[Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 110th Congress]
[110th Congress]
[House Document 109-157]
[Rules of the House of Representatives]
[Pages 333-982]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 333]]

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


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

[[Page 335]]

                  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 336]]

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. 37; H. Res. 333, Jan. 
23, 2002, p. 3; H. Res. 9, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 21; H. Res. 488, Jan. 20, 
2004, p. ----; H. Res. 8, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----; H. Res. 651, Jan. 31, 
2006, p. ----; H. Res. 10, Jan. 4, 2007, 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 337]]

  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 Speaker'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).

  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 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).


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.


[[Page 338]]


  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, Mar. 1, 1954, p. 2424; 
see also Speaker Rayburn, Mar. 1, 1943, p. 1487 (air-raid drill)). 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. 19543; Oct. 
10, 2002, p. 20274). Occupants of the gallery are not to manifest 
approval or disapproval of, or otherwise disrupt, proceedings on the 
floor (see, e.g., Speaker Foley, June 12, 1990, p. 13593) and the 
Speaker may quell such demonstrations prior to the adoption of the rules 
(Speaker Gingrich, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 454).


[[Page 339]]

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. 
14627). 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 that 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 that would be demeaning to the House, or 
to any Member of the House, or that 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 the page or to use the page 
as though part of the exhibit (June 11, 2003, p. 14417; Speaker Hastert, 
June 12, 2003, p. 14576). 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

  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).

  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). 
See also Sec. 962, infra.


[[Page 340]]

p. 6086; May 22, 2003, p. 12965; 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).

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,




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 341]]

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 342]]

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. 11110); 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 343]]

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 344]]

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. 17613). 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 345]]

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. 8681; 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. 8681; 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. 23510).

  The Speaker 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. ----).


[[Page 346]]

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. ----).
  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;

  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; 
July 18, 2006, p. ----). 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. 23510); (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) (although the Chair may explain the application 
of the procedural status quo to a pending proposal to change that status 
quo by way of an amendment to the standing rules (Feb. 1, 2006, p. ----
)); (12) judge the appropriateness of Senate action (Apr. 10, 2003, p. 
9279); (13) characterize proceedings of a committee (June 15, 2006, 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).


[[Page 347]]



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).


  An appeal may not be entertained from the following: (1) response to a 
parliamentary inquiry (V, 6955; VIII, 3457); (2) decision on recognition 
(II, 1425-1428; VI, 292; VIII, 2429, 2646, 2762; July 23, 1993, p. 
16820; Apr. 4, 1995, p. 10298; June 17, 1999, p. 13465; June 22, 2006, 
p. ----); (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. ----). Although the timeliness of 
the Chair's recognition of a Member to offer a motion to table an appeal 
is not subject to appeal (June 22, 2006, p. ----), the Chair's ruling on 
timeliness of a Member's demand that words be taken down is subject to 
appeal (Jan. 22, 2007, p. ----).

  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 348]]

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. ----
).
  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).


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.



[[Page 349]]

  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).

  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, 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).


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.


[[Page 350]]

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

  (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 
tempore 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.

  (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. 7). 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. 6118; Jan. 
20, 2005, p. ----).


[[Page 351]]

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 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



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).


[[Page 352]]

penses of the system may be paid from applicable accounts of the House 
for official expenses.



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 ex



  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. 
7).


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. 7). 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.




[[Page 353]]

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.




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 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.


  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).


[[Page 354]]

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. ----).
  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;

  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 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).


[[Page 355]]

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).
  The Speaker may appoint conferees from committees (1) that have not 
reported a measure, (2) that 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) that 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 modify an appointment 
by removal (e.g., Mar. 10, 1998, p. 3049), addition (e.g., Nov. 14, 
2005, p.----), or substitution of one conferee for another (Dec. 16, 
2005, p.----), or by expansion of the specification of provisions for 
which a conferee is appointed (Oct. 3, 2002, p. 19011; Nov. 14, 2005, 
p.----). 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


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. 7). 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)(1)  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.


  (2) To suspend the business of the Committee of the Whole House on the 
state of the Union when notified of an imminent threat to its safety, 
the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may declare an emergency 
recess subject to the call of the Chair.


[[Page 356]]

viously appointed, then he may, in consultation with the Minority 
Leader--
  (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 pre

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

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


  (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. 7) and the application of paragraph (b) to the 
Committee of the Whole was clarified in the 110th Congress (sec. 505(a), 
H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). For similar 
authority in the Senate, see Senate Resolution 296 (108th Cong., Feb. 3, 
2004, 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. ----). For a drill, see 
March 6, 2003 (p. 5355). For the Speaker's inherent authority to declare 
a recess under clause 2 of rule I, see Sec. 622, supra.


                                 Rule II


Elections
                      other officers and officials


[[Page 357]]

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.



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


  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 
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 certain 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.


[[Page 358]]

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).
  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


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, 1980, p. 4350; and Mar. 12, 1992, p. 5519), 
Clerk (Nov. 15, 1975, p. 36901; Jan. 6, 1999, p. 257; Nov. 18, 2005, p. 
----), 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; Speaker 
Hastert, Dec. 6, 2005, p. ----) even when prospective (Feb. 6, 2007, p. 
----). The resignation of an elected officer of the House is subject to 
acceptance by the House (Mar. 23, 2000, p. 3480; Feb. 6, 2007, p. ----).



[[Page 359]]




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.



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 on one occasion, 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).


  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).-


[[Page 360]]

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. 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




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).


  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 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.


  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.




[[Page 361]]


  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;

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



[[Page 362]]


  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.



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

  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).


[[Page 363]]

their respective Houses for enrollment, and the two cooperate in the 
interchange of bills for signature.

  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




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--



Sec. 650. Documents.

      (1) retain  in the library at the 
Office of the Clerk for the use of the Members, Delegates, Resident 
Commissioner, and officers of the House, and not to be withdrawn 
therefrom, two copies of all the books and printed documents deposited 
there; and



      (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.



[[Page 364]]


  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.



  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 amended 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. 7).




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.




[[Page 365]]


  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. This clause has been 
construed to authorize the Clerk to 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.



  (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, 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).


-  (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

[[Page 366]]

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).


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 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).




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 367]]

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).
  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

  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).


[[Page 368]]

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).

-- <>   (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


  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 to enforce order without the mace has been questioned as 
illegitimate (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).



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.




[[Page 369]]


  (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.
  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).


[[Page 370]]

tion and shall be subject to the oversight of the Committee on House 
Administration.-


661. Duties.

  4.  (a) The Chief Administrative Officer shall 
have operational and financial responsibility for functions as assigned 
by the Committee on House Administra




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.





Sec. 663. Cooperation with others.

  (c)  The Chief 
Administrative Officer 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, 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.


[[Page 371]]

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).-


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



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 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).





665. Duties of the Chaplain.

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



[[Page 372]]

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).
  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


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.


  (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;


[[Page 373]]

the course of carrying out responsibilities under this clause;
      (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

      (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


      (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.


[[Page 374]]

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).

  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


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).





669. Historian.

  7.  There is established an Office of the 
Historian of the House of Representatives. The Speaker shall appoint and 
set the annual rate of pay for employees of the Office of the Historian.




[[Page 375]]

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.


  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, 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.









[[Page 376]]
 
  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).

  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, 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).


[[Page 377]]

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).


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;


  The House has at times 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.



  (b) No other person may cast a Member's vote or record a Member's 
presence in the House or the Committee of the Whole House on the state 
of the Union.



[[Page 378]]


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 that 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) In a Committee of the Whole 
House on the state of the Union, each Delegate and the Resident 
Commissioner shall possess the same powers and privileges as Members of 
the House. 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). 
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 (current clause 6(h) of rule XVIII) (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). The changes 
effected in the 103d Congress were revoked in the 104th Congress (sec. 
212, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462) and reinstated in the 110th 
Congress (H. Res. 78, Jan. 24, 2007, p. ----).


[[Page 379]]

  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 (current clause 6(h) of rule XVIII), 
was upheld based on the premise that immediate ``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 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 380]]

  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 that 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 of a Delegate in parliamentary 
matters are not limited to legislation affecting his own territory (VI, 
240). Under paragraph (a), the Delegates and the Resident Commissioner 
are counted for purposes of establishing a quorum in a Committee of the 
Whole (Feb. 8, 2007, p. ----).

  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).

  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 381]]

tertain 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 conference meetings of its Members, except when the House 
agrees to take part in any ceremonies to be observed therein. The 
Speaker may not en



  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.

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


[[Page 382]]

      (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 383]]

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. 7). 
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 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.

  The portion of this clause that 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 384]]


  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 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; June 17, 2004, 
p. ----), other children (May 18, 1995, p. 13490; Oct. 7, 1999, p. 
24425;), or Senators exercising floor privileges (May 18, 1995, p. 
13491).



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) A former 
Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner; a former Parliamentarian of 
the House; or a former elected officer of the House or former minority 
employee nominated as an elected officer of the House shall not be 
entitled to the privilege of admission to the Hall of the House and 
rooms leading thereto if he or she--


      (1) is a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal as 
those terms are defined in clause 5 of rule XXV;

      (2) has any direct personal or pecuniary interest in any 
legislative measure pending before the House or reported by a committee; 
or


[[Page 385]]

      (3) is in the employ of or represents any party or organization 
for the purpose of influencing, directly or indirectly, the passage, 
defeat, or amendment of any legislative proposal.


  (b) The Speaker may promulgate regulations that exempt ceremonial or 
educational functions from the restrictions of this clause.

  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). It was adopted initially in the 94th Congress (H. Res. 
1435, Oct. 1, 1976, pp. 35175-80) to consolidate in one place 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. The form of the rule adopted during the 
109th Congress established plainer proscriptions with respect to 
registered lobbyists, agents of foreign principals, and persons with 
similar representational roles and specified particular exercises of 
regulatory authority by the Speaker (H. Res. 648, Feb. 1, 2006, p. ----
).

  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 granted by this clause, Speakers have issued regulations from 
time to time (Speaker O'Neill, Jan. 6, 1977, p. 321; Speaker Foley, June 
9, 1994, p. 12387; Speaker Gingrich, May 24, 1995, p. 14300; Speaker 
Gingrich, Aug. 1, 1996, p. 21031; Speaker Hastert, Feb. 1, 2006, p. ----
).

  A former Member has not been 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 has been 
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). Even before the adoption of a 
more categorical form of the rule during the 109th Congress, intent to 
lobby was assumed where a former Member was 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, for example, the Speaker's 
Lobby and the cloakrooms (Speaker Gingrich, May 24, 1995, p. 14300; Aug. 
1, 1996, p. 21031) and the Rayburn Room (Feb. 1, 2006, p. ----).


[[Page 386]]

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).

  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




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 387]]

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 388]]

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 389]]

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 390]]

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 391]]

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 played an important role in the 
evolution of the system by which the House compiles 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 392]]

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 393]]

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 394]]

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 395]]

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 
clause 8 of rule XVII, 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. 3663).

  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; see also Feb. 25, 2003, p. 4402).


[[Page 396]]

clause 9 of rule XIV) 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).
  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

  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 that 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 that do not contain reflections on himself, 
delivered by another Member and withheld for revision (V, 6964).


[[Page 397]]



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 
that he had offered on a previous day and that 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 398]]

  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 that 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 to direct 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 399]]

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). This prohibition does not apply to the insertion of remarks 
spoken in debate in the Senate in the form of a colloquy (Mar. 7, 2006, 
p. ----) given the form of clause 1 of rule XVII as adopted in the 109th 
Congress.


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, stipulates that it 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 individual; (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 (V, 7005). Neither


  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 400]]

specific legislation, including tables and charts but not newspaper 
clippings and editorials. The Clerk normally does not require a cost 
estimate for 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

  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). 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).


[[Page 401]]

Correspondents for the Periodical Press Gallery, 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


  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 402]]

ulations as he may prescribe, one representative 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 reg






 
  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 403]]

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 404]]

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 405]]

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 not covered 
by clause 3 of this rule (Mar. 22, 1991, p. 7549).


[[Page 406]]

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 407]]



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 408]]

  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 409]]

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 adopt a resolution authorizing the 
person to respond. 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 410]]

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 411]]

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 412]]




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).




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; Feb. 6, 2007, p. 
----). 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 413]]

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 414]]

committee chairmen to conduct oversight of that matter, but refraining 
from alleging any impropriety (Nov. 3, 2005, p. ---- (sustained by 
tabling of appeal)). 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 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. 9492 (sustained by tabling of appeal); Oct. 2, 2002, pp. 
18932 (sustained by tabling of appeal), 18934 (sustained by tabling of 
appeal), 18936 (sustained by tabling of appeal), 18938 (sustained by 
tabling of appeal); Oct. 3, 2002, pp. 19001 (sustained by tabling of 
appeal), 19002 (sustained by tabling of appeal)). 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); (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. 9492 (sustained by tabling of 
appeal)); and (3) a resolution alleging that Congress had been negligent 
in its oversight responsibilities with regard to military involvement in 
Iraq, and calling on leadership and


[[Page 415]]

mittee 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. ----); (15) 
alleging, among other things, the improper and unilateral firing of 
nonpartisan staff of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and 
illegal activities between a lobbyist and Members, and directing that 
committee to investigate misconduct of Members and staff with that 
lobbyist (Mar. 30, 2006, p. ----; Apr. 5, 2006, p. ----); (16) alleging 
improper conduct by a former Member with regard to the House Page 
program and insufficient response thereto by the House leadership, and 
directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to establish a 
subcommittee to investigate (Sept. 29, 2006, p. ----); (17) alleging a 
violation of the Code of Official Conduct and issuing a reprimand (May 
22, 2007, p. ----); (18) directing the Committee on Standards of 
Official Conduct to investigate a Member's conduct and make a 
recommendation regarding expulsion (June 5, 2007, p. ----). For a 
discussion 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) 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) establishing an ad hoc committee to investigate allegations of 
``ghost'' employment in the House (Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9029); (3) 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) 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) appointing an outside counsel 
(Sept. 19, 1996, p. 23851; Sept. 24, 1996, p. 24525); (6) committing 
other matters to an outside counsel already appointed by the committee 
(June 27, 1996, p. 15917); (7) directing the committee to release the 
report of an outside counsel (Sept. 19, 1996, p. 23852; Sept. 24, 1996, 
p. 24526); (8) 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) 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) making allegations of 
unauthorized actions by a committee employee to intervene in judicial 
proceedings (Feb. 5, 1992, p. 1601); (11) 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) 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) 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) 
alleging, among other things, the improper and unilateral firing of 
nonpartisan staff of the Com



[[Page 416]]

mittee 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 Committee on House Administration to redress the erroneous 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 com



[[Page 417]]


  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).


  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 of a contested election to which he was party (H. Res. 233, 
Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19340).

  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 418]]

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).
  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,


[[Page 419]]

  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. ----); (4) alleging that known errors in 
the engrossment of a bill were ignored, that matter had been inserted 
into a conference report after conferees had signed it, that material 
information concerning legislation had been withheld for the purpose of 
achieving passage of that measure in a prior Congress, and resolving 
that the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct investigate 
inaccuracies in the enrollment of a bill (Feb. 16, 2006, 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. 
----), as does a resolution alleging such abuse, both in a prior 
Congress and in the current one, and alleging illegal behavior on the 
House floor during one such vote (bribery of a public official) (Dec. 8, 
2005, p. ----).


[[Page 420]]

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. ----); (4) alleging that the majority members of a committee 
wrongfully withheld a committee record from minority committee members 
(Jan. 24, 2007, p. ----).

  Alleged improprieties in committee procedures, including charges of 
committee inaction (III, 2610), secret committee conferences (VI, 578), 
refusal to make a 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 calling for a determination whether 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




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 421]]

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 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. 9492 (sustained by tabling of appeal)).


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 House's 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 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



[[Page 422]]

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. 9492 
(sustained by tabling of appeal); Oct. 2, 2002, pp. 18932 (sustained by 
tabling of appeal), 18934 (sustained by tabling of appeal), 18936 
(sustained by tabling of appeal), 18938 (sustained by tabling of 
appeal); Oct. 3, 2002, pp. 19001 (sustained by tabling of appeal), 19002 
(sustained by tabling of appeal)). 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.

  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;


[[Page 423]]

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'' that 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 Constitution, have been held to have a privilege that 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 that 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



  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).



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 Member'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). A Member's mere assertion of general corruption in the 
House does not support a question of personal privilege (Jan. 18, 2007, 
p. ----).



[[Page 424]]

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).
  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

  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 governing the conduct of 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 425]]

privilege based upon press accounts of another Member's remarks, in 
debate or off the floor, that 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 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, 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. 17613; 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



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.


  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; June 5, 2007, p. ----), 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 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).


[[Page 426]]

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).
  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


  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).




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 personal 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). The Chair may require a Member to 
submit for examination the material upon which the Member would rely 
prior to conferring recognition for a question of personal privilege 
(Jan. 18, 2007, p. ----).



<>   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

[[Page 427]]

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 (Feb. 11, 1994, p. 
2209; Sept. 13, 1994, p. 24389; Feb. 3, 1995, p. 3571).


[[Page 428]]

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; June 8, 2006, p. ----). 
Debate on a question of personal privilege must be confined to the 
statements or issues that gave rise to the question of privilege (V, 
5075-77; VI, 576, 608; VIII, 2448, 2481; May 31, 1984, p. 14623). A 
Member recognized only on the question of whether a resolution qualifies 
as a question of privilege is not recognized to debate such resolution 
(Nov. 3, 2005, p. ----).




