion that managers on the part
    of the House be permitted to close to the public a meeting or meetings
    of their conference committee shall be privileged, shall be decided
    without debate, and shall be decided by the yeas and nays.

    [[Page 893]]

    shall be considered as rejected, the House shall be considered to have
    insisted on its amendments or on disagreement to the Senate amendments,
    as the case may be, and to have requested a further conference with the
    Senate, and the Speaker may appoint new conferees without intervening
    motion.

      (b) A point of order that a conference committee failed to comply with
    paragraph (a) may be raised immediately after the conference report is
    read or considered as read. If such a point of order is sustained, the
    conference report

      This clause as originally added to former rule XXVIII on January 14,
    1975 (H. Res. 5, 94th Cong., p. 20) provided that conference committee
    meetings be open except where a majority of the managers of the House or
    Senate voted to close the meeting, and provided that the clause not
    become effective until the Senate adopted a similar rule. The Senate
    adopted an identical rule on November 5, 1975 (p. 35203). The clause was
    substantially changed on January 4, 1977 (H. Res. 5, 95th Cong., pp. 53-
    70) to require that conference meetings be open except where the House
    by record vote determines that a meeting may be closed, to allow a point
    of order against a conference report where the conferees have violated
    this clause, and to provide for subsequent disposition of the matter
    reported from conference should such a point of order be sustained. It
    was further amended in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp.
    7-16) to provide that if the conference report is considered read under
    this rule, a point of order under this clause must be made immediately
    upon consideration of the conference report. Before the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, the former version of this provision
    was found in former clause 6 of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). In the 108th Congress the record vote by which the motion is to be
    decided was particularized to be by the yeas and nays (sec. 2(u), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).

      At any time after a bill has been sent to conference, a motion
    pursuant to this clause authorizing a conference committee to close its
    meetings to the public is privileged for consideration in the House and
    must be voted on by a record vote (Speaker O'Neill, May 23, 1977, pp.
    15880-84; Apr. 13, 1978, p. 10128). Although a motion to close a
    conference committee meeting ``to the public'' would, under the
    precedents (see V, 6254, fn.), exclude Members who were not conferees, a
    motion may be offered as privileged under this clause to authorize a
    conference committee to close its meetings to the public, except to
    Members of Congress (Speaker O'Neill, May 23, 1977, pp. 15880-84).

    [[Page 894]]

    they have been formally appointed in both Houses and do not meet
    formally in open session after such appointment, the conference report
    is subject to a point of order under this clause resulting in an
    automatic request for a further conference (Dec. 20, 1982, p. 32896).
    Also, conferees on the part of the House are entitled to reasonable
    notice of and opportunity to attend a meeting of the conference
    committee (July 20, 2000, p. ----). However, a point of order will not
    lie against a conference report called up under an order of the House
    that has waived all points of order against consideration of the
    conference report (July 20, 2000, p. 15654; Oct. 30, 2003, p. ----).
      In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Chair stated that, under
    the rules and precedents of the House, a conference report must be the
    product of an actual meeting of the managers appointed by the two Houses
    (Oct. 30, 2003, p. ----, p. ----). Although the Chair does not normally
    look behind signatures of conferees to determine the propriety of
    conference procedure, if proposed conferees have signed a conference
    report before

      Clause 11(k) of rule X provides that this provision does not apply to
    conference committee meetings respecting legislation (or any part
    thereof) reported by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

                                   Rule XXIII

                            code of official conduct

      There is hereby established by and for the House the following code of
    conduct, to be known as the ``Code of Official Conduct'':

    Sec. 1095. Official conduct of Members, officers, or
    employees of the House.

          1.  A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House shall conduct himself at all times in
    a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.

          2. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House shall adhere to the spirit and the letter of the Rules of
    the House and to the rules of duly constituted committees thereof.

    [[Page 895]]

          3. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may not receive compensation and may not permit
    compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source, the
    receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted
    from his position in Congress.

          4. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may not accept gifts except as provided by clause 5 of rule
    XXV.

          5. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may not accept an honorarium for a speech, a writing for
    publication, or other similar activity, except as otherwise provided
    under rule XXV.

          6. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner--

              (a) shall keep his campaign funds separate from his personal
    funds;

              (b) may not convert campaign funds to personal use in excess
    of an amount representing reimbursement for legitimate and verifiable
    campaign expenditures; and

              (c) except as provided in clause 1(b) of rule XXIV, may not
    expend funds from his campaign account that are not attributable to bona
    fide campaign or political purposes.

          7. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall treat as
    campaign contributions all proceeds from testimonial dinners or other
    fund-raising events.

          8. (a) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer of
    the House may not retain an employee who does not perform duties for the
    offices of the employing authority commensurate with the compensation he
    receives.

    [[Page 896]]

    the chairman may require that such member affirm in writing that the
    employee has complied with clause 8(a) (subject to clause 9 of rule X)
    as evidence of compliance by the chairman with this clause and with
    clause 9 of rule X.
          (b) In the case of a committee employee who works under the direct
    supervision of a member of the committee other than a chairman,

          (c)(1) Except as specified in subparagraph (2)--

              (A) a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not
    retain his spouse in a paid position; and

              (B) an employee of the House may not accept compensation for
    work for a committee on which his spouse serves as a member.

          (2) Subparagraph (1) shall not apply in the case of a spouse whose
    pertinent employment predates the One Hundred Seventh Congress.

          9. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may not discharge and may not refuse to hire an individual,
    or otherwise discriminate against an individual with respect to
    compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of
    the race, color, religion, sex (including marital or parental status),
    disability, age, or national origin of such individual, but may take
    into consideration the domicile or political affiliation of such
    individual.

    [[Page 897]]

    participation in the business of each committee of which he is a member,
    and a Member should refrain from voting on any question at a meeting of
    the House or of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the
    Union, unless or until judicial or executive proceedings result in
    reinstatement of the presumption of his innocence or until he is
    reelected to the House after the date of such conviction.
          10. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who has been
    convicted by a court of record for the commission of a crime for which a
    sentence of two or more years' imprisonment may be imposed should
    refrain from

          11. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not authorize
    or otherwise allow an individual, group, or organization not under the
    direction and control of the House to use the words ``Congress of the
    United States,'' ``House of Representatives,'' or ``Official Business,''
    or any combination of words thereof, on any letterhead or envelope.

          12. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), an employee of the
    House who is required to file a report under rule XXVI may not
    participate personally and substantially as an employee of the House in
    a contact with an agency of the executive or judicial branches of
    Government with respect to nonlegislative matters affecting any
    nongovernmental person in which the employee has a significant financial
    interest.

    [[Page 898]]

    participation of the employee in the activity described in paragraph (a)
    is necessary. A copy of each such waiver shall be filed with the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
          (b) Paragraph (a) does not apply if an employee first advises his
    employing authority of a significant financial interest described in
    paragraph (a) and obtains from his employing authority a written waiver
    stating that the

          13. Before a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House may have access to classified information, the
    following oath (or affirmation) shall be executed:

              ``I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will not disclose any
    classified information received in the course of my service with the
    House of Representatives, except as authorized by the House of
    Representatives or in accordance with its Rules.''

        Copies of the executed oath (or affirmation) shall be retained by
    the Clerk as part of the records of the House. The Clerk shall make
    signatures a matter of public record, causing the names of each Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who has signed the oath during a week
    (if any) to be published in a portion of the Congressional Record
    designated for that purpose on the last legislative day of the week and
    making cumulative lists of such names available each day for public
    inspection in an appropriate office of the House.

    [[Page 899]]

          14. (a) In this Code of Official Conduct, the term ``officer or
    employee of the House'' means an individual whose compensation is
    disbursed by the Chief Administrative Officer.

          (b) An individual whose services are compensated by the House
    pursuant to a consultant contract shall be considered an employee of the
    House for purposes of clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, and 13 of this rule. An
    individual whose services are compensated by the House pursuant to a
    consultant contract may not lobby the contracting committee or the
    members or staff of the contracting committee on any matter. Such an
    individual may lobby other Members, Delegates, or the Resident
    Commissioner or staff of the House on matters outside the jurisdiction
    of the contracting committee.

    [[Page 900]]

    permit campaign funds to be used to defray certain official expenses
    (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). Clause 6 was also amended
    by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-194) to specify that campaign
    funds be used only for bona fide campaign or political purposes. Clause
    7 was amended in the 95th Congress to eliminate an exception permitting
    sponsors to give notice of purpose (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1975, p. 20). The
    Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-194) amended clause 8 to broaden
    Members' accountability for the pay and performance of staff. Clause 8
    was again amended in the 106th Congress to permit telecommuting by House
    employees (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clause 8(c) was added in the
    107th Congress (sec. 2(t), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). Clause 9 was
    added in the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). Clause 9
    was amended in the 100th Congress to prohibit discrimination in
    employment based upon age (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6) and again the
    101st Congress to conform existing staff antidiscrimination rules to the
    Fair Employment Practices resolution adopted in the 100th Congress (now
    contained in the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-1; 2
    U.S.C. 1301; see Sec. 1101, infra)). Clause 10 was added in the 94th
    Congress (H. Res. 46, Apr. 16, 1975, p. 10340). Clause 11 was added in
    the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16). Clause 12 was
    added by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-194) to proscribe
    certain contacts as involving conflicts of interest. Clause 13 was added
    in the 104th Congress (sec. 220, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468),
    except the last sentence, which was added in the 107th Congress (sec.
    2(t), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). Clause 14 (which was an
    undesignated paragraph at the end of the rule before the rules were
    recodified in the 106th Congress) was amended in the 92d Congress to
    bring the Delegates and Resident Commissioner within the definition of
    ``Member'' (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144; H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13,
    1972, pp. 36021-23). It was again amended in the 106th Congress to
    include consultants among employees covered by certain provisions of the
    code of conduct (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47) and in the 107th
    Congress to add the last two sentences of clause 14(b) (sec. 2(v), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). In the 105th Congress the rule was amended
    to effect three clerical corrections (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121);
    in the 106th Congress clerical and stylistic changes were effected when
    the rules were recodified (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47); and in the
    107th Congress conforming changes were made to reflect the redesignation
    of several rules (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24) and a
    clerical correction to a cross reference in clause 8(b) was effected
    (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26).
      This rule was transferred from rule XLIII to rule XXIV when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). It was redesignated as rule XXIII in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(s),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). The rule was originally adopted in the
    90th Congress (H. Res. 1099, Apr. 3, 1968, p. 8803). The jurisdiction of
    the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct was redefined in the same
    resolution. Clause 4 was entirely rewritten (and definitions for the
    purpose of clause 4 were deleted) in the 104th Congress to reflect the
    adoption of a Gift Rule (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077). Prior to
    the 104th Congress, clause 4 had been amended in the 95th Congress to
    change the prohibition against acceptance of gifts of ``substantial
    value'' (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1975, p. 20) and definitions for purposes of
    clause 4 were added in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2, 1977, pp.
    5933-53). Those definitions were amended in the Ethics Reform Act of
    1989 to make conforming changes in the definition of ``relative'' (P.L.
    101-194). Clause 4 was also amended: (1) in the 100th Congress to
    increase from $35 to $50 the value of personal hospitality of an
    individual that is not to be counted when computing the aggregate amount
    of gifts per calendar year (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6); and (2) in
    the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 to revise the rules governing the
    acceptance of gifts, including value thresholds and waivers (P.L. 101-
    194). Those threshold and aggregate values were again adjusted by
    section 314(d) of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for fiscal
    year 1992 (P.L. 102-90). The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-194)
    amended clause 5 to prohibit the acceptance of honoraria. Clause 6 was
    amended in the 95th Congress to delete from the second sentence the
    exception ``unless specifically provided by law,'' which had been added
    in the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1975, p. 20) and was again
    amended in the 109th Congress to conform it to the change in clause 1 of
    rule XXIV to

      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct, see the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong.,
    2d Sess.). The committee also has compiled a complete statement of the
    rules on gifts and travel, which supersedes Chapter 2 of the 1992 House
    Ethics Manual (Gifts and Travel, 106th Cong., 2d Sess.).

    [[Page 901]]

    the House and not the Chair to judge the conduct of Members (Nov. 17,
    1987, p. 32153). The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct has
    opined that ``conviction'' in clause 10 includes a plea of guilty or a
    certified finding of guilty even though sentencing may occur later (H.
    Rept. 94-76).

      It is not a proper parliamentary inquiry to ask the Chair to interpret
    the application of a criminal statute to a Member's conduct, as it is
    for

                                    Rule XXIV

    Limitations on use of official and unofficial accounts
                      limitations on use of official funds

    1096. Limitation on accounts.

      1.  (a) Except as provided in
    paragraph (b), a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not
    maintain, or have maintained for his use, an unofficial office account.
    Funds may not be paid into an unofficial office account.

      (b)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner may defray official expenses with funds of his
    principal campaign committee under the Federal Election Campaign Act of
    1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.).

      (2) The funds specified in subparagraph (1) may not be used to defray
    official expenses for mail or other communications, compensation for
    services, office space, furniture, or equipment, and any associated
    information technology services (excluding handheld communications
    devices).

    [[Page 902]]

    Studio revolving fund for telecommunications satellite services, the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may accept reimbursement from
    nonpolitical entities in that amount for transmission to the Clerk for
    credit to the Official Expenses Allowance.
      2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this rule, if an amount from
    the Official Expenses Allowance of a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner is paid into the House Recording

      3. In this rule the term ``unofficial office account'' means an
    account or repository in which funds are received for the purpose of
    defraying otherwise unreimbursed expenses allowable under section 162(a)
    of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as ordinary and necessary in the
    operation of a congressional office, and includes a newsletter fund
    referred to in section 527(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

      This provision (formerly rule XLV) was adopted in the 95th Congress
    (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2, 1977, pp. 5933-53). It was amended in the 102d
    Congress to permit Members to receive reimbursements to their expense
    allowances for recording studio charges attributable to nonpolitical
    organizations receiving the transmissions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p.
    39). When the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it
    consolidated former rules XLV and XLVI under clauses 1 through 9 of rule
    XXV and the second sentence of former clause 8 of rule I and former
    clauses 2(n)(5) and 5(e) of rule XI under clause 10 of rule XXV (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This rule was redesignated as rule XXIV in the
    107th Congress (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). In the 109th
    Congress clause 1 was amended to permit campaign funds to be used to
    defray certain official expenses (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p.
    25).

    Limitations on use of the frank
      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct, see the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong.,
    2d Sess.).

    [[Page 903]]

    1097. Limitations on use of frank.

      4.  A Member, Delegate,
    or Resident Commissioner shall mail franked mail under section 3210(d)
    of title 39, United States Code at the most economical rate of postage
    practicable.

      5. Before making a mass mailing, a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner shall submit a sample or description of the mail matter
    involved to the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards for
    an advisory opinion as to whether the proposed mailing is in compliance
    with applicable provisions of law, rule, or regulation.

      6. A mass mailing that is otherwise frankable by a Member, Delegate,
    or Resident Commissioner under the provisions of section 3210(e) of
    title 39, United States Code, is not frankable unless the cost of
    preparing and printing it is defrayed exclusively from funds made
    available in an appropriation Act.

      7. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not send a mass
    mailing outside the congressional district from which he was elected.

      8. In the case of a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, a mass
    mailing is not frankable under section 3210 of title 39, United States
    Code, when it is postmarked less than 90 days before the date of a
    primary or general election (whether regular, special, or runoff) in
    which he is a candidate for public office. If the mail matter is of a
    type that is not customarily postmarked, the date on which it would have
    been postmarked, if it were of a type customarily postmarked, applies.

    [[Page 904]]

    of mail are deposited singly or in bulk, or at the same time or
    different times), totaling more than 500 pieces of mail in that session,
    except that such term does not include a mailing--
      9. In this rule the term ``mass mailing'' means, with respect to a
    session of Congress, a mailing of newsletters or other pieces of mail
    with substantially identical content (whether such pieces

          (a) of matter in direct response to a communication from a person
    to whom the matter is mailed;

          (b) from a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner to other
    Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, or Senators, or to
    Federal, State, or local government officials; or

          (c) of a news release to the communications media.

      This provision (formerly rule XLVI) was adopted in the 95th Congress
    (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2, 1977, pp. 5933-53). In the 102d Congress it was
    extensively amended to conform to restrictions on franking and mass
    mailings included in the legislative branch appropriations acts for
    fiscal years 1990 and 1991 (P.L. 101-163 and 101-520, respectively) (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). Clause 7 (formerly clause 4) was rewritten
    in the 103d Congress to conform to the statutory prohibition against
    mass mailings outside the congressional district from which a Member was
    elected. Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    this provision was found in former rule XLVI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). In the 109th Congress clause 8 was amended to expand the window
    during which a mass mailing is not frankable from 60 days before the
    date of an election to 90 days, thereby conforming the rule to section
    3210 of title 39, United States Code (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4,
    2005, p. ----).

    Prohibition on use of funds by Members not elected to succeeding
      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct, see the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong.,
    2d Sess.).

            Congress

    [[Page 905]]

    not be made available for travel by a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, or Senator after the date of a general election in which
    he was not elected to the succeeding Congress or, in the case of a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who is not a candidate in a
    general election, after the earlier of the date of such general election
    or the adjournment sine die of the last regular session of the Congress.

    1098. Travel by Members not reelected.

      10.  Funds from the
    applicable accounts described in clause 1(j)(1) of rule X, including
    funds from committee expense resolutions, and funds in any local
    currencies owned by the United States may

      This provision was added in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2,
    1977, p. 5941). In the 105th and 106th Congresses this clause was
    amended to update archaic references to the ``contingent fund'' (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). When the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it consolidated the second
    sentence of former clause 8 of rule I and former clauses 2(n)(5) and
    5(e) of rule XI under clause 10 of former rule XXV (redesignated as rule
    XXIV in the 107th Congress) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A
    conforming change was effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(a), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

                                    Rule XXV

    Outside earned income; honoraria
          limitations on outside earned income and acceptance of gifts

    1099. Income limitations.

      1. (a)  Except as provided by
    paragraph (b), a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House may not--

    [[Page 906]]

          (1) have outside earned income attributable to a calendar year
    that exceeds 15 percent of the annual rate of basic pay for level II of
    the Executive Schedule under section 5313 of title 5, United States
    Code, as of January 1 of that calendar year; or

          (2) receive any honorarium, except that an officer or employee of
    the House who is paid at a rate less than 120 percent of the minimum
    rate of basic pay for GS-15 of the General Schedule may receive an
    honorarium unless the subject matter is directly related to the official
    duties of the individual, the payment is made because of the status of
    the individual with the House, or the person offering the honorarium has
    interests that may be substantially affected by the performance or
    nonperformance of the official duties of the individual.

      (b) In the case of an individual who becomes a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House, such
    individual may not have outside earned income attributable to the
    portion of a calendar year that occurs after such individual becomes a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee that
    exceeds 15 percent of the annual rate of basic pay for level II of the
    Executive Schedule under section 5313 of title 5, United States Code, as
    of January 1 of that calendar year multiplied by a fraction, the
    numerator of which is the number of days the individual is a Member,
    Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee during that
    calendar year and the denominator of which is 365.

    [[Page 907]]

    ceived by that Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee. Such a payment may not exceed $2,000 or be made to a
    charitable organization from which the Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee or a parent, sibling, spouse, child,
    or dependent relative of the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee, derives a financial benefit.
      (c) A payment in lieu of an honorarium that is made to a charitable
    organization on behalf of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House may not be re

      2. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of
    the House may not--

          (a) receive compensation for affiliating with or being employed by
    a firm, partnership, association, corporation, or other entity that
    provides professional services involving a fiduciary relationship except
    for the practice of medicine;

          (b) permit his name to be used by such a firm, partnership,
    association, corporation, or other entity;

          (c) receive compensation for practicing a profession that involves
    a fiduciary relationship except for the practice of medicine;

          (d) serve for compensation as an officer or member of the board of
    an association, corporation, or other entity; or

    [[Page 908]]

    Copyright royalties
          (e) receive compensation for teaching, without the prior
    notification and approval of the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct.

      3. (a) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may not receive an advance payment on copyright royalties.
    This paragraph does not prohibit a literary agent, researcher, or other
    individual (other than an individual employed by the House or a relative
    of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee)
    working on behalf of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
    or employee with respect to a publication from receiving an advance
    payment of a copyright royalty directly from a publisher and solely for
    the benefit of that literary agent, researcher, or other individual.

      (b) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of
    the House may not receive copyright royalties under a contract entered
    into on or after January 1, 1996, unless that contract is first approved
    by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct as complying with the
    requirement of clause 4(d)(1)(E) (that royalties are received from an
    established publisher under usual and customary contractual terms).
    Definitions

    [[Page 909]]

    greater than 120 percent of the minimum rate of basic pay for GS-15 of
    the General Schedule, and who is so employed for more than 90 days in a
    calendar year.
      4. (a)(1) In this rule, except as provided in subparagraph (2), the
    term ``officer or employee of the House'' means an individual (other
    than a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner) whose pay is
    disbursed by the Chief Administrative Officer, who is paid at a rate
    equal to or

      (2)(A) When used with respect to an honorarium, the term ``officer or
    employee of the House'' means an individual (other than a Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner) whose salary is disbursed by the
    Chief Administrative Officer.

      (B) When used in clause 5 of this rule, the terms ``officer'' and
    ``employee'' have the same meanings as in rule XXIII.

      (b) In this rule the term ``honorarium'' means a payment of money or a
    thing of value for an appearance, speech, or article (including a series
    of appearances, speeches, or articles) by a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House, excluding any actual
    and necessary travel expenses incurred by that Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee (and one relative) to the
    extent that such expenses are paid or reimbursed by any other person.
    The amount otherwise determined shall be reduced by the amount of any
    such expenses to the extent that such expenses are not so paid or
    reimbursed.

    [[Page 910]]

    lodging and meals while away from his residence or principal place of
    employment.
      (c) In this rule the term ``travel expenses'' means, with respect to a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House, or a relative of such Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee, the cost of transportation, and the cost of

      (d)(1) In this rule the term ``outside earned income'' means, with
    respect to a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House, wages, salaries, fees, and other amounts received
    or to be received as compensation for personal services actually
    rendered, but does not include--

          (A) the salary of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee;

          (B) any compensation derived by a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House for personal services
    actually rendered before the adoption of this rule or before he became a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee;

          (C) any amount paid by, or on behalf of, a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House to a tax-
    qualified pension, profit-sharing, or stock bonus plan and received by
    him from such a plan;

    [[Page 911]]

          (D) in the case of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House engaged in a trade or business in
    which he or his family holds a controlling interest and in which both
    personal services and capital are income-producing factors, any amount
    received by the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee, so long as the personal services actually rendered by him in
    the trade or business do not generate a significant amount of income; or

          (E) copyright royalties received from established publishers under
    usual and customary contractual terms; and

      (2) outside earned income shall be determined without regard to
    community property law.

      (e) In this rule the term ``charitable organization'' means an
    organization described in section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of
    1986.

    [[Page 912]]

    House employees to receive honoraria; the parenthetical in clause 4(b)
    was adopted; and, when the House recodified its rules, it consolidated
    former rules XLI, XLVII, and LI under rule XXVI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). This rule was redesignated as rule XXV in the 107th
    Congress (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). Clause 4(a)(1)
    (and clause 5(e)) were amended in the 107th Congress to conform the
    definition of ``officer or employee'' to rule XXIII (sec. 2(w), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26). Clause 2 was amended in the 108th Congress to
    except the practice of medicine from the restriction against outside
    earned income received from providing professional services that involve
    a fiduciary relationship (sec. 2(q), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).
      The rule on outside earned income (formerly rule XLVII) was adopted in
    the 95th Congress (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2, 1977, pp. 5933-53). It was
    amended for the first time in the 96th Congress to increase the limit on
    a single honorarium from $750 to $1000 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-
    16). The rule was amended further in the 97th Congress to (1) increase
    the limitation on outside earned income for a calendar year from 15 to
    30 percent of a Member's salary; (2) strike the $1000 limitation on a
    single honorarium; and (3) provide that honoraria shall be attributable
    to the calendar year in which payment is received (H. Res. 305, Dec. 15,
    1981, p. 31529). In the 99th Congress, the rule was amended to delete
    the 30 percent of aggregate salary limitation on outside earned income
    and to conform the limitation to that contained in law (2 U.S.C. 31-1
    provides that a Member of Congress may not accept honoraria in excess of
    40 percent of his aggregate salary) (H. Res. 427, Apr. 22, 1986, p.
    8328). The next day, the House adopted a resolution vacating the
    proceedings by which that resolution had been adopted and laying that
    resolution on the table (H. Res. 432, Apr. 23, 1986, p. 8474). The
    Ethics Reform Act of 1989: (1) amended the title of the rule; (2)
    amended clause 1 to effect for 1991 and future years the elimination of
    honoraria not assigned to charity and closer restrictions on outside
    earned income (including limitation to 15 percent of Executive Level II
    pay); (3) amended clause 2 to effect for 1991 and future years new
    limits on outside employment; and (4) amended clause 3 to revise certain
    definitions (P.L. 101-194). That Act also established a civil cause of
    action against an individual who violates the limitations on outside
    earned income and employment (5 U.S.C. app. 504). In the 102d Congress
    clause 2 was further amended to specify that the ban on affiliation with
    a firm applies only if compensation is received and only with respect to
    a professional services firm, and clause 3 was further amended to
    specify the applicability of outside earned income restrictions to
    officers and employees of the House (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). In
    the 104th Congress a new clause was added to prohibit the receipt of
    advance payments on copyright royalties and the receipt of any payments
    on copyright royalties under future contracts unless approved in advance
    by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (H. Res. 299, Dec. 22,
    1995, p. 38488). In the 106th Congress the rule was amended to permit
    certain

      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct, see the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong.,
    2d Sess.).