 
  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 
a matter of right, require the reading of a book or paper by 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 must 
take this preliminary step in raising a question of the privileges of 
the House (III, 2546, 2547; VI, 565-569; VII, 3464). Such a resolution 
is read in full by the Clerk (Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25420), and a 
parliamentary inquiry regarding its content, in the discretion of the 
Chair, should await the conclusion of the reading (Dec. 8, 2005, p. ----
). 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 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 may include recognition for an hour of debate on a motion to 
refer under clause 4 of rule XVI (Mar. 12, 1992, p. 5557; Sept. 29, 
2006, p. ----); a separate hour of debate on the resolution, itself, 
under clause 2 of rule XVII (formerly


                                 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 429]]

  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 and Technology), 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. 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.

  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 Oversight and 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 Natural Resources, Transportation and Infrastructure 
(formerly Public Works and Transportation), Armed Services (National 
Security during the 104th and 105th Congresses), and Science and 
Technology (formerly Science, Space, and Technology) (sec. 202(a), H. 
Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). The 109th Congress increased the number 
to 20 by establishing the Committee on Homeland Security (sec. 2(a), H. 
Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----).

  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).


[[Page 430]]

  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 apply to 
a bill erroneously referred (VII, 2125), 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), 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 most bills is accomplished by 
unanimous consent (see Procedure, ch. 17, Sec. Sec. 17-38).

  Before the 94th Congress, a bill could not be divided among two or 
more committees, even though it might have contained 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. 7; 
see Sec. 816, infra).

  A committee having jurisdiction over 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 over 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 timely 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).


  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.



[[Page 431]]

      (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.

      (19) Rural development.


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


[[Page 432]]

partment of Agriculture was transferred to the Committee on 
Appropriations (VII, 1860).
  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 De

  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 Foreign 
Affairs (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 over 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), and, in addition to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce, amending the Horse Protection Act to prevent the 
shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, or receiving of horses to be 
slaughtered for human consumption (July 13, 2006, p. ----).


[[Page 433]]

  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 Natural 
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 over 
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 
research 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 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 (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 434]]

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 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

  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, which was 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.



Sec. 718. Armed Services.

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


      (2) Common defense generally.


[[Page 435]]

      (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.


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


[[Page 436]]

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).
  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

  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 437]]


  The Committee exercised jurisdiction with the Committee on Interior 
and Insular Affairs (now Natural Resources) over a resolution 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 438]]

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) (now subparagraph (1)); (2) 
granting the committee jurisdiction over the congressional budget 
process generally in a new subparagraph (3) (now subparagraph (2)); and 
(3) granting the committee jurisdiction over special controls over the 
Federal budget in a new subparagraph (4) (now subparagraph (3)), 
including receiving from the former Committee on Government Operations 
(now Oversight and 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 Oversight and 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 Oversight and 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 439]]


  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 Labor.

      (1) Child labor.



Sec. 720. Education and Labor.

        (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 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 the Committee on Education 
and the Workforce (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121) and was again 
redesignated the Committee on Education and Labor in the 110th Congress 
(sec. 212(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----).


[[Page 440]]

tion 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 Natural Resources); 
jurisdiction of the committee over international education matters was 
specifically transferred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs; and its 
special oversight func


  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 441]]

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 442]]

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 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 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 (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 443]]

ing 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 (now 
Science and Technology), while the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
obtained exclusive jurisdiction over regulation of the domestic nuclear 
energy industry (subpara. (13)) from the Committee on Natural 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 and Technology) (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, and jurisdiction over trading with 
the enemy to the Committee on Foreign Affairs (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 generally (subpara. (11)), measures relating to 
exploration, production, storage, supply, marketing, pricing, and 
regulation of energy resources (subpara. (6)), measures relat

  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 444]]

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 over bills proposing construction of bridges across 
navigable streams, which now are banned under clause 4 of rule XII if 
private (see Sec. 822, infra; see also General Bridge Act, 33 U.S.C. 
525, 533).
  The Committee has general jurisdiction over bills affecting domestic 
and foreign commerce, except such as may affect the revenue (IV, 4097). 
It also has jurisdiction over 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, international congress of hygiene, etc. (IV, 4111), 
bills declaring as to whether or not streams are navigable and for 
preventing or regulating hindrances


  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 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 
Labor, 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 Education and Labor (then 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 445]]



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 (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).


[[Page 446]]

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 
Foreign Affairs), 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 Foreign Affairs, 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. 7).
  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 and Technology) 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 of the Committee 
Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975, that jurisdiction 
was transferred to the standing Committee


[[Page 447]]

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 over 
bills providing consolidation of grant-in-aid programs for urban 
development (Mar. 18, 1970, p. 7887), bills providing for U.S. 
participation in the International Development Association (Mar. 9, 
1960, p. 5046), bills to authorize GSA to acquire land in D.C.

  (h) Committee on Foreign Affairs.



Sec. 723. Foreign Affairs.

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


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

      (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.


[[Page 448]]

      (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). In the 110th 
Congress it was changed back to Foreign Affairs (sec. 213(a), H. Res. 6, 
Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----).

  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 of the Committee on Banking and Currency (now 
Financial Services); international commodity agreements other than those 
relating to 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 Natural Resources) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 
34470). When the legislative jurisdiction of the Joint Committee on 
Atomic Energy in the House 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).


[[Page 449]]

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).
  It has 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),

  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 general but not exclusive 
jurisdiction over legislation relating to claims affecting international 
relations (IV, 4168; VII, 1882). Pursuant to its jurisdiction over 
international education, the committee (and not the Committee on 
Education and Labor) has exercised jurisdiction over bills establishing 
scholarship programs for foreign students (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 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).

  (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).


[[Page 450]]

          (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. ----).




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. 10722). 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. 23433). In the 108th Congress the House reestablished a 
Select Committee on Homeland Security (sec. 4, H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, 
p. 11). 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.


  (j) Committee on House Administration.


[[Page 451]]



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)).

      (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.


[[Page 452]]

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

      (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.

  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 Congress (created in 1893) (IV, 4299), and Memorials 
(created January 3, 1929, VII, 2080).



[[Page 453]]


  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 Natural 
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 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).


  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, and House Information Resources.




Sec. 727. Library.

  Under  the Reorganization Act the 
committee has jurisdiction over 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 Transportion (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 over 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. 101), are elected by resolution each 
Congress.



[[Page 454]]

  The Committee has jurisdiction over 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 the Judiciary.



Sec. 729. 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 455]]

      (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. 730. 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 Oversight and 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 
creation of the new Committee on Homeland Security, see January 4, 2005, 
p. ----.


[[Page 456]]

p. 34032; Aug. 20, 1974, p. 29366). The Committee has reported Articles 
of Impeachment of the President (Aug. 20, 1974, pp. 29219-81; Dec. 17, 
1998, p. 27819). Where the House has voted to impeach, 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,

  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 (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 457]]

increase the amount of pension granted a certain class of persons (Feb. 
15, 1960, p. 2523), and imposing criminal sanctions under the Controlled 
Substances Act (Nov. 14, 1983, p. 32457). The Committee has exclusive 
jurisdiction over the Legal Services Corporation (Nov. 19, 1975, p. 
37288). The Committee has exercised jurisdiction, with the Committee on 
Education and Labor, 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 Oversight and 
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 Natural 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), eliminating racketeering in the interstate sale of 
cigarettes (Feb. 9, 1972, p. 3429), providing worker's compensation for 
non-Federal firefighters killed during civil disorder (May 6, 1968, p. 
11798) or to non-Federal policemen and firemen (Dec. 12, 1975, p. 
40204), 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


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

  (l) Committee on Natural Resources.



Sec. 731. Natural 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 458]]

      (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 459]]

      (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); to 
Resources (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464); and back to 
Natural Resources (sec. 214(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----).

  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 miners, formerly 
under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Mines and Mining, in the 
Committee on Education and Labor. Until the Reorganization Act, military 
parks, battlefields, and national cemeteries were under the 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 460]]

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 461]]

(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 park 
land 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. 18796). 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 Labor, and not this committee, has 
jurisdiction over a bill amending the Native American Programs Act of 
1974 (an Indian education matter)


  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).

  (m) Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.



Sec. 732. Oversight and 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.


[[Page 462]]

      (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.

  In the 82d Congress the name of this committee was changed from 
Expenditures in the Executive Departments to Government Operations (July 
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), in 
the 106th Congress it was changed to Government Reform (H. Res. 5, Jan. 
6, 1999, p. 47), and in the 110th Congress it was changed to Oversight 
and Government Reform (sec. 215(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----). 
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).


[[Page 463]]

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 exemptions 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 this committee 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 Oversight and Government Reform) retains programmatic 
jurisdiction over that Fund); (2) the Committee on the Budget has 
primary jurisdiction over a


[[Page 464]]

adjustment for administrative law judges (July 31, 1991, p. 20677; June 
10, 1999, p. 12435).
  The Committee has exercised jurisdiction over 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


  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. The Committee may authorize the taking of depositions 
pursuant to subpoena (clause 4(c)(3) of rule X). 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 studying 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.

  (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 465]]

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 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

  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).



[[Page 466]]


  The jurisdiction of this committee is primarily over propositions to 
make or change the rules (V, 6770, 6776; VII, 2047), to create 
committees (IV, 4322; VII, 2048), and to direct 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).



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 this 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 
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; H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 
2007, p. ----). 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 that 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 and Technology.



Sec. 735. Science and Technology.

      (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.


[[Page 467]]

      (3) Civil aviation research and development.

      (4) Environmental research and development.

      (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 468]]

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 jurisdictional 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 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 
110th Congress renamed the committee as the Committee on Science and 
Technology (sec. 216(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----).
  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


  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 Natural 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 Natural 
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. 18796).

  (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.


[[Page 469]]

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


  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. 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).

  (q) Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.


      The Code of Official Conduct.


[[Page 470]]



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.

  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 the 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 House referred to the 
committee a resolution relating to the House Page Program offered as a 
question of privilege (H. Res. 1065, 109th Cong., Sept. 29, 2006, p. --
--).

  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 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).


[[Page 471]]

  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.).



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



  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.


[[Page 472]]

      (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).

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

      (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.


[[Page 473]]

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


      (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 Natural 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 mattersfrom 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 
creation of that committee, see January 4, 2005, p. ----.


[[Page 474]]

tions (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 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 Oversight and 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 
Oversight and Government Reform and Oversight, 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 Natural 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 Oversight and 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 Administra


[[Page 475]]

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 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 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 Oversight and Government Reform) over a bill 
to require the Administrator


  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 476]]

tion (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 Natural 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 
Labor. 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 (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' Legisla

  (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).


[[Page 477]]

ing 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.
  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 
Bank

  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 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; 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 Oversight and 
Government Reform); however, revenue sharing was stricken from the 
jurisdictional statement of that committee in the 104th Congress (sec. 
202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).

  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 
creation of that committee, see January 4, 2005, p. ----.


[[Page 478]]

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).
  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 over 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 offered for

  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 ``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 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 Natural 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).



[[Page 479]]


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--


      (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;


[[Page 480]]

      (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;

      (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.


[[Page 481]]

  (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 
Oversight and Government Reform and to the Committee on House 
Administration. In developing its plan each committee shall, to the 
maximum extent feasible--

      (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 explanation of steps that have been or will 
be taken to ensure such coordination and cooperation;

      (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.


[[Page 482]]

of oversight plans and otherwise to achieve the objectives of this 
clause.
  (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 Oversight and 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


  (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.


[[Page 483]]

Congress (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). Paragraph (d) 
was amended in the 110th Congress to reflect a change in committee name 
(sec. 215(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----).

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 
Oversight and 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 the 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 
Oversight and Government Reform) and House Oversight (now House 
Administration). The Committee on Oversight and 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



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 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.


  (b) 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.

  (c) 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.

  (d) The Committee on Education and Labor 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.


[[Page 484]]

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

  (f) The Committee on Foreign Affairs 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.

  (g) 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.

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

  (i) The Committee on Oversight and 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.

  (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.


[[Page 485]]

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

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


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


[[Page 486]]

of oversight functions of the Committees on Oversight and 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 (g) (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 
2005, p. ----).
  The oversight authority conferred on the Committee on Appropriations 
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 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 
(e) (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 Oversight and Government Reform 
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 Natural Resources 
and Energy and Commerce were adopted to reflect the transfer of 
jurisdiction over nonmilitary nuclear energy from the Committee on 
Natural Resources to the Committee on 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 (except for paragraphs (g) and (m)) 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; H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----). Clerical 
and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified its rules 
in the 106th Congress, including the transfer to this clause


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 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).



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.


[[Page 487]]

  (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.



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 subsequent 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.



  (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

[[Page 488]]

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 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.


[[Page 489]]

resolution on the budget for a fiscal year is agreed to.

  (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


  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 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).


[[Page 490]]

priations, and three members of the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence.


Sec. 747a. Select Intelligence Oversight Panel.

  (5)(A)  There 
is established a Select Intelligence Oversight Panel of the Committee on 
Appropriations (hereinafter in this paragraph referred to as the 
``select panel''). The select panel shall be composed of not more than 
13 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the 
Speaker, of whom not more than eight may be from the same political 
party. The select panel shall include the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Appropriations, the chairman and ranking 
minority member of its Subcommittee on Defense, six additional members 
of the Committee on Appro


  (B) The Speaker shall designate one member of the select panel as its 
chairman and one member as its ranking minority member.

  (C) Each member on the select panel shall be treated as though a 
member of the Committee on Appropriations for purposes of the select 
panel.

  (D) The select panel shall review and study on a continuing basis 
budget requests for and execution of intelligence activities; make 
recommendations to relevant subcommittees of the Committee on 
Appropriations; and, on an annual basis, prepare a report to the Defense 
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations containing budgetary and 
oversight observations and recommendations for use by such subcommittee 
in preparation of the classified annex to the bill making appropriations 
for the Department of Defense.

  (E) Rule XI shall apply to the select panel in the same manner as a 
subcommittee (except for clause 2(m)(1)(B) of that rule).


  (F) A subpoena of the Committee on Appropriations or its Subcommittee 
on Defense may specify terms of return to the select panel.


  Subparagraph (5) was added in the 110th Congress (H. Res. 35, Jan. 9, 
2007, p. ----).

  (b) The Committee on the Budget shall--


[[Page 491]]



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;

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


      (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.


[[Page 492]]

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).

  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



Sec. 749. Oversight and Government Reform.

  (c)(1)  The 
Committee on Oversight and 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

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

      (2) In addition to its duties under subparagraph (1), the 
Committee on Oversight and 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.


[[Page 493]]

and regulating the taking of depositions by a member or counsel of the 
committee, including pursuant to subpoena under clause 2(m) of rule XI 
(which hereby is made applicable for such purpose).
  (3)(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform may adopt a 
rule authorizing

  (B) A rule adopted by the committee pursuant to this subparagraph--

      (i) may provide that a deponent be directed to subscribe an oath 
or affirmation before a person authorized by law to administer the same; 
and

      (ii) shall ensure that the minority members and staff of the 
committee are accorded equitable treatment with respect to notice of and 
a reasonable opportunity to participate in any proceeding conducted 
thereunder.


  (C) Information secured pursuant to the authority described in 
subdivision (A) shall retain the character of discovery until offered 
for admission in evidence before the committee, at which time any proper 
objection shall be timely.


[[Page 494]]

the jurisdiction of the committee. Paragraph (c)(3) was added in the 
110th Congress (sec. 502, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 
5, 2007)).

  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 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, 106th, and 110th Congresses (sec. 202(b), H. 
Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47; sec. 
215(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2007, 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). 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



Sec. 750. House Administration.

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




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 495]]

ever, 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). The Committee also provides policy review and 
oversight of the Chief Executive Officer for Visitor Services within the 
Office of the Architect of the Capitol (sec. 6701, P.L. 110-28). 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), 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. How


[[Page 496]]

department, agency, establishment, wholly owned Government corporation, 
or instrumentality of the Federal Government or of the government of the 
District of Columbia.


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



  (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


[[Page 497]]

      (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.


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 were 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 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 year 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. 7).


[[Page 498]]

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.



757. Electing committees.

  5.  (a)(1) The standing committees 
specified in clause 1 shall be elected by the House within seven 
calendar days



  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, 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).



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;


[[Page 499]]

      (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).


  (C) In the case of a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner 
elected to serve as the chairman or the ranking minority member of the 
committee, tenure on the committee shall be limited only by paragraph 
(c)(2) of this clause.


[[Page 500]]

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. 7). 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. ----).
  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

  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, 
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. 7).


  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.



[[Page 501]]

  (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.

  (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 subcommittees of that committee 
during that Congress. The lists of Members, Delegates, or the Resident 
Commissioner so named shall be announced to the House.


  (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 502]]

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).

  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,



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.



[[Page 503]]

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

  (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.


[[Page 504]]

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. ----).
  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.


  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 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, during the 104th through 109th Congresses the 
minority leadership had responsibility for the committee assignments of 
that Member.



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.



[[Page 505]]

tive Congresses (disregarding for this purpose any service for less than 
a full session in a Congress).

  (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 consecu

  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. ----). 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).


  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 Oversight and 
Government Reform may have not more than seven subcommittees.


[[Page 506]]

a subcommittee on oversight (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In the 
110th Congress it was amended to reflect a change in the name of a 
committee (sec. 215(e), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----). 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).
  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


  Notwithstanding clause 5(d), the Committee on Oversight and 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 Foreign 
Affairs was permitted to have not more than six during the 107th and 
108th Congresses and not more than seven during the 109th and 110th 
Congresses (sec. 3(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26; sec. 3(b), H. 
Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 11; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----
; sec. 511(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)); 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure was permitted to have 
not more than six during the 107th, 108th, 109th, and 110th Congresses 
(sec. 3(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 
7, 2003, p. 11; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----; sec. 
511(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)); and 
the Committee on Armed Services was permitted to have not more than six 
during the 108th and 109th Congresses and not more than seven during the 
110th Congress (sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 11; sec. 3(b), H. 
Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----; sec. 511(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 
---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). 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. That 
committee reduced the number of its subcommittees to 10 in the 109th 
Congress, and increased it to 12 in the 110th Congress. In each case, 
the committee's reorganization was in compliance with this clause.