      Before its coverage was restricted to the Senate in the Ethics Reform
    Act of 1989 (sec. 601(b), P.L. 101-194), a separate provision of law (2
    U.S.C. 441i) provided criminal penalties for any elected or appointed
    Federal employee who accepts an honorarium of more than $2000 per
    speech. A statutory ceiling of $25,000 from honoraria in a calendar year
    was repealed in 1981 (P.L. 97-51). The Senate repealed its rule on
    outside earned income in the 97th Congress (S. Res. 512, Dec. 14, 1982,
    p. 30640).

    Gifts
      For provisions of the Federal criminal code restricting postemployment
    activities, see 18 U.S.C. 207, which was originally enacted in title V
    of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-521) and most recently
    amended in the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-194) and a related
    technical corrections Act (P.L. 101-280).

    1100. Gift rule.

      5. (a)(1)(A)  A Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House may not knowingly accept
    a gift except as provided in this clause.

    [[Page 913]]

    ward the $100 annual limit. The value of perishable food sent to an
    office shall be allocated among the individual recipients and not to the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner. Formal recordkeeping is not
    required by this subdivision, but a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House shall make a good faith
    effort to comply with this subdivision.
      (B) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of
    the House may accept a gift (other than cash or cash equivalent) that
    the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    reasonably and in good faith believes to have a value of less than $50
    and a cumulative value from one source during a calendar year of less
    than $100. A gift having a value of less than $10 does not count to

      (2)(A) In this clause the term ``gift'' means a gratuity, favor,
    discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan, forbearance, or other item
    having monetary value. The term includes gifts of services, training,
    transportation, lodging, and meals, whether provided in kind, by
    purchase of a ticket, payment in advance, or reimbursement after the
    expense has been incurred.

      (B)(i) A gift to a family member of a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House, or a gift to any other
    individual based on that individual's relationship with the Member,
    Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee, shall be
    considered a gift to the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee if it is given with the knowledge and acquiescence
    of the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee and
    the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee has
    reason to believe the gift was given because of his official position.

    [[Page 914]]

    gate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House and the
    spouse or dependent thereof, only the food or refreshment provided to
    the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee shall
    be treated as a gift for purposes of this clause.
      (ii) If food or refreshment is provided at the same time and place to
    both a Member, Dele

      (3) The restrictions in subparagraph (1) do not apply to the
    following:

          (A) Anything for which the Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House pays the market value,
    or does not use and promptly returns to the donor.

          (B) A contribution, as defined in section 301(8) of the Federal
    Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431) that is lawfully made under
    that Act, a lawful contribution for election to a State or local
    government office, or attendance at a fundraising event sponsored by a
    political organization described in section 527(e) of the Internal
    Revenue Code of 1986.

          (C) A gift from a relative as described in section 109(16) of
    title I of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App. 109(16)).

          (D)(i) Anything provided by an individual on the basis of a
    personal friendship unless the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House has reason to believe that, under the
    circumstances, the gift was provided because of his official position
    and not because of the personal friendship.

    [[Page 915]]

    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House shall consider the circumstances under which the gift was offered,
    such as:
          (ii) In determining whether a gift is provided on the basis of
    personal friendship, the

              (I) The history of his relationship with the individual giving
    the gift, including any previous exchange of gifts between them.

              (II) Whether to his actual knowledge the individual who gave
    the gift personally paid for the gift or sought a tax deduction or
    business reimbursement for the gift.

              (III) Whether to his actual knowledge the individual who gave
    the gift also gave the same or similar gifts to other Members,
    Delegates, the Resident Commissioners, officers, or employees of the
    House.

          (E) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(3), a contribution or
    other payment to a legal expense fund established for the benefit of a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House that is otherwise lawfully made in accordance with the
    restrictions and disclosure requirements of the Committee on Standards
    of Official Conduct.

          (F) A gift from another Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House or Senate.

          (G) Food, refreshments, lodging, transportation, and other
    benefits--

    [[Page 916]]

    ties that are not connected to his duties as an officeholder), or of his
    spouse, if such benefits have not been offered or enhanced because of
    his official position and are customarily provided to others in similar
    circumstances;
              (i) resulting from the outside business or employment
    activities of the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House (or other outside activi

              (ii) customarily provided by a prospective employer in
    connection with bona fide employment discussions; or

              (iii) provided by a political organization described in
    section 527(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in connection with a
    fundraising or campaign event sponsored by such organization.

          (H) Pension and other benefits resulting from continued
    participation in an employee welfare and benefits plan maintained by a
    former employer.

          (I) Informational materials that are sent to the office of the
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House in the form of books, articles, periodicals, other written
    materials, audiotapes, videotapes, or other forms of communication.

          (J) Awards or prizes that are given to competitors in contests or
    events open to the public, including random drawings.

    [[Page 917]]

    ment provided in the presentation of such degrees and awards).
          (K) Honorary degrees (and associated travel, food, refreshments,
    and entertainment) and other bona fide, nonmonetary awards presented in
    recognition of public service (and associated food, refreshments, and
    entertain

          (L) Training (including food and refreshments furnished to all
    attendees as an integral part of the training) if such training is in
    the interest of the House.

          (M) Bequests, inheritances, and other transfers at death.

          (N) An item, the receipt of which is authorized by the Foreign
    Gifts and Decorations Act, the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange
    Act, or any other statute.

          (O) Anything that is paid for by the Federal Government, by a
    State or local government, or secured by the Government under a
    Government contract.

          (P) A gift of personal hospitality (as defined in section 109(14)
    of the Ethics in Government Act) of an individual other than a
    registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal.

          (Q) Free attendance at a widely attended event permitted under
    subparagraph (4).

          (R) Opportunities and benefits that are--

              (i) available to the public or to a class consisting of all
    Federal employees, whether or not restricted on the basis of geographic
    consideration;

              (ii) offered to members of a group or class in which
    membership is unrelated to congressional employment;

    [[Page 918]]

    ship is related to congressional employment and similar opportunities
    are available to large segments of the public through organizations of
    similar size;
              (iii) offered to members of an organization, such as an
    employees' association or congressional credit union, in which member

              (iv) offered to a group or class that is not defined in a
    manner that specifically discriminates among Government employees on the
    basis of branch of Government or type of responsibility, or on a basis
    that favors those of higher rank or rate of pay;

              (v) in the form of loans from banks and other financial
    institutions on terms generally available to the public; or

              (vi) in the form of reduced membership or other fees for
    participation in organization activities offered to all Government
    employees by professional organizations if the only restrictions on
    membership relate to professional qualifications.

          (S) A plaque, trophy, or other item that is substantially
    commemorative in nature and that is intended for presentation.

          (T) Anything for which, in an unusual case, a waiver is granted by
    the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

          (U) Food or refreshments of a nominal value offered other than as
    a part of a meal.

    [[Page 919]]

          (V) Donations of products from the district or State that the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner represents that are intended
    primarily for promotional purposes, such as display or free
    distribution, and are of minimal value to any single recipient.

          (W) An item of nominal value such as a greeting card, baseball
    cap, or a T-shirt.

      (4)(A) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may accept an offer of free attendance at a widely attended
    convention, conference, symposium, forum, panel discussion, dinner,
    viewing, reception, or similar event, provided by the sponsor of the
    event, if--

          (i) the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House participates in the event as a speaker or a panel
    participant, by presenting information related to Congress or matters
    before Congress, or by performing a ceremonial function appropriate to
    his official position; or

          (ii) attendance at the event is appropriate to the performance of
    the official duties or representative function of the Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House.

      (B) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of
    the House who attends an event described in subdivision (A) may accept a
    sponsor's unsolicited offer of free attendance at the event for an
    accompanying individual.

    [[Page 920]]

    transportation and lodging may not be accepted in connection with the
    event unless--
      (C) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of
    the House, or the spouse or dependent thereof, may accept a sponsor's
    unsolicited offer of free attendance at a charity event, except that
    reimbursement for

          (i) all of the net proceeds of the event are for the benefit of an
    organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code
    of 1986 and exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code;

          (ii) reimbursement for the transportation and lodging in
    connection with the event is paid by such organization; and

          (iii) the offer of free attendance at the event is made by such
    organization.

      (D) In this paragraph the term ``free attendance'' may include waiver
    of all or part of a conference or other fee, the provision of local
    transportation, or the provision of food, refreshments, entertainment,
    and instructional materials furnished to all attendees as an integral
    part of the event. The term does not include entertainment collateral to
    the event, nor does it include food or refreshments taken other than in
    a group setting with all or substantially all other attendees.

    [[Page 921]]

      (5) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of
    the House may not accept a gift the value of which exceeds $250 on the
    basis of the personal friendship exception in subparagraph (3)(D) unless
    the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct issues a written
    determination that such exception applies. A determination under this
    subparagraph is not required for gifts given on the basis of the family
    relationship exception in subparagraph (3)(C).

      (6) When it is not practicable to return a tangible item because it is
    perishable, the item may, at the discretion of the recipient, be given
    to an appropriate charity or destroyed.

      (b)(1)(A) A reimbursement (including payment in kind) to a Member,
    Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House from
    a private source other than a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
    principal for necessary transportation, lodging, and related expenses
    for travel to a meeting, speaking engagement, factfinding trip, or
    similar event in connection with his duties as an officeholder shall be
    considered as a reimbursement to the House and not a gift prohibited by
    this clause, if the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee--

          (i) in the case of an employee, receives advance authorization,
    from the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer under whose
    direct supervision the employee works, to accept reimbursement; and

          (ii) discloses the expenses reimbursed or to be reimbursed and the
    authorization to the Clerk within 30 days after the travel is completed.

    [[Page 922]]

      (B) For purposes of subdivision (A), events, the activities of which
    are substantially recreational in nature, are not considered to be in
    connection with the duties of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House as an officeholder.

      (2) Each advance authorization to accept reimbursement shall be signed
    by the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer of the House
    under whose direct supervision the employee works and shall include--

          (A) the name of the employee;

          (B) the name of the person who will make the reimbursement;

          (C) the time, place, and purpose of the travel; and

          (D) a determination that the travel is in connection with the
    duties of the employee as an officeholder and would not create the
    appearance that the employee is using public office for private gain.

      (3) Each disclosure made under subparagraph (1)(A) of expenses
    reimbursed or to be reimbursed shall be signed by the Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, or officer (in the case of travel by that Member,
    Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer) or by the Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, or officer under whose direct supervision the
    employee works (in the case of travel by an employee) and shall
    include--

          (A) a good faith estimate of total transportation expenses
    reimbursed or to be reimbursed;

          (B) a good faith estimate of total lodging expenses reimbursed or
    to be reimbursed;

    [[Page 923]]

          (C) a good faith estimate of total meal expenses reimbursed or to
    be reimbursed;

          (D) a good faith estimate of the total of other expenses
    reimbursed or to be reimbursed;

          (E) a determination that all such expenses are necessary
    transportation, lodging, and related expenses as defined in subparagraph
    (4); and

          (F) in the case of a reimbursement to a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, or officer, a determination that the travel was in
    connection with his duties as an officeholder and would not create the
    appearance that the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer
    is using public office for private gain.

      (4) In this paragraph the term ``necessary transportation, lodging,
    and related expenses''--

          (A) includes reasonable expenses that are necessary for travel for
    a period not exceeding four days within the United States or seven days
    exclusive of travel time outside of the United States unless approved in
    advance by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct;

          (B) is limited to reasonable expenditures for transportation,
    lodging, conference fees and materials, and food and refreshments,
    including reimbursement for necessary transportation, whether or not
    such transportation occurs within the periods described in subdivision
    (A);

    [[Page 924]]

    attendees as an integral part of the event, except for activities or
    entertainment otherwise permissible under this clause; and
          (C) does not include expenditures for recreational activities, nor
    does it include entertainment other than that provided to all

          (D) may include travel expenses incurred on behalf of a relative
    of the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee.

      (5) The Clerk shall make available to the public all advance
    authorizations and disclosures of reimbursement filed under subparagraph
    (1) as soon as possible after they are received.

      (c) A gift prohibited by paragraph (a)(1) includes the following:

          (1) Anything provided by a registered lobbyist or an agent of a
    foreign principal to an entity that is maintained or controlled by a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House.

          (2) A charitable contribution (as defined in section 170(c) of the
    Internal Revenue Code of 1986) made by a registered lobbyist or an agent
    of a foreign principal on the basis of a designation, recommendation, or
    other specification of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House (not including a mass mailing or other
    solicitation directed to a broad category of persons or entities), other
    than a charitable contribution permitted by paragraph (d).

    [[Page 925]]

    dent Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House.
          (3) A contribution or other payment by a registered lobbyist or an
    agent of a foreign principal to a legal expense fund established for the
    benefit of a Member, Delegate, Resi

          (4) A financial contribution or expenditure made by a registered
    lobbyist or an agent of a foreign principal relating to a conference,
    retreat, or similar event, sponsored by or affiliated with an official
    congressional organization, for or on behalf of Members, Delegates, the
    Resident Commissioner, officers, or employees of the House.

      (d)(1) A charitable contribution (as defined in section 170(c) of the
    Internal Revenue Code of 1986) made by a registered lobbyist or an agent
    of a foreign principal in lieu of an honorarium to a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House are not
    considered a gift under this clause if it is reported as provided in
    subparagraph (2).

      (2) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    who designates or recommends a contribution to a charitable organization
    in lieu of an honorarium described in subparagraph (1) shall report
    within 30 days after such designation or recommendation to the Clerk--

          (A) the name and address of the registered lobbyist who is making
    the contribution in lieu of an honorarium;

          (B) the date and amount of the contribution; and

    [[Page 926]]

    the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.
    The Clerk shall make public information received under this subparagraph
    as soon as possible after it is received.
          (C) the name and address of the charitable organization designated
    or recommended by

      (e) In this clause--

          (1) the term ``registered lobbyist'' means a lobbyist registered
    under the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act or any successor statute;

          (2) the term ``agent of a foreign principal'' means an agent of a
    foreign principal registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act;
    and

          (3) the terms ``officer'' and ``employee'' have the same meanings
    as in rule XXIII.

      (f) All the provisions of this clause shall be interpreted and
    enforced solely by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. The
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct is authorized to issue
    guidance on any matter contained in this clause.

    [[Page 927]]

    ing to attend a charity event (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. --
    --). The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct has compiled a
    complete statement of the rules on gifts and travel, which supersedes
    Chapter 2 of the 1992 House Ethics Manual (Gifts and Travel, 106th
    Cong., 2d Sess.). The history of earlier rules bearing the designation
    LI or LII follow.

      This provision originally was adopted in the 104th Congress as rule
    LII (H. Res. 250, Nov. 16, 1995, p. 33433). It was amended in the 106th
    Congress to permit acceptance of a gift having a value of less than $50
    and a cumulative value from any one source in the calendar year of less
    than $100 (H. Res. 9, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 237). In the 105th Congress it
    was redesignated as rule LI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121), and when
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    consolidated with former rule XLI and XLVIII under former rule XXVI
    (redesignated as rule XXV in the 107th Congress) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). Clause 5(e) and clause 4(a)(1) were amended in the 107th
    Congress to conform the definition of ``officer or employee'' to rule
    XXIII (sec. 2(w), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26). In the 108th Congress
    clause 5(a)(1)(B) was amended to allocate the value of perishable food
    sent to an office among the individual recipients rather than to the
    Member (sec. 2(r), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----) and clause
    5(a)(4)(C) was amended to permit, under specified circumstances, a
    Member to be reimbursed for transportation and lodg

    Claims against the Government

    Sec. 1101. Former rules on employment practices
    and application of certain laws.

      The earliest  form of the rule on ``employment
    practices'' was designated as rule LI. It grew out of the Fair
    Employment Practices Resolution first adopted in the 100th Congress (H.
    Res. 558, Oct. 3, 1988, p. 27840) and renewed in the 101st Congress (H.
    Res. 15, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 85). The terms of that resolution were
    incorporated by reference in a standing rule LI in the 102d Congress (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39), and were codified in full text, with
    certain amendments, in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p.
    49). The Employment Practices rule was overtaken by the earliest form of
    ``application of certain laws,'' which was originally designated as LII
    in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 578, Oct. 7, 1994, p. 29326). The
    Application of Laws rule, in turn, was overtaken by the Congressional
    Accountability Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-1; 2 U.S.C. 1301). Certain savings
    provisions appear in section 506 of that Act (2 U.S.C. 1435). A later
    form of the rule designated as LII (gift rule) was adopted in the 104th
    Congress (H. Res. 250, Nov. 16, 1995, p. 33433). In the 105th Congress
    the Gift Rule was redesignated as rule LI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p.
    121).

    1102. Officers and employees not to be agents of
    claims.

      6.  A person may not be an officer or employee of the House, or
    continue in its employment, if he acts as an agent for the prosecution
    of a claim against the Government or if he is interested in such claim,
    except as an original claimant or in the proper discharge of official
    duties.

      This provision was adopted in 1842 (V, 7227). It was renumbered
    January 3, 1953 (p. 24). It was amended by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989
    to include employees in the prohibition against prosecuting or having an
    interest in any claim against the Government, to specify the
    inapplicability of that prohibition to the discharge of official duties,
    and to delete an obsolete reference to the Committee on House
    Administration (P.L. 101-194). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule XLI (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 928]]

    ployees with respect to bribery of public officials (18 U.S.C. 201-203),
    claims against the Government (18 U.S.C. 204, 205, 207(e), 216), and
    public officials acting as agents of foreign principals (18 U.S.C. 219).

      In addition to rules XXIII through XXVI, several provisions of the
    Federal criminal code also address the conduct of Members, officers, and
    em

                                    Rule XXVI

                              financial disclosure

    Sec. 1103. Financial report disclosing certain financial
    interests.

      1.  The Clerk shall send a copy of each report filed with the
    Clerk under title I of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 within the
    seven-day period beginning on the date on which the report is filed to
    the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. By August 1 of each
    year, the Clerk shall compile all such reports sent to him by Members
    within the period beginning on January 1 and ending on June 15 of each
    year and have them printed as a House document, which shall be made
    available to the public.

      2. For the purposes of this rule, the provisions of title I of the
    Ethics in Government Act of 1978 shall be considered Rules of the House
    as they pertain to Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner,
    officers, and employees of the House.

    [[Page 929]]

    the 95th Congress to delete an obsolete reference (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4,
    1977, pp. 53-70). The rule was completely amended in the 95th Congress,
    effective July 1, 1977, to: (1) broaden the sources and minimum amounts
    of income reported; (2) require reports to be filed with the Clerk as
    well as with the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct; and (3)
    make reports available to the public as printed House documents rather
    than having them maintained in the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2, 1977, pp. 5933-53). The rule was again
    amended in the 96th Congress to incorporate by reference the relevant
    provisions of title I of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 as they
    pertain to Members, officers, and employees of the House of
    Representatives (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16). Clause 1 was
    amended by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 to make conforming changes in
    certain dates (P.L. 101-194). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule XLIV (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This rule was redesignated as rule XXVI in
    the 107th Congress (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24).
      The original version of this rule (formerly rule XLIV) was adopted in
    the 90th Congress, in the same resolution that redefined the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (H. Res.
    1099, Apr. 3, 1968, p. 8803). In the 91st Congress the rule was amended,
    effective for years after 1970, to require public disclosure of: (1)
    honoraria from a single source totaling $300 or more; and (2) each
    creditor to whom was owed an unsecured loan or other indebtedness of
    $10,000 or more outstanding for at least 90 days in the preceding
    calendar year (H. Res. 796, May 26, 1970, p. 17019). It was further
    amended in the 92d Congress to bring the Delegates and Resident
    Commissioner within the definition of ``Members'' in the final sentence
    of the rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144; H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13,
    1972, pp. 36021-23), and was amended in

      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct, see the House Ethics Manual (102d Cong.,
    2d Sess.).

      Pertinent provisions of title I of the Ethics in Government Act of
    1978 (5 U.S.C. App. 101-111) follow:

         Title I--Financial Disclosure Requirements of Federal Personnel

                            persons required to file

      Sec. 101. (a) Within thirty days of assuming the position of an
    officer or employee described in subsection (f), an individual shall
    file a report containing the information described in section 102(b)
    unless the individual has left another position described in subsection
    (f) within thirty days prior to assuming such new position or has
    already filed a report under this title with respect to nomination for
    the new position or as a candidate for the position.

                                      * * *

    [[Page 930]]

    calendar years, such individual need not file a report unless he becomes
    a candidate for another vacancy in that office or another office during
    that year.
      (c) Within thirty days of becoming a candidate as defined in section
    301 of the Federal Campaign Act of 1971, in a calendar year for
    nomination or election to the Office of President, Vice President, or
    Member of Congress, or on or before May 15 of that calendar year,
    whichever is later, but in no event later than 30 days before the
    election, and on or before May 15 of each successive year an individual
    continues to be a candidate, an individual other than an incumbent
    President, Vice President, or Member of Congress shall file a report
    containing the information described in section 102(b). Notwithstanding
    the preceding sentence, in any calendar year in which an individual
    continues to be a candidate for any office but all elections for such
    office relating to such candidacy were held in prior

      (d) Any individual who is an officer or employee described in
    subsection (f) during any calendar year and performs the duties of his
    position or office for a period in excess of sixty days in that calendar
    year shall file on or before May 15 of the succeeding year a report
    containing the information described in section 102(a).

      (e) Any individual who occupies a position described in subsection (f)
    shall, on or before the thirtieth day after termination of employment in
    such position, file a report containing the information described in
    section 102(a) covering the preceding calendar year if the report
    required by subsection (d) has not been filed and covering the portion
    of the calendar year in which such termination occurs up to the date the
    individual left such office or position, unless such individual has
    accepted employment in another position described in subsection (f).

      (f) The officers and employees referred to in subsections (a), (d),
    and (e) are-- * * *

      (9) a Member of Congress as defined under section 109(12);

      (10) an officer or employee of the Congress as defined under section
    109(13);

                                      * * *

      (g)(1) Reasonable extensions of time for filing any report may be
    granted under procedures prescribed by the supervising ethics office for
    each branch, but the total of such extensions shall not exceed ninety
    days. * * *

      (h) The provisions of subsections (a), (b), and (e) shall not apply to
    an individual who, as determined by the designated agency ethics
    official or Secretary concerned (or in the case of a Presidential
    appointee under subsection (b), the Director of the Office of Government
    Ethics), the congressional ethics committees, or the Judicial
    Conference, is not reasonably expected to perform the duties of his
    office or position for more than sixty days in a calendar year, except
    that if such individual performs the duties of his office or position
    for more than sixty days in a calendar year--

              (1) the report required by subsections (a) and (b) shall be

            filed within fifteen days of the sixtieth day, and

              (2) the report required by subsection (e) shall be filed as

            provided in such subsection.

      (i) The supervising ethics office for each branch may grant a publicly
    available request for a waiver of any reporting requirement under this
    section for an individual who is expected to perform or has performed
    the duties of his office or position less than one hundred and thirty
    days in a calendar year, but only if the supervising ethics office
    determines that--

              (1) such individual is not a full-time employee of the

            Government,

              (2) such individual is able to provide services specially

    [[Page 931]]

            needed by the Government,

              (3) it is unlikely that the individual's outside employment or

            financial interests will create a conflict of interest, and

              (4) public financial disclosure by such individual is not

            necessary in the circumstances.

                               contents of reports

      Sec. 102. (a) Each report filed pursuant to section 101 (d) and (e)
    shall include a full and complete statement with respect to the
    following:

      (1)(A) The source, type, and amount or value of income (other than
    income referred to in subparagraph (B)) from any source (other than from
    current employment by the United States Government), and the source,
    date, and amount of honoraria from any source, received during the
    preceding calendar year, aggregating $200 or more in value and,
    effective January 1, 1991, the source, date, and amount of payments made
    to charitable organizations in lieu of honoraria, and the reporting
    individual shall simultaneously file with the applicable supervising
    ethics office, on a confidential basis, a corresponding list of
    recipients of all such payments, together with the dates and amounts of
    such payments.