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


[[Page 507]]

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).
  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


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 committee (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).


[[Page 508]]

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--


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


      (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

      (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 appropriate to provide the House with basic 
estimates of the expenditures contemplated by the primary expense 
resolution.


[[Page 509]]



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--



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 compensation 
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



[[Page 510]]

enactment of the provisions of the resolution as permanent law.

      (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

  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, this 
provision was found in former clause 5 of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 
1999, p. 47).

  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).


[[Page 511]]

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.



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



  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


[[Page 512]]

      (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.

  (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 the Committee on House 
Administration) of the total annualized amount made available under 
expense resolutions for such committee in the preceding session of 
Congress.

  (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.


[[Page 513]]

  (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.

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


  (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.


[[Page 514]]

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).
  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


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 (H. 
Res. 77, Feb. 13, 2003, p. 3793) and a new standing committee (Jan. 4, 
2005, p. ----).



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 
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.


  (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.


[[Page 515]]

      (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.



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 in complying with reporting 
requirements in applicable Federal law and shall be open for public 
inspection.


  (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--


[[Page 516]]

      (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.

  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 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).


[[Page 517]]

dated 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.

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. Consoli



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 518]]

ity 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 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 minor



[[Page 519]]

(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, 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

  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

      (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.



[[Page 520]]

tration in connection with the reporting of any primary or additional 
expense resolution.

  (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 Adminis


  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. 3, 2001, 
p. 24); 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. 7). 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. 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 maximum rate of pay as in effect from time to time under 
applicable provisions of law.



[[Page 521]]

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 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




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.



  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 XI (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).


[[Page 522]]

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.
  (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

  (g) Each staff member appointed pursuant to a request by minority 
party members under paragraph (a), and each staff member appointed 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.


[[Page 523]]

the minority party members are otherwise assigned to assist the minority 
party members.

  (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


  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. ----).




Sec. 780. Nonpartisan staff.

  (i)  Notwithstanding paragraph 
(a)(2), a committee may employ nonpartisan staff, in lieu of or in 
addition to 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.



[[Page 524]]

(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).
  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


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 525]]




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 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.



  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).


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 Foreign Affairs; and


[[Page 526]]

      (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.

  (4)(A) Except as permitted by subdivision (B), a Member, Delegate, or 
Resident Commissioner, 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).

  (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:


[[Page 527]]

tional Intelligence Program as defined in section 3(6) of the National 
Security Act of 1947.
      (A) The Central Intelligence Agency, the Director of National 
Intelligence, and the Na

      (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.

      (D) Authorizations for appropriations, both direct and indirect, 
for the following:

          (i) The Central Intelligence Agency, the Director of National 
Intelligence, and the National 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).


[[Page 528]]

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.
  (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

  (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.


[[Page 529]]

sistent with paragraph (g) to protect national security.
  (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 con

  (2) The select committee shall obtain annual reports from the Director 
of National Intelligence, 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 committee. 
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.


[[Page 530]]

  (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.

  (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


[[Page 531]]

such employee or person will be given access by the select committee.
      (2) received an appropriate security clearance, as determined by 
the select committee in consultation with the Director of National 
Intelligence, that is commensurate with the sensitivity of the 
classified information to which

  (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 disclosure of classified information clearly outweighs 
any infringement on the privacy of a person.

  (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.


[[Page 532]]

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.
  (2)(A) In a case in which the select committee votes to disclose 
publicly any information that has been classified under established 
security

  (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 national interest of the United States posed by the 
disclosure is of such gravity that it outweighs any public interest in 
the disclosure.

  (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.


[[Page 533]]

  (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.

  (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 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?''.


[[Page 534]]

  (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).

  (B) The select committee shall, under such regulations as it may 
prescribe, make information described in subdivision (A) available to a 
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.


[[Page 535]]

in violation of subparagraph (3) and report to the House concerning any 
allegation that it finds to be substantiated.
  (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

  (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, officer, 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.

  (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.


[[Page 536]]

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:
  (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

      (1) The activities of the Director of National Intelligence and 
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

      (2) The activities of the Central Intelligence Agency.

      (3) The activities of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

      (4) The activities of the National Security Agency.

      (5) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities of other 
agencies and subdivisions of the Department of Defense.

      (6) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the 
Department of State.

      (7) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation.

      (8) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities of all 
other departments and agencies of the executive branch.

  (j)(1) In this clause the term ``intelligence and intelligence-related 
activities'' includes--


[[Page 537]]

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;
      (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

      (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;

      (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 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

      (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.


[[Page 538]]

department, agency, bureau, or subdivision referred to in this clause.
  (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


  (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 539]]

(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. Membership, 
administration, jurisdiction.

  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, 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. 7); (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. 
----); (13) to reflect a change in the name of a committee (sec. 213(c), 
H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----); and (14) to conform jurisdictional 
statements to changes in the intelligence community (sec. 504, H. Res. 
6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). Before the House 
recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in 
former rule XLVIII


  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)(1) (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 
Technology) and Foreign Affairs 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).


[[Page 540]]

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).
  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

  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, see 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.


  (B) Each subcommittee is a part of its committee and is subject to the 
authority and direction of that committee and to its rules, so far as 
applicable.

  (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.


[[Page 541]]

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.
  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

  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).


  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.



[[Page 542]]

  (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.


  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 changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in 
the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).




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.



[[Page 543]]

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).

  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



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.

  (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 recommendations made or actions 
taken thereon.

  (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



[[Page 544]]


      (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).



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


[[Page 545]]

      (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.

  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 testimony. 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. ----).

  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).


[[Page 546]]

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).


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


  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.

  Committees generally conduct their business under the five-minute rule 
but may employ the ordinary motions that are in order in the House, such 
as under clause 4 of rule XVI.
Regular meeting days



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



[[Page 547]]

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.
  (c)(1) The chairman of each standing committee may call and convene, 
as he considers


[[Page 548]]

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 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.


  (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.

  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 chairmen 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).

  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). These 
precedents should be read in light of clause 5(c) of rule X and clause 
2(d) or rule XI. 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--



[[Page 549]]

subject only to technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections 
authorized by the person making the remarks involved; and
      (i) in the case of a meeting or hearing transcript, a 
substantially verbatim account of remarks actually made during the 
proceedings,

      (ii) a record of the votes on any question on which a record vote 
is demanded.



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.


[[Page 550]]



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.

  (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.


[[Page 551]]

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).
  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

  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 that 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 committee) 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).


[[Page 552]]

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).
  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 Permanent 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


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, Foreign Affairs, and Armed Services.




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).


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), 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.


[[Page 553]]

committee, 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).


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 sub



[[Page 554]]

  (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).

  (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 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.


[[Page 555]]

ligence, and the subcommittees thereof, may vote by the same procedure 
to close up to five additional, consecutive days of hearings.
  (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 Intel

  (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 Daily Digest and 
made available in electronic form.


[[Page 556]]

fiscal years by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness.
  (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

  (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 557]]

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 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 the case of a 
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



[[Page 558]]


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).


  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 
overruled 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).


[[Page 559]]



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).


  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 (other 
than the committee on Oversight and Government Reform under clause 4(c) 
of rule X) 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.


[[Page 560]]

sume 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.

  (B) A rule adopted pursuant to this subparagraph shall provide that 
when proceedings re

  This subpararaph was added in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(g), H. Res. 
5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7).
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 561]]

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 permitted 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



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.

  (B) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting a specified 
number of its members to 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.


[[Page 562]]

and the minority party and may not exceed one hour in the aggregate.

  (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


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.


  (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.


[[Page 563]]

that the evidence or testimony that the witness would give at a hearing 
may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate the witness--
  (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

      (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

      (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 
from such person to subpoena additional witnesses.

  (6) Except as provided in subparagraph (5), the chairman shall receive 
and the committee shall dispose of requests to subpoena additional 
witnesses.


[[Page 564]]

  (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.

  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 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).


[[Page 565]]

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.

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




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.




[[Page 566]]


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 567]]

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 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

  (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.

  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 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).


[[Page 568]]

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.
  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


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 
authorizes an 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 
lawsuit 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 or interrogatories. Other than the authority of 
the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform under clause 4(c) of 
rule X, that authority must be conferred by separate action of the House 
(see Sec. 800, supra).



806. Standards of Official Conduct; additional 
duties.

  3. (a) The  Committee on Standards of Official Conduct has the following 
functions:



[[Page 569]]

tigation under subparagraph (2) shall only be issued or implemented as a 
part of a report required by such subparagraph.
      (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 
inves

      (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 570]]

      (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 committee, 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.

      (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.

      (6)(A) The committee shall offer annual ethics training to each 
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, and employee of the 
House. Such training shall--

          (i) involve the classes of employees for whom the committee 
determines such training to be appropriate; and

          (ii) include such knowledge of the Code of Official Conduct 
and related House rules as may be determined appropriate by the 
committee.


[[Page 571]]

      (B)(i) A new officer or employee of the House shall receive 
training under this paragraph not later than 60 days after beginning 
service to the House.

      (ii) Not later than January 31 of each year, each officer and 
employee of the House shall file a certification with the committee that 
the officer or employee attended ethics training in the last year as 
established by this subparagraph.

  (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.


[[Page 572]]

relating to the official conduct of an individual Member, Delegate, 
Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House only--
  (2) Except in the case of an investigation undertaken by the committee 
on its own initiative, the committee may undertake an investigation

      (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 573]]

      (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 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.

  (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.

  (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, 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.


[[Page 574]]

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.
  (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,

  (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.

  (c)(1) Notwithstanding clause 2(g)(1) of rule XI, each meeting of the 
Committee on Standards 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.

  (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.


[[Page 575]]

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:
  (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

      ``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 by the Committee on Standards of 
Official Conduct and appropriate action shall be taken.

  (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.


[[Page 576]]

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).
  The investigative authority contained in this provision (formerly 
clause 4(e) of rule X) was first conferred upon the committee 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 not less than seven committee members 
authorize an investigation was changed to permit a majority of the 
committee to provide that authorization (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 
1974, p. 34470). That provision

  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 committee 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 
committee 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 a 
general limitation on actions for committee consideration of ethics 
matters.

  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 
committee 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).


[[Page 577]]

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). Paragraph (a)(6) was added 
in the 110th Congress, effective March 1, 2007 (sec. 211, H. Res. 6, 
Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----).
  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 committee 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 
committee 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 committee 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


Committee agendas
  In the 110th Congress, the House adopted a resolution directing the 
Committee to empanel an investigative subcommittee upon a Member being 
indicted or otherwise formally charged with criminal conduct, or to 
report to the House if it decides not to so empanel a subcommittee (H. 
Res. 451, June 5, 2007, p. ----).



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--

      (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;


[[Page 578]]

or duties with the committee without specific prior approval from the 
chairman and ranking minority member; and
      (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

      (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.

  (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.


[[Page 579]]

  (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--

      (A) all meetings or hearings of the committee or any subcommittee 
thereof, other 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


[[Page 580]]

Public disclosure
      (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.

  (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

  (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.
Duties of chairman and ranking minority member regarding properly filed 

        complaints


[[Page 581]]

  (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 582]]

firmative 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 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 af

        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

      (2) recommend to the committee that it authorize the establishment 
of an investigative subcommittee.
Investigative and adjudicatory subcommittees

  (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;


[[Page 583]]

from the majority and minority parties) whenever such a subcommittee is 
established pursuant to the rules of the committee; and
      (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

      (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;

      (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


[[Page 584]]

lation, 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
  (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, regu

  (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.

  (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


[[Page 585]]

Due process rights of respondents
      (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.

  (p) The committee shall adopt rules to provide that--

      (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 that evidence is 
being withheld and of the count to which such evidence relates;

      (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;


[[Page 586]]

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;
      (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

      (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--

          (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;


[[Page 587]]

          (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;

      (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--


[[Page 588]]

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;
      (1) whenever an investigative subcommittee does not adopt a 
statement of alleged violation

      (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--

          (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 before the subcommittee votes 
on whether to adopt the report;

          (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


[[Page 589]]

spondent's views previously submitted pursuant to subdivision (B) and 
any additional views respondent may submit for attachment to the final 
report; 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 re


      (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.

  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 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 for 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 free-standing 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. 7). 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. ----).


[[Page 590]]

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).

  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


 ``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 

        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 


[[Page 591]]

        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 

        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 


[[Page 592]]

        advice of the committee.''.


                               __________

  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, 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. 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).


[[Page 593]]

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).
  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


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--



[[Page 594]]

      (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.



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) 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--



[[Page 595]]

      (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.



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 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. 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.


[[Page 596]]

ing room shall be in accordance with fair and equitable procedures 
devised by the Executive Committee of the Radio and Television 
Correspondents' Galleries.
      (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 meet

      (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.

      (5) Equipment necessary for coverage by the television and radio 
media may not be installed in, or removed from, the hearing or meeting 
room while the committee is in session.

      (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.


[[Page 597]]

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.
      (7) In the allocation of the number of still photographers 
permitted by a committee or



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.




[[Page 598]]


      (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.


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 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).




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.



[[Page 599]]

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).
  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,


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. 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 600]]

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).



 
  The business of conferences between the two Houses is not interrupted 
by an adjournment of a session that 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


                                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 601]]

clause only to the extent that they will contribute to the achievement 
of the objectives of this clause.
  (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

  (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 602]]

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 exception in paragraph (c)(1) was added (sec. 2(i), H. 
Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). 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 Natural Resources) (regulation of the 
domestic nuclear energy industry, since transferred to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce in the 104th Congress), Foreign Affairs 
(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 (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

  An order of the House precluding or limiting the potential for 
organizational or legislative business on certain days 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, extended by unanimous consent 
on Jan. 22, 1992, p. 149, and Jan. 28, 1992, p. 745; H. Res. 619, 109th 
Cong., Dec. 16, 2005, p. ----, amended by H. Res. 640, 109th Cong., Dec. 
18, 2005, p. ----).


[[Page 603]]

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. 21936; Speaker Hastert, Mar. 13, 2001, p. 3448; Speaker 
Hastert, July 26, 2002, p. 15146). 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

  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 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 604]]

eration 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. 9384). The Speaker exercised 
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 consid


  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 
where a bill is 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 605]]

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 Natural 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

  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. 23681); (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 606]]

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 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


  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 Foreign Affairs 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; sec. 213(d), H. Res. 6, 
Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----). 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 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 Foreign Affairs (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 607]]

Speaker to be obscene or insulting) shall be entered 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


  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 608]]




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 military 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 609]]


  (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 Oversight and 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). No recommendations were reported. 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 specified by sponsor and 
title proposing a commemoration (which was contained in the resolved 
clause and not merely in the preamble) (Oct. 24, 2001, p. 20545).




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 610]]

of order may not be raised as to jurisdiction (IV, 4390, 4391; VII, 
2131). 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



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 611]]

to the House or is discharged from its consideration.
  (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

  (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 612]]

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. 7). 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 and 110th Congresses the House adopted the 
same initial order but for the entire Congress (sec. 3(c), H. Res. 5, 
Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----; sec. 217, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, 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,

  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 
that 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 613]]

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. 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

  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. 11196; 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. 
----).


  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).




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.




[[Page 614]]

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:


      (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 United 
States for money or property, or referring a claim to the Court of 
Claims.


[[Page 615]]

not requiring referral to the Calendar of the Committee of the Whole 
House on the state of the Union.
      (2) A House Calendar, to which shall be referred all public bills 
and public resolutions


      (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 a bill to a calendar is governed 
by the text of the bill as referred to committee, 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 did not remain on the calendar from Congress to 
Congress, even when a law seemed 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 616]]

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 entitlement 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




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.





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.



[[Page 617]]

nonprivileged reports only (contrast the 1999 codification with its 
predecessor in form; 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). An erstwhile form of paragraph (a)(2) advisedly 
applied to

  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 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 618]]



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 necessary to bring the measure or 
matter to a vote.





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.


  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).


[[Page 619]]

2(c) of rule XIII with respect to the guaranteed time for composing 
separate views (see Sec. 836, infra) (Dec. 17, 1982, p. 31951).

  Absent a special order of the House, committee reports must be 
submitted while the House is in session, except as permitted under 
clause




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 620]]



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. 7).


[[Page 621]]

and the names of members voting for and against, shall be included in 
the committee report. The preceding sentence does not apply to a report 
by the Committee on Rules on a rule, joint rule, or the order of 
business or 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 
expanded 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). An exception for the 
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct was adopted in the 105th 
Congress (sec. 8, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19318) and expanded to 
include the Committee on Rules in the 110th Congress (sec. 503, H. Res. 
6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). 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 the 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 622]]

cept that an estimate of new budget authority shall include, when 
practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for the 
relevant programs to the appropriate levels under current law.
      (2) The statement required by section 308(a) of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974, ex

      (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.



[[Page 623]]


  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).



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 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.



[[Page 624]]

of any program authorized by the bill or joint resolution if less than 
five years);


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


      (B) a comparison of the estimate of costs described in subdivision 
(A) made by the committee with any estimate of such costs made by a 
Government agency and submitted to such committee; and

      (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 625]]

ed 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) (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 amend

  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


[[Page 626]]

      (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.


  (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 changes in existing law proposed to 
be made by the bill or joint resolution as proposed to be amended.

  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).


[[Page 627]]

the House has resolved into the Committee of the Whole for its 
consideration (VIII, 2243-2245).
  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


  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.



[[Page 628]]


  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).