      (B) The source and type of income which consists of dividends, rents,
    interest, and capital gains, received during the preceding calendar year
    which exceeds $200 in amount or value, and an indication of which of the
    following categories the amount or value of such item of income is
    within:

              (i) not more than $1,000,

              (ii) greater than $1,000 but not more than $2,500,

              (iii) greater than $2,500 but not more than $5,000,

              (iv) greater than $5,000 but not more than $15,000,

              (v) greater than $15,000 but not more than $50,000,

              (vi) greater than $50,000 but not more than $100,000,

              (vii) greater than $100,000 but not more than $1,000,000,

              (viii) greater than $1,000,000 but not more than $5,000,000,

            or

              (ix) greater than $5,000,000.

      (2)(A) The identity of the source, a brief description, and the value
    of all gifts aggregating more than the minimal value as established by
    section 7342(a)(5) of title 5, United States Code, or $250, whichever is
    greater, received from any source other than a relative of the reporting
    individual during the preceding calendar year, except that any food,
    lodging, or entertainment received as personal hospitality of an
    individual need not be reported, and any gift with a fair market value
    of $100 or less, as adjusted at the same time and by the same percentage
    as the minimal value is adjusted, need not be aggregated for purposes of
    this subparagraph.

    [[Page 932]]

      (B) The identity of the source and a brief description (including a
    travel itinerary, dates, and nature of expenses provided) of
    reimbursements received from any source aggregating more than the
    minimal value as established by section 7342(a)(5) of title 5, United
    States Code, or $250, whichever is greater, and received during the
    preceding calendar year.

      (C) In an unusual case, a gift need not be aggregated under
    subparagraph (A) if a publicly available request for a waiver is
    granted.

      (3) The identity and category of value of any interest in property
    held during the preceding calendar year in a trade or business, or for
    investment or the production of income, which has a fair market value
    which exceeds $1,000 as of the close of the preceding calendar year,
    excluding any personal liability owed to the reporting individual by a
    spouse, or by a parent, brother, sister, or child of the reporting
    individual or of the reporting individual's spouse, or any deposits
    aggregating $5,000 or less in a personal savings account. For purposes
    of this paragraph, a personal savings account shall include any
    certificate of deposit or any other form of deposit in a bank, savings
    and loan association, credit union, or similar financial institution.

      (4) The identity and category of value of the total liabilities owed
    to any creditor other than a spouse, or a parent, brother, sister, or
    child of the reporting individual or of the reporting individual's
    spouse which exceed $10,000 at any time during the preceding calendar
    year, excluding--

              (A) any mortgage secured by real property which is a personal

            residence of the reporting individual or his spouse; and

              (B) any loan secured by a personal motor vehicle, household

            furniture, or appliances, which loan does not exceed the

    With respect to revolving charge accounts, only those with an
    outstanding liability which exceeds $10,000 as of the close of the
    preceding calendar year need be reported under this paragraph.
            purchase price of the item which secures it.

      (5) Except as provided in this paragraph, a brief description, the
    date, and category of value of any purchase, sale or exchange during the
    preceding calendar year exceeds $1,000--

              (A) in real property, other than property used solely as a

            personal residence of the reporting individual or his spouse; or

              (B) in stocks, bonds, commodities futures, and other forms of

    Reporting is not required under this paragraph of any transaction solely
    by and between the reporting individual, his spouse, or dependent
    children.
            securities.

      (6)(A) The identity of all positions held on or before the date of
    filing during the current calendar year (and, for the first report filed
    by an individual, during the two-year period preceding such calendar
    year) as an officer, director, trustee, partner, proprietor,
    representative, employee, or consultant of any corporation, company,
    firm, partnership, or other business enterprise, any nonprofit
    organization, any labor organization, or any educational or other
    institution other than the United States. This subparagraph shall not
    require the reporting of positions held in any religious, social,
    fraternal, or political entity and positions solely of an honorary
    nature.

    [[Page 933]]

    the two calendar years prior to the calendar year during which the
    individual files his first report under this title, the individual shall
    include in the report--
      (B) If any person, other than the United States Government, paid a
    nonelected reporting individual compensation in excess of $5,000 in any
    of

              (i) the identity of each source of such compensation; and

              (ii) a brief description of the nature of the duties performed

            or services rendered by the reporting individual for each such

    The preceding sentence shall not require any individual to include in
    such report any information which is considered confidential as a result
    of a privileged relationship, established by law, between such
    individual and any person nor shall it require an individual to report
    any information with respect to any person for whom services were
    provided by any firm or association of which such individual was a
    member, partner, or employee unless such individual was directly
    involved in the provision of such services.
            source.

      (7) A description of the date, parties to, and terms of any agreement
    or arrangement with respect to (A) future employment; (B) a leave of
    absence during the period of the reporting individual's Government
    service; (C) continuation of payments by a former employer other than
    the United States Government; and (D) continuing participation in an
    employee welfare or benefit plan maintained by a former employer.

      (8) The category of the total cash value of any interest of the
    reporting individual in a qualified blind trust, unless the trust
    instrument was executed prior to July 24, 1995 and precludes the
    beneficiary from receiving information on the total cash value of any
    interest in the qualified blind trust.

      (b)(1) Each report filed pursuant to subsections (a), (b), and (c) of
    section 101 shall include a full and complete statement with respect to
    the information required by--

              (A) paragraph (1) of subsection (a) for the year of filing and

            the preceding calendar year,

              (B) paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (a) as of the date

            specified in the report but which is less than thirty-one days

            before the filing date, and

              (C) paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection (a) as of the filing

            date but for periods described in such paragraphs.

      (2)(A) In lieu of filling out one or more schedules of a financial
    disclosure form, an individual may supply the required information in an
    alternative format, pursuant to either rules adopted by the supervising
    ethics office for the branch in which such individual serves or pursuant
    to a specific written determination by such office for a reporting
    individual.

      (B) In lieu of indicating the category of amount or value of any item
    contained in any report filed under this title, a reporting individual
    may indicate the exact dollar amount of such item.

    [[Page 934]]

    part of the calendar year of filing up to the date of the termination of
    employment.
      (c) In the case of any individual described in section 101(e), any
    reference to the preceding calendar year shall be considered also to
    include that

      (d)(1) The categories for reporting the amount or value of the items
    covered in paragraphs (3), (4), (5), and (8) of subsection (a) are as
    follows:

              (A) not more than $15,000;

              (B) greater than $15,000 but not more than $50,000;

              (C) greater than $50,000 but not more than $100,000;

              (D) greater than $100,000 but not more than $250,000;

              (E) greater than $250,000 but not more than $500,000;

              (F) greater than $500,000 but not more than $1,000,000;

              (G) greater than $1,000,000 but not more than $5,000,000;

              (H) greater than $5,000,000 but not more than $25,000,000;

              (I) greater than $25,000,000 but not more than $50,000,000;

            and

              (J) greater than $50,000,000.

      (2) For the purposes of paragraph (3) of subsection (a) if the current
    value of an interest in real property (or an interest in a real estate
    partnership) is not ascertainable without an appraisal, an individual
    may list (A) the date of purchase and the purchase price of the interest
    in the real property, or (B) the assessed value of the real property for
    tax purposes, adjusted to reflect the market value of the property used
    for the assessment if the assessed value is computed at less than 100
    percent of such market value, but such individual shall include in his
    report a full and complete description of the method used to determine
    such assessed value, instead of specifying a category of value pursuant
    to paragraph (1) of this subsection. If the current value of any other
    item required to be reported under paragraph (3) of subsection (a) is
    not ascertainable without an appraisal, such individual may list the
    book value of a corporation whose stock is not publicly traded, the net
    worth of a business partnership, the equity value of an individually
    owned business, or with respect to other holdings, any recognized
    indication of value, but such individual shall include in his report a
    full and complete description of the method used in determining such
    value. In lieu of any value referred to in the preceding sentence, an
    individual may list the assessed value of the item for tax purposes,
    adjusted to reflect the market value of the item used for the assessment
    if the assessed value is computed at less than 100 percent of such
    market value, but a full and complete description of the method used in
    determining such assessed value shall be included in the report.

      (e)(1) Except as provided in the last sentence of this paragraph, each
    report required by section 101 shall also contain information listed in
    paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (a) of this section respecting
    the spouse or dependent child of the reporting individual as follows:

              (A) The source of items of earned income earned by a spouse

            from any person which exceed $1,000 and the source and amount of

            any honoraria received by a spouse, except that, with respect to

            earned income (other than honoraria), if the spouse is self-

    [[Page 935]]

            employed in busi

            ness or a profession, only the nature of such business or

            profession need be reported.

              (B) All information required to be reported in subsection

            (a)(1)(B) with respect to income derived by a spouse or

            dependent child from any asset held by the spouse or dependent

            child and reported pursuant to subsection (a)(3).

              (C) In the case of any gifts received by a spouse or dependent

            child which are not received totally independent of the

            relationship of the spouse or dependent child to the reporting

            individual, the identity of the source and a brief description

            of gifts of transportation, lodging, food, or entertainment and

            a brief description and the value of other gifts.

              (D) In the case of any reimbursements received by a spouse or

            dependent child which are not received totally independent of

            the relationship of the spouse or dependent child to the

            reporting individual, the identity of the source and a brief

            description of each such reimbursement.

              (E) In the case of items described in paragraphs (3) through

            (5) of subsection (a), all information required to be reported

            under these paragraphs other than items (i) which the reporting

            individual certifies represent the spouse's or dependent child's

            sole financial interest or responsibility and which the

            reporting individual has no knowledge of, (ii) which are not in

            any way, past or present, derived from the income, assets, or

            activities of the reporting individual, and (iii) from which the

            reporting individual neither derives, nor expects to derive, any

            financial or economic benefit.

              (F) For purposes of this section, categories with amounts or

            values greater than $1,000,000 set forth in sections

            102(a)(1)(B) and 102(d)(1) shall apply to the income, assets, or

            liabilities of spouses and dependent children only if the

            income, assets, or liabilities are held jointly with the

            reporting individual. All other income, assets, or liabilities

            of the spouse or dependent children required to be reported

            under this section in an amount or value greater than $1,000,000

            shall be categorized only as an amount or value greater than

    Reports required by subsections (a), (b), and (c) of section 101 shall,
    with respect to the spouse and dependent child of the reporting
    individual, only contain information listed in paragraphs (1), (3), and
    (4) of subsection (a), as specified in this paragraph.
            $1,000,000.

      (2) No report shall be required with respect to a spouse living
    separate and apart from the reporting individual with the intention of
    terminating the marriage or providing for permanent separation; or with
    respect to any income or obligations of an individual arising from the
    dissolution of his marriage or the permanent separation from his spouse.

    [[Page 936]]

    (a), (b), and (c) of this section with respect to the holdings of and
    the income from a trust or other financial arrangement from which income
    is received by, or with respect to which a beneficial interest in
    principal or income is held by, such individual, his spouse, or any
    dependent child.
      (f)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), each reporting individual
    shall report the information required to be reported pursuant to
    subsections

      (2) A reporting individual need not report the holdings of or the
    source of income from any of the holdings of--

              (A) any qualified blind trust (as defined in paragraph (3));

              (B) a trust--

                      (i) which was not created directly by such individual,

                    his spouse, or any dependent child, and

                      (ii) the holdings or sources of income of which such

                    individual, his spouse, and any dependent child have no

                    knowledge of; or

              (C) an entity described under the provisions of paragraph (8),

            but such individual shall report the category of the amount of

            income received by him, his spouse, or any dependent child from

            the trust or other entity under subsection (a)(1)(B) of this

            section.

      (3) For purpose of this subsection, the term ``qualified blind trust''
    includes any trust in which a reporting individual, his spouse, or any
    minor or dependent child has a beneficial interest in the principal or
    income, and which meets the following requirements:

              (A)(i) The trustee of the trust and any other entity

            designated in the trust instrument to perform fiduciary duties

            is a financial institution, an attorney, a certified public

            accountant, a broker, or an investment advisor who--

                      (I) is independent of and not associated with any

                    interested party so that the trustee or other person

                    cannot be controlled or influenced in the administration

                    of the trust by any interested party;

                      (II) is not and has not been an employee of or

                    affiliated with any interested party and is not a

                    partner of, or involved in any joint venture or other

                    investment with, any interested party; and

                      (III) is not a relative of any interested party.

                  (ii) Any officer or employee of a trustee or other entity

                who is involved in the management or control of the trust--

                      (I) is independent of and not associated with any

                    interested party so that such officer or employee cannot

                    be controlled or influenced in the administration of the

                    trust by any interested party;

                      (II) is not a partner of, or involved in any joint

                    venture or other investment with, any interested party;

                    and

                      (III) is not a relative of any interested party.

              (B) Any asset transferred to the trust by an interested party

            is free of any restriction with respect to its transfer or sale

            unless such restriction is expressly approved by the supervising

    [[Page 937]]

            ethics office of the reporting individual.

              (C) The trust instrument which establishes the trust provides

            that--

                      (i) except to the extent provided in subparagraph (B)

                    of this paragraph, the trustee in the exercise of his

                    authority and discretion to manage and control the

                    assets of the trust shall not consult or notify any

                    interested party;

                      (ii) the trust shall not contain any asset the holding

                    of which by an interested party is prohibited by any law

                    or regulation;

                      (iii) the trustee shall promptly notify the reporting

                    individual and his supervising ethics office when the

                    holdings of any particular asset transferred to the

                    trust by any interested party are disposed of or when

                    the value of such holding is less than $1,000;

                      (iv) the trust tax return shall be prepared by the

                    trustee or his designee, and such return and any

                    information relating thereto (other than the trust

                    income summarized in appropriate categories necessary to

                    complete an interested party's tax return), shall not be

                    disclosed to any interested party;

                      (v) an interested party shall not receive any report

                    on the holdings and sources of income of the trust,

                    except a report at the end of each calendar quarter with

                    respect to the total cash value of the interest of the

                    interested party in the trust or the net income or loss

                    of the trust or any reports necessary to enable the

                    interested party to complete an individual tax return

                    required by law or to provide the information required

                    by subsection (a)(1) of this section, but such report

                    shall not identify any asset or holding;

                      (vi) except for communications which solely consist of

                    requests for distributions of cash or other unspecified

                    assets of the trust, there shall be no direct or

                    indirect communication between the trustee and an

                    interested party with respect to the trust unless such

                    communication is in writing and unless it relates only

                    (I) to the general financial interest and needs of the

                    interested party (including, but not limited to, an

                    interest in maximizing income or long-term capital

                    gain), (II) to the notification of the trustee of a law

                    or regulation subsequently applicable to the reporting

                    individual which prohibits the interested party from

                    holding an asset, which notification directs that the

                    asset not be held by the trust, or (III) to directions

                    to the trustee to sell all of an asset initially placed

                    in the trust by an interested party which in the

                    determination of the reporting individual creates a

                    conflict of interest or the appearance thereof due to

                    the subsequent assumption of duties by the reporting

                    individual (but nothing herein shall require any such

                    direction); and

                      (vii) the interested parties shall make no effort to

                    obtain information with respect to the holdings of the

    [[Page 938]]

                    trust, including ob

                    taining a copy of any trust tax return filed or any

                    information relating thereto except as otherwise

                    provided in this subsection.

              (D) The proposed trust instrument and the proposed trustee is

            approved by the reporting individual's supervising ethics

            office.

              (E) For purposes of this subsection, ``interested party''

            means a reporting individual, his spouse, and any minor or

            dependent child; ``broker'' has the meaning set forth in section

            3(a)(4) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.

            78c(a)(4)); and ``investment adviser'' includes any investment

            adviser who, as determined under regulations prescribed by the

            supervising ethics office, is generally involved in his role as

            such an adviser in the management or control of trusts.

              (F) Any trust qualified by a supervising ethics office before

            the effective date of title II of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989

            shall continue to be governed by the law and regulations in

            effect immediately before such effective date.

      (4)(A) An asset placed in a trust by an interested party shall be
    considered a financial interest of the reporting individual, for the
    purposes of any applicable conflict of interest statutes, regulations,
    or rules of the Federal Government (including section 208 of title 18,
    United States Code), until such time as the reporting individual is
    notified by the trustee that such asset has been disposed of, or has a
    value of less than $1,000.

      (B)(i) The provisions of subparagraph (A) shall not apply with respect
    to a trust created for the benefit of a reporting individual, or the
    spouse, dependent child, or minor child of such a person, if the
    supervising ethics office for such reporting individual finds that--

              (I) the assets placed in the trust consist of a well-

            diversified portfolio of readily marketable securities;

              (II) none of the assets consist of securities of entities

            having substantial activities in the area of the reporting

            individual's primary area of responsibility;

              (III) the trust instrument prohibits the trustee,

            notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (3)(C) (iii) and

            (iv) of this subsection, from making public or informing any

            interested party of the sale of any securities;

              (IV) the trustee is given power of attorney, notwithstanding

            the provisions of paragraph (3)(C)(v) of this subsection, to

            prepare on behalf of any interested party the personal income

            tax returns and similar returns which may contain information

            relating to the trust; and

              (V) except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the trust

            instrument provides (or in the case of a trust established prior

            to the effective date of this Act which by its terms does not

            permit amendment, the trustee, the reporting individual, and any

            other interested party agree in writing) that the trust shall be

    [[Page 939]]

            administered in ac

            cordance with the requirements of this subsection and the

            trustee of such trust meets the requirements of paragraph

            (3)(A).

                                      * * *

      (5)(A) The reporting individual shall, within thirty days after a
    qualified blind trust is approved by his supervising ethics office, file
    with such office a copy of--

              (i) the executed trust instrument of such trust (other than

            those provisions which relate to the testamentary disposition of

            the trust assets), and

              (ii) a list of the assets which were transferred to such

            trust, including the category of value of each asset as

    This subparagraph shall not apply with respect to a trust meeting the
    requirements for being considered a qualified blind trust under
    paragraph (7) of this subsection.
            determined under subsection (d) of this section.

      (B) The reporting individual shall, within thirty days of transferring
    an asset (other than cash) to a previously established qualified blind
    trust, notify his supervising ethics office of the identity of each such
    asset and the category of value of each asset as determined under
    subsection (d) of this section.

      (C) Within thirty days of the dissolution of a qualified blind trust,
    a reporting individual shall--

              (i) notify his supervising ethics office of such dissolution,

            and

              (ii) file with such office a copy of a list of the assets of

            the trust at the time of such dissolution and the category of

            value under subsection (d) of this section of each such asset.

      (D) Documents filed under subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of this
    paragraph and the lists provided by the trustee of assets placed in the
    trust by an interested party which have been sold shall be made
    available to the public in the same manner as a report is made available
    under section 105 and the provisions of that section shall apply with
    respect to such documents and lists.

      (E) A copy of each written communication with respect to the trust
    under paragraph (3)(C)(vi) shall be filed by the person initiating the
    communication with the reporting individual's supervising ethics office
    within five days of the date of the communication.

    [[Page 940]]

      (6)(A) A trustee of a qualified blind trust shall not knowingly and
    willfully, or negligently, (i) disclose any information to an interested
    party with respect to such trust that may not be disclosed under
    paragraph (3) of this subsection; (ii) acquire any holding the ownership
    of which is prohibited by the trust instrument; (iii) solicit advice
    from any interested party with respect to such trust, which solicitation
    is prohibited by paragraph (3) of this subsection or the trust
    agreement; or (iv) fail to file any document required by this
    subsection.

      (B) A reporting individual shall not knowingly and willfully, or
    negligently, (i) solicit or receive any information with respect to a
    qualified blind trust of which he is an interested party that may not be
    disclosed under paragraph (3)(C) of this subsection or (ii) fail to file
    any document required by this subsection.

      (C)(i) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any
    appropriate United States district court against any individual who
    knowingly and willfully violates the provisions of subparagraph (A) or
    (B) of this paragraph. The court in which such action is brought may
    assess against such individual a civil penalty in any amount not to
    exceed $10,000.

      (ii) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any appropriate
    United States district court against any individual who negligently
    violates the provisions of subparagraph (A) or (B) of this paragraph.
    The court in which such action is brought may assess against such
    individual a civil penalty in any amount not to exceed $5,000.

      (7) Any trust may be considered to be a qualified blind trust if--

              (A) the trust instrument is amended to comply with the

            requirements of paragraph (3) or, in the case of a trust

            instrument which does not by its terms permit amendment, the

            trustee, the reporting individual, and any other interested

            party agree in writing that the trust shall be administered in

            accordance with the requirements of this subsection and the

            trustee of such trust meets the requirements of paragraph

            (3)(A); except that in the case of any interested party who is a

            dependent child, a parent or guardian of such child may execute

            the agreement referred to in this subparagraph;

              (B) a copy of the trust instrument (except testamentary

            provisions) and a copy of the agreement referred to in

            subparagraph (A), and a list of the assets held by the trust at

            the time of approval by the supervising ethics office, including

            the category of value of each asset as determined under

            subsection (d) of this section, are filed with such office and

            made available to the public as provided under paragraph (5)(D)

            of this subsection; and

              (C) the supervising ethics office determines that approval of

            the trust arrangement as a qualified blind trust is in the

            particular case appropriate to assure compliance with applicable

            laws and regulations.

      (8) A reporting individual shall not be required to report the
    financial interests held by a widely held investment fund (whether such
    fund is a mutual fund, regulated investment company, pension or deferred
    compensation plan, or other investment fund), if--

              (A)(i) the fund is publicly traded; or

              (ii) the assets of the fund are widely diversified; and

              (B) the reporting individual neither exercises control over

            nor has the ability to exercise control over the financial

    [[Page 941]]

            interests held by the fund.

      (g) Political campaign funds, including campaign receipts and
    expenditures, need not be included in any report filed pursuant to this
    title.

      (h) A report filed pursuant to subsection (a), (d), or (e) of section
    101 need not contain the information described in subparagraphs (A),
    (B), and (C) of subsection (a)(2) with respect to gifts and
    reimbursements received in a period when the reporting individual was
    not an officer or employee of the Federal Government.

      (i) A reporting individual shall not be required under this title to
    report--

              (1) financial interests in or income derived from--

                      (A) any retirement system under title 5, United States

                    Code (including the Thrift Savings Plan under subchapter

                    III of chapter 84 of such title); or

                      (B) any other retirement system maintained by the

                    United States for officers or employees of the United

                    States, including the President, or for members of the

                    uniformed services; or

              (2) benefits received under the Social Security Act.

                                filing of reports

      Sec. 103. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the
    reports required under this title shall be filed by the reporting
    individual with the designated agency ethics official at the agency by
    which he is employed (or in the case of an individual described in
    section 101(e), was employed) or in which he will serve. The date any
    report is received (and the date of receipt of any supplemental report)
    shall be noted on such report by such official.

                                      * * *

      (g) Each supervising Ethics Office shall develop and make available
    forms for reporting the information required by this title.

      (h)(1) The reports required under this title shall be filed by a
    reporting individual with--

              (A)(i)(I) the Clerk of the House of Representatives, in the

            case of a Representative in Congress, a Delegate to Congress,

            the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, an officer or

            employee of the Congress whose compensation is disbursed by the

            Clerk of the House of Representatives, an officer or employee of

            the Architect of the Capitol, the United States Botanic Garden,

            the Congressional Budget Office, the Government Printing Office,

            the Library of Congress, or the Copyright Royalty Tribunal

            (including any individual terminating service, under section

            101(e), in any office or position referred to in this

            subclause), or an individual described in section 101(c) who is

            a candidate for nomination or election as a Representative in

            Congress, a Delegate to Congress, or the Resident Commissioner

            from Puerto Rico;

    [[Page 942]]

                                      * * *

              (ii) in the case of an officer or employee of the Congress as

            described under section 101(f)(10) who is employed by an agency

            or commission established in the legislative branch after the

            date of the enactment of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989--

                      (I) the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the

                    House of Representatives, as the case may be, as

                    designated in the statute establishing such agency or

                    commission; or

                      (II) if such statute does not designate such

                    committee, the Secretary of the Senate for agencies and

                    commissions established in even numbered calendar years,

                    and the Clerk of the House of Representatives for

                    agencies and commissions established in odd numbered

                    calendar years;

                                      * * *

              (2) The date any report is received (and the date of receipt

            of any supplemental report) shall be noted on such report by

            such committee.

      (i) A copy of each report filed under this title by a Member or an
    individual who is a candidate for the Office of Member shall be sent by
    the Clerk of the House of Representatives or Secretary of the Senate, as
    the case may be, to the appropriate State officer designated under
    section 316(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 of the State
    represented by the Member or in which the individual is a candidate, as
    the case may be, within the 30-day period beginning on the day the
    report is filed with the Clerk or Secretary.

      (j)(1) A copy of each report filed under this title with the Clerk of
    the House of Representatives shall be sent by the Clerk to the Committee
    on Standards of Official Conduct of the House of Representatives within
    the 7-day period beginning on the day the report is filed.