  (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 629]]

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 enactment 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 that propose direct permanent repeal or amendment of a rule of the 
House,



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 
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;


[[Page 630]]

ation explaining why a macroeconomic impact analysis is not calculable; 
or
      (ii) the report includes a statement from the Joint Committee on 
Internal Revenue Tax

      (iii) the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means causes a 
macroeconomic impact analysis to be printed in the Congressional Record 
before consideration of the bill or joint resolution.

  (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. 7). 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).


[[Page 631]]

committee on that measure or matter has been available to Members, 
Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner.


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


  (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 632]]

and the Resident Commissioner before the consideration of the measure or 
matter in the House.

  (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,

  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 633]]

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 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 that 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




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 that are privileged (such as a 
resolution authorizing the printing of material as a House document), 
but that 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 634]]


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, either 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 635]]

      (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.


[[Page 636]]

  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), again on February 2, 1951 (p. 883), and yet again 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 Natural 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. ----).

  At the time these privileges originated all reports were made on the 
floor, and often with great difficulty because of the pressure of 
business (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).


[[Page 637]]



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'' that 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 
that are privileged under the rules (III, 2426-2530; V, 6454; VIII, 
3465).


  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, 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).


[[Page 638]]

is under consideration (Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3542; July 27, 1993, p. 
17129). 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 that 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


  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 is 
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 639]]

of the Whole House to consider the Private Calendar (IV, 3082-3085; VI, 
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 over 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 over the 
motion to resolve into Committee



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 but may not entertain any other 
dilatory motion until the report shall have been disposed of.


[[Page 640]]

  (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; or


      (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 641]]

Congress (sec. 505(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 
2007)). For rulings under the earlier form of the rule, see Sec. 859, 
infra.
  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 that 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. ----) and a technical change to paragraph (b) was effected in 
the 110th

  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 vote 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 over it, 
even when the previous question and the yeas and nays 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 that 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 642]]

would otherwise prohibit the consideration of a bill being made in order 
by the resolution (Speaker Albert, Mar. 20, 1975, p. 7676; Mar. 24, 
1975, p. 8418), or that 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 that

  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 643]]

(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 
reconsider 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) and may be offered immediately after the 
reading of the resolution (Mar. 20, 2002, pp. 3671-72) but 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 led 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


  A motion to recommit a special rule from the Committee on Rules is not 
in order (VIII, 2270, 2753).


[[Page 644]]



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.


  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., a special order providing that 
a concurrent resolution correcting the enrollment of a bill within the 
jurisdiction of another committee be considered 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 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 645]]

shall recognize a member of the committee who rises for that purpose.


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



  (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. Privileged motion.

  (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 646]]

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 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




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 647]]

``request'' in asking for information from the President and ``direct'' 
in addressing the heads of departments (III, 1856, footnote, 1895). It 
is usual 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




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'' (except on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 896-898)) 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). 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 648]]

lege 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 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 privi






 


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 that 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 649]]

  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 much 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 650]]

of business could be superseded by operation of other rules (H. Res. 5, 
Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). But when the order of business is interrupted by a 
privileged matter, the business in order proceeds 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 resolving 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 are 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 gives 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 that 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 that, 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 order


  (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 651]]

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 
Chair, 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 652]]



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 653]]

  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 654]]

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'' and 
not involving an expenditure (IV, 3103) has been placed on the House 
Calendar (IV, 3096; VI, 727, 736, 738) or Private Calendar (IV, 3102). 
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 655]]

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 656]]

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 that 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 that 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 657]]

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 658]]




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 was 
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 that 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 properly be on the House Calendar (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 his 
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).



[[Page 659]]


6. <>   All questions relating to the priority of business 
shall be decided by a majority without debate.



Sec. 883. Conditions of the motion to go into 
Committee of the Whole at the end of one hour.

  The phrase  ``one hour'' has been 
interpreted to include a shorter time in the case that 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 660]]

gress, 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. 3(d), H. 
Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 11). That authority was extended by unanimous 
consent through the last Wednesday in June (Apr. 30, 2003, p. 10063) 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 Con



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 
that 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 661]]

(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).
  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 that has been ruled out 
of order by the Speaker

  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; Jan. 22, 2007, p. ----
). 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 withdraw and modify 
the motion rests with its proponent (May 10, 2006, 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 but may not entertain any other motion until the vote 
is taken on the motion to suspend the rules.



[[Page 662]]

  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).

  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), and yields to such 
questions of privilege (III, 2553; VI, 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). 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 Committee on Rules. 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 663]]

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), 
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 that 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.

    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).
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




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 664]]




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 but may not entertain 
any other motion until the vote is taken on the suspension.



  This provision (formerly clause 8 of rule XVI) was adopted in 1868 (V, 
5743), and amended in 1911 (VIII, 2823). A technical change was effected 
in the 110th Congress (sec. 505(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- 
(adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). 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).

  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). Any challenge to 
the Member recognized to control the time in opposition to the motion 
must be made when the time is allocated by the Chair (May 15, 1984, p. 
12215; Speaker Wright, June 2, 1987, p. 14223).


[[Page 665]]

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).

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.



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.

  (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.


[[Page 666]]

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.
  (c) A motion presented under paragraph (b) shall be placed in the 
custody of the Clerk, who


[[Page 667]]

  (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 discharge shall have precedence in the order of 
their entry on the Journal.

  (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 but 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 668]]

  (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 appropriate calendar, where it shall have the same status as if 
the committee from which it was discharged had duly reported it to the 
House.

  (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.

  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 resolution the House immediately voted on 
adoption of the resolution (Speaker Rayburn, Jan. 24, 1944, p. 631).


[[Page 669]]

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) and a 
technical correction was effected in the 110th Congress (sec. 505(d), H. 
Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)).
  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

  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 670]]

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, pp. 145-56).
  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 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 right to close 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 671]]

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 Oversight and 
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 and 110th Congresses 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; sec. 215(f), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----). 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 Oversight and 
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 Oversight and 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 672]]

does not affect the eligibility of further such business after 
suspensions have been completed (Sept. 17, 1984, p. 25523).

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



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 673]]

a motion that the House dispense with the call on this day.
  (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

  (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 674]]

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, 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).




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 that 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 discretion 
of the Chair 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 (Nov. 17, 1981, p. 27770 (sustained 
by tabling of appeal)).


[[Page 675]]

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 
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




Sec. 899. Former Consent Calendar.

  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 prior placement on 
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 676]]

less two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum 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) un


  (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 677]]

  (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 before 
automatically resolving into Committee of the Whole House on the state 
of the Union (VII, 952).


[[Page 678]]

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), a committee may 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 that 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 that 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 679]]

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; Apr. 18, 2007, 
p. ----). 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.


  In 1880 the first sentence of this clause was composed of language 
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 680]]

demand that a motion be reduced to writing and in the proper form, 
including 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 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


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 discussion of dilatory motions pending consideration of 
a report from the Committee on Rules, see Sec. Sec. 857-858, supra.




[[Page 681]]




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.


  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 
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 House always insists that the motion 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 the question on 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 682]]

Committee of the Whole by voice vote may not be withdrawn (June 17, 
2004, p. ----).
  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, pp. 8490, 8491). An amendment disposed of 
in the

  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 that 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).



[[Page 683]]




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.


  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 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 that 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.



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 684]]

a bill the consideration of which has been provided by a special order 
of business (IV, 3175; V, 4953-4957; June 22, 2006, p. ----; Jan. 24, 
2007, p. ----; Jan. 31, 2007, p. ----), 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 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 merely for reference, 
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


  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), 
and the question of consideration is not available after the House has 
resolved into the Committee of the Whole (May 10, 2007, p. ----).



Sec. 909. Relation of question of consideration to points of 
order.

  A  point of order against consideration of a bill 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).



[[Page 685]]



Sec. 910. Unfunded mandates; congressional 
earmarks.

  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.



Precedence of motions
  Clause 9of rule XXI establishes a point of order against consideration 
of certain measures for failure to disclose (or disclaim the presence 
of) certain earmarks, tax benefits, and tariff benefits (paragraph (a)), 
and permits a vote on the question of consideration of a rule or order 
waiving such points of order (paragraph (b)). Certain cognizability 
thresholds are established for points of order under the rule (paragraph 
(c)). See Sec. 1068d, 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):


      (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


[[Page 686]]

      (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).

  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).



[[Page 687]]

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. 10725; Apr. 
18, 2002, 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. ----).
  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,

  When the House has fixed the hour of daily meeting, the simple motion 
to adjourn may not be amended (V, 5754), whether by specifying a 
particular day (V, 5360) or hour (V, 5364) (but see Sec. 913, infra, for 
a discussion of the equally privileged motion to fix the day and time to 
which the House shall adjourn); or 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. 1291), 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).


[[Page 688]]

(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).


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


  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 the Speaker to declare a recess for up to three days (Dec. 15, 
1995, p. 37102).


[[Page 689]]

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).


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; June 
22, 2006, p. ----), 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


  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 a preamble or another resolution with 
which it is connected (V, 5428, 5430); a petition does not accompany the 
motion to receive it when the latter is laid on the table (V, 5431-
5433); and a bill does not accompany a motion to instruct conferees that 
is laid on the table (VIII, 2658).

  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 resolve 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).


[[Page 690]]

(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).
  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



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.




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 privileged 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, proceedings under the Calendar Wednesday rule are in 
order (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).


  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 
only within narrow limits (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).


[[Page 691]]

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).
  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 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



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 (or commit, as the case may be), with or 
without instructions, pending the motion for or after ordering of the 
previous question as provided in clause 2(a) of rule XIX (V, 5569); the 
motion to recommit (or commit, as the case may be), with or without 
instructions, after the previous question has been ordered on a bill or 
joint resolution to final passage, provided in clause 2(b) of rule XIX; 
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 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).


  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).


[[Page 692]]

ber (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).
  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 Mem



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.



[[Page 693]]

  (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.


  Paragraphs (a) and (b) (former clause 6) were first adopted in 1789, 
and were 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 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).

  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).


[[Page 694]]

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).


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,


  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. 7344) may be 
divided. A resolution of impeachment presenting discrete articles may be 
divided (VI, 545; Dec. 18, 1998, p. 11064).

  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).


[[Page 695]]

lated 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 amendments 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).
  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 puts the question thereon (Nov. 8, 
1983, p. 31495). A division may be demanded on an amendment to strike 
out various unre

  A division of the question may not be demanded on a motion to strike 
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 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 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 the words may not be offered as a 
substitute, as it would have the effect of dividing the motion to strike 
and insert (June 29, 1939, pp. 8282, 8284; June 19, 1979, pp. 15566-68).

  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.


[[Page 696]]

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).
  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

  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 the House (VIII, 2175, 3164), 
a question against which a point of order is pending (VIII, 3432), or 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 (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).


[[Page 697]]

mand 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).
  After the vote on the first portion of the question, the second is 
open to debate and amendment, 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, 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 de


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).




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 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.


  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.


[[Page 698]]

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).


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


  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).


[[Page 699]]

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 perfecting 
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).
  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

  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 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 
displace 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).


[[Page 700]]

sition 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).
  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 paragraph, 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 propo



Sec. 924. Relation of point of order to motion to 
amend.

  Except  as provided in clauses 4 and 5(a) of rule XXI, 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; July 15, 1997, pp. 14492, 14493), but thereafter comes too 
late (V, 6894, 6898-6899) unless the Member was on his feet seeking 
recognition for that purpose at the time the amendment was offered (May 
25, 2006, p. ----). 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 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 raise a 
point of order (V, 6906; July 18, 1990, p. 17930).




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).



[[Page 701]]

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. 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 preferentially to offer 
amendments to perfect it over 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




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).



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 702]]

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 by 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, 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



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).


[[Page 703]]

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).
  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,

  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).

  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, 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 that are not germane thereto, the inclusion of sufficiently 
diverse provisions in such title affecting various provisions in the 
bill may permit further amendments that need only be germane to the bill 
as a whole (Apr. 10, 1979, pp. 8034-37).

  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 House-passed bill, which related 
to offenses directly related to official duties and responsibilities of 
Federal officials (Oct. 12, 1978, pp. 36459-61).


[[Page 704]]

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 that, 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 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),

  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).

  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 
motions to strike the following sections that 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).



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).



[[Page 705]]

  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 706]]



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 amendment 
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 that was originally in the Senate bill or 
amendment and that 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) that 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).



[[Page 707]]

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. 11110 (sustained by tabling of appeal)); to a 
bill reauthorizing the National Transportation Safety Board, an 
amendment extending unemployment insurance benefits (May 15, 2003, p. 
11955 (sustained on appeal)); to an immigration bill addressing (1) 
issues of admissibility, detention, removal, and deportation of various 
classes of aliens (Sept. 21, 2006, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of 
appeal)) or (2) improvements in enforcement and judicial proceedings 
(Sept. 21, 2006, p. ----), a motion to recommit with instructions 
proposing an increase in the number of U.S. Marshals; to a bill confined 
to housing-related matters, an amendment providing funding for various 
infrastructure projects (May 17, 2007, p. ----).


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 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 joint resolution continuing appropriations for the current 
fiscal year, a motion to recommit with instructions to revise the 
reconciliation instructions in the concurrent resolution on the budget 
(Sept. 29, 2005, p.----); 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); 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


  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 amendment directing the 
Administrator to issue preliminary summer guidelines for citizen fuel 
use (as a further delineation of those functions) (Mar. 6, 1974, p. 
5436).


[[Page 708]]

ance, including food stamps and soup kitchen programs, was held not 
germane (Feb. 29, 1996, p. 3257).
  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 assist



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, 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. Thus, 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). 
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, pp. 11233, 11234).



[[Page 709]]

sition 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 (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 propo


[[Page 710]]

(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 (also broader 
in scope) (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 (also 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 
(also within the jurisdiction of a different committee) (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, thereby 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, p. 23156); to a bill providing new budget authority, a motion 
to recommit with instructions 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 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

[[Page 711]]

amendment addressing such perpetrators by treatment and rehabilitation 
(Mar. 14, 2002, p. 3203).
  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 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 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)


[[Page 712]]

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 (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 committee'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,

[[Page 713]]

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 Foreign Affairs, 
an amendment expressing support for the armed forces carrying such 
mission within the jurisdiction of both the Committees on Armed Services 
and Foreign Affairs (Mar. 11, 1999, p. 4301); to a bill addressing 
certain diplomatic efforts to curb alleged price-fixing in the global 
oil market within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 
an amendment proposing to suspend oil exportation through changes to the 
Mineral Leasing Act within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural 
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 Energy and Commerce (Mar. 22, 2000, p. 3281); to a bill 
confined to tax issues within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways 
and Means, a motion to recommit with instructions to report an amendment 
addressing the minimum wage, a matter within the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce (now Education and Labor)

[[Page 714]]

(June 22, 2006, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of appeal)), or vice versa 
(Jan. 10, 2007, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of appeal)).


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 
joint resolution continuing appropriations for the current fiscal year, 
a motion to recommit with instructions to revise the reconciliation 
instructions in the concurrent resolution on the budget (Sept. 29, 2005, 
p.----); 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 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, an amendment 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


  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 rendering further similar 
amendments 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 Foreign Affairs, 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, pp. 18797, 
18809).

  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 715]]

(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 amendment that, 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

  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) (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 716]]

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 
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. 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



[[Page 717]]

5501); to a Senate amendment striking an earmark from an appropriation 
bill, a House amendment reinserting part of the amount but adding other 
earmarks 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 
law, an amendment to accomplish another purpose by amending that 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 health hazard (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,

[[Page 718]]

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 (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 
(June 22, 2005, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of appeal)) or requiring 
that Social Security receipts and outlays be counted as receipts or 
outlays of the United States (June 22, 2005, p. ---- (sustained by 
tabling of appeal)); to a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the 
Constitution to afford equal rights on the basis of sex, an amendment to 
add ``race, creed, or color'' (Oct. 12, 1971, pp. 35813, 35814).


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; June 20, 
2001, pp. 11233, 11234); 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 (also in 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 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.



[[Page 719]]

broadcasting to Cuba, an amendment 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 addressing 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 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 one class of imported goods (those 
produced by forced labor), an amendment addressing all imported goods 
from a specified country (Nov. 5, 1997, p. 24643).


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 a department 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. 30534-35); 
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



[[Page 720]]

(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, an amendment addressing funding 
for other departments as well as 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 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

  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 721]]

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 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


  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 the 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 
(July 20, 1982, pp. 17073, 17074, 17092, 17093).


[[Page 722]]

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 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 included in 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 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 
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

[[Page 723]]

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 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 may be 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 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 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 Com

[[Page 724]]

mittee on Agriculture to require the adoption of a minimum standard for 
the contents of ice cream was held germane, since it was 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



[[Page 725]]

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 contingencies textually predicated upon other unrelated 
actions of Congress) (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); to a proposition 
reducing the line-item authorization for certain missiles and 
prohibiting procurement of certain other missiles, an amendment 
proposing a conditional restriction on the availability of funds for 
such procurement that merely requires observation of activities of 
another country, which activities already constitute the policy basis 
for the funding of that governmental activity (missile procurement) (May 
16, 1984, p. 12510); to a bill authorizing federal funding of certain 
qualifying state programs, 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); to an 
authorization bill, an amendment that conditions the availability of 
such funds 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);



[[Page 726]]

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 defense funds to foreign contractors 
based upon their compliance with Federal law regarding discrimination 
not otherwise applicable to them (and within the jurisdiction of other 
committees) (June 16, 1983, p. 16060); an amendment conditioning the 
availability of grants to states and localities based upon their 
compliance with Federal immigration law regarding employment eligibility 
verification not otherwise applicable to them (and within the 
jurisdiction of other committees) (Mar. 7, 2007, p. ----).
  On the other hand, the following conditions on the availability of 
funds are not germane: an amendment conditioning the use of funds on the 
conduct 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 (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,

  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).