                                      * * *

      (k) In carrying out their responsibilities under this title with
    respect to candidates for office, the Clerk of the House of
    Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate shall avail themselves
    of the assistance of the Federal Election Commission. The Commission
    shall make available to the Clerk and the Secretary on a regular basis a
    complete list of names and addresses of all candidates registered with
    the Commission, and shall cooperate and coordinate its candidate
    information and notification program with the Clerk and the Secretary to
    the greatest extent possible.

                     failure to file or filing false reports

    [[Page 943]]

    section 102. The court in which such action is brought may assess
    against such individual a civil penalty in any amount, not to exceed
    $10,000.
      Sec. 104. (a) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any
    appropriate United States district court against any individual who
    knowingly and willfully falsifies or who knowingly and willfully fails
    to file or report any information that such individual is required to
    report pursuant to

      (b) The head of each agency, each Secretary concerned, the Director of
    the Office of Government Ethics, each congressional ethics committee, or
    the Judicial Conference, as the case may be, shall refer to the Attorney
    General the name of any individual which such official or committee has
    reasonable cause to believe has willfully failed to file a report or has
    willfully falsified or willfully failed to file information required to
    be reported.

      (c) The President, the Vice President, the Secretary concerned, the
    head of each agency, the Office of Personnel Management, a congressional
    ethics committee, and the Judicial Conference of the United States, may
    take any appropriate personnel or other action in accordance with
    applicable law or regulation against any individual failing to file a
    report or falsifying or failing to report information required to be
    reported.

      (d)(1) Any individual who files a report required to be filed under
    this title more than 30 days after the later of--

              (A) the date such report is required to be filed pursuant to

            the provisions of this title and the rules and regulations

            promulgated thereunder; or

              (B) if a filing extension is granted to such individual under

            section 101(g), the last day of the filing extension period,

            shall, at the direction of and pursuant to regulations issued by

            the supervising ethics office, pay a filing fee of $200. All

            such fees shall be deposited in the miscellaneous receipts of

            the Treasury. The authority under this paragraph to direct the

            payment of a filing fee may be delegated by the supervising

            ethics office in the executive branch to other agencies in the

            executive branch.

      (2) The supervising ethics office may waive the filing fee under this
    subsection in extraordinary circumstances.

                     custody of and public access to reports

      Sec. 105. (a) Each agency, each supervising ethics office in the
    executive or judicial branch, the Clerk of the House of Representatives,
    and the Secretary of the Senate shall make available to the public, in
    accordance with subsection (b), each report filed under this title with
    such agency or office or with the Clerk or the Secretary of the Senate.

                                      * * *

    [[Page 944]]

    shall be made available for public inspection within 30 calendar days
    after May 15 of such year or within 30 days of the date of filing of
    such a report for which an extension is granted pursuant to section
    101(g). The agency, office, Clerk, or Secretary of the Senate, as the
    case may be may require a reasonable fee to be paid in any amount which
    is found necessary to recover the cost of reproduction or mailing of
    such report excluding any salary of any employee involved in such
    reproduction or mailing. A copy of such report may be furnished without
    charge or at a reduced charge if it is determined that waiver or
    reduction of the fee is in the public interest.
      (b)(1) Except as provided in the second sentence of this subsection,
    each agency, each supervising ethics office in the executive or judicial
    branch, the Clerk of the House of Representatives, and the Secretary of
    the Senate shall, within thirty days after any report is received under
    this title by such agency or office or by the Clerk or the Secretary of
    the Senate, as the case may be, permit inspection of such report by or
    furnish a copy of such report to any person requesting such inspection
    or copy. With respect to any report required to be filed by May 15 of
    any year, such report

      (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a report may not be made available
    under this section to any person nor may any copy thereof be provided
    under this section to any person except upon a written application by
    such person stating--

              (A) that person's name, occupation and address;

              (B) the name and address of any other person or organization

            on whose behalf the inspection or copy is requested; and

              (C) that such person is aware of the prohibitions on the

    Any such application shall be made available to the public throughout
    the period during which the report is made available to the public.
            obtaining or use of the report.

      (3)(A) This section does not require the immediate and unconditional
    availability of reports filed by an individual described in section
    109(8) or 109(10) of this Act if a finding is made by the Judicial
    Conference, in consultation with United States Marshall Service, that
    revealing personal and sensitive information could endanger that
    individual.

      (B) A report may be redacted pursuant to this paragraph only--

              (i) to the extent necessary to protect the individual who

            filed the report; and

              (ii) for as long as the danger to such individual exists.

      (C) The Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall submit
    to the Committees on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and
    of the Senate an annual report with respect to the operation of this
    paragraph including--

              (i) the total number of reports redacted pursuant to this

            paragraph;

              (ii) the total number of individuals whose reports have been

            redacted pursuant to this paragraph; and

              (iii) the types of threats against individuals whose reports

            are redacted, if appropriate.

      (D) The Judicial Conference, in consultation with the Department of
    Justice, shall issue regulations setting forth the circumstances under
    which redaction is appropriate under this paragraph and the procedures
    for redaction.

    [[Page 945]]

      (E) This paragraph shall expire on December 31, 2001, and apply to
    filings through calendar year 2001.

      (c)(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to obtain or use a report--

              (A) for any unlawful purpose;

              (B) for any commercial purpose, other than by news and

            communications media for dissemination to the general public;

              (C) for determining or establishing the credit rating of any

            individual; or

              (D) for use, directly or indirectly, in the solicitation of

            money for any political, charitable, or other purpose.

      (2) The Attorney General may bring a civil action against any person
    who obtains or uses a report for any purpose prohibited in paragraph (1)
    of this subsection. The court in which such action is brought may assess
    against such person a penalty in any amount not to exceed $10,000. Such
    remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available under
    statutory or common law.

      (d) Any report filed with or transmitted to an agency or supervising
    ethics office or to the Clerk of the House of Representatives or the
    Secretary of the Senate pursuant to this title shall be retained by such
    agency or office or by the Clerk or the Secretary of the Senate, as the
    case may be. Such report shall be made available to the public for a
    period of six years after receipt of the report. After such six-year
    period the report shall be destroyed unless needed in an ongoing
    investigation, except that in the case of an individual who filed the
    report pursuant to section 101(b) and was not subsequently confirmed by
    the Senate, or who filed the report pursuant to section 101(c) and was
    not subsequently elected, such reports shall be destroyed one year after
    the individual either is no longer under consideration by the Senate or
    is no longer a candidate for nomination or election to the Office of
    President, Vice President, or as a Member of Congress, unless needed in
    an ongoing investigation.

                                review of reports

      Sec. 106. (a)(1) Each designated agency ethics official or Secretary
    concerned shall make provisions to ensure that each report filed with
    him under this title is reviewed within sixty days after the date of
    such filing, except that the Director of the Office of Government Ethics
    shall review only those reports required to be transmitted to him under
    this title within sixty days after the date of transmittal.

      (2) Each congressional ethics committee and the Judicial Conference
    shall make provisions to ensure that each report filed under this title
    is reviewed within sixty days after the date of such filing.

    [[Page 946]]

    applicable laws and regulations, he shall state such opinion on the
    report, and shall sign such report.
      (b)(1) If after reviewing any report under subsection (a), the
    Director of the Office of Government Ethics, the Secretary concerned,
    the designated agency ethics official, a person designated by the
    congressional ethics committee, or a person designated by the Judicial
    Conference, as the case may be, is of the opinion that on the basis of
    information contained in such report the individual submitting such
    report is in compliance with

      (2) If the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, the Secretary
    concerned, the designated agency ethics official, a person designated by
    the congressional ethics committee, or a person designated by the
    Judicial Conference, after reviewing any report under subsection (a)--

              (A) believes additional information is required to be

            submitted, he shall notify the individual submitting such report

            what additional information is required and the time by which it

            must be submitted, or

              (B) is of the opinion, on the basis of information submitted,

            that the individual is not in compliance with applicable laws

            and regulations, he shall notify the individual, afford a

            reasonable opportunity for a written or oral response, and after

            consideration of such response, reach an opinion as to whether

            or not, on the basis of information submitted, the individual is

            in compliance with such laws and regulations.

      (3) If the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, the Secretary
    concerned, the designated agency ethics official, a person designated by
    a congressional ethics committee, or a person designated by the Judicial
    Conference, reaches an opinion under paragraph (2)(B) that an individual
    is not in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, the official
    or committee shall notify the individual of that opinion and, after an
    opportunity for personal consultation (if practicable), determine and
    notify the individual of which steps, if any, would in the opinion of
    such official or committee be appropriate for assuring compliance with
    such laws and regulations and the date by which such steps should be
    taken. Such steps may include, as appropriate--

              (A) divestiture,

              (B) restitution,

              (C) the establishment of a blind trust,

              (D) request for an exemption under section 208(b) of title 18,

            United States Code, or

              (E) voluntary request for transfer, reassignment, limitation

    The use of any such steps shall be in accordance with such rules or
    regulations as the supervising ethics office may prescribe.
            of duties, or resignation.

      (4) If steps for assuring compliance with applicable laws and
    regulations are not taken by the date set under paragraph (3) by an
    individual in a position in the executive branch (other than in the
    Foreign Service or the uniformed services), appointment to which
    requires the advice and consent of the Senate, the matter shall be
    referred to the President for appropriate action.

    [[Page 947]]

    Foreign Service or the uniformed services, the Secretary concerned shall
    take appropriate action.
      (5) If steps for assuring compliance with applicable laws and
    regulations are not taken by the date set under paragraph (3) by a
    member of the

      (6) If steps for assuring compliance with applicable laws and
    regulations are not taken by the date set under paragraph (3) by any
    other officer or employee, the matter shall be referred to the head of
    the appropriate agency, the congressional ethics committee, or the
    Judicial Conference, for appropriate action; except that in the case of
    the Postmaster General or Deputy Postmaster General, the Director of the
    Office of Government Ethics shall recommend to the Governors of the
    Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service the action to be
    taken.

      (7) Each supervising ethics office may render advisory opinions
    interpreting this title within its respective jurisdiction.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the individual to whom a
    public advisory opinion is rendered in accordance with this paragraph,
    and any other individual covered by this title who is involved in a fact
    situation which is indistinguishable in all material aspects, and who
    acts in good faith in accordance with the provisions and findings of
    such advisory opinion shall not, as a result of such act, be subject to
    any penalty or sanction provided by this title.

             confidential reports and other additional requirements

      Sec. 107. (a)(1) Each supervising ethics office may require officers
    and employees under its jurisdiction (including special Government
    employees as defined in section 202 of title 18, United States Code) to
    file confidential financial disclosure reports, in such form as the
    supervising ethics office may prescribe. The information required to be
    reported under this subsection by the officers and employees of any
    department or agency shall be set forth in rules or regulations
    prescribed by the supervising ethics office, and may be less extensive
    than otherwise required by this title, or more extensive when determined
    by the supervising ethics office to be necessary and appropriate in
    light of sections 202 through 209 of title 18, United States Code,
    regulations promulgated thereunder, or the authorized activities of such
    officers or employees. Any individual required to file a report pursuant
    to section 101 shall not be required to file a confidential report
    pursuant to this subsection, except with respect to information which is
    more extensive than information otherwise required by this title.
    Subsections (a), (b), and (d) of section 105 shall not apply with
    respect to any such report.

      (2) Any information required to be provided by an individual under
    this subsection shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed to the
    public.

      (3) Nothing in this subsection exempts any individual otherwise
    covered by the requirement to file a public financial disclosure report
    under this title from such requirement.

    [[Page 948]]

    poses of preventing conflicts of interest or apparent conflicts of
    interest. Such provisions of this title shall not supersede the
    requirements of section 7342 of title 5, United States Code.
      (b) The provisions of this title requiring the reporting of
    information shall supersede any general requirement under any other
    provision of law or regulation with respect to the reporting of
    information required for pur

      (c) Nothing in this Act requiring reporting of information shall be
    deemed to authorize the receipt of income, gifts, or reimbursements; the
    holding of assets, liabilities, or positions; or the participation in
    transactions that are prohibited by law, Executive order, rule, or
    regulation.

                        authority of comptroller general

      Sec. 108. (a) The Comptroller General shall have access to financial
    disclosure reports filed under this title for the purposes of carrying
    out his statutory responsibilities.

      (b) No later than December 31, 1992, and regularly thereafter, the
    Comptroller General shall conduct a study to determine whether the
    provisions of this title are being carried out effectively.