  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).


[[Page 727]]

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).
  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), and 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

  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); an amendment conditioning authorization for one agency (National 
Science Foundation) on appropriations for another (National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration) (May 2, 2007, p. ----); 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); and 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 728]]

nished by yet another agency, as an additional limitation on the 
authority of the agency being extended that 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 that 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 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 fur

  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).

  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 of recipient upon 
an unrelated contingency such as action or inaction by another class of 
recipient or agent not covered by the bill (Mar. 5, 1986, p. 3613).


[[Page 729]]

rectly 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).
  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 di


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, as it dealt 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 the violation of an international agreement 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 
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.

      (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 state of 
the Union under clause 5 of rule XVIII.


[[Page 730]]

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.

      (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

  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. 21). This latest amendment eliminated the provision that 
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), although when called 
up pursuant to a unanimous-consent request, it is reported by title only 
(Dec. 18, 2005, p. ----). 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 731]]

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 immediately after it had 
been ordered to be engrossed and before it had been read a third time by 
title (IV, 3400, 3403, 3404; VII, 1061); and 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 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






 


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, consideration of 
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.



  (b) Remarks in debate (which may include references to the Senate or 
its Members) shall be confined to the question under debate, avoiding 
personality.


[[Page 732]]

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.
  This clause (formerly clause 1 of rule XIV) was adopted in 1880, but 
was made up, in its main provisions, of 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 outlined in 
former paragraph (b)) (Sec. 371, supra; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6; 
H. Res. 5, Jan.

  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; Oct. 17, 2005, p. ----); (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 
(see, e.g., Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4081; May 22, 2003, p. 12965; 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. 12965; 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 to the Speaker, Members 
direct their remarks to the occupant of the Chair and address him as 
``Mr. Speaker'' pursuant to this clause (Nov. 1, 1983, p. 30267).


[[Page 733]]

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).
  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

  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).

  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).


[[Page 734]]

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; May 11, 2006, p. ----). 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 
Members 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).


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



[[Page 735]]



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 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. 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. 3663).



[[Page 736]]

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, pp. 3663-64; June 3, 2003, p. 13483, p. 13486). 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. 9997). 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. 3664) 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, 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 that gave rise to the question of privilege (V, 5075-5077; VI, 
576, 608; VIII, 2448, 2481; May 31, 1984,

  While 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 737]]

tion 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 line of 
precedent that 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, necessarily came to pertain to the bill or other 
business that 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 discre



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 738]]

sent). 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 unanimous 
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 con

  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), 
to recognize for a special order after midnight (May 10, 2007, p. ----), 
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. 25605). 
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 739]]

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. ----; Jan. 31, 2006, p. ----; Jan. 4, 2007, 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. 
21327). 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. 3; Jan. 7, 2003, p. 24; Jan. 20, 2004, p. ----; Jan. 
4, 2005, p. ----; Jan. 31, 2006, p. ----; Jan. 4, 2007, 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 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




Sec. 952. ``Oxfordstyle'' 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 740]]

quest to modify the motion may be entertained only if the proponent 
yields for that purpose (Jan. 5, 1996, p. 348). In the case of a motion 
to instruct conferees (Mar. 29, 2006, p. ----), a measure on which the 
previous question has been ordered without intervening motion (Feb. 13, 
2007, p. ----, p. ----), or a measure on which time has been yielded 
under the hour rule solely for the purpose of debate (Dec. 16, 2005, p. 
----), the Chair will entertain a unanimous-consent request regarding 
the disposition of the measure only if the majority manager yields for 
that purpose. The Member who originally introduces the bill that a 
committee reports has no claim 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 raises an objection in a joint session to count the electoral 
vote, and the Houses separate to consider the objection, the Chair first 
recognizes that Member (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). When an 
order of the House makes consideration of a measure in order, only a 
manager will be recognized to bring it up (Deschler, ch. 21, Sec. 1.25; 
Jan. 18, 2007, p. ----). 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 
that 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 discre

[[Page 741]]

tion of the Chair (VI, 541; Mar. 23, 2007, p. ----), 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. 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 that 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 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 re


  The Chair may follow a tradition of the House to allow the highest 
ranking elected leaders (Speaker, Majority Leader, and Minority Leader) 
additional time to make their remarks in debate (Dec. 18, 1998, p. 
27834; May 18, 2004, p. ----).



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 742]]

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).
  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


[[Page 743]]

measures) only when assured that the request, and each constituent part 
of the request, has been cleared under this policy (Oct. 10, 2002, p. 
20339; Oct. 16, 2002, p. 20765; Nov. 14, 2002, p. 22513). The Speaker's 
enforcement of this policy is not subject to appeal (Apr. 4, 1995, p. 
10298) and is a matter of discretionary recognition in the first 
instance (Sept. 27, 2006, p. ----). ``Floor leadership'' in this 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. 23510), 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, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays, the Speaker exercises 
discretion in recognition (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. This policy includes: (1) requests relating to 
reported measures (July 23, 1993, p. 16820) and unreported measures 
(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. 
10297); (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. 11838); (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. 23510). The Speaker will recognize for 
an ``omnibus'' unanimous-consent request (one request disposing of 
various





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 that 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 744]]

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. 19527). In the 104th Congress the Speaker announced his intention to 
strictly enforce 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 27, 
2002, p. 11849; May 9, 2003, p. 11039; 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


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.


[[Page 745]]

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).
  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 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 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. 14313). 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. 2059). 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.

  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 where not a member of the reporting 
committee (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 746]]

26, 2002, p. 14972) and including the manager of a measure that was 
reported adversely (Feb. 13, 2002, p. 1355). 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 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 in oppostion to 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 in oppostion to 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 paragraph (c) (June 15, 2000, pp. 11040, 11047).
  As codified in paragraph (c), the manager of a bill or other 
representative of the committee and not the proponent of an amendment 
has the right to close controlled debate on an amendment (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), 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


[[Page 747]]

porting 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 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 re



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 748]]

consider proper. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not be 
held to answer a 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

  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 749]]

(Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4081) or during recognition of another Member (June 
5, 2003, p. 13884). He may order the offending Member to take his seat 
(June 5, 2003, p. 13884) or may deny further recognition, subject to the 
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

  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) and the Chair's ruling in that regard is 
subject to appeal (Jan. 22, 2007, p. ----). 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. 24002). For instances in which the 
Chair admonished Members for improper references to the Senate after 
brief intervening debate, see Sec. 371, supra.


[[Page 750]]

  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).

  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 (VIII, 2528, 2538, 2540, 2543, 2544; July 16, 
1998, p. 15827; June 28, 2000, pp. 12771, 12776). Unanimous consent is 
not required for a Member to withdraw his demand that words be taken 
down before a ruling by the Chair (June 18, 1986, p. 14232).

  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, 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. 9005).

  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. 10232) or offered by any 
Member (July 25, 1996, p. 1970; Mar. 21, 2007, p. ----). 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 751]]

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 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

  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. 10232), 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).

  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).



[[Page 752]]

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.




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 
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.


  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. 7). 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 753]]

to be in proper attire in the Chamber (June 28, 2000, p. 12654; June 20, 
2006, p. ----), 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).
  Originally Members wore their hats during sessions, as in Parliament, 
and the custom was not abolished until 1837 (II, 1136). The prohibition 
against Members wearing hats in the Chamber while the House is in 
session includes doffing a 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 and 109th Congresses 
Members were reminded of the need

  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). The Chair has 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. 14627); 
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).



[[Page 754]]

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).




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, in his discretion, may submit the question of 
its use to the House without debate.


  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).


[[Page 755]]

  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. 12977). 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.



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 
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).


  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 from the well of the House of a chart that is not being 
utilized during debate (Apr. 1, 1982, p. 6304), or that is otherwise 
disruptive of decorum.


[[Page 756]]

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).

Galleries


Sec. 965. Earlier practice.

  The reading  of papers other than 
those 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 that 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





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 757]]

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 Record by unanimous consent only (Mar. 20, 
2002, p. 3663). 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. 12965; 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




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).


[[Page 758]]

message from the President was referred without reading; but no motion 
was made for a secret session (V, 7255).
  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

  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 that the Member has a secret communication to 
make to the House (June 6, 1978, p. 16376). A motion having been 
defeated, a Member may offer a second motion on the same legislative day 
if he has additional communications to make (May 10, 2007, p. ----). The 
motion is subject to the motion to lay on the table (May 10, 2007, p. --
--).

  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 assured 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).


[[Page 759]]

session, a Member may be recognized to offer a motion that the session 
be dissolved (July 17, 1979, pp. 19057-59).
  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; Sept. 26, 2006, p. ----). 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

  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, 
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 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 Member, Delegate, or the 
Resident Commissioner as 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 760]]

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). That 
authority was repealed in the 104th Congress (sec. 212(b), H. Res. 6, 
Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468) and reinstated in the 110th Congress (H. Res. 78, 
Jan. 24, 2007, p. ----). 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).
  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



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. 2079). 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).


[[Page 761]]

  The chairman 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).


  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 762]]

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. 7).


[[Page 763]]

  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 of 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 that is to be borne other 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 764]]

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 
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 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 765]]

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 where 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 766]]

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 to 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 manager in general debate will be considered as yielded back 
upon recognition of the majority manager to close general debate (Feb. 
27, 2002, p. 2059). 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 767]]

debate, move that the Committee rise (May 25, 1967, p. 14121) or further 
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 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 of 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 the absence of an 
order by the House, the Committee of the Whole may by unanimous consent 
determine 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 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, pp. 8923, 8924).


[[Page 768]]

the floor be read for amendment by sections 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. 14733).
  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. 12262). 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) or yield blocks of time (June 14, 2006, p. ----). For a further 
discussion of management of time for debate on amendments in the 
Committee of the Whole, see Sec. 959, supra.


[[Page 769]]

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 770]]

ment, as it is not in order for the offeror of an amendment to amend his 
own amendment except by unanimous consent (Oct. 14, 1987, p. 27898). A 
pro forma amendment may be offered after a substitute has been adopted 
and before the vote on the amendment, as amended, by unanimous consent 
only, since the amendment has been amended in its entirety and no 
further amendments, including pro forma amendments, are in order (Oct. 
18, 1983, p. 28185; June 28, 1995, p. 17633). A Member recognized on a 
pro forma amendment may not allocate or reserve time, though he may in 
yielding indicate to the Chair when he intends to reclaim his time (May 
19, 1987, p. 12811; July 13, 1994, p. 16438). The Chair endeavors to 
alternate recognition to offer pro forma amendments between majority and 
minority Members (giving priority to committee members) rather than 
between sides of the question (Mar. 21, 1994, p. 5730).

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 or 
proposition, even on a subsequent day (July 14, 1998, p. 15298; May 23, 
2002, p. 8913 (see May 22, 2002, p. 8707)), 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 (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); a Member who has 
debated a substantive amendment may thereafter rise in opposition to a 
pro forma amendment thereto (July 20, 1951, p. 8566); and a Member may 
offer a pro forma amendment to both a pending amendment and a second 
degree amendment thereto (June 12, 2007, p. ----). 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 amend




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 771]]

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 772]]

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 Chair 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 Chair 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 100 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 Chair has put the question on a pending 
proposition, after a quorum of the Committee of the Whole has been once 
established on that day (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). The clause 
was amended again in the 96th Congress

  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 773]]

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 Chair'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 that must appear to permit the 
Committee to continue its business is a quorum of the Committee and



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 774]]

  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; June 12, 2007, p. ----), and is not debatable (May 17, 2000, p. 
8203). However, the motion cannot interrupt a Member who has the floor 
(VIII, 2370, 2371; June 12, 2007, p. ----, p. ----) 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 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). A demand for a recorded vote on an 
amendment is untimely where the Chair has recognized for the next 
amendment (Dec. 15, 2005, p. ----) or put the question on the next 
amendment pending on the tree (Procedure, ch. 30, Sec. 12.5), or where 
considerable time has elapsed after the Chair's announcement of the 
voice vote (June 13, 2006, p. ----).


[[Page 775]]

another electronic vote without intervening business, provided that the 
minimum time for electronic 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

  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). By unanimous consent waiving the five-minute 
minimum set by paragraphs (f) and (g), the House has authorized the 
chairman of the Committee of the Whole to reduce questions to two-minute 
electronic votes (e.g., Mar. 16, 2006, p. ----; May 23, 2006, p. ----).

  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 to fewer than 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. 
15305). An amendment pending as unfinished business where proceedings on 
a request for a recorded vote have been postponed can be modified by 
unanimous consent on the initiative of its proponent (July 19, 2005, p. 
----; see also Mar. 30, 2000, p. 4037). 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) 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); (3) 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); (4) 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 (5) 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 776]]

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 
by the voice vote thereon (e.g., Sept. 17, 1998, p. 20845; 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




Sec. 985. De novo votes where Delegates 
decisive.

  (h)  Whenever a recorded vote on any question has been decided by 
a margin within which the votes cast by the Delegates and the Resident 
Commissioner have been decisive, the Committee of the Whole shall rise 
and the Speaker shall put such question de novo without intervening 
motion. Upon the announcement of the vote on that question, the 
Committee of the Whole shall resume its sitting without intervening 
motion.


  This paragraph (former clause 2(d) of rule XXIII) was added in the 
103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49), repealed in the 104th 
Congress (sec. 212(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468), and reinstated 
in the 110th Congress (H. Res. 78, Jan. 24, 2007, p.----).



[[Page 777]]

Dispensing with the reading of an amendment
  Whether the votes cast by the delegates are decisive is determined by 
a ``but for'' test, the question being whether the result would be 
different if their votes were not counted (May 19, 1993, p. 10409; Feb. 
8, 2007, p. ----). The Chair's count in such matter is not subject to 
appeal (Feb. 8, 2007, p. ----). The Chair does not differentiate between 
Members and Delegates and the Resident Commissioner in announcing the 
result of a record vote in the Committee of the Whole (Feb. 8, 2007, p. 
----). An amendment adopted by immediate proceedings de novo in the 
House does 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.



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.



[[Page 778]]

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.
  (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


  (c) Material submitted for printing in the Congressional Record under 
this clause shall indicate the full text of the proposed amendment, the 
name of the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner proposing it, the 
number of the bill or resolution to which it will be offered, and the 
point in the bill or resolution or amendment thereto where the amendment 
is intended to be offered. The amendment shall appear in a portion of 
the Record designated for that purpose. Amendments to a specified 
measure submitted for printing in that portion of the Record shall be 
numbered in the order printed.


[[Page 779]]

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).
  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 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 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.


[[Page 780]]

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).
  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

  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 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).


[[Page 781]]

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).
  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,


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).




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

  9.  A motion that the Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
the Union rise and report a bill or resolution to the House with the 
recommendation that the enacting or resolving clause be stricken shall 
have precedence of a motion to amend, and, if carried in the House, 
shall constitute a rejection of the bill or resolution. Whenever a bill 
or resolution is reported from the Committee of the Whole with such 
adverse recommendation and the recommendation is rejected by the House, 
the bill or resolution shall stand recommitted to the Committee of the 
Whole without further action by the House. Before the question of 
concurrence is submitted, it shall be in order to move that the House 
refer the bill or resolution to a committee, with or without 
instructions. If a bill or resolution is so referred, then when it is 
again reported to the House it shall be referred to the Committee of the 
Whole without debate.



[[Page 782]]

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).
  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



Sec. 989. Practice as to use of the motion to 
strike the enacting clause.

  The motion  may not be made until the first section of 
the bill has been read (V, 5327; VIII, 2619), and 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 that permits only committee amendments and no 
amendments thereto, a motion that the Committee rise and report with the 
recommendation that the enacting clause be stricken is not in order 
where no committee amendments are in fact offered (Apr. 16, 1970, p. 
12092).



[[Page 783]]

  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 (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).

  A point of order against the motion should be made before debate 
thereon has begun (V, 6902; VIII, 3442; May 6, 1950, p. 6571), and when 
challenged the Member offering the motion must qualify as being opposed 
to the bill (Mar. 13, 1942, p. 2439; May 6, 1950, p. 6571; June 14, 
1979, p. 14995; Jan. 26, 1995, p. 2521). When a bill is reported from 
the Committee of the Whole with the recommendation that the enacting 
words be stricken out, the motion to strike out is debatable (V, 5337-
5340), but a motion to lay on the table is not in order (V, 5337). The 
previous question may be moved on the motion to concur without applying 
to further action on the bill (V, 5342). When the House disagrees to the 
action of the Committee in striking out the enacting words and does not 
refer it under the provisions of the rule, it goes back to the Committee 
of the Whole, where it becomes unfinished business (V, 5326, 5345, 5346; 
VIII, 2633). Notwithstanding that consideration of the pending bill was 
governed by a ``modified-closed'' rule permitting only specified 
amendments, pending the concurrence of the House with a recommendation 
of the Committee of the Whole that the enacting clause be stricken, the 
House could by instructions in a motion to refer under this clause 
direct the Committee of the Whole to consider additional germane 
amendments (Apr. 14, 1994, p. 7452). When the enacting words of a bill 
are stricken, 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).



[[Page 784]]

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, the 
House automatically resolves into Committee of the Whole for 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

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

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


[[Page 785]]

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.

  (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


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).



991. Unfunded mandates.

  11. (a)  In the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union, an amendment proposing only to 
strike an unfunded mandate from the portion of the bill then open to 
amendment, if otherwise in order, may be precluded from consideration 
only by specific terms of a special order of the House.



  (b) In this clause the term ``unfunded mandate'' means a Federal 
intergovernmental mandate the direct costs of which exceed the threshold 
otherwise specified for a reported bill or joint resolution in section 
424(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.


[[Page 786]]

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. ----).

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




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 787]]

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. 18735; 
May 3, 2007, p. ----); (10) to permit consideration of an additional 
amendment (July 28, 1988, p. 19491; June 10, 1998, p. 11914; June 24, 
2005, p. ----; Mar. 15, 2006, p. ----); (11) to authorize a supplemental 
report from the Committee on Rules in lieu of the original report 
referred to in the special order (Speaker Wright, Aug. 11, 1988, p. 
22105); (12) to permit another to offer an amendment vested in a 
specified Member (May 1, 1990, p. 9030); (13) to permit a division of 
the question on an amendment rendered indivisible by a special order 
(July 16, 1996, p. 17318); (14) to preclude procedural votes (where the 
order of the House refrained from precluding any form of motion to rise) 
(July 26, 2001, p. 14754); (15) to preclude further amendment except as 
specified (Apr. 3, 2003, p. 8490); (16) 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 requiring the Chair to put the question on 
the pending amendments at the expiration of certain hours of 
consideration (Apr. 10, 1986, p. 7079; Oct. 30, 1991, p. 29213; Aug. 3, 
1999, p. 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



[[Page 788]]

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); (11) 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. 12441); (12) to permit a request for a 
recorded vote even though untimely (Mar. 28, 2007, 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 (see, e.g., June 10, 1993, p. 12486; July 
24, 1996, p. 18906; May 6, 1998, p. 8332; Mar. 29, 2000, p. 4017; Mar. 
13, 2002, p. 3127), 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 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 proponent 
of an amendment to yield control of time in support to another (Mar. 9, 
2006, p. ----); (9) 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); (10) to reach ahead in the reading of a general 
appropriation bill to consider one amendment without prejudice





 
  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


[[Page 789]]

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.



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


  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 motion to commit from clause 1 
of rule XVII to clause 2 of this rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

  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).


[[Page 790]]

to the preamble, unless the motion so 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).


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 and 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, 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



[[Page 791]]



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), which must be put first (V, 5480; VIII, 
2609, 2684). 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 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. 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 
from the beginning of debate to final passage without intervening motion 
(IV, 3211-3213, June 14, 2001, p. 10725; Apr. 18, 2002, p. 4969).




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 amendment 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. 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.



[[Page 792]]

in former clause 3 of rule XVII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The 
Chair may recognize and respond to a parliamentary inquiry although the 
previous question may have been demanded (Mar. 27, 1926, p. 6469).
  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


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 debated after the ordering of the previous question (III, 
2532).



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 Resident 
Commissioner who is opposed to the measure.


  (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.


[[Page 793]]

(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.
  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



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 amendments after the stage of disagreement where utilized to 
displace a pending preferential motion (Speaker Albert, Sept. 16, 1976, 
p. 30887).


  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).


[[Page 794]]

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. 10725).
  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

  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).



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 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 (July 26, 2006, p. ----), a Member under 
recognition may yield to another while remaining on his feet (Feb. 27, 
2002, p. 2081).



[[Page 795]]

with by unanimous consent) (Feb. 27, 2002, p. 2084). An amendment to a 
motion to recommit is not debatable (Feb. 27, 2002, p. 2084). 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).
  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

  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).



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 reports 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) 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) an 
amendment in violation of clause 2 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. 11072).

  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) of rule XIII, which precludes the Committee on Rules from 
reporting a rule that would prevent a motion to recommit from including 
amendatory instructions (see Sec. 857, supra).


[[Page 796]]

to (Sept. 23, 1992, p. 27178). The adoption of a motion to recommit with 
instructions to report back ``forthwith''occasions an immediate report 
on the floor. The adoption of a motion to recommit with other 
instructions, however, 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; May 3, 2007, p. ----).
  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 there

  Only one motion to commit is in order (V, 5577, 5582, 5585; VIII, 
2763). If a 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. ----).

  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 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).

  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).


[[Page 797]]



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).


  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 a 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) and 
accepts a Member's averment of opposition (Nov. 9, 2005, p.----; Apr. 
26, 2006, p. ----; May 4, 2006, p. ----). 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 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 Chair also advised that it is 
not a violation of the rules for a Member to vote for passage after 
asserting opposition to a measure in order to qualify to offer a motion 
to recommit, and it is not the province of the Chair to instruct a 
Member how to vote (Apr. 26, 2006, p. ----).


[[Page 798]]

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) or obtain unanimous consent if not 
(e.g., Mar. 14, 2007, p. ----).

Reconsideration
  The priority in 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 is entitled to offer 
an amendment to the motion to recommit, regardless of party affiliation, 
such as the chairman (June 26, 1981, pp. 14791-93) or another majority-
party member (Feb. 27, 2002, pp. 2080-85) of the committee reporting the 
bill. 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




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 session of Congress, such a motion shall be disposed of 
when entered.


  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).


[[Page 799]]

  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 800]]

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 question 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 resolve 
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 that 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


  The motion to reconsider is in order in 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 practice in 
the standing committees, 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).



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 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).



[[Page 801]]

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 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, 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 resolve into Committee


[[Page 802]]

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).


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




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).



[[Page 803]]

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. 1010. Debate on the motion to reconsider.

  A  motion to 
reconsider is debatable only if the proposition 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;





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.






 
  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.



[[Page 804]]

vice 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.

  (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 de

  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 
in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(a) of 
rule I (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

  The former right to demand tellers was not precluded by the fact that 
the yeas and nays had been refused (V, 5998; VIII, 3103), by a point of 
no quorum 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).


[[Page 805]]

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).
  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 clause 8, a division may again be 
demanded when the

  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).

  A demand for a record vote cannot interrupt a vote by division that is 
in progress (June 10, 1975, p. 18048). Where both a division vote and a 
recorded vote are requested, the Chair will count for a recorded vote 
(July 22, 2003, p. ----). 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).




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).




[[Page 806]]


  (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).




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. A 
record vote by electronic device shall not be held open for the sole 
purpose of reversing the outcome of such vote. 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 or quorum call by electronic 
device shall be 15 minutes.


  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. 7). The third 
sentence of paragraph (a) was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 302, H. 
Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). The electronic 
system was first utilized in the House on January 23, 1973 (p. 1793).


[[Page 807]]

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).
  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

  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). Once the Clerk has announced changes, the voting 
stations close and further changes must be made in the well (Nov. 17, 
2005, p. ----).

  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 (Speaker O'Neill, June 
11, 1981).


[[Page 808]]

if unexpected, may require more time to complete (Jan. 18, 2007, p. ----
). In addition, the Chair is constrained to differentiate between 
activity toward the establishment of an outcome on the one hand, and 
activity that might have as its purpose the reversal of an already-
established outcome, on the other. As such, the Chair may hold the vote 
open beyond expiration of the minimum time in order to allow all Members 
to vote (Mar. 14, 2007, p.----; May 9, 2007, p. ----).
  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. 9, 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. ----; Dec. 8, 2005, p. 
----). In response to a parliamentary inquiry concerning the rule on 
holding votes open for the sole purpose of reversing the outcome, the 
Chair advised that the first record vote of a legislative day, 
especially

  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). Starting in the 104th 
Congress, the Speaker has announced that each occupant of the Chair 
would have the Speaker's 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; Speaker Hastert, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 249; 
Speaker Hastert, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 41; Speaker Hastert, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 
24; Jan. 8, 2003, p. 172; Speaker Hastert, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----; 
Speaker Pelosi, Jan. 5, 2007, p. ----); 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; Nov. 17, 2005, p. ----).




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.



[[Page 809]]

  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 
names of those not recorded, alphabetically by surname. Members 
appearing after the second

[[Page 810]]

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. 4054; Sept. 19, 2002, p. 17237; 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. 17103).

  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 
that 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 811]]

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 recapitulation 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



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 (Oct. 4, 1988, pp. 28126, 28148) or 
any question following another vote by electronic device (e.g., May. 23, 
2006, p. ----) to two-minute electronic votes, two bells were rung.

  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 used.

  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 812]]

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 vacate proceedings when a quorum of the Committee appears. Bells 
are repeated every five minutes unless (a) the call is vacated by 
ringing of

  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 813]]

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 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) except in the 
discretion of the Chair and if related to the call (Deschler-Brown, ch. 
31, Sec. Sec.  15.14, 15.15), 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). The rules do not preclude a Member





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) that 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 814]]


  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 815]]

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 
electronic device unless the Speaker 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 816]]

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 the former leave for a committee to sit 
during sessions did 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). 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); and 
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).

  Form of resolution for the arrest of Members absent without leave (VI, 
686).


[[Page 817]]

ation, and disposition of any motion incidental to a call of the House. 
This includes 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). An appeal also may not be 
entertained during a call of the yeas and nays (V, 6051). 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 the 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, 
consider




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 818]]

number of the House thereafter appears in the 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

  (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 819]]

vising that the inability of the House to establish 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 ad

  (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 820]]

from any State in respect of a Representative 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

  (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 821]]

  This paragraph was added in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, 
Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). 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 822]]

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. 7). 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 that 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 823]]

at-Arms 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 taken 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-



Sec. 1026. Conduct of the call in the new form.

  Under  this 
clause the roll is called 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 that 
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 824]]

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. 10725). 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), or by unanimous consent may initiate a call of the 
House without motion (Speaker Foley, Mar. 14, 1990, p. 4324) 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). When one Member is already 
under recognition for debate, however, another Member may be recognized 
to move a call of the House only if the first Member yields for that 
purpose (July 23, 1998, p. 16989). For precedents addressing timeliness 
in raising a point of order of no quorum, see Deschler, ch. 20, Sec. 13.


[[Page 825]]

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 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,


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.


[[Page 826]]

      (B) The question of adopting a resolution or concurrent 
resolution.

      (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 if the managers have filed a 
report in the House).

      (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 827]]

postponed under this clause without disposing of such questions, then on 
the next legislative day the unfinished business is the disposition of 
such questions.

  (d) If the House adjourns on a legislative day designated for further 
proceedings on 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. 47); 
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. 7). 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 (Sept. 17, 2003, p. ----).


[[Page 828]]

  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. 7). 
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.

  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 106th Congress, unanimous consent is required to 
permit the Speaker to postpone such record votes (Oct. 6, 1986, p. 
28704).

  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 829]]

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 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


  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 830]]

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 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 
regarding 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,




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


[[Page 831]]

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 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 does 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 may entertain such 
a request when circumstances ensure sufficient notice (June 24, 2005, p. 
----; June 15, 2007, p. ----). The House has by unanimous consent 
authorized the Speaker to reduce to two minutes electronic votes 
conducted under this clause (e.g., May 23, 2007, 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


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. 11211). A voice vote on the question of adoption of a 
resolution following a 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question 
is not construed as ``intervening business'' such as would preclude 
five-minute votes on certain postponed questions (Sept. 26, 2002, pp. 
18096, 18097). 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.



[[Page 832]]

continuing appropriations for the current fiscal year but also enacting 
by reference six general appropriation bills (Oct. 21, 2003, p. ----).

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




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 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.






 
  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.




[[Page 833]]

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).



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.



[[Page 834]]

subject matter) and except rescissions of appropriations contained in 
appropriation Acts.


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




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 amendment 
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. 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 835]]

gency 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. 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 Emer





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.



[[Page 836]]

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).


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 that 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


  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 transferred to clause 2(a)(2) and former clause 2(a) 
became clause 2(a)(1) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

  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).


[[Page 837]]

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

  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 the 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 the motion preferential to any motion to amend 
at that stage (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).


  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 838]]

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 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 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 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,

  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). Clause 2(c) provides 
that a limitation not specifically contained in existing law or 
authorized for the period of the limitation shall not be in order during 
consideration of a general appropriation bill except as contemplated by 
clause 2(d), including a requirement that it come at the end of the 
reading (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).


[[Page 839]]

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).
  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 that 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, pp. 14716, 14721). Where a point of

  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 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).

  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. 


[[Page 840]]



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); or (3) examine the accompanying report to determine the 
intent of the section (June 25, 2004, p. ----).


  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 that 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 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, pp. 19368, 19369; see also July 13, 2004, p. ----, 
p. ---- and May 25, 2006, 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).

  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).


[[Page 841]]

directly or indirectly changing the application of existing law are 
presumably legislation, absent rebuttal by the committee (May 31, 1984, 
p. 14591).

  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



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. 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 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).



[[Page 842]]

(sec. 511(a)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 
2007)), to wit:

  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, exceeded 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 was 
sustained (sec. 2, H. Res. 248, Apr. 28, 2005, p. ----). The 110th 
Congress adopted the same procedure

  Sec. 511. (a)(5)(A) During the One Hundred Tenth 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--

          (i) to a motion offered under clause 2(d) of rule XXI; or

          (ii) 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--

          (i) 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

          (ii) 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.


[[Page 843]]

ernmental 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, pp. 13662-65; cf. VII, 1144).


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 gov


  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 that 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), cooperation with State investigations (IV, 3650; VII, 1301, 
1302), the investigation of foods in relation to commerce (IV, 3647, 
3648; VII, 1298), or the compiling of tests at an exposition (IV, 3653).


[[Page 844]]

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. ----).
  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. 11936; Nov. 28, 2001, pp. 23239, 23240) 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

  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 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).

  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).



[[Page 845]]

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).
  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




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 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).



[[Page 846]]

$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 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). 
``Public works and objects already in progress'' include tangible 
matters like buildings, roads, etc., but 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



[[Page 847]]

lished has been admitted under this principle (IV, 3766-3773) as have 
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).



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 
estab





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 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. 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).



[[Page 848]]

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. ----).


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; June 9, 2006, p. ----
); (2) permitting funds to be available immediately upon enactment 
before


  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 in a separate 
resolution of disapproval under that Act (July 29, 1982, pp. 18625, 
18626).

  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, pp. 11294-97 (sustained on 
appeal); June 20, 2001, p. 11224; 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. ----).


[[Page 849]]

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), nor contracts authorized (IV, 3868-
3870; May 14, 1937, p. 4595).
  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


  An amendment to a general appropriation bill stating a legislative 
position constitutes legislation (July 24, 2001, pp. 14349, 14351) as 
does one establishing a select committee (Mar. 16, 2006, p. ----) or a 
trust fund in the Treasury (June 9, 2006, 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 amendments 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. ----).


  A limitation may provide 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).


[[Page 850]]

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, pp. 13683, 
13684).
  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

  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 limitation,'' 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).

  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).


[[Page 851]]

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. ----).
  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

  It is not in order, even by language in the form of a limitation, to 
restrict the discretionary authority conferred by law to administer the 
expenditure of appropriated funds, such as by limiting the percentage of 
funds that may be apportioned for expenditure within a certain 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).

  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).


[[Page 852]]

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).

  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



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 853]]

tion 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 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, pp. 13001-03); (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, pp. 13693, 13694); (30) 
require an investigation into whether an applicant for immigration has 
been involved in the harvesting of organs (July 18, 2001, pp. 13702-05); 
(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, pp. 11788, 11789); (32) require the examination of 
certain legislative reports to determine whether an entity is 
specifically identified by name (July 17, 2002, pp. 13365, 13366); (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. ----);

[[Page 854]]

(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 the National Institutes of Health, a 
different entity (June 8, 2005, p. ----) or require the administrator of 
the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program to determine whether a 
federal prohibition on certain mineral exploration (administered by a 
different federal entity) remained in effect (Mar. 15, 2006, 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. ----); (42) prescribe a policy 
for an agency in the distribution of grants (June 6, 2006, p. ----); 
(43) require determinations of citizenship based on birth (June 6, 2006, 
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 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) require 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 rela


[[Page 855]]

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 
(relating to import restrictions) from being enforced (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, 
pp. 13683, 13684); (14) denying the use of funds in contravention of a 
cited statute (May 17, 2005, p. ----; June 6, 2006, 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 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)


[[Page 856]]

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 judgments 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

  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).


  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 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).


[[Page 857]]

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).


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


  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); (3) making the availability of 
funding in the bill contingent on the funding of a separate provision of 
law (Mar. 15, 2006, p. ----); and (4) 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).

  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. ----); (6) 
compliance with a law not otherwise applicable (Sept. 4, 2003, p. ----).


[[Page 858]]

ative direction not required by law, does not destroy the validity of a 
limitation (June 27, 1974, pp. 21687-94).


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 affirm


  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).

  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 to deprive any share renter of payments'' to which he might 
otherwise be entitled was held in order (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 66.1).

  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 as it would require 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).


[[Page 859]]

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; Mar. 16, 2006, p. ---- (sustained on appeal)).
  Language waiving provisions of an existing law that did not 
specifically permit inclusion of such a waiver in an appropriation bill 
has been ruled

  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).

  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) changes to a set of overtime compensation 
regulations in existence on a given date (with a certain nonlegislative 
exception) because they did not require 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, pp. ----, ----).


[[Page 860]]

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).



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), or requires 
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) (including by stating that not less than a 
certain sum ``should be allocated'' (June 9, 2006, p. ----)), or 
earmarks appropriated funds to the arts and requires their expenditure 
pursuant to standards otherwise applicable only as guidelines (July 12, 
1989, p. 14432). Where existing




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 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).



[[Page 861]]

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).
  An amendment adding a new paragraph indirectly increasing an 
unauthorized amount contained in a prior paragraph permitted to remain 
is

  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).

  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). 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 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); (4) an amendment to a legislative 
provision extending the availability of certain housing assistance to 
certain recipients (June 13, 2006, p. ----).


[[Page 862]]

ment did not therefore require any different or more onerous 
determinations (June 27, 1984, p. 19113).
  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 amend


  To a paragraph permitted to remain despite 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



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 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).



[[Page 863]]

  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 requiring 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).