                                   definitions

      Sec. 109. For the purposes of this title, the term--

      (1) ``congressional ethics committees'' means the Select Committee on
    Ethics of the Senate and the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    of the House of Representatives;

      (2) ``dependent child'' means, when used with respect to any reporting
    individual, any individual who is a son, daughter, stepson, or
    stepdaughter and who--

              (A) is unmarried and under age 21 and is living in the

            household of such reporting individual; or

              (B) is a dependent of such reporting individual within the

            meaning of section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;

      (3) ``designated agency ethics official'' means an officer or employee
    who is designated to administer the provisions of this title within an
    agency;

                                      * * *

      (5) ``gift'' means a payment, advance, forbearance, rendering, or
    deposit of money, or any thing of value, unless consideration of equal
    or greater value is received by the donor, but does not include--

              (A) bequest and other forms of inheritance;

              (B) suitable mementos of a function honoring the reporting

            individual;

              (C) food, lodging, transportation, and entertainment provided

            by a foreign government within a foreign country or by the

            United States Government, the District of Columbia, or a State

            or local government or political subdivision thereof;

              (D) food and beverages which are not consumed in connection

    [[Page 949]]

            with a gift of overnight lodging;

              (E) communications to the offices of a reporting individual,

            including subscriptions to newspapers and periodicals; or

              (F) consumable products provided by home-State businesses to

            the offices of a reporting individual who is an elected

            official, if those products are intended for consumption by

            persons other than such reporting individual;

      (6) ``honoraria'' has the meaning given such term in section 505 of
    this Act;

      (7) ``income'' means all income from whatever source derived,
    including but not limited to the following items: compensation for
    services, including fees, commissions, and similar items; gross income
    derived from business (and net income if the individual elects to
    include it); gains derived from dealings in property; interest; rents;
    royalties; dividends; annuities; income from life insurance and
    endowment contracts; pensions; income from discharge of indebtedness;
    distributive share of partnership income; and income from an interest in
    an estate or trust;

                                      * * *

      (11) ``legislative branch'' includes--

              (A) the Architect of the Capitol;

              (B) the Botanic Gardens;

              (C) the Congressional Budget Office;

              (D) the General Accounting Office;

              (E) the Government Printing Office;

              (F) the Library of Congress;

              (G) the United States Capitol Police;

              (H) the Office of Technology Assessment; and

              (I) any other agency, entity, office, or commission

            established in the legislative branch;

      (12) ``Member of Congress'' means a United States Senator, a
    Representative in Congress, a Delegate to Congress, or the Resident
    Commissioner from Puerto Rico;

      (13) ``officer or employee of the Congress'' means--

              (A) any individual described under subparagraph (B), other

            than a Member of Congress or the Vice President, whose

            compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate or the

            Clerk of the House of Representatives;

              (B)(i) each officer or employee of the legislative branch who,

            for at least 60 days, occupies a position for which the rate of

            basic pay is equal to or greater than 120 percent of the minimum

            rate of basic pay payable for GS-15 of the General Schedule; and

              (ii) at least one principal assistant designated for purposes

            of this paragraph by each Member who does not have an employee

            who occupies a position for which the rate of basic pay is equal

            to or greater than 120 percent of the minimum rate of basic pay

    [[Page 950]]

            payable for GS-15 of the General Schedule;

      (14) ``personal hospitality of any individual'' means hospitality
    extended for a nonbusiness purpose by an individual, not a corporation
    or organization, at the personal residence of that individual or his
    family or on property or facilities owned by that individual or his
    family;

      (15) ``reimbursement'' means any payment or other thing of value
    received by the reporting individual, other than gifts, to cover travel-
    related expenses of such individual other than those which are--

              (A) provided by the United States Government, the District of

            Columbia, or a State or local government or political

            subdivision thereof;

              (B) required to be reported by the reporting individual under

            section 7342 of title 5, United States Code; or

              (C) required to be reported under section 304 of the Federal

            Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434);

      (16) ``relative'' means an individual who is related to the reporting
    individual, as father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle,
    aunt, great aunt, great uncle, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband,
    wife, grandfather, grandmother, grandson, granddaughter, father-in-law,
    mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-
    law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother,
    stepsister, half brother, half sister, or who is the grandfather or
    grandmother of the spouse of the reporting individual, and shall be
    deemed to include the fiance or fiancee of the reporting individual;

                                      * * *

      (18) ``supervising ethics office'' means--

              (A) the Senate Committee on Ethics of the Senate, for

            Senators, officers and employees of the Senate, and other

            officers or employees of the legislative branch required to file

            financial disclosure reports with the Secretary of the Senate

            pursuant to section 103(h) of this title;

              (B) the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the

            House of Representatives, for Members, officers and employees of

            the House of Representatives and other officers or employees of

            the legislative branch required to file financial disclosure

            reports with the Clerk of the House of Representatives pursuant

            to section 103(h) of this title;

              (C) the Judicial Conference for judicial officers and judicial

            employees; and

              (D) the Office of Government Ethics for all executive branch

            officers and employees; and

      (19) ``value'' means a good faith estimate of the dollar value if the
    exact value is neither known nor easily obtainable by the reporting
    individual.

            notice of actions taken to comply with ethics agreements

    [[Page 951]]

    a Senate confirmation committee, a congressional ethics committee, or
    the Judicial Conference, to take any action to comply with this Act or
    any other law or regulation governing conflicts of interest of, or
    establishing standards of conduct applicable with respect to, officers
    or employees of the Government, that individual shall notify in writing
    the designated agency ethics official, the Office of Government Ethics,
    the appropriate committee of the Senate, the congressional ethics
    committee, or the Judicial Conference, as the case may be, of any action
    taken by the individual pursuant to that agreement. Such notification
    shall be made not later than the date specified in the agreement by
    which action by the individual must be taken, or not later than three
    months after the date of the agreement, if no date for action is so
    specified.
      Sec. 110. (a) In any case in which an individual agrees with that
    individual's designated agency ethics official, the Office of Government
    Ethics,

      (b) If an agreement described in subsection (a) requires that the
    individual recuse himself or herself from particular categories of
    agency or other official action, the individual shall reduce to writing
    those subjects regarding which the recusal agreement will apply and the
    process by which it will be determined whether the individual must
    recuse himself or herself in a specific instance. An individual shall be
    considered to have complied with the requirements of subsection (a) with
    respect to such recusal agreement if such individual files a copy of the
    document setting forth the information described in the preceding
    sentence with such individual's designated agency ethics official or the
    appropriate supervising ethics office within the time prescribed in the
    last sentence of subsection (a).

                          administration of provisions

      Sec. 111. The provisions of this title shall be administered by * * *

                                      * * *

      (2) the Select Committee on Ethics of the Senate and the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct of the House of Representatives, as
    appropriate, with regard to officers and employees described in
    paragraphs (9) and (10) of section 101(f).

                                      * * *

      The General Accounting Office, referred to in Sec. 1190(11)(D), is now
    designated the Government Accountability Office (31 U.S.C. 702 note).

                                   Rule XXVII

                         Statutory Limit on Public Debt

    [[Page 952]]

    Budget Act of 1974 that sets forth, as the appropriate level of the
    public debt for the period to which the concurrent resolution relates,
    an amount that is different from the amount of the statutory limit on
    the public debt that otherwise would be in effect for that period, the
    Clerk shall prepare an engrossment of a joint resolution increasing or
    decreasing, as the case may be, the statutory limit on the public debt
    in the form prescribed in clause 2. Upon engrossment of the joint
    resolution, the vote by which the concurrent resolution on the budget
    was finally agreed to in the House shall also be considered as a vote on
    passage of the joint resolution in the House, and the joint resolution
    shall be considered as passed by the House and duly certified and
    examined. The engrossed copy shall be signed by the Clerk and
    transmitted to the Senate for further legislative action.

    Sec. 1104. Public debt limit.

      1.  Upon adoption by Congress
    of a concurrent resolution on the budget under section 301 or 304 of the
    Congressional

    [[Page 953]]

    ods, only one engrossed joint resolution shall be prepared under clause
    1; and the blank referred to in the preceding sentence shall be filled
    with the limitation that is to apply for each period.
      2. The matter after the resolving clause in a joint resolution
    described in clause 1 shall be as follows: ``That subsection (b) of
    section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking out
    the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu
    thereof `$____'.'', with the blank being filled with a dollar limitation
    equal to the appropriate level of the public debt set forth pursuant to
    section 301(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 in the
    relevant concurrent resolution described in clause 1. If an adopted
    concurrent resolution under clause 1 sets forth different appropriate
    levels of the public debt for separate peri

      3. (a) The report of the Committee on the Budget on a concurrent
    resolution described in clause 1 and the joint explanatory statement of
    the managers on a conference report to accompany such a concurrent
    resolution each shall contain a clear statement of the effect the
    eventual enactment of a joint resolution engrossed under this rule would
    have on the statutory limit on the public debt.

      (b) It shall not be in order for the House to consider a concurrent
    resolution described in clause 1, or a conference report thereon, unless
    the report of the Committee on the Budget or the joint explanatory
    statement of the managers complies with paragraph (a).

      4. Nothing in this rule shall be construed as limiting or otherwise
    affecting--

          (a) the power of the House or the Senate to consider and pass
    bills or joint resolutions, without regard to the procedures under
    clause 1, that would change the statutory limit on the public debt; or

          (b) the rights of Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner,
    or committees with respect to the introduction, consideration, and
    reporting of such bills or joint resolutions.

    [[Page 954]]

    of title 31, United States Code, and obligations guaranteed as to
    principal and interest by the United States (except such guaranteed
    obligations as may be held by the Secretary of the Treasury), as
    determined under section 3101(b) of such title after the application of
    section 3101(a) of such title, that may be outstanding at any one time.

      5. In this rule the term ``statutory limit on the public debt'' means
    the maximum face amount of obligations issued under authority of chapter
    31

      This rule was added in the 96th Congress by Public Law 96-78 (93 Stat.
    589) and was originally applicable to concurrent resolutions on the
    budget for fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 1980 (fiscal
    1981). However, in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 642, Apr. 23, 1980, p.
    8800), 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 1981 (H. Con. Res. 307, June 12, 1980, pp. 14505-19;
    see H.J. Res. 569 and H.J. Res. 570, June 13, 1980, p. 14609).
    Conforming changes were made in clauses 2 and 5 of this rule with the
    codification of title 31, United States Code, by Public Law 97-258 (96
    Stat. 1066). The rule was amended in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 241,
    June 23, 1983, p. 17162) to reflect the enactment into law (P.L. 98-34)
    of a new permanent, rather than temporary, debt limit. Clause 2 was
    rewritten, and clause 1 modified, to change the form of the joint
    resolution engrossed pursuant to the rule in order to delete references
    to a temporary debt limit and to reflect instead changes in a permanent
    debt limit. The rules change also provided that where a budget
    resolution contains more than one public debt limit figure (for the
    current and the next fiscal year), only one joint resolution be
    engrossed, containing the debt limit figure for the current fiscal year
    with a time limitation, and the debt limit figure for the following
    fiscal year as the permanent limit. Another conforming change in clause
    1 was made in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
    1985 (P.L. 99-177, Dec. 12, 1985, p. 36209) to delete reference to a
    second concurrent resolution on the budget (no longer required under
    section 310 of the Budget Act). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule XLIX.
    Recodification placed it as rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    The rule was repealed in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    3, 2001, p. 24) and reinstated in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(t), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----).

    [[Page 955]]

    date under this rule for deeming the House to have passed the joint
    resolution (July 14, 1986, p. 16316; Speaker Wright, June 25, 1987, p.
    17424).

      This rule has been ordered inapplicable to a conference report on a
    concurrent resolution on the budget (e.g., H. Res. 131, Mar. 25, 1999,
    p. 5671; H. Res. 446, Mar. 23, 2000, p. ----). The date of final House
    action in adopting the conference report on the concurrent resolution on
    the budget, rather than the date of final Senate action, when later, is
    the appropriate

                                   Rule XXVIII

                               general provisions

    Sec. 1105. Relations of Jefferson's Manual and Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946 to the Rules of the House.

      1.  The provisions
    of law that constituted the Rules of the House at the end of the
    previous Congress shall govern the House in all cases to which they are
    applicable, and the rules of parliamentary practice comprised by
    Jefferson's Manual shall govern the House in all cases to which they are
    applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with the Rules and
    orders of the House.

      2. In these rules words importing the masculine gender include the
    feminine as well.

      Clause 1 was adopted in 1837 (V, 6757), and amended January 3, 1953,
    p. 24, when it was also renumbered. When the House recodified its rules
    in the 106th Congress, clause 1 was transferred from former rule XLII
    and was modified to reference all provisions of law comprising House
    rules at the end of the previous Congress (a compilation of which is
    included in Sec. Sec. 1127-1130, infra); and clause 2 was added (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This rule was redesignated as rule XXVII in the
    107th Congress (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24) and
    redesignated as rule XXVIII in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(t), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 2003, p. ----). Discussion of the importance of Jefferson's
    Manual as an authority in congressional procedure (VII, 1029, 1049;
    VIII, 2501, 2517, 2518, 3330).