  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).


[[Page 864]]

does not add further legislation and is in order (July 30, 1980, pp. 
20499-20503).
  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

  A motion to recommit the District of Columbia appropriation bill with 
instructions to reduce the proportion of the fund appropriated from the 
Federal 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).

  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 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).

  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).


[[Page 865]]

  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 
that 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 that 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.



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. 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).



[[Page 866]]

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).
  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 that 
are available for the current fiscal

  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; June 9, 
2006, p. ----). 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).


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 authorized amount contained in the bill (Aug. 4, 
1999, p. 19513). The Chair will query for points of order against 
provisions of a bill not yet read when they are addressed by an 
offsetting amendment under this paragraph (e.g., May 17, 2005, p. ----).



[[Page 867]]

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.



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,



[[Page 868]]

of 1985.'' An amendment limiting funds for a transportation project (1) 
that was part of an aggregate, annual level of obligation limitations 
set forth in section 8003 of SAFETEA-LU, (2) that was not covered by the 
``past practice'' assumption, and (3) the funding for which could not be 
redirected elsewhere in the program, was held to cause an obligation 
limitation to be below the funding level required by this clause (June 
14, 2006, p. ----).
  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 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


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 

        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).


[[Page 869]]

                  (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 870]]

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 
having that jurisdiction. A point of order against an appropriation in 
such a bill, joint resolution, or amendment thereto may be raised at any 
time


  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 (except as 
applied through clause 5 of rule XXII) (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 over 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 that 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 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 871]]

ment 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-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 amend

  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 872]]

  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 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).

  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, resolution, or 
amendment that 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 acts (see Sec. 1127, supra). See also Deschler, ch. 25, 
Sec. 4 for a discussion of appropriations on legislative bills 
generally.


[[Page 873]]



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 
may be raised at any time during pendency of that measure for amendment.



  (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. 7). 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 

        utilized solely to support, subject to annual appropriations, 

        the service, program, or activity (including agency functions 


[[Page 874]]

        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 875]]

for the accession of the Russian Federation into the World Trade 
Organization, thereby effecting changes to that country's products under 
domestic tariff law (June 28, 2006, 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. 12). 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 
(Sept. 9, 2003, p. ----); (2) a limitation on funds to process the 
importation of any product from Iran (June 18, 2004, p. ----); (3) a 
limitation on funds

  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 876]]

because it did not necessarily affect revenue collection levels or tax 
liabilities (June 18, 1991, p. 15189).
  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

  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 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 877]]

the amount of revenue derived and the manner of its deposit indicated 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 and Technology), 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), as 
were amendments to a general appropriation bill proposing in part to 
temper recently enacted reductions in rates of tax on income (July 10, 
2003, pp. ---- and ----).

Passage of tax rate increases-
  To a bill reported from the Committee on Education and Labor 
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 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




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 878]]

amendment to a pertinent section of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
the imposition of a new rate of tax thereunder, and an increase in the 
amount of tax thereby imposed) and a measure that does not fulfill even 
the first element does not carry a Federal income tax rate increase 
(Jan. 18, 2007, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of appeal)). This 
paragraph does not apply to a concurrent resolution (Speaker Gingrich, 
May 18, 1995, p. 13499). A resolution reported from the Committee on 
Rules rendering this paragraph inapplicable may be adopted by majority 
vote (Oct. 26, 1995, p. 29477). The Speaker rules on the applicability 
of this paragraph 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 rendering this paragraph 
inapplicable (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). The modified version of this 
paragraph comprises three elements (an



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.



[[Page 879]]

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).




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.




<> 7. It shall not be in order to consider a 
concurrent resolution on the budget, or an amendment thereto, or a 
conference report thereon that contains reconciliation directives under 
section 310 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 that specify changes 
in law reducing the surplus or increasing the deficit for either the 
period comprising the current fiscal year and the five fiscal years 
beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the following calendar year 
or the period comprising the current fiscal year and the ten fiscal 
years beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the following calendar 
year. In determining whether reconciliation directives specify changes 
in law reducing the surplus or increasing the deficit, the sum of the 
directives for each reconciliation bill (under section 310 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974) envisioned by that measure shall be 
evaluated.

  This clause was adopted in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(q), H. Res. 5, 
Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).



[[Page 880]]


  This clause was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 402, H. Res. 5, Jan. 
4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)).



Sec. 1068c. Budget Act points of order.

    8. With respect to 
measures considered pursuant to a special order of business, points of 
order under title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall 
operate without regard to whether the measure concerned has been 
reported from committee. Such points of order shall operate with respect 
to (as the case may be)--


      (a) the form of a measure recommended by the reporting committee 
where the statute uses the term ``as reported'' (in the case of a 
measure that has been so reported);

      (b) the form of the measure made in order as an original bill or 
joint resolution for the purpose of amendment; or


      (c) the form of the measure on which the previous question is 
ordered directly to passage.


  This clause was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 403, H. Res. 5, Jan. 
4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)).

  9. (a) It shall not be in order to consider--


[[Page 881]]



Sec. 1068d. Congressional earmarks.

      (1) a  bill or joint 
resolution reported by a committee unless the report includes a list of 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, and limited tariff 
benefits in the bill or in the report (and the name of any Member, 
Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who submitted a request to the 
committee for each respective item included in such list) or a statement 
that the proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits;


      (2) a bill or joint resolution not reported by a committee unless 
the chairman of each committee of initial referral has caused a list of 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, and limited tariff 
benefits in the bill (and the name of any Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner who submitted a request to the committee for each 
respective item included in such list) or a statement that the 
proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or 
limited tariff benefits to be printed in the Congressional Record prior 
to its consideration;

      (3) an amendment to a bill or joint resolution to be offered at 
the outset of its consideration for amendment by a member of a committee 
of initial referral as designated in a report of the Committee on Rules 
to accompany a resolution prescribing a special order of business unless 
the proponent has caused a list of congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the amendment (and the name of 
any Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who submitted a request 
to the proponent for each respective item included in such list) or a 
statement that the proposition contains no congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits to be printed in the 
Congressional Record prior to its consideration; or


[[Page 882]]

part of the House and the managers on the part of the Senate includes a 
list of congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, and limited tariff 
benefits in the conference report or joint statement (and the name of 
any Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator who submitted a 
request to the House or Senate committees of jurisdiction for each 
respective item included in such list) or a statement that the 
proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or 
limited tariff benefits.
      (4) a conference report to accompany a bill or joint resolution 
unless the joint explanatory statement prepared by the managers on the

  (b) It shall not be in order to consider a rule or order that waives 
the application of paragraph (a). As disposition of a point of order 
under this paragraph, the Chair shall put the question of consideration 
with respect to the rule or order that waives the application of 
paragraph (a). The question of consideration shall be debatable for 10 
minutes by the Member initiating the point of order and for 10 minutes 
by an opponent, but shall otherwise be decided without intervening 
motion except one that the House adjourn.


[[Page 883]]

  (c) In order to be cognizable by the Chair, a point of order raised 
under paragraph (a) may be based only on the failure of a report, 
submission to the Congressional Record, or joint explanatory statement 
to include a list required by paragraph (a) or a statement that the 
proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or 
limited tariff benefits.

  (d) For the purpose of this clause, the term ``congressional earmark'' 
means a provision or report language included primarily at the request 
of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator providing, 
authorizing or recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget 
authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for a contract, 
loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure with 
or to an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality or 
Congressional district, other than through a statutory or administrative 
formula-driven or competitive award process.

  (e) For the purpose of this clause, the term ``limited tax benefit'' 
means--

      (1) any revenue-losing provision that--

          (A) provides a Federal tax deduction, credit, exclusion, or 
preference to 10 or fewer beneficiaries under the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986, and

          (B) contains eligibility criteria that are not uniform in 
application with respect to potential beneficiaries of such provision; 
or

      (2) any Federal tax provision which provides one beneficiary 
temporary or permanent transition relief from a change to the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986.



[[Page 884]]


  (f) For the purpose of this clause, the term ``limited tariff 
benefit'' means a provision modifying the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States in a manner that benefits 10 or fewer entities.

  This clause was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 404, H. Res. 6, Jan. 
4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). A similar point of order 
operated during part of the 109th Congress (H. Res. 1000, Sep. 14, 2006, 
p. ----). A point of order under this clause does not lie against an 
unreported measure where the chairman of the committee of initial 
referral has printed in the Record a statement that the measure contains 
no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 
benefits (Jan. 31, 2007, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of appeal)), or 
against a reported measure where the committee report contains such a 
statement (May 10, 2007, p.----; May 23, 2007, p. ----). Paragraph (c) 
requires that a point of order under this clause be predicated only on 
the absence of a complying statement, and does not contemplate a 
question of order relating to the content of such statement (May 10, 
2007, p. ----) A point of order under this clause is untimely after 
consideration has begun (Mar. 23, 2007, p. ----).


---   <> 10. It shall not 
be in order to consider any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or 
conference report if the provisions of such measure affecting direct 
spending and revenues have the net effect of increasing the deficit or 
reducing the surplus for either the period comprising the current fiscal 
year and the five fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year that ends 
in the following calendar year or the period comprising the current 
fiscal year and the ten fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year that 
ends in the following calendar year. The effect of such measure on the 
deficit or surplus shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by 
the Committee on the Budget relative to--

[[Page 885]]

  The House adopted an order during the 110th Congress establishing a 
point of order against the consideration of a conference report to 
accompany a regular general appropriation bill unless its joint 
explanatory statement contains a list of earmarks (within the meaning of 
paragraph (d)) that were not committed to the conference and were not in 
the House or Senate committee report on such measure. It further 
provided a point of order against a rule or order waiving such 
provision. Points of order against such rule or order or against such 
conference reports are decided by the question of consideration under 
paragraph (b) (H. Res. 491, June 18, 2007, p. ----).

      (a) the most recent baseline estimates supplied by the 
Congressional Budget Office consistent with section 257 of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 used in considering a 
concurrent resolution on the budget; or


      (b) after the beginning of a new calendar year and before 
consideration of a concurrent resolution on the budget, the most recent 
baseline estimates supplied by the Congressional Budget Office 
consistent with section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act of 1985.




 
  This clause was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 405, H. Res. 6, Jan. 
4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)).


                                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.



[[Page 886]]

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. 7).
  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




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). However, a committee receiving sequential 
referral of a bill or not reporting thereon need not authorize the 
motion (Oct. 4, 1994, p. 27643). This clause was recodified in the 106th 
Congress to reflect this practice (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). On a 
Senate bill with a House amendment consisting of the text of two 
corresponding House bills 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)(3) 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. 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.




[[Page 887]]


  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, all provisions of former clause 2 of rule XXIV except this one 
were transferred to clause 2 of rule XIV (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.


  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).


[[Page 888]]

of the Whole (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).


Sec. 1073. Consideration of Senate amendments in 
Committee of the Whole.

  While  a Senate amendment that is merely a 
modification of a House proposition, such as 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 that 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 an 
amendment is offered in the House to provide an appropriation for 
another purpose than that of the Senate amendment, the House resolves 
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 on which a separate vote is demanded 
are voted on severally (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 after the House has disagreed thereto and 
the amendments have been reported from conference in disagreement to 
raise a point of order that Senate amendments should have been 
considered in Committee





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 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. 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 current practice, which is described in 
Sec. 1074, supra) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).


[[Page 889]]

ference committee back to the two Houses for disposition by separate 
motion.


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 con


  (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.

  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 890]]

procedure does not thereby prevent a point of order from 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 only to language in Senate 
amendments. Thus the conferees may without violating this clause agree 
to language in a Senate bill that 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 that was permitted to remain and that 
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


  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.


[[Page 891]]

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).

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




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.


  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. 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.


[[Page 892]]

entitled to priority merely by the rules relating to the order of 
business (V, 6454).
  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); (7) pending 
the forthwith report of a committee following adoption of a motion to 
recommit while the previous question is operating (e.g., Apr. 24, 2007, 
p. ----); and (8) on Calendar Wednesday (VII, 907), but consideration of 
such reports yields to Calendar Wednesday business (VII, 899). It takes 
precedence over: (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); (3) the 
motion to reconsider (V, 5605); (4) the motion to resolve 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); and (6) unfinished business (Speaker O'Neill, Oct. 
4, 1978, p. 33473). It 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). 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 that relates to the integrity 
of the House as an agency for action may not be required to yield 
precedence to a matter

  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).


  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.



[[Page 893]]


  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).



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 announces to the House his intention to do so and 
the form of the motion.


  (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.


[[Page 894]]

2003, p. 7); 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).
  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,


  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 failed to report 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 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. ----).



[[Page 895]]




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 interpret the 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).

  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 
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).




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 the Congressional 
Budget 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--



[[Page 896]]

      (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.

  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 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 
waiving only 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).


  For an example of a resolution reported by the Rules Committee waiving 
only 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--



[[Page 897]]

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
      (A) the third calendar day (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal 
holidays except when

      (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 898]]

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 ordered 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



  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 Oversight and 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.




[[Page 899]]


  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.



  (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 who opposes the conference report or motion on 
demand of that 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, pp. 6624, 6634), preceded by the minority manager, 
preceded 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, pp. 22409, 22460).


[[Page 900]]

emerging from conference in disagreement, whether reported in 
disagreement or before the House upon rejection of a conference report 
by a vote or 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), upon 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 
upon a motion to dispose of a further stage of amendment that 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 
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 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


  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 (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.




[[Page 901]]


  This provision was added 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).




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 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.


  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).


[[Page 902]]

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, pp. 22408, 
22409).
  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

  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 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 that were not contained in either version and that are not 
repetitive of existing law may be ruled out in violation of this 
paragraph (Speaker O'Neill, Oct. 14, 1977, pp. 33770-73).


[[Page 903]]

tained in existing law that 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 that 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 that directed them 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).
  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 con


[[Page 904]]

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 (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 either a funding limitation (Sept. 13, 
1994, p. 24402) or a change in income tax law (Nov. 8, 2005, p. ---- 
(sustained by tabling of appeal); Dec. 7, 2005, p. ----) not contained 
in the House bill or Senate amendment. Such motion also may not instruct 
managers to include funding for a program above both of the respective 
amounts in the House bill and Senate amendment for that program (Dec. 7, 
2005, p. ---- (sustained by tabling of appeal)). 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 with 
House managers to eliminate


  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;

      (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.


[[Page 905]]

batable for 40 minutes, one-half in favor of the motion and one-half in 
opposition thereto.
  (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 de

  (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.

  (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 under subparagraph 
(2) or (3), as the case may be.

  (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


[[Page 906]]

      (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.


  (e) If, on a division of the question on a motion described in 
paragraph (a)(1)(B) or (C), the 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).


[[Page 907]]

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 matters 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).
  The 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. The provision (formerly clause 5 of 
rule XXVIII) addressing nongermane matter in



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 that 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 amendment not rejected as recommended in the conference 
report and to insist on disagreement to those amendments that have been 
rejected.


  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).


[[Page 908]]

  Where possible, the Speaker rules on points of order against 
conference reports that, 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).




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 that was not contained in 
any form in the Senate version and that 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 (as by concurring therein 
with a House amendment carrying an appropriation) 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



[[Page 909]]


      (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.

  (3) In conducting conferences with the Senate, managers on the part of 
the House should endeavor to ensure--

      (A) that meetings for the resolution of differences between the 
two Houses occur only under circumstances in which every manager on the 
part of the House has notice of the meeting and a reasonable opportunity 
to attend;

      (B) that all provisions on which the two Houses disagree are 
considered as open to discussion at any meeting of a conference 
committee; and

      (C) that papers reflecting a conference agreement are held 
inviolate to change without renewal of the opportunity of all managers 
on the part of the House to reconsider their decisions to sign or not to 
sign the agreement.


[[Page 910]]

at least one complete copy of the final conference agreement for the 
purpose of recording their approval (or not) of the final conference 
agreement by placing their signatures (or not) on the sheets prepared to 
accompany the conference report and joint explanatory statement of the 
managers.
  (4) Managers on the part of the House shall be provided a unitary time 
and place with access to


  (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 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.


[[Page 911]]

to be by the yeas and nays (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). 
Subparagraphs (a)(3) and (4) were added in the 110th Congress (sec. 
303(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)).
  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

  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 (now the yeas and nays) (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).

  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 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. 15657). The adoption of paragraphs (a)(3) 
and (a)(4) in the 110th Congress imposed additional considerations on 
conference committees. 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. ----).


<>  It shall not be in order to consider a conference 
report the text of which differs in any way, other than clerical, from 
the text that reflects the action of the conferees on all of the 
differences between the two Houses, as recorded by their placement of 
their signatures (or not) on the sheets prepared to accompany the 
conference report and joint explanatory statement of the managers.


[[Page 912]]


  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.




 
  This clause was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 303(b), H. Res. 6, 
Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)).


                               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.

      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.


[[Page 913]]

ing for publication, or other similar activity, except as otherwise 
provided under rule XXV.
      5. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee 
of the House may not accept an honorarium for a speech, a writ

      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 914]]

      (b) In the case of a committee employee who works under the direct 
supervision of a member of the committee other than a chairman, 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.

      (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 915]]

ceedings 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 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 pro

      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 916]]

      (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 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.

      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.

      14. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not, with the 
intent to influence on the basis of partisan political affiliation an 
employment decision or employment practice of any private entity--

          (a) take or withhold, or offer or threaten to take or 
withhold, an official act; or


[[Page 917]]

          (b) influence, or offer or threaten to influence, the official 
act of another.

      15. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a Member, Delegate, 
or Resident Commissioner may not use personal funds, official funds, or 
campaign funds for a flight on an aircraft.

      (b) Paragraph (a) does not apply if--

          (1) the aircraft is operated by an air carrier or commercial 
operator certificated by the Federal Aviation Administration and the 
flight is required to be conducted under air carrier safety rules, or, 
in the case of travel which is abroad, by an air carrier or commercial 
operator certificated by an appropriate foreign civil aviation authority 
and the flight is required to be conducted under air carrier safety 
rules;

          (2) the aircraft is owned or leased by a Member, Delegate, 
Resident Commissioner or his or her family member (including an aircraft 
owned by an entity that is not a public corporation in which the Member, 
Delegate, Resident Commissioner or his or her family member has an 
ownership interest, provided that such Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner does not use the aircraft any more than the Member, 
Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or family member's proportionate share 
of ownership allows);


[[Page 918]]

an individual on the basis of personal friendship; or
          (3) the flight consists of the personal use of an aircraft by 
a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner that is supplied by

          (4) the aircraft is operated by an entity of the Federal 
government or an entity of the government of any State.

      (c) In this clause--

          (1) the term ``campaign funds'' includes funds of any 
political committee under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, 
without regard to whether the committee is an authorized committee of 
the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner involved under such Act;

          (2) the term ``family member'' means an individual who is 
related to the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, as father, 
mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, husband, wife, father-in-law, or 
mother-in-law; and

          (3) the term ``on the basis of personal friendship'' has the 
same meaning as in clause 5 of rule XXV and shall be determined as under 
clause 5(a)(3)(D)(ii) of rule XXV.


[[Page 919]]

another Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner. For purposes of this 
clause and clause 17, the terms ``congressional earmark,'' ``limited tax 
benefit,'' and ``limited tariff benefit'' shall have the meanings given 
them in clause 9 of rule XXI.
      16. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not condition 
the inclusion of language to provide funding for a congressional 
earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any bill 
or joint resolution (or an accompanying report) or in any conference 
report on a bill or joint resolution (including an accompanying joint 
explanatory statement of managers) on any vote cast by

      17. (a) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who requests 
a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff 
benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an accompanying report) or 
in any conference report on a bill or joint resolution (or an 
accompanying joint statement of managers) shall provide a written 
statement to the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee 
of jurisdiction, including--

          (1) the name of the Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner;

          (2) in the case of a congressional earmark, the name and 
address of the intended recipient or, if there is no specifically 
intended recipient, the intended location of the activity;

          (3) in the case of a limited tax or tariff benefit, 
identification of the individual or entities reasonably anticipated to 
benefit, to the extent known to the Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner;

          (4) the purpose of such congressional earmark or limited tax 
or tariff benefit; and


[[Page 920]]

sional earmark or limited tax or tariff benefit.
          (5) a certification that the Member, Delegate, or Resident 
Commissioner or spouse has no financial interest in such congres

      (b) Each committee shall maintain the information transmitted 
under paragraph (a), and the written disclosures for any congressional 
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits included in 
any measure reported by the committee or conference report filed by the 
chairman of the committee or any subcommittee thereof shall be open for 
public inspection.

      18. (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 921]]

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 
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 in 
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 18 (which was an 
undesignated paragraph at the end of the rule before

[[Page 922]]

being numbered as clause 14 when 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 paragraph (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). Clauses 14 through 17 were added in the 
110th Congress (secs. 202, 207, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ----; sec. 
404(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. ---- (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). Clause 
15 was amended in its entirety during the 110th Congress (H. Res. 363, 
May 2, 2007, p. ----).
  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

  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.).





 
  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 the House and not the Chair to judge the conduct of Members (Nov. 
17, 1987, p. 32153). In response to a parliamentary inquiry, the Chair 
advised that the operation of clause 16 was not affected by a special 
order of the House waiving various points of order against a measure and 
against its consideration (Mar. 23, 2007, p. ----). 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).


                                Rule XXIV


Limitations on use of official and unofficial accounts
                  limitations on use of official funds


[[Page 923]]

have maintained for his use, an unofficial office account. Funds may not 
be paid into an unofficial office account.


1096. Limitation on accounts.

  1.  (a) Except as provided in 
paragraph (b), a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not 
maintain, or


  (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).

  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 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.


[[Page 924]]

a newsletter fund referred to in section 527(g) of the Internal Revenue 
Code of 1986.

  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

  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.).



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.


[[Page 925]]

frayed exclusively from funds made available in an appropriation Act.
  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 de

  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.

  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 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--

      (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



[[Page 926]]


      (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 to 90 days before the date 
of an election (from 60 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




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 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.



[[Page 927]]

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. ----).




 
  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


                                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--


      (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.


[[Page 928]]

ficer, 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.
  (b) In the case of an individual who becomes a Member, Delegate, 
Resident Commissioner, of

  (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 received 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.

  2. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of 
the House may not--


[[Page 929]]

vides professional services involving a fiduciary relationship except 
for the practice of medicine;
      (a) receive compensation for affiliating with or being employed by 
a firm, partnership, association, corporation, or other entity that pro

      (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

      (e) receive compensation for teaching, without the prior 
notification and approval of the Committee on Standards of Official 
Conduct.
Copyright royalties

  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.


[[Page 930]]

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
  (b) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of 
the House may not

  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 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.

  (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.


[[Page 931]]

ber, 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.
  (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 Mem

  (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 
lodging and meals while away from his residence or principal place of 
employment.

  (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;


[[Page 932]]

      (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;

      (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 933]]

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 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. 7).
  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

  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 934]]

  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) and reinstated it in the 102d Congress (S. Res. 192, Oct. 31, 
1991, p. 29567).


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).



1100. Gift rule.

  5. (a)(1)(A)(i)  A Member, Delegate, 
Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House may not 
knowingly accept a gift except as provided in this clause.


  (ii) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee 
of the House may not knowingly accept a gift from a registered lobbyist 
or agent of a foreign principal or from a private entity that retains or 
employs registered lobbyists or agents of a foreign principal except as 
provided in subparagraph (3) of this paragraph.


[[Page 935]]

ficer, or employee of the House shall make a good faith effort to comply 
with this subdivision.
  (B)(i) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee 
of the House may accept a gift (other than cash or cash equivalent) not 
prohibited by subdivision (A)(ii) 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 toward 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, of

  (ii) A gift of a ticket to a sporting or entertainment event shall be 
valued at the face value of the ticket or, in the case of a ticket 
without a face value, at the highest cost of a ticket with a face value 
for the event. The price printed on a ticket to an event shall be deemed 
its face value only if it also is the price at which the issuer offers 
that ticket for sale to the public.

  (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.


[[Page 936]]

  (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.

  (ii) If food or refreshment is provided at the same time and place to 
both a Member, Delegate, 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.

  (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)).


[[Page 937]]

      (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.

      (ii) In determining whether a gift is provided on the basis of 
personal friendship, the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, 
officer, or employee of the House shall consider the circumstances under 
which the gift was offered, such as:

          (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 (e)(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 938]]

gate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House (or other 
outside activities 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, Dele

          (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 939]]

sociated food, refreshments, and entertainment 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 as

      (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 an 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 940]]

gressional credit union, in which membership 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 con

          (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 941]]

such as display or free distribution, and are of minimal value to any 
single recipient.
      (V) Donations of products from the district or State that the 
Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner represents that are intended 
primarily for promotional purposes,

      (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 942]]

charity event, except that reimbursement for 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

      (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 943]]

  (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 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 when 
it is from a private source other than a registered lobbyist or agent of 
a foreign principal or a private entity that retains or employs 
registered lobbyists or agents of a foreign principal (except as 
provided in subdivision (C)), 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 15 days after the travel is completed.


[[Page 944]]

Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House as an officeholder.
  (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

  (C) A reimbursement (including payment in kind) to a Member, Delegate, 
Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House for any purpose 
described in subdivision (A) also shall be considered as a reimbursement 
to the House and not a gift prohibited by this clause (without regard to 
whether the source retains or employs registered lobbyists or agents of 
a foreign principal) if it is, under regulations prescribed by the 
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to implement this provision--

      (i) directly from an institution of higher education within the 
meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965; or

      (ii) provided only for attendance at or participation in a one-day 
event (exclusive of travel time and an overnight stay).
Regulations prescribed to implement this provision may permit a two-
night stay when determined by the committee on a case-by-case basis to 
be practically required to participate in the one-day event.

  (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;


[[Page 945]]

      (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) 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;

      (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);

      (F) a description of meetings and events attended; and


[[Page 946]]

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.
      (G) in the case of a reimbursement to a Member, Delegate, Resident 
Commissioner, or

  (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);

      (C) does not include expenditures for recreational activities, nor 
does it include entertainment other than that provided to all attendees 
as an integral part of the event, except for activities or entertainment 
otherwise permissible under this clause; and

      (D) may include travel expenses incurred on behalf of a relative 
of the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee.


[[Page 947]]

for public inspection as soon as possible after they are received.
  (5) The Clerk of the House shall make all advance authorizations, 
certifications, and disclosures filed pursuant to this paragraph 
available

  (c)(1)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), a Member, Delegate, 
Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House may not accept 
a reimbursement (including payment in kind) for transportation, lodging, 
or related expenses for a trip on which the traveler is accompanied on 
any segment by a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal.

  (B) Subdivision (A) does not apply to a trip for which the source of 
reimbursement is an institution of higher education within the meaning 
of section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965.

  (2) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of 
the House may not accept a reimbursement (including payment in kind) for 
transportation, lodging, or related expenses under the exception in 
paragraph (b)(1)(C)(ii) of this clause for a trip that is financed in 
whole or in part by a private entity that retains or employs registered 
lobbyists or agents of a foreign principal unless any involvement of a 
registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal in the planning, 
organization, request, or arrangement of the trip is de minimis under 
rules prescribed by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to 
implement paragraph (b)(1)(C) of this clause.


[[Page 948]]

penses for a trip (other than a trip permitted under paragraph (b)(1)(C) 
of this clause) if such trip is in any part planned, organized, 
requested, or arranged by a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign 
principal.
  (3) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of 
the House may not accept a reimbursement (including payment in kind) for 
transportation, lodging, or related ex

  (d) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of 
the House shall, before accepting travel otherwise permissible under 
paragraph (b)(1) of this clause from any private source--

      (1) provide to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct 
before such trip a written certification signed by the source or (in the 
case of a corporate person) by an officer of the source--

          (A) that the trip will not be financed in any part by a 
registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal;

          (B) that the source either--

              (i) does not retain or employ registered lobbyists or 
agents of a foreign principal; or

              (ii) is an institution of higher education within the 
meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965; or


[[Page 949]]

quest, or arrangement of the trip considered to qualify as de minimis 
under such rules;
              (iii) certifies that the trip meets the requirements 
specified in rules prescribed by the Committee on Standards of Official 
Conduct to implement paragraph (b)(1)(C)(ii) of this clause and 
specifically details the extent of any involvement of a registered 
lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal in the planning, organization, 
re

          (C) that the source will not accept from another source any 
funds earmarked directly or indirectly for the purpose of financing any 
aspect of the trip;

          (D) that the traveler will not be accompanied on any segment 
of the trip by a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal 
(except in the case of a trip for which the source of reimbursement is 
an institution of higher education within the meaning of section 101 of 
the Higher Education Act of 1965); and

          (E) that (except as permitted in paragraph (b)(1)(C) of this 
clause) the trip will not in any part be planned, organized, requested, 
or arranged by a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal; 
and

      (2) after the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct has 
promulgated the regulations mandated in paragraph (i)(1)(B) of this 
clause, obtain the prior approval of the committee for such trip.

  (e) A gift prohibited by paragraph (a)(1) includes the following:


[[Page 950]]

      (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 (f).

      (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, Resident Commissioner, officer, or 
employee of the House.

      (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.


[[Page 951]]

  (f)(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 is 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

      (C) the name and address of the charitable organization designated 
or recommended by the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.
The Clerk shall make public information received under this subparagraph 
as soon as possible after it is received.

  (g) 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.


[[Page 952]]

thorized to issue guidance on any matter contained in this clause.
  (h) 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 au

  (i)(1) Not later than 45 days after the date of adoption of this 
paragraph and at annual intervals thereafter, the Committee on Standards 
of Official Conduct shall develop and revise, as necessary--

      (A) guidelines on judging the reasonableness of an expense or 
expenditure for purposes of this clause, including the factors that tend 
to establish--

          (i) a connection between a trip and official duties;

          (ii) the reasonableness of an amount spent by a sponsor;

          (iii) a relationship between an event and an officially 
connected purpose; and

          (iv) a direct and immediate relationship between a source of 
funding and an event; and

      (B) regulations describing the information it will require 
individuals subject to this clause to submit to the committee in order 
to obtain the prior approval of the committee for any travel covered by 
this clause, including any required certifications.



[[Page 953]]


  (2) In developing and revising guidelines under paragraph (1)(A), the 
committee shall take into account the maximum per diem rates for 
official Government travel published annually by the General Services 
Administration, the Department of State, and the Department of Defense.



[[Page 954]]


  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 rules 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) (now 5(g)) 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. 7) and clause 
5(a)(4)(C) was amended to permit, under specified circumstances, a 
Member to be reimbursed for transportation and lodging to attend a 
charity event (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). In the 109th 
Congress, clause 5(b)(4)(D) was amended to expand the definition of 
``necessary transportation, lodging, and related expenses'' to include 
travel expenses of a relative of a Member (rather than only a spouse or 
child) (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. ----). In the 110th 
Congress, clause 5 was amended as follows: (1) to add subdivision (ii) 
to paragraph (a)(1)(A), with a corresponding cross reference in 
paragraph (a)(1)(B)(i); (2) to add subdivision (ii) to paragraph 
(a)(1)(B); (3) to include as gifts reimbursement for transportation and 
lodging expenses from entities that retain registered lobbyists or 
agents of a foreign principal in paragraph (b)(1)(A) with an exception 
in a new subdivision (C) for reimbursements from institutions of higher 
education or for participation in one-day events (effective March 1, 
2007); (4) to shorten from 30 to 15 days the time in which disclosure is 
made to the Clerk under paragraph (b)(1)(A)(ii) (effective March 1, 
2007); (5) to add subdivision (F) to paragraph (b)(3); (6) to make a 
conforming amendment to paragraph (b)(3) (effective March 1, 2007); (7) 
to include additional certifications and disclosures in paragraph (b)(5) 
(effective March 1, 2007); (8) to add paragraphs (c) and (d) (effective 
March 1, 2007); and (9) to add paragraph (i) (effective March 1, 2007)). 
Subdivision (Q) was amended during the 110th Congress to clarify the 
events for which a gift of free attendance is not prohibited (sec. 4, H. 
Res. 437, May 24, 2007, p. ----). Subdivision (Q) was amended during the 
110th Congress to clarify the events for which a gift of free attendance 
is not prohibited (sec. 4, H. Res. 437, May 24, 2007, 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.


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 955]]
 
  In addition to rules XXIII through XXVI, several provisions of the 
Federal criminal code also address the conduct of Members, officers, and 
employees 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).


                                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 956]]

available to the public as printed House documents rather than having 
them maintained by 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 (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 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


  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.


                                  * * *

  (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 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.


[[Page 957]]

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).
  (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

  (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 

        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 


[[Page 958]]

        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.

  (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.


[[Page 959]]

$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.
  (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

  (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.

  (B) If any person, other than the United States Government, paid a 
nonelected reporting individual compensation in excess of $5,000 in any 
of 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--


[[Page 960]]

          (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.

  (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 part of the calendar year of filing up to the date of the 
termination of employment.

  (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:


[[Page 961]]

          (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-

        employed in business 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 


[[Page 962]]

        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.

  (f)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), each reporting individual 
shall report the information required to be reported pursuant to 
subsections (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.


[[Page 963]]

  (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 

        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 


[[Page 964]]

                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 

                trust, including obtaining 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 


[[Page 965]]

        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 

        administered in accordance with the requirements of this 

        subsection and the trustee of such trust meets the requirements 


        of paragraph (3)(A).


                                  * * *


[[Page 966]]

  (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.

  (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.


[[Page 967]]

graph. The court in which such action is brought may assess against such 
individual a civil penalty in any amount not to exceed $10,000.
  (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 para

  (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 

        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--


[[Page 968]]

          (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, United States Capitol Police, 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;


                                  * * *

          (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 


[[Page 969]]

                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

  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 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.

  (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.


[[Page 970]]

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.
  (c) The President, the Vice President, the Secretary concerned, the 
head of each agency, the Office of Personnel Management, a congressional 
ethics

  (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 971]]

  (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 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.

  (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.

  (E) This paragraph shall expire on December 31, 2005, and apply to 
filings through calendar year 2005.

  (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.


[[Page 972]]

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.
  (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)


  (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.

  (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 applicable laws and regulations, he shall 
state such opinion on the report, and shall sign such report.

  (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 


[[Page 973]]

        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.

  (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 Foreign Service or the uniformed services, the Secretary 
concerned shall take appropriate action.


[[Page 974]]

  (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.

  (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 purposes 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.


[[Page 975]]

  (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 

        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;


[[Page 976]]

  (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 Government Accountability 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 

        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;


[[Page 977]]

  (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 978]]

cial 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, 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 Judi


  (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).





 
                                  * * *


                               Rule XXVII


                     Statutory Limit on Public Debt


[[Page 979]]

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 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


  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 periods, 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.


[[Page 980]]

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.
  3. (a) The report of the Committee on the Budget on a concurrent 
resolution described in

  (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 981]]

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 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

  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 
year 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 year 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 as rule XVII (sec. 
2(t), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7).






[[Page 982]]
 
  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. 3442). 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 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).


                               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. 7). The importance of Jefferson's Manual as an 
authority in congressional procedure has been discussed (VII, 1029, 
1049; VIII, 2501, 2517, 2518, 3330